Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

A “cost” is a “goal”

Categories
Intelligent Design
Share
Facebook
Twitter/X
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

In the phys.org news “Researchers solve biological mystery and boost artificial intelligence” is cited a research about “The Evolutionary Origins of Modularity” (in Proceedings of the Royal Society B, Jan. 30, 2013).

The researchers have simulated “25,000 generations of evolution within computers” and believe to have discovered why biological systems show modularity.

They say:

“Researchers have discovered why biological networks tend to be organized as modules – a finding that will lead to a deeper understanding of the evolution of complexity. […] As it turned out, it was enough to include a “cost of wiring” to make evolution favor modular architectures. […] Once you add a cost for network connections, modules immediately appear. Without a cost, modules never form.”

What means to program a “cost” in a computer simulation of evolution? In two words, it is to write a set of instructions that says: “if the digital organism behaves or develops X then reward it with a bonus; differently if it fails X then punish it”. In one word, a “cost” is a “goal”.

Darwinists always said that evolution works because of a “cost of unfit” only. Today they add a “cost of wiring” to get modules. I suspect tomorrow they will add a “cost of blindness” to get eyes, the day after tomorrow they will add a “cost of immobility” to get legs … and so on.

Also, Darwinists always said that evolution is blind and has no goal. But each “cost” is a “goal”. So, what they call “deeper understanding of the evolution of complexity” seems to me simply additional contradictions of their theory.

