Jump to content


Photo

Survival Of The Florid Screensaver


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 mutamike

mutamike

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 10 posts

Posted 25 February 2009 - 06:11 PM

This is a simple simulation of how natural selection works. There are just two species - flowers and butterflies. Each species comes in three colours. Each butterfly has larvae that do best when they eat flowers of it own colour. If flowers of one colour predominate (say red), butterflies of that colour will come to predominate too - for a while. The heavy predation will reduce the size of the red flower population.The red butterfly population will also fall as their host plants start to disappear. The butterfly population has to adapt or go extinct. A mutant butterflies of a different colour will now have an advantage and should start spreading. The populations of butterflies and flowers cycle through the colours as they try to keep up with each other. To keep things simple I have made both butterflies and flowers asexual. The brightness of their colour indicates how much energy they have stored. As in nature, extinction can occur. When this happens environment is reseeded with flowers and butterflies.



http://home.metroweb..._sgg/m2ma_1.htm

Enjoy!

mutamike
  • 0

#2 CompanionCube

CompanionCube

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 220 posts

Posted 01 March 2009 - 12:59 AM

Very good, terrible graphics, but very good. I enjoyed watching it. 7/10.
  • 0

#3 makerofthegames

makerofthegames

    TV's busboy

  • GMC Member
  • 7310 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 01 March 2009 - 09:39 AM

Well, this doesn't have anything to do with natural selection, and in nature, extinction almost never occurs, or never occurs unless we do something.

But I like it.

Edited by makerofthegames, 01 March 2009 - 09:41 AM.

  • 0

#4 CompanionCube

CompanionCube

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 220 posts

Posted 01 March 2009 - 11:45 PM

Ha ha, have some human object interfering with it and running around protesting.
  • 0

#5 mutamike

mutamike

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 10 posts

Posted 04 March 2009 - 02:01 PM

Well, this doesn't have anything to do with natural selection, and in nature, extinction almost never occurs, or never occurs unless we do something.

But I like it.


Actually it does. Differential survival and reproduction plus inheritable variation gives you natural selection. Most species that have ever lived are extinct. Extinction usually occurs. Humans are speeding up the process.

mutamike
  • 0

#6 makerofthegames

makerofthegames

    TV's busboy

  • GMC Member
  • 7310 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 04 March 2009 - 10:38 PM

I was under the impression the term "natural selection" is when animals kill other animals to lessen the amount of that other animal there (not onpurpous, in their mind they are getting food), and if they stopped that animal would be too plentiful.

Or did you think it meant something else?
  • 0

#7 mutamike

mutamike

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 10 posts

Posted 05 March 2009 - 06:20 AM

You sort of have the idea. It does not have to be animals - and abiotic factors can also limit populations.

mutamike
  • 0

#8 pick yer poison

pick yer poison

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 13 posts

Posted 04 May 2009 - 10:05 PM

I was under the impression the term "natural selection" is when animals kill other animals to lessen the amount of that other animal there (not onpurpous, in their mind they are getting food), and if they stopped that animal would be too plentiful.

Or did you think it meant something else?


Natural selection refers to only one thing, and you're not even close to it.

Natural selection refers to when a favorable mutation in a gene occurs, for example an animal is born with longer than usual legs. Now let's say that a predator begins chasing the animals. The one with the longer legs can run faster, and will have a better chance of surviving, and in turn reproducing, thus passing on the better genes to its descendants, who will repeat the process. The new gene was chosen over the old gene by natural selection.
  • 0

#9 makerofthegames

makerofthegames

    TV's busboy

  • GMC Member
  • 7310 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 05 May 2009 - 08:16 PM

Not even close? I beg to differ.

http://en.wikipedia....tural_Selection

I might have said a couple things wrong, but what you said, or atleast, what this said isn't far from what I said.

Edited by makerofthegames, 05 May 2009 - 08:18 PM.

  • 0

#10 pick yer poison

pick yer poison

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 13 posts

Posted 05 May 2009 - 09:03 PM

Not even close? I beg to differ.

http://en.wikipedia....tural_Selection

Two words for you:

EPIC. FAIL.

