Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!isi.edu!smoliar From: smoliar@isi.edu (Stephen Smoliar) Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy Subject: Re: computer life? Message-ID: <17187@venera.isi.edu> Date: 16 Mar 91 02:02:44 GMT References: <2179@cluster.cs.su.oz.au> <1991Mar11.165932.19507@news.larc.nasa.gov> <4149@aipna.ed.ac.uk> <1991Mar13.225321.14042@Think.COM> <1991Mar14.170618.1731@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au> Reply-To: smoliar@venera.isi.edu (Stephen Smoliar) Organization: Information Sciences Institute, Univ. of So. California Lines: 45 In article <1991Mar14.170618.1731@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au> u1365281@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au writes: >In article <1991Mar13.225321.14042@Think.COM>, kurt@think.com (Kurt Thearling) >writes: > >> >> You might be interested in "Self-Reproducing Automata and the Origin of >> Life," Robert C. Newman, Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, >> vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 24-31. In this article the self-reproducing automaton >> designed by Chris Langton is analyzed to show that life is designed. >> >> From the abstract: "... Langton's very simple self-reproducing automaton is >> described in detail. The complexity of Langton's automaton strongly >> suggests that life is designed rather than accidental." >> >> Newman computes the time to required consider all of the possible designs >> for such a self-reproducing automaton. This time is (in his estimate) >> 3 * 10**139 years. He then assumes that the universe is 20 billion years >> old to determine that the probablility of producing the self-reproducing >> automaton via random formation is 10**-129. >> >> >> kurt >> > >Of course Lord Kelvin thought he showed Darwin was wrong by showing that >the Sun would have cooled long ago if Darwin were right. Kelvin did not >know about nuclear reactions. > >In the life case, it is wrong to take all possible combinations, since >early combinations severly restrict future combinations. We call this >historical constraint (see Brooks and Wiley, _Evolution as Entropy_ >Chicago: 1988). > There is also a question of how Newman came up with his time estimate. Even assuming that you WANT to consider an unguided search through all possibilities, there is no need to assume that the search be sequential. If Kelvin did not know about nuclear reactions, Newman may not know about the Burgess shale and the possibility of truly MASSIVE possibilities all be explored concurrently. -- USPS: Stephen Smoliar 5000 Centinela Avenue #129 Los Angeles, California 90066 Internet: smoliar@venera.isi.edu