Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Artificial Life Experiments Show How Complex Functions Can Evolve
NSF ^ | May 8, 2003 | Staff

Posted on 05/08/2003 10:11:06 AM PDT by Nebullis

Artificial Life Experiments Show How Complex Functions Can Evolve

Arlington, Va.—If the evolution of complex organisms were a road trip, then the simple country drives are what get you there. And sometimes even potholes along the way are important.

An interdisciplinary team of scientists at Michigan State University and the California Institute of Technology, with the help of powerful computers, has used a kind of artificial life, or ALife, to create a road map detailing the evolution of complex organisms, an old problem in biology.

In an article in the May 8 issue of the international journal Nature, Richard Lenski, Charles Ofria, Robert Pennock, and Christoph Adami report that the path to complex organisms is paved with a long series of simple functions, each unremarkable if viewed in isolation. "This project addresses a fundamental criticism of the theory of evolution, how complex functions arise from mutation and natural selection," said Sam Scheiner, program director in the division of environmental biology at the National Science Foundation (NSF), which funded the research through its Biocomplexity in the Environment initiative. "These simulations will help direct research on living systems and will provide understanding of the origins of biocomplexity."

Some mutations that cause damage in the short term ultimately become a positive force in the genetic pedigree of a complex organism. "The little things, they definitely count," said Lenski of Michigan State, the paper's lead author. "Our work allowed us to see how the most complex functions are built up from simpler and simpler functions. We also saw that some mutations looked like bad events when they happened, but turned out to be really important for the evolution of the population over a long period of time."

In the key phrase, "a long period of time," lies the magic of ALife. Lenski teamed up with Adami, a scientist at Caltech's Jet Propulsion Laboratory and Ofria, a Michigan State computer scientist, to further explore ALife.

Pennock, a Michigan State philosopher, joined the team to study an artificial world inside a computer, a world in which computer programs take the place of living organisms. These computer programs go forth and multiply, they mutate and they adapt by natural selection.

The program, called Avida, is an artificial petri dish in which organisms not only reproduce, but also perform mathematical calculations to obtain rewards. Their reward is more computer time that they can use for making copies of themselves. Avida randomly adds mutations to the copies, thus spurring natural selection and evolution. The research team watched how these "bugs" adapted and evolved in different environments inside their artificial world.

Avida is the biologist's race car - a really souped up one. To watch the evolution of most living organisms would require thousands of years – without blinking. The digital bugs evolve at lightening speed, and they leave tracks for scientists to study.

"The cool thing is that we can trace the line of descent," Lenski said. "Out of a big population of organisms you can work back to see the pivotal mutations that really mattered during the evolutionary history of the population. The human mind can't sort through so much data, but we developed a tool to find these pivotal events."

There are no missing links with this technology.

Evolutionary theory sometimes struggles to explain the most complex features of organisms. Lenski uses the human eye as an example. It's obviously used for seeing, and it has all sorts of parts - like a lens that can be focused at different distances - that make it well suited for that use. But how did something so complicated as the eye come to be?

Since Charles Darwin, biologists have concluded that such features must have arisen through lots of intermediates and, moreover, that these intermediate structures may once have served different functions from what we see today. The crystalline proteins that make up the lens of the eye, for example, are related to those that serve enzymatic functions unrelated to vision. So, the theory goes, evolution borrowed an existing protein and used it for a new function.

"Over time," Lenski said, "an old structure could be tweaked here and there to improve it for its new function, and that's a lot easier than inventing something entirely new."

That's where ALife sheds light.

"Darwinian evolution is a process that doesn't specify exactly how the evolving information is coded," says Adami, who leads the Digital Life Laboratory at Caltech. "It affects DNA and computer code in much the same way, which allows us to study evolution in this electronic medium."

Many computer scientists and engineers are now using processes based on principles of genetics and evolution to solve complex problems, design working robots, and more. Ofria says that "we can then apply these concepts when trying to decide how best to solve computational problems."

"Evolutionary design," says Pennock, "can often solve problems better than we can using our own intelligence."


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: ai; crevolist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340 ... 1,961-1,975 next last
To: AmericanAge
What does George Bush have to do with conservative philosophy? Conservatives were around long before George Bush. Not all people on this website profess to be Christians or any other religious persuasion.
301 posted on 05/08/2003 1:20:27 PM PDT by stanz (All those folks who believe in evolution should go jump off the flat edge of the Earth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: Dataman
What would you accept as proof?

Well, first you need to define exactly what it is that you mean by God, or rather what you know of this God. If this God has no defined properties, then it's rather worthless as a concept. Once you've nailed down some properties (again, not the complete comprehensive definition -- I couldn't give you a complete comprehensive definition of 'the sun', but I don't doubt its existence), show exactly what methods can be used to demonstrate the existence of a "God" with the defined properties. If you claim that this God created the universe, show evidence of this creation that lends credence to the notion that it was done by a God who has the properties that you've laid out so as to rule out alternative explanations.

