From: Glenn Morton (glennmorton@entouch.net)
Date: Sun Jul 27 2003 - 14:53:48 EDT
>-----Original Message-----
>From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
>Behalf Of Richard McGough
>Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2003 11:01 PM
I worte:
>>No. Nonlinear equations are precise but they are not predictable. I think
>>what you like about the evolution of elements is that the equations give
>>prediction. But nonlinear equations are no less exact, they are
>however much
>>less predictable. I suspect what you are looking for is
>predictability. We
>>have exact equations for the weather system but they aren't predictable.
>>
>
>I don't think this really touches my intuition at all. The problem
>is not that the equations describing animal evolution are harder
>to solve than those describing chemical evolution - the problem is
>that the equations for life do not exist! But we do have
>intellectually satisfying equations that describe the "evolution"
>of the elements even if we can't solve them exactly.
>
We have the equations of hydrodynamic flow, which can model the motion of
the cells, we have the equations for each chemical reaction, thus I would
say that we do have the equations for life. The problem is that we can't do
a calculation that complex. And nonlinear behavior will arise from them. We
have all the physical equations we could want to describe a living system,
unless you are reverting to a form of vitalism.
>The only way evolution of elements could be equivalent to the
>evolution of life is in a fully reductionist sense where we have
>fully described everything in terms of elementary particles. The
>fact that this would involve equations that would probably be
>unsolvable is not a problem at all. The problem is that I really
>do not believe that evolution, even if shown to be the origin of
>life and species, could ever be fully described by appealing to
>nothing but the natural laws governing the underlying physical elements.
That of course, is a belief in vitalism. We do have before us living
creatures which show no sign of vitalism maintaining their existence. What
is the evidence that life is only explainable through vitalism? Complexity?
faith?
And for the record, reductionism in the sense of full predictability has
been dead and gone since Heisenberg, von Neumann and Lorenz.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Jul 27 2003 - 14:54:48 EDT