Wednesday, 23 November 2016

Evolution of asexual reproduction

We should engineer a woman who whose bones are made entirely of tooth enamel built from the inside out and can reproduce asexually by parthenogenesis by vaginal birth and whose clones will slowly outcompete the rest of humanity. Sometimes an advantageous trait comes with a costly trait because the more of one hard to evolve trait you have, the less of another hard to evolve trait you can evolve to have. If we reproduce asexually, there will be a much smaller tendency that the more of one hard to evolve trait you have, the less of another one you can evolve to have because there will be no genetic recombination and the mutation rate is so low. She should also be engineered so that no disease will spread and kill all of her clones but the only way for it not to kill them all is if the ability to survive the disease is not completely genetic. Because of the mutations that already occurred, after the disease wipes out some of them, there will be an ever so slight tendency for the ones who survived to have a genome that makes them more likely to survive the disease. The next disease that wipes some of them out will evolve them to be slightly more resistant to diseases. After enough time goes by, there will be more genetic diversity as a result of mutations so they won't evolve a trait that enables a disease to spread and wipe out all of them. Because they reproduce asexually, a person whose very resistant to any disease will also produce a kid whose very resistant to any disease and it will be possible to evolve extreme resistance to malaria without the risk of sickle cell anemia so people will evolve to have the mortality rate of malaria extremely low. In fact, there will even be frequency dependent selection for genetic variation speeding up the evolution of it because mutations that make somebody less likely to die from a disease by being different in the right way will be selected for because there will be so few people like her for a deadly disease to start in and spread to her from. Maybe it's easier to properly research how to make humanity not be destined for extinction on Earth by engineering many women whose clones will spread giving genetic diversity. Also because they reproduce asexually, it will be easier for them to evolve to not be so restrictive in what they do and still be ever so unlikely to break a bone with an ever so tiny costly trait coming with that trait. Old ladies will no longer have to fear that they're going to fall and break a bone. It's possible that they might even evolve to be able to survive on the rare occasion that somebody accidentally falls to the hard ground from 3 km high while climbing the poll because of asexual reproduction combined with tooth enamel bones. They'll probably also evolve to not get heat pain very easily because it's disadvantageous to be so restrictive that they don't get burnt very often because they can evolve to repair burn damage. They'll probably also evolve to be able to grow back a body part when ever they lose one so that they can be even less restrictive in their life, unless it's very rare for them to lose a body part in the first place because of the tooth enamel bones.

Another advantage in asexual reproduction is that fetuses would not evolve to reduce their own options and weaken the mother's immune system and make it so that the mother will be infected if the fetus dies, like at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjbgZwgdY7Q.

She should also be engineered to be a poikilotherm who can thrive in a wide range of core temperatures all the way down to freezing. Because that will be an easier trait to evolve, her clones will have the same trait instead of going extinct by genetic recombination to produce a kid who can't. Also, her clones will not evolve to thrive in a very narrow range of temperatures because it that would require more energy and that trait could come with an ever so small costly trait because of asexual reproduction. In addition to that, the core temperature could go as low as the skin temperature can go without harm so rather than constricting blood vessels in the cold to stop the core from cooling too much, the body would generate heat in below freezing whether and dilate blood vessels at the surface to prevent frostbite and the colder it was, the more heat the body would generate to keep the surface above freezing. They might also evolve to be extremely pale in the visible region to survive really high temperatures in the blasting sun by not heating up as much from it and pale in the infrared region to survive extremely low temperatures at night by burning less energy to stay above freezing because they don't emit as much radiation. As a result of being poikilotherms, the human species might even survive the freezing temperatures caused by the next asteroid that will cause a mass extinction. If some of them had stored enough body energy to survive a year without food after the next asteroid that causes a mass extinction, then each time one occurrs, people will evolve to store enough energy to be extremely unlikely to starve to death when a mass extinction occurrs. Maybe they'll even evolve to be so uneasily tireable which would be great. I once climbed the CN tower without once stopping to rest and I still didn't get tired which was great and it took 26:08. We can evolve to be better than that. That's because they'll sometimes have to go on really super long walks with no eating or stopping to rest during it because there exists a more advantageous way to react to the unpredictable environment that will give a more random distribution in when they eat and because of their parthenogenic reproduction, it will be possible for them to evolve to store so much energy in the first place for those walks and have an ever so small costly trait come with it. They won't be eating that often because they don't burn energy as fast because they don't need to be warm so the the longest walk they will do with no stopping to rest or eating will be really long. I'm against humans colonizing space because they would spread so rapidly until they can no longer spread and then there would be vicious competition and we would be so lucky not to have happened to be one of the people experiencing it because the number of people who would die in the competition would be such a high fraction of all humans who will ever exist. Lucilly, researchers might actually be able to stop humans from getting wiped out by a disaster. The sun is getting brighter through the course of its life so Earth will slowly get hotter and the amount of plant food will slowly decrease until there's none as long as we first give Earth more stable weather patterns by changing it's orbit to revolve around the sun the opposite way from Venus and have the slowest retrograde rotation that makes it face the same side to Venus every time it passes Venus (see https://www.quora.com/What-would-it-be-like-to-live-on-Venus/answer/Timothy-Bahry) so maybe the evolutionary stable size of the human population will be controlled by the amount of plant food and so will also slowly shrink with the amount of plant food until there's nobody left instead of suddenly becoming extinct from an asteroid and so few of the people who will ever exist will be sorry that humanity's not going to last that much longer that will occur before the sun runs out of fuel which is great. Venus should also be made to have an earth like atmosphere and revolve the opposite way from Earth while having the slowest retrograde rotation that makes it face the same side to Earth every time it passes Earth and to not be as close to the sun as it is which would trigger the runaway greenhouse effect again and humans should colonize it but make sure they do it right and have nobody inhabit it until a high fraction of the population all agrees to inhabit it because if only a few people inhabit it, there will be plenty of generations to select for people with a high fertility rate and then there will be vicious competition once the population is so big that it can no longer grow, unless we put a single asexually reproducing woman there who has already evolved resistance to any disease because she will be very slow to evolve to have a higher fertility rate.

