[sophacles]

> p could be exponentially small, if OoL requires some extremely unlikely step.

"exponentially" is not a measure of size, nor is it a measure of relative size. If you think this anything base on "exponentially small" is a valid argument, go look in a mirror and slap yourself.

[pfdietz]

The meaning is clear in context. Try reading what I wrote in good faith rather than searching for a gotcha.

[sophacles]

If you don't like me repeating your words to you, maybe you should look in a mirror and slap yourself?

[pfdietz]

Ok, I will spell it out.

"Exponentially small" here means "the probability could be ~ e^-n" where n is a number proportional to the complexity of the minimal evolving system. This would happen if there's some gap that has to be bridged by random chance before we get a system capable of sustaining natural selection.

The point here is that this could easily be vastly smaller than 1/N, where N is (say) the number of atoms in the universe x age of the universe x rate at which atoms might interact to form such systems.

I think you could have easily understood this point if you had made an effort to do so, without me having to spoonfeed it to you here.

[sophacles]

If you think my point has anything to do with math, maybe you should go look in a mirror and slap yourself.