Mutations favoring extinction over intelligence

Here we report bugs in the beta.
User avatar
humon
Posts: 188
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2017 11:09 pm

Re: Mutations favoring extinction over intelligence

Postby humon » Fri Jan 05, 2018 4:21 pm

Alast wrote:That's simply not how natural selection works. No matter how much you want it.

If you smart with a smart swimmer in an environment favoring smart over dumb swimmers you will never see the smart swimmer successfully mutating into a dumb one because the smart one is more efficient here.

Vice versa on an environment favoring dumb swimmers.

I'd too love seeing smart organisms evolve from dumb ones. We've tried that pretty hard in the past. "Nature" just doesn't provide it on such small scale.

You guys are thinking evolution is so weak.
I do have a recipe which allows dumb cells to easily turn into smart ones, the only flaw being that it is close to impossible to get a programmed senseocyte simply because they pop up without programming, which is basically a keratinocyte in a substrate without predators. Automatic random programmation on popup is reasonable, but to get to the point, here is the recipe:
-Simple dumb buyocytic swimmer
-Rapid mutation causes a new cell to appear on the organism, a senseocyte. It produces S1 when it sees the wall.
-The buyocyte was forced to be programmed randomly due to radiation being turned on, just like snap values.

This didn't mean it was any different from regular buyocytes. It just had the ability to react to S1 by 8x from a, while their passive -3 b remained.

This was completely random, not the slightest amount of favouring of a specific kind of cell. It just didn't have tons of 0 scores in many cell modes from the start that would originally not even alter the behaviour or efficiency of the cell.
This organism having the ability to oscillate without a neurocyte by bouncing near the wall, is quite a bit more efficient than regular ones.

An even simpler example of such randomised programmation of a newly appeared cell is the age buyocyte. A buyocyte which has the ability to reverse its flow after 20 hours of going up. Much more efficient, all it takes is for programmation to tick itself on cell creation, and on cell mutation.
-First experiment of the Aspiring Apprentice-
Once a single split,
Now a grand gift,
Thanks to evolution,
A complete revolution.

The substrate being well lit,
The cells no longer fit,
One last tragic split:
"I quit!"

-the Lost Poet

fungus3
Posts: 76
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2016 1:15 pm

Re: Mutations favoring extinction over intelligence

Postby fungus3 » Fri Jan 05, 2018 4:47 pm

Then how about making it easier for radiation to program neural cells such as stereocytes, and program cell behavior

User avatar
Alast
Posts: 1828
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 9:15 am

Re: Mutations favoring extinction over intelligence

Postby Alast » Fri Jan 05, 2018 5:59 pm

I actually think that evolution is one of the strongest forces in the universe.

More chance of programmed values in programmable cells upon initial mutation has already been suggested here. It's not a bad thought.
Perfection hasnt reached me yet, but it tries hard!

User avatar
Petter
Site Admin
Posts: 547
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2014 11:03 pm

Re: Mutations favoring extinction over intelligence

Postby Petter » Sun Jan 14, 2018 1:29 am

humon wrote: the only flaw being that it is close to impossible to get a programmed senseocyte simply because they pop up without programming


Unless there is a bug I'm unaware of, this is not true. Contaminate cells have random programmable values. All cells have all programmable values, they are just not in use (kind of like "junk" dna), but can still mutate. E.g. a contaminate photocyte will have a smell output value that is random. Once this photocyte mutates to a stereocyte this value will be in use. A genome editor photocyte will have zero on the programmable outputs, but these will quickly have mutated since they do not affect survivability and they will be essentially random in the long run.

To be clear:
snap values is only a feature of the genome editor making editing easier.
no programmable mutations/contaminate settings show up if the gene pool doesn't have senseo/stereo/neuro-cytes.

Return to “Beta testing”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests