The emergence of emergence: a critique of "design, observation, surprise!"

Artificial life research begins from the premise that Alife subsumes real life. A criterion for emergence in Alife has been formulated that, however, excludes real life and postulates the need for a real life Designer and an Observer. This in effect nullifies the premise of Alife and takes us back to the argument for God from design of Bishop Paley in 1802. An alternative is to realize that Alife could include two properties: simulated organisms that both design themselves and are the observers. Self-design can come about via evolution in a population of mating organisms, especially via mutations that are gene or higher order duplications. Duplications permit novelty while retaining previously attained functions. The ability to observe can itself evolve, if its construction process evolves. This may now be possible to simulate, if new paradigms for embryogenesis, such as positional information or differentiation waves, prove accurate, or at least sufficiently robust to construct a wide diversity of observational abilities. The evolution of perception, however, may be limited by the physics available to the Alife organisms, which can come in three forms: simulated physics, real physics accessible to robots, or "Cyberspace physics".