Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 181 guests, and 2 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 3 1 2 3
#1847 08/01/05 12:52 AM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 50
F
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally posted by dkv:
So you mean to say that evolution process has no goal?!!
In that case the whole meaning of existence reduces to meaningless (or rather a goaless) struggle for survival between species....
We have already reached at the top of the food chain and we have also reached at a threshold of environmental food chain disaster...
Such is the condition that we manufacture some of the species for our food ....e.g Chicken
Finding Chicken in wild is wild dream .. atleast for me...
So species have vanished before and how many will ...but the question is do we need prevent this vanishing act ...
to put it simply I would like to ask can we prevent the cataclysmic downfall of our species ?
How has the reduction in Whale number affected our chances of survival in say next 1000 years..?
What kind of role the population of Human species will play in our chances of survival ?these are important issues because
I feel that the chain of destruction has its own inertia...and therefore we must understand and act before it is too late...
dkv, you are not talking about evolution. Perhaps there is a language barrier; to a scientist, the word "evolution" refers to the process by which groups of organisms change over the course of many generations. Evolution has nothing to do with solving the world's problems.
Instead of evolution, I think you are speaking of what, in English, we might call "human destiny".
As several others have pointed out, the process of evolution is not guided in any particular direction or by any particular goal. Overall, evolution does not even represent progress.
A couple more observations: 1, to say that long life is a goal of natural selection is to fail, utterly, to understand even the most basic of Darwinian thinking. And 2, wild chickens do still exist; the southeast asian species Gallus gallus, known in English as the "Red Jungle Fowl" is unquestionably the most recent ancestor of domestic chickens. In fact, domestic chickens will readily breed with wild jungle fowl.

.
#1848 08/01/05 04:41 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
An Old discussion got revived as you capture the pattern of the recent questions.... (This is an amazing discovery for all of us)
Anyways back to the discussion:
================================
dkv, you are not talking about evolution. Perhaps there is a language barrier; to a scientist, the word "evolution" refers to the process by which groups of organisms change over the course of many generations. Evolution has nothing to do with solving the world's problems.
Instead of evolution, I think you are speaking of what, in English, we might call "human destiny".
REP: That was a stupid thing to say... Speices change to solve certain existing problem bologically...In fact human-destiny is a biased answer.
==============================
As several others have pointed out, the process of evolution is not guided in any particular direction or by any particular goal. Overall, evolution does not even represent progress.
REP: So you think we have not progressed in the last 2000 years of 1 million years...We are the same a******.
Let us grow up. We have progressed in terms of domination over the planet.. No other species can now dare to invade our spcae...(But aswe are greedy and now we have invaded their sapce)
======================
A couple more observations: 1, to say that long life is a goal of natural selection is to fail, utterly, to understand even the most basic of Darwinian thinking.
REP: No wonder that you think that there is no goal... Even if it is not so then will it be not worth aiming....
========================
And 2, wild chickens do still exist; the southeast asian species Gallus gallus, known in English as the "Red Jungle Fowl" is unquestionably the most recent ancestor of domestic chickens. In fact, domestic chickens will readily breed with wild jungle fowl.
REP:We have chained the lifecylce of Chickens and they are all subjected to similar environements which results in the lowering of resistance power...And finally they end up having Bird Flu or Pig Virus.....
Am not sure whom we are trying to kill the Chickens or Ourselves...
Pray for Red Jungle Fowl.

#1849 08/01/05 02:47 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 50
F
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 50
dkv, I'm afraid that you don't understand what evolution is. You seem to think about everything is human terms and with an eye toward solving problems. I applaud your determination to work on the world's problems and I encourage others to work as hard as you want to.
But this has nothing to do with evolution.
Yes, I do believe that we have not progressed in all the millenia of human history. We have changed. To make the average human life longer may be a nice goal and it certainly has been achieved by various means (sanitation, medicine, education, etc.) You need to understand, though, that this is not evolution, in the sense of a change in a population's genetic structure.

I advise you not to call people stupid, especially when you are preaching about making the world a better place.

I'm sorry dkv, but while you appear to be an intelligent person, it is very clear to me that you are lacking in education. I am a high school teacher and I am very familiar with people who are intelligent but ignorant. I'm guessing that you're about 15-16 years old. Your intelligence will carry you far, when you lose the arrogance and when you have a deeper understanding of the subjects that interest you.

#1850 08/01/05 02:57 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,940
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,940
1. Evolution has no discernable goal.

2. Evolution does not act to increase lifespan, in general. Evolution is about living long enough to reproduce. This is why evolution can actually produce things that will kill a species. Sickle cell may kill you, but in a place where you're likely to die early of malaria, it provides you the chance to live at least long enough to breed.

3. There is scientific knowledge and there are other kinds of knowledge. Saying that something is not scientific is not the same as saying that it's not true or that it's not useful.

4. Evolution, indeed science itself, does not guarantee survival for us or any other species. If anything, this is a lesson that we need to be careful and pay attention.

#1851 08/01/05 04:14 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Jumboman07 ... thank you for using your intellect to promote intelligent discourse about science. No doubt some day you will become a contributing member of society ... perhaps flipping burgers or digging ditches.

And thanks for demonstrating, so graphically, the value of birth control.


DA Morgan
#1852 08/01/05 05:46 PM
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 50
F
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 50
Quote:
Originally posted by TheFallibleFiend:
1. Evolution has no discernable goal.

2. Evolution does not act to increase lifespan, in general. Evolution is about living long enough to reproduce. This is why evolution can actually produce things that will kill a species. Sickle cell may kill you, but in a place where you're likely to die early of malaria, it provides you the chance to live at least long enough to breed.

3. There is scientific knowledge and there are other kinds of knowledge. Saying that something is not scientific is not the same as saying that it's not true or that it's not useful.

4. Evolution, indeed science itself, does not guarantee survival for us or any other species. If anything, this is a lesson that we need to be careful and pay attention.
Well said, FF.

#1853 08/02/05 04:37 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
First things first..
No one in the without intelligence and therefore no one is stupid.. We know why we are discussing the science here .. We have a purpose behind all the disussion .. it is making all of us more aware of the truths .. we are acheiving (or atleast trying to achieve) greater awareness and then some say that together as a whole we do not have a purpose...
I disagree and have a good logical reason behind it.
======================
1. Evolution has no discernable goal.
REP: All around I see desired destiny... How come the goal becomes discernable when we talk about the Life as a whole... Thats so dull that I could resist my outburst.
============================
2. Evolution does not act to increase lifespan, in general. Evolution is about living long enough to reproduce. This is why evolution can actually produce things that will kill a species. Sickle cell may kill you, but in a place where you're likely to die early of malaria, it provides you the chance to live at least long enough to breed.
REP: Agree . But Evolution is all about finding my passion and to exprience it for longest period... As Human I hope I am experiencing much more using my intellignce that any other species therefore I want to increase my Life Span...
And Hence OUR GOAL should be(or if it not already) to Increase the Life Span...
==============================
3. There is scientific knowledge and there are other kinds of knowledge. Saying that something is not scientific is not the same as saying that it's not true or that it's not useful.
REP:Agree.
===========================
4. Evolution, indeed science itself, does not guarantee survival for us or any other species. If anything, this is a lesson that we need to be careful and pay attention.
REP:Evolution can not guarantee anything .. It is a name given to a process limited within its defintion of Life and its related problems...
It we extend the term for non-living beings(without worring about the domain) then even stars has such a process in place...
No one guarnatee the Survival of Universe...
BUT AS PART OF THE UNIVERSAL EVOLUTION WE MUST TRY TO EXTEND THE LIFE SPAN OF THE UNIVERSE OTHERWISE WE WILL NOT EXIST.. AND MAJORITY OF US WILL AGREE THAT WE SHOULD NOT EVAPORATE SINCE WE HAVE COME INTO EXISTENCE AFTER SUCH A LONG TIME... If this desire is hardoced into the system then we can call it the destiny...
And OUR the destiny is to survive whether using Worm Holes or using God.
===========================

#1854 08/03/05 03:29 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,940
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,940
1. rewording "Evolution has no SCIENTIFICALLY discernable goal." Part of the reason it seems to work so well is that it doesn't seem to have a goal. While optimizing along a particular axis, there yet remains sufficient variability that many species can remain resilient even if the environment changes (within limits).

4. I'm not sure what scientific meaning destiny has. I strongly want the human species to survive. I strongly desire the continuance of my own existence. I've never seen any indication the that the universe has any opinion or awareness of my desires. My guess would be the universe doesn't consult us - either individually or collectively - when it's deciding what to do. DOES it "decide" what to do?

#1855 08/04/05 04:16 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
1. rewording "Evolution has no SCIENTIFICALLY discernable goal."
REP:OK. So we exist without any scientific Purpose!!
A goal is something which needs to be achieved because of the law of Cause and Effect.
An electron needs to achieve an higher Energy Level jump after receving a Photon packet....
A car needs to achieve higher speed if accelerator is pressed. It sounds mechnical but this the law of cause and effect.
My question is this : Given the current conditions(or set of causes) what is our next step orgoal...
If you still disagree with me then I can attribute this misunderstanding to a self-referral situation which needs to be understood.
A scientific purpose involves the knowledge and the knower but in our case(i.e in LIFE sense) .. We are the Knowledge and the Knower.This becomes obvious when we understand ourselves as part of the Universe and the entire Universe is what is presented to us for study and research...
Rewording :This Scientific illusion of NO-GOAL is created due to the false seperation of Knowledge and knower.
If the entire information in the Universe can be projected for 'experience' and 'understanding' then we can say that the knowledge is completly known as the other details can be derived using little bit of effort.
So the question is what is the next step...?
If you have found the next step then what will be the next step after that and so on...
Finally what will happen during the climax and why...What is the direction of Growth with in the error limits?
Going by Creator and consumer philosophy Universe has created us as the consumer for the knowledge it created by coming into existence.

