A-Life
I've been working on my artificial life program some more, and I'm making some (if I do say so myself) incredible leaps forward. I did a little research today, and discovered that I've done in about a week what it took formal scientists decades to complete. I even independently created some theory and performed some experiments that weren't done until the early 80's!
For all that, though, I've realized that for life to be simulated is easy... and frustrating. I can make pictures mimic living things. I can even program into them capacity to mate, fight, run, and, through natural selection, experience an eventual genetic improvement in the population.
Still, though, what frustrates me is, that while my little qritters can evolve, they can only do so within the confines that I have created for them.
22222222
2170140142
2022222202
272 212
212 212
202 212
272 212
21222222122222
207107107111112
2222222222222
(Credit to Chris Langston for dreaming up such magnificence)
*points up* And that, ladies and gentlemen, is both the coolest thing I've seen all day and the sum of my frustration. What you're looking at is a self-reproducing organism built entirely of information. The cells in state 2 act as sheathes to protect it from the environment. The cells within that 'skin' are genetic information. It can reproduce itself four times (that is, until the space around it is completely filled up). Each of its children will also be capable of self-reproduction. In an infinite world, they can expand infinitely.
This is a very simple model of artificial 'life.' It doesn't have to eat, move, mate, or any of those other things that my life can do. And yet, in the most important way, it is just as limited, as fake, as my life.
Why? Because although they can both sense changes in their environment, and reproduce themselves perfectly, they both lack the critical capacity to evolve beyond what I have specifically enabled them to be.
This is the point at which my thinking departs from conventional a-life thinking. Most scientists would search frantically for a way to make their life forms evolve. The key, of course, would be discovering the universal principles that nature seems to use to make life shape itself. The true test of life, in the eyes of most researchers, isn't the ability to move, eat, mate, or any of those other things. The true test of life is the ability for one organism to create an even more complex organism. In other words, to truly evolve.
I wonder, myself, if this is even possible. Many scientists take evolution for granted, and assume right away that since it has happened in real life, it can be duplicated on a computer.
I, however, am not so sure. While I believe in natural selection, I also recognize that there most certainly are some "magical" elements to life, such as how cells ever learned to cooperate and take on specialized roles, or how those cells in our own bodies know what to do and when. The processes that a brand-new human life undergo in its first moments are still a mystery.
Also, I don't believe in macro-evolution. If life on this planet has the ability to evolve into more complex forms of itself, I have yet to see good evidence of it. I think it's far more likely that things came into being more or less as they are today. Complex structures like an eye or a brain... behaviors, such as instincts... how could these evolve? I'll admit that there's an (insanely tiny) fraction of a chance that an eye or a brain could develop, randomly, given enough time and tries. I still find that pretty unlikely. But behavior... now that's the tricky part. Organisms can learn during their lifetimes. That much, we know. But knowledge cannot be passed down through the generations genetically.
How, then, does a newborn sea-turtle know to head for the ocean? How does a baby know how to suckle at a mother's breast? How can the brain know intuitively how to control the body's basic functions?
Those characteristics are ones that my life forms can exhibit. But only because I have specifically told them how to do so. And where did the complex instructions of DNA originate, anyway? My organisms have sets of genes, which are marginally reshuffled in their offspring. But only because I designed such a system and put it in them.
I have gained a new kind of appreciation for God. We are built perfectly, to do what we need to do, as is all other life. The universe we live in is perfectly built to support life. That itself is a major point. I've been doing a lot of thinking lately about what kinds of universes could support life at all, and have decided that they are tremendously rare. The laws of physics, the position of our planet, the materials found here, are all just right. The very existence of matter and energy, and the very laws that govern reality, all are just right.
Anyway, the magic element to life that a-life researchers seek is simply that - the principles that allow life to order itself and create something better. If it exists at all, it's pretty much the only exception the the second law of thermodynamics.
I don't know if it exists... and I suspect that it does not. I don't see that ability in the world around me. The whole "random mutation thing" is way too implausible for me to seriously consider.
But I wonder... if such principles, such magic, don't really exist, can I create them? Can I program an open-ended, evolving organism with emergent behavior? And if I do so, won't I really be proving myself wrong? For, if I can program such a thing, then I will, myself, be such a thing. In the act of creating a superior being, I'd become equal to my creation. And it would no longer be superior. Which would, I suppose, prove me right after all.
Rawr... I dunno. But I'm discovering within myself a real passion for biology, here. I aim to take some bio classes next semester. Well, probably only one. But biology + computer science seems very exciting to me, and it's a direction I want to move farther in.
That's more or less where I stand right now.
So, in other news, I finally got Kris a birthday/Christmas/I-Love-You present. Also had a conversation with Zak. Ate some pizza. Watched Star Trek: Generations. Twice. =)
And now it's time to get studying for math. But, by "now," I do of course mean tomorrow. Right now, it's time to read some more about a-life. =)
*upset* I'm more wide awake now than I've been all day. Not good. No sleep tonight, I fear. And it wasn't chemically induced this time... finally, something woke up my brain and switched it to full capacity, no coffee required. Maybe I should start each day with a little a-life study. =)
For all that, though, I've realized that for life to be simulated is easy... and frustrating. I can make pictures mimic living things. I can even program into them capacity to mate, fight, run, and, through natural selection, experience an eventual genetic improvement in the population.
