Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

typodupeerror

## Chicken and Egg Problem Solved449

Java Pimp writes "It seems scientists and philosophers now agree which came first. The Egg. From the CNN article: 'Put simply, the reason is down to the fact that genetic material does not change during an animal's life. Therefore the first bird that evolved into what we would call a chicken, probably in prehistoric times, must have first existed as an embryo inside an egg. Professor John Brookfield, a specialist in evolutionary genetics at the University of Nottingham, told the UK Press Association the pecking order was clear.' So, does this mean we can now show P=NP?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

## Chicken and Egg Problem Solved

• #### Old News (Score:3, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @03:36PM (#15411841) Homepage Journal
I solved that question in a paper for a philosophy class years ago...
• #### Next news.... (Score:4, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @03:37PM (#15411842) Journal
Complete details of why the chicken crossed the road... ba dum bum
• #### So, does this mean we can now show P=NP? (Score:4, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @03:37PM (#15411846)
Only for P = 0 or N = 1.
• #### Now that this one's solved... (Score:3, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @03:38PM (#15411849) Homepage Journal
So when did the nuggets and fingers come into play?
• #### Obligatory Chicken & Egg Joke #928 (Score:5, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @03:38PM (#15411854)
So the chicken and the egg are laying in bed together. The egg's smoking a cigarette. The chicken says, "Well, I guess we know the answer to THAT question!"
• #### Re:So, does this mean we can now show P=NP? (Score:4, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @03:40PM (#15411872)
Reading the above post, I could have swarn it said PORN.
• #### They messed up the punchline... (Score:3, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @03:41PM (#15411889) Homepage
Q: Which came first; the chicken or the egg?

A: The Rooster.
• #### Re:I thought this was obvious to everybody (Score:3, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @03:44PM (#15411909)
Something that was almost a chicken laid an egg that hatched into a chicken. So, the egg had to have been first.

But what if the almost-chicken converted?
• #### Re:I thought this was obvious to everybody (Score:3, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @03:50PM (#15411963)
And to answer that, you have to define what a chicken egg is, is it an egg that hatches into a chicken, or is it an egg laid by a chicken?

Because you'll never get anywhere if you don't define your terms :)

KFG
• #### Re:I thought this was obvious to everybody (Score:5, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @04:01PM (#15412053)
If it was obvious, then why is it on Slashdot?

That's exactly why it's on Slashdot. :-)

• #### Two days ago (Score:2, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @04:07PM (#15412107)
Two days ago I was driving for a few hours in my car and started thinking about this and came to the same conclusion.

I knew they were onto me.... *puts tinfoil hat back on*
• #### Now what I wish they'd prove... (Score:2, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @04:08PM (#15412113)
P = ~P

For those who haven't had any Philosphy classes relating to logic... P equals NOT P.

When they prove that, we'll I'm building myself a perpetual motion machine.
• #### Re:So, does this mean we can now show P=NP? (Score:1, Funny)

by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 26, 2006 @04:08PM (#15412121)
Well that's not as bad as having to write about the synthesis of a phosphorus+oxygen+radon molecule in a peer-reviewed journal.
• #### Re:Next news.... (Score:4, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @04:11PM (#15412135)
Dumb ass croc. It was a one-way street.
• #### Re:Obligatory Chicken & Egg Joke #928 (Score:4, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @04:12PM (#15412140) Journal
I think in this case, the egg may have been laying the chicken. :-P
• #### Re:I thought this was obvious to everybody (Score:3, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @04:16PM (#15412178) Homepage
Haven't you seen the cartoon where the chicken and egg are lying in bed smoking cigarettes, and the chicken says "I guess that answers that"
• #### Re:Next news.... (Score:5, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @04:22PM (#15412215)

Complete details of why the chicken crossed the road... ba dum bum

The question "Why did the chicken cross the road" is invalid. It is invalid because "why" assumes that the chicken had some reason for taking the action "cross the road". This, in turn, assumes that the chicken has the concept of "road"; after all, if the chicken doesn't know that the road is there, then the chicken did not - from the chickens point of view - cross the road, and consequently it is meaningless to ask for its motivations for doing so.

