>One thing we might
>take from Kauffman's experience goes along the lines of what Glenn
>said. There are apparently a great number of models falling within
>the generic class of models that Kauffman is considering with only
>a very few of them having the property of giving a robust response
>without being overly constrained by the initial conditions. So
>again we have an apparent fortuitousness upon which anthropic
>principles are based. Also, the strange attractors seem to be
>located at very convenient places ;-).
>
What I argued for in the Spring of '95, when Behe and I discussed design
was almost precisely what Brian hit upon here. The polymers made of amino
acids (proteins) have a phase space (call it a function space if you want)
in which you can map the function of a protein onto the sequence space.
(for those who don't know a sequence space is a multidimensional space in
which the number of dimensions equals the number of amino acids in the
protein). The topology of the function map is quite convoluted and
complex. A given function does not necessarily occur only in one isolated
part of the space but is spread throughout like dust on a coffee table.
What this can mean is that starting with randomly generated sequences, and
then randomly mutating them, you can probably find a sequence which
performs the desired function. (Once again I cite the accessible "Directed
Molecular Evolution" Scientific American Dec 1992, p. 90ff) In that
article Joyce describes how randomly generated sequences of RNA can be
mutated and reproduced to create molecules of almost any property.
These functional maps on sequence space are like the strange attractors of
chaos theory fame. And as Brian noted, the strange attractors are located
at very convenient places. I believe that science is in the process of
discovering that the functional attractors in biological polymers are
similarly arranged so that it is almost inevitable that functions needed
for life are easy to find. In my mind, this is evidence of design because
it is like having the roulette wheel rigged to give black 34 all the time.
Why should we expect so many molecules to perform the same function? I
would say we shouldn't expect this, and history says that not many
evolutionists or Christian anti-evolutionists anticipated this finding.
This is design THROUGH or by means of evolution. The typical Christian
approach is: evolution is untrue, therefore life is designed. I think it
is designed because the evolution is true.
glenn
Foundation,Fall and Flood
http://members.gnn.com/GRMorton/dmd.htm