They'll also evolve to be very nice and get along well because there will be no men to influence those women away from their natural tendencies of being nice. In addition to that, there will be no evolutionary pressure for meanness for the following reason. Those who produce more kids than they have enough food to rear are more likely to rear even fewer so people won't produce more kids than they can get enough food to rear so there will be an evolutionary stable population size with each woman on average producing 1 kid. There will be an evolutionary advantage in fighting back anyone who starts a fight for more than their fair share of resources but the evolutionary cost of losing the fight and getting even less is bigger than the evolutionary advantage in winning the fight selecting for people who won't even start a fight for more than their fair share of resources in the first place. The reason there was previously an evolutionary advantage in men sometimes being rough is because it sometimes enabled them to reproduce with more women and have more kids that are their own, and because it would enable him to stop his wife from having an affair and if she does, he can't have as many kids that are his own.

There's the unfortunate cost of humans reproducing asexually which is that they will evolve to be less intelligent because they will have an even better connection supressing ability because it will be easier to evolve it, with no hyperaware people like Kim Peek out there. For that reason, researchers are going to have to research how to create an evolutionary stable eugenics program that actually will give them a defect in the connection supressing ability making them superintelligent. One way to evolve them to have a defect in the connection supressing ability is if people who have a defect in the connection supressing ability are still extremely unlikely not to have the skills they need for survival making the natural selection against a defect in the connection supressing ability as weak as the genetic drift for it. Fortunately, the requirement to be able to look at a star puzzle then solve it in the bare minimum possible number of moves blind folded all in 4 minutes by reproduction age and to not lose that ability at an older age will select for smartness without selecting against a defect in the ability to supress connections unrelated to solving it because people have such a long time gain that ability by continuously getting smarter that a proper connection supressing ability is not required to ensure that you will get that skill.

Maybe if in addition to the eugenics for the ability to solve the star puzzle by reproduction age, we did not engineer a woman to reproduce asexually by parthenogenesis but instead engineered a man to reproduce sexually by parthenogenesis where his genome could produce a man or a woman and he reproduces with a lot of women to produce an entire colony of people all of which have exclusively his genome but only a few of which are men, then a man from that colony can reproduce with a lot of women from that colony to produce the next colony. One of those colonies will bud into 2 colonies and then those colonies that bud into 2 colonies will outcompete the colonies that don't so there will be many colonies so natural selection can select for better colonies. Once humanity reaches an evolutionary stable size, bigger colonies will outcompete smaller colonies and then they'll be so big that people will evolve to be very smart because they'll evolve to do complex tasks for the colony. They'll actually evolve to be really monsterously big because unlike ants, it will be a male that produces the colony and males can evolve to reproduce in such large numbers with ease. Those who don't like growing up maybe will have no problem because they'll feel like kids because they're women and men in the colony tell women in it what to do but not the other way around. Unfortunately, the evolutionary stable strategy would give people a good strong connection supressing ability that makes it so that if one of them went to school, they'd badly struggle to retain information and think of ideas to get marks on tests and it the connection supressing ability would be really strong because of parthenogenic reproduction but at least it wouldn't be as strong as it would be once after they reached an evoltionary stable strategy if humanity were all females with each person producing one kid by parthenogenesis because it's so hard to evolve a strong connection supressing ability for such complex skills. What we really want is people with the type of brain that would have evolved if the following occurred. Men produce colonies in the same way and Earth provides an environment for them that doesn't change for 4,000,000 years. Suddenly the environment changes and each person was taught in school what they need to do to survive including a complex set of rules on how to react to an unpredictable future situation and yet has 1 chance in 20 of being unable to survive and reproduce due to their inability to retain information and figure things out from it with survival being environmental by chaos theory rather than genetic. After that, natural selection selects for people with a defect in the connection supressing ability because they're more likely to be able to learn what they need to learn and they start evolving the defect faster than they would have by genetic drift alone. Even mutations for a faster mutation rate get selected for because the only people with a certain amount of defect in the connecting supressing ability after a certain short amount of time are the ones who had a faster mutation rate further speeding up the evolution of the universal defect in the connection supressing ability making humans so intelligent because they had already evolved to do complex tasks for the colony. After even more time goes by, they would evolve the ability to supress connections unrelated to survival in the new environment. What we want is people with the trait that would have evolved after they evolved the universal defect in the connection supressing ability but before they evolved a new connection supressing ability for the new environment. Hopefully some day, researchers will figure out how to create an evolutionary stable eugenics program that will give people the same trait but without first creating a nasty change like that.

In addition to that, people would evolve to be very altruistic. Maybe scientists will invent the technology to live a lot longer and on average it won't be until they're 6,000 years old that they're tired of life and don't want to continue living but that can still be done without an overpopulation problem if each person born after a certain time on average produces fewer than 2 children because then there will be fewer people who have not yet reproduced and they'll produce even fewer people. However, since they eventually want to die anyway, there will keep on being new people so we might as well evolve them to have better traits. Since we can't make humans live for ever, some time before they die, they should learn how to be unafraid of death the same way as I did by thinking of it in the following way; I define a future of a consciousness to be a consciousness that has a memory of that consciousness so by my definition, I don't have a future where I'm dead because I will have none of the memories of when I was alive after I die. Shortly after the colonies outcompete the rest of humanity not by taking resources and making them starve but by making them produce fewer children in the first place by reducing the amount of food they can get by being better at finding it, there will be so few men to do mean actions and the women will be so nice because there's so few men to influence them away from their natural tendencies of being nice. They'll also continue to be nice because it's evolutionary advantageous to remain that way because being selfish towards a fellow colony member is bad for the colony. Maybe only living in colonies and not having humans entirely female each producing 1 kid by parthenogenesis would prevent women from evolving from having a natural tendency to be a tiny bit more selfish. In some all girls schools, a lot of lockers are left unlocked. That's probably because each girl there learned from past experience that the girls there can be trusted not to steal anything and that in turn is probably partly because there were no boys to influence them away from their natural tendencies one speck. However, those altruistic traits are not evolutionary stable. So few girls very rarely interact with a boy so natural selection selected for women who are influenced by men to be a tiny bit selfish, not for ones who are naturally that way. Certain selfish actions like stealing something from a locker are not selected for. However, the evolution of other selfish actions that were selected for probably naturally resulted in those selfish actions as well.

