Panel Discussion, continued...
Q: I just got the impression that everything involves life. I started reading the new modern explanations about the origins of the universe and that's the way it struck me. The concept of biological energy, Darwin interaction. Then I started reading about cosmological theory in the beginning. How can we explain to our students what the similarities between these two types of evolution are? That is to say, if we just call them change through time, they are both "change through time". That might be how they're the same. How are they both different and am I missing any other similarities as well as possible differences between cosmological evolution and biological evolution?
SCOTT: Let me just throw out a quick answer to that. Other panelists may have additions. But since I brought it up I'll answer it first. The idea of the big picture of evolution of this cumulative change through time is very useful in addition to, I think, being accurate because galaxies and other physical phenomena do change throughout time. And they use the term evolution when cultures evolve. Where the differences come in, and there are substantial differences, is in process and mechanism. Because clearly, natural selection is a very sensible mechanism for explaining biological change through time and even many aspects of cultural change through time. But I don't think it's terribly relevant to physical and chemical phenomena.
MULLER: I agree completely. What was the term you referred to if Homo sapiens happened to have evolved simultaneously in two different locations? Parallel development. In cosmology I think we have parallel development. I don't think all stars develop because there was one mother star from which they all evolved. Stars developed on this side of the universe and they developed on that side of the universe because the conditions were the same. So, I think we call the term "evolution" but there's no real natural selection or life in the form of being able, of passing on changes with time that we have in real evolution. I think cosmology is really quite different.
SCOTT: In mechanism, yes.
Q: But things develop and that is to say things don't instantaneously appear as we see it. I see that as a theme in both regions of study.
SCOTT: It is a cumulative change through time. The present is different from the past.
Q: Here's a modern horse but that's not how it always was. It's just a concept to give you a better understanding. We're going to have to look backward in time.
MULLER: I age and now I need bifocals but I don't call that evolution. That's just changing with time. The universe changes with time but I really wouldn't call that evolution.
|
BioForum Index
