AC> Fractles are created with neither the aid of mutation nor 
 AC> selection.  They deterministically follow from the formula
 AC> used to create them.  And, their complexity is easily debated. 
 AC> Consider, pi is an infinite number of digits but it is still 
 AC> a single point on a number line. 
The fractle as you define it is a mathematic construct; however, 
when you find that construct in evidence of real form, what you 
see is subject to outside forces, cosmic rays, environment change, 
or other quantum or physical factors.  As such, the *examples* of 
fractle math that you encounter, are, in fact, affected by mutated 
or selected forms.  I do not here, argue complexity. 
 
 AC> Observationally, we know that the genomes of species become 
 AC> simpler, not more complex, over time (e.g. extinction).  DNA 
 AC> replication is a copy process, not an iteration process.  And, 
 AC> no one has shown that DNA can reduced in complexity through 
 AC> fractile compression. 
I do not see that genomes are *exclusively* simpler Andrew. Nor so 
I say that DNA is in itself, an iteration, but that when it splits 
and unites with another cell in fertilization, the whole process 
that then begins is one of iteration.  At sexual maturity, you can 
again see the copy process of DNA, and the iteratve process that 
begins, with as some say, a baby.  Is a fertilized egg a baby? 
 
Whether this proves anything about evolution is not my point; the 
world is full of sets of facts, which are different for each of 
us.  The facts that I have make evolution and the big bang look 
like reasonable explanations.  You may have different facts, and 
the limited space here, as well limits on our communication skill 
and time suggest that we may never come to agreement.  So, as we 
see, you have a very different concept of the meaning of fractles. 
 
For all I know, the world was created to look as if it was several 
billion years old; just cause it *looks* that way don't mean that 
it is.  You may pick anytime to stipulate it's creation; be that 
as it may, the evidence remains as it is, for the creations could 
well have included the evidence of hoary age.  But for me, it will 
be a lot easier to conceptualize its creation either then, or only 
a moment ago. 
 
More to the point, is so what? what diff do it make when it was 
really created?  Whenever it was created, it seems to have objects 
of veneration, such as the bible, which convince some people that 
the world was created 6000 years ago.  That it convinces them is 
of trivial importance to me inasmuch as PT Barnum and Bill Gates 
have amply demonstrated that most people are fools.  You cannot do 
any good arguing with a fool. 
___ 
 * OFFLINE 1.58 * A train of thought like a slow freight- long & clattering. 
--- Maximus 3.01
---------------