Atheistforums.com

Science Section => Science General Discussion => Biology, Psychology & Medicine => Topic started by: SGOS on May 31, 2017, 09:43:18 AM

Title: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: SGOS on May 31, 2017, 09:43:18 AM
My dad used to take me places, and the first time I remember him taking me to the zoo, I found myself in the primate building.  There were monkeys there.  I thought they were more interesting than the other animals, although I liked all the different animals that day.  I was just big enough to stand next to an enclosure and see in without being picked up.  There were 20 or so monkeys swinging around on trees and bars in the cage.  It was a hive of activity.  One swung over to me, and just from the other side of the glass, looked me right in the eyes.  He was as interested in me as I was of him.  Both of us stood frozen looking at each other.  He seemed to be very curious about me as he searched my face with a questioning look.  I wondered what he was thinking. My dad came over to see what was happening, and I said, "They look like little people."  My dad said, "Some people say we are related to them."

At that age, my dad told me a lot of things that didn't make sense, but this information made perfect sense, and I thought, "Yeah, that must be why they look like little people.  Dogs don't look like people.  Birds don't look like people, but monkeys look like little people.  We must be related to them somehow."  I didn't know how, but there was definitely something about our similarities that invites the idea that we are linked.

My dad was very religious, but seemed to think that some of those people who said we were related might be right, but in retrospect, I don't if that's what he actually thought.  He wasn't trying to indoctrinate me.  He just passed along what he had learned, without saying that those other people were wrong, but to me it was obvious.  Monkeys looked like people. 

At one time my dad became good friends with a guy we met on vacation.  You might say my father idolized this person who my father said completely rejected evolution.  When my father's friend visited our house, I asked him why he didn't accept evolution.  He responded by reaching down to the ground and picking up a fallen leaf.  He said, "Look at this leaf, see the parallel veins, and the intricacy of the design?  This could only be made by God."

I thought, "OMG!  This guy is a idiot.  Who hasn't examined a leaf?  Yep, parallel veins, but sometimes not parallel veins, and yes, I think they are very nice."   Philosophical my dad's friend was, and poetic too, but still mentally confused.  When asked about differences between species, you don't explain it by being a wordsmith.  Do it methodically, informally footnoting your claims with simple explanations.  Try to follow a progression of ideas that actually result in a sequitur.  Don't spout poetry.  That's not very helpful.

Evolution is actually quite simple.  Some people might think it's complicated, and some of the biochemistry can be, but evolution itself is easy enough for a child to understand.  There is no need to make it confusing, and brining religion into it just confuses it more.

Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Baruch on May 31, 2017, 12:45:01 PM
40 years ago, my Dad noted that chickens (we had a coop) look rather primitive.  Must be related to dinosaurs.  Of course subsequent evidence vindicated that ... they are descended from dinosaurs.  Humans however are not descended from dinosaurs, we have a common ancestor, that predated both dinosaurs and mammals.  Hence the relative lack of resemblance.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Unbeliever on May 31, 2017, 04:36:53 PM
Carl Sagan was pretty good at explaining evolution in simple (but not simplistic) ways. I really enjoyed his discussion of samurai crabs, on the original Cosmos, though that was actually artificial selection, is was easy to see how it could apply to natural selection.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIeYPHCJ1B8


Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Baruch on May 31, 2017, 06:50:27 PM
Yes, and centuries of going to Kabuki drama, is why Japanese faces are all so ... scrunched up and angry looking (see posters of samurai characters) ;-)  Like my mom warned, if you make a face like that, it might stay that way ;-)
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: SGOS on May 31, 2017, 08:43:01 PM
Yeah, I remember that episode of Cosmos.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Gawdzilla Sama on May 31, 2017, 09:18:46 PM
SGOS, you should have gone to the zoo with Valentine Michael.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: SGOS on June 01, 2017, 08:20:59 AM
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on May 31, 2017, 09:18:46 PM
SGOS, you should have gone to the zoo with Valentine Michael.
I'm drawing a blank here.  I looked this guy up, but I'm not making a connection.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Gawdzilla Sama on June 01, 2017, 08:29:59 AM
Quote from: SGOS on June 01, 2017, 08:20:59 AM
I'm drawing a blank here.  I looked this guy up, but I'm not making a connection.
Try "Valentine Michael Smith".
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: SGOS on June 01, 2017, 09:51:47 AM
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on June 01, 2017, 08:29:59 AM
Try "Valentine Michael Smith".
I did, and I know who he is.  I'm just not sure how it relates to my experience.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Gawdzilla Sama on June 01, 2017, 10:45:05 AM
Quote from: SGOS on June 01, 2017, 09:51:47 AM
I did, and I know who he is.  I'm just not sure how it relates to my experience.
When he goes to the zoo and watches the big monkey pick on the small monkey and the small monkey vent by beating up on a smaller monkey he finally understands humans. And asks how he can be ordained.

So, if you'd gone with Mike you might be a reverend by now.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: SGOS on June 01, 2017, 10:52:12 AM
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on June 01, 2017, 10:45:05 AM
When he goes to the zoo and watches the big monkey pick on the small monkey and the small monkey vent by beating up on a smaller monkey he finally understands humans. And asks how he can be ordained.

So, if you'd gone with Mike you might be a reverend by now.
I guess Mike and I learned different things at the zoo.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Gawdzilla Sama on June 01, 2017, 10:54:56 AM
Quote from: SGOS on June 01, 2017, 10:52:12 AM
I guess Mike and I learned different things at the zoo.
You weren't an essential tabula rasa when you went there. Mike wasn't even happy with the idea that he was one of these "humans". Once he grokked them he knew what had to be done.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Cavebear on June 18, 2017, 07:45:20 AM
Michael Valentine Smith (or whatever - it seems to vary) adapted to Mars individually, but that has nothing to do with evolution.  The premise sucked big time but I liked the book after that when I first read it a couple times.  But as I grew older, I decided the whole story was moronic and puerile.  And when it comes to books, I'm pretty good at "the willing suspension of disbelief".

I can't read Heinlein any more.  I came to view him as a sexist libertarian nut far sideways of even Ayn Rand.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Baruch on June 18, 2017, 09:01:32 AM
Quote from: Cavebear on June 18, 2017, 07:45:20 AM
Michael Valentine Smith (or whatever - it seems to vary) adapted to Mars individually, but that has nothing to do with evolution.  The premise sucked big time but I liked the book after that when I first read it a couple times.  But as I grew older, I decided the whole story was moronic and puerile.  And when it comes to books, I'm pretty good at "the willing suspension of disbelief".

I can't read Heinlein any more.  I came to view him as a sexist libertarian nut far sideways of even Ayn Rand.

Science fiction is an opportunity to write a social thought experiment, or satire, in ways that would be unacceptable with real people.  Like a video game, a first person shooter.  You wouldn't shoot a real person, would you?
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Gawdzilla Sama on June 19, 2017, 07:24:26 AM
Quote from: Cavebear on June 18, 2017, 07:45:20 AM
Michael Valentine Smith (or whatever - it seems to vary) adapted to Mars individually, but that has nothing to do with evolution.  The premise sucked big time but I liked the book after that when I first read it a couple times.  But as I grew older, I decided the whole story was moronic and puerile.  And when it comes to books, I'm pretty good at "the willing suspension of disbelief".

I can't read Heinlein any more.  I came to view him as a sexist libertarian nut far sideways of even Ayn Rand.
The first line of Stranger in a Strange Land is "Once upon a time there was a Martian named Valentine Michael Smith." It doesn't "vary", people get it wrong.

And your opinion is noted.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Cavebear on June 20, 2017, 02:30:54 AM
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on June 19, 2017, 07:24:26 AM
The first line of Stranger in a Strange Land is "Once upon a time there was a Martian named Valentine Michael Smith." It doesn't "vary", people get it wrong.

