New findings on evolution and probability

_{Denyse O'Leary

February 14, 2016

Evolution, Information, Intelligent Design}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Dr. Robert J Marks II — Robert Marks, II

Prof. Robert Marks, Editor-in-Chief of Bio-Complexity, offers the following vids, featuring computer scientist Winston Ewert’s work: (Part I, Part II, and Part III:

Winston J. Ewert

Journal Homepage Image

Part I:

Paper.

Dr. Winston Ewert, a Senior Research Scientist at both Biologic Institute and the Evolutionary Informatics lab, discusses the mathematical foundation for why we know Mount Rushmore is designed and Mount Fuji isn’t. The mathematical theory of algorithmic specified complexity is introduced and illustrated. A single complex snowflake, for example, displays essentially zero algorithmic specified complexity whereas two identical snowflakes earns a high algorithmic specified complexity. The model discussed by Dr. Ewert can also measure algorithmic specified complexity in units of bits in the context of poker. Dr. Ewert explains how a Royal Flush has a high algorithmic specified complexity of about 16 bits whereas a poker hand with a single pair has essentially zero algorithmic specified complexity. The theory Dr. Ewert discusses is developed in the paper:

Winston Ewert, William A. Dembski, Robert J. Marks II, “Algorithmic Specified Complexity,” in Engineering and the Ultimate: An Interdisciplinary Investigation of Order and Design in Nature and Craft, edited by Jonathan Bartlett, Dominic Halsmer and Mark Hall (Blyth Institute Press, 2014), pp.131-149.

—

Part II:

Paper.

Conway’s Game of Life is played on a rectangular grid. Cells live or die depending on the cells that surround them. Hobbyists have designed highly complex and interesting patterns using Conway’s four simple rules of birth, death and survival. Patterns include oscillators, spaceships and glider guns. Dr. Winston Ewert explains how the theory of algorithmic specified complexity can be applied to measure, in bits, the degree to which these cellular automata life forms are designed. The discussion centers around the peer-reviewed journal article:

Winston Ewert, William A. Dembski and Robert J. Marks II, “Algorithmic Specified Complexity in the Game of Life,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics: Systems, Volume 45, Issue 4, April 2015, pp. 584-594 DOI: 10.1109/TSMC.2014.2331917

Part III:

Paper.

In this, the third and final podcast of the series, Dr. Winston Ewert explains the role of context in measuring meaning in images. A non-humanoid gelatinous alien would assign no meaning to the faces on Mount Rushmore if the alien had never before seen a humanoid. Humans, on the other hand, have the context of familiarity with human heads and historical figures that allow them to assxign high algorithmic specified complexity when viewing Mount Rushmore. Information theoretic-based algorithmic specified complexity applied to images is developed in the peer-reviewed archival journal article:

Winston Ewert, William A. Dembski, Robert J. Marks II. “Measuring meaningful information in images: algorithmic specified complexity,” IET Computer Vision, 2015, Vol. 9, #6, pp. 884–894 DOI: 10.1109/TSMC.2014.2331917

See also: Robert Marks on the paradox challenging physics

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Comments

I take great pleasure in having to link to an epic music video that now very much personifies Kathy. None can safely brush-off her legend by letting it be believed that her loyalty was to the Discovery Institute fellows. What made her popular was being very good at solving K-12 level education related problems for District 6 in Kansas. Letting the DI have their say was part of making sure all is done for those who very much wanted a public hearing to learn more about the theory of intelligent design. It was noisy but having them appear does not cost the taxpayers money, the rise in tourism made it profitable and all the great scientists of the world online trying to help improve their public school education was a blessing that led to that actually happening. What gives Kathy a collective Roar comes from the people she was elected to serve. What she needs to see more of is a wonderful learning experience that leads someone like me back to what Genesis says without ever going out of bounds of science while at the same time speak for all who really matter, to her. In that respect I am the same power level as the Discovery Institute who likewise puts what they have "on the table" for her and those she serves to be the judge of, decide upon. I do not generate the roar, just help generate then amplify: Katy Perry - Roar (Official) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CevxZvSJLk8 There are ways of going about detecting intelligence in biology, so it's not like I am saying that anyone has to stop doing that. What is required is to first get on the same page as everyone else in regards to what makes intelligence such a powerfully controlling force. All need to include what David Heiserman taught for machine intelligence, and how 2D or 3D networks can be added to navigate its environment as in a hippocampus. What ends up getting stored in motor or 2D or 3D internal world model memory is what to look for when searching for a genetic level neocortex that can recall much of life it had (maybe even consciously) since the beginning of time. It might very well turn out to resemble what you're trying to get at using another approach that needs to begin with the teachings of David Heiserman. In that case you start off with a representative virtual world where (can call protointelligence) unintelligent Alpha random behavior bounces off the arena walls and occasionally food. Success staying fed remains the same, never learns anything. Adding motor RAM in a way that causes confidence level guessing to take place in the system changes everything, a real "It's alive!" moment you have to yourself experience where success rate rises so much it's no longer a challenge to stay fed anymore learns fast while outdoing itself until an expert at the task given. Adding what our neocortex gives us is for makes it like the brain of a live rat that can avoid the unseen that shocks at a given time and place in a rotating arena. So as always mad-scientists welcomed. It's just that in this case you have to keep it real by first proving worthy to Camp Peavy and others who know what I'm talking about in regards to intelligence appearing in a system being a very detectable thing. What you come up with for a model might even impress Larry Moran, in which case you get to experience the power of science making all once in your way gone. That is what I want to see happen to those who are least trying. The first attempt was maybe a good enough of a starting point to connect with what those who study "intelligence" have for information. The power of science then leaves no doubt in your mind that it works just fine with religion, as you become a legend too. The roar is then for you as you make your own big waves through science, regardless of where results are posted. I must encourage making that happen and hope you do. So I took the time to explain what it takes to impress the Illuminati of sorts that will settle for nothing less than total world domination of ID and what Kathy just roared is fine by them too. My seeing Winston being so close but yet so far away made it necessary to react with initial honest opinion followed by why it is that way so I don't leave it at that. It's just though a long story, where in the end what the DI thinks is irrelevant but that makes it possible a theory of intelligent design that thrives elsewhere as a model for public school educators who need to know what is seriously possible where the how-to world is behind your work and putting it into action without anyone at the education level getting stuck in a controversy. If you're OK with that for theory then welcome aboard, your help will get us where we want to go in science and become a hero to Kathy and beyond for helping along theory that in your case provides a basis for looking for the kind of intelligence that none of yet dreamed about until now where you Winston might be able to translate contents of memory into signatures only found in an intelligence that has an imaginative internal world model of itself like we have at the level of our brain. It's something that has never been done before easily enough possible that needs attention from someone like you, who has the ambition for such a mission. The theory I have favors that being true at the genetic level, so it's not whim that only has a small chance of being true it's something that for the sake of ID is well worth your following up on. I'm standing by to help, in any way I can. My apology for what is I admit is a rather sneering response that needing detail to show its more like a reaction to wasted time and talent situation that you needed to know about but I did not even know where to begin explaining why yet knew I had to at least try, and include example of what it looks like when Katy personifies Kathy.GaryGaulin_{February 16, 2016
February
02
Feb
16
16
2016
08:35 PM
8
08
35
PM
PDT}

