Re: Evolution model

Perplexed in Peoria <jimmenegay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote or quoted:

> A narrower definition yet restricts "evolution" to Darwinian evolution
> under natural selection. I'm pretty sure you don't qualify, under that
> definition. Several things are missing from your process - the most
> important being any kind of heritable variation. Systems like yours,
> or like Conway's game "Life", don't have that essential ingredient.

Conway's life does not /usually/ exhibit evolution - but an interesting
proof by Berlekamp, Conway, and Guy in 1982 showed that it was
computationl universal - and additionally was rich enough to support
self-reproducing agents, and could thus support evolutionary processes
in principle.

The details are in "Winning Ways for Your Mathematical Plays",
E. Berlekamp, J. Conway, and R. Guy, London: Academic Press, 1982.

However - despite the existence proof, the expected organisms may
well be large and complex - and so far no self-reproducing agent has
actually been constructed in Conway's universe.
--
__________
|im |yler http://timtyler.org/ tim@xxxxxxxxxxx Remove lock to reply.

.

Quantcast