I've encountered this "wet a-life" research program before. There's a biologist at my school who's doing similar stuff... see http://web.pdx.edu/~niles/Lehman_Lab_at_PSU/Research.html
I think your analogy is quite understated, Subbu. There are an awful lot more than 2^(2^10) permutations of elements involved, for starters. (Have you heard of Tom Ray's "Tierra" project?) But, if I read you right, I totally agree that Cronin is being unwarrantedly optimistic. There's more to life than just evolution; metabolism and homeostasis come to mind. In a way, biology is in a similar situation to computer science in that we have a big collection of facts, a handful of vague heuristics, and relatively weak real theoretical grounding. I would encourage those with an interest in this stuff to read Robert Rosen, and also perhaps Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela. While somewhat heterodox, they're the best I've found in the subject of theoretical biology so far. Any others? -- Max 2011/9/20 K. K. Subramaniam <[email protected]> > On Tuesday 20 Sep 2011 9:25:11 AM Shawn Morel wrote: > > only slightly off topic. The questions posed seem really applicable when > > pointed at boot-strapping truly complex software: > > http://www.ted.com/talks/lee_cronin_making_matter_come_alive.html > The software equivalent of this experiment would be create random mutations > of > a 1MB array to see if it becomes a useful program ;-). > > Subbu > > _______________________________________________ > fonc mailing list > [email protected] > http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc >
_______________________________________________ fonc mailing list [email protected] http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