Anthropic, the Discovery Institute left an unresolved issue in Kansas from having many times repeated at a public school board hearing "The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection." School officials and people like me essentially had to figure out the theory, just for its scientific merit to be fairly judged by anyone. Along the way we ended up introducing self-assembly and more to science classrooms but the DI did not care about that either, just ignored it all. If it were not for the theory I defend that shows Kathy Martin was right about it being worthwhile to follow up on she and others would have been left with the shame from almost all in the scientific community hating them for taking ID seriously. The theory of intelligent design that I defend is for serious educators who needed to get out of a big mess the DI long ago got them into. Staying in spirit with Kansas state education law makes it more or less mandatory to include later developments in how the public hearing over the "theory of intelligent design" was finally resolved, even where that is accomplished by mostly teacher break room chat that makes education legend for their public schools to forever be proud of. You can be sure that ID theory we are having science fun of a lifetime with right now is what US academia takes seriously. It is accepted that there is no way for such a thing to have come from the institute, and it has to be that way for at least that to be taken seriously. Don't have to take it personal. It's not our fault things turned out this way. But that's what happens when you start something that has to be finished then others get stuck having to finish it for you. And as you may have seen the one member on the board with the job of explaining what this is religiously has spoken: https://uncommondescent.com/christian-darwinism/slate-offers-poster-child-for-christian-atheism/#comment-597445 From what I know there is no time limit on resolving a public hearing issue that goes to computer forum for later resolution. State education law requires it be decided by state board members concerned, who the DI came to impress. That in turn makes her opinion like official Kansas Public School business even though that time it gets way religious. There is no science stopper in that short message, which is easy enough to get around. By the way state law works this is something that has to exist apart from the Discovery Institute organization. Final say must be by Kansas taxpayers who the hearing was for the benefit of. At issue was and still is the scientific merit of the "theory of intelligent design" for explaining how "intelligent cause" works. And to be kept scientifically fair you like I must have a testable operational definition for "intelligent" and all else a scientific theory like this requires for it to be coherent. You can take what I say as sneers but the theory of intelligent design I defend now stands as the model to best show what the DI was and is still missing. That at least got Kathy and others out of serious trouble with the scientific community. It is then forgivable that the premise was too luring to resist. Honestly though the things that are still being worked on by the institute only helps show why they were unable to develop something that fairly represents the theory in question.GaryGaulin_{February 14, 2016
February
02
Feb
14
14
2016
11:28 PM
11
11
28
PM
PDT}

Actually, GG1 and anthropic3, clueless sneers such as are posted at 1 don't even sound like a way to look busy. "Idle" (idled?) sounds more apt.News_{February 14, 2016
February
02
Feb
14
14
2016
10:00 PM
10
10
00
PM
PDT}

GG1 "Well that’s one way to look busy." So is posting clueless sneers.anthropic_{February 14, 2016
February
02
Feb
14
14
2016
05:48 PM
5
05
48
PM
PDT}

I hope he gets paid handsomely...DiEb_{February 14, 2016
February
02
Feb
14
14
2016
01:29 PM
1
01
29
PM
PDT}

Dr. Winston Ewert, a Senior Research Scientist at both Biologic Institute and the Evolutionary Informatics lab, discusses the mathematical foundation for why we know Mount Rushmore is designed and Mount Fuji isn’t.
Well that's one way to look busy.GaryGaulin_{February 14, 2016
February
02
Feb
14
14
2016
11:54 AM
11
11
54
AM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply