home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!sgiblab!darwin.sura.net!ukma!cs.widener.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!sagi.wistar.upenn.edu
- From: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
- Newsgroups: talk.origins
- Subject: Re: Probability of Evolution
- Message-ID: <98069@netnews.upenn.edu>
- Date: 17 Nov 92 21:21:09 GMT
- References: <1ebaj2INNoui@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>
- Sender: news@netnews.upenn.edu
- Reply-To: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
- Organization: The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology
- Lines: 17
- Nntp-Posting-Host: sagi.wistar.upenn.edu
- In-reply-to: bz754@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Derek J. Wojciech)
-
- In article <1ebaj2INNoui@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, bz754@cleveland (Derek J. Wojciech) writes:
- >>This is false: broken symmetry. Consider snowflakes.
-
- >But do snowflakes have a higher information content than the atmospheric
- >water that existed before the freezing process? You need less information to
- >describe the snowflakes because when water freezes it creates countless
- >millions of ice crystals that have sixfold symmetry.
-
- Oops. Did I not say I am considering a broken symmetry model of snowflake
- formation? Atmospheric water vapor is treated as a structureless fluid and
- freezes out at random, producing highly ordered structures.
-
- The point is, there are numerous well-known physical counterexamples to
- Kalki's broad claims. Considering the great difficulty he has admitting
- whether or not supernovae occur, it's a bit overkill to point this out.
- --
- -Matthew P Wiener (weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)
-