A forum for discussion and criticism of specialized topics relevant (pro and con) to Intelligent Design (ID) -- design detection, design specification, irreducible complexity, origin of life, platonic forms, design matrix, population genetics, cybernetic theories, semiotic theories, Fishers's fundamental theorem, Kimura's neutral evolution, Darwinian evolution, modern synthesis, probability theories, fine tuning, typology, discontinuity systematics, steganography, evolutionary algorithms, published ID material, ID philosophy, front loaded evolution, omega point theory, anthropic principles, multiverses and many-worlds, panspermia, extra terrestrials, teleology in biology, redundant complexity and fault tolerance, algorithmic complexity, complexity measures, no free lunch, blindwatchmakers, bad design, evil design, junk DNA, DNA grammars, von Neumann replicators vs. autocatalysis, Quines, polyconstrained DNA, Mendel's Accountant, DNA skittle, re-association kinetics, molecular clocks, GGU/GID models, enigma of consciousness and Quantum Mechanics, Turing machines, Lenski's bacteria, thermodynamics, Avida, self organization, self disorganization, generalized entropy, Cambrian explosion, genetic entropy, Shannon information, proscriptive information, Programming of Life, law of large numbers, etc.
by WinstonEwert » Tue Apr 08, 2014 8:29 pm
I recently had a paper published at bio-complexity:
This is a thread to discuss the paper or ask questions of the author (me).
To participate in this thread, you must read the paper and come with an attitude of seeking to understand the paper's argument even if you don't accept its conclusions. Anyone who seeks to merely complain, mock, or disrupt discussion of the paper will be uninvited.
-
WinstonEwert
-
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 12:01 am
by johnspenn » Wed Apr 09, 2014 7:41 pm
Winston,
Congrats on getting your work published. It all made perfect sense to me, although I am already convinced that life itself is irreducibly complex.
It seems to me like it's a lot of work to prove something that should be as obvious as the nose on one's face, but the work is necessary and thankfully there are smart guys like you to do it. Keep up the good work!
-
johnspenn
-
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 7:27 pm
by DiEb » Thu Apr 10, 2014 12:44 pm
-
DiEb
-
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 1:48 am
by Roy » Fri Apr 11, 2014 2:55 pm
Two quick questions:
1) Why does your calculation for Tierra group the individual instructions into 'genes', but your calculation for Avida not do so?
2) Why do you state that Dave Thomas's Steiner tree model contains only binary state objects when the additional nodes have a million possible positions?
Roy
-
Roy
-
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 6:13 pm
by stcordova » Fri Apr 11, 2014 8:26 pm
-
stcordova
-
- Posts: 447
- Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 1:41 am
by Roy » Sat Apr 12, 2014 6:42 am
-
Roy
-
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 6:13 pm
Return to Intelligent Design