The Math Behind Evolution

[Trey of Diamonds]

I read somewhere that the concept of evolution was unlikely from a mathematical perspective because the number of mutations required to reach humanity would require billions of years more than the earth has been around. I can’t recall where I read that, nor can I find anything like it doing a basic Internet search. Does anyone here have any mathematical info pertaining to evolution and the number of years required for mutations to achieve higher life forms? Would you consider such information proof of anything?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Any mathematician who would make such a statement isn't a very good biologist - or mathematician for that matter.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I read somewhere that the concept of evolution was unlikely from a mathematical perspective because the number of mutations required to reach humanity would require billions of years more than the earth has been around. I can’t recall where I read that, nor can I find anything like it doing a basic Internet search. Does anyone here have any mathematical info pertaining to evolution and the number of years required for mutations to achieve higher life forms? Would you consider such information proof of anything?

How, exactly, is anyone supposed to be able to mathematically demonstrate how many mutations are required for speciation to occur? That's like asking "how long is a piece of string?" Mutations aren't like notches on a belt - we can't just count up the difference in number between one and the next to determine when we'll probably need to start wearing a new pair of trousers. Every single living thing that is ever born carries around 100-200 unique mutations in it's genetic code, all of them random and with any number of effects on that creature and it's morphology - some few beneficial, some few detrimental, most completely neutral. You then have to factor into that how successfully that individual reproduces, how many of those unique genes will be passed on to it's offspring, how many children those offspring have who then carry those same mutations, how many times those mutations themselves change over the generations due to environmental pressures, etc., for thousands (if not millions) of generations until those offspring become a separate species.

Sorry, but such a mathematical model is not only impossible, but completely ludicrous. As far as I'm aware, no such model exists that is able to "count" the number of mutations required for a population of organisms to speciate, and anybody who claims that they possess such a model are off their rocker.

 

[painted wolf]

No but I can give you actual math behind evolution.

such as:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardy%E2%80%93Weinberg_principle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_equation

Every aspect of evolution involves mathematics.

To say evolution is mathematically impossible is to ignore the actual mathematics being used. I can only surmise that those that use the mathematics argument don't actually realize how much mathematics is used in studying evolution. Not that I'm surprised that people don't understand how evolution is studied.

wa:do

 

[Revoltingest]

Sorry, but such a mathematical model is not only impossible, but completely ludicrous. As far as I'm aware, no such model exists that is able to "count" the number of mutations required for a population of organisms to speciate, and anybody who claims that they possess such a model are off their rocker.

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the idea of mathematically modelling evolution.
Certainly, the models I've seen trying to debunk evolution made very wrong-headed assumptions.
Painted Wolf....where are you?

Oh, there you are! Didn't see you up there.

 

[Photonic]

How, exactly, is anyone supposed to be able to mathematically demonstrate how many mutations are required for speciation to occur? That's like asking "how long is a piece of string?" Mutations aren't like notches on a belt - we can't just count up the difference in number between one and the next to determine when we'll probably need to start wearing a new pair of trousers. Every single living thing that is ever born carries around 100-200 unique mutations in it's genetic code, all of them random and with any number of effects on that creature and it's morphology - some few beneficial, some few detrimental, most completely neutral. You then have to factor into that how successfully that individual reproduces, how many of those unique genes will be passed on to it's offspring, how many children those offspring have who then carry those same mutations, how many times those mutations themselves change over the generations due to environmental pressures, etc., for thousands (if not millions) of generations until those offspring become a separate species.

Sorry, but such a mathematical model is not only impossible, but completely ludicrous. As far as I'm aware, no such model exists that is able to "count" the number of mutations required for a population of organisms to speciate, and anybody who claims that they possess such a model are off their rocker.

Except that there are actually mathematical models used in biology to express that very thing. Painted Wolf was kind enough to furnish us with some of them.

 

[painted wolf]

Modeling genetic drift:

Predicting allele fixation due to genetic drift:

Loss of an allele due to drift and mutation:

Just to give a small sample of the math behind one type of evolutionary modeling used.


wa:do

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

I suspected what I had read wasn't reliable and I knew folks here would have some knowledge. Thanks you much, even to Painted Wolf who's posts made my head hurt. :cover: (I hate math, I'm more of a history and English lit kind of guy)

 

[Panda]

Modeling genetic drift:

Predicting allele fixation due to genetic drift:

Loss of an allele due to drift and mutation:

Just to give a small sample of the math behind one type of evolutionary modeling used.


wa:do

Is the mathematical model for evolution quite well defined?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the idea of mathematically modelling evolution.
Certainly, the models I've seen trying to debunk evolution made very wrong-headed assumptions.
Painted Wolf....where are you?