And your opinion is noted.

My apologies.  Memory betrayed me...
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Baruch on June 20, 2017, 07:14:29 AM
Quote from: Cavebear on June 20, 2017, 02:30:54 AM
My apologies.  Memory betrayed me...

Berenstein Bears ... a nearly universal false memory.  It was Berenstain Bears.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Gawdzilla Sama on June 20, 2017, 08:55:55 AM
Quote from: Cavebear on June 20, 2017, 02:30:54 AM
My apologies.  Memory betrayed me...
I have said the same thing myself, which is why I drilled it into my brain.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Unbeliever on June 20, 2017, 05:05:22 PM
Trepanning, huh? That sometimes works...
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Gawdzilla Sama on June 20, 2017, 05:33:24 PM
Quote from: Unbeliever on June 20, 2017, 05:05:22 PM
Trepanning, huh? That sometimes works...
It's best done at home, the authorities don't need to know.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Cavebear on July 14, 2017, 08:19:15 AM
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on June 20, 2017, 05:33:24 PM
It's best done at home, the authorities don't need to know.

Simple operation these days.  Bottle of whiskey, electric drill, spade bit, towel under head.  Maybe a small vacuum cleaner...
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Unbeliever on July 30, 2018, 02:32:24 PM
I see this thread is kind of old, but this seems to fit here better than elsewhere:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aq5BK-dmtqc
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Baruch on July 30, 2018, 06:55:53 PM
Quote from: Unbeliever on July 30, 2018, 02:32:24 PM
I see this thread is kind of old, but this seems to fit here better than elsewhere:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aq5BK-dmtqc

No time to study science, still working out how many angels can dance on the head of a pin ;-)
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Jason78 on July 30, 2018, 08:59:47 PM
Quote from: Unbeliever on May 31, 2017, 04:36:53 PM
Carl Sagan was pretty good at explaining evolution in simple (but not simplistic) ways. I really enjoyed his discussion of samurai crabs, on the original Cosmos, though that was actually artificial selection, is was easy to see how it could apply to natural selection.

Why can't I get away with selectively breeding humans?
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Unbeliever on July 30, 2018, 09:03:26 PM
You're just not rich enough.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Hydra009 on July 31, 2018, 01:09:48 AM
I know it's super late to point this out, but it's not quite so simple as in the OP.

Sure, monkeys look like people (in fact, that's why it's a favorite insult of people trying to dehumanize other people - comparing them to apes/monkeys) and of course, monkeys and people are very closely related.  So similarity = relation, right?  Well, not quite.

There are tons of species that are very similar-looking but are not closely related.  This can be due to either convergent evolution (similar features due to a similar niche, not due to close relations) or mimicry (a species disguising itself as another species).

For kids, I think the best example of evolution is island giganticism.  Island species look extremely similar to mainland species, just bigger.  It doesn't take long to deduce both migration and slight genetic changes in response to the environment.  Boom.  Variation + selection = change over time.  The core concept of evolution.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: SGOS on July 31, 2018, 08:44:03 AM
Quote from: Hydra009 on July 31, 2018, 01:09:48 AM
Sure, monkeys look like people (in fact, that's why it's a favorite insult of people trying to dehumanize other people - comparing them to apes/monkeys) and of course, monkeys and people are very closely related.  So similarity = relation, right?  Well, not quite.

There are tons of species that are very similar-looking but are not closely related.  This can be due to either convergent evolution (similar features due to a similar niche, not due to close relations) or mimicry (a species disguising itself as another species).
It's reasonable that similar environments will nurture similar adaptations.  Throw in a bit of coincidence, and we would expect similar but unrelated species, just as evolution predicts.  Darwin was a very good guesser as well as a better than average observer, but his theory still involved a lot of speculation at the time.  This tends to invite controversy.  Throw in some things that challenge religion, and the controversy is magnified to astounding proportion.

