Evolution (split from The concept of Time)

[iNow]

No

5 hours ago, julius2 said:

Does this make sense?

 

[Phi for All]

7 hours ago, julius2 said:

Does not affect space. If there is indeed another time vector, different to that of the inextricable continuum, the question is how would one access such a time vector?

No, that's not the question, you're Begging that Question, which means you're assuming its premise is already true, and that's a logical fallacy. The real question is whether a universe with multiple temporal dimensions is stable in the first place. 

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

Quote

Max Tegmark has argued that, if there is more than one time dimension, then the behavior of physical systems could not be predicted reliably from knowledge of the relevant partial differential equations. In such a universe, intelligent life capable of manipulating technology could not emerge. Moreover protons and electrons would be unstable and could decay into particles having greater mass than themselves. (This is not a problem if the particles have a sufficiently low temperature.)

 

[julius2]

So iin summary, and I know all these threads can be hard to follow, but the way I see it:

Time dimension / Time vector

encompasses the Big Bang through to earth development

Earth's timescale includes the evolution of species including that of people (humans)

Is there a longer time vector than currently known by 21st century science?

(past) longer vector, history in Time. (disputed)

what would a longer time vector encompass?  There appears to be no "evidence" of a longer time vector. Therefore it doesn't exist...

 

(future) longer vector, space science (universe exploration) - giving a future for mankind

time science (proposed), indicating interaction with a Time domain

[julius2]

Further detail on evolution:

My hypothesis looks at what has evolved

horse / giraffe

horse / elephant

These animals are roughly similar (compared to say a bird). I envisage in evolution that there might have been a "base animal" one with 4 legs, a heart, lungs, neck etc

But then this "base animal" evolved with a "helping hand" from Time, to be a horse. And with a "helping hand" the base animal evolved to be a giraffe.

The contribution of earth is to provide an environment with which these "changing species" can evolve. i.e. even with a "helping hand" it would still take many years to see the diversity of animals we see today. To rely on genetic mutations, natural selection - just doesn't seem feasible.

I have looked at a phylogenetic tree which seems to branch earth life into some grouping - vetebrata / chordata, arthropoda, mollusca.

Just to give a view of diversity of life in this world:

lizard / crocodile

fish / whale / seal

cat / lion / panther

bird / eagle /hawk

elephant / grizzly bear / polar bear / tiger / lion

 

[CharonY]

35 minutes ago, julius2 said:

Further detail on evolution:

My hypothesis looks at what has evolved

horse / giraffe

horse / elephant

These animals are roughly similar (compared to say a bird). I envisage in evolution that there might have been a "base animal" one with 4 legs, a heart, lungs, neck etc

But then this "base animal" evolved with a "helping hand" from Time, to be a horse. And with a "helping hand" the base animal evolved to be a giraffe.

The contribution of earth is to provide an environment with which these "changing species" can evolve. i.e. even with a "helping hand" it would still take many years to see the diversity of animals we see today. To rely on genetic mutations, natural selection - just doesn't seem feasible.

I have looked at a phylogenetic tree which seems to branch earth life into some grouping - vetebrata / chordata, arthropoda, mollusca.

Just to give a view of diversity of life in this world:

lizard / crocodile

fish / whale / seal

cat / lion / panther

bird / eagle /hawk

elephant / grizzly bear / polar bear / tiger / lion

 

Seems like a convoluted way to state that all extant species have a common ancestor somewhere. And the helping hand is a combination of selection and chance. The main issue is the direction, i.e. the assumption that it is guided toward something. 

[sethoflagos]

1 hour ago, julius2 said:

I envisage in evolution that there might have been a "base animal" one with 4 legs, a heart, lungs, neck etc

Nearly.

It is not known with absolute certainty that the last common ancestor of all living tetrapods was itself a tetrapod. But either way, it would have been almost indistinguishable from some closely related lobefin fish living at the same time around 380+/-10 million years ago (mid- to late Devonian). So it had lobefins rather than legs and it not known with absolute certainty that it had a neck.

