"Real" ringworlds

[narf poit chez BOOM]

evelution has no explanation for intelligence and rules it out. why? chemicals aren't intelligent. chemicals have gravity. lots of chemicals have lots of gravity. lots of chemicals don't have intelligence. unless everything is intelligent, in which case, i may not win, but you will lose.

[Krsqk]

Mind you, to get this energy, you have to be able to manipulate a small black hole, which is probably very difficult (if possible) and very dangerous.

Dangerous? Is that where all the neighborhood cats have gone? Dear me, what a terrible accident.

Like Mom always said, "It's all fun and games until someone gets radiation poisoning." Or was it "until someone gets knocked past an event horizon"?

[Phoenix-D]

evelution has no explanation for intelligence and rules it out. why? chemicals aren't intelligent."

Evolution has very little to do with chemicals actually. That's a couple levels too low.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

from an evelotionary point of view, where chemicals and electromagnatism and electricity. none of these explains intelligence, becuase none of these has been shown to have intelligence.

[Phoenix-D]

narf, you're missing my point I think.

Evolution doesn't work on the chemical level. (well, not in the sense biologists are talking about)

Move up to organisms and populations. There you CAN get intelligence supported by natural selection- if it results in the intelligent variant having more offspring or surving better.

Whether the indivudual molecules or atoms have intelligence is irrelevet; intelligence is an emergant property, like a heartbeat, breathing etc. Looking at one cell, you couldn't predict it. Take a human heart cell by itself, and it would be a sad, useless critter. Link it up with other, differently specialized cells though, and you've got something useful.

[Dingocat85]

Originally posted by Primogenitor:

quote:

---

Every single living organism on this planet .... wants to do only one thing: Find and fix problems.

Thats not stricly true. There is no concious disire to "fix problems". Its simply that those that do not "fix problems" die. Conside a group of foxes and a group of rabits. The foxes chase the rabits, the slow rabits are caught and die, so the remaining rabits are the only ones that can breed and the next generateion are on average faster. The slow foxes don't catch any rabits and die of starvation. Therefore only the fastest foxes breed and the next generatin is also, on average, faster than the previous one. This kills the slower of the new rabits, which get faster, and then starve the slower foxes, which get faster,..... and so on ad infinitum. Until you get light speed rabitts

---

Ah, but the foxes and the rabbits - even the ones that die - are still trying to fix problems.

In the foxes' case:Each fox is trying to fix the problem of not having enough food to eat.
In the rabbits' case:Each rabbit is trying to (ah! ah! ah! ah!) stay alive, fixing the problem of their lives being in danger.

The foxes that die because they can't catch food, and the rabbits that are too slow, are animals that can't fix their problems...So, evolution is just survival of the animals best suited to fix their problems.

Originally posted by narf poit chez BOOM:
ev{o}lution has no explanation for intelligence and rules it out. why? chemicals aren't intelligent. chemicals have gravity. lots of chemicals have lots of gravity. lots of chemicals don't have intelligence. unless everything is intelligent, in which case, I may not win, but you will lose.

Intelligence actually is an evolutionary trait. Without intelligence, organisms get better suited to their environment via natural selection. Those less suited to their environment die off, the better-suited breed, etc. etc. - in other words, , and the organisms adapt to the environment (via mutations given to them at birth), propelled by death (of the weaker).

The more intelligence an organism has, the more it gets better suited to its environment via innovation. Just like the non (or almost non-)intelligent organisms, those less suited to their environment die off, the beter-suited proliferate & breed, etc. etc. - but the difference is, the environment is adapted by the organisms - Intelligence is giving organisms a chance to improve their own ability to survice, instead of using nothing more than their naturally imbued abilities.

There are two extremes on this specialization vs. adaptability spectrum:

On one end, you have Insects. Insects are very specialized, almost perfectly adapted to their current environment. The problem is...is the environment changes into something they're not adapted to, the insects die off. This is why insects have such short lifespans, and breed so quickly...those weaker-suited insects die before they can "make" more of their weak, not-suited-to-survive-in-this-environment kind. Conversely, those that are better sutied to the environment breed & breed & breed, and the whole cycle of better-suited insects making more of their kind goes on & on.
This mass breed/death cycle propels evolution, giving every newly created insect a slightly different variation - and those with advantageous variations proliferate & make more of their kind.

The other side of the spectrum is, of course, humans. Next to reptiles, Humans have one of the longest lifespans out of all creatures on this planet. Why? So they can think up more innovations, ways to manage their problems better.
Including a naturally adaptible chassis, humans can survive in a variety of environments and through a variety of problems armed with two things: tools (clothing, cars, bow & arrow), and knowledge (those purple berries are bad, this is the best knot to use when rigging a ship's sails). But neither tools nor knowledge come to a human at birth; they are acquired, used, and improved upon. Humans are such intellectual creatures, that the solutions they come up with (cars, iron working) create their own problems (pollution, dependency on metal)...we are also the only creatures we know of that have routinely engaged in genetic manipulation (horses used to be only strong enough to pull things, i.e. chariots, wagons - then they got stronger, and they could have stuff on their back, i.e. packhorses, horseback riders - then they got so strong, they could even wear armor, i.e. knights & cavaliers.
The intellect of humans also allows us to have complex social bonds, letting a soceity function as a whole - but that's a whole different story.

Note 1: There is some knowledge that has become so essential, and has been basically the same knowledge every time it was used, that people are born knowing that knowledge. Otherwise known as Instinct, some examples are eating & sleeping.

Note 2: Some scientists think that the only reason humans are so smart, is that when deciding between a man with intellect and a man who's fit, women have repeatedly chose those with brains

EDIT: Humans are also remarkable, because they have a form of communication that can express an infinite amount of ideas...

[ May 15, 2003, 06:52: Message edited by: Dingocat85 ]

[narf poit chez BOOM]

my point was, that although the brain is a complex computer and could come up with ideas, that doesn't explain why i exist. chemicals and energy can't come up with me, they just are acted upon, there is nothing there to act.