Book:  What is your dangerous idea?
  / Edited by John Brockman /
Article:
Seeing Darwin in the light of Einstein;
Seeing Einstein in the light of Darwin.
  / by Lee Smolin.  /
===.
Seeing Einstein in the light of Darwin suggests that
natural selection could act not only on living things
but on the properties defining the various species
of elementary particles.
  /  Page 115 /
We physicists have now to understand Darwin’s lesson:
The only way to understand how one out of a vast number
of choices was made, which favors improbable structure,
is that is the result of evolution by natural selection.
  / Page 117 /
Now the only possible way of accounting for the laws of nature,
and for uniformity in general, is to suppose them results of evolution.
  / Page 117 /
And I believe that once this is achieved, Einstein and Darwin
will be understood as partners in the greatest revolution yet in science, . . .
  / Page 118 /
=====================.

socratus - 17 October 2011 10:41 PM

Book:  What is your dangerous idea?
  / Edited by John Brockman /
Article:
Seeing Darwin in the light of Einstein;
Seeing Einstein in the light of Darwin.
  / by Lee Smolin.  /
===.
Seeing Einstein in the light of Darwin suggests that
natural selection could act not only on living things
but on the properties defining the various species
of elementary particles.
  /  Page 115 /
More physicists have now to understand Darwin’s lesson:
The only way to understand how one out of a vast number
of choices was made, which favors improbable structure,
is that is the result of evolution by natural selection.
  / Page 117 /
Now the only possible way of accounting for the laws of nature,
and for uniformity in general, is to suppose them results of evolution.
  / Page 117 /
And I believe that once this is achieved, Einstein and Darwin
will be understood as partners in the greatest revolution yet in science, . . .
  / Page 118 /

At the elemental level, I would not use the phrase natural selection (Darwinian) per se. There are only 92 natural elements, which by their very properties can only combine in specific ways, forming the compounds on which everything is built. Thus, while the interactions of particles may be accidental, the results are consistent and predictable. I believe that qualifies as Mathematical evolution which is geometric and deterministic in nature, rather than Darwinian evolution, which is biological and indeterministic in nature. i.e. Each type of evolution functions under specific, sometimes different sets of natural laws.

Write4U - 18 October 2011 01:10 AM

At the elemental level, I would not use the phrase natural selection (Darwinian) per se.

On which biological level is it possible to use phrases :
Darwinian natural selection , Darwin’s evolution ?
=.
  Book ‘ The trouble with Physics’ / by Lee Smolin /
Part 8. The first superstring revolution.
Page 126 – 127.
‘. . . the growing catalog of string theories meant that
we weren’t actually studying a fundamental theory.’ . . .
‘ . . . but the many versions of string theory opened up
the possibility that it was true of essentially all the
properties of the elementary particles and forces. This would
mean that properties of the elementary particles were
environmental and could change in time. If so, it would mean
that physics would be more like biology, in that the
properties of the elementary particles would depend on the
history of our universe. ‘
( These thoughts would lead to a 1992 paper titled ‘ Did the
Universe Evolve?’ and a 1997 book called
‘ The Life of the Cosmos.’ Our story later turns on these ideas.)

    Lee Smolin. 
          http://www.leesmolin.com/
==.

Write4U - 18 October 2011 01:10 AM

I believe that qualifies as Mathematical evolution
which is geometric and deterministic in nature,
rather than Darwinian evolution, which is biological and indeterministic in nature.

Does your Mathematical evolution belong to some object / subject in Nature ?

No, IMO, there is a subtle difference in concepts.  A geometric evolution occurs as an efficient way for a simple system to evolving into a complex system. It follows strict mathematical rules of evolutionary expansion.
Fractals are perfect examples of geometric evolution. A fundamentally simple form replicating itself with fundamentally simple instructions. There is nothing random, nothing selective, nothing accidental about geometric evolution. The resulting complexity of geometric (fractal) evolution can be truly awe inspiring, like the universe…. .

OTOH Darwinian evolution is a mixture of luck, variety, and environmental pressures. This involves the integration and evolution of already very complex systems. Predation, diseases, environmental pressures causing mass extinctions. Mating is a hit or miss way to propagate. But mating is required to produce variety, not replication. This is a different type of evolution and expansion.

The Fern is a perfect example of both fractal and Darwinian evolution. It is interesting to note that after a forest fire which destroys the entire forest, the first reappearing plantlife is the Fern, it is but a simple plant…..(the meek shall inherit…... )

Random side-note. This fern has a whopping 1,262 chromosomes! Not so simple, I would say http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ophioglossum

With this letter I finish my participation on this forum.
Thank you to everybody who took part on this link.
Your participation was important to me because it helped
me better to understand the philosophy of physics.
===.
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus
=====================.