On 07/12/2015 09:38, email@example.com wrote:
Message: 4 Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2015 22:01:40 -0500 From: "DAVID SAROFF (RIT Student)"firstname.lastname@example.org To: Discussion of Numerical Pythonnumpyemail@example.com Cc: Stefi Baumstefibaumodea@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Numpy-discussion] array of random numbers fails to construct Message-ID: CABMftcSkX9kL=G2sepOn80YCKQygFGHa7WBdmAxy3_1iVAtJcw@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
I see with a google search on your name that you are in the physics department at Rutgers. I got my BA in Physics there. 1975. Biological physics. A thought: Is there an entropy that can be assigned to the dna in an organism? I don't mean the usual thing, coupled to the heat bath. Evolution blindly explores metabolic and signalling pathways, and tends towards disorder, as long as it functions. Someone working out signaling pathways some years ago wrote that they were senselessly complex, branched and interlocked. I think that is to be expected. Evolution doesn't find minimalist, clear, rational solutions. Look at the amazon rain forest. What are all those beetles and butterflies and frogs for? It is the wrong question. I think some measure of the complexity could be related to the amount of time that ecosystem has existed. Similarly for genomes.
Dear David, You are mistaken in this remark in your message;
Evolution blindly explores metabolic and signalling pathways, and tends towards disorder, as long as it functions.
In fact, biological evolution does just the opposite. It overcomes disorder and creates complexity at the expense of 'pulling in' energy from the outside, from the environemnt.
Of course you are correct that biological evolution does NOT look for nor does it achieve optimum solutions. It merely replaces current mechanism with another mechanism biologically derived from the current mechanism, provided only that the replacement mechanism is marginally, fractionally superior in the totality of the life of the ecosystem.
Have a good day,
On Dec 7, 2015 3:41 AM, "Sydney Shall" firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
In fact, biological evolution does just the opposite. [...]
Can I suggest that any further follow-ups to this no-doubt fascinating discussion be taken off-list? No need to acknowledge or apologize or anything, just trying to keep the noise down.