I expected a note regarding "competition". This is indeed a very fruitful
area of research. Recently Dr. Bejan, a mechanical engineer (Ph.D.) like
myself published an article in ME magazine on the structure/priciple of
tree-like networks. He claims that his finding joins biology with physics
very nicely and that the universal tree-like strutures we see everywhere in
nature should be considered as a universal law, when a system grows under
constraints from a point to maximum posible space. A full article was
submitted to Nature, I'm waiting on it, the ME article can be seen at
don't know whether this falls into the "competition category". In any case,
natural selection and competition in no way prove macro-evolution.
David Campbell wrote:
> > What I mean is that the
> >plant is not really competing but just following a law. The same goes for the
> >roots (geotropism -).
> These can be viewed as both competition and following a law-competition
> must be clearly defined.
> >BTW, nobody knows yet why these things happen in terms
> >of basic mechanism.
> I vaguely recall from botany class various studies that revealed
> differences in concentrations of growth hormones in response to the
> different stimuli (gravity, light, etc.) It seems like a good deal was
> known, though I'm sure there's more to be found out.
> David Campbell