Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Starboy · 08-15-2002, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Doubting Didymus:
However, there IS a theory in the abiogenesis department that clay crystals might count as a replicator, so dont count your rocks before they've hatched.

That also goes for ice crystals, do they also evolve?

Starboy

Doubting Didymus · 08-15-2002, 07:51 PM

Dont get me wrong Starboy, its not MY theory. The theory that clay crystals have the capacity to evolve is discussed breifly in the blind watchmaker. Basically: clay crystals can reproduce, by layering. Any mutations, such as an imperfection on the crystal surface, is inherited by the next generation. Occasionally, a layer or group of layers breaks off, and this layer begins growing its own layers. Although the possibily seems fairly remote, the theory seem fairly sound.

I think that ice crystals do not layer and break off in quite the same way as clay crystals. I think that mutations on the surface of an ice crystal would grow over rather than be passed on. Also, at least on earth, ice crystals would be too transient, and would not stick around for long enough to evolve into a more permanent form.

monkenstick · 08-15-2002, 08:03 PM

this board is so much more fun than the others. The evolution denial here is amusing rather than frustrating

Starboy · 08-15-2002, 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Doubting Didymus:
Dont get me wrong Starboy, its not MY theory. The theory that clay crystals have the capacity to evolve is discussed breifly in the blind watchmaker. Basically: clay crystals can reproduce, by layering. Any mutations, such as an imperfection on the crystal surface, is inherited by the next generation. Occasionally, a layer or group of layers breaks off, and this layer begins growing its own layers. Although the possibily seems fairly remote, the theory seem fairly sound.

I think that ice crystals do not layer and break off in quite the same way as clay crystals. I think that mutations on the surface of an ice crystal would grow over rather than be passed on. Also, at least on earth, ice crystals would be too transient, and would not stick around for long enough to evolve into a more permanent form.

How do snow flakes fit into this picture?

Starboy

Doubting Didymus · 08-15-2002, 08:15 PM

I don't know of snow flakes that split into new, identical snowflakes, so I don't think they count. The transience thing would still be a problem, on earth at least, as the problem with melting would be restrictive. Also, (though I am not completely confident of this), I think that the structure of ice would mean that, even in snowflakes, mutations on the surface would grow over, rather than pass on. Correct me if I am wrong on this count.

Camaban · 08-15-2002, 08:23 PM

*mutters about dirty god-damned hippies*

Starboy · 08-15-2002, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Doubting Didymus:
I don't know of snow flakes that split into new, identical snowflakes, so I don't think they count. The transience thing would still be a problem, on earth at least, as the problem with melting would be restrictive. Also, (though I am not completely confident of this), I think that the structure of ice would mean that, even in snowflakes, mutations on the surface would grow over, rather than pass on. Correct me if I am wrong on this count.

I was not aware of the clay crystal phenomena. However if you assume that mankind is a natural force then you could argue that integrated circuits evolve.

Starboy

Doubting Didymus · 08-15-2002, 08:48 PM

I am not sure what an integrated circuit is, but if it replicates, mutates, and inherits then it can evolve, in the sense that we mean. Applying natural selection to a randomly varying object, however, is a slightly different thing. Using that method, you could get an advanced and efficient circuit, but if it does not produce children, it will not evolve as a species does.

MrDarwin · 08-16-2002, 05:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Doubting Didymus:
Please, everyone. Stop talking about whether auras are real or not. Thaioouba has posited a hypothetical situation, in which auras are discovered to be real. This conversation should be about whether or not this would pose a problem for evolutuionary theory.

At the moment, I can not see anything that would prevent the evolution of auras if they were possible things. Thaioouba may need to clarify exactly what problems he/she thinks the aura would pose for evolution.

I have already asked Thiaoouba to clarify just what problem he sees, but he has not replied. Judging from his previous post-and-run behavior on this board, I'm not holding my breath. He has amply demonstrated that he is not interested in actually discussing evolution, or even its problems (real or perceived).