I don't think that you'll be able to 'prove' God's existence (I said that I've been told that there is proof, but what I seek is just 'strong evidence'), but perhaps you could provide good repeatable tests that provide strong evidence.
302 posted on 05/08/2003 1:20:36 PM PDT by Dimensio (Sometimes I doubt your committment to Sparkle Motion!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 295 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
I think herein lies the problem for many creationists: they simply cannot envision a continuous change of a population over time. This may be an artifact of our need to categorize things and the difficulty to draw a line in a continuum.

So somehow they seem to think that there must be a discontinuity between category 'A' and category 'B' just because they have different names. That this doesn't have to be so is obvious in the case of the visible spectrum but why they have this difficulty to see that this is the same principle for a population changing over time is beyond me.

303 posted on 05/08/2003 1:20:50 PM PDT by BMCDA (Lotteries are a tax on people that suck at math)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: Grando Calrissian
whose ponch -- your bird (( brain )) ?
304 posted on 05/08/2003 1:20:56 PM PDT by f.Christian (( Marching orders: comfort the afflicted // afflict the comfortable ! ! ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 300 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
Gravity, however, is only theoretical. Scientists have, through repeated observation and testing, come up with a comprehensive theory as to the workings of a force known as gravity, but it is possible that their beliefs regarding how gravity works are flawed or even completely wrong and that the numbers that they have found to be consistent through testing are the result of coincidence or a matter of just being lucky enough to test their predictions within a limited space under which their notions apply, even if the notions are not universal.

Would it be fair to summarize your statement like this?

The existence of gravity is certain but its mechanism is unknown and therefore theoretical? If so, your statement that all science is theoretical is not exactly factual.

305 posted on 05/08/2003 1:21:03 PM PDT by Dataman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 271 | View Replies]

To: Dataman
Nothing incoherent about it. If you can't understand it, then you are the one with the problem.

If I remember correctly, Christians are supposed to be humble, so far I haven't seen it from either of you.

I see arrogance in the extreme, and ignorance, but why am I not surprised?

I know some REAL Christians, and if they saw what the 2 of you were writing, they would be praying for you, hard.
306 posted on 05/08/2003 1:21:33 PM PDT by Aric2000 (Are you on Grampa Dave's team? I am!! $5 a month is all it takes, come join!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
1) That's *my* point - it wasn't teaching a moral, it was *telling about the creation of the world*, just like it says.

2) Why am I not surprised. And to think that people were mad at me for calling you "atheist".

3) This was previously about conservatism vs. morality. I rest my case, since you just agreed with it.

4) Since I don't know you personally, I can't comment on this more.

5) Yet, that's what evolutionists claim.

6) Call me arrogant. But when Christ comes again, we'll see who is laughing. The wages of sin aren't light, and blasphemy is one of the greatest. I can just picture you standing before God, trying to claim that you were "just kidding".
307 posted on 05/08/2003 1:21:47 PM PDT by AmericanAge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 287 | View Replies]

To: Dataman
The existence of gravity is certain but its mechanism is unknown and therefore theoretical? If so, your statement that all science is theoretical is not exactly factual.

But it isn't so.

308 posted on 05/08/2003 1:22:40 PM PDT by BMCDA (Lotteries are a tax on people that suck at math)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 305 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
But frankly, I'd rather see a proof of religion!

One who needs proof that religion exists first needs critical thinking skills.

309 posted on 05/08/2003 1:22:40 PM PDT by Dataman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 273 | View Replies]

To: Dataman
Critical thinking placemarker.
310 posted on 05/08/2003 1:27:35 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 309 | View Replies]

To: BMCDA
That this doesn't have to be so is obvious in the case of the visible spectrum but why they have this difficulty to see that this is the same principle for a population changing over time is beyond me.

The problem is, they generally have no direct experience of the natural world. If you watch birds, for example, you're well aware species like the northern junco or eastern meadowlark vary continuously with geographical location across the continent. And if a species can vary with location, why can't it vary with time? But if you've never looked at juncos, or meadowlarks (or many types of warblers, or the hundreds of other species that show clinal variation) you might well think species are somehow well-defined and immutable, rather than just convenient categories.

311 posted on 05/08/2003 1:29:18 PM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 303 | View Replies]

To: Dataman
The existence of gravity is certain but its mechanism is unknown and therefore theoretical?