Since chicken is an animal, it is unlikely that it has the concept of road in the same sense than humans do; since it is a bird, whose ancestors were propably capable of flight in the near past, it is unlikely to have the concept of road in any sense - why would a flying bird need roads ?

Therefore, the chicken can never have any motivation for crossing the road, since from the chickens point of view, it never does any such thing. It simply moves from one point to another, and these points happen to be on the opposite side of a flat area of ground. No road-crossing has happened.

Think of it this way: if you walk over a scent trail left by some animal, and you don't know that the trail is there, it is foolish to ask your motives of crossing that trail. One can ask your motives for walking in the first place, but the crossing was pure coincidence and not something you chose.

• #### Re:Now that this one's solved... (Score:5, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @04:28PM (#15412271)
So when did the nuggets and fingers come into play?

The hell with that, when did they evolve buffalo wings?

• #### Re:Next news.... (Score:5, Funny)

<{corbettw} {at} {yahoo.com}> on Friday May 26, 2006 @04:31PM (#15412299) Journal
The question "Why did the chicken cross the road" is invalid.

You must be a riot at parties.
• #### Re:Old News - Older even than you (Score:2, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @04:47PM (#15412427) Homepage
I don't remember you saying anything like that at all.

But then again... I probably don't know you.

• #### Re:Old News (Score:2, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @05:03PM (#15412547)
A philosophy paper can't prove anything.
• #### Re:Old News (Score:4, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @05:12PM (#15412617) Homepage Journal
The interesting part of the question to me is, the fact that it makes you look at the egg as the point of most radical change, a point on the line of evolution. And it nicely illustrates the way our minds think about that continuum of change, and how we decide when an evolving form merits one designation, and not another. The animals that gave birth to the class of beings we now call "chickens" were themselves, not quite chickeny enough to be themselves "chickens."

Since chickens have been artificially selected by humans for centuries, if not millenia, they have obtained an especially "chicken-like" form, consciously and unconsciously sculpted by the human chicken aesthetic.

Interesting now is the highly concentrated factory farm method of chicken selection. The chickens are stressed beyond their original design, and so factory farmers are forced to use more forceful methods to predominate over the ailments of overstressed overcrowded fowl. The evolved chicken factory employs de-beaking as the solution to aggression, and antibiotics boosters as the solution to natural death, before conveying them into the slaughtering and plucking machines.

Which leads to the next axiom: "Never trust an inexpensive chicken."

Similar conditions exist for the majority of laying hens, and who knows what it does to the eggs? I don't eat inexpensive chickens or eggs any more, but plenty of people will.

I imagine a science fiction scenario where the factory method of chicken evolution is permitted to continue unrestrained for many centuries. The chickens continue to evolve, selected for their hardiness and calmness under pressure.

But what will the chicken evolve into?

Will humans of the future ask, "Which came first, the Xorph or the Cubulex?"

Could there one day be a chicken equivalent of the Kwisatz Haderach?

Will chickens become so powerful that they rebel against the factory workers, and massacre the human race?

Or, will chickens become so overstressed, right down to their genetics, that the species loses its viability?

Or, could the chicken's natural genetics, in its spontaneous, creative way, evolve antibodies or poisons in their flesh to infect and debilitate humans, in the same way as toads developed poisons to protect them?

Or, since chickens are descended from dinosaurs, maybe the cumulative effect of generations of genetic pressure could cause latent DNA to awaken, so that chickens develop more dinosaur-like traits, reverting to more primordial forms. Chickens on psilocybin suspended in sensory deprivation tanks - like in "Altered States."

