Ok Never mind , I wont evolve any good bots for Db, you guys do what ever you want with Db , I am just here because reading and replying to posts is fun...
(Right now I am working on pusher bots anyway)
Under all simulations I have (insane by a biologist point of view as I can see) mutation rates, well I'll see what happens with pusherbots , if it is going to be worth posting , I would post it on my website...
I hate the compile and the execute parts of the dna because every little element is different, its so annoying.
And forget about mutations... forget about mutations (you guys won't like it anyway) ,.. but: I have to include clone for each type of type of data , add remove change , all must be specific and independent of each other , it ends up being us much work as compile only more because you have to add randomizations everywear.
(Funny, I better not tell in college what I am good at, ill just say I know some vb , thats all , I dont want to see no reactions of no proffesors brainwashing them about the evolutions stuff) Hey I am not enstein I dont have the modevation he has when he pulls out all his paper work and presents it to the scientific comunity like its gold.
The knowledge I gain from my little computer science experience and my ideas it seems will go with me to the grave, like hell I dont want that to happen but I guess I ran out of choices.
Below: stuff NOT out of real life , its from a combinations of calculations I did in my head right now , and stuff I learned from computer simulations
Maybe if the organisms become completely meat sims when they reproduce (that is, both of the daughter cells die if the mutation is bad) then, of course, it is nice to skip mutations once in a while.
(Numsgils translation for the tired:
If mutations cause a lot of death then it is better to skip generations for muations once in a while.But if you have a situation where the organism is going to reproduce anyway, even if its mutations are bad, then its actually good to have constant mutations. That is, the faster a mutation can become good or some crazy system will evolve that, by its uniqueness beats the competition, the better. You really need to see how Pusherbots (my project I've mentioned before) works to understand this paragraph (or a poor excuse for a paragraph until Num here fixed it).
(Numsgil fixed poor sentence structure. Remember, sentences have predicates and nomitaves, and they should follow a logical order.)Finally, when you have a parent that DOES NOT MUTATE WHEN IT GIVES BIRTH, as long as it does not lose a lot of resources, then it doesn't hurt it if the child dies 99% of the time.
Computer code needs a high rate of change for it to produce good results. In code below:
turnstop
skip 3 , memory(0) > 3
memory(1) mod memory(0) , 2
skip 1 , memory(1) = 0
turnleft
skip 1 , memory(1) = 1
turnright
memory(0) setmemory memory(0) + 1
skip 1 , memory(0) < 7
memory(0) setmemory 0
If all mutations do is change one number, I.e. 1 to 2 , or 7 to 8 , or 3 to 4, then the code will still be doing the same thing, or perhaps even worse.
But what if new code was produced in the same quantity as above? I think one of the following results:
- We get complete chaotic code that does nothing good.
- We get code that actualy does somthing new.
New = Competly unbeleivable , how did it realise to do that by itself? - We get something new that is "actually" better than the precursor.
Hey maybe a computer does not exsist in real life, its all in my head.
Rearticulated by Numsgil for better responses.