@gwern @cinnamon_carter There's far more evidence in the paper than just the trend-line
-
@NickSzabo4@cinnamon_carter True and irrelevant. Complexity of minimal life doesn't imply strict linearity of growth over all time!
@gwern @cinnamon_carter The point is not strict linearity, the point is eliminate the hidden assumption of miraculously improbable events.
-
-
@NickSzabo4@cinnamon_carter Huh? the point of that paper *is* strict linearity. It's whole model: assume linearity and project backwards. -
@gwern@cinnamon_carter It posits a reasonable working assumption about complexity growth instead of hand-waving about "open niches". -
@gwern@cinnamon_carter Ecosystem with 150 base pairs of complexity is chemically very handicapped, and has very few open niches available. -
@NickSzabo4@cinnamon_carter On a proto-earth, no niches are filled; all are open. No competition by definition. -
@gwern@cinnamon_carter It's not a niche if no organism has chemical ability to exploit it. -
@gwern@cinnamon_carter Niches that required photosynthesis, nitrogen fixing, and even many far simpler capabilities were unavailable. -
@NickSzabo4@cinnamon_carter Nevertheless, early Earth would have a great variety of organic chemicals to harvest. That is a big opportunity -
@gwern@cinnamon_carter What kinds of organics? What 150 base pair ecosystem could exploit them? Be specific stop hand-waving. - 22 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@NickSzabo4@cinnamon_carter And there's no 'removal of miracles' in a model involving panspermia w/no better mechanisms for abiogenesis...Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.