Re: Experimental basis for the Non-Beneficial Gap Problem

On Jul 9, 11:51 am, hersheyh <hershe...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jul 9, 7:47 am, Seanpit <sean...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jul 8, 4:53 pm, Rupert Morrish <rup...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

[snip]

And, what that means is that the average number of
mutations needed to cross the gap increases exponentially.

And where, exactly, have you actually calculated an "average" anything
from actual data? To do that, you would first have to show, in
systems that *did* evolve, that there was some sort of correlation
between the size of the end product and the number of mutational steps
from functionally useful precursors. You have never shown such a
correlation from actual data from actual systems that have evolved.
You have merely *assumed* without evidence that there is such a
correlation.

You don't have it quite right. All the systems that have been
observed to evolve have had a structural threshold minimum of no more
than a few hundred fairly specified residues. The vast majority of
these real examples of evolution in action have crossed gaps of only
one or two residue differences. This true regardless of if the
minimum structural requirements were 40aa or 400aa. So, according to
your argument you would say that there is no correlation between the
size of the minimum gap distance and the structural threshold
requirement. That's where you're quite mistaken.

Consider a novel system of function that only requires 40aa. Most
bacterial genomes would have a large number of pre-existing starting
point sequences that would be within a handful of mutations of this
potentially beneficial target. Compare this with a 400aa target
system. There will be exponentially fewer starting points within the
genome that will be within the same handful of mutations from this
higher level system.

See the correlation? That is why 1000aa systems don't evolve in real
time - - because, as you extrapolate this pattern while moving up the
ladder of functional complexity, the odds of any pre-existing starting
point being with striking distance of any potentially beneficial
1000aa drop exponentially.

< snip >

The minimum number is related to the average number along a Poisson
distribution. The odds that the minimum number will stay at the
minimum possible number of 1, as those like Howard Hershey suggest,
drop dramatically along a Poisson distribution as the average number
increases exponentially.

As the "average" gap size increases, assuming you could actually
calculate "average gap size* form total size, the probability that the
minimum *available* pathway at any one time involves a single step
would decrease.

That's right. That's the only important factor affecting predictive
value here.

But the minimum *possible* pathway will still be one,
regardless of the size of the end result.

That fact, while true, is completely irrelevant as far as predicting
the outcome of evolutionary potential is concerned. Its an irrelevant
red herring.

But what those odds are
depends on what the starting system contains and not on the size of
the end product.

The starting points are known. The target locations are not. Unknown
target locations are what introduce the random variable into the
equation and necessitate the use of odds to determine the likelihood
that any target will be within striking range of any one of the known
starting points.

You don't use any calculations nor do you even try to estimate the
odds that any target will be within striking distance of any one of
your known starting points. That's what makes your position
completely devoid of predictive value and therefore non-scientific.

Unless, of course, you can actually calculate an
"average gap size" with real data involving things you accept as
having 'evolved' and show us the correlation between total size and
'mutational gap size' without invoking the idea of a maximally distant
starting point and complete randomness.

The pattern is very clear – even with functional systems that have
actually evolved in real time.

If anyone considered that the likelihood of 1000aa protein systems
arising without precursors was an argument in favor of evolution, you
may have a point. But no-one does, so you are simply attacking a straw man.

I never said that one had to start without precursors.

That is what your numerology proclaims while you deny that it does so.

How is that Howard? Do you not understand basic mathematics? My
mathematics assume that the likely minimum gap distance is always
smaller than the maximum possible distance. How do you not understand
such a simple concept?

Start with
whatever precursor you want in an organism that never had the novel
function in question to begin with.

Like Lenski did? Like nylonase?

That's right . . .

There are always starting points
that are closer to a potentially beneficial functional system than the
maximum possible distance. However, the gap that remains is still too
large to cross when it comes to systems with minimum part requirements
beyond 1000aa.

What evidence do you have to support this claim?

It's not been observed to happen . . .

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Repost: Ken Millers presentation
    ... Kenneth Miller's argument that 40 of the 50 or so proteins can be ... evolve so rapidly while those that require a few hundred evolve much ... This discussion concerned the minimum gap distance. ... of mutations required because it was a single step selection and at ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Repost: Ken Millers presentation
    ... structural threshold requirements of just a few amino acid residues ... mutations needed to produce a new function. ... This discussion concerned the minimum gap distance. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Ron Okimoto and the Gap Problem
    ... about the gap bogousity than you aren't talking about anything ... some existing protein changing to something else. ... billions of individuals that is dozens of mutations wide. ... true regardless of the minimum structural threshold requirements under ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Most valuable poster
    ... than one or two thousand specifically arranged residues. ... the job based solely on sequence comparisons. ... You don't understand that the likely minimum gap size isn't measured by ... A gap of over one or two hundred residues changes/random mutations ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The Living Dead
    ... > Since Sean is modeling his sequence space in the space defined by amino acid ... The more mutations happening the more his ... documented where something had to cross a neutral gap of three ... crossed in multiple species and not just in E. coli. ...
    (talk.origins)