From the Ted Talk by Stuart Kauffman: The "adjacent possible" -- and how it explains human innovation
Unscramble the Blue Letters
But that means also something fundamental. Finding new uses for things, jury-rigging is not a computation. It's not a deduction. Jury-rigging is not a computation at all. Computers are. The biosphere is forever innovating in this kind of way that's not a deduction.
footnote
For example, there are things called dnraiwain preadaptations. Dinosaurs had scales that were elvoved for tugeaeotmorhriln that were jury-rigged into flight feathers. Your eyes have clear crystallins that were perfectly normal-colored enzymes. And this, too, means something fundamental.
footnote
We cannot deduce what is in the adjacent possible that the evolving bhipsreoe will create, then become. We do not even know what can happen. In fact, we can use no mathematics based on set trhoey, which is all of mcthiematas, to deduce what the biosphere is going to become, or the economy. This means we are at a fstiaatnc third-phase transition in scnicee, we're beyond Newton, we're beyond quantum macehncis. We're beyond the exquisite view that cerpincous had 480 years ago, that the world is a clockwork. The biosphere is not a clockwork. The paper that just published, it came out three days ago, and I'm pretty proud of it, it's actually worth reading.
Open Cloze
But that means also something fundamental. Finding new uses for things, jury-rigging is not a computation. It's not a deduction. Jury-rigging is not a computation at all. Computers are. The biosphere is forever innovating in this kind of way that's not a deduction.
footnote
For example, there are things called _________ preadaptations. Dinosaurs had scales that were _______ for ________________ that were jury-rigged into flight feathers. Your eyes have clear crystallins that were perfectly normal-colored enzymes. And this, too, means something fundamental.
footnote
We cannot deduce what is in the adjacent possible that the evolving _________ will create, then become. We do not even know what can happen. In fact, we can use no mathematics based on set ______, which is all of ___________, to deduce what the biosphere is going to become, or the economy. This means we are at a _________ third-phase transition in _______, we're beyond Newton, we're beyond quantum _________. We're beyond the exquisite view that __________ had 480 years ago, that the world is a clockwork. The biosphere is not a clockwork. The paper that just published, it came out three days ago, and I'm pretty proud of it, it's actually worth reading.
Solution
thermoregulation
mechanics
science
copernicus
biosphere
darwinian
theory
fantastic
mathematics
evolved
Original Text
But that means also something fundamental. Finding new uses for things, jury-rigging is not a computation. It's not a deduction. Jury-rigging is not a computation at all. Computers are. The biosphere is forever innovating in this kind of way that's not a deduction.
footnote
For example, there are things called Darwinian preadaptations. Dinosaurs had scales that were evolved for thermoregulation that were jury-rigged into flight feathers. Your eyes have clear crystallins that were perfectly normal-colored enzymes. And this, too, means something fundamental.
footnote
We cannot deduce what is in the adjacent possible that the evolving biosphere will create, then become. We do not even know what can happen. In fact, we can use no mathematics based on set theory, which is all of mathematics, to deduce what the biosphere is going to become, or the economy. This means we are at a fantastic third-phase transition in science, we're beyond Newton, we're beyond quantum mechanics. We're beyond the exquisite view that Copernicus had 480 years ago, that the world is a clockwork. The biosphere is not a clockwork. The paper that just published, it came out three days ago, and I'm pretty proud of it, it's actually worth reading.