Fly brain Is optimized

[Farabi]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/07/110708123935.htm

This is a miracle. Each time I asked about designer, someone gottabe answer there is no designer, I got it, God is an avoidable word in here because of the forum rule. So, lets redefine "designer" word.

When Im optimizing dave's algo, it does not mean that algos was mine, it was dave's mine, so I cant say that the algo was my design, because it was dave is who first design it, the one who improve it, but after I fix it, I can say that I design it too. So, in this context, I was a designer.
So, let's say evolution was right, there is no God, and everything is based from evolution. If fly invent that Cognitive Function gradually, step by step, Cant we say that the fly designed it? I think on this context, design does not mean God, right?

So, lets go back to the Topik. Does it not amazing how the nature invent all of this? Or maybe God, or maybe the fly, or Nature, anything? I've been spent my my on this months and get no clue how to mimicking it MASMatically. It is too complicated.

[jj2007]

...amazing how the nature invent all of this? Or maybe God, or maybe the fly, or Nature, anything? I've been spent my my on this months and get no clue how to mimicking it MASMatically. It is too complicated.

1. Use a simple method: Trial and error.
2. Spend more time on it. One month is not enough. Use 12*2^9 months (life started roughly 2^9 years ago).

[baltoro]

ONAN (aka, Farabi).   
You might find this classic paper by Theodosius Dobzhansky interesting: Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution
Theodosius Dobzhansky was a prominent geneticist and evolutionary biologist, and a central figure in the field of evolutionary biology for his work in shaping the unifying modern evolutionary synthesis. He published a major work of the modern evolutionary synthesis, the synthesis of evolutionary biology with genetics, in 1937.   
When I was younger, I read a book by American Paleontologist, George Gaylord Simpson, entitled, "The Major Features of Evolution, 1953", which changed my entire perspective about Life and Evolution. Simpson's major contribution was: Tempo and Mode in Evolution, 1944. Simpson was perhaps the most influential paleontologist of the twentieth century, and a major participant in the modern evolutionary synthesis.

[dedndave]

i have my doubts about natural selection

after 2 billion years, we still had gw bush

[hutch--]

I confess I have always chuckled about the distinctions between religion and science. You can break it down to two different categories, theology versus physics. If a topic addresses theology (no matter how much physics it claims to contain) it is theology where if a topic addresses physics (no matter how much theology it contains) its physics.

Now it just happens to be the case that theology generates really lousy physics just as physics generates really lousy theology.

Now when a worshipper of MITHRA makes the claim "Mithra created the world in 9 days" it becomes subject to such criteria as PROOF and sad to say for the worshipper of Mithra that proof is not forthcoming. Equally when a "physicist" makes claims that an observed phenomenon functions to the proof that Mithra does not exist the same criterion of proof is not forthcoming.

For the technical the problem is that of a "Category Error", roughly the difference between chalk and cheese, people talking about different things with little comprehension as to why what they are saying is nonsense.  :bg

[Astro]

i have my doubts about natural selection

after 2 billion years, we still had gw bush

:lol :lol

It's all very well arguing creators/designers vs. random chance, however, there is one aspect constantly overlooked: how does a bunch of chemicals like something? How does a bunch of chemicals live? Let's break this down to the absurd - amoeba.

An amoeba is a single-cell organism. It moves around. It apparently thinks. It looks for food, then eats it. A single cell. What is driving this tiny bunch of chemicals to act this way? It is not random that it just happens to move and eat all day long, as it dies, too.

Let me take this to the extreme: there are cells that dump the nucleus. That's right - the cytoplasm gets rid of the nucleus so that the cytoplasm can survive. Now how the heck does CYTOPLASM do this?????? Note also that in the living cytoplasm, after this event, contains no DNA, therefore no "software", as we perceive it, yet it is still alive, and apparently still autonomous (as far as tests have shown). Any answers to this killer question?

Once we answer this question, THEN we can contemplate more complex life-forms.

References to computers aside, I found this to be quite an intriguing theory: http://www.simulation-argument.com/simulation.html

Maybe The Maxtrix is closer to reality than we realize?

Another way to look at it: if I could somehow zoom with my eyes into my own physical being, I would eventually end up looking at atoms. I conclude therefore, that "something" is "running" on top of these atoms (the "hardware"), in order that they move, etc.., and thus make me a living thing.

Chemistry dictates that certain processes occur in the body (e.g. filtering of things in the liver) but it does NOT explain why the liver itself can die (by definition, if pure chemistry was involved, it could never die). There must be something else, something "not physical", occurring.

[Farabi]

Hutch:
Yeah youre right, that is why I left religion. I always though that religion is not based on fact, but "lie". When if you dont belive on my "fact" you dead.

[vanjast]

The fly's brain is probably too optimised and doesn't have enough visual 'parallel processing'..

I still find it easy to swot one,
.. by distracting it with one hand, then swot it from the other side with the other hand..
OR
...wait for it to clean it's feelers/probe, then hammer it.
OR
.. Do not swot it vertically, but horizontally as it cannot lift fast enough.

There's an art to swotting a fly  :green2

[dedndave]

either you have too much time on your hands, or too much cow shit in the yard   :lol

[vanjast]

 :bg   :bg  :green2

[hutch--]

From long ago i knew these folks in the country that used to have those disgusting fly paper rolls over the table where you ate but the star of the show was a 3 foot long fly swat with a fine wire mest as the swat surface and it was so effective you could accurately swat them out of the air.

[dedndave]

i am beginning to see what i have missed all my life...

i always wondered why the zen masters are catching flies with their eyelids, and so on
now i see that there is a connection between killing flies and a higher level of thinking   :lol
sounds like a good excuse for a government research grant

[vanjast]

..sounds like a good excuse for a government research grant

Hasn't the USA/CIA already poured $$$ into 'Bug's like this, psuedo insects that spy on you..
Everytime you swot a really dumb bug (one that doesn't move fast enough), it could be a CIA agent.. :bdg  :green2

[dedndave]

i am more likely to hit it if i believe it's a politician - lol