From: kv07@IASTATE.EDU (Warren Vonroeschlaub)
Subject: Re: Probability of Evolution
Reply-To: kv07@IASTATE.EDU (Warren Vonroeschlaub)
Organization: Ministry of Silly Walks
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 23:41:49 GMT

In article <em48TB7w165w@kalki33>, kalki33!system@lakes.trenton.sc.us writes:
> kv07@IASTATE.EDU (Warren Vonroeschlaub) writes:
>>  1) Do you know any programming?  Download and examine the Tierra simulator.
>>The program does not do anything to the artificial life it is simulationg exc
>>obey their commands and randomly mutate them.
>> 
>>  2) The universe can be viewed as a computer processor.  The laws of physics
>>are the assembly code, the atoms & molecules are commands & data.
> 
> And who, in this analogy, is the programmer?

  Completely beside the point.  This has nothing to do with the topic at hand. 
If you want to discuss this, I will gladly take it up with you on
talk.religion.misc.

  the point was that if the universe can be considered a computer, then your
objection to the tierra simulator as evidence because it is a computer is
unfounded.  You did not address this.

>>  3) No computer can be programmed to change reality, trust me on this.
> 
>So the computer that is programmed to control the operation of a
>gene-splicer is not changing reality? What do you mean by "reality",
>then? If you mean matter, then certainly a computer can be programmed to
>change matter. The electrons that are in the computer are changing their
>positions as a direct result of the program being run.

  This was in response to your comment that a good programmer can program a
computer to change stone into bread in a nanosecond.  If you have a computer
interface for altering matter in this way I would love to see a demo.  Until
then the objection holds.

>>  False assumption.  First, the universe _is_ a computer (so to speak).  Seco
>>the mear existence of code actives the Universe 1.0, one atom and it is up &
>>running, no programmer needed.
> 
> Where did the code come from, if there is no programmer?

  Again, we can take this up on t.r.m.  My point was that there is no need to
start it up.  It works independantly of any startup code.  As for where the
universe comes from, a number of researchers have come up with a great deal of
evidence that has been highly popularized in many books.  If you are that
interested, they are recommended.

>>  The point was that the life wasn't created by an intelligent being.  The
>>"physical laws" were determined by a human, but the rest happened on its own.
> 
>If the "physical laws" were determined by a human, then where was the
>human before he invented the laws? Where did the human come from, since
>he could not have been produced by the action of the laws, which did not
>exist until he determined them?

  Not the physical laws for the universe, for the computer simulation.  Again, I
have to point out that since we are ina universe, just as there _must_ have been
_some_ initial conditions, there must also have been _some_ physical laws. 
Whether or not the ones we have are probable or improbably is moot, no matter
what happened there would have been _something_.

> I don't know, prabhu, your statements seem to be getting less and less
> scientific.

  No, you are just missing the point by a wider and wider mark, shishya.

 |  __L__
-|-  ___  Warren Kurt vonRoeschlaub
 |  | o | kv07@iastate.edu
 |/ `---' Iowa State University
/|   ___  Math Department
 |  |___| 400 Carver Hall
 |  |___| Ames, IA  50011
 J  _____