Here is a segment that I lifted from Hayashi 2006. While randomizing about 30% of the protein which infected its target was able to get some activity after 20 trials Hayashi estimated 10^77 trials to find the wild type. This is very similar to your discussion.Experimental Rugged Fitness Landscape in Protein Sequence Space
The question remains regarding how large a population is required to reach the fitness of the wild-type phage. The relative fitness of the wild-type phage, or rather the native D2 domain, is almost equivalent to the global peak of the fitness landscape. By extrapolation, we estimated that adaptive walking requires a library size of 1070 with 35 substitutions to reach comparable fitness. Such a huge search is impractical and implies that evolution of the wild-type phage must have involved not only random substitutions but also other mechanisms, such as homologous recombination. Recombination among neutral or surviving entities may suppress negative mutations and thus escape from mutation-selection-drift balance.
Would one of the many excellent evolutionary scientists engage @Faizal_Ali here. He is new here and we should not treat him like a professor would an undergraduate. @Art@NLENTS can you jump in here. Thanks
I’m not asking you to write a book. Just some specific reference to the findings you have made in this “active area of research”. I don’t understand why that is not a reasonable request. Usually, scientists won’t stop talking about their research, even if you want them to!
Thanks for the request, but I have a reasonable understanding of the evolutionary explanations for such adaptive traits in biology that give the appearance of having been “designed.” I am, however, admittedly quite ignorant of the recent finding by ID scientists, in what we have been reassured by one of the leading figures in that field is an “active areas of research.” Since I am not aware of a single scrap of such research, it must be a result of my ignorance. I suppose it is possible that evolutionary scientists might be aware of this research. But wouldn’t it be better coming from someone in the field of ID? That how it would seem to me, anyway.
Perhaps you misunderstood. When I said it was an active area of research, I meant it was an active area of research in the scientific community as a whole. We are not engaged in this research. But we are interested in it.