🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <862304355.15801@dejanews.com>, e904952p@hjc.edu.sg wrote:

snip

> living things to develop. Even more astonishing is that life has a
> tendency to evolve in the direction towards greater complexity. Here the
> theory of evolution fails complete, at least to me. In terms of ability
> to reproduce and surviving in harsh conditions we human loses helplessly
> to some simple single-cell organisms. Yet the very fact that you are
> reading this article suggests that there're built-in forces of nature
> that lead inevitably to the formation of systems of higher organisation
> and greater complexity. So far I know of no theory that explains
> satisfactorily this phenomena. And it's my hope that someone in this
> newsgroup would give me some convincing explanations.

Here is something to think about.  The vast majority of all life on Earth
by any measure is simple, not complex.  If you go by mass, or by
biodiversity, you get the same results--the small, simple stuff rules. 
What we really see is that life can't get simpler than it is and still be
life.  The complex stuff (like us) is very rare.  The situation is
something like this:  consider taking a 100 question multiple choice test
with 100 possible choices on each question.  If this test is taken by a
huge number of people who all give random answers, then there is a big
pile up around 1/100, and you can't get smaller than 0.  But there will be
a long thin tail stretching toward the higher scores.  Most of life is at
the simple peak, we are in the thin tail.

John