[joigus]

2 hours ago, julius2 said:

But then this "base animal" evolved with a "helping hand" from Time, to be a horse.

You mean like a biblical helping hand? Something like...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution ?

[julius2]

5 hours ago, sethoflagos said:

Nearly.

It is not known with absolute certainty that the last common ancestor of all living tetrapods was itself a tetrapod. But either way, it would have been almost indistinguishable from some closely related lobefin fish living at the same time around 380+/-10 million years ago (mid- to late Devonian). So it had lobefins rather than legs and it not known with absolute certainty that it had a neck.

Thanks for the info.

I looked at a tetrapod phylogeny. If we look at lungfish / eusthenopteron   and further on.  Ichthyos tega / Human,

how are these species changing? Are we relying on genetic mutations which happen by chance in a population etc.

My hypothesis is that Time has played a guiding role in getting these species to evolve.

4 hours ago, joigus said:

You mean like a biblical helping hand? Something like...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution ?

Yes. Theistic evolution fills a gap. But where does the role of Time come in to play?  Where does God fit in relation to Time?   Is God real?

[joigus]

2 hours ago, julius2 said:

Yes. Theistic evolution fills a gap.

Gap? What gap?

2 hours ago, julius2 said:

Is God real?

What god? There are about 5,000

If I were to make a guess, I'd say they are 5,000 different fantasies.

[julius2]

10 hours ago, sethoflagos said:

Nearly.

It is not known with absolute certainty that the last common ancestor of all living tetrapods was itself a tetrapod. But either way, it would have been almost indistinguishable from some closely related lobefin fish living at the same time around 380+/-10 million years ago (mid- to late Devonian). So it had lobefins rather than legs and it not known with absolute certainty that it had a neck.

A question, how come we don't see much development in living species on earth today?

I mean in evolution there was a change from fish to walking fish say.....

We don't see that degree of change today, do we?

[joigus]

1 minute ago, julius2 said:

A question, how come we don't see much development in living species on earth today?

 

It's quite irritating when people just ignore your answer:

Punctuated equilibrium?

Introns, regions of DNA where exploration of possibilities can be afforded only by eukaryotes? I'll use bold for those particular points you seem to have difficulty with:

On 11/30/2023 at 6:21 PM, joigus said:

Sorry, not new, but much much better formulated. To account for some kind of stratification in taxa, which is what your rough idea seems to be about:

Quote

“Punctuated equilibrium is the idea that evolution occurs in spurts instead of following the slow, but steady path that Darwin suggested. Long periods of stasis with little activity in terms of extinctions or emergence of new species are interrupted by intermittent bursts of activity.”

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/punctuated-equilibrium#:~:text=“Punctuated equilibrium is the idea,by intermittent bursts of activity.”

Gradual, of course, is not absurd. We see it all the time. We see it in the bones, in the teeth, and so on.

The "substance" you're looking for is, perhaps, alternative splicing. Or at least that's what some of those clueless scientists seem to have guessed at:

https://www.nature.com/articles/nrg2776

Introns develop long, long before they are used against the environment. Most of these introns are lost, because they are no use.

Every so-and-so many tens of millions of years, one of these intron rarities, happens to be useful for a specific environmentally-related purpose.

When this extremely rare event happens, it manifests in the fossil record looking so similar to a miracle that only an expert could tell the difference.

That's why having super-redundant eukaryote DNA is such a blessing in evolutionary terms.

These "bursts of accelerated evolution" have been identified, studied, and at least partially understood long, long ago. Science is always a work in progress, of course.

Fossils don't provide a movie of evolution for us to watch. Discontinuity of the fossil record was already observed by Darwin. Gee, I think somebody's mentioned it here too,

On 11/1/2023 at 7:41 PM, CharonY said:

There are many fossils showing several levels of gradual changes from our ancestor to now. The limitation is not the presence or absence of a miraculous substance but the mere fact that fossilization is a rare event and discovery of fossils even rarer. 