Comments
M. Holcumbrink, Here are all the main publications (which are linked) at evoinfo lab: http://evoinfo.org/publications/ Here is the search for a search paper: The Search for a Search: Measuring the Information Cost of Higher Level Search William A. Dembski and Robert J. Marks II Abstract: Needle-in-the-haystack problems look for small targets in large spaces. In such cases, blind search stands no hope of success. Conservation of information dictates any search technique will work, on average, as well as blind search. Success requires an assisted search. But whence the assistance required for a search to be successful? To pose the question this way suggests that successful searches do not emerge spontaneously but need themselves to be discovered via a search. The question then naturally arises whether such a higher-level “search for a search” is any easier than the original search. We prove two results: (1) The Horizontal No Free Lunch Theorem, which shows that average relative performance of searches never exceeds unassisted or blind searches, and (2) The Vertical No Free Lunch Theorem, which shows that the difficulty of searching for a successful search increases exponentially with respect to the minimum allowable active information being sought. http://evoinfo.org/publications/search-for-a-search/bornagain77
February 2, 2013
February
02
Feb
2
02
2013
10:03 AM
10
10
03
AM
PST
ba77, what links do you have handy pointing to works by Dembski et al regarding a search for a search?M. Holcumbrink
February 2, 2013
February
02
Feb
2
02
2013
09:50 AM
9
09
50
AM
PST
No. you've got it all wrong, Billmaz. a) Our worldly intelligence is our lowest form of intelligence; b) With quantum physics and astrophysics, the comfortable world of our worldly reason, the Rationalist's pride and joy, is largely being left behind in a cloud of dust. Science seems to be increasingly about managing paradoxes... which involves good sense - not a notable capacity of the atheist, self-styled rationalist, who have perforce battened onto quantum physics to earn their daily bread, but resent and effectively dispute its clear and fundamental implications with their jejune polemics.Axel
February 2, 2013
February
02
Feb
2
02
2013
09:50 AM
9
09
50
AM
PST
i.e. the success of the EA is bogus because it presupposes the search for a search.M. Holcumbrink
February 2, 2013
February
02
Feb
2
02
2013
09:44 AM
9
09
44
AM
PST
This EA is a search algorithm. But thanks to Dembski et. al., we know that the odds against successfully looking for and finding a search algorithm is just as or more unlikely than searching for and finding the thing searched for without a search algorithm. That wasn’t confusing, was it?M. Holcumbrink
February 2, 2013
February
02
Feb
2
02
2013
09:41 AM
9
09
41
AM
PST
No? Well then does ID propose that we will evolve? If so, how is that different from our past evolution up to the present? Or does ID propose that the Grand Designer will come back down and create a new human being, more intelligent, more wise, more empathetic, less belligerent, less aggressive, more loving, than we are today? Why didn't He design those qualities in us in the first place? Why did he create a system in which we have to kill other animals in order to eat? Why did He create a system in which we are susceptible to so many organisms (viruses, bacteria, etc.) and internal genetic errors which cause us disease? Either the Grand Designer is incompetent or He is conducting experiments with us. Don't get me started.billmaz
February 2, 2013
February
02
Feb
2
02
2013
09:40 AM
9
09
40
AM
PST
The problem with ID is that it assumes that humans will not evolve anymore. God created us perfect. We have supposedly reached the acme of our development.
ID relies on no such assumptions.William J Murray
February 2, 2013
February
02
Feb
2
02
2013
09:01 AM
9
09
01
AM
PST
Question: What would happen if sometime in the future we discover an alien species from another planet that is vastly more intelligent than we are. If we were designed by God then they, too, must have been designed by God, since there can only be one god in the universe. What will we say then? Will we say that God decided to make the other species more intelligent than we are? Why? Were we not worthy of higher intelligence? Or do we really believe that humans have reached the highest level of intelligence possible? That would be absurd. The problem with ID is that it assumes that humans will not evolve anymore. God created us perfect. We have supposedly reached the acme of our development. But the vastness of the universe tells us that billions of planets exist which can have intelligent life, many of which are millions of years older with intelligent beings that have evolved for much longer periods of time. We are not the center of the universe, something which religion from its inception has had a hard time accepting. These other beings may also think they are the center of the universe, until they travel and find us here, or some other planet with beings that are much older and more intelligent than they are. And so it goes. We must avoid pride and hubris, something the Bible warns us against. Don't be surprised if tomorrow a spaceship lands in Central Park and infinitely advanced beings emerge who tell us that we are quite ordinary and even low on the totem pole of intelligent life in the universe.billmaz
