I will admit to being influenced by Nick Lane's book "The Vital Question: Energy, Evolution and the Origin of Complex Life." He explained that the origin of the eukaryotic cell only becomes possible after millions of years of prokaryotic evolution. Sexual reproduction only emerges on a eukaryotic basis.
Thus the "arrow of time" is a critical precondition for the range of emerging features that become possible in the evolution of organisms. There are innumerable sequences and lineages, but every new twist is only possible on the basis of what has gone on before. It is not possible for us to know all the sequences that have already taken place, but we do know that the second law of thermodynamics is a reality governing all possibilities.
Debates over "complexity" and simplicity" cannot be resolved except on the basis of knowledge of sequence. But at the same time, the outcome is not necessarily more "complex" than the progenitor. Complexity itself is not easy to define, and therefore tends to be impressionistic. We should remember Engels' comment on "progressive evolution" vs "regressive evolution." --Jim
I will admit to being influenced by Nick Lane's book "The Vital Question: Energy, Evolution and the Origin of Complex Life." He explained that the origin of the eukaryotic cell only becomes possible after millions of years of prokaryotic evolution. Sexual reproduction only emerges on a eukaryotic basis.
Thus the "arrow of time" is a critical precondition for the range of emerging features that become possible in the evolution of organisms. There are innumerable sequences and lineages, but every new twist is only possible on the basis of what has gone on before. It is not possible for us to know all the sequences that have already taken place, but we do know that the second law of thermodynamics is a reality governing all possibilities.
Debates over "complexity" and simplicity" cannot be resolved except on the basis of knowledge of sequence. But at the same time, the outcome is not necessarily more "complex" than the progenitor. Complexity itself is not easy to define, and therefore tends to be impressionistic. We should remember Engels' comment on "progressive evolution" vs "regressive evolution." --Jim
You are right about this, Gordon. Thanks for the comments.