|
Post by Archagon on Feb 13, 2004 0:14:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by AZERTY on Feb 13, 2004 1:09:24 GMT -5
I beleive that evolution does apply in a similar way to the rest of the universe but not to the scientific forces that govern the universe. Therefore, atomic and subatomic particles always react in the same way, but in random fashion, those subatomic particles and atomic particles can react to create the big bang or suns, or other interesting objects and, resulting from that, higher order atoms can be created...
|
|
|
Post by Antid on Feb 13, 2004 2:12:58 GMT -5
Oooh!! Take biology AP and you'll find the answer. It's kinda late tonight, but tomorrow I'll try to make a big scientific explanation.
In short, yeah there is "chemical" selection in the sense that some molecular compositions are preferable to others.
In terms of physics, too, there is a sort of natural selection - Objects seek to release their energy and increase their entropy.
|
|
|
Post by AZERTY on Feb 13, 2004 2:17:09 GMT -5
however, outside of that, the laws do not change and are not naturally suppresed....
|
|
|
Post by Archagon on Feb 13, 2004 2:32:50 GMT -5
But what "law" causes these laws to remain unchangeable? There is almost always a higher level of everything, and chances are there is something beyond these laws, for how else could whatever was before the big bang exist?
|
|
|
Post by AZERTY on Feb 13, 2004 2:38:45 GMT -5
THese laws actually created the big bang.... And it is not that there are higher laws, but instead it is that all the laws and forces actually tie into one great big force, but we cannot find the connections between some yet.... (for example we have already found the connection between the magnetic and electric force... we now have the electro-magnetic force... Soon we will have a Gravito-electro magnetic force...)
|
|
|
Post by Antid on Feb 13, 2004 2:46:54 GMT -5
Have you guys ever heard of the "string" theory? The theory that subatomic particles are composed of string-like components that vibrate a certain direction and give atoms their characteristics? I read an interesting essay on it, but I'm too lazy/busy right now to go look for the link.
|
|
|
Post by AZERTY on Feb 13, 2004 2:54:57 GMT -5
no never heard of it...
|
|
|
Post by Archagon on Feb 13, 2004 3:15:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by BlueDolphin on Feb 13, 2004 23:02:23 GMT -5
ooh. I watched that show. I wished I recorded part 1 though.
Yes, evolution does apply to non life things sometimes. Like what Magister said, some chemical reactions are preferable to others. Hence after a long time, the stable ones are the only ones left.
Even something like sand can be said to obey this. Smaller particles are more stable nearer to the water than larger particles. So they tend to sort themselves out automatically.
|
|
|
Post by Antid on Feb 14, 2004 0:22:25 GMT -5
I beleive that evolution does apply in a similar way to the rest of the universe but not to the scientific forces that govern the universe. Therefore, atomic and subatomic particles always react in the same way, but in random fashion, those subatomic particles and atomic particles can react to create the big bang or suns, or other interesting objects and, resulting from that, higher order atoms can be created... Mmm... I don't quite agree. I don't believe that the big bang was some spontaneous beginning of the universe. In fact, it is only hypothetical. Some people tend to think of it as some sort of supernatural event, when in fact it is nothing more than the earliest event in time that we can trace. There was sure to be something before it, probably governable by the same laws of nature. In any case, the only universal laws we can safely describe are those which we know for certain exist, for example the law of universal gravitation. All particles, if free to move, are accelerated toward each other. We don't know the exact composition of the smallest particles, and we therefore we cannot know for sure why they are attracted to each other. However, since natural selection governs practically all concepts that we are aware of, we can extrapolate this idea to say that "if particles are attracted to one another, it probably benefits them in some way." So, evolution guides everything that happens with matter. Life itself, in fact, evolved by natural selection. But of that, another day.
|
|
|
Post by Haku on Feb 14, 2004 2:25:48 GMT -5
It is amazing that we have discovered so much about evolution in the last hundred or so years.
|
|
|
Post by Evilduck on Feb 17, 2004 15:03:43 GMT -5
Darwinian evolution and physical matter evolution are different though.
In Darwinian evolution, the animals that are most fit to obtain food, survive hazards, and reproduce are "selected" to go on. And natural selection is simply that process.
While matter doesn't evolve. Natural selection there is the law that matter always seeks to eb at a state of lowest energy (thi is why salt dissolves in water, for example).
Laws of physics don't change, though. And there doesn't have to be a higher law which we haven't discovered yet that governs them, and they don't necessarily tie into one universal law that's the theory of everything. Laws of physics are just there.
|
|
|
Post by Archagon on Feb 17, 2004 17:44:55 GMT -5
I'm not directly comparing Darwin's theory to my idea! It could work differently, but as long as the end result is the same, it would still be evolution, no?
|
|
|
Post by Antid on Feb 17, 2004 18:28:27 GMT -5
Archagon is right. For example, the evolution of life itself from simple atoms is evolution governed by the laws of physics. Physical evolution made it favorable for certain atoms to bond in certain ways under certain conditions. All phenomenon exist because they are naturally favorable. If we want to find out why specifically these phenomenon are favorable, we must study atoms at a subatomic levels. Still, I fear there will be no answer, because matter can be infinitely small. Imagine a quark being a gigantic universe of its own where fools like us are also wondering the ways of nature.
|
|