Artificial Life Experiments Show How Complex Functions Can Evolve

NSF ^ | May 8, 2003 | Staff

[null and void]

Also, as technologically savy as you are, I assumed you had a really old machine.

;^)

[Aric2000]

Indeed, but it had been patented in 2000, and there have been more patents pending since then.

This must be a real disapointment to you....

Wow, it could actually change an entire worldview, what a concept.

Doesn't hurt mine though, my faith is not based on a neverchanging outlook on life.

[AndrewC]

I think you just proved my point.

What point. Cost was not part of the design, compactness was. 9 is less than 17. 17 is less than 55,000,000. Gee isn't that easy.

[null and void]

I see. In your world a coma "," is not compact, but a period "." is...

[AndrewC]

Indeed, but it had been patented in 2000, and there have been more patents pending since then.

No it hadn't!! The article was written in Feb 2003. The quote was in the article. I saw no evidence of a granted patent for the tuning algorithms or topology.

[AndrewC]

I see. In your world a coma "," is not compact, but a period "." is...

Red Herring. Comma and period both are a single character.

[Quick1]

Elements and atoms are NOT science. The study of them is.

Prove to me that the study of elements and atoms has not changed.

[balrog666]

So, the first troll got things rolling downhill and the old trolls keep it rolling. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[Dataman]

No one really knows who wrote much of the New Testament.

Now there's a universal you'd have some difficulty supporting.

I take it you're not a scholar of koine Greek? Fine, neither am I.

A scholar, no. I can read it and understand it which I suspect is something you are unable to do.

Let's stick to the plain English meaning. And in English, a matter that is proven by the preponderance of evidence does not require faith.

??!!!??? That only works if you define faith to suit your own bias. Perhaps those who saw Christ's miracles no longer could have faith in Him. Did Thomas lose his faith when he touched Christ's wounds? No! He had absolute proof and his response was, "My Lord and my God!"

Bottom line: Your definition of faith doesn't square with the Bible. Since we all know who the Author of faith is, it only makes sense to apply the meaning He intends rather than an unbeliever's personal fancy.

If the universe were inanimate, the question would be 'how', not 'why'. Stipulating that this has nothing to do with evolution. I think the best answer which is in accordance with modern physical theory would be that the vacuum is unstable with respect to non-vacuum. A vacuum is the most symmetric possible state; but universally in the physical sciences we see phenomena where more symmetric systems spontaneously break symmetry and become less symmetric.

Nice swing-and-miss. Materialistic cosmology denies the existence of said vacuum before the BB. So where did the vacuum come from?

There is no satisfactory alternative to Creation.

[PatrickHenry]

I'm sure that any Freeper practicing engineer will correct me if I'm wrong, but I suspect that most circuits are up and running long before anyone writes a verbal description. That would be done by a technical writer, who might be a lawyer or work under the supervision of a lawyer.

I've seen a large number of patents (and patent applications) in the electronics field. The one quoted in this thread is typical in its detail and style. The patent lawyers I've known are indeed engineers (who for one reason or another went on to law school). It's nerd city, usually, with pocket protectors, and probably a youth spent wearing propeller beanies, but they're amazingly bright. They are quite capable of writing such descriptions after briefly consulting with the inventors. It's the drawings, in my experience, that are done by a specialized technical person.

[CobaltBlue]

According to my husband, what is required in a patent application is that the device be described with sufficient certainty that it can be constructed by someone who is learned in the art.

Upstream somebody said that a computer program has designed a circuit and that the device in question has been built but the engineers are not really sure how it works.

If they built it, they can certainly describe how they built it with sufficient certainty that a replica can be constructed by someone who is learned in the art.

[f.Christian]

Aren't you confusing learning -- perception -- symbols with subject // object ...

two sometimes opposite things ---

has physics // mathematics ever changed ?

"such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena" ...

does that change ---

physical world ?

phenomena ... things we see --- don't understand ?


The definition I work by ... in a positive science you don't interject your value system or your bias --- those change all the time --- not science !

[whattajoke]

There is no satisfactory alternative to Creation.

does your assertion therefore allow for different "creations?" Cause even you must be aware that there are countless creation myths, right? There are entire religions/cultures that don't pay head to the Genesis account. Which Creation?

Ooooooooooooooooooooohhhhhhhh, you mean the Fundamentalist christian version of things! Your failure to see the silliness of your assertion speaks volumes.

[whattajoke]

"head" = "heed."

[CobaltBlue]

Evolutionists don't ignore the questions involving the origin of the Universe and the origin of life, but it's a philosophical question, not a scientific question.

I think what you're doing is ignoring the questions of how God created the universe and life on earth. You really can't know that by reading the Bible, because it doesn't really explain it.

The Bible says God did it in 6 days, but it doesn't say how long a day is to God.

[Lurking Libertarian]

Placemarker.

[null and void]

A coma is bigger than a period. A 17 transistor circuit is bigger than a 9 transistor circuit, yet you describe one as being compact, and the other as not being compact.

I'm trying to determine where in your pea brain something is no longer compact.

Is it 100 square microns? 200? 300?

For scale, a hair has a cross section of about 5000 sqµ...

[CobaltBlue]

My husband wants to know if the circuit you are talking about is this one:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6362718.WKU.&OS=PN/6362718&RS=PN/6362718

[Aric2000]

Sorry, information overload, you're right, it wasn't explained in this article. My apologies.

I have read elsewhere, that this device had been patented in 2000 and since then there have been a number of others that have been submitted.

Hence the term, Patent Pending.

Sorry, but NOT all of my information comes from this forum, but then again, I should have been more succinct, you can't seem to handle the fact that evolution does INDEED work, and is proven EVERY day.

Yep, must be tough for you guys, but then again, galileo made it awfully tough for the church too, but they finally came around.

[f.Christian]

"Not true" ...

most patents are not in reality --- they are supposed to be !

Patent examiners are like traffic cops and mayors court --- moneymakers !