Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Stochasticity and Natural Selection
Parsimonious_Razor
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 5 (169186)
12-16-2004 10:48 PM


Perhaps it’s hopeless but I would still like to pursue the idea from the last few posts in the great debate/syamsu thread. This one can be a little more focused and look specifically at what role stochastic processes have in natural selection and evolution.
The exchange starts around here:
http://EvC Forum: Anyone interested in taking on Syamsu in a "Great Debate"? -->EvC Forum: Anyone interested in taking on Syamsu in a "Great Debate"?
It ended with my attempts at an extremely simplistic mathematical treatment of stochastic elements in natural selection. Syamsu responded with the idea that an organism’s likelihood of survival was small to begin with so any stochastic processes prevent the fittest from surviving. Maybe Syamsu could respond here with specifically what role he thinks stochastic processes play in nature and why they invalidate natural selection as an agent of reaching optimal fitness in a given fitness landscape. And we could go from there.

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Syamsu, posted 12-17-2004 3:35 AM Parsimonious_Razor has not replied

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 2 of 5 (169200)
12-17-2004 12:04 AM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Ben!, posted 12-17-2004 3:40 AM AdminNosy has not replied

  
Syamsu 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5590 days)
Posts: 1914
From: amsterdam
Joined: 05-19-2002


Message 3 of 5 (169253)
12-17-2004 3:35 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Parsimonious_Razor
12-16-2004 10:48 PM


I suggest you read the "natural selection is wrong thread" referenced earlier, and the paper referenced therein.
Obviously if the expected outcome of natural selection for a good deal of cases is that the less fit reproduce, then natural selection is invalidated as a means of reaching optimal fitness. It is there a means of reaching less then optimal fitness. It just depends on the scenario if natural selection leads to optimal fitness.
Obviously this mistake of survival of the fittest would never have been made if natural selection had been formulated individually in stead of comparitively.
After the mistake has been found out that the fittest don't actually survive, the next mistake to be found out is that populations actually go extinct.
10X each with probability of 0.00001 percent of reproduction
5Y each with probability of 0.00005 percent of reproduction
A huge 5 times more likely to reproduce advantage for Y variants!
Now what would differential reproductive success result in?
Maybe this should be covered by the theory of differential reproductive failure?.........
A word like "success" in a theory should make any science minded person sucpicious about the scientific merit of the theory.
But all discussed countless times before, as for example in the "natural selection is wrong" thread.
regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Parsimonious_Razor, posted 12-16-2004 10:48 PM Parsimonious_Razor has not replied

  
Ben!
Member (Idle past 1399 days)
Posts: 1161
From: Hayward, CA
Joined: 10-14-2004


Message 4 of 5 (169255)
12-17-2004 3:40 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by AdminNosy
12-17-2004 12:04 AM


Duplicate thread?
AdminNosy,
I designed this thread for (I believe) discussion of the same topic:
Natural Heuristic Solutions: Evidence Against Creationism?
I wanted to add the reference here. If you want to close the other, as it is duplicate to this one, I'm fine with that.
Ben

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by AdminNosy, posted 12-17-2004 12:04 AM AdminNosy has not replied

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 5 of 5 (175588)
01-10-2005 5:24 PM


Thread moved here from the Biological Evolution II forum.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024