The Personal Website of Mark W. Dawson

Containing His Articles, Observations, Thoughts, Meanderings,
and some would say Wisdom (and some would say not).

The Probability of the Evolution of Life and Intelligent Life

This article examines the probabilities of the evolution of life, and intelligent life, once it has begun. As to the probability of reaching a state in which life could begin, I have written on this topic in my Science Article “Intelligent Life in the Universe“. First, however, I would make some comments on the limitations of Mathematics and Science as a foundation for this article.

Mathematics is the pursuit of knowledge unconstrained by the physical properties of the universe. Much of mathematics has no foundation in reality, but much mathematics is needed to explain reality. Mathematical Theorems are a rigorous pursuit of mathematical truths that require strict standards for the proofs. Less strict standards for Mathematical Conjectures are allowed, but such conjectures are not proofs, but speculations that require a proof to be developed to be accepted as a Mathematical Theorem. Mathematics, therefore, cannot be utilized to prove anything except that the mathematics is correct. Scientific Theories are the best explanation of physical phenomena that fits all the known facts, and much science requires a mathematical foundation to be proven correct. Also, scientific theories cannot be “proven”, as new facts are often discovered, which requires that the Scientific Theory be modified or replaced, as outlined in my Science Article “On the Nature of Scientific Inquiry“.

As God is not a mathematical theorem nor a physical phenomenon, the existence or nonexistence of God is beyond the scope of mathematics or science. Consequently, a Mathematician or Scientist is free to believe or not believe in the existence of God, but they cannot claim that Mathematics or Science proves nor disproves the existence of God. I am a firm believer that science is the best way of explaining the physical properties and physical laws of the universe. I also am a firm believer that God created our universe and established its physical properties and physical laws. And I see no conflict between the views of Science and Religion, as I have explained in my Article “Science versus Religion “. Science is the explanation of how God created the universe, and God is the explanation of why we have “The Fundamental Properties and Constants of the Universe“.

As for probabilities, one of the common mistakes that many people make is they only examine the beginning and end states to determine the probability of an event occurring. However, this is not the proper way to determine the probability of the end state. You must examine all the numerous intermediate state probabilities to determine the end state probability. A Dendrogram of this process makes this visually apparent. This Dendrogram is very basic, as it only shows a few levels of branch points, but the branch points in the evolution of life are of many levels. It also only shows two-prong branch points, while these branch points often had multiple branching. It also does not show that some branches end because of extinction events.

To determine the probability of reaching an end state requires that you not just consider the start and endpoints. You must examine the probability of each intermediate state, which often have a much higher probability. When you aggregate the probabilities of the intermediate states, this aggregation makes for a more probable end state.

One of the peculiarities of the human mind is its inability to grasp the very small and the very large. We place numbers on the very small and very large to assist us in comprehending them. However, we can never fully grasp them in their entirety. The Enormousness of Time and the Vastness of Space in the Universe is something that the human mind is incapable of grasping. A universe that is 13.8 billion years old, and perhaps hundreds of billions of light-years in size, is not something a human being can fully grasp. The vastness of space is not germane to this article, but the enormousness of time is germane. We must keep in mind the enormousness of time whenever we discuss evolution.

The Earth is about 4.5 billion years old, and the evolution of microbial life on Earth started about 3.7 billion years ago. The earliest evidence of complex cells with tiny cellular structures that performs specific functions within a cell dates back to 1.85 billion years, while more complex life forms began about 850 million years ago. The Cambrian Explosion event occurred approximately 541 million years ago when most major animal phyla appeared in the fossil record. It lasted for about 13 – 25 million years and resulted in the divergence of most modern life forms. Human evolution is the evolutionary process that led to the emergence of anatomically modern humans, beginning with the evolutionary history of primates—in particular, genus Homo—and leading to the emergence of Homo sapiens as a distinct species of the hominid family, the great apes. Within the apes' superfamily, the Hominidae family diverged from the gibbon family some 15–20 million years ago; African great apes diverged from orangutans about 14 million years ago; and the humans, Australopithecines and other extinct biped genera, and chimpanzees tribe parted from the gorilla tribe between 8–9 million years ago. The humans and their biped ancestors and chimpanzees separated from the others about 6 to 7 million years ago.

As can be seen, the evolution of life on Earth took an enormous amount of time, and even the 6 to 7 million years it took for humans to evolve is an extremely large amount of time. Always keep in mind the enormousness of time whenever you think about evolution. This enormity of time increases the likelihood of biological life evolving to the state in which it is today. If you only examined the probabilities of the start and endpoints, you could conclude that life as we know it was highly improbable. However, if you calculate the probability of life by the probabilities of the intermediate states' life as we know, it is more probable. And since it did happen, we can conclude that life is probable. As to the probability of intelligent life evolving, this is examined in my Science Article “Intelligent Life in the Universe“.

Disclaimer

Please Note - many academics, scientist and engineers would critique what I have written here as not accurate nor through. I freely acknowledge that these critiques are correct. It was not my intentions to be accurate or through, as I am not qualified to give an accurate nor through description. My intention was to be understandable to a layperson so that they can grasp the concepts. Academics, scientists, and engineers entire education and training is based on accuracy and thoroughness, and as such, they strive for this accuracy and thoroughness. I believe it is essential for all laypersons to grasp the concepts of this paper, so they make more informed decisions on those areas of human endeavors that deal with this subject. As such, I did not strive for accuracy and thoroughness, only understandability.

Most academics, scientist, and engineers when speaking or writing for the general public (and many science writers as well) strive to be understandable to the general public. However, they often fall short on the understandability because of their commitment to accuracy and thoroughness, as well as some audience awareness factors. Their two biggest problems are accuracy and the audience knowledge of the topic.

Accuracy is a problem because academics, scientist, engineers and science writers are loath to be inaccurate. This is because they want the audience to obtain the correct information, and the possible negative repercussions amongst their colleagues and the scientific community at large if they are inaccurate. However, because modern science is complex this accuracy can, and often, leads to confusion amongst the audience.

The audience knowledge of the topic is important as most modern science is complex, with its own words, terminology, and basic concepts the audience is unfamiliar with, or they misinterpret. The audience becomes confused (even while smiling and lauding the academics, scientists, engineers or science writer), and the audience does not achieve understandability. Many times, the academics, scientists, engineers or science writer utilizes the scientific disciplines own words, terminology, and basic concepts without realizing the audience misinterpretations, or has no comprehension of these items.

It is for this reason that I place understandability as the highest priority in my writing, and I am willing to sacrifice accuracy and thoroughness to achieve understandability. There are many books, websites, and videos available that are more accurate and through. The subchapter on “Further Readings” also contains books on various subjects that can provide more accurate and thorough information. I leave it to the reader to decide if they want more accurate or through information and to seek out these books, websites, and videos for this information.