Aya, I've always assumed that the Mandelbrot Set was at the root of all evolution, with either the "starting make-up of Z" or else some element of C determining the rate at which changes would occur. I would think that the metabollic rate of any animal is built into the Z, but we can imagine how the C would eventually lead to changes (slowing down) as any animals a) matures individually and b) advanced as a more "developed" species.
I'm actually interested more in the external effects on change in a species than in any internal structural building blocks.
I was trying to find a correlation between equilibrium in evolutionary development (the periods of stasis) and equilibrium in an economic system.
According to the punctuated equilibrium model, evolution does not develop gradually. There are long periods when species remain exactly the same. Then, under the pressure of events, rapid speciation occurs.
It seems the economy is given to the same sorts of record breaking events followed by long periods of seeming stability.
Aya, the way I think I'm seeing the Mandelbrot Set apply is that it would apply to the big picture - from external on down to internal. If one thinks of the simple formula it does show how gradual (or dramatic) changes take place. What it doesn't show, of course, is exactly what "every little element of C" is.
I would think that the difference between punctuated evolution (of anything) versus a more gradual process would depend on (to put it in super-simple terms) the "size" and/or complexity and/or make-up of "C". Again, though, this only demonstrates the process by which change occurs, as opposed to showing the exact "elements" of it.
If you use human beings as an example, you can start "out at the universe", go "down to society" and then "down to more immediate external and internal factors" that would make up the "C" in any human being (including all the way "down" to cell growth and genes).
Rules of this forum, no swearing, no straw men arguments and no FSM nonsense. Most importantly remember, Ridicule is not an argument. Enjoy. If want to continue to believe you come from a rocky soup. You...
Please keep out of this thread unless you are Mark Knowles or Gardner Osagie.We have both decided on a formal debate, structured as follows:Three rounds of:The Affirmative always goes first(that would be Gardner)Then...