In Darwin's day, such controversy would be expected, and he faced a lot of it, both from the science community and clergy.  He could have been proven wrong eventually, except that he wasn't.  What started as a guy simply writing about what he think probably happened, turned out to be one of the most widely accepted and continually verified theories in science.

In my mind, our discovery and understanding of DNA cinched the theory, and only the most uneducated and biased voices still argue about it.

OK, I got a little off track from your comment.  But we now know monkeys and man are closely related, but the uncanny similarities were still an important tip off to invite the search for more understanding.  Although Darwin's original observations seem to focus a lot on birds.  Sometimes I think little children could have arrived at a similar conclusion about man and monkeys.  Well, maybe not a conclusion, but similar observations.  I didn't create any great theory on my first trip to the local zoo, but I remember being overwhelmed at how much monkeys looked like little people.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Unbeliever on July 31, 2018, 01:19:41 PM
I've heard the phrase "form follows function" somewhere, and I suppose there may be something to it.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: SGOS on July 31, 2018, 01:44:33 PM
Quote from: Unbeliever on July 31, 2018, 01:19:41 PM
I've heard the phrase "form follows function" somewhere, and I suppose there may be something to it.
Frank Lloyd Wright used to say that.  I don't know if he coined it or not.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Unbeliever on July 31, 2018, 01:55:46 PM
Wikipedia says it was coined by an architect, Louis Sullivan:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Form_follows_function
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: SGOS on July 31, 2018, 02:23:09 PM
From you link:

Quote
Frank Lloyd Wright adopted and professed the same principle in a slightly different formâ€"perhaps because shaking off the old styles gave them more freedom and latitude.
I've toured a few of Wright's buildings and studied him some in collage, and while I admire the practical philosophy of form following function, I really can't see it in Wright's designs.  It's not like they defy the philosophy over all.  They are just buildings that are more or less practical.  I think today's buildings are actually more practical.  And Wright does deviate by adorning his architecture with attractive, but totally unnecessary foo fah at times.  What he did well was design buildings with his metaphorical visual signature.  You can spot one of his buildings from a block away, and I'm sure the owners will point out that it's a Frank Lloyd Wright design in case you didn't notice.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Baruch on July 31, 2018, 03:41:45 PM
Quote from: Unbeliever on July 31, 2018, 01:55:46 PM
Wikipedia says it was coined by an architect, Louis Sullivan:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Form_follows_function

Louis Sullivan was from the Chicago School of architecture, he designed the first high rise office building

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Sullivan

Frank Lloyd Wright was one of his students.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Cavebear on August 01, 2018, 06:20:52 AM
Quote from: Jason78 on July 30, 2018, 08:59:47 PM
Why can't I get away with selectively breeding humans?

You need a population totally under your control.  It's awkward.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Baruch on August 01, 2018, 07:28:56 AM
Quote from: Cavebear on August 01, 2018, 06:20:52 AM
You need a population totally under your control.  It's awkward.

He probably means ... he wants to be the only male breeder ;-)  Majaraja time.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Cavebear on August 01, 2018, 07:37:01 AM
Quote from: Baruch on August 01, 2018, 07:28:56 AM
He probably means ... he wants to be the only male breeder ;-)  Majaraja time.

Oh well then, maybe he wants to be a naked mole rat or meerkat or some type of cichlid...
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Gawdzilla Sama on August 06, 2018, 09:54:56 AM
Quote from: Cavebear on August 01, 2018, 06:20:52 AM
You need a population totally under your control.  It's awkward.
And sooner or later they get so selective they won't breed with you.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Cavebear on August 09, 2018, 07:19:03 AM
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on August 06, 2018, 09:54:56 AM
And sooner or later they get so selective they won't breed with you.

