Yup, I was denying.. just curious to see whether he would come up with some Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I never said that chemistry was random.. But what dictates 'the laws of thermodynamics and other physical laws' ? And do we know exactly how the laws of thermodynamics and other physical laws dictate the specific characteristics of the various elements ? I don't think so Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
If we didn't know how the laws of thermodynamics dicate how atoms and molecules will interact with one another, we wouldn't be able to predict the outcome of a chemical reaction. But we can make those predictions, so I'd say we have a pretty good understanding of how to apply the laws of thermodynamics to chemical systems.
Ok, so how did this laws come into existence ? Was their existence painstakingly planned and plotted ?
What are you getting at, Enmos. I don't want to play semantic word games, so if you have a point just be direct and make it already.
Ok. But how could we know that though? Because of the end result that many organs have evolved? For an organ to be evolved in two ways simultaneously both successful adaptations must have survived to the next generation. I guess it depends on how gradual the adaptation is, the bigger steps the less chance, so for something to evolve in two ways simultaneously it would need to evolve in smaller steps (less changes). Ok, I guess we could say that we have greater chance of survival than most animals, but of course we would die if we were the only ones left. Still, many species are at risk of extinction because of us - simply because they can't adapt as quickly to the changing environment, or because they can't breed as quickly as we kill them off. Ok. Yeah, I think so too. Ok. I think that is a bad thing, cause sooner or later there will be some kind of environmental change that they just are too few to adapt to. Yes, that's right. In any species you can think of, is there any attractions to things that isn't right now in the current environment, but rather seems to be an attraction to features that would be fit for a different environment? Like a preparation? Ok, I guess that it would be hard to calculate or even guess how many of a species that would be needed to come at odds with that... Ok, interesting.
What change in environment would be needed for single cell organisms to become multicellular? Or if it happens by chance alone then how complex is the process in which the multicellular organisms duplicates? (cause the most simple multicellular organisms surely doesn't have to mate? - and if it does have to mate, then how many cells are the minimum for that?) I didn't think evolution would somehow compensate to go back to how things were before - even if I do think that the former state of an organ would be more easily accessed than a totally new state, as much of the information for the former state probably still is available in the DNA. That is; if the intelligence we have doesn't solve the problem, in which evolution wouldn't be needed, if we have enough time to solve the problem, then the brain is superior, but if we don't have enough time, so that many people dies and only a few is left, then we probably don't have the "manpower" to solve the problems ourselves, and the brain wouldn't be needed as much. Hmmm, I agree. Do you think it's reasonable to think that we will at one time create a situation where it is beneficial for all to "live together" in symbiosis? Or that a situation will occur in other ways in which we all live in symbiosis? Can you elaborate in which form a chemical could evolve? ...and for what reason? What would be the constraints? I didn't mean to imply that I thought evolution thought of us as a concurrent, but that we in fact were a concurrent to other species adaptation to the environment, by helping them (making the gap for transitional environmental change larger and larger - and harder to overcome). Even though evolution "doesn't care", life is still self-sustaining, and if there were a way to know what way to adapt or what pieces of the DNA to make weaker or stronger in order for them to adapt more easily to a changing environment because those pieces might produce results that fit better whatsoever the change might be then that is a preferred way and this is the kind of changes that would hard for us to see as they are more subtle. The attraction between males and females is also one place to make changes if to prepare for future adaptations. Evolution. Millions of years of evolution. Well, let's call them principles then. I already gave an example. The weaker parts of the DNA are more easily changed, in a long timescale it would be beneficial for a lifeform to relate the DNA that are more easily changed to the adaptations that would be needed for environmental change, even if that weakness is subtle, there could also be repair processes that would solve known errors (I know there is such processes already) that changes might produce in order to lead it to a beneficial change.
The aleph set of all infinite sets of units of time and it'll still never happen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCWYJFRjuNc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3QHsUS3Lp4&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9V_2r2n4b5c&feature=related refuted.
The second link was really good. Thank you. Though I do think that OilIsMastery posted about the complexity of the cell, and that didn't get addressed in either of the links you provided. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ukPD4G5eSw (wow!)
An example would be that we can induce resistance to multiple drugs at once in viruses. An organ example would be eyes and ears. They used to be the same organ. Quite correct. That is a distinct possibility. You bet. That's where many sexual fetishes come from.
Roll a dice. The dice obeys to all the laws of nature but the result is still dictated by chance. Right ?
lol, I wonder what is the preparation for someone interested in shoes Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!, the world will look quite different if that scenario turns out to be true!
Actually, there is no such thing as chance Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! the result is what happens after "the dice obeys to all the laws of nature". There could be chance in the quantum way of things, which seems to have totally different laws from what we are used to.
I guess so Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!, I can somewhat understand why people would be interested in bare feet, but shoes? There's people out there that collect them (!), I guess some things are best left unexplained Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Sorry, not that simple. What about this one, "everything exists, because nothing cannot exist"? Maybe the universe had a start, but nothing did never ever exist. Nothing never prevailed, but still there was a start...hmmm...still this is would be a different thread though.