I don't actually think we should change humans to living in colonies with a king because who knows what colonies will evolve to sometimes do to rival colonies. I prefer we change humans to individualy reproduce asexually. and reach an evolutionary stable strategy where they each produce 1 kid. Maybe the true evolutionary stable strategy won't have there be no men but will jut have them be very rare. If any mutant man occurrs who can have sex with a woman and have his sperm hijack her body to produce a kid with his genome and he has sex with many women, men will start to outcompete women but then women will evolve to be more resistant to their bodies being hijacked by a sperm to produce a kid with the man's genome until we reach an evolutionary stable strategy of men being extremely rare. If men were rarer, the nautral selection for resistance against their bodies being hijacked would be weaker than the genetic drift against it so women would evolve to be less resistant to the hijacking of their bodies by a sperm so men would stop being as rare.

Wednesday, 20 August 2014

Evolution of teeth

I don't know if getting most of our energy from eating whole raw carrots would have evolved our teeth to similar shaped to the way they actually are now but if it would have done so, then there should be evolutionary pressure for the following changes during the test:
*evolution of teeth ideally suited for eating whole raw carrots with a blunt end. The test should test the ability to climb up a vertical pole with bare hands and feet at all. After evolution makes it less common for people to be unable to, there should start being high rise apartment building with 2 poles, one for climbing up and the other for climbing down and there should be no elevators. Each person on their test day should be asked by observers whether they climbed up the pole to their apartment the previous day and if not, the partner finding site should do nothing to help them find a partner. Because the assigned day is not known ahead, it will evolve people to climb very high every day. This ensures the human species will always be very full of energy and not easily tireable, something only having to climb really high once won't do. Evolution would eventually evolve us to climb at what ever speed burns the least energy because there's a natural evolutionary disadvantage in climbing at a speed that burns more energy. In addition to that, whole raw carrots with a blunt end should be a huge part of people's diet so that we will evolve teeth ideally suited for eating them, and will even do so quite quickly on an evolutionary time scale because we'll be burning so much energy. Over the generations, the buildings we live in should slowly get taller and taller over the generations until they're 3,000 m tall. For anyone who can't climb the pole to their apartment the day before their assigned test day, it's an absolute no no for any of their descendants who haven't already found a partner to be found one by the site because otherwise, humans would devolve from genetic drift. Each person when buying an apartment to start up their own family should have a room assigned to them instead of getting to choose it themself so that we will evolve to be resistant to the harmful effects of climbing any height per day from 5 m to 3,000 m. That is, almost everybody will both be resistant to gaining so much weight that they can't climb at all from having gotten too little exercise climbing only 5 m a day and resistant to the tiring effects of climbing up 3,000 m a day. Evolution would probably evolve the teeth into a shape that maximizes the ability to get energy from chewing carrots. That's actually a stronger version of evolution of mobility too. People should be marked based entirely on how high they actually climb, not how high they climb for their age. The only reason old people this generation find it so hard is because they previously lacked the evolutionary pressure for mobility. Because a whole carrot is too big to fit into the mouth, incisors would never evolve into another type of tooth so I suspect that the canines would evolve to be in between the shape of an incisor and that of a premolar. Another good thing about this evolutionary pressure is that I suspect that evolutionary pressure for the ability to climb a vertical pole would prevent humans from ever evolving away from human shape.
*evolution against exposed dentin. For anyone who doesn't prove they have no exposed dentin by taking an X-ray, it should be an absolute no no for the site to help them find a partner. People with exposed dentin should not have a partner found for them whether it's from nail biting, physical wear or a dental carry. That way, almost no one in distant future generations will suffer dental pain. In addition to that, that evolutionary pressure would prevent top lateral incisors from not growing all the way in because they would take some of the wear for people with a nail biting habit slowing down the wear of the top central incisors. In addition to that people would evolve a more symmetrical jaw set because that will prevent one tooth from taking so much wear from nail biting because the tooth that's a reflection of it across the sagittal plane is at an awkward angle for nail biting. If in addition to that, we start up a trend where everybody occasionally drinks pure lemon juice but not often enough to corrode all the way through their enamel layer within their life time, some people will dissolve off a microscopic layer of enamel which will cause the plaque to detach from it and make their teeth ultra smooth making it harder for new plaque to stick in the first place. That will prevent dental caries since bacteria live in the plaque and make acid that corrodes the tooth. Some people will happen to be drinking lemon juice at the right frequency that's so on the edge of enough to get the plaque off that some people will natually have smooth enough teeth to have the lemon juice make them smooth enough to detach the plaque and others won't, some of whom will get a dental carry and be refused to be found a partner because of that. That would cause the next generation to on average have smoother teeth and the generation after even smoother teeth until teeth are natually so smooth that practically nothing can stick to them so well, maybe making cavities an impossibility.
*evolution against teeth defects. If someone had any permanent teeth grow in without pushing the decidous teeth out first or has any tilted wisdom teeth or can't prove with an old X-ray that they had all 4 wisdom teeth grow in straight before they got some of them removed, it should be an absolute no no for the site to help them find a partner. If there was enough room for them to grow in straight but not quite enough room for them to finish growing in, then they should be treated normally and be allowed to do the partner finding challenges. After all, the natural evolutionary advantage in having a body more full of energy will probably slowly take care of that problem and the crooked jaw set problem on its own, because people can get more energy from chewing carrots when they have fully grown in wisdom teeth that can do part of the chewing. It should also be an absolute no no for anyone who got any wisdom teeth removed before they had enough time to grow in because it's too late to find out whether they would have grown in untilted. The evolutionary pressure against tilted wisdom teeth would probably also make us evolve a more symmetrical jaw set because that way it's less likely that one side of the jaw will be too crowded for a wisdom to grow in straight.