And if you still have not understood then give me a good defintion of Life.
=====================================
Part of the reason it seems to work so well is that it doesn't seem to have a goal. While optimizing along a particular axis, there yet remains sufficient variability that many species can remain resilient even if the environment changes (within limits).
REP:If no goal is an advantage then why am I not taking it...???
===================================
4. I'm not sure what scientific meaning destiny has. I strongly want the human species to survive. I strongly desire the continuance of my own existence.
REP: That should be spirit when so many people want to die...We get life only once for all practical purposes...
======================
I've never seen any indication the that the universe has any opinion or awareness of my desires.
REP: The cause and effect does not require common logical understanding of the reality...
No wonder that you dont know how it effected the Universe.You need more inofrmation(in the right way) to know that. But it happened trust Sceince..
==================
My guess would be the universe doesn't consult us - either individually or collectively - when it's deciding what to do. DOES it "decide" what to do?
REP:Universe doesnot consult anyone it does what it should be doing ...
We do what we should be doing ....
But what are we(or Universe) going to do next(and after infinite time)?
And why ?

#1856 10/11/05 04:34 PM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
R
RM Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
R
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
If intelligent machines were to take over the world because they were much better at performing human processes, would this count as evolution?

#1857 10/11/05 05:32 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,940
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,940
"If intelligent machines were to take over the world because they were much better at performing human processes, would this count as evolution?"

Answer 1. It's all a semantic issue that is almost entirely arbitrary.

Answer 2. In the most general definition of the term 'evolution', yes, it is evolution.

Answer 3. Is it biological evolution? I'm not sure.

An sf book you might find interesting: "Code of the Lifemaker," by Hogan.

In any case, I don't expect anything like this (computers that are "intelligent" in the ordinary sense that we mean the term) to happen in my lifetime and probably not in my children's lifetimes. Possibly in my grandchildren's lifes, but I doubt even that. One day, I think we'll figure it out, but not too soon.

Recent news:
Stanford won DARPA's grand challenge this year. They did a great job and they probably deserve the $2 million. But I'm guessing those conditions were relatively controlled. It's significant progress, but it's still only a fraction of where we'd like to be with autonomous vehicles (or so I'm guessing).

A japanese company recently demonstrated a robot that could ride a bike and stop and start without falling over. Significant, but we're still not there. I think we need numerous quantum leaps in technology to get there from here.

#1858 10/12/05 11:34 AM
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
R
RM Offline
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
R
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 560
TheFallibleFriend
Which method of creating AI do you agree with?
1. The algorithm method (I think it's called the top-down method)
2. The neuron method in which artificial neurons are created that act in a similar way.

#1859 10/12/05 03:01 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,940
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,940
"Which method of creating AI do you agree with?
1. The algorithm method
2. The neuron method in which artificial neurons are created that act in a similar way."

I suppose I agree with both of them, as I've implemented trivial AIs with both of them. OTOH, I'm guessing you mean a non-trivial AI. I couldn't even hazzard a guess at it. One thing, though - these things aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. I implemented artificial neurons by means of algorithms.

#1860 10/13/05 05:55 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
If intelligent machines were to take over the world because they were much better at performing human processes, would this count as evolution?
REP:Imagine a DOG less evolved than you.You and DOG live together happily.
Now Imagine a LION less evolved than you.YOu and LION can not live happily together unless you have your space defined.
Thus IF machines take over (as Matrix would like to tell you) then you created objects of LION types and not DOG types...
We know not many many LIONS can live together..
There is an inherent limitations of any such Techonology to create harmony out of LIONS....
The failure to understand the base nature of HARMONY has led to so many wars ....
Harmony of Strenghts comes out Evolved Knowledge..
Knowledge which proposes Ecologocal Stability..
Knowlegde which Proposes Diversity ...
Knowlegde which Proposes Peace ...

Those high held values are not meant to taken as moral crap ... but rather it is a reality ..
REALITY of EXISTENCE OF WAYS OF RESOLVING ISSUES OR CONFLICTS WITHOUT A KILLING.
Everyday We live this law.. when someone says bad about you for no reason.

Page 3 of 3 1 2 3

Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokÂþ»­¾W
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5