On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 03:57:36 +0000 (UTC), sharikoff{at}lycos.ru
(chupacabra) wrote:

>The question that perplexes me - why does evolution progress from the
>simple to the complex? The simple bacteria and other "primitive" forms
>of live are by no means less "viable" then more complex forms --
>animals and humans. Many of these "primitive" species remain the same
>for the hundreds of millions of years, survive perfectly in their
>enviroments and don't need to evolve into the complex forms. Indeed,
>complex forms are often more fragile and susceptible to the
>environment perturbations than primitive ones. So how natural
>selection alone can explain the  general vector of evolution - from
>simple and primitive to more complex forms? Or could there exist some
>another force apart from the natural selection -- to "push" evolution
>in the direction of complexity, developed nervous system,
>self-awareness etc.???

The general idea now is that there is no "progression" of evolution
towards more and more complex forms.  It is necessarily true that the
original life forms were relatively simple. It is also true that we
are rather complex.  So if you look at evolution from the original
form to us, it does seem like an increase in complexity.  However,
most living things are microorganisms and if you look at evolution
from the original to a modern bacterium, you get a different
impression.

Another way to look at it is as a random walk process.  Evolution
tends to spread out organisms in all directions.  However, it started
with simple things and there is a lower bound to how simple an
organism can be and still be alive.  So there is necessarily an
increase in average complexity with time. Still, most things remain
simple.
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 4/15/04 11:49:25 AM