Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Article  Is human complexity an accident of evolution?

#1
C C Offline
It's reassuring to think humans are evolution's ultimate destination, but research shows we may be an accident
https://theconversation.com/its-reassuri...ent-201048

EXCERPTS: Modern biologists agree that the most complex organisms have become more complex over the last 4 billion years, but they disagree about what sort of process accounts for this.

Because most organisms are still very simple, one possibility is that maximum complexity has increased “accidentally”, like the diffusion of a drop of ink in a glass of water. If true, this could be a blow to our human sense of significance as the most complex organisms.

Another theory is that increasing complexity is driven, on average, by natural selection. Sometimes selection acts on many, independent branches of the tree of life in a similar way and in parallel. This can produce similar effects in many of those branches and is known as a driven trend.

While driven trends need not imply divine purpose, they at least suggest that complexity was mostly an improvement, which is reassuring for us humans.

So which pattern is the most common in the evolution of complexity: accidental diffusion or driven trend?

[...] Our paper shows that increasing complexity in mammals has both diffusive and driven aspects. Rather than marching towards greater complexity, mammals evolved in lots of different directions, with only some lineages pushing the upper bounds of complexity.

Unfortunately, there is little research addressing this question. One of the few published studies demonstrates that crustaceans (crabs, lobsters, shrimps and their relatives) evolved with a driven trend for increasing complexity over the last half a billion years... (MORE - missing details)
Reply
#2
Zinjanthropos Offline
(Sep 6, 2023 04:35 PM)C C Wrote: It's reassuring to think humans are evolution's ultimate destination, but research shows we may be an accident
https://theconversation.com/its-reassuri...ent-201048

EXCERPTS: Modern biologists agree that the most complex organisms have become more complex over the last 4 billion years, but they disagree about what sort of process accounts for this.

Because most organisms are still very simple, one possibility is that maximum complexity has increased “accidentally”, like the diffusion of a drop of ink in a glass of water. If true, this could be a blow to our human sense of significance as the most complex organisms.

Another theory is that increasing complexity is driven, on average, by natural selection. Sometimes selection acts on many, independent branches of the tree of life in a similar way and in parallel. This can produce similar effects in many of those branches and is known as a driven trend.

While driven trends need not imply divine purpose, they at least suggest that complexity was mostly an improvement, which is reassuring for us humans.

So which pattern is the most common in the evolution of complexity: accidental diffusion or driven trend?

[...] Our paper shows that increasing complexity in mammals has both diffusive and driven aspects. Rather than marching towards greater complexity, mammals evolved in lots of different directions, with only some lineages pushing the upper bounds of complexity.

Unfortunately, there is little research addressing this question. One of the few published studies demonstrates that crustaceans (crabs, lobsters, shrimps and their relatives) evolved with a driven trend for increasing complexity over the last half a billion years... (MORE - missing details)

How did the lowly mantis shrimp evolve the most complex eyes of any creature. We’re not even close in comparison.

https://www.science.org.au/curious/earth...20kingdom.

Excerpt: Humans can process three channels of colour (red, green and blue), while mantis shrimps perceive the world through 12 channels of colour, and can detect UV (ultra violet) and polarised light, aspects of light humans can’t access with the naked eye.

The mantis shrimp’s visual system is unique in the animal kingdom. Mantis shrimps, scientifically known as stomatopods, have compound eyes, a bit like a bee or a fly, made up of 10,000 small photoreceptive units. Some of these photoreceptors are arranged in a strip-like arrangement across their eyes so in fact they see their world by scanning this strip across their subject, a bit like a bar-code reader in a shop.


Does complex mean more with less? Better natural machinery but without a huge cost, the shrimp didn’t give up much evolutionarily
Reply
#3
Magical Realist Offline
Complexity may have other driving factors other than evolution. Take snowflakes for example. Crystals growing out of simple water droplets and freezing temps to result into unique and symmetrical structures. I think complexity could well nigh be infinite given the duration of a species existence. Fractal geometry at the molecular level, particular in the realm of DNA/RNA, may account for many exquisite forms in the biological kingdom. Chaotic indeterminacy may be another..
Reply
#4
Ostronomos Offline
Please take into account Langan's evolution of complex systems.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Fourteen discoveries made about human evolution in 2022 C C 0 70 Dec 28, 2022 05:19 PM
Last Post: C C
  Did eating human poop play a role in dog evolution? + Searching space for ET viruses C C 1 232 Aug 25, 2020 01:32 PM
Last Post: Zinjanthropos



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)