Still, though, what frustrates me is, that while my little qritters can evolve, they can only do so within the confines that I have created for them.
22222222
2170140142
2022222202
272 212
212 212
202 212
272 212
21222222122222
207107107111112
2222222222222
(Credit to Chris Langston for dreaming up such magnificence)
*points up* And that, ladies and gentlemen, is both the coolest thing I've seen all day and the sum of my frustration. What you're looking at is a self-reproducing organism built entirely of information. The cells in state 2 act as sheathes to protect it from the environment. The cells within that 'skin' are genetic information. It can reproduce itself four times (that is, until the space around it is completely filled up). Each of its children will also be capable of self-reproduction. In an infinite world, they can expand infinitely.
This is a very simple model of artificial 'life.' It doesn't have to eat, move, mate, or any of those other things that my life can do. And yet, in the most important way, it is just as limited, as fake, as my life.
Why? Because although they can both sense changes in their environment, and reproduce themselves perfectly, they both lack the critical capacity to evolve beyond what I have specifically enabled them to be.
This is the point at which my thinking departs from conventional a-life thinking. Most scientists would search frantically for a way to make their life forms evolve. The key, of course, would be discovering the universal principles that nature seems to use to make life shape itself. The true test of life, in the eyes of most researchers, isn't the ability to move, eat, mate, or any of those other things. The true test of life is the ability for one organism to create an even more complex organism. In other words, to truly evolve.
I wonder, myself, if this is even possible. Many scientists take evolution for granted, and assume right away that since it has happened in real life, it can be duplicated on a computer.
I, however, am not so sure. While I believe in natural selection, I also recognize that there most certainly are some "magical" elements to life, such as how cells ever learned to cooperate and take on specialized roles, or how those cells in our own bodies know what to do and when. The processes that a brand-new human life undergo in its first moments are still a mystery.
Also, I don't believe in macro-evolution. If life on this planet has the ability to evolve into more complex forms of itself, I have yet to see good evidence of it. I think it's far more likely that things came into being more or less as they are today. Complex structures like an eye or a brain... behaviors, such as instincts... how could these evolve? I'll admit that there's an (insanely tiny) fraction of a chance that an eye or a brain could develop, randomly, given enough time and tries. I still find that pretty unlikely. But behavior... now that's the tricky part. Organisms can learn during their lifetimes. That much, we know. But knowledge cannot be passed down through the generations genetically.
How, then, does a newborn sea-turtle know to head for the ocean? How does a baby know how to suckle at a mother's breast? How can the brain know intuitively how to control the body's basic functions?
Those characteristics are ones that my life forms can exhibit. But only because I have specifically told them how to do so. And where did the complex instructions of DNA originate, anyway? My organisms have sets of genes, which are marginally reshuffled in their offspring. But only because I designed such a system and put it in them.
I have gained a new kind of appreciation for God. We are built perfectly, to do what we need to do, as is all other life. The universe we live in is perfectly built to support life. That itself is a major point. I've been doing a lot of thinking lately about what kinds of universes could support life at all, and have decided that they are tremendously rare. The laws of physics, the position of our planet, the materials found here, are all just right. The very existence of matter and energy, and the very laws that govern reality, all are just right.
Anyway, the magic element to life that a-life researchers seek is simply that - the principles that allow life to order itself and create something better. If it exists at all, it's pretty much the only exception the the second law of thermodynamics.
I don't know if it exists... and I suspect that it does not. I don't see that ability in the world around me. The whole "random mutation thing" is way too implausible for me to seriously consider.
But I wonder... if such principles, such magic, don't really exist, can I create them? Can I program an open-ended, evolving organism with emergent behavior? And if I do so, won't I really be proving myself wrong? For, if I can program such a thing, then I will, myself, be such a thing. In the act of creating a superior being, I'd become equal to my creation. And it would no longer be superior. Which would, I suppose, prove me right after all.
Rawr... I dunno. But I'm discovering within myself a real passion for biology, here. I aim to take some bio classes next semester. Well, probably only one. But biology + computer science seems very exciting to me, and it's a direction I want to move farther in.
That's more or less where I stand right now.
So, in other news, I finally got Kris a birthday/Christmas/I-Love-You present. Also had a conversation with Zak. Ate some pizza. Watched Star Trek: Generations. Twice. =)
And now it's time to get studying for math. But, by "now," I do of course mean tomorrow. Right now, it's time to read some more about a-life. =)
*upset* I'm more wide awake now than I've been all day. Not good. No sleep tonight, I fear. And it wasn't chemically induced this time... finally, something woke up my brain and switched it to full capacity, no coffee required. Maybe I should start each day with a little a-life study. =)