I could tell a very funny anecdote about the day Sister Mary Priscilla said, "THOMAS, COME TO ME AND PUT YOUR HAND ON MY WOUND!!" and I was daydreaming but awakened when I heard my name yelled.
But I won't because it's too embarassing.
RNA viruses? They are built by DNA.
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc picosecond timing precision measurement jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
This is a design group. Design involves considering possibilities. Adherence to orthodoxy and reflexive rejection of possibilities is poison to design.
Besides, the random mutation and selection concept of the origin of life is just another fantasy, and not a very good one. There's no evidence for it either.
Any time that the biological origin of life is freely considered, some people will start to scream about religion to shut off possibilities that they don't approve of.
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc picosecond timing precision measurement jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
that
ve evolutionary steps can follow any path that works.
Only an unimaginative fool would believe living organisms evolved at random . The process was very deterministic beyond a certain point where the organ ism's interaction with its environment influenced its gene development and DNA chemistry. It's called epigenetics.
Wait for the part when the toad eats the beetle:
Sure that's a random adaptation......
On May 8, 2019, John Larkin wrote (in article):
Sure it can. Very slowly, with lots of mistakes made and then erased. Not an efficient process at all. But it does not need to be.
is a huge literature.
.said that the chromosomes were a blueprint of the critter to be made.
order. This is critical, because making slight changes to recipes is done all the time, and over time those recipes evolve and improve. Blueprints are a little harder.
Also mentioned was junk DNA - people back in the day said that because they
DNA had the same kind of statistics as music or written language.)
It turned out to be the control system that controlled the development
control loops that force a sequence including waits (checkpoints) to ensure that things are ready for the next step to be taken.
are using as the intro text. The best such book I ever read was written by either Watson or Crick of DNA helix fame, but that book is dated now.
Circling back to engineering, back in the days when I was a computer programmer, I had great success in applying research methods from biology (how to make progress on something too complex to understand) to debugging software and the like.
Joe Gwinn
Every breath you take (ideal gas laws) gets math analyses, with lots of zeroes. Molecule size to planet size (lots of zeroes), microseconds in a year (lots of zeroes) and years of life presumably in development... yes, certainly lots of zeroes.
The universe is a big place. I bet we don't have a monopoly on DNA. Given that chemistry is likely the same everywhere, it's possible we are more alike than anyone would expect. I believe the term is "strange attractor".
-- Rick C. -++ Get a 1,000 miles of free Supercharging -++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Huh? You saw an argument???
-- Rick C. +-+ Get a 1,000 miles of free Supercharging +-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
ey
he junk
g
re
Biology is so complex because it was *not* created by intelligence which wo uld limit it's capabilities. It happened by random changes, some of which were removed by natural selection while others remained. So the manner int eractions in the systems that evolved can be inordinately complex, as long as they work... mostly.
I recall an evolutionary experiment which I believe was done in an analog c ircuit simulation, I don't recall for sure. It used the typical method of introducing small, random changes with a selection step and may have includ ed multiple paths with intermittent sharing. It's been too long to recall details. What I do remember is that it only took a few thousand cycles for the circuit to evolve to the point where it mostly met the specification. There would be some spurious elements in the signal produced, but they wer e not dominant. The odd part is that the circuit did not operate remotely like anything a human would have designed. The circuit appeared to be a ra ndom jumble of components without a clear form or structure. Very much lik e life and very unlike anything designed by a person with intent.
Didn't NASA design an antenna by similar means with a similar result of it not looking remotely like it was a designed component?
-- Rick C. +++ Get a 1,000 miles of free Supercharging +++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
If you're going to copy a few million base pairs, you've got to move along. One part of RNA polymerase, the helicase, spins at about 10,000 RPM as it unwinds and rewinds the DNA double helix.
Some bacterial flagellum motors rotate at 300 rps, 18,000 RPM. Biologists once mocked the idea that any part of a bacteria could rotate.
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc lunatic fringe electronics
At least one of them was intelligent design propaganda.
Intelligent design advocates are good at that kind of hand-waving analysis. It's worthless for anything except for supporting their arguments from selective ignorance.
John Larkin certainly is.
The origin of live is almost certainly the random shuffling of nonliving molecules which eventually produced one that could copy itself, and it's been imperfect copying with selection ever since.
The origin of the universe is a silly question - there's nothing outside the universe for it originate from.
Consciousness is just a monitoring program running in our minds - one of many other programs. The only mystery there is why anybody takes it seriously.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
n . r s
he
ay
There's a big difference between having an open mind and having a mind so o pen that your brains fall out.Design does involve rejecting possibilities t hat can be shown not to be able to work, which isn't the same as rejecting possibilities that nobody else seems to have looked at.
None that John Larkin knows about.
You seem to be one of them. You do seem to have the delusion that a belief in Darwinian evolution by imperfect reproduction and subsequent selection i s some kind of religion, but this is just one of your many misapprehensions .
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
The process was very deterministic beyond a certain point where the organism's interaction with its environment influenced its gene development and DNA chemistry. It's called epigenetics.
Epigenetics explains why some environmental effects are visible after one of two generations. It isn't a mechanism that would allowed acquired characteristics to be passed down any further.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reverse transcriptase does the opposite.
but the RNA for that is found in retroviruses so it could be argued that it's not "life", weasel words that pomoters of that claim may cling to.
-- When I tried casting out nines I made a hash of it.
Mostly. There are some RNA-only enzymes.
People are looking for RNA-only cellular organisms
Cells are more complicated than viruses, and the superior stability of DNA would be worth more to them than it is to viruses, and may have given them an overwhelming competitive advantage over the last few billion years.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Huh? Every object IN the universe, and their dispositions as we can see them, are clues.
Life is well enough understood to custom-build some...
Consciousness is possible to mimic with mechanisms, because we've collected enough clues for that one, too.
If you don't see clues, see your eye doctor.
Quite right.
I always consider that gremlins are the cause of my circuits' maloperation.
Strawman argument.
Darwinian evolution describes how species evolve, not the origin of DNA.
The origin of DNA is, as yet, unclear and a fascinating question.
I've seen no evidence that flying spaghetti monsters, earth-divers, protogenoi, and other deities have anything to do with it.
If you have evidence, let's hear it.
No. If evidence is provided, they will listen. It may take the usual 50 years until all the old fogies have died, but evidence will be sufficient in the end.
Our eyes are a terrible design compared to either top preditors or deep sea cephalopods. They are just good enough for a hominid omnivore. We have the advantageous feature of colour vision for seeing ripe fruit. A few people have various forms of colour blindness and much rarer are people who can distinguish living and dead plant pigments by eye.
Raptor livers are another complete disaster area. Somewhat dodgy compromises for being able to fly fast and take severe impact stresses.
If a God designed them then he was having an off day when he did so.
You start out with a spot that is light sensitive and gradually evolve under competitive pressure. Every tiny incremental improvement makes survival of the owner more likely (all other things being equal), neutral things make no difference and defects tend to get you killed.
People seem to forget that incremental improvements stack up exponentially so that 100 1% improvements gets you to 270%.
Evolution works so well that for some otherwise intractable problems we use computer models of evolution to solve real world optimisations.
Simulated anealling works pretty well too for difficult global optimisation problems - and that is *entirely* random but with a very specific thermodynamic rule on when it is allowed to jump to a sub optimal state which is gradually tightened as it is allowed to cool.
You can believe in approved random "just so" stories if you wish but do not try to peddle them in the sci.* heirarchy.
-- Regards, Martin Brown
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.