Theory Of Everything - The Chicken And The Egg Which First?)

[chrisdarroch]

Chris Langan; famous for his extraordinarily high IQ gives this answer to WHAT CAME FIRST. Contrary to popular belief, this age-old dilemma actually has a very straightforward solution.

[chrisdarroch]

First, you must specify what kind of egg you mean. If you mean any kind of egg, then the egg came first (because chickens were preceded on the evolutionary timeline by, for example, egg-laying fish, insects and dinosaurs). If, on the other hand, you mean a chicken egg, then you must specify whether this means (a) an egg laid by a chicken, (b) an egg containing a chicken, or (c) an egg laid by and containing a chicken.

[chrisdarroch]

In cases (a) and (c), the answer is by definition the chicken (if the answer were the egg, then the egg could not have been laid by a chicken).

In case (b), the usual and most interesting interpretation, the answer is the egg. This is because interspecies mutations separating a new species from its parent species occur in reproductive rather than somatic DNA, i.e. in germ cells rather than body cells.

[chrisdarroch]

(Germ cells include the sperm and egg cells produced in the reproductive tracts of male and female animals respectively.) Since germ cells are merely produced, but not somatically expressed, by the parents of the organism(s) whose biological information they encode, their expression begins in the egg containing the offspring. So the egg contains a chicken, but was not laid by a chicken. (See how easy that was?)

[WopWops]

Chicken

With in a chickens life time its more exposed to life changes than the egg, so as evolution goes the chicken develops more chicken traits which is passed onto the egg...my point is they may evolve into chickens with four legs and the only way to do that is exposure to the environment overtime.

[Simwillb]

You could also ask what came first Egg-istance....(sorry for the pun :P) or a void of emptyness?, but you'll get a leapfroging argument. Fore existance to be there would have to be at one point nothing....fore there to be nothing something must exist, OTHERWISE....nothing would have always been, if you get what i mean. To have something from nothing and vice-verca. but then im MAD :D PEACE, LOVE and some other human emotion.

[duckp86]

The answer to this question basically can be compared to another major question: Is there a god or not?

If you believe in creationism, then it is the chicken.

If you believe in Evolution, its the egg.

You can't answer that question without answering the first.

[protheory]

I know the genetics argument already but thanks for your comment. What I mean is that this is meant to be seen as a paradox, rather than a genetic question. Nonetheless it's interesting to discuss. Peace. Pro.

[56dlp]

I see....so without genetics it would be impossible to rationalize a solution....unless you use Protheory....which considers all possible solutions and concludes that a simultaneous event took place....where the chicken and the egg arrived at the same time....which does not answer the original question...."Which came first?"....but who cares....interresting idea

[protheory]

Yup, something like that. If we're talking on genetics then fair enough, a different answer is needed than the ones I'm giving. I've always seen this question as an opener for debate as you can't 'prove' it either way as it were. For what it's worth I'm up for a discussion on anything really, genetics included, it's all good imo

[protheory]

In fact yes you're correct, without genetics, (i.e. in paradoxical context) it's impossible to rationalise 100% chicken or egg as an answer. Pro theory offers simultaneous events in an attempt to (sort of) rationalise the question, or at least rationalise the theoretical outcome(s) of the question.

[56dlp]

This has been solved by scientists a couple of years ago....its not secret that the EGG came first....here is why....

It is genetically impossible for a bird/chicken that DID NOT come from an egg to have the ability to lay eggs....hence produce its own species via an egg....

Its all over the internet....with more complicated explanations than mine....but the general idea is....genetics does not change over time....a chicken is born genetically with the ability to lay eggs....problem solved

[147Jesusfreak]

The chicken came first. If the egg was by itself, no one would be ale to take care of it and it would die. And eggs are a product of reproduction, which requires an already existing living organism.

[neuropatico]

I think it's not a real paradox. All land creature (thus ancestors of chickens) came from sea creatures. We know fish lay eggs, soft jelly eggs..those eggs of sea creatures slowly harded as creatures came to land. You might say what came first the egg or the sea creature, and that's a good question. I'm no scientist, but I think it has someting to with cells dividing, where gradually that dividing starts takin place inside the organism, hell I dont know..dont really care.

[suffering44]

somethings dont have an answer that is included in the system like liers paradox. We have tried the two cases, chicken first, and egg first namely, and we derived at a inconcievable point. So the answer cannot be any of them. You see if an answer exists then it must be out of the system. May be a superposition of those two conditions.

It has a philosophical value and a meta mathematical value.. I am not a genious I am just telling my opinion

good luck

[nittro]

Reptiles, such as dinosaurs laid eggs long before birds evoluted from them. So the egg is more ancient than the bird-form of reptiles, in this case, the chicken.

[monica245]

well bird eggs are different than reptile eggs, which tend to be leathery unlike the hard chiken egg.

[suffering44]

but it is not the question here we are not dealing a scientifical paradox we are just fasinated about this as a symbolic way, as a metaphor. The reason we cannot deal with science here is we have numerous examples of the same paradox and science cannot answer them

good luck

[donrane]

The chicken..heres how. A chicken is born...not in an egg but in some softer version that cant be defined as an egg. That chicken then was blessed with some genes or a small mutation that made it, later in life ,lay the the very first egg.. Taaadaa.

[FUCKINGHELL999]

i reckon it's the egg came first cos of evolution of a random bird into a chicken. say the bird is slowly evolving into a chicken so like it gradually gets closer to becoming from not chicken to chicken so liek from say a 10% chicken to 99.999999% chicken which lays an EGG which hatches into a 100% chicken which means the egg comes first

[TawntheAtheist]

This problem is only a paradox for most people because they think in a discontinuous way.. the problem lies with our definition of what a chicken is. One could ask, at what point does a child become an adult. We might pick an arbitary birthday - but youre not telling me there is noticable difference between 11:59 on one day and 2 mins later..

[becca199212]

The chicken HAD to have come out of a egg, however the egg didn't have to be laid by a chicken, it could have been laid by a bird which mated with another bird and thus you get the chicken!

[56dlp]

And that is EXACTLY what happened....

Its no secret that the egg came first....it has been scientifically proven a couple of years ago....its all over the internet....google it for yourself

[protheory]

Hi pdoeman, thanks for the comment mate. It's just a weird idea I had once and I just couldn't let it go. I've got a forum if you're interested :)

[protheory]

The best way to make yourself laugh is to imagine yourself laughing for absolutely no reason at all, just imagine yourself laughing...

[pdoeman]

At about 4 mins I actually started laughing.

Mate. You dont give in easily on a topic.

[popebenadict16]

man your so funny i have to make a vid about you tc bro

[pdoeman]

Pope. You have a lot to answer for. I just watched the whole of this vid.