Joined: June 2008
It is now quite a way back in the conversation, but Nakashima has played:
I think Dr Meyer is mistaken in characterizing the “magic pathway” which scientists might discover in the future, which connects simple substances to organic life.
Rather than new laws, by the thousands, the stepping stones on this pathway are merely specific circumstances which must arise consecutively in time and space, which allow the existing and relatively well known laws of nature to operate. We could in theory trace this magic pathway from the Big Bang through the formation of galaxies, stars, planets, surfaces, atmospheres, etc. until we arrived at the spot where, like Chinese fast food Happy Family, lipids, proteins and RNA were being mixed together.
Now this still might be a list of thousands of circumstances. If we multiply through the probabilities, we would find that only a vanishingly small proportion of the space and mass of the universe meet those conditions. And lo, it is true! Most of the universe is empty and dead.
But the main point is that it is much easier to discover circumstances than laws. The universe has rules less complex than Mornington Crescent, no matter what Dr Meyer might say.
Unless he says “Ealing Common!”
Playing a Carrom off another player or bystander was declared legal in the Australian Tests of '56, no matter the subsequent rioting.
King's Cross (Platform 9 3/4, to be exact)
I’m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter
I’m not an evolutionist, I’m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima