Cellular evolution concept/questions

Subject: Re: Cellular evolution concept/questions Wed Nov 02, 2011 2:27 pm

We may not need editors, but we will need modifiable defined parts, coloration, bone structure, basically everything the editor is used for modifying will have to be modifiable anyway, except it is modified by a program (auto-evo), not the player. All the editor is is an interface for the code... I'm pretty sure it is, anyway.

Subject: Re: Cellular evolution concept/questions Wed Nov 02, 2011 2:36 pm

The Uteen wrote:: We may not need editors, but we will need modifiable defined parts, coloration, bone structure, basically everything the editor is used for modifying will have to be modifiable anyway, except it is modified by a program (auto-evo), not the player. All the editor is is an interface for the code... I'm pretty sure it is, anyway.

so why even to put editor if we got auto - evo?

Subject: Re: Cellular evolution concept/questions Wed Nov 02, 2011 3:47 pm

roadkillguy wrote:: I don't want to write an editor. I want to write a creature stage. That said, I'll probably write a planet renderer first, and then fish, and then walking Belgium.

Honestly, editors seem kinda lame to me. This isn't spore, it's a simulation.

The issue though, is that our evolution system, the core of the game, is based on the inclusion of an intricate but well-balanced organism editor.

Subject: Re: Cellular evolution concept/questions Wed Nov 02, 2011 5:44 pm

ido66667 wrote:

The Uteen wrote:: We may not need editors, but we will need modifiable defined parts, coloration, bone structure, basically everything the editor is used for modifying will have to be modifiable anyway, except it is modified by a program (auto-evo), not the player. All the editor is is an interface for the code... I'm pretty sure it is, anyway.

so why even to put editor if we got auto - evo?

Because I want to play with it, and so does everyone else. Beyond that, it's a remarkably good way to organize systems in an animal. Our OE really helps classify what does what and how it does it.

Subject: Re: Cellular evolution concept/questions Wed Nov 02, 2011 6:00 pm

~sciocont wrote:

ido66667 wrote:: so why even to put editor if we got auto - evo?

Because I want to play with it, and so does everyone else. Beyond that, it's a remarkably good way to organize systems in an animal. Our OE really helps classify what does what and how it does it.

The OE is what auto-evo is based off of.

Subject: Re: Cellular evolution concept/questions Wed Nov 02, 2011 6:20 pm

~sciocont wrote:

ido66667 wrote:

The Uteen wrote:: We may not need editors, but we will need modifiable defined parts, coloration, bone structure, basically everything the editor is used for modifying will have to be modifiable anyway, except it is modified by a program (auto-evo), not the player. All the editor is is an interface for the code... I'm pretty sure it is, anyway.

so why even to put editor if we got auto - evo?

Because I want to play with it, and so does everyone else. Beyond that, it's a remarkably good way to organize systems in an animal. Our OE really helps classify what does what and how it does it.

And if we write an OE, then we can check out how things work by creating our own stuff before we turn auto-evo loose on the world without knowing what it produces. And we can play with the advanced functions, and I can build you a coral reef or something.

^ Great promo material, that. ^

Newcomer Posts : 56 Reputation : 6 Join date : 2011-10-26

Alright I finally have a window of time to flesh out cellular auto evo.

So then for heat resistance, I think a cell would have about 3 degrees of heat to deal with, the first being normal heat, then hot, then extremely hot. (probably shouldn't worry about the cold, we're using earth chem after all, and most earth organisms have a much higher cold tolerance then heat tolerance.) Every time a cell population fails due to death by heat it will evolve to be tolerant of the next heat level. If it has thermoplasts and is starving, then it will also become more tolerant to heat.

sounds alright?

Ph is a bit more tricky. (yes I know what that basically is (no pun intended) with more H+ atoms a solution is more acidic, with more OH- molecules a solution is more basic.) If a cell has a stronger resistance to acidity I would assume it would have a weaker resistance to basicness (due to buffers and such) but I simply don't know. So if I could get a quick answer on that it'd be great.

Anyways, xells would adapt to these acidic and basic solutions the same way they would heat, witch means there would be 5 levels of Ph:
Extremely acidic, acidic, neutral, basic, extremely basic.
Works?

Edit: Also if my internet research h is right, cells with cell walls can only move with cilia on the exterior of that wall right?

Also could a cell have multiple methods of movement, E.G: With Cilia and a Flagellum? If so how many methods of moment can one cell have at a time, and/or which ones can be put together if any?

Subject: Re: Cellular evolution concept/questions Mon Nov 07, 2011 1:44 am

I have a small correction - we are going to use actual pH from 0 to 14 as well as temperature values in our maps. Instead of levels, cells should be tolerant to a certain range of pH (say 5-9 from the start) and then this range would change when the cell evolves (to 6-11 when it gains acid resistance). The same would apply for temperature.

Subject: Re: Cellular evolution concept/questions Mon Nov 07, 2011 6:00 pm

Commander Keen wrote:: I have a small correction - we are going to use actual pH from 0 to 14 as well as temperature values in our maps. Instead of levels, cells should be tolerant to a certain range of pH (say 5-9 from the start) and then this range would change when the cell evolves (to 6-11 when it gains acid resistance). The same would apply for temperature.

Lower pH-> more acidic
higher pH-> more basic
meaning pH from 0 to right under seven is acidic and pH from over 7 to 14 is basic.

Subject: Re: Cellular evolution concept/questions Mon Nov 07, 2011 6:02 pm

~sciocont wrote:: Lower pH-> more acidic
higher pH-> more basic
meaning pH from 0 to right under seven is acidic and pH from over 7 to 14 is basic.

All done.

Subject: Re: Cellular evolution concept/questions Mon Nov 07, 2011 7:10 pm

~sciocont wrote:

Commander Keen wrote:: I have a small correction - we are going to use actual pH from 0 to 14 as well as temperature values in our maps. Instead of levels, cells should be tolerant to a certain range of pH (say 5-9 from the start) and then this range would change when the cell evolves (to 6-11 when it gains acid resistance). The same would apply for temperature.

Lower pH-> more acidic
higher pH-> more basic
meaning pH from 0 to right under seven is acidic and pH from over 7 to 14 is basic.

There is no zero, but yes.
All right, how buffers work is... you have a weak acid or a weak base inside the cell or organism. Because of complicated chemistry stuff that me, scio, and maybe two or three other people on this forum care about at the moment, for every weak acid you have a conjugate base, and for every weak base, you have a conjugate acid.

(Note: A weak acid is from about 5-7, a weak base is about 7-9)

Since you have both an acid and a base in the solution, if you add a small amount of strong acid to it, the base reacts with it and neutralizes it. Same for a strong base.

Your buffer solutions come in PH's of about 4-10. If you have a more acidic buffer, it will be highly resistant to PH change by bases (be 'tolerant' of them) and if you have a more basic buffer, it will be highly resistant to PH changes by acids, or more 'tolerant' of them. Your acidic buffer will have some resistance to strong acids, but not as much as if the PH of the buffer were higher. Same principle applies to basic, or alkaline, buffers.

Blood's PH, for example, is approximately 7.4, so slightly basic or alkaline. It resists changes by acids or bases to a certain extent. Since it is made up of a heck of a lot of different buffers and self-adjustment systems it has a better than average ability to deal with acids and bases, but strong acids or bases could still change the PH dangerously.

Your basic cell would not be this complicated. It would have an organic acid or base (Ammino or otherwise) as an internal buffer and we can assign this internal buffer randomly between 4 and 10. Then, the cell's ability to venture into different areas would be determined by that number by the rules above.

The only way to evolve to a greater range of PH's is for the cell to aquire multiple buffers in the solution, which can for all intents and purposes be ascribed randomly, as I just did that math on my chem test and it's too belgiumming complicated for me, scio, or roadkill to deal with in something as simple as cell stage. I'll dig up an equation eventually.

/epic Calli Longpost.

Subject: Re: Cellular evolution concept/questions Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:02 pm

~sciocont wrote:: Lower pH-> more acidic
higher pH-> more basic
meaning pH from 0 to right under seven is acidic and pH from over 7 to 14 is basic.

Sorry, got it confused. My point was, instead of using levels like 'strongly acidic' and such, we should use actual pH values.

Newcomer Posts : 56 Reputation : 6 Join date : 2011-10-26

probibly'd work out better.

Newcomer Posts : 56 Reputation : 6 Join date : 2011-10-26

So I finally got around to working on the official document for this, I'm noticing a problem with movement parts, or more specifically witch ones are compatible with each other. As of right now the only way to improve a cell's movement would be to add parts, or to change movement.

So basically I can't think of a way to incorporate movement into cellular evolution , any ideas?
edit: sorry for double posting

Subject: Re: Cellular evolution concept/questions Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:04 pm

Dr_Chillgood wrote:: So I finally got around to working on the official document for this, I'm noticing a problem with movement parts, or more specifically witch ones are compatible with each other. As of right now the only way to improve a cell's movement would be to add parts, or to change movement.

So basically I can't think of a way to incorporate movement into cellular evolution , any ideas?
edit: sorry for double posting I think it's allowed after a while for bumping a post/thread. Even better if it's with new ideas.

I think, rather than movement improvements (which fail, it turns into a 'collect the set' sort of thing), the movement should be something to adapt. Certain styles could have different attributes, like:

Cilia: Good acceleration, good energy saver, but low top speed.
Flagellum: Good acceleration, good top speed, but bad energy saver.
Ameboid movement (the squishing one?): Good top speed, low acceleration, but no momentum, so bad energy saver if going long distances.

The orange means it could be either good or bad, depending on what is using it. It would be good for plant-eaters, which want to stay immobile to feed of the plant and only need to go short distances to get to the next, but bad for anything else. The cilia are good at saving energy energy, probably best for primary predator. The flagellum has a high top speed, which is good for secondary predators to catch up with the first.