Well, until they become "not you" it's good.  They one day it isn't.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: trdsf on August 11, 2018, 07:07:41 PM
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on August 06, 2018, 09:54:56 AM
And sooner or later they get so selective they won't breed with you.
So that's why I couldn't get a date in high school or college â€" I'm the wrong species!  XD
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Baruch on August 11, 2018, 08:36:13 PM
Quote from: trdsf on August 11, 2018, 07:07:41 PM
So that's why I couldn't get a date in high school or college â€" I'm the wrong species!  XD

Male youths think mistakenly that they are entitled to dates, particularly with pretty girls.  This is part of toxic teen/college culture.  Of course there is a corresponding female version ;-)
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Cavebear on August 12, 2018, 04:05:12 AM
Quote from: trdsf on August 11, 2018, 07:07:41 PM
So that's why I couldn't get a date in high school or college â€" I'm the wrong species!  XD

Well, yeah, if you don't show the right feathers, or fluttery wing-waves, or swan-neck bend, or club membership, or dance moves, or the right car, you are not going to be chosen. 
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Baruch on August 12, 2018, 06:08:20 AM
Who wouldn't want to date that ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLnbiTkj1TQ
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: trdsf on August 12, 2018, 02:16:33 PM
Quote from: Cavebear on August 12, 2018, 04:05:12 AM
Well, yeah, if you don't show the right feathers, or fluttery wing-waves, or swan-neck bend, or club membership, or dance moves, or the right car, you are not going to be chosen.
Not to mention having been socially conditioned to assume I was straight.  And a reasonably devout Catholic.  So I didn't pursue dates with girls with any sort of enthusiasm, and I couldn't conceive of pursuing a date with a guy because one just "didn't".  And being 1-2 years younger than everyone else in my class didn't help â€" I graduated at 16.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Baruch on October 10, 2018, 05:49:43 AM
https://sustainablepulse.com/2018/10/09/the-creator-of-gmo-potatoes-reveals-the-dangerous-truth-exclusive-interview/#.W73Jqy-ZNTZ

Yes, evolution is complicated, being a diachronic process, not a synchronic one.  Particularly when humans are doing the modifying, not random mutations.  Use legacy seeds when you can.  Or enjoy cancer.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Cavebear on October 10, 2018, 01:40:47 PM
Quote from: Baruch on October 10, 2018, 05:49:43 AM
https://sustainablepulse.com/2018/10/09/the-creator-of-gmo-potatoes-reveals-the-dangerous-truth-exclusive-interview/#.W73Jqy-ZNTZ

Yes, evolution is complicated, being a diachronic process, not a synchronic one.  Particularly when humans are doing the modifying, not random mutations.  Use legacy seeds when you can.  Or enjoy cancer.

"Diachronic"?  I'm impressed!  You amaze me sometimes. That's why I'm still reading your posts.  Not that you should do that deliberately, but I love seeing words I know sometimes that I don't think to use. 
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Baruch on October 10, 2018, 08:50:12 PM
Quote from: Cavebear on October 10, 2018, 01:40:47 PM
"Diachronic"?  I'm impressed!  You amaze me sometimes. That's why I'm still reading your posts.  Not that you should do that deliberately, but I love seeing words I know sometimes that I don't think to use.

But did you understand ... that there is more than one way to do anything, and a smart person doesn't rule any method out, but uses whichever applies at any given time.  Without diachrony there is no cause-effect, no history.  But synchrony is useful sometimes.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Cavebear on October 14, 2018, 09:35:22 AM
Quote from: Baruch on October 10, 2018, 08:50:12 PM
But did you understand ... that there is more than one way to do anything, and a smart person doesn't rule any method out, but uses whichever applies at any given time.  Without diachrony there is no cause-effect, no history.  But synchrony is useful sometimes.

You mean as an analysis of change over time?  Yeah.  Though I think "spacetime" is nearly the same.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Baruch on October 14, 2018, 10:01:15 AM
Quote from: Cavebear on October 14, 2018, 09:35:22 AM
You mean as an analysis of change over time?  Yeah.  Though I think "spacetime" is nearly the same.

