Mark Perakh posted Entry 2445 on July 12, 2006 04:20 PM.
Trackback URL: http://www.pandasthumb.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.fcgi/2440

This is a guest appearance of Erik Tellgren (it is his first appearance on the Panda’s Thumb). Again, lest it can be misinterpreted by inattentive readers (as this happened before), Erik is the sole author of this essay to which I (MP) did not contribute in any way except for posting it as a courtesy to Erik.

Those readers who are familiar with Talk Reason archive may recall that Erik was the author of a 2002 essay wherein he provided a rigorous mathematical rebuttal of Dembski’s so called law of conservation of information (see here ).

The original NFL theorem and rugged fitness landscapes are briefly reviewed and it is pointed out that the fact the assumptions behind the former leads to the latter type of fitness landscape. Furthermore, it is stressed that for these fitness landscapes, the absolute performance of evolution is not prohibitively bad, that high-fitness regions tend to be well-connected, and that the difficulty of finding high-fitness regions does not increase with the size of the search space.

Continue reading Free Noodle Soup on Talk Reason.

Commenters are responsible for the content of comments. The opinions expressed in articles, linked materials, and comments are not necessarily those of PandasThumb.org. See our full disclaimer.

Comment #111776

Posted by Mark Perakh on July 12, 2006 5:00 PM (e)

I have just noticed that Pim van Meur beat me having posted a link to Erik’s essay before I did so. The reason is the lack of co-ordination of our actions - we all are, here on PT, independent individuals. So, I chose to leave my entry intact as a testimony to our independence and as a sign that more than one contributor to PT share appreciation of Erik’s fine essay.

Comment #111838

Posted by fnxtr on July 12, 2006 10:54 PM (e)

Predicting Dembski’s goalpost hoist-and-move in 3, 2, 1….

Comment #112902

Posted by lamuella on July 17, 2006 1:07 PM (e)

this time he jumped straight to the ad hominem instead, as evidenced by the trackback from his crappy blog