Of course, these movement types will give an advantage to the predator, not the prey, so they will adapt. Then the predator will. It should result in adaptation to the predator, while being limited by the energy requirements.

There are probably other movement types, and I'm no expert on those, but it's an example.

Newcomer Posts : 56 Reputation : 6 Join date : 2011-10-26

Excellent Uteen, I will get to work on finishing the mutation sets.

edit: here's the updated chart:

Spoiler:

here's the document:

Spoiler:

Subject: Re: Cellular evolution concept/questions Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:31 pm

Maybe I missed something... But what happened to protocells?

This thread doesn't seem to have the answer - it's just discussion about whether or not to do top-down or not, then how ph and buffers work. Over three pages.

Newcomer Posts : 56 Reputation : 6 Join date : 2011-10-26

They act the same as they do in Redstar's original concept I'd imagine, if a population consumes enough of them then they receive a specific organelle. The problem is giving AI populations organelles through this method. Another few issues would be how large do we make these populations, where will they occur, and will they stay in that spot forever.

Subject: Re: Cellular evolution concept/questions Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:23 am

Dr_Chillgood wrote:: They act the same as they do in Redstar's original concept I'd imagine, if a population consumes enough of them then they receive a specific organelle. The problem is giving AI populations organelles through this method. Another few issues would be how large do we make these populations, where will they occur, and will they stay in that spot forever.

Ah, okay.

Subject: Re: Cellular evolution concept/questions Sat May 05, 2012 9:45 pm

If a cell have that wall thing ( green wall that plants cells have, don't know the translation) i am pretty sure that they can't move like a amoeba. It is too hard to move that way.

So in your equation a cell can't loose any parts? Except the PH resistence? I think that after a while some cells should stay the same, but some should make the glue upgrade. What will impede all cells from reaching glue and make normal cells instinc?

Without that questions I see the sistem working. I think I would make a cell with poison pilus and bioluminescence, staying still i could lure prey to my spikes and then eating them. With glue it would look quite awesome.

Subject: Re: Cellular evolution concept/questions Sat May 05, 2012 10:18 pm

Theusfilipe wrote:: If a cell have that wall thing ( green wall that plants cells have, don't know the translation) i am pretty sure that they can't move like a amoeba. It is too hard to move that way.

So in your equation a cell can't loose any parts? Except the PH resistence? I think that after a while some cells should stay the same, but some should make the glue upgrade. What will impede all cells from reaching glue and make normal cells instinc?

Without that questions I see the sistem working. I think I would make a cell with poison pilus and bioluminescence, staying still i could lure prey to my spikes and then eating them. With glue it would look quite awesome.

Amoeboid movement won't be possible with a cell wall. I think after endocytosis, you should be able to access the cell editor to switch things about, so yes, you could lose things. Gluing won't be inherently advantageous, and even if it was, as soon as you gather up enough cells, you needn't worry about tiny microorganisms anymore.

Subject: Re: Cellular evolution concept/questions Tue May 08, 2012 2:31 am

For the AI/auto-evo losing things, i think it should work like this:

Each part has a certain, high energy usage
If a cell dies from undernutrition, it can add a new nutrition part, but it can also remove a part randomly

There should be some rules to what a cell would lose so we don't get cells going round with no movement, so some rules like "if there are no chloroplasts or thermoplasts, the cell must have a movement organ" could be coded in.

Subject: Re: Cellular evolution concept/questions Tue May 08, 2012 5:16 pm

Holomanga wrote:

For the AI/auto-evo losing things, i think it should work like this:

Each part has a certain, high energy usage
If a cell dies from undernutrition, it can add a new nutrition part, but it can also remove a part randomly

There should be some rules to what a cell would lose so we don't get cells going round with no movement, so some rules like "if there are no chloroplasts or thermoplasts, the cell must have a movement organ" could be coded in.

Only thing I don't really like here is the "remove part randomly." There's a lot of parts a cell can't do without, so randomizing a loss is a fast track to extinction if, say, the Golgi gets chucket out. Also, not all movement abilities come from movement organs. Just ask your amoeba. I agree that there should only be the ability to lose non-essential organelles.

Oh, the second point: Not all energy uses in a cell are high. Different parts should have different energy uses: for example, Mitochondrions don't use energy so much as they process it.

Subject: Re: Cellular evolution concept/questions Tue May 08, 2012 5:56 pm

Mitochondria make energy. There's a huge advantage to having them, since it makes the energy received from food go up around 10-20 fold.

Newcomer Posts : 31 Reputation : 0 Join date : 2011-10-26

I know about organelles and stuff, all of them seem pretty important! how would you live without ribosomes or vacuoles or mitochondria? you would die very quickly.

» My Evolution System Concept
» Crash Course Evolution
» Evolution tree
» Loooong evolution
» Organism Evolution, how i think it will look