Yes.  But don't mistake the tool for the work.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Cavebear on October 14, 2018, 10:46:28 AM
Quote from: Baruch on October 14, 2018, 10:01:15 AM
Yes.  But don't mistake the tool for the work.

Spacetime is not a tool.. Get with the program...
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Baruch on October 14, 2018, 01:41:45 PM
Quote from: Cavebear on October 14, 2018, 10:46:28 AM
Spacetime is not a tool.. Get with the program...

Spacetime is an idea, used by humans, to work relativity problems with.  It isn't the Bahamas, that Columbus has discovered.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Cavebear on October 14, 2018, 02:28:18 PM
Quote from: Baruch on October 14, 2018, 01:41:45 PM
Spacetime is an idea, used by humans, to work relativity problems with.  It isn't the Bahamas, that Columbus has discovered.

The Science Channel declared last night that Spacetime is "everything there is".  You arguing with them too now?  ;)
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Baruch on October 14, 2018, 04:49:15 PM
Quote from: Cavebear on October 14, 2018, 02:28:18 PM
The Science Channel declared last night that Spacetime is "everything there is".  You arguing with them too now?  ;)

No everything is a whole number - Pythagoras.

Actually the idea that spacetime is everything, is from William Clifford, and even predates Relativity by decades.  In spite of much effort, this hasn't entirely worked out (but QFT is close).

Everything is virtual particles of the various quantum fields, zipping into and out of existence per Heisenberg.  It is a mystery why there is more than one field, why they have the forms and interactions that they do, and why they have 4 non-euclidean degrees of freedom (aka spacetime).
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Cavebear on November 24, 2018, 06:18:56 PM
Quote from: Baruch on October 14, 2018, 04:49:15 PM
No everything is a whole number - Pythagoras.

Actually the idea that spacetime is everything, is from William Clifford, and even predates Relativity by decades.  In spite of much effort, this hasn't entirely worked out (but QFT is close).

Everything is virtual particles of the various quantum fields, zipping into and out of existence per Heisenberg.  It is a mystery why there is more than one field, why they have the forms and interactions that they do, and why they have 4 non-euclidean degrees of freedom (aka spacetime).

The most popular current version of reality, maybe.  And keep in mind that Heisenberg made up the dead/not dead cat as sarcasm...

And with that, I retire.  To where I may or may not be asleep, and sleeping, perchance to dream of being awake or not and I won't know until I awake and consider whether I am a person dreaming I am a butterfly or a butterfly dreaming I am a person, while I might well be a cockroach anyway!
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Baruch on November 24, 2018, 08:45:12 PM
Quote from: Cavebear on November 24, 2018, 06:18:56 PM
The most popular current version of reality, maybe.  And keep in mind that Heisenberg made up the dead/not dead cat as sarcasm...

And with that, I retire.  To where I may or may not be asleep, and sleeping, perchance to dream of being awake or not and I won't know until I awake and consider whether I am a person dreaming I am a butterfly or a butterfly dreaming I am a person, while I might well be a cockroach anyway!

Retired to bed, but not soon enough.  Schroedinger, not Heisenberg.  They even hated each other.  And stop reading Kafka, or you will wake up Jewish.  Not likely as an early Chinese person.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Unbeliever on December 28, 2018, 02:29:32 PM
Here's a good talk about how we know evolution is true:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18YwBwIK_no
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Baruch on December 28, 2018, 07:07:45 PM
Devolution is definitely real.  Been a witness for over 6 decades.
Title: Re: Darwin for Toddlers. It's Not that Complicated.
Post by: Minimalist on December 28, 2018, 08:28:04 PM
Quote from: Jason78 on July 30, 2018, 08:59:47 PM
Why can't I get away with selectively breeding humans?


Go to a bar just before closing time and choose carefully from what's available.