Not long ago, we thought anomalocaris was really anomalous, a rarity of the Cambrian seas. Here's the picture now:

Do you seriously think mountains don't grow only because you don't see them grow in your lifetime?

[sethoflagos]

2 hours ago, julius2 said:

A question, how come we don't see much development in living species on earth today?

I mean in evolution there was a change from fish to walking fish say.....

We don't see that degree of change today, do we?

Genetic mutations and related changes are sporadic events. Therefore evolution cannot be a continuous process and we may have to wait some time before we suddenly observe a small step change in a population. This waiting time can be quite short for microorganisms that reproduce very quickly.  

In recent years we've observed evolutionary process produce new strains of COVID every few months.

Evolution in larger creatures can take much longer to accrue sufficient change for an observable effect. In the last 10,000 years or so we've seen the evolution of blue eyes in some eurasian populations of humans; lactose tolerance in pastoral populations reliant on dairy produce; the appearance of the sickle cell gene in populations subject to infection with malaria.

Such timescales are far beyond the lifetime of any single human; beyond the lifetime even of a civilisation; so why should we expect to see anything happening before our very eyes?

 However, if we can see some small change occur on the scale of 1,000 years, think how much change we could see in 1 million years! Our ancestors of 1 million years ago didn't actually look that different to how we look now. But we would see that they were different enough to consider whether or not we were all of the same species.

If we could go back in time 100 million years, we'd probably see no more evolution happening in our daily lives than we do now. But the animals around us, including our ancestors, would have looked very different.

And there is no need for any 'guiding hand' here. A bit of low level background radiation, and some small degree of unreliability in certain complex chemical reactions are quite sufficient to explain the all the natural diversity we see.

And time is, along with the space occupied by the planet's surface simply the passive stage on which this activity plays out. 

Edited December 7, 2023 by sethoflagos
sp

[exchemist]

7 hours ago, julius2 said:

Thanks for the info.

I looked at a tetrapod phylogeny. If we look at lungfish / eusthenopteron   and further on.  Ichthyos tega / Human,

how are these species changing? Are we relying on genetic mutations which happen by chance in a population etc.

My hypothesis is that Time has played a guiding role in getting these species to evolve.

Yes. Theistic evolution fills a gap. But where does the role of Time come in to play?  Where does God fit in relation to Time?   Is God real?

I note the introduction of a new topic, in an irrelevant manner. This is a tediously familiar pattern. 

Edited December 7, 2023 by exchemist

[joigus]

7 minutes ago, exchemist said:

I note the introduction of a new topic, in an irrelevant manner. This is a tediously familiar pattern. 

I think after a while one develops an intuition for when a poster is waiting for the right moment to unpack the real message.

[Bufofrog]

3 hours ago, julius2 said:

A question, how come we don't see much development in living species on earth today?

I mean in evolution there was a change from fish to walking fish say.....

We don't see that degree of change today, do we?

We don't see any change because our lives are very short compared to the time frame of evolution.  Evolution is happening all around us it is just any change in a species over the course of 100 years is miniscule.  But I suspect you know that, at least I hope you know enough about evolution to know it.

[julius2]

Aside from evolution, but related to Time, does anyone have an opinion on where our world is heading?

My guess is that we are heading towards an "Old World" unless we find something fantastic in the universe first.....

[swansont]

6 minutes ago, julius2 said:

Aside from evolution, but related to Time, does anyone have an opinion on where our world is heading?

My guess is that we are heading towards an "Old World" unless we find something fantastic in the universe first.....

!

Moderator Note

If you want to discuss a topic other than evolution, open a new thread.

 

[iNow]

10 hours ago, Bufofrog said:

We don't see any change because our lives are very short compared to the time frame of evolution

Correct in most cases, but exceptions exist. 
 

https://www.businessinsider.com/examples-of-evolution-happening-right-now-2015-2

[Bufofrog]

2 hours ago, iNow said:

Correct in most cases, but exceptions exist. 

Agreed.