I think the evolutionary pressure of teeth would result in the following results:
*feet shaped half like hands to be better at climbing
*canines becoming incisors with the top ones having a tiny speck of a second premolar cusp due to a combination of evolutionary pressure for teeth ideally suited for eating carrots and canines being able to be worn down faster than incisors. My top lateral incisors have a really tiny bump at the back very slightly resembling a premolar.
*straighter teeth to make it easier to bite and chew carrots getting more energy from them, even for people who don't wear braces
*dentin extending less far to the tip of the incisors because some people have a bad fingernail chewing habit
*thicker enamel layer because some people frequently drink pop which dissolves it and because of evolutionary pressure against cracks in teeth
*very symmetrical jaw set because that way it's less likely that a tooth will be so heavily worn down because the same type of tooth on the other side can't get a proper grip of the fingernails to do some of the nail biting for it

If this part of the test does not get created, there should at least be a restaurant chain that has a job on the third floor where there are 2 ways to go from the second floor to the third floor, going up a stair case and climbing up a pole. To create evolutionary pressure to be a good climber, the door on the third floor should be locked until the restaurant is open to customers and the people doing the morning shift should be required to enter by climbing the pole with bare hands and feet. The purpose in having the pole go from the second floor to the third floor instead of from the first to the second is that way, the second floor can be kept nice and warm because the cold air on the first floor at the foot of the stairs will sit there not coming up to the second floor because it's denser. Since tools can't be carried very well while climbing, all tools used for the restaurant job should be left on the third floor all the time. The restaurant should also serve a whole raw carrot with a blunt end as part of every main course meal so that people will evolve to have teeth ideally suited for eating carrots because people who can eat carrots can eat pretty much anything.

We should also make the evolutionary change of having a skeleton entirely made of tooth enamel built from the inside out but the only way I see to do that is is to first engineer an asexually reproducing woman with that trait whose clones will slowly outcompete the rest of the population as described in the next post. That would be so good. People will evolve to be unable to get joint pain even when the joint lubrication is accidentally missing because there will be no evolutionary advantage in it because it won't be able to wear out from rubbing anyway. In addition to that, every time somebody falls and breaks a bone, they will have a slight chance of not reproducing or their kids not reproducing because of it, selecting for people who will break a bone less easily because their bones were smoother and hadn't initiated a crack because their bones crack less easily. Also, people will evolve to get physical pain less easily because the evolutionary advantage of pain is smaller because they can't break a bone as easily and there's an evolutionary disadvantage in being so restrictive in what you do to avoid the risk of pain. Maybe that person will have to be engineered to have cartilage ribs so that their ribs won't break when they dive deep underwater because enamel ribs can't bend to reduce the pressure difference between the lungs and the outside of the body.

Monday, 4 August 2014

Evolution of ambidexterity

I not only want to create evolution of ambidexterity but evolution of super high ambidexterity. The ambidexterity part of the test should have you sit in a chair and then there are 2 close together horizontal slits and a ring further away from you both picked at a random spot. One of your hands is randomly picked and you are tested on the ability to throw a golf ball sized ball made of flawless diamond through the horizontal slits and the ring without the ball hitting the edges with that hand and then the test is repeated with the other hand. The inner edge of the ring will slowly get smaller through the generations with the people who miss on either of the 2 attempts being refused to be helped find a partner until it is slightly less than twice as big as the ball.

To further create evolutionary pressure of ambidexterity, there should be some restaurant jobs that for every chiral tool they have, should have an equal number of right-handed and left-handed versions and should only hire people who can do the job in a fast complex way where they take which ever copy of the tool they get regardless of which version of the tool it is if they want to keep the job. Those jobs that tell people which hand to use should warn people ahead in their job ad or interview about that policy so that they won't trick somebody into taking the job who didn't want it and will only take people who knew what it was like and decided to accept it because it's so hard to find a job.

The world is easier when everybody is ambidextrous. It really is. Evolution would increase the extent to which a skill automatically transfers from one hand to the other hand making it so that using one hand half the time will slow down the other hand gaining skill by an ever so tiny amount. It allows the same person to sometimes cut celery in one area and sometimes cut celery in another area depending on which of those areas is already getting used by somebody else. Ambidexterity might also be advantageous for cutting a tuna because some parts of it are nonsymmetrical and so favor one hand for cutting off whose reflection across the sagittal plane favors the other hand. It also avoids the need to rearrange people at the dinner table. All new kids should be taught to mirror write when ever they're writing with their left hand which is more natural, and avoids smudging pencil lead and pressing on binder rings and spiral notebook rings. It also creates evolutionary pressure for smartness for people in jobs to suck up learning how to read mirror writing which is not that hard to learn. The cafeteria should have rows of tables with cutlery laid out where people on one side are required to eat with their right hand and those on the other side are required to eat with their left hand. To ensure students don't establish a dominant hand, in early grades, they should be assigned seats at each meal eating with their right hand at some meals and their left hand at other meals. Each person should have a big non-side biased so that the teacher can randomly hand out scissors half of which are left-handed randomly to the class with each student take which ever version of scissors they get and use them with the hand they're designed for, sometimes using right-handed scissors and sometimes using left-handed scissors. All grades should be like the grades starting from grade 7 where the students have different teachers and different binders for different subjects. Each teacher for each class each year should have it randomly decided whether all students in that class are supposed to write normally with their right hand or all of them are supposed to mirror write with their left hand. The reason is because it would create a very disorganized binder having some of the writing in it mirror writing and some of it not with no clear beginning and ending of the binder writing. The teacher should also write on the board the same way as the students are supposed to with the same hand, should mirror print tests and handouts for those classes where the students are supposed to mirror write with their left hand, should give out inverted textbooks for those classes where the students are supposed to mirror write, and should give a zero for a homework assignment that was written normally in a mirror writing class and for a mirror written homework assignment in a normal writing class. If a student continues writing with their dominant hand during a class where they're supposed to write with the other hand, that hand will be restrained with a wire frame glove that goes over that hand and get locked shut during each class where they're not supposed to use that hand. The teacher is not allowed to wrestle the glove on but if the student refuses to put it on themself in a class where they're supposed to, they should get a zero in the rest of the course. All music classes should provide their own instruments with half the copies an inverted version and should randomly hand them out to the class each class so that each student will get one version some classes and the other version other classes. In all music playing tests, each student should be given music they never saw before and have an intrument randomly handed to them by the teacher and may not choose which version to play on. However, the music sheets will either all be mirror written or none be mirror written for the entire year for the entire class because music classes should not be treated differently than other classes. Even for 2 hand tasks such as playing a flute and typing at a keyboard, it's still useful to use 2 versions of the flute or keyboard because it will improve the general skill of to what extent the skill of any task transfers to the skill of its mirror image. For that reason, every school library should have rows of computers where those on one side of each row are uninverted and those on the other side are inverted, and they should have however many computer makes each person who wants to use one to type school work wait as long for a computer as at Steacie Library so that students will be forced to take which ever computer becomes available first and therefore type on an inverted keyboard half the time and an uninverted keyboard the other half of the time. Having half the computers inverted will also force them to normal read and mirror read equally frequently keeping their doors open to being a teacher who has no trouble reading mirror written assignments for those classes where students are supposed to lefty mirror write.

