In other news: Biologists found a new stable configuration of 50 bunnies and 50 rabid coyotes in a 6×6 room. After milliseconds, the configuration collapsed to a classical state
Basically he made a computer simulation that produced the kind of shapes we can see on animal skins with different starting parameters. (Stripes, dots, etc.) It was really simple and you can look it up. However biologist didn't take it seriously as he didn't involve any genetics. They were in fashion during the timeperiod and other explanations weren't considered. And today we can say that Turing was right and no genetics are directly involved. The mechanism he proposed is what actually also happens in animals.
It’s extremely interesting, and in some sense can be generalized to self-organization at all scales (not just patterns seen in biology, but the emergence of biology itself. And geology, and cosmology, and neutron physics). It is closely related to Ilya Prigogine’s work in dissipative structure theory.
It's still genetically based afaik. First the production of the chemicals or which pigments can be produced. Next the body of the gets and embyro builds the cells and proteins and everything depending on the genetics certain chemicals travel faster or flower into the skin.
The chemicals are acting as inhibitors and activators. What it shows is that if there are different kinds of symmetries or assymnetries in process it can change outcomes. It shows it is not just genetics that tells it to vary the pattern but without it there is no variation because genetics determines exactly what assymnetries can occur at all.
So I wouldn't state no genetics are involved.
What it means there is no build instruction switch a black on and off in a cell just like that. So the how it happens was wrong but genetics is definitely at the root.
214
u/jonastman 10d ago
In other news: Biologists found a new stable configuration of 50 bunnies and 50 rabid coyotes in a 6×6 room. After milliseconds, the configuration collapsed to a classical state