> I've been reading about information content, complexity (in the > mathematical/CS sense), randomness etc. quite a bit recently. > > One of the things that stands out is the idea (implicit, mostly) that > TANSTAAFL (There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch) -- that you > cannot get more complexity from less (if you could, that would be a > valid compression, and therefore not as complex). > > So what I've been picturing is that organisms, in evolving, are > "absorbing" complexity from the Universe around them. And although I > used to think evolution always strives for more complexity, lately I > see this a bit differently...
On what basis would you make this point about absorbing complexity from the universe? We get energy, and that's about it. The rest of the input is, at best, the visual movement of the planets, stars, and sun, which isn't that much information. The other place complexity can be found is in the scale of matter. Evolution has plumbed them depths of molecular mechanics very effectively, but it's still a closed, static system. The real impetus of evolution is co-evolution, competition between candidate lifeforms. This keeps the fitness landscape changing all the time, and usually incrementing the complexity of the system. Co-evolution + energy + time = complexity If you're going to propose that we're absorbing complexity from elsewhere, could you be more concrete? > > I suspect that in a sense, what is going on is a holographic process: > that if the whole shebang keeps going on, in the end every bit of > complexity is mirrored everywhere else -- each organism absorbing or > reflecting the complexity of their surroundings, which includes the > other organisms. A sort of Indra's Net of complexity. This can only happen when said organisms can interact with one another. ------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