Oh, there you are! Didn't see you up there.

I meant a mathematical model used to determine the exact number and exact timeframe required for evolution between one species and the next to occur.

 

[Revoltingest]

I meant a mathematical model used to determine the exact number and exact timeframe required for evolution between one species and the next to occur.

Doable.....some day.

 

[Panda]

I meant a mathematical model used to determine the exact number and exact timeframe required for evolution between one species and the next to occur.

That sort of model isn't really possible for a lot of thing, I suspect evolution is one of them. So many uncertainties in it that a deterministic model is probably unlikely.

 

[painted wolf]

Is the mathematical model for evolution quite well defined?

There are people working on getting the models as well defined as is reasonably possible. Like you pointed out, there are a lot of factors to consider.

The two major Genetic Drift models for example, differ on how they treat generations: overlapping vs. distinct. In some species generations don't overlap (annual plants) in others they do (humans).

One of the ways that the drift models keep themselves well defined is by limiting themselves to single alleles rather than all the alleles in a population.

wa:do

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Maths. Is there anything it can't do?

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Maths. Is there anything it can't do?

Divide by zero?

 

[PolyHedral]

Divide by zero?

Only on the real line.You can do it on Reimann sphere quite easily.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Only on the real line.You can do it on Reimann sphere quite easily.

MATH!

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

If necessity was the mother of invention
Then I’d like to kill the guy who invented this
The numbers come together in some kind of third dimension
A regular algebraic bliss

Let’s starts with something simple
Like 1 and 1 ain’t 3
Any 2 plus 2 will never get you 5
There’s fractions in my subtraction
And x don’t equal y
But my homework is bound to multiply

Math suks (math suks), math suks (math suks)
I’d like to burn this text book
I hate that stuff so much
Math suks (math suks), math suks (math suks)
Sometimes I think that I don’t know that much
But math suks

I got so bored with my homework
I turned on the tv
The beauty pageant winners were all smiling through their teeth
And they asked the new miss america
Hey babe can you add up all those bucks
She looked puzzled then just said "math suks"

Math suks (math suks), math suks (math suks)
You don’t even have to spell it
All you have to do is yell it
Math suks (math suks), math suks (math suks)
Sometime times I think that I don’t know that much
But math suks

Geometry and trigonometry and if they don’t tax your brain
There are numbers to big to be named
Numerical precision is a science with a mission
And I think its’ gonna drive me insane

Parents fighting with their children
And the congress can’t agree
Teachers and their students are all jousting constantly
Management and labor keep rattling old sabres
Quacking like those peabody ducks

Math suks (quack quack), math suks (quack quack)
You don’t even have to spell it
All you have to do is yell it
Math suks, that’s right, math suks, you got it
Sometime times I think that I don’t know that much
But math suks
All right there goes our g rating

Math suks, math suks, math suks the big one
Math suks, math suks, math suks the big one
Math suks, math suks, math suks the big one
Math suks, math suks, math suks, math suks

Math Suks
~ Jimmy Buffett

(Sorry, couldn't resist.)

 

[rusra02]

No but I can give you actual math behind evolution.

such as:

Hardy

Price equation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Every aspect of evolution involves mathematics.

To say evolution is mathematically impossible is to ignore the actual mathematics being used. I can only surmise that those that use the mathematics argument don't actually realize how much mathematics is used in studying evolution. Not that I'm surprised that people don't understand how evolution is studied.

wa:do

"mathematics assumes that real-world evolution is a gradual, random process. It does not (and cannot) demonstrate it." - The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution by Michael Behe p.174 (Italics added)

 

[ScottySatan]

All a math model does is show a predicted relationship between a few variables. It does not actually say what evolution is, or what it's doing.

We do think that random point mutations, at the rate we know them to occurr, coupled with the length of a generation and rate of population growth, that random point mutations are too slow. This is what a lot of anti-evolutionists refer to when they make that argument.

However, the research done in the past 40 years has revealed more molecular mechanisms of evolution that are much, much faster. For example, mutations are not random. And there's a really obvious one that people seem to forget: SEX! Just goes to show you what creationists are like, forgetting about sex and all.

Mr Wolf, I think they would like to see you define the variables and walk them through the equations.