Something doesn't have to be alive to be under the same pressures of evolution. If you had self replicating robots they would be faced with evolution too... If a zero flipped to a one in their machine code and it harmed them they would possibly malfunction, if it helped them they build more robots quicker they would become the dominant robot type. "Life" isn't required.for evolution.
but it's still random chance. there is a little more selection when some cognisance comes into it but how much is deliberate in picking the best mate and that is then interesting. do bacteria have awareness no, does a slug, maybe does a bird? yes.
Bacteria don't have awareness but do have the ability to respond to specific stimuli. Bacteria are generally asexual though. I don't know a lot about slug reproduction, other than some random facts, like Banana slugs have penis like projections that can grow as long as 36 inches long despite the slug itself only being 6inches long. (Imagine having a 12 meter penis when scaled to human sizes). Oh and they eat each other's penises when they're done. If slugs are anything like snails, I do know quite a bit about snail reproduction (it's actually quite diverse and varied). Snails will have sex with anything that barely resembles them... Not much mate selection going on. They're not even too concerned about getting with the right species or genus. I watched a spixi try to mate with a rock once.
I suppose that depends on the definition of "life". As viruses are incapable of independent reproduction and require host cell machinery I assume that is why they are not considered to be alive? I know even less about robotics than biology - is machine code susceptible to the same reproduction error that creates biological mutation? Without it natural selection wouldn't occur.
That's one aspect. They do not have full dna and are far smaller than a single cell organism. This is the 1000 monkeys at typewriters thing isnt it? Will you get eventually something that makes sense.
It's one of those things that have been debated since viruses have been discovered. Most scientists say viruses are not technically alive, but it's a bit like the argument of whether Pluto is a planet. It gets more complicated by things called giant viruses (Small Pox is one, although not the largest), they still require a host cell to replicate but they are much more complex than other viruses and can be larger than some bacteria. Depends how the data for the code is stored. Yes. Write errors can occur... But far less likely than a replication error in DNA/RNA.
wellllll pluto is a round astrological body of a certain size so that is opinion there of convenience as to say theres 100s of planets in the solar system would be troublesome for schools Viruses on the other hand you'd have to argue to add another type of life on earth to the list plants, animals, fungi, protists, archaea, and bacteria. If anything a virus could be described as a precursor to life i suppose given that it is RNA based so has not the complexity of full DNA the biggest argument to my mind is that it has no metabolism, as such its somewhere below full life and somewhere above organic chemicals
Yes, were viruses to be categorized as life they would need to be added to a new kingdom. (Or more likely multiple kingdoms, there's a greater evolutionary gap between some viruses than there is between humans and toadstools). Not all viruses are just RNA. There are DNA based viruses too (Herpes is a DNA virus for example). It's highly likely Viruses evolved more than once. Some from simple broken bits of RNA, but there is evidence that others, like the giant viruses ( small pox example again) might have evolved from cellular organisms that lost functionality over time and lost the ability to self replicate without a host.
Re earthquakes, if anyone cares... Lol... I was curious why all the mini earthquakes we've been having were so loud and yet larger earthquakes elsewhere are so quiet. There is an explanation. It's all about the depth. If an earthquake happens 30 miles below the ground you won't hear it. The sound is blocked out by the time it reaches the surface. If an earthquake happens a mere mile or two underground (as ours have) the sound is much larger despite them being tiny earthquakes because we're closer to the quake. So, a really simple and boring answer to something I thought would be much more interesting. And now you are all bored too after expecting something more exciting.
