Post by Babu on Sept 29, 2018 15:54:29 GMT -5
Evolution works by good mutations surviving and bad mutations not, and works very slowly and successively.
One thing I've often thought about is some evolutional traits and features seem like they'd require some sort of leap. Sometimes, each mutation required for feature, organ, trait etc. is negative by itself, and is only positive if a tonne of specific mutations are made at the same time.
One example I've wondered about in particular is wings. Neither extremely long fingers, super feathery arms, nor porous skeleton and lightweight bodies seems like it would be a positive trait for a dinorsaur to suddenly mutate. Super long fingers and feathers would just get in the way and be clumsy, and even if a dinosaur suddenly got fully functional wings, they'd be useless because the dinosaur would be too heavy.
Now obviously wings did manage to evolve in some way I don't know about, or else there wouldn't be birds.
There's a similar phenomenon where extremes are preffered over average-ness, but that had to do more with single mutations, like it's better to have either black or white fur than grey fur, which could then divide a species. There's a similar phenomenon where extreme traits are preferred over average traits, but that has more to do with single mutations. For example, it might be better to be either a black moth, and hide in the blacks of a birch, or a white moth, and hide in the whites of a birch, than to be a grey moth and not be able to hide anywhere, which would cause white and black moths to only reproduce with their own colors, and thus eventually divide into seperate species.
However, what I wonder is if any of you know the scientific term for this kind of "evolutional leap paradox" like with the wing example I suggested, where many different mutations are dependent on eachother to be useful, making a good final product less likely.
I'm interested in the subject but I don't know what to search for to learn more about it. All that shows up is that moth thing which is not the same "paradox"
One thing I've often thought about is some evolutional traits and features seem like they'd require some sort of leap. Sometimes, each mutation required for feature, organ, trait etc. is negative by itself, and is only positive if a tonne of specific mutations are made at the same time.
One example I've wondered about in particular is wings. Neither extremely long fingers, super feathery arms, nor porous skeleton and lightweight bodies seems like it would be a positive trait for a dinorsaur to suddenly mutate. Super long fingers and feathers would just get in the way and be clumsy, and even if a dinosaur suddenly got fully functional wings, they'd be useless because the dinosaur would be too heavy.
Now obviously wings did manage to evolve in some way I don't know about, or else there wouldn't be birds.
There's a similar phenomenon where extremes are preffered over average-ness, but that had to do more with single mutations, like it's better to have either black or white fur than grey fur, which could then divide a species. There's a similar phenomenon where extreme traits are preferred over average traits, but that has more to do with single mutations. For example, it might be better to be either a black moth, and hide in the blacks of a birch, or a white moth, and hide in the whites of a birch, than to be a grey moth and not be able to hide anywhere, which would cause white and black moths to only reproduce with their own colors, and thus eventually divide into seperate species.
However, what I wonder is if any of you know the scientific term for this kind of "evolutional leap paradox" like with the wing example I suggested, where many different mutations are dependent on eachother to be useful, making a good final product less likely.
I'm interested in the subject but I don't know what to search for to learn more about it. All that shows up is that moth thing which is not the same "paradox"
