Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

First Mechanical Gear Found in a Living Creature

popularmechanics.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 191 posts

Re: First Mechanical Gear Found in a Living Creature

#101

Post by GravityWell »

chockablock wrote: post #83
swamp40 wrote: post #77

It is for beauty like this that I believe all living things were originally designed by some intelligence, somewhere. Perhaps designed to mutate and evolve, or perhaps that was a limitation in the source materials, but there are some beautifully engineered living systems on our planet.

non sequitur . Why does beauty imply the existence of an intelligent designer?

It doesn't. In this context, "...that I believe all living things", the words "I believe" can be directly converted to "I have faith without any evidence".

Re: First Mechanical Gear Found in a Living Creature

#102

Post by emiljbs »

snowwrestler wrote: post #96
swamp40 wrote: post #77

It is for beauty like this that I believe all living things were originally designed by some intelligence, somewhere. Perhaps designed to mutate and evolve, or perhaps that was a limitation in the source materials, but there are some beautifully engineered living systems on our planet.

Evolution is the ultimate proof of the power of agile engineering--ship on a schedule, test with real data, then work on the next iteration, keeping the good and discarding the bad.

Except that the new iteration is pretty much making random changes.

Re: First Mechanical Gear Found in a Living Creature

#103

Post by swamp40 »

biomecha wrote: post #91
itsybitsycoder wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because mutations are random. Evolution doesn't result in the ideal designs for everything, just the best (or good enough) of the random mutations that happen. OTOH, if we were designed by something, why would the designer not use the optimal leg designs for all the jumping bugs?

> if we were designed by something, why would the designer not use the optimal leg designs for all the jumping bugs? Because: - the designer is not that clever, - the designer likes to play with its creatures, - the designer is not alone, - the designer forgot to update its creations, - or simply because she does not care.

Yes, my personal pet theory is that something really smart made a 3D printer-like life machine, and then gave it to thousands of other not-so-smart individuals - who then came up with all these crazy and inconsistent life forms on Earth.

Some designed Bengal Tigers, and others designed Aye Ayes.

Re: First Mechanical Gear Found in a Living Creature

#104

Post by dsego »

snowwrestler wrote: post #96
swamp40 wrote: post #77

It is for beauty like this that I believe all living things were originally designed by some intelligence, somewhere. Perhaps designed to mutate and evolve, or perhaps that was a limitation in the source materials, but there are some beautifully engineered living systems on our planet.

Evolution is the ultimate proof of the power of agile engineering--ship on a schedule, test with real data, then work on the next iteration, keeping the good and discarding the bad.

But if the environment suddenly changes you die out.

Re: First Mechanical Gear Found in a Living Creature

#105

Post by Slackwise »

swamp40 wrote: post #77

It is for beauty like this that I believe all living things were originally designed by some intelligence, somewhere. Perhaps designed to mutate and evolve, or perhaps that was a limitation in the source materials, but there are some beautifully engineered living systems on our planet.

Just because something looks "engineered", doesn't mean it is.

A perfect example is the eye. An organ of great complexity, but one that is very easily explained by logical evaluation, as well as existing living creatures and fossils: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nwew5gHoh3E

If you're a software engineer, I hope you understand how procedural systems and algorithms can transform data and functions. Similar processes take place via chemistry and biological interaction. Conway's Game of Life is a good example of a simple system giving rise to complex interaction and patterns.

Complex beauty can arise from the interaction of systems, but if you say to yourself that it "must have been engineered by something greater than me", you settle in your mind, and shortcut around critical thinking and never progress toward understanding. And that's a great, great shame.

Re: First Mechanical Gear Found in a Living Creature

#106

Post by nfg »

wslh wrote: post #18
john_b wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Four. A gear is just a piece of geometry that happens to be useful for a number of practical purposes. Same with rods, rings, and so on. People apply labels to it according to how they perceive it.

And what's the limit for such innovation? can microprocessors be developed naturally?

I get your meaning obviously, but fundamentally tis a strangely Manichaean outlook: they were developed naturally.

Re: First Mechanical Gear Found in a Living Creature

#107

Post by dragonwriter »

boldfield wrote: post #85
dragonwriter wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If there are "many jumping" insects, how does it come to be that only a single specie (that we know of, granted) that has evolved this feature, and why have we not observed others undergoing the evolutionary process that could/would yield them in others? Because evolution isn't planned, it involves selection from randomly[1]-occuring variations each of which has a extremely low probability. Certainly, we see some s…

Certainly, we see some some traits that arise independently in different populations in different places with similar traits and are preserved and develop in similar ways, but the fact that a feature that contributes to fitness arises uniquely in one place is far from surprising. I grant you all but a feature that contributes to fitness arises uniquely in one place is far from surprising . First, I'm not a biologist…

> it seems at least mildly surprising that we've never observed at least similarly structured creatures.

Its not surprising that some survival-valuable features (especially when they fulfill a function for which there are other mechanisms) arise and are preserved and further developed only once, since them arising in a species in which they are survival-useful is a matter of chance, as is their preservation.

So, its not surprising that features we haven't seen in other species is continue to be discovered. Its remarkable enough to be newsworthy and interesting, but not something that fundamentally challenges the expectations and understandings we have from basic understanding of evolution.

Re: First Mechanical Gear Found in a Living Creature

#108

Post by dragonwriter »

boldfield wrote: post #75
vdaniuk wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Statistically, it is very likely that at any given point in time there will be only one species with the trait that humans consider significant.

I'm about to commit an HN faux pax here, but, citation? Off the top of my head I can think of traits which do not fit your assertion: vision in the 390-700nm wavelengths, hair/fur, eye placement (think predator v. prey), etc, etc.

I think GP used significant in a sense more like "newsworthy", in that, ceteris paribus, the perceived significance of a trait is inversely related to the frequency with which it has been seen in the past.

Re: First Mechanical Gear Found in a Living Creature

#109

Post by dragonwriter »

emiljbs wrote: post #102
snowwrestler wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Evolution is the ultimate proof of the power of agile engineering--ship on a schedule, test with real data, then work on the next iteration, keeping the good and discarding the bad.

Except that the new iteration is pretty much making random changes.

> Except that the new iteration is pretty much making random changes.

E.g., avoiding ivory tower planning and instead using empirical, in-the-wild A/B testing.

Re: First Mechanical Gear Found in a Living Creature

#110

Post by [deleted] »

shmageggy wrote: post #94
swamp40 wrote: post #77

It is for beauty like this that I believe all living things were originally designed by some intelligence, somewhere. Perhaps designed to mutate and evolve, or perhaps that was a limitation in the source materials, but there are some beautifully engineered living systems on our planet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleological_argument What I was looking for but didn't find in the article was an explanation (or even a hypothesis) for how this mechanism evolved. One of the things I find most fascinating about evolution is how seemingly irreducible complexity in nature always turns out to have a some path of mutations and adaptations that led to the current state. For instance, the canonical example…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN