I read in an issue of The Economist recently that some product development has been given to computers. That computers can simulate evolution and new products are "born" from these iterations.
For example, a computer programmer simulates the mating of two inanimate objects. I think the article referenced the two products being identical: a driver's side mirror on an automobile (as the male) and the same driver's side mirror (as the female). Mate these two mirrors millions of times and there will be mutations. Most of the (children) mirrors... "mirror the parent...ha ha", but some mutations do occur. Some mutations are not helpful; some mutations are more efficient than the parents. So mate two of the identical mutations....and see what other "efficiencies" can be gained. Over time, the computer programmer is able to select an offspring mirror that is more aerodynamic, reduces blind spots, etc. The article referenced that this process has been employed in the auto industry with great success.
What if two similar but not identical inanimate objects are mated?
2 comments:
And... what would the censors say if National Geographic filmed the mating process?
I can't imagine that the rules for mating constructed by a programmer for something as simple as a mirror could in any way approach the complexity of those for living things.
There aren't too many variables to worry about. It would be much easier to have "offspring" that survived mutations.
But maybe National Geographic would at least be able to document the mating call.
Post a Comment