The force that causes objects to fall to the ground is defined as gravity (again, a definition, not an explanation), kind of how like we define water falling from the sky as 'rain'. That objects have been falling on earth for millenia is certain, though while evidence strongly suggests it it is not 100% certain that things will continue doing that in the instant future.
312 posted on 05/08/2003 1:29:18 PM PDT by Dimensio (Sometimes I doubt your committment to Sparkle Motion!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 305 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
Good News For The Day

‘The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone.’ (Luke 20:17)

"The most familiar, and the best-loved images of Jesus, are those that picture to us, his gentle, compassionate spirit. "Whoever comes to me, I will in no wise cast out"; "Come to me, all you who are weary"; "Let the little children come to me."

"But there are other images of Jesus in the Gospels, which show another aspect of his personality. They emphasize the steel in him. Sometimes Jesus was awesome; formidable."

"In the parable, Jesus presents himself as the landlord's Son; the rejected stone, that eventually becomes the most important stone in the superstructure of the kingdom of God. Jesus plainly thought that those who opposed him were in collision with God. He was warning nation's leaders: "It is unwise and unsafe to be against me." Tough talk from Jesus! He was signaling what was taken up by Peter at Pentecost, where, full of resurrection joy and authority, he preached saying: "This Jesus, you put him to death. . . . but God raised him from the dead. God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ" (Acts 2:31-36).

"In the parable of the wicked tenants, Jesus teaches that those who discard him, will not thereby have gotten rid of him. Jesus was not, and is not now, a passing phenomenon. So truly does Jesus represent reality; so deeply entrenched in the ultimate truth of existence, is his life and teaching, that He, and not his opponents, will prevail. If the universe is a moral place (and Christ himself is the most convincing evidence that it is), then his prediction that he would triumph, even over those who killed him, must come true. Therefore let us treasure the august aspects of his personality, as much as his gentle features, for they signal a world order in which 'goodness', as Jesus taught it, will... reign---unopposed. The stone that was rejected, will become the capstone."

Good News For The Day

‘The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone.’ (Luke 20:17)

"There is a certain inevitability about Christ. He is the fulfillment of Herod's worst nightmare. Herod killed John the Baptist, and when Christ followed, the ruler thought John had risen from the dead. In a sense, it was true. Jesus' first appeals to the corrupt king were made through the Baptist."

"Christ is uncompromising; inexorable. He is unpreventable, unstoppable, unavoidable. An outline of the creation's future is discernible in the personality of Jesus. The new world order will bear the stamp of his character."

"The invincibility of Jesus is good news. It confirms our deepest hope-that the highest values known to humankind, will overcome, and reign. It is good strengthening to believe that... Spirit---is higher than matter. No one really wants to inhabit a world where material values rule. The incarnation of such values are exampled by Adolf Hitler, or Idi Amin."

"It is good news to know that we are loved by a 'tough love'; a love that is not willing to give up, or let go, and hence, a love that suffers long. In short we are loved by a love that will triumph. "Love never fails."

Good News For The Day

‘He who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces, but on whom it falls will be crushed.’ (Matthew 21:44)

"In his parable of the tenants, Jesus looks across the years of Israel's covenant privilege, and gives his interpretation of them. He sees that Israel's history can be stated in terms of its refusal to recognize Him-the rejected stone. Through the prophetic ministry, Christ had made many pre-incarnational appeals to his people. "How often would I have gathered you together, even as a hen gathers her chickens."

"Thus did Jesus claim deep involvement in his nation's history. The Jews had stumbled over the Christ of the Old Testament. Many times the people had been humbled and broken through its rejection of his claims. So it may be with us. Our life story can be understood as the tale of a person engaged in a quest to make terms with the Stone-with Christ."

"From the beginning, Christ has been present to us. Our first meeting with him was through the warmth and love of our mother; then our father, and later, teachers and mentors. Christ has been there in providence; in good and ill. We have bumped into him time and again, in our attempts to be free of his claims. We have fought tooth and nail for our freedom from God. We have been burned and bruised repeatedly. These seasons of brokenness have been gracious. They have been... signs to us---that life will not work any other way but Christ's way."

"God enable me to discern the ministry of Jesus, the Stone, in my life."

313 posted on 05/08/2003 1:29:18 PM PDT by f.Christian (( Marching orders: comfort the afflicted // afflict the comfortable ! ! ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 306 | View Replies]

To: Grando Calrissian
gc ...

Do you mock Ponch -- His existence ?

fC ...


who's ponch -- your bird (( brain )) ?
314 posted on 05/08/2003 1:32:38 PM PDT by f.Christian (( Marching orders: comfort the afflicted // afflict the comfortable ! ! ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 300 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
SOUP FOR ALL!!!

PANCREATIC EVOLUTIONARY SPONGE STEROIDS FOR NONE

315 posted on 05/08/2003 1:33:19 PM PDT by Grando Calrissian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies]

Comment #316 Removed by Moderator

To: f.Christian

BOW DOWN AND PRAY!

