imported_inspire
Senior member
- Jun 29, 2006
- 986
- 0
- 0
Originally posted by: Gibsons
Originally posted by: inspire
Question: Random, in the mathematical sense, also implies that the expected value of a random variable is equal to zero. We're talking so much about evolution being 'random' - do we devolution as much as evolution (I'm assuming equal weights in this question for the sake of arguement; I'm not trying to pull a fast one.)?
Not entirely sure what you mean by the question, but I'll throw two things out there...
Mutations aren't entirely random, if that's what you're asking. An A is more likely to be mutated into a G than either a T or a C for instance. Given enough generations and a large population size however, one should expect to see most all possible point mutations sampled at one point or another. Larger (and perhaps more important in the evolutionary process) events such as duplications, translocations etc. are much more difficult to predict.
On another level, there are some fairly simple evolutionary scenarios whereby adoption of a more complex system (including the irreducibly complex) is easily acquired, causes a selectable advantage and is probably irreversible (as it's irreducible).
Yeah, I realize now that I did a poor job of phrasing the question (which usually happens). I meant to ask if the 'randomness' in evolution behaved like random error (which is generally modeled under the assumption that the expected value of said error is zero, and is normally distributed - seems logical enough, but I admit, in hindsight, I took this for granted...)
Thanks Gibsons, sleeping through Biology makes me dumb when it comes to stuff like this. So, mutations aren't truly random in the sense of random error, or noise, but in the sense of a random variable. That's interesting.