Oolon Colluphid · 08-16-2002, 06:16 AM

The clay crystals hypothesis comes I think from A G Cairns-Smith, in his <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0521398282/qid=1029506665/sr=1-5/ref=sr_1_5/102-5540742-2760949" target="_blank">Seven Clues to the Origins of Life</a>, and, as previously mentioned, Dawkins uses it in Blind Watchmaker.

From what I remember (and I haven�t read the Cairns-Smith yet) the idea is that clay crystals would be rough replicators. A clay that dried out more easily into small particles could be more �successful� at getting itself blown on the wind, and so could seed another pond / lake / whatever. It would out-compete heavier particles or ones that held water more readily. Later, the surfaces of clay crystals could have acted as templates for the first organic (carbon-chain) replicators... and off we go with evolution.

I don�t know what the status of the hypothesis is, but apparently montmorillonite clay can catalyze the synthesis of RNA polymers.

More info here:
<a href="http://www.origins.rpi.edu/clayandtheoriginsoflife.html" target="_blank">www.origins.rpi.edu/clayandtheoriginsoflife.html</a>

Cheers, Oolon

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-15-2002, 07:51 PM	#32
Doubting Didymus Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: East Coast. Australia. Posts: 5,455	Dont get me wrong Starboy, its not MY theory. The theory that clay crystals have the capacity to evolve is discussed breifly in the blind watchmaker. Basically: clay crystals can reproduce, by layering. Any mutations, such as an imperfection on the crystal surface, is inherited by the next generation. Occasionally, a layer or group of layers breaks off, and this layer begins growing its own layers. Although the possibily seems fairly remote, the theory seem fairly sound. I think that ice crystals do not layer and break off in quite the same way as clay crystals. I think that mutations on the surface of an ice crystal would grow over rather than be passed on. Also, at least on earth, ice crystals would be too transient, and would not stick around for long enough to evolve into a more permanent form.

08-15-2002, 08:03 PM	#33
monkenstick Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 214	this board is so much more fun than the others. The evolution denial here is amusing rather than frustrating

08-15-2002, 08:15 PM	#35
Doubting Didymus Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: East Coast. Australia. Posts: 5,455	I don't know of snow flakes that split into new, identical snowflakes, so I don't think they count. The transience thing would still be a problem, on earth at least, as the problem with melting would be restrictive. Also, (though I am not completely confident of this), I think that the structure of ice would mean that, even in snowflakes, mutations on the surface would grow over, rather than pass on. Correct me if I am wrong on this count.

08-15-2002, 08:23 PM	#36
Camaban Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 473	mutters about dirty god-damned hippies

08-15-2002, 08:48 PM	#38
Doubting Didymus Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: East Coast. Australia. Posts: 5,455	I am not sure what an integrated circuit is, but if it replicates, mutates, and inherits then it can evolve, in the sense that we mean. Applying natural selection to a randomly varying object, however, is a slightly different thing. Using that method, you could get an advanced and efficient circuit, but if it does not produce children, it will not evolve as a species does.

08-16-2002, 06:16 AM	#40
Oolon Colluphid Contributor Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Alibi: ego ipse hinc extermino Posts: 12,591	The clay crystals hypothesis comes I think from A G Cairns-Smith, in his <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0521398282/qid=1029506665/sr=1-5/ref=sr_1_5/102-5540742-2760949" target="_blank">Seven Clues to the Origins of Life</a>, and, as previously mentioned, Dawkins uses it in Blind Watchmaker. From what I remember (and I haven�t read the Cairns-Smith yet) the idea is that clay crystals would be rough replicators. A clay that dried out more easily into small particles could be more �successful� at getting itself blown on the wind, and so could seed another pond / lake / whatever. It would out-compete heavier particles or ones that held water more readily. Later, the surfaces of clay crystals could have acted as templates for the first organic (carbon-chain) replicators... and off we go with evolution. I don�t know what the status of the hypothesis is, but apparently montmorillonite clay can catalyze the synthesis of RNA polymers. More info here: <a href="http://www.origins.rpi.edu/clayandtheoriginsoflife.html" target="_blank">www.origins.rpi.edu/clayandtheoriginsoflife.html</a> Cheers, Oolon

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.