Design Disquisitions: Critic’s Corner-Sahotra Sarkar

Thanks Dionisio! More will be up shortly :) Joshua G

This was posted in another thread, but maybe it fits in this one too.

Are they referring to the embedded variability framework (EVF) that operates within the biological systems? Don’t birds remain birds? Bacteria remain bacteria? Plants remain plants? Amphibians remain amphibians? Apes remain apes? Humans remain humans? Many ethnic groups but all equally humans. The evo-devo fundamental conundrum remains unresolved: Dev(d) = Dev(a) + Delta(a,d) That’s the bottom line. The rest is speculation. Without Delta(a,d) there’s no way to get Dev(d) from Dev(a). That’s daydreaming illusion. Figment in their imagination. Pie pie in the sky. It’s time to get serious. A couple of years ago a science professor claimed to know exactly how morphogen gradients form, but even today the research papers point to the complexity of such an important process that still is poorly understood. As outstanding questions get answered new ones are raised. However, as every new discovery sheds more light on the elaborate cellular and molecular choreographies orchestrated within the biological systems, the emerging big picture points more and more to marvelously designed systems.

BTW, 'a' stands for 'ancestor' and 'd' for 'descendant'. Dev(x) is the entire developmental process of a given biological system 'x'. Delta(x,y) is the entire set of spatiotemporal changes required in Dev(x) in order to get Dev(y). All the bells and whistles have to be included. The whole enchilada. The point is to show how to get Delta(x,y) assuming that we know Dev(x) and Dev(y). I challenge that professor and his cousins to show me one example that satisfies the above formulation. We can sweep and mop the floor with all their baseless ideas. With every new discovery their situation will get even worse. Dionisio

Joshua G, You have quite an interesting collection of articles in your website. Thank you for sharing it. Dionisio