Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Rekna · 08-26-2004, 03:05 PM

Well it is not a proof of God it does suggest that our current model of evolution is incorrect. Also the fact that many things non-biological have phi in them; hurricanes, galaxies, planets, ect we can rule out that phi is only a result of it being optimal for evolution.

Let's look at evolution and the scientific process.

The scientific process is based on observing phenomena, formulating hypotheses that fit the phenomena, continue observing. When a new phenomenon is observed it either A. fits your hypotheses or B. doesn’t fit your hypotheses. If A is true then it strengthens your original hypotheses. If B is true then you have to either revise or reject your hypotheses to fit this new phenomenon.

Now Darwin’s theory of evolution and natural selection hinges on random mutations that give an edge to a creature over others. This edge allows this creature to survive better and reproduce. Eventually the random mutation propagates throughout the genes and becomes the norm.

Now if this theory were true you would expect things in nature to be fairly random. In the case of the sunflower it is possible that sunflowers randomly picked the optimal solution but it is unlikely, instead it is more likely that they would have a setting that was efficient but not optimal. In the case of animals and their proportions you would expect there to be an entire range of values for different species. You would hardly expect many of them to have the same proportions unless having those proportions provided some sort of advantage.

But it has been observed that this number occurs throughout nature a lot and in many circumstances this proportion provides no clear advantage. The reason the mathworld post does not go into biology is because it is focusing on the math side of phi only. There are entire mathematical digest dedicated to phi occurring in nature. These are peer reviewed articles and are not some random people posting on the internet. In addition these people writing these articles are meticulous scientists who do research for a living. This number is not so easy to just brush aside.

So we need to modify our theory of evolution to fit the new facts. Somehow there is a commonality between these organisms but why? What purpose does this ratio serve? And why is it occurring in non-biological environments also? What is the connection between the biological and non-biological occurrences? To me it seems that there is something greater at work than what science currently accepts. Maybe we are all in a matrix like a previous poster said but if that is the case we again have changed our look on evolution.

08-26-2004, 03:05 PM	#24 (permalink)
Rekna Junkie	Well it is not a proof of God it does suggest that our current model of evolution is incorrect. Also the fact that many things non-biological have phi in them; hurricanes, galaxies, planets, ect we can rule out that phi is only a result of it being optimal for evolution. Let's look at evolution and the scientific process. The scientific process is based on observing phenomena, formulating hypotheses that fit the phenomena, continue observing. When a new phenomenon is observed it either A. fits your hypotheses or B. doesn’t fit your hypotheses. If A is true then it strengthens your original hypotheses. If B is true then you have to either revise or reject your hypotheses to fit this new phenomenon. Now Darwin’s theory of evolution and natural selection hinges on random mutations that give an edge to a creature over others. This edge allows this creature to survive better and reproduce. Eventually the random mutation propagates throughout the genes and becomes the norm. Now if this theory were true you would expect things in nature to be fairly random. In the case of the sunflower it is possible that sunflowers randomly picked the optimal solution but it is unlikely, instead it is more likely that they would have a setting that was efficient but not optimal. In the case of animals and their proportions you would expect there to be an entire range of values for different species. You would hardly expect many of them to have the same proportions unless having those proportions provided some sort of advantage. But it has been observed that this number occurs throughout nature a lot and in many circumstances this proportion provides no clear advantage. The reason the mathworld post does not go into biology is because it is focusing on the math side of phi only. There are entire mathematical digest dedicated to phi occurring in nature. These are peer reviewed articles and are not some random people posting on the internet. In addition these people writing these articles are meticulous scientists who do research for a living. This number is not so easy to just brush aside. So we need to modify our theory of evolution to fit the new facts. Somehow there is a commonality between these organisms but why? What purpose does this ratio serve? And why is it occurring in non-biological environments also? What is the connection between the biological and non-biological occurrences? To me it seems that there is something greater at work than what science currently accepts. Maybe we are all in a matrix like a previous poster said but if that is the case we again have changed our look on evolution.