February 2, 2013
February
02
Feb
2
02
2013
08:56 AM
8
08
56
AM
PST
Yes, Mung, Intelligent Design Evolution is true. :cool:Joe
February 2, 2013
February
02
Feb
2
02
2013
08:01 AM
8
08
01
AM
PST
But we can define a possible range or collection of 'targets' and since we did not specify a specific target in advance we can assert that there was no target and therefore no goal and therefore no goal-directedness. Therefore evolution is true. QED.Mung
February 2, 2013
February
02
Feb
2
02
2013
07:52 AM
7
07
52
AM
PST
Prezactly.kairosfocus
February 2, 2013
February
02
Feb
2
02
2013
07:34 AM
7
07
34
AM
PST
Let's see, if someone DESIGNS a program that is supposed to DESIGN something specific or to solve a specified problem, and it does so, then it did so BY DESIGN, not via blind and undirected physical processes.Joe
February 2, 2013
February
02
Feb
2
02
2013
06:08 AM
6
06
08
AM
PST
Here are a few assorted notes refuting evolutionary algorithms: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1h33EC4yg29Ve59XYJN_nJoipZLKIgupT6lBtsaVQsUs/editbornagain77
February 2, 2013
February
02
Feb
2
02
2013
01:34 AM
1
01
34
AM
PST
Niwrad posted this:
The problem is another. It is that Darwinian evolution of systems is claimed to have no goal . . .
Wrong. Go back and read the textbook. No long-term goal. Individual systems certainly have a short-term goal: to survive.
timothya
February 2, 2013
February
02
Feb
2
02
2013
01:16 AM
1
01
16
AM
PST
I don't "dismiss computer programs for having a goal". I love them. The problem is another. It is that Darwinian evolution of systems is claimed to have no goal while computer simulations of evolution need goals.niwrad
February 2, 2013
February
02
Feb
2
02
2013
12:58 AM
12
12
58
AM
PST
What is a "goal" is a matter of an arbitrary convention. One could consider a ball rolling to the bottom of a bowl as "having a goal" of reaching the lowest point. Fundamental equations of physics can be generally formulated as the goal seeking "principle of least action." Hence dismissing a computer program for "having a goal" is no more effective or useful than dismissing a thesis of a scientific book because its front cover colors are not "pretty enough."nightlight
February 2, 2013
February
02
Feb
2
02
2013
12:38 AM
12
12
38
AM
PST
Billmaz #7: "The idea is to program the system or each individual module of a system to retain “mutations” that make it function better as a system."
What means "function better"? "Function better" is too unspecified to work. The researchers had to program a specific "cost of wiring" to get modules. So it is false that "the modeling of the process of evolution does not require that one have a goal or an endpoint". Without specific costs and goals no specific functions. Without specific functions no complex system, given that complex systems are hierarchies of functions.niwrad
February 2, 2013
February
02
Feb
2
02
2013
12:00 AM
12
12
00
AM
PST
F/N: I suggest the What Really Matters thread is a better place to deal with the debate. KFkairosfocus
February 1, 2013
February
02
Feb
1
01
2013
09:40 PM
9
09
40
PM
PST
bizarreMung
February 1, 2013
February
02
Feb
1
01
2013
08:37 PM
8
08
37
PM
PST
MP3 Audio http://www.apologetics315.com/2013/02/william-lane-craig-vs-alex-rosenberg-debate-mp3-audio.htmlMung
February 1, 2013
February
02
Feb
1
01
2013
07:30 PM
7
07
30
PM
PST
Here is a short, snarky, summary of the Craig debate: Summary and audio: William Lane Craig debates Alex Rosenberg: Does God Exist? http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2013/02/01/summary-and-audio-william-lane-craig-debates-alex-rosenberg-does-god-exist/bornagain77
February 1, 2013
February
02
Feb
1
01
2013
07:22 PM
7
07
22
PM
PST
OT: William Lane Craig debate is about to start www.biola.edu/debatebornagain77
February 1, 2013
February
02
Feb
1
01
2013
04:10 PM
4
04
10
PM
PST
I think the report of the death of evolution is greatly exaggerated and premature. The modeling of the process of evolution does not require that one have a goal or an endpoint. The idea is to program the system or each individual module of a system to retain "mutations" that make it function better as a system. Yes you have to set parameters as to what "better" means which evolution does in terms of being more adaptive to the environment, but you don't determine ahead of time what that will look like. Natural selection is modeled as retaining the random changes that are introduced to the system. But in order for the modeling to be more accurate, it would also have to introduce many other forces believed to be working in evolution-such as the electromagnetic waves described above, information theory, horizontal acquisition of whole genes from other organisms, maybe even fractal geometry and quantum mechanics. So, you're all right, it is a very difficult system to model especially since we don't really understand how it all works. But I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that you have to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Not yet.billmaz