317 posted on 05/08/2003 1:36:20 PM PDT by Grando Calrissian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 304 | View Replies]

To: Grando Calrissian
To: DWPittelli

You're missing the point. The whole idea of individual liberty is rooted in rebellion, in the idea that "No one has the right to tell me what to do!". Evil began when Lucifer cried out his eternal non serviam to God in Heaven, and to this day human beings follow in his footsteps, refusing to submit their own wills to any authority.

Rebellion is pandemic in our society; everywhere, people cry out for freedom from Church, State, parents, teachers, or anything else that denies them the satiation of the senses or the deification of the Self. The worship of the goddess Liberty has become our national cult; piety towards our Creator and loyalty towards our ancestors (i.e. traditionalism) have been cast aside by our culture. Confronted with the majesty of God and His Law, we turn instead to the worship of the golden calf of that makes us happy -- our own selves. But there is no happiness there. There is no freedom there. There is only us, enslaved to our nerve endings for all eternity.

The freedom promised by this world is an illusion. Every man who "liberates" himselves from the Yoke of God only chains himself to the millstone of his own desires. The way of Self, as both Our Lord and the Buddha pointed out, is the most abject slavery of all. Only by dying to Self -- by renouncing the illusion of individual liberty and submitting our wills to God -- can we hope to live. In a very real sense, the only way to be free is to become a slave of Christ. "He that loses his life for My sake shall find it."

Only by acknowledging Jesus Christ as our LORD -- not our buddy or our peer but as our absolute Master -- can we ever be free. Christianity is a religion of humilty, not pride; of submission, not of independence. Only by throwing away our pride, by humbling ourselves before God and the authorities he institutes here on Earth (even when it hurts!), and by dedicating ourselves to obedience, order, and our duty can we ever cast of the shackles of unquenchable desire and truly be free.

"Where the Spirit of the LORD is, there is liberty."

23 posted on 05/01/2003 1:40 PM PDT by B-Chan (Catholic. Monarchist. Texan. Any questions?)

To: B-Chan

fC ...

Very good ... protestant -- Christian -- republican -- hawaiian --- any questions !

27 posted on 05/01/2003 2:02 PM PDT by f.Christian (( The separation of state and religion means ... ideology // whacks --- NOT God ! ))

318 posted on 05/08/2003 1:37:17 PM PDT by f.Christian (( Marching orders: comfort the afflicted // afflict the comfortable ! ! ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 315 | View Replies]

To: AmericanAge
2. Science *Is* anti-God. It seeks to disprove His existance every day!

Hmmm. I too yearn for a return to the Dark Ages. Life was so much simpler then!

/taliban_mode>

319 posted on 05/08/2003 1:37:19 PM PDT by RightWingNilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: AmericanAge
It is telling a story, with a moral, if you can't see it, then you are much more closeminded then even I thought.

I am NOT an atheist, just because I do not believe the way you do does not make me an atheist, again, your arrogance is astounding.

Being a conservative, is a political belief, not a religious belief, although, moraltiy is in there, in regards to trustworthiness, committment to law etc, etc. President Bush gets his moral base from religion, if that is what it takes for him, great for him, and great for me too. I don't mind if he's a christian, I wouldn't mind if he wasn't either. He's an honest man, as am I. I can trust him, and I am trustworthy as well. We have the same morals, but from different sources and different reasons. It comes to the same thing. Whether you care to admit it or not.

If you NEED to be a Christian in order to be moral, well that's fine, I just happen to not need the threat of eternal damnation in order to be moral. You obviously do, and that's just fine.

No, it is NOT what evolutionsist claim, you need to study a bit more, I'm tired of feeding information to trolls that really don't want the information anyway.

That's great that you believe that way, but to say that if I am not a christian that I cannot be a conservative, or anything else for that matter is demonizing those that do not have your belief structure. And I am not going to claim that I was just kidding, if you're right and I'm wrong, then I will suffer the consequences. If I'm right and You're wrong, big fricking deal.

To me, if you are a conservative, and believe politically what I believe, then hey, I welcome you to the team, your religious beliefs are not important to me. Only when you try to ram your religious beliefs down my throat, and act arrogant, like you are, do I get defensive.


Oh, and when you claim that somehow because evolution is scientific and therefore atheistic, because it does not agree with your worldview and therefore must be changed or destroyed in order to adapt to your worldview. I get a little uptight, because it shows me that there are religious doctrines out there that will do their best to control information and science in order for them to keep power over their fundamentalist believers.

POWER, it's all about POWER, oh and money. But that's for a whole other thread.
320 posted on 05/08/2003 1:38:39 PM PDT by Aric2000 (Are you on Grampa Dave's team? I am!! $5 a month is all it takes, come join!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340 ... 1,961-1,975 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson