Artificial Life Experiments Show How Complex Functions Can Evolve

NSF ^ | May 8, 2003 | Staff

[f.Christian]

Main Entry: 1ag·nos·tic
Pronunciation: ag-'näs-tik, &g-
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek agnOstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnOstos known, from gignOskein to know -- more at KNOW
Date: 1869
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
- ag·nos·ti·cism /-t&-"si-z&m/ noun

[f.Christian]

Main Entry: athe·ism
Pronunciation: 'A-thE-"i-z&m
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French athéisme, from athée atheist, from Greek atheos godless, from a- + theos god
Date: 1546
1 archaic : UNGODLINESS, WICKEDNESS
2 a : a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there is no deity

[whattajoke]

Interesting that you don't bother cutting and pasting the definition of atheist, since I don't see a part about "hating god" as you state. Atheists don't "hate god," as there's nothing to hate, you goofball. I certainly don't "hate god" anymore than I hate leprechauns or Nessie.

Main Entry: athe·ist
Pronunciation: 'A-thE-ist
Function: noun
Date: 1571
: one who denies the existence of God
- athe·is·tic /"A-thE-'is-tik/ or athe·is·ti·cal /"A-thE-'is-ti-k&l/ adjective
- athe·is·ti·cal·ly /-ti-k(&-)lE/ adverb

[Dataman]

Uh, no, a vacuum is the absence of 'something'. Specifically it is the abscence of matter, which would allow for it to contain light, but it does not contain light by definition, so a vacuum could very well be 'nothing'.

Oh. Light, energy and matter exist in nothing. Space is nothing. The universe is therefore nothing even as it expands. OK, real good....

Do you think a vacuum requires space? Space is something-- even your naturalistic cosmologists admit that. A vacuum is the absence of something like a steak dinner is the absence of chicken. Things can exist in a vacuum. Things cannot exist in nothing.

I find the great lengths at which you evos will go to deny the obvious nothing short of astounding-- especially when creationists are accused of the same thing.

[null and void]

Agnostic merely means "without knowledge".

A Theist "knows" there is a God/Gods.

An Atheist "knows" there is no God/Gods.

IMHO, it requires every bit as much faith to believe there is no God as to believe there is...

[whattajoke]

ok,you beat me to it... but I still fail to see anything about "hating" anything or "truth//science" whatever the hell that means.

[donh]

Must be a strange occupation, watching all this take place.

If you mean these endlessly repeated, feeble, ignorance-couched creationism debate ploys, I half-heartedly concur.

If you mean artificial life experiments, I whole-heartedly concur. I think Chastein and Wolfram have got a tiger by the tail. In the next 50 years, I expect the debate about origins to move heavily in the direction of their research into uncomputability and a-life. And I hope to be still around to see how their work manifests itself on the factory floor. It will move us beyond programming to some other mode of interaction with our programs that more approximates a partnership and it will leave the tangential AI stuff I now employ in the dust.

[null and void]

OK, you're ahead of me here...

[AndrewC]

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.

The relevant assertion is that a circuit patented in 2000 providing a certain output was replicated in function by a genetic algorithm. This novel circuit is alleged to have improved upon the performance of the patented circuit in some unsubstantiated way. The circuit achieved by the human designer had as a requirement compactness. Also included as a requirement was sustained operation into the gigahertz range. If you look at the design in the patent, there are no resistors within its design or description. There are a total of 9 semiconductor elements in the design, five NPN transistors and 4 diodes. The genetic design "competed" against the patented circuit in a modified version. It introduced 2 resistors and used transistors to act as diodes. This will have an effect on the operation of the circuit.

[Ten Megaton Solution]

Toast, US Patent #6,080,436

A Patent for a varation on the theme of Peanut Butter and Jelly, UP Patent #6,004,596

James Randi on PB & J:
When I found out they'd issued a patent recently on "toast" and on a variety of the peanut-butter-and-jelly sandwich, I was sufficiently stunned, but this one is The Winner in the Stupid Field, hands-down. I cannot, in my widest imaginings (and I'm adept at that art, I assure you) come up with any means of turning a profit on 6,368,227, unless the intent is to close down playgrounds all over the globe.... Look it up, but be seated when you read it....

[Right Wing Professor]

Hey- I thought you were going to give me the last word.

Usually, when someone does that, the person with the last word knows better than to use it for a put-down. Next time, be gracious, and I won't change my mind.

[f.Christian]

the doctrine (( dogma )) that there is no deity

Main Entry: dog·ma
Pronunciation: 'dog-m&, 'däg-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural dogmas also dog·ma·ta /-m&-t&/
Etymology: Latin dogmat-, dogma, from Greek, from dokein to seem -- more at DECENT
Date: 1638
1 a : something held as an established opinion; especially : a definite authoritative tenet b : a code of such tenets < pedagogical dogma > c : a point of view or tenet put forth as authoritative without adequate grounds
2 : a doctrine or body of doctrines concerning faith or morals formally stated and authoritatively proclaimed by a church

[Dataman]

Evolution is a theory of biology. It has nothing to do with universe origins.

Ok. That means evolutionists won't object when it is posited that God created the universe and God caused life from non-life. You can't object because you just said your theory has nothing to do with those two miracles.

Let it be known here and now that Dimensio insists evolution has nothing to say about God's creation of the universe or His bringing forth of life from non-life.

That evolution is an attempt to remove God from every aspect of human life is a creationist strawman

That happens to be your straw man argument since I have never seen a creationist put it forth.

[Celtjew Libertarian]

Artificial life is not LIFE.

I'm not so sure of that.

Artificial life is life with a creator. Life, as we live it, is life with a Creator. If anything, artificial life demonstrates a parallel that bolsters the case that God exists. It's only artificial, if you want to say that what God creates is real, but what man creates is not.

[Dataman]

Usually, when someone does that, the person with the last word knows better than to use it for a put-down.

There was no put-down. I invite you to read it again.

[f.Christian]

theism: for

agnostic: neutral

a-theist: a-gainst !

[Right Wing Professor]

"I can read it and understand it which I suspect is something you are unable to do."

[jwalsh07]

Not necessary. :-)

[Ten Megaton Solution]

IMHO, it requires every bit as much faith to believe there is no God as to believe there is...

That's why one shouldn't introduce the concept of "belief" or "faith" into the discussion. Establish your atheism as a scientific theory, and let your oppeonents prove your theory false.

The good athiest says, "There is no God". It's up to the person insisting a God exists to pony up his proof.

So far, no evidence to contradict the theory has been provided.

[donh]

Wait now. What we really need is a in intensity gradient of nothingness. If we call intersteller space nothingness[sub0]--really, quite a poor example of nothingness, what with all those dust particles, cosmic rays, and light beams constantly interrupting it's reverie. Then we can call ideal vacuum nothingness[sub1], what with it still having dimension to exist in, and spontaneous eruptions of particles from nothing. And we had better, than, call true absense of Anything nothingness[sub2].

But wait, what's a void, and what is nil? Is a nil argument in c++ an example of nothingness[sub2]? And with this tool, perhaps we can address a classic question: how many vacuums can you fit in a void?

I'll be applying for a Kirby Nothingness Duplicator patent shortly. If mickey mouse can belong to Disney forever, there's no reason I can't patent a technique for nothingness-stuffing.