February 1, 2013
February
02
Feb
1
01
2013
04:07 PM
4
04
07
PM
PST
Here's profound breakthrough that ought to ruffle a few Darwinian feathers:
Bioelectric Signals Can Be Used to Detect Early Cancer - Feb. 1, 2013 Excerpt: Biologists at Tufts University School of Arts and Sciences have discovered a bioelectric signal that can identify cells that are likely to develop into tumors. The researchers also found that they could lower the incidence of cancerous cells by manipulating the electrical charge across cells' membranes. "The news here is that we've established a bioelectric basis for the early detection of cancer," ,,, ,, "We've shown that electric events tell the cells what to do. The voltage changes are not merely a sign of cancer. They control and direct whether the cancer occurs or not." Bioelectric signals underlie an important set of control mechanisms that regulate how cells grow and multiply. ,,, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/02/130201090812.htm
Here's the paper:
Transmembrane voltage potential is an essential cellular parameter for the detection and control of tumor development in a Xenopus model - Brook T. Chernet and Michael Levin* - December 2012 Excerpt: Understanding mechanisms that orchestrate cell behavior into appropriately patterned tissues and organs within the organism is an essential element of preventing, detecting and treating cancer. Bioelectric signals (resting transmembrane voltage potential gradients in all cells) underlie an important and broadly conserved set of control mechanisms that regulate pattern formation. ,,, Moreover, control of resting membrane potential is functionally involved in the process by which oncogene-bearing cells depart from normal morphogenesis programs to form tumors. Modulation of Vmem levels is a novel and promising strategy for tumor normalization. http://dmm.biologists.org/content/early/2013/01/31/dmm.010835.abstract
Here are some related notes:
The face of a frog: Time-lapse video reveals never-before-seen bioelectric pattern - July 2011 Excerpt: For the first time, Tufts University biologists have reported that bioelectrical signals are necessary for normal head and facial formation in an organism and have captured that process in a time-lapse video that reveals never-before-seen patterns of visible bioelectrical signals outlining where eyes, nose, mouth, and other features will appear in an embryonic tadpole.,,, "When a frog embryo is just developing, before it gets a face, a pattern for that face lights up on the surface of the embryo,",,, "We believe this is the first time such patterning has been reported for an entire structure, not just for a single organ. I would never have predicted anything like it. It's a jaw dropper.",,, http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-07-frog-time-lapse-video-reveals-never-before-seen.html An Electric Face: A Rendering Worth a Thousand Falsifications - September 2011 Excerpt: The video suggests that bioelectric signals presage the morphological development of the face. It also, in an instant, gives a peak at the phenomenal processes at work in biology. As the lead researcher said, “It’s a jaw dropper.” http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2011/09/electric-face-rendering-worth-thousand.html The (Electric) Face of a Frog - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndFe5CaDTlI Let there be sight: Retinal waves wire visual system - video http://player.vimeo.com/video/51010591 Video description: A wave of 'spontaneous' activity sweeps across axons of retinal ganglion cells in the mid-brain of a 6-day old mouse. Such activity primes (presages) the developing neuronal circuits, enabling mice to process visual information after they open their eyes, usually between 10 days and two weeks.,,, The development of animals from a fertilized egg into trillions of intricately connected and specialized cells is the result of a precisely timed expression of genes. However, the Nature paper introduces another necessary factor—a mysterious wave of activity arising in the retina itself that propagates through several regions of the brain. Crair terms this wave an 'emergent property', or a trait possessed by a complex system that cannot be directly traced to its individual parts. This experiment in living, neonatal mice shows that this (preceeding) wave is crucial to the proper wiring not only of the visual system but other brain areas as well. Entire article here: Burst of fetal neural activity necessary for vision - October 11, 2012 http://medicalxpress.com/news/2012-10-fetal-neural-vision.html#jCp Not in the Genes: Embryonic Electric Fields - Jonathan Wells - December 2011 Excerpt: although the molecular components of individual sodium-potassium channels may be encoded in DNA sequences, the three-dimensional arrangement of those channels -- which determines the form of the endogenous electric field -- constitutes an independent source of information in the developing embryo. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/12/not_in_the_gene054071.html The mechanism and properties of bio-photon emission and absorption in protein molecules in living systems – May 2012 Excerpt: From the energy spectra, it was determined that the protein molecules could both radiate and absorb bio-photons with wavelengths of less than 3 micrometers and 5–7 micrometers, consistent with the energy level transitions of the excitons.,,, http://jap.aip.org/resource/1/japiau/v111/i9/p093519_s1?isAuthorized=no The Real Bioinformatics Revolution - Proteins and Nucleic Acids 'Singing' to One Another? Excerpt: the molecules send out specific frequencies of electromagnetic waves which not only enable them to ‘see' and ‘hear' each other, as both photon and phonon modes exist for electromagnetic waves, but also to influence each other at a distance and become ineluctably drawn to each other if vibrating out of phase (in a complementary way).,,, More than 1 000 proteins from over 30 functional groups have been analysed. Remarkably, the results showed that proteins with the same biological function share a single frequency peak while there is no significant peak in common for proteins with different functions; furthermore the characteristic peak frequency differs for different biological functions.,,, The same results were obtained when regulatory DNA sequences were analysed.
bornagain77
February 1, 2013
February
02
Feb
1
01
2013
01:48 PM
1
01
48
PM
PST
Here's profound breakthrough that ought to ruffle a few Darwinian feathers:
Bioelectric Signals Can Be Used to Detect Early Cancer - Feb. 1, 2013 Excerpt: Biologists at Tufts University School of Arts and Sciences have discovered a bioelectric signal that can identify cells that are likely to develop into tumors. The researchers also found that they could lower the incidence of cancerous cells by manipulating the electrical charge across cells' membranes. "The news here is that we've established a bioelectric basis for the early detection of cancer," ,,, ,, "We've shown that electric events tell the cells what to do. The voltage changes are not merely a sign of cancer. They control and direct whether the cancer occurs or not." Bioelectric signals underlie an important set of control mechanisms that regulate how cells grow and multiply. ,,, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/02/130201090812.htm
Here's the paper:
Transmembrane voltage potential is an essential cellular parameter for the detection and control of tumor development in a Xenopus model - Brook T. Chernet and Michael Levin* - December 2012 Excerpt: Understanding mechanisms that orchestrate cell behavior into appropriately patterned tissues and organs within the organism is an essential element of preventing, detecting and treating cancer. Bioelectric signals (resting transmembrane voltage potential gradients in all cells) underlie an important and broadly conserved set of control mechanisms that regulate pattern formation. ,,, Moreover, control of resting membrane potential is functionally involved in the process by which oncogene-bearing cells depart from normal morphogenesis programs to form tumors. Modulation of Vmem levels is a novel and promising strategy for tumor normalization. http://dmm.biologists.org/content/early/2013/01/31/dmm.010835.abstract
Here are some related notes:
The face of a frog: Time-lapse video reveals never-before-seen bioelectric pattern - July 2011 Excerpt: For the first time, Tufts University biologists have reported that bioelectrical signals are necessary for normal head and facial formation in an organism and have captured that process in a time-lapse video that reveals never-before-seen patterns of visible bioelectrical signals outlining where eyes, nose, mouth, and other features will appear in an embryonic tadpole.,,, "When a frog embryo is just developing, before it gets a face, a pattern for that face lights up on the surface of the embryo,",,, "We believe this is the first time such patterning has been reported for an entire structure, not just for a single organ. I would never have predicted anything like it. It's a jaw dropper.",,, http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-07-frog-time-lapse-video-reveals-never-before-seen.html An Electric Face: A Rendering Worth a Thousand Falsifications - September 2011 Excerpt: The video suggests that bioelectric signals presage the morphological development of the face. It also, in an instant, gives a peak at the phenomenal processes at work in biology. As the lead researcher said, “It’s a jaw dropper.” http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2011/09/electric-face-rendering-worth-thousand.html The (Electric) Face of a Frog - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndFe5CaDTlI Let there be sight: Retinal waves wire visual system - video http://player.vimeo.com/video/51010591 Video description: A wave of 'spontaneous' activity sweeps across axons of retinal ganglion cells in the mid-brain of a 6-day old mouse. Such activity primes (presages) the developing neuronal circuits, enabling mice to process visual information after they open their eyes, usually between 10 days and two weeks.,,, The