tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post4394939570566006661..comments2023-09-27T07:44:19.769-04:00Comments on Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: Why do Science?Sabine Hossenfelderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comBlogger48125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-9637217724293895242013-06-10T03:22:03.556-04:002013-06-10T03:22:03.556-04:00"Since we have to manage finite resources on ..."Since we have to manage finite resources on this planet, there is always the question how much energy, time, money, and people to invest into any one human activity for the most beneficial outcome. This is a question which has to be addressed on a case-by-case basis and greatly depends on what is meant with “beneficial”, a word that would bring us back to opinions and “should”s. So the Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14450883588074355393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-68294832881659050162013-06-06T12:07:52.725-04:002013-06-06T12:07:52.725-04:00Sabine:
If one believes that we are all homo sapi...Sabine:<br /><br />If one believes that we are all homo sapiens, then there are similar "distribution of intelligent levels", whatever that means, in a 1st world country as in a place somewhere in central Africa, say. So even though the nations in the latter case are probably doomed to failure if nothing is done, the former has no doubt a better chance to evolve, as a nation. That meansChristine Cordula Dantashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05271747374185459530noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-23957379804222886602013-06-06T10:45:18.550-04:002013-06-06T10:45:18.550-04:00As long as we live on a planet with finite resourc...As long as we live on a planet with finite resources and the human lifespan is finite there is selective pressure. Take one group of people who vaccinate their children, perform (scientific!) safety checks on their cars and come to the conclusion that seatbelts and airbags are a good idea and make them mandatory, use enhanced crops to adapt to climate change, build earthquake and tsunami warning Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-33601409614668922572013-06-06T10:29:11.038-04:002013-06-06T10:29:11.038-04:00Natural selection operates only if there is select...Natural selection operates only if there is selection pressure. When variations are selectively neutral, selection doesn't take place. I think modern industrial society has greatly reduced selection pressures on humans.<br /><br />In any case, in the reasons for doing science, Darwinian natural selection is mostly irrelevant upto now. Whatever selection pressures favored humans developing Arunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03451666670728177970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-22676425080045665482013-06-06T04:39:59.907-04:002013-06-06T04:39:59.907-04:00Yes, but it slows it down substantially. Essentia...Yes, but it slows it down substantially. Essentially, it changes a Gaussian (or some skewed version thereof) to a Heaviside distribution: As long as you have some minimal level of fitness, you're in, and if not, you're out, and all those who are in are on equal footing. So selection still weeds out those who are out, but there is no differential success among those who are in.<br />Phillip Helbighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12067585245603436809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-69657354654770269752013-06-06T04:22:51.783-04:002013-06-06T04:22:51.783-04:00Hi Phillip,
You don't need to have more offsp...Hi Phillip,<br /><br />You don't need to have more offspring. You need to have more offspring that produces offspring. All offspring that fails to reach sexual maturity or fails to find a partner or fails to produce surviving offspring with that partner is not "fit" in the Darwinian sense. Putting a bound on the number of offspring doesn't remove this selective pressure. It justSabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-77491370952950784802013-06-06T04:09:07.353-04:002013-06-06T04:09:07.353-04:00Maybe at least sexual selection is still operating...Maybe at least <a href="http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2986#comic" rel="nofollow">sexual selection</a> is still operating. :-)<br /><br /><i>"I'm not sure that birth control is as relevant as you say though. It would slow down the "classical selection" but not stop it."</i><br /><br />Natural selection works because fit individuals have more fertilePhillip Helbighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12067585245603436809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-34768784237279010772013-06-06T03:51:28.115-04:002013-06-06T03:51:28.115-04:00Hi Phillip,
"However, classical natural sele...Hi Phillip,<br /><br /><i>"However, classical natural selection, where the fittest produce more offspring, has essentially been turned off in many parts of the world due to birth control"</i><br /><br />If by "classic natural selection" you mean selection of genes, I would agree. As I wrote though, there are now other aspects of "fitness" that are becoming relevant Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-61049694507347987052013-06-06T03:45:41.525-04:002013-06-06T03:45:41.525-04:00Hi Christine,
"How is natural selection stil...Hi Christine,<br /><br /><i>"How is natural selection still operating in non-rustic conditions? And (possibly) with genetic therapy?"</i><br /><br />As I explained in my post, natural selection always operates. The question is just what it selects for, ie what constitutes a good "adaption". In the long history (more than hundreds of thousands of years), an adaption has been a Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-6357016092023134322013-06-06T03:20:06.074-04:002013-06-06T03:20:06.074-04:00Maybe this gives some idea what our future will be...Maybe <a href="http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2987#comic" rel="nofollow">this</a> gives some idea what our future will be like. :-)Phillip Helbighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12067585245603436809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-2963897058343814362013-06-06T02:55:51.234-04:002013-06-06T02:55:51.234-04:00Those whose genetic material is very poor might be...Those whose genetic material is very poor might be weeded out because they can't reproduce at all. However, classical natural selection, where the fittest produce more offspring, has essentially been turned off in many parts of the world due to birth control. Not that successful alpha males no longer have thousands of groupies, it's just that they no longer have thousands of children. Phillip Helbighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12067585245603436809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-10081751366402288402013-06-05T12:11:39.523-04:002013-06-05T12:11:39.523-04:00Sabine:
I'm referring to now, and possibly no...Sabine:<br /><br />I'm referring to now, and possibly now on, and with respect to modern societies, not villages in, say, current Africa. <br /><br />How is natural selection still operating in non-rustic conditions? And (possibly) with genetic therapy? Christine Cordula Dantashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05271747374185459530noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-33050256401124841792013-06-05T10:10:56.965-04:002013-06-05T10:10:56.965-04:00More generally: Let us not forget that there are m...More generally: Let us not forget that there are many diseases and disabilities that we cannot presently cure and that we can plausibly expect to decrease chances of reproduction. Giotis writes<br /><br />"The probability for a human to survive and mate (and pass her/his genes to next generation) is almost one for all people regardless of their individual genetic and other characteristics.&Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-26922698378398534262013-06-05T10:04:50.726-04:002013-06-05T10:04:50.726-04:00Well, 150 years is basically today. I'm not su...Well, 150 years is basically today. I'm not sure though what timescale Giotis might have been referring to.Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-42452601112921603072013-06-05T07:48:25.560-04:002013-06-05T07:48:25.560-04:00Sabine
That was based on data of villagers more t...Sabine<br /><br />That was based on data of villagers more than 150 years ago... I'm not sure that is still valid in (post-)modern societies...<br /><br />Best.Christine Cordula Dantashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05271747374185459530noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-75802508867945078282013-06-05T04:03:39.885-04:002013-06-05T04:03:39.885-04:00Giotis,
In the paragraph from which you quote, I ...Giotis,<br /><br />In the paragraph from which you quote, I was referring to the past, not to today or to the future. Natural selection is of course still working for the human race. What has changed, as I wrote, is the mechanism of "mutations", the process that produces changes among which natural selection selects the "fittest". <br /><br />Besides this <a href="http://Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-38845632153016520142013-06-05T03:42:22.638-04:002013-06-05T03:42:22.638-04:00"It makes thus sense that natural selection f..."It makes thus sense that natural selection favors using brains to develop theories of nature."<br /><br />So only physicists will mate and all humans will end up being physicists? Well if nothing else it would be a very dull world:-)<br /><br />Seriously, natural selection is not working any more for human race. The probability for a human to survive and mate (and pass her/his genes toGiotishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03594944884584261018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-43432094211670517852013-06-05T00:15:33.935-04:002013-06-05T00:15:33.935-04:00Dear Arun,
First, I didn't say that our brain...Dear Arun,<br /><br />First, I didn't say that our brain evolved to do scientific research as we know it today, but to develop consistent theories if nature. And yes, I was thinking of maybe some 100,000 years or so during which this has proved beneficial. This, I said, is plausibly why we like doing science today and why we are reasonably good at it.<br /><br />Second, that the increased Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-71191324718941449932013-06-04T21:08:39.416-04:002013-06-04T21:08:39.416-04:00In this discussion it is good to differentiate pur...<br />In this discussion it is good to differentiate pure and applied research.<br /><br />Both evolved from our need to understand nature and manipulate our environment in order to survive.<br /><br />Pure research has developed into a cross between an art form and detective work. We do it for the sheer pleasure of creativity and figuring things out.<br /><br />Life without science would be Robert L. Oldershawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15396555790655312393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-64269296608911525232013-06-04T17:11:45.627-04:002013-06-04T17:11:45.627-04:00Dear Bee,
Science as we understand it today is pe...Dear Bee,<br /><br />Science as we understand it today is perhaps 400 years old; you may make a case that it is 2500 years old. In any case that is insignificant compared to the length of human evolution, which is of the order of a million years; even if you take only the last 100,000 years to be significant, the period of science is tiny. <br /><br />Moreover it is not clear that the increased Arunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03451666670728177970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-77940559237422107982013-06-04T13:35:06.596-04:002013-06-04T13:35:06.596-04:00Some do, sure.Some do, sure.Christine Cordula Dantashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05271747374185459530noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-64718614099103429112013-06-04T10:03:57.566-04:002013-06-04T10:03:57.566-04:00Note that even though the wood and paper industrie...Note that even though the wood and paper industries are quite important, the forested area in Sweden actually increases from year to year (more is planted than harvested). Of course, this is not directly comparable to a rainforest, but it does show that some countries do it correctly.<br />Phillip Helbighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12067585245603436809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-13404794510646386572013-06-04T09:42:36.839-04:002013-06-04T09:42:36.839-04:00[Side comment] "or like clear-cutting Amazoni...[Side comment] "or like clear-cutting Amazonian rainforest to create cropland) are bad"<br /><br />Yes, very bad. Brazil is doing its best to decrease and eventually halt this. Contrary to the "1st world" countries, which have destroyed not only their own forests but also those which they have put their hands on while "colonizing" or invading elsewhere in the past Christine Cordula Dantashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05271747374185459530noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-49516291458850330082013-06-04T03:50:33.380-04:002013-06-04T03:50:33.380-04:00Dear Arun,
Yes, as I wrote, we use science to cha...Dear Arun,<br /><br />Yes, as I wrote, we use science to change the environment. Natural selection still selects who is best adapted, but the process of adaption is now genetic modification together with our ability to make the environment fit to us. This is why I wrote that backreaction has become important: we're not adapting to a fixed background, we're changing the background as we goSabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-13053936622097671002013-06-03T14:56:25.342-04:002013-06-03T14:56:25.342-04:00Dear Bee,
Let me see if I get it by playing it ba...Dear Bee,<br /><br />Let me see if I get it by playing it back:<br /><br />1. What are the driving principles behind humans doing science?<br /><br />2. Since "good" or "desirable" are subjective things, we can only talk about the end results, such as "science serves to improve human adaption to the environment", without providing a value judgment.<br /><br />Some Arunhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03451666670728177970noreply@blogger.com