Re: What does the creation lack?

From: Tim Ikeda (
Date: Sun Oct 28 2001 - 23:09:32 EST

  • Next message: "Stqaged developmental creation. ( Was-What does the creation lack?)"

    About the "collapsing of wave functions" and "quantum tweaking" notions
    of extra-natural guidance in biological evolution...

    How is this any different from moving a rock from point-A to point-B
    or dropping that rock on a couple slugs as part of an effort at cosmic
    animal husbandry? If one can tweak wave functions such that one nucleotide
    base can be substituted, why couldn't one tweak a few more and have
    all the air surrounding a slug jump one centimeter away until it expires?
    That's got to beat Maxwell's demon anytime. Star Trek-style transporters
    would be a snap.

    Counselor Troi: "Captain! A giant space slug is about to engulf the ensign!"
    Captain Picard: "LaForge, get a transporter lock on that and set coordinates
          to beam it into a wall!"
    LaForge: "Oh no! The quantum molecular overthruster unbalanced the
          pattern buffers and tunnelled a new set of chromosomes into the
          slug in an energy-less information transfer event. It's evolving
          into a telemarketer!
    Expendable crew member: "Iyeeee!"

    The mechanism is irrelevant, possibly even in the case of natural,
    extra-terrestrial designers because we'd probably never know the details.
    The question isn't about which back door a "designer" would use to futz
    with a system, but whether a particular system can make the transformation
    from state-X to state-Y without help from outside the immediate system.
    If the system can't make the transition to where you want it to go without
    your tweaking, then I wouldn't say that it had "all requisite formational
    capabilities" or that such action wouldn't be "violating or overpowering
    the natural capabilities of any creaturely system." If you change
    probabilities to determine which slugs will live and serve your ultimate
    goals by evolving into the perfect, live-animal prop for a particular
    Star Trek episode (perhaps evolving photogenic beauty was at one time
    outside the formational capabilities of "pre-intervention" slugs),
    you're messing with natural capabilities big time.

    So what we're talking about here sounds like a classic variant of
    progressive creationism. Let's just call it that.

    Tim Ikeda

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Oct 28 2001 - 23:12:45 EST