development of animals from a fertilized egg into trillions of intricately connected and specialized cells is the result of a precisely timed expression of genes. However, the Nature paper introduces another necessary factor—a mysterious wave of activity arising in the retina itself that propagates through several regions of the brain. Crair terms this wave an 'emergent property', or a trait possessed by a complex system that cannot be directly traced to its individual parts. This experiment in living, neonatal mice shows that this (preceeding) wave is crucial to the proper wiring not only of the visual system but other brain areas as well. Entire article here: Burst of fetal neural activity necessary for vision - October 11, 2012 http://medicalxpress.com/news/2012-10-fetal-neural-vision.html#jCp Not in the Genes: Embryonic Electric Fields - Jonathan Wells - December 2011 Excerpt: although the molecular components of individual sodium-potassium channels may be encoded in DNA sequences, the three-dimensional arrangement of those channels -- which determines the form of the endogenous electric field -- constitutes an independent source of information in the developing embryo. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/12/not_in_the_gene054071.html The mechanism and properties of bio-photon emission and absorption in protein molecules in living systems – May 2012 Excerpt: From the energy spectra, it was determined that the protein molecules could both radiate and absorb bio-photons with wavelengths of less than 3 micrometers and 5–7 micrometers, consistent with the energy level transitions of the excitons.,,, http://jap.aip.org/resource/1/japiau/v111/i9/p093519_s1?isAuthorized=no The Real Bioinformatics Revolution - Proteins and Nucleic Acids 'Singing' to One Another? Excerpt: the molecules send out specific frequencies of electromagnetic waves which not only enable them to ‘see' and ‘hear' each other, as both photon and phonon modes exist for electromagnetic waves, but also to influence each other at a distance and become ineluctably drawn to each other if vibrating out of phase (in a complementary way).,,, More than 1 000 proteins from over 30 functional groups have been analysed. Remarkably, the results showed that proteins with the same biological function share a single frequency peak while there is no significant peak in common for proteins with different functions; furthermore the characteristic peak frequency differs for different biological functions.,,, The same results were obtained when regulatory DNA sequences were analysed. http://www.i-sis.org.uk/TheRealBioinformaticsRevolution.php
bornagain77
February 1, 2013
February
02
Feb
1
01
2013
01:46 PM
1
01
46
PM
PST
No question that modularity can be a valuable design tool/approach. But these "evolution within a computer" simulations are mostly GIGO. The simulations are not even coming close to actually simulating anything that actually occurs in biology. And if you peel back the onion (as you have done in the OP), the most we can typically conclude is that if we program a simulation to proceed toward x, it will proceed toward x. Amazing. /sarc That said, if we ever get to the point where some real biological processes are being simulated, we might actually learn something.Eric Anderson
February 1, 2013
February
02
Feb
1
01
2013
08:57 AM
8
08
57
AM
PST
"Is not an animal a hierarchy of parts?" Certainly yes! About, you could read: https://uncommondescent.com/evolution/functional-hierarchy/niwrad
February 1, 2013
February
02
Feb
1
01
2013
08:21 AM
8
08
21
AM
PST
Is it even possible to write a true evolutionary algorithm? My understanding is that every evolutionary algorithm has a goal embedded in the code somewhere and that without that goal the algorithm doesn't work. It seems to me that a true evolutionary algorithm would be extremely difficult to write, if one could be written at all. Would not scientists need to know all the changes that need to occur to bring about a given morphological change? Don't they also need to know how each change may or may not be dependent on previous changes? Is not an animal a hierarchy of parts of ever greater complexity that must be assembled in a certain order? Don't scientists also need to know how all the "assembly instructions" are changed to accomplish building a different biological structure - how to change legs into flippers for example? Must not lots of multiple changes be coordinated? Moving the external testes of a land animal to be placed internally in a whale is one example. Ignoring the question of when the testes might be moved - probably after the animal has taken on mostly aquatic adaptations - the testes will be sterile if the cooling system is not also constructed at the same time. Is there a paper somewhere that might answer some of my layman's questions?NeilBJ
February 1, 2013
February
02
Feb
1
01
2013
08:02 AM
8
08
02
AM
PST
Nice post. There is no end to their willingness to deceive themselves. Desperation is in the air. I don't think this patient will survive much longer.Mapou
February 1, 2013
February
02
Feb
1
01
2013
03:05 AM
3
03
05
AM
PST
1 2 3

Leave a Reply