Did you even read the article? Allow me to quote directly from it:

A rabbit which runs faster than others may be more likely to escape from predators, and an algae which is more efficient at extracting the energy from sunlight will grow faster. Individuals that have better odds for survival also have better odds for reproduction.

Nowhere in there does it say anything about what you said.

Edited by pick yer poison, 05 May 2009 - 09:04 PM.

  • 0

#11 makerofthegames

makerofthegames

    TV's busboy

  • GMC Member
  • 7310 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 05 May 2009 - 09:32 PM

Epic fail? Excuse me? What is that suppose to mean?

means that some individuals will survive better than others in their current environment. For example, the peppered moth exists in both light and dark colors in the United Kingdom, but during the industrial revolution many of the trees on which the moths rested became blackened by soot, giving the dark-colored moths an advantage in hiding from predators. This gave dark-colored moths a better chance of surviving to produce dark-colored offspring, and in just a few generations the majority of the moths were dark.


Thus the non dark moths were killed off by other animals because they were easier to see.

Either way, please stop this flame war you are trying to start. It doesn't get anywhere, I don't even know you, you don't even know me.

Edited by makerofthegames, 05 May 2009 - 09:33 PM.

  • 0

#12 pick yer poison

pick yer poison

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 13 posts

Posted 05 May 2009 - 09:42 PM

means that some individuals will survive better than others in their current environment. For example, the peppered moth exists in both light and dark colors in the United Kingdom, but during the industrial revolution many of the trees on which the moths rested became blackened by soot, giving the dark-colored moths an advantage in hiding from predators. This gave dark-colored moths a better chance of surviving to produce dark-colored offspring, and in just a few generations the majority of the moths were dark.


Thus the non dark moths were killed off by other animals because they were easier to see.

You're making a different point than you were before. Natural selection is what you just refered to--not the vague "animals killing off other animals" that you began with.

Either way, please stop this flame war you are trying to start. It doesn't get anywhere, I don't even know you, you don't even know me.

Frankly, I should have seen the whole "flame war" thing coming; things dissolve into this kind of accusation often on the Internet. I'm just making a valid point and backing it up, and accusing me of trying to start a flame war (which is repeated insults between two or more individuals) is pointless. Go ahead, think I'm a big fat jerk; you may, in some way, be right. But I have a valid point, and I plan to prove it.

Edited by pick yer poison, 05 May 2009 - 09:43 PM.

  • 0

#13 Sulfuric

Sulfuric

    Nintendo Worshiper

  • New Member
  • 1353 posts

Posted 01 August 2009 - 03:39 AM

means that some individuals will survive better than others in their current environment. For example, the peppered moth exists in both light and dark colors in the United Kingdom, but during the industrial revolution many of the trees on which the moths rested became blackened by soot, giving the dark-colored moths an advantage in hiding from predators. This gave dark-colored moths a better chance of surviving to produce dark-colored offspring, and in just a few generations the majority of the moths were dark.


Thus the non dark moths were killed off by other animals because they were easier to see.

You're making a different point than you were before. Natural selection is what you just refered to--not the vague "animals killing off other animals" that you began with.

Either way, please stop this flame war you are trying to start. It doesn't get anywhere, I don't even know you, you don't even know me.

Frankly, I should have seen the whole "flame war" thing coming; things dissolve into this kind of accusation often on the Internet. I'm just making a valid point and backing it up, and accusing me of trying to start a flame war (which is repeated insults between two or more individuals) is pointless. Go ahead, think I'm a big fat jerk; you may, in some way, be right. But I have a valid point, and I plan to prove it.

I'm sorry Pick Yer Poison, but I believe your tone has been harsh enough that I'd consider you trying to start a flame war. Maybe not a flame war, but you definitely want makerofthegames to feel wrong in every way possible.

Anyway, I liked this, and I understand what's going on, but it's hard to tell who's doing what, as the graphics are pretty bad. What are the little thin things?

Also, most people just refer to Natural Selection as the survival of the fittest. Granted, this means genetic mutation, but in reality, it's just the survival of the fit enough. Anyways, nice little simulation. It is indeed fun to watch, but I don't know if it would "save your screen." It's pretty bright and doesn't move much (the background and such). The ones on vista are worse though, so I doubt it matters.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users