@NickSzabo4 @cinnamon_carter Genome length is not a clock; it is an expense. If my budget increases 1% year, that means I am centuries old?
@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. -
@NickSzabo4@cinnamon_carter It would use the amino acids and nuclear acids floating around, you know that. The usual abiogenesis proposals. -
@gwern@cinnamon_carter A 150 base pair ecosystem can't catch, much less put to use, most of the amino & nuclear acids floating around. - 20 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@NickSzabo4@cinnamon_carter If genomes are clocks and linear growth at all sensible, why aren't *all* genomes ever longer? -
@gwern@cinnamon_carter It's overall pattern that reflects laws of probability and expense of genome (thus long-term efficient compression).
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@NickSzabo4@cinnamon_carter Not reasonable at all. No genomes are clocks. All lineages trace back 4bya; evolution has not stopped anywhere.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.