>The interesting part of evolutionary biology is the phenotype,
>about which you have nothing to say, except presumably that there
>is the potential for phenotypic differences due to altered DNA
>sequences. There is also the potential for natural selection to
>preserve a phenotype for a long time, in the face of genetic
>drift. So where is the significance of the 2d law for evolutionary
>biology, other than explaining the basic engine that generates
>an unpredictable range of variations, variations that may or may
>not be favored by natural selection?
As you said, DNA ultimately controls phenotype. That should be enough
connection for anyone. If the 2nd law drives changes in the DNA and DNA
controls changes in phenotype, what exactly is the problem?
>
>> [long mathematical argument]
>> Thus I would contend that evolution is driven by the 2nd law.
>
>Fine, but what else is there to say about the 2d law? Why not just
>explain the situation in familiar Darwinian terms of random variation?
Because we are discussing the 2nd law.
>How would the Darwinian model be different if only Darwin understood
>that
>1 x 10^-2,107,209,969!- 1 x 10^2,107,209,962! = Omega D?
The darwinian model would remain the same.
>> Ah but it does. Have you ever used that screen saver with worms crawling
>> all over your screen? They move randomly but they start out at the same
>> spot on the screen. The fact that they end up at all locations is an effect
>> of the 2nd law. A DNA genome is nothing more than a billion dimensional
>> space and the 10 million animals are similar to putting 10 million worms at
>> the same spot in that multidimensional space. When you start 10 million
>> animals all at the same point in this billion dimensional space and allow
>> random mutations, the animal genomes over time will diverge from the
>> starting point. The path of the genomes over time is exactly like the worms
>> on your screen, only in higher dimensional euclidean spaces.
>
>Okay, except you have no grounds for saying anything intreresting about
>any particular genome or group of genomes, about their evolutionary past or
>future, about constraints on their evolution, or about their phenotypes.
>
You have a very narrow definition of "interesting". You seem to thing that
the only "interesting" thing about evolution would be if it could predict
that felis domesticus will evolve in a deterministic fashion into some
predeterminable creature. Under that definition we would have to say that
meteorologists have nothing interesting to say about the weather. They
can't predict what the present state of the atmosphere will evolve into in
two weeks hence.
>> >So everything is going to blow up or run down or something in the end--
>> >what does that tell me about evolution?
>>
>> That is NOT the meaning of the 2nd law!!!!! The 2nd law says that things go
>> from the improbable to the probable. It is more probable for the molecules
>> in my office to spread out throughout the volume than it is for them to be
>> concentrated in one corner. This is different than saying that the 2nd law
>> says things run down.
>
>You can make predictions about the probable behavior of gas molecules,
>but to make predictions in evolutionary biology you need to know more
>than the 2d law. If I asked something about an email program's behavior,
>would your explanation cite Ohm's law? There's a connection, but it's so
>many levels away that it can be reasonably deemed irrelevant to the
>discussion.
>
I can also make preditions about the probable behavior of a species. It
will diverge into many species.
>I really have no clue as to what your point is. I know some folks
>simply claim that the 2d law proves that evolution could not have
>occurred. I presume that is not what you're up to.
Since I have claimed that evolution is driven by the 2nd law, how in the
world could you wonder that I am up to claiming "that the 2d law proves that
evolution could not have occurred"?
I believe in evolution. My point is that I disagree with those who do claim
that the 2nd law disproves evolution.
glenn
Adam, Apes, and Anthropology: Finding the Soul of Fossil Man
and
Foundation, Fall and Flood
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm