Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Imitating biology

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
    You're doing the math on a single binary coin. What you have to image is that you have a billion coins in a sequence, and you toss a random one of them. What are the odds that you'll get the same sequence after a hundred throws? In case the random would diverage away from the original value.
    I'm saying a random walk will on average, not get you anywhere, a billion random walks won't get you anywhere, though it is indeed unlikely that you will return to the exact state you started in. The average position will be zero, per Wikipedia, and a random walk (with adsorbing boundaries) is a good way to model genetic drift, per MIT.

    Blessings,
    Lee
    "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

    Comment


    • Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
      I'm saying a random walk will on average, not get you anywhere, a billion random walks won't get you anywhere, though it is indeed unlikely that you will return to the exact state you started in. The average position will be zero, per Wikipedia, and a random walk (with adsorbing boundaries) is a good way to model genetic drift, per MIT.
      No, MIT suggests it's a good way to teach genetic drift.

      If it were a good model, you'd see it being used in the peer reviewed literature. I anxiously await you sharing examples of that.
      "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

      Comment


      • Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
        No, MIT suggests it's a good way to teach genetic drift.

        If it were a good model, you'd see it being used in the peer reviewed literature. I anxiously await you sharing examples of that.
        Well, how about here?

        Source: PLOS

        Our results suggest that the random walk model can act as a useful predictive tool for describing the evolutionary dynamics of range expansions composed of an arbitrary number of genotypes with different fitnesses.

        Source

        © Copyright Original Source



        Blessings,
        Lee
        "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

        Comment


        • Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
          Well, how about here?

          Source: PLOS

          Our results suggest that the random walk model can act as a useful predictive tool for describing the evolutionary dynamics of range expansions composed of an arbitrary number of genotypes with different fitnesses.

          Source

          © Copyright Original Source

          That's not a model of genetic drift. Keep trying. Though credit for it actually being biology related.
          "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

          Comment


          • I think Lee's arguments and posts are getting more and more convoluted as time goes on (perhaps unintentionally so?).

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Seeker View Post
              I think Lee's arguments and posts are getting more and more convoluted as time goes on (perhaps unintentionally so?).
              Flipping coins in the dark, and stumbling around erratically with no known intentional direction.
              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

              go with the flow the river knows . . .

              Frank

              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Seeker View Post
                I think Lee's arguments and posts are getting more and more convoluted as time goes on (perhaps unintentionally so?).
                It's worth remembering that this is way off his initial contention, which about the behavior of fitness landscapes. I gave multiple reasons his contention was false, and he's become fixated on just one - the role of drift on a specific type of landscape. And now he's gotten bogged down in trying to describe it in ways that would support his beliefs, but are completely divorced from biology.

                Meanwhile, all those other reasons his initial argument was wrong? They're still out there, unaddressed.

                I can't tell whether these sorts of diversions, which seem to happen quite often with Lee, are the product of brilliant tactics on his part, or simply the result of his confused thinking on biology. The fact that he trusts a bunch of unscientific charlatans (it's like he's never read the Wedge Document) and not the actual biological research community makes me tend to think the latter.
                "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

                Comment


                • Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
                  That's not a model of genetic drift. Keep trying. Though credit for it actually being biology related.
                  Well, it actually mentions genetic drift in the title--that's about the best I can do.

                  It's worth remembering that this is way off his initial contention, which about the behavior of fitness landscapes. I gave multiple reasons his contention was false, and he's become fixated on just one...
                  The thread sort of got derailed, glad to discuss these other points, I think I did address them to some extent.

                  Blessings,
                  Lee
                  "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                    Well, it actually mentions genetic drift in the title--that's about the best I can do.
                    Then you can't do very well, can you? It's not used as a model for genetic drift by scientists, and i've listed a number of ways in which it fails to recapitulate features of biology. On your side... well, all you've presented here is that you think it is a good model.
                    "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                      I'm saying a random walk will on average, not get you anywhere, a billion random walks won't get you anywhere, though it is indeed unlikely that you will return to the exact state you started in. The average position will be zero, per Wikipedia, and a random walk (with adsorbing boundaries) is a good way to model genetic drift, per MIT.

                      Blessings,
                      Lee
                      You're now talking about a random walk in two-dimensions? The average position of a random walk in 2D is not the center. It is in fact a probability distribution that spreads out over time.

                      Now back to the example, you're still wrong. For any given mutation, it is highly unlikely that a second mutation returns you to the starting position. If you have a billion coins, the odds of one throw getting cancelled out by the other is 1 to a billion squared. Extremely improbable.

                      Over time the random mutations introduce changes, and the space of possibility configurations you can end up in grows. This is a very easy exercise you can do and verify yourself just using twenty coins. Just start to throw, and see how long it takes to return to the start.

                      Your argument is wrong, the random walk won't conserve the DNA.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
                        Then you can't do very well, can you? It's not used as a model for genetic drift by scientists, and i've listed a number of ways in which it fails to recapitulate features of biology. On your side... well, all you've presented here is that you think it is a good model.
                        And here is Brenner's Encyclopedia of Genetics:

                        Source: Brenner

                        In the first phase, genetic drift causes each subdivision to undergo a random walk in allele frequencies to explore new combinations of genes.

                        Source

                        © Copyright Original Source



                        Blessings,
                        Lee
                        "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
                          You're now talking about a random walk in two-dimensions? The average position of a random walk in 2D is not the center. It is in fact a probability distribution that spreads out over time.
                          No, the average of the distribution is indeed, the center.

                          Now back to the example, you're still wrong. For any given mutation, it is highly unlikely that a second mutation returns you to the starting position. If you have a billion coins, the odds of one throw getting cancelled out by the other is 1 to a billion squared. Extremely improbable.
                          Yes, you have a lot of variation, when there are a lot of sites to mutate, but I stand by Wikipedia's statement that the average position is still zero.

                          Over time the random mutations introduce changes, and the space of possibility configurations you can end up in grows. This is a very easy exercise you can do and verify yourself just using twenty coins. Just start to throw, and see how long it takes to return to the start.
                          Yes, the variation increases, but variation, and average, and the position after N trials, are different concepts.

                          Blessings,
                          Lee
                          "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                            And here is Brenner's Encyclopedia of Genetics:

                            Source: Brenner

                            In the first phase, genetic drift causes each subdivision to undergo a random walk in allele frequencies to explore new combinations of genes.

                            Source

                            © Copyright Original Source



                            Blessings,
                            Lee
                            Excellent set of articles, which I will read further, but I do not believe you have read them, because they do not use the bogus science and statistics you use. It is not good to simply argue by Google search.
                            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                            go with the flow the river knows . . .

                            Frank

                            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Seeker View Post
                              I think Lee's arguments and posts are getting more and more convoluted as time goes on (perhaps unintentionally so?).
                              By ''convoluted'' I mean ''confusing/confused''. Just to be clear.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Seeker View Post
                                By ''convoluted'' I mean ''confusing/confused''. Just to be clear.
                                Maybe he is an undercover avid supporter of natural abiogenesis and evolution trying to give Intelligent Design a bad image.
                                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                                Frank

                                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-18-2024, 12:15 PM
                                48 responses
                                136 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Sparko
                                by Sparko
                                 
                                Started by Sparko, 03-07-2024, 08:52 AM
                                16 responses
                                74 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by rogue06, 02-28-2024, 11:06 AM
                                6 responses
                                48 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Working...
                                X