If forcing ambidexterity on people at a young age is too much bother for them, that's fine, we don't need to do it. The eugenics test will eventually select for people who are naturally ambidexrous anyway. Those people who fail to establish a dominant hand and naturally use each hand half the amount of time will be more likely to pass the throwing eugenics test and less likely for the partner finding site to refuse to find them a partner. Once almost everybody is ambidextrous, the world will be easier if everybody on each side of a linear table is told to eat with the same hand because there will be no bumping elbows. It might as well be that for all linear tables, one side is laid out for right hand use and the other for left hand use becuase then after that change, the throwing eugenics test will further select for people who don't form a tendency to always pick the side that favors the same hand for eating to sit at. Even people who naturally would be fully ambidextrous might form a weak handedness due to the current chiral environment of there being more right-handed tools than left-handed ones. Since ambidexterity is currently so rare, we won't be able to make the fraction of people who are ambidextrous increase as rapidly as those who are left-handed. There is an advantage in selecting for left-handed people over right-handed people. That's that once left-handedness is as common as right-handedness, the world will feel free to start producing both versions of each tool in equal proportions, which will keep up the full ambidexteiry of naturally ambidextrous people. That can be done by having those people who throw the ball really accurately when they do it with their left hand in the test more likely to pass the test. We should also be removing the natural selection against left-handedness by making a law that the proportion of copies of a tool that a factory proces in the left-handed version is not allowed to be lower than the fraction of people who are left-handed so that left-handers won't be stuck with having to get a right-handed copy.

The world is even easier when everybody is a fast skill learner with both hands for so many high motor skills because that enables restaurants to hire somebody who will be given many different cutting jobs in different areas of the restaurant each of which they must do with which ever hand the environment is set up to favor if they want to keep the job. For example, when somebody is first given a mushroom slicing job, they will gain skill really fast and be able to do the job with a different hand at different times depending on which area they do the job in. There should be some restaurants doing the huge bother of tracking down those very few such people now so that they can create evolutionary pressure for that fast skill gaining ability saving employers in future generations the trouble of having people not very good at the job. Once somebody has previous experience with such a job, they will be faster at gaining skill for for which ever of those jobs is set up to favor the opposite hand with the opposite hand in another restaurant. In fact, transfer of skill from a task to its mirror image with the other hand is a special case of the brain's ability to build up skill gaining shortcuts for new skills from practice with old ones. One of the partner finding challenges should be being randomly given a high skilled task that you only get 4(1/2) hours to practice from such a large number of tasks that you couldn't have possibly gotten any practice with all of them and then the tester should use a random generator do decide whether you have to do the task one way or the other mirror image way. For example, flipping a pancake on a frying pan only by jerking the handle with which ever hand you're asked to, freemounting a unicycle where you can't decide which foot starts off on top, going up a slight slope forwards on a rips-tic where you can't decide which foot is over the front wheel, and doing a golf drive on the first attempt at least 250 yards with which ever version of golf driver is randomly handed to you where each version has a 50% chance of being the version handed to you.

It's better to create evolutionary pressure for ambidexterity but if we're not going to do that, we should at least create evolutionary pressure for 50% of people to be left-handed. It's easier for right-handed people to be able to train their left hand to be skilled for the convenience of ambidexterity when evolution makes 50% of us left-handed than when evolution makes 12% of us left-handed because it removes the evolutionary pressure for a predetermined handedness making it easier for a right-handed person to choose to train their left hand to become ambidextrous. It allows restaurants restaurants to hire left-handers for a cutting board job in an area that favors the left hand and right-handers for a cutting board job in an area that favors the right hand because half of all cutting boards in any restaurant job will be in an area that favors the left hand. For example, if there's a wall on the left and a garbage can on the right, it's more favorable to cut the celery with your left hand so that you can throw away the bad end with your right hand not wasting job time putting the knife down to pick up the bad end. When the job has a celery cutting area like that, they should only require somebody to be able to do the job with their left hand, not require them to be left-handed. Having only 50% of people right-handed also solves the problem of people bumping elbows at the dinner table if we use linear tables with people on one side eating with their right hand and those on the other side eating with their left hand and having the cutlery laid out as such. Also making it easier for people on one side to reach a salt shaker with their right hand automatically makes it easier for those on the other side to reach one with their left hand. It also enables schools to save desk space and fit more people into the classroom by having 2-person desks that are so small that the person in the seat on the left side does not have room to write with their right hand without bumping the other person with their elbow even if the other person is also using their right hand.

