The Turing machine has been touted as explaining certain evolutionary adaptations too. This article is quite an eye opener in showcasing the amazing capabilities of it. I think we have said for quite some time now that nature seems very capable; natural processes are not all just "blind". And we think that certain quantum mechanisms could explain that. The origin of life does not have to be seen as an impossible feat for nature.
Over 160 years now and the situation for die-hard evolutionists has gotten worse.It takes a lot of faith to believe what they believe.A lot of faith coupled with ignorance of the science involved.
I confess that article was a bit beyond me, but it was interesting reading nonetheless. Thanks for sharing.
Quote from: palewine on October 26, 2020, 07:44:10 amI confess that article was a bit beyond me, but it was interesting reading nonetheless. Thanks for sharing.I see no connection with the origin of life, however.
In reaction to both, see Dennett's article in The Atlantic.
^ Oh my. I did not intend to make such a claim on behalf of Wolfram. In fact I only linked Wolfram to try and illustrate the "amazing" potential of a Turing machine mechanism in the general context of my post.
I think the Turing machine example isn't supposed to provide an explanation as such, but rather spark our imagination and lead us to consider ways in which our manifested reality could be the product of simple mechanisms -- with the Turing machine being an example of one.
I myself think that there is a Logos attribute to the natural processes that work along the lines of the least action principle. There might not even exist a physical mechanism that says that paths that do not reach the end goal are cancelled out--they just do. So, in that theory, abiogenesis is the path that isn't cancelled out. Of course, this is a teleological theory of design. Hence, theistic evolution.
It's not just that theism has been proved, even deism is ruled out because it's clear that there's been intervention repetitively to generate the life we see.
Call it and believe what you like, but it does not necessary follow that hence..theistic evolution. The non-theist is under no obligation to agree with that conclusion.