Evolution, Part II
Once again, I wrote a lot but didn't say all I meant to say so here is some more on evolution.
Overall, you can think of evolution as life attempting to solve the survival equation. That is, how does a species make certain it will survive? The solution space is vast and it is quite possible to end up in suboptimal solutions. As well, there are many solutions possible and it is impossible for the organisms, either individually or as an entire species, to 'see' the solution space. All they can do is change and try it out, see if it is better or worse.
It is about energy efficiency and conservation. If you can be very lazy and survive then this is better than being very active whilst surviving.
The only way to survive those big cataclismic events is either to be EXTREMELY adaptable, EXTREMELY robust or to be able to control your environment. Bacteria are extremely robust, with many species able to survive as spores for long periods, perhaps thousands or millions of years while conditions are too harsh for active life. Many other animals are not so adaptable so they die quickly when changes occur too fast for them to change. Humans, able to control our environment and even leave our biosphere in limited capacity, represent perhaps the highest level of survivability, though we are also intelligent enough to create weapons of mass destruction. Those weapons could wipe us out (as could a large scale comet or minor planet impact) unless we colonize other planets but the lowly bacteria would survive both a nuclear war and have already survived multiple impacts. It has been postulated that bacteria are ejected into space during impacts, and could actually survive and travel through space, something we think of as the realm of humans alone.
So the answer to why there are still simple organisms around is: they represent another solution in the game of life. Which one is the optimal solution? Who knows? It is impossible to tell yet. We haven't out-competed them and probably never will.
Overall, you can think of evolution as life attempting to solve the survival equation. That is, how does a species make certain it will survive? The solution space is vast and it is quite possible to end up in suboptimal solutions. As well, there are many solutions possible and it is impossible for the organisms, either individually or as an entire species, to 'see' the solution space. All they can do is change and try it out, see if it is better or worse.
It is about energy efficiency and conservation. If you can be very lazy and survive then this is better than being very active whilst surviving.
The only way to survive those big cataclismic events is either to be EXTREMELY adaptable, EXTREMELY robust or to be able to control your environment. Bacteria are extremely robust, with many species able to survive as spores for long periods, perhaps thousands or millions of years while conditions are too harsh for active life. Many other animals are not so adaptable so they die quickly when changes occur too fast for them to change. Humans, able to control our environment and even leave our biosphere in limited capacity, represent perhaps the highest level of survivability, though we are also intelligent enough to create weapons of mass destruction. Those weapons could wipe us out (as could a large scale comet or minor planet impact) unless we colonize other planets but the lowly bacteria would survive both a nuclear war and have already survived multiple impacts. It has been postulated that bacteria are ejected into space during impacts, and could actually survive and travel through space, something we think of as the realm of humans alone.
So the answer to why there are still simple organisms around is: they represent another solution in the game of life. Which one is the optimal solution? Who knows? It is impossible to tell yet. We haven't out-competed them and probably never will.
posted by Harry at 6:58 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home