Quote:
Originally posted by Greg700
Smooth, take a look at the 'evolved' verses the human invented chips for several circuits. Using genetic programming, scientists have been able to duplicate previously patented inventions by 'evolving' circuits. Interestingly, these evolved circuits are usually better than their human invented counterparts, and in the case of the example given in the article (a circuit for generating cubic waves, I think) we don't understand how it works. It, like many complex systems would not operate if any one piece was removed (except for a few left over extraneous ones), and yet it's existence is due to an evolutionary process.
I couldn't find the original article anywhere, but I think the one I am referring to came from the february 2003 issue of scientific american.
|
Yes you are correct. An EXCELLENT book on this subject is
Digital Biology. I can't recall the authors name at this time. Evolution of both hardware and software is an increibly exciting field at the moment, operating on the very fringes of computer science. It is now obvious that the only way we are really going to develop artificial intelligence is by "evolving" it, rather than attempting to actaully write it, in the traditional sense of software engineering.
Were evolution not a natural phenomena, then I would say that I was amazed at how humans have invented quite an amazing tool!
Whatever the media may tell you, to be hosest with you, all
real scientists simply take evolution as fact, and get on with it. It is only when dealing with public relations, that they have to be P.C. and tip toe around the subject.
Why is it that evolution comes under such a strong attack? Especially be complete outsiders and non-scientists? (or "scientists" with a degee in a completely unrelated area). I mean there are far more shakey areas of science that don't come under nearly as much outsider attention. Take for instance the world of particle physics. The theories and hypothesises behind this science aren't nearly as watertight as evolution. Why aren't people complaining about the propsed existence of messons? There is far less evidence than there is for evolution.