To create that evolutionary change, one of the partner finding challenges should be taking a chiral tool and using it, where the number of available copies is the same as the number of people currently doing the challenge, which the fraction of copies that are left-handed a tiny bit more than the fraction of left-handers in the population, leaving a small fraction of right-handers stuck with a left-handed version. That fraction has to be small in order to not lose support for eugenics. Men who can flip a pancake on a frying pan with their left hand only by jerking the handle should have the option of donating a large number of sperm to grow a zygote in vitro. Elementary schools should start having those 2-person desks and purposefully ordering 2 versions of scissors that are mirror images of each other and have half of them be the left-handed version and not order very many more pairs of scissors than the number of students in the school and then it will finally be right-handed people competing for right-handed scissors and for seats on the right side of the desk having to suck up using left-handed scissors and not the other way around. To make sure right handed people don't use left-handed scissors with their right hand, the school should purposely order a type of scissors that will fail to cut if used with the opposite hand than it's designed for. Left-handed kids and those right-handed kids who failed to win a seat on the right side of the desk from competing should be taught to mirror write with their left hand. If they persist in using their right hand to write, the school should restrain their right hand by putting their right hand in a wire frame glove and locking it shut until the school day is over. That way, the kid will start developing skill in their left hand until they eventually become left-handed.

Evolution of smartness

A star puzzle should get invented and we should select for those who can look at it, blind fold themselves and then solve it in the bare minimum possible number of moves all within 4 minutes at any age past reproduction age. That way, people will evolve to build up smartness with time up to a huge extent. It's like a Rubik's cube except that it's a sphere with triangular and pentagonal faces that can slide against each other as shown in Figure 1. People whose ascendants didn't fail the test after they were born can choose when to use that program to help them find a partner but their assigned day for that part of the test can occur any time after they choose to use that program. In that part of the test, the original position of the puzzle should be random among all possible arrangements that can be solved. Unlike the Rubik's cube, the design on the solved state could be something like an abstract picture that totally ignores the lines where all pieces have asymmetry and are not identical to another piece or its mirror image. Half of all star puzzles produced should have one design on them and the other half should have the mirror image of that design. Maybe the orientation of the design compared to the pieces should be random, so that one star puzzle is not necessarily the same as another star puzzle or its mirror image.
XT_Icosa_F1_Sphere_PPT.jpg
Figure 1: Star puzzle Source:http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/oaktree/butterfly/backpages/icosa_great_circles.htm

We should do what ever we can to research how to gradually get society functioning in such a way that gives selective pressure for smartness in the real world. There should be people keeping track of other people doing certain useful types of tasks that are hard to figure out how to do and those people who do things that are the hardest to figure out how to do, especially those that require a huge amount of past knowledge to figure it out from, should be more likely to be counted as passing the smartness part of the test even though the smartness that was tested was not done in the test. It's not possible for testing only of what's done in the test to create evolutionary pressure for the same type of smartness. Calculators that eliminate the need to do mental computation should also gradually get sold less and less until they don't get sold at all. Also, cash registers should use unvigesimal and should not do the adding for you either and instead there should be shift supervisors seeing if the cashier can add and subtract in their head properly. There should also only be coins whose value is that of a penny × a power of 2 because that reduces the number of coins in change.

The chemistry careers that deal with formulae such as the density of water as a function of temperature should be using exact formulae, not approximate ones. I know the exact formula won't be an elementray function but that doesn't mean nobody is able to be taught how to apply that function to a randomly generated value given up to 5 unvigesimal decimal places because that's all that's needed to make a super accurate calculation. Their task should be to be told how many univigesimal decimal places they are to express the result in then be given a randomly generated number assuming its a tapered number and not a rounded one then then output the ends point of an interval where the lower end point is the greatest lower bound that terminates after that number of decimal places and the upper end point is the least upper bound that terminates after that number of decimal places. Those people should even be required to apply those functions in their mind and not using a computing device. That would create evolutionary pressure for smartness because somebody without a well paid job is less likely to have 3 kids than somebody with one. To create evolutionary pressure for even higher smartness, they should only hire those people who show that they can memorize a randomly generated unvigesimal number tapered to 44 decimal places without forgetting and relearning any digits then compute the continuous tetration of it to the base 2 mentally like in Hyperschooling.

Alternatively, people can also evolve to be really smart through extremely weak selection to be able to win a chess competition at any age past reproduction age that works as follows: you play with another human doing the test on a computer. Given your marks on the other tests, there's 1 chance in 1,000 less that they will not find you a partner if you lose and 1 chance in 2,000 less if you draw. The rules differ from real chess in the following ways. You can't resign or declare a draw. There's no 50 move rule. Each player has 30 seconds to make their first move before they forfeit the match and each time it becomes their turn, 30 seconds gets added to the amount of time they have to make a move in order to not forfeit. If the game doesn't end after 4.5 hours, it's a draw. The advantage in keeping the selection weak is that it will be highly subject to genetic drift creating a defect in the ability to supress connections irrelevant to playing chess so people will evolve to be hyperaware and able to become really smart at anything. With that selection, people are actually better off without strong selection to be able to compute continuous tetration in their mind as doing so will evolve them to supress other connections too much. After all, the ability to almost definitely be trained to do that will come with the trait that's selected for naturally.

Friday, 1 August 2014

Evolution of mobility

One of the things each person should be tested on is the unaided ability to walk up a flight of 4 stairs and anyone who can't do that should fail the test. Also if the person doing the test trips during the test then can't get up on their own, they should fail the test. There should be no exception to not being allowed to decide the assigned day is inconvenient and changing the day to take the test. On rare occasion somebody might be space travelling in no gravity when they get called to take the test the next day and will probably fail the test from having adapted to no gravity. However, if space travel becomes very common for everybody, the evolutionary pressure against adaption to no gravity will be stronger than the genetic drift for it and people not using their muscles will no longer make them lose them and they will be really easily able to function in 1 G immediately after a prolonged period in 0 G. That evolutionary change would also make it no longer possible for anyone to make themself really strong by training their muscles which is a good thing because it means they can't fight another person without them defending themself.

Evolution of hearing

One of the things tested in the test for deciding whether someone is allowed 2 or 3 kids should be testing how small an electrical spark they can hear while blindfolded where they show a sign of hearing it by reacting to hearing it. The hearing ability, at least for high hearing, can be further improved  by creating evolutionary pressure for clear Eustachian tubes because a difference in pressure between both sides of the ear drums reduces the amount of high frequency vibration of them in response to sound. Temperature changes of the air are creating a pressure differnce at the eardrum all the time. There's also a disadvantage in having clear Eustachian tubes which is that the clearer somebody's Eustachian tubes are, the more easily water can go into the inner ear when swimming underwater, especially when very deep with high pressure. That problem can be solved by creating evolutionary pressure for people to be able consciously control their nose muscles to hole their breath by closing their nostrils instead of by closing the valve people close to make more air come out of their mouth when playing a wind instrument. The test should test how much of the way people can close their own nostrils without touching them with their hands.

We should also track down those men who are the very best at how much of the way they can close their nose without touching it and allow them to donate sperm to millions of women who want to raise children on their own because once evolution has made some people able to completely close their nostrils, the next evolutionary change of clear Eustachian tubes will follow naturally for people from deep freediving tribes. Somebody should invent a spear gun that people can wear around their neck instead of holding in their hand while freediving for fish because that way, they will be able to swim more efficiently. Also, somebody should invent a type of googles that will turn each set of parallel light rays in the water into parallel light rays going in the same direction in air but spaced further apart just before they enter the eyes so that the evolutionary pressure for underwater vision with those googles won't resist the evolutionary pressure for vision working in the way described in the previous post. Fortunately, the fish to be caught are much bigger than pupil size preventing evolutionary pressure of super sharp underwater vision which would sacrifice super sharp air vision.

That evolutionary change doesn't just improve hearing. It also prevents feeling a pressure change in the ears with height as well as removing the runny nose caused by the common so that people no longer care if they have the common cold and the only symptom of it being having slightly weaker muscles. Another thing that would create evolutionary pressure for clear Eustachian tubes once evolution of the ability to close nostrils has already occurred is that the clearer their Eustachian tubes are, the less their ears will hurt if they dive to the ocean floor which is sometimes 20 m deep where they are, so the more likely they are to dive that deep so the less likely they are to starve to death from not catching enough fish.

It would be even better if we could select for people who any time after reproduction age can freedive through ice cold water to what ever depth will have them evolve to take 4 minutes to dive to and return from that depth and then do it again and again and then come out appearing very dark on an infrared camera for quite a while. That's because people would even evolve the ability to hold their breath for 4 minutes while moving because a certain swimming speed minimizes the amount of oxygen consumed for distance, to thrive in a wide range of temperatures, to not feel pressure changes in their ears or the bends with height at all, and to grow until reproduction age so that people below reproduction age will be shorter than those at and above reproduction age because a certain tall height will be evolutionary stable for people past reproduction age because being bigger consumes less oxygen per body mass per distance but being smaller is better for not having too much weight to support when you're walking. If only there was a way to make that evolutionary change without some people dying in the process.

Wednesday, 30 July 2014

Evolution of vision

If you were a woman who naturally had super horrible vision and were so immobile that you struggle to move, would you make the descision to have no kids before you become too old to have some in exchange for super high vision and mobility? I think people should be given challenges on partner finding sites to give people with less desirable traits a lower chance of reproduction. Don't think of the purpose of this as being to treat people with lower vision worse; think of the purpose as being to cure the vision problems of people in future generations. Keeping the evolutionary pressure of vision zero really would make a much bigger difference to distant future generations than to the generation one away. The number of people in distant future generations this evolutionary change would prevent from suffering huge problems from genetic drift like total immobility will be much smaller than the number of people who will do a smaller amount of suffering from not finding a partner. The law orders employers to pay their employees minimum wage and people can be ordered to have their house torn down to straighten a highway. Since the law orders already existing people around in a harmful way to benefit other already existing people, why should it not do the same to benefit people who will exist? To make sure society doesn't ever lose support for eugenics and discontinue it, we should make sure that the fraction of the population that can't find a partner never exceeds 5%. That fraction might be made lower in distant future when a much smaller fraction of people have highly undesirable traits.

This is how the evolutionary change should get made: each person will be randomly assigned a time some time in their life to take a test showing how good their vision is and not taking the test on the assigned day should count as failing the test to avoid evolutionary pressure to not take the test. The test would actually test other desirable traits as well. Already eixisting partner finding sites should disappear and be replaced by a government made partner finding site that gives people challenges they must beat in order to find a partner. The better you are your parents did on the vision part of the test, the less hard the partner finding challenge will be. By doing it that way, there will also be evolutionary pressure for good vision in old age. If somebody refuses to not wear glasses during the test, it will be an absolute no no for the site finding them a partner. Actually, each person should not know until 1 day before their assigned day which day that is because otherwise, people might evolve to go out of their way to do something to make sure they have really good vision near the time of the test instead of evolutionary pressure to have really good vision their whole life. In fact their assigned day should not even be decided ahead and should occur when a random generator just happens to assign a time 1 day away to them. If somebody dies of old age before their randomly assigned time to take the test, it should be treated like failing the test.

Also, anyone who was allowed 3 kids one of which died from a disease or in an accident should not be allowed to have a new 3rd kid to replace them because that would remove the evolutionary pressure not to die. Following that rule would evolve babies not to die easily in India anymore. The only people who should not be permitted to have any kids at all are the descendants of those people who had more kids than they're allowed because otherwise there will be strong evolutionary pressure for people to have more kids than they're allowed causing a really high population and then people will gradually evolve to fight each other for food in a deadly fight. Doing this would also evolve happier men in future generations because they won't wish their wife wanted sex more often then she does. After all, having more kids than you're allowed is a purposeful breaking the rules.

Here are the aspects of vision there should be evolutionary pressure for and how it should be done:
  • good focusing at the back of the eyeball for all distances past a certain distance. There should actually be 2 tasks for testing this, one for how small relative size words you can read and one for how small absolute size you can read. The latter should be done by giving somebody a smooth sphere with a 4 letter word on it and they may hold it at what ever distance from their eyes they want. It turns out that after the evolutionay change, the age will have no effect on the smallest absolute size that can be read dispite the fact that very young kids have small eyeballs because a smaller eyeball can fit fewer cone cells on the retina but a smaller eyeball can also focus at a closer distance. The former should be done by restraining the head and then randomly generating a number between 9/8 and approximately average closest focusing distance for age/50 m then dividing average closest focusing distance for age by that number to use as the picked distance then randomly generating another number between 0 and 1 and setting the size of the word to min(picked distance, 1 m) * 2-second randomly generated number then keeping on halving the size of the randomly generated 4 letter string to be read until the subject can't read it anymore.
  • good focusing everywhere on the retina for infinite distances. What's the point in good focusing in the periphery without a brain that can make use of it by having really good field vision? An image that simulates an infinitely far away image should be projected into the eyes, possibly by reflecting a pattern similar to a condensation pattern on a flat surface off a finite number of curved mirrors if that's even mathematically possible. The subject should first be shown a blown up random small part of the image with the number of times the area of a condensation droplet the blown up picture is being linearly proportional to the log of the reciprocal of the size of the condensation droplets in the image than they should be shown the whole image and be asked to find the spot in the image where the blown up part of the image they saw earlier is. The eyes can be forced to lock onto one part of the image by projecting a really small random 4 letter string that they're tested on knowing when ever it changes into another 4 letter string.
  • addition of a 4th cone cell type that detects very near ultraviolet light that's just as close to violet as the other 3 cone cells are to each other in the logarithm of which wavelength they respond to and removal of rods cells. Stimulation of only blue cone cells actually makes people see violet, not blue. The confusion comes from the fact that no wavelength of light stimulates only one type of cone cell. Also, stimulation of only red cone cells makes us see red but we see the wavelength red cones most strongly respond to as yellowish green because it also stimulates green cone cells and green cone cells have a much taller sensitivity curve than red cone cells. Green cone cells respond even more strongly to green light which is what they're most sensitive to.
  • merging of all 4 cone cell types into a single cell type that distinguishes 4 primary colors
  • really small cone cell size
  • arrangement of cone cells into domains each of which has a hexagonal array of cone cells because of noneuclidian geometry of the retina. The size of the domains should be about cube root of eyeball size2 * cone cell size.
  • domains are arranged the same way in both eyes and in each domain, the domain in the same position in the other eyes has its cone cells arranged in the same orientation and within the domain cone cells are divided into 3 groups in such a way that within each group, the cone cells in that group are arranged in a hexagonal array with square root of 3 times the spacing between cone cells within the group as that between cone cells within the domain and half the spaces between cone cells are filled in with cone cells from the other eye and each cone cells corresponds to a cone cell of the other eye in one of the holes right beside it with the direction off from it depending on which of the 3 groups that cone cell is in. Another use in creating this evolutionary pressure is that it will create evolutionary pressure for super perfect eye allignment in the very centre of vision automatically because perfect eye alignment makes the cone cells in one eye at the centre of vision be in retinal image positions as far away from the retinal image positions of the cone cells of the other eye as possible maximizing visual acuity which there will already be evolutionary pressure for.
  • high visual accuity in all light intensities from that of the sunlight to 2-22 times that intensity. Furthermore, during the testing of that trait. A random real number between 0 and 1 should get generated then the intensity of the sunlight * 2-that number, half that intensity, and so on until 2-21 times that intensity should all be tested all in a row and the score on the part of the test testing that should be linearly proportional to the average of the log of the visual accuity for all 22 of those those intensities tested. To create evolutionary pressure for eyes to quickly adapt from light to dark and vice versa, it should be random which order all 22 of those intensities are tested in. After being tested on all 22 of those light intensities, a number x from 1 to 22 should be randomly picked and they should be asked, 'for which number y was intensity of the sunlight * 21 - y - that number, used on the xth intensity to be tested?' and 'Which 4 letter string was used on that attempt?' to create evolutionary pressure for memory. This evolutionary pressure also has the advantage of people not having a tendency disfavor the center of vision for seeing in the dark. In addition to that, the evolutionary change in the last bullet point combined with perfect eye allignment means the center of vision will always have the least clustering of cones cell in one eye on the retinal image with cone cells in the other eye completely eliminating the tendency to disfavor the center of vision.
  • absence of dispersion in the eyeball. Evolution would probably make that change by having the eye lens be made of very thin alternating layers of 2 substances for the high refractive index of one to cancel out the dispersion of the other. That evolutionary change should be made by showing the person doing the test a random 4 letter string where each letter is a monochromatic light source of random wavelength in the visible region and seeing how small a 4 letter string they can read. To make the dispersion finish evolving to disappear, there should be evolutionary pressure against the need for a directional accomodation stimulus. Normally the eye can tell the difference between an image focused in front of the retina and an image focused behind the retina by which of red or ultraviolet light is more out of focus. Another possible more complex way of telling whether an image is focused in front of or behind the retina is by knowing both the derivative of the shape of the lens and the derivative of the amount of blurriness with respect to time and using that to tell whether the image is focused in front of or behind the retina and adjust the shape of the eye lens, though the accomodation response would actually be an unconscious process. Preventing the evolutionary advantage of having a slight bit of dispersion in the eyes can be done by having one of the times somebody is tested on how small a 4 letter string they can read be when the room is lit by monochromatic light where having the ability to use dispersion for accomodation is an impossibility, and that will help people have even better vision from not having dispersion in their eyes.
  • reduction of movement blur. That can be done by giving evolutionary pressure for counting whether a falling maple key spun an odd or even number of times, that is, after it lands, put it back in its original orientation in such a way that the quaternion corresponding to its orientation is the same one as it started at, not the negative of it.
  • ability to tell very precisely where on the retina each part of an image is landing. That result would probably cause another result of seeing what a shape is with very high accuracy.
  • no need to blink from dry eyes. People's eyeballs should be dry all the time only needing to blink when something is moving fast towards the eyes. That prevents people from making themselves not see every few seconds when they blink. The tear fluid in front of the cornea is also slightly changing shape all the time blurring vision a tiny amount. The cornea needs oxygen and it needs to be wet to absorb oxygen from the air but I think it's possible for the cornea to evolve to instead do anaerobic respiration. That can be done by having people do the vision part of the test with a breathing tube where the air in the room over the generations gradually starts being replaced with helium until evolution totally stops the need for eyes to receive oxygen from the air. In addition to that because the cornea will no longer respire like a frog's skin, people will no longer suffer the pain of accidently letting the cornea get dry or the extreme pain of onion juice squirted onto the cornea.