Or, in another scenario, chicken chemistry becomes a major factor in selecting human offspring, and as a result over many millenia chicken geist merges with human geist. Chicken chemistry subtly influences the chemistry of the human womb, infants are born early, die young, and the United States eventually has the second-highest infant mortality rate of all industrialized nations.

In another scenario, it is learned that KFC is not really chicken, that the chain long ago sought out chickens with extra limbs and those born without brains, and began genetically selecting these birds. They turn out to be funding studies into chicken DNA so that they can grow chicken meat in any desired form. Some of the horrors uncovered are described as "large pulsing triple-breasted oysters" and "quivering picushions bearing as many as twenty chicken legs and thighs." When the legal smoke clears nothing happens. KFC stock doubles every month as their patented creations become staggeringly popular worldwide.
• #### Re:Next news.... (Score:3, Funny)

by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 26, 2006 @05:14PM (#15412628)
Actually the question "Why did the chicken cross the road?" is perfectly valid. While you may be correct that the chicken does not have a 'reason' for crossing the road because reasons (used precisely rather than as in common parlance) require intentionality with regard to their object, causes do not require intentionality and yet are at least as commonly if not more commonly the object of the interogative 'why' as reasons are.

To put it simply, I may say that the cause of the chicken's crossing of the road was the action of a particularly strong gust of wind in that direction. This provides an adequate explanation for the phenomenon and answers the question "Why did the chicken cross the road?" without imputing sentience or intentionality to the chicken's actions.

--
www.allauthors.com
• #### Re:I thought this was obvious to everybody (Score:4, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @05:17PM (#15412652)
Philosophers announce after 150 years (since The Origin of Species was published) that they've solved a great philosophical problem. Scientists and scientifically minded laymen say "duh."
• #### The Chicken Came First (Score:4, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @05:42PM (#15412814)
The Bible says that birds and animals were created on the fifth and sixth day. That would mean that the chicken was made before an egg came into existence. It's so sad that people disregard the Bible (special creation) and rely on theories like evolution. The Bible has been proven the most historically accurate book ever, while evolution is full of contradictory ideas which do not work out. It contradicts both the first and second law of thermodynamics, and much more which I will not go in to right now. Sure, it may seam fine now to not believe in God, but what do you think is on the other side after you die? You are dead a lot longer than you are alive. Are you 100% sure where you are going? Jesus came down to earth as the ultimate sacrifice. All you need to do to be assured you will go to heaven is believe what God did for you (sent Jesus to die for our sins), ask for forgiveness and repent (choose to turn around and follow God). No matter how many or how big of a sin you did, it can be forgiven without you having to "make up for it." So next time someone asks you which came first, the chicken or the egg, I pray that you proudly say "The chicken did" and tell them why.
• #### Re:Old News (Score:1, Funny)

by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 26, 2006 @06:03PM (#15412980)
I solved this also when I was 13-15 years old (I don't know why parent was modded funny, but this is not a joke). I also solved the same problem for those who bulieve God created it all. The answer for them is that chicken was first. Reason: In the bible it says that god created animals and birds, there's nothing about creating eggs.

But I seriously don't understand why this is news. Are you really telling me that some "smart" people have been trying to solve a problem that 15-year old solved 10 years ago, after thinking it few hours? It really wasn't that much of a problem. It might been a problem when we didn't know about evolution, but when I was young, that was already teached at schools.
• #### Re:Next news.... (Score:4, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @06:04PM (#15412988)
Yeah, that's one egg that doesn't get laid too often, I'd bet.
• #### That's just great (Score:2, Funny)

on Friday May 26, 2006 @07:27PM (#15413407)
That's just great, now everytime I sit down at my 3 egg omellete at IHOP I have to worry about the possibility of wiping out an entirely new species of chicken.

#### Related LinksTop of the: day, week, month.

When a fellow says, "It ain't the money but the principle of the thing," it's the money. -- Kim Hubbard

Working...