Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Self organization - a new paradigm?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="rjw" data-source="post: 67068220" data-attributes="member: 27906"><p><strong>Is self-organization an alternative to natural selection?</strong>&#8232;&#8232;</p><p></p><p>The authors note that some researchers see self-organization as an alternative to natural selection, thereby driving a very different evolutionary process to that generally envisaged by the mainstream of researchers. &#8232;&#8232;</p><p></p><p>However, they dont accept this, and their reasons are as follows.</p><p></p><p>There is no doubt that self-organizing systems exist within living organisms. Take the cell. The question to be addressed it this - are these self-organizing mechanisms the product of natural selection or are they simply an intrinsic properties of a cells physics and chemistry. If the latter then the role of natural selection is much reduced.&#8232;&#8232;</p><p></p><p>The authors dont accept the latter point of view. They think that self organizing systems evolve and that the mechanisms that sustain them evolve. They describe <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RayleighBénard_convection" target="_blank"><strong>Bernard convection cells</strong></a> as an example illustrating certain properties which are common to both physical and biological self-organizing systems. Bernard convection cells form rapidly and spontaneously under the right physical conditions. However, they do not form robustly, in that if the physical conditions are altered slightly, then the cells break down or fail to form. These properties appear to exist for all self-organizing processes.</p><p></p><p>Such properties are the basis for the argument that natural selection retains its importance in evolution. A cell has to do a lot of work to set up the conditions and maintain them, for self-organization of any subsystem to occur. Furthermore, finding the right elements to react with each other in a self-organizing process is not a trivial task, given all the possible components genes can make. Hence it would seem from these two points alone, if it self-organization were just an intrinsic property of the cell, then the unique processes we see and the common processes that occur amongst cells simply would not be. Its as if some kind of hand is selecting certain kinds of self-organization to exist.&#8232;&#8232;</p><p></p><p>Furthermore, given the non-robustness of self-organizing systems mentioned above, the authors point out that cells have to go to great lengths to maintain the conditions to keep any self-organized system from falling apart as soon as it forms. They write that Organisms are full of such regulatory procedures for maintaining homeostasis in the face of environmental perturbations, whereas self-organizing processes in isolation have no such ability.</p><p></p><p>&#8232;&#8232;In short, in isolation, a self-organizing process is a product of a given circumstance and when those circumstances change (even slightly), the process breaks down. Such self organization is intrinsic. In biology however, it is different. Amongst all potentialities, only certain self-organizing systems occur, and they have to be maintained in the face of many environmental perturbations. Hence they are not spontaneous in the sense that intrinsic systems or processes are. They write that selection has to fine-tune and control many parameters to get work out of a self-organization process. Thus, although selection does not need to construct an elaborate plan to generate complexity when self-organization is involved, it does have to drive the evolution of elaborate mechanisms for invoking self-organizing processes and controlling their dynamics. Therefore, selection should play the dominant organizing role even when much of the complexity one observes appears to be spontaneous.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>To be continued ...</p><p>&#8232;&#8232;&#8232;&#8232;&#8232;&#8232;&#8232;&#8232;</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="rjw, post: 67068220, member: 27906"] [b]Is self-organization an alternative to natural selection?[/b]

 The authors note that some researchers see self-organization as an alternative to natural selection, thereby driving a very different evolutionary process to that generally envisaged by the mainstream of researchers. 

 However, they dont accept this, and their reasons are as follows. There is no doubt that self-organizing systems exist within living organisms. Take the cell. The question to be addressed it this - are these self-organizing mechanisms the product of natural selection or are they simply an intrinsic properties of a cells physics and chemistry. If the latter then the role of natural selection is much reduced.

 The authors dont accept the latter point of view. They think that self organizing systems evolve and that the mechanisms that sustain them evolve. They describe [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RayleighBénard_convection][b]Bernard convection cells[/b][/url] as an example illustrating certain properties which are common to both physical and biological self-organizing systems. Bernard convection cells form rapidly and spontaneously under the right physical conditions. However, they do not form robustly, in that if the physical conditions are altered slightly, then the cells break down or fail to form. These properties appear to exist for all self-organizing processes. Such properties are the basis for the argument that natural selection retains its importance in evolution. A cell has to do a lot of work to set up the conditions and maintain them, for self-organization of any subsystem to occur. Furthermore, finding the right elements to react with each other in a self-organizing process is not a trivial task, given all the possible components genes can make. Hence it would seem from these two points alone, if it self-organization were just an intrinsic property of the cell, then the unique processes we see and the common processes that occur amongst cells simply would not be. Its as if some kind of hand is selecting certain kinds of self-organization to exist.

 Furthermore, given the non-robustness of self-organizing systems mentioned above, the authors point out that cells have to go to great lengths to maintain the conditions to keep any self-organized system from falling apart as soon as it forms. They write that Organisms are full of such regulatory procedures for maintaining homeostasis in the face of environmental perturbations, whereas self-organizing processes in isolation have no such ability. 

In short, in isolation, a self-organizing process is a product of a given circumstance and when those circumstances change (even slightly), the process breaks down. Such self organization is intrinsic. In biology however, it is different. Amongst all potentialities, only certain self-organizing systems occur, and they have to be maintained in the face of many environmental perturbations. Hence they are not spontaneous in the sense that intrinsic systems or processes are. They write that selection has to fine-tune and control many parameters to get work out of a self-organization process. Thus, although selection does not need to construct an elaborate plan to generate complexity when self-organization is involved, it does have to drive the evolution of elaborate mechanisms for invoking self-organizing processes and controlling their dynamics. Therefore, selection should play the dominant organizing role even when much of the complexity one observes appears to be spontaneous. To be continued ... 







 [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Self organization - a new paradigm?
Top
Bottom