|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: coded information in DNA | |||||||||||||||||||
WordBeLogos Member (Idle past 5413 days) Posts: 103 From: Ohio Joined: |
mark,
But he must of, your logic requires that conclusion. But we can exclude man, therefore we are left with "other-intelligence." This argument can not identify the intelligence. Only that it is the only known available explanation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5215 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
WordBeLogos,
Only that it is the only known available explanation. Nope, it could have evolved. This is why your overreliance on premise #2 is flawed, leading you to a similarly flawed conclusion. There was a phylogeny based on the genetic code (try as I might I can't find the thing) & it's variants, & guess what? It matched the accepted phylogeny of life. Such congruence is evidence that it did evolve. Do you have evidence it was created? Mark Edited by mark24, : No reason given. There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
|
|||||||||||||||||||
onifre Member (Idle past 2971 days) Posts: 4854 From: Dark Side of the Moon Joined: |
Hi WordBeLogos,
This is circular reasoning. You are already assuming, that you, consisting of information through DNA, arose naturally. This sounds like you are claiming I was artificially made...? I believe my parents did have sex, not that I want to think about that, but they did, and now I'm here - naturally. So you see in the case of ME, chemistry - human reproduction - came before the "coded information" that is me - and it was all natural.
The laws of physics and chemistry do not account for the coded information (unless you are willing to provide an example) any more then the paper and ink in a book account for the message it contains. First, the elements that construct the "coded information" are found to exist prior to the coded information being found on this planet. So the laws of physics and chemistry pre-date DNA. Now, wouldn't you agree that nucleosynthesis, which is how these elements come to exist, fits quite well within your definition of coded information? The definition you provided:
quote: The description of the Periodic Table of Elements quote: The description of nucleosynthesis quote: As per the above 2 descriptions I think: The Periodic Table of Elements are an example of: "a set of symbols that uniquely map a point in space "A" to a point in space "B." How: The table shows us a progressive order of increased atoms that take us from point A(hydrogen) to point B(helium). Using this method of going from point A to point B we can easily progress up the table of elements. That Nucleosynthesis is an example of: "there is special symbolic correspondence between a letter or word (idea) and a real physical entity. How: By the process of nucleosynthesis, which combines different atoms in high temperatures, we get all of the different elements found in the Periodic Table. It also follows a law of increased atoms, or increased complexity, as the elements get heavier. Furthermore, the letter (H) gives us a description of the gas hydrogen - which represents the physical entity. And by understanding nucleosynthesis we understand the orgin of all the physical elements. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So, by the definition that you provided, I think I have shown 2 things that fit the bill for "coded information"... Show me where I'm wrong, I challenge you. - oni "I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks "I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 305 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Agree, so when can we observe the origin of the coded information in DNA? Well, we can watch mutations producing new information. If that isn't good enough for you, though, then using a mode of reasoning which we know to be fallacious is not a substitute for observation.
I believe in intelligent evolution. Which, for some reason, happens faster in the presence of certain chemicals.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1425 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi WordBeLogos, and welcome to the fray.
I see you're having fun with this old saw. The DNA molecule seems complex, it seems to be a blueprint for life, therefore it must be a code.
But how do we account for the coded symbolic information in DNA through the laws of physics and chemistry? The same way we account for the coded symbolic information in H2O. Atoms tend to bond to other atoms in specific patterns based on their atomic number and the available combinations. A salt crystal grows by assembling Chlorine and Sodium atoms in specific patterns. A snow flake grows by assembling hydrogen and oxygen atoms already bonded into water molecules in specific patterns. The more complex the molecule the more different patterns it can make, and these different patterns can combine with other molecules to make more molecules. The laws of physics and chemistry tell us that atoms will bond in certain ways in certain environments (acid, base, hot, cold, dry, wet, etc etc etc). There are no DNA molecules that do not follow these basic patterns of combination. Enjoy. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. • • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •
|
|||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1275 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
When my computer logs on for automatic updates, all by itself, is this by intelligent design or just natural? What is ultimately acting itself out, be it unobsevable and without direct intervention? Your computer is an inanimate object which cannot come together with its programming without the intervention of an outside agent. The same can be said for all codes that you describe. This distinguishes them from DNA which comes together all by itself according to well-known laws of chemistry. You need to explain why chemistry, genetics and evolution are insufficient to account for the existence of DNA. Chemistry explains how DNA works. Genetics describes how DNA changes. Evolution explains why certain combinations of DNA will tend to be more prevalent than others. None of these explanations require appeal to any intelligent agent. You are attempting to define the field of inquiry and claim victory based on that limited field. You are ignoring well-understood natural processes that are observed on a daily basis. I've never seen anyone successfully defend any scientific theory while ignoring the evidence. Nothing about your argument makes me suspect you are the exception. For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack Obama We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Michamus Member (Idle past 5178 days) Posts: 230 From: Ft Hood, TX Joined: |
WordBeLogos writes:
This has gone from "Can a code exist without a creator" to "Have we seen the creation of DNA".
Agree, so when can we observe the origin of the coded information in DNA?
You really should stop dancing around, and stick to the issue at hand.
WordBeLogos writes:
It's funny that I couldn't find a definition that matches the one you have just provided, and I checked dictionary.com, and my own Webster's Unabridged Dictionary.
Definition of coded information - a system of symbols used by an encoding/ decoding mechanism which transmits a message representing a idea, plan or instructions etc., that are independent of the communication medium.
What's even more interesting is when I checked both sources, not one of them provided an example of a code Link Here that wasn't created by humans, with the exception of the Genetic Code. Since we are discussing the Genetic Code, I think it fitting we pull up the definition provided for the term:
quote:Seems pretty straight-forward. Biology, Physics, and Chemistry all account for how DNA operates, and how it originated. The bonding of nucleotide triplets is certainly one of the most well understood processes in these modern fields. WordBeLogos writes:
With the exception of the fact that DNA self replicates, and it's molecular construction (which you deem as the code) is understood within the realm of biology and chemistry. There is no more reason to believe DNA was created by an intelligent agent, than there is to believe that Water was created by an intelligent agent.
DNA code has much in common with human language and computer languages
WordBeLogos writes:
Which demonstrates why your second premise is a false one, in that we can see the bonding of nucleotides occur without any intelligent agent involved at all.
Correct, except here, we can observe Obama himself to know otherwise.
ABE: Your statement:"All codes are created by a conscious mind.." "All molecules are created by a conscious mind.." "..there is no natural process known to science..""..I do not know of a natural process known to science, that very well may be known, as I am a layman.." "that creates coded information.""that creates molecules." This is an argument from ignorance, and petitio principii (Begging the Question) in that your Premise is your conclusion.
WordBeLogos writes:
We have already demonstrated that the Genetic Code is no more special a molecule than water.
Besides human language we also observe animal mating calls, bee waggle dances, bird songs, whale songs,and ant communication by pheromone etc
I would highly recommend you do some actual research in the field of biology, before continuing forward. Edited by Michamus, : formatting issue. Edited by Michamus, : second formatting issue How hard they must find it, those who take authority as truth, rather than truth as the authority. -unknown
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Meldinoor Member (Idle past 4829 days) Posts: 400 From: Colorado, USA Joined: |
We can see DNA develop and change today. Oftentimes mutations will add information to the genome. Mutations that have been shown to be random. Thus random chemical processes are adding information all the time. Micro-organisms that develop new traits and abilities. The speckled moths which mutated to blend into smoggy city environment. Do you need any more proof of information coming from natural processes?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.3 |
Do you know what Shannon Information is? If I take a cube of ice and then hit it with a hammer, is there more or less information afterwards?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22479 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
Hi WordBeLogos,
Sorry to reply to an old message, but I think this thread may have gotten off to a bad start due to some unfortunate definitions and incorrect interpretations. This one is probably the most fundamentally misleading definition:
Coded information = a system of symbols used by an encoding / decoding mechanism that transmits a message which is seperate from the communication medium itself. This definition looks like it comes from information theory, and it is taylored for its explanatory power in communicating the concepts of information theory in a digital world. It is not a general definition of coded information, but it's okay as long as it is not interpreted too strictly. For example, if a military sentry is supposed to make the sound of a bird if he sees an enemy force using increasing volume and pitch according to its size, then that is coded information. Your definition of "a system of symbols" might be used to exclude such codes if interpreted to mean only sets of symbols you can write on paper like (C A G T) or (0 1) and so forth. And so we have to correct and extend what you say next:
Examples would be english, computer languages, radio signal and music and yes, DNA. But except for DNA your examples are all human constructs that we know can't arise naturally, and so this is begging the question. But you included radio signals in your list, and the natural world has no trouble producing radio signals, so allow me to focus on that. If you're using a wireless router to connect to the Internet, then your computer's network card is using radio signals to exchange coded information with the router in the form of 0's and 1's. Clearly this fits your definition of a code, but that definition is taylored for the information age that at heart communicates in binary. But now turn on your AM radio, where sound is modulated into the amplitude of a radio signal. No symbols here, but somehow information is being encoded, communicated, and decoded. See the inherent inadequacy of your definition? Now imagine that instead of turning on your AM radio that you turn on your radio telescope and point it at the Large Magellanic Cloud, a satellite galaxy of the Milky Way. Now you're receiving and attempting to decode the information encoded in the radio signals from that galaxy. Where did the information come from? What did the encoding? Where did the encoding system come from? Whatever answers you come up with, unless your answers are all "God did it" then they will be natural answers based upon our understanding of the laws of the natural world.
All known codes always involve a system of symbols which represent a idea, concept or plans etc. In the context of information theory, this is clearly false. Ideas, concepts, plans, these all have meaning. Meaning is a human construct and is completely separate from coding systems. Let me quote Shannon himself from his landmark paper A Mathematical System of Communication:
Shannon writes: The fundamental problem of communication is that of reproducing at one point either exactly or approximately a message selected at another point. Frequently the messages have meaning; that is they refer to or are correlated according to some system with certain physical or conceptual entities. These semantic aspects of communication are irrelevant to the engineering problem. The fundamental reality is that the natural world is full of codes that communicate information, and DNA is probably the most complex and interesting example we've found so far. --Percy Edited by Percy, : Improve clarity of wireless router para. Edited by Percy, : Grammar in last para. Edited by Percy, : Fix typo.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
caffeine Member (Idle past 1045 days) Posts: 1800 From: Prague, Czech Republic Joined: |
quote: It doesn't really code for all of this quite so specifically. The genetic code just dictates the synthesis of a series of proteins; but the organism created from the proteins can vary quite a lot depending on the chemical environment it's all taking place in. Colonial insects can produce their different castes of workers and soldiers without each needing a different genome - they just manipulate the environment in which each develops. We don't need an intelligence to arbitrarily assign meanings like 'GGGACCGAACTTCAG means blue eyes" - the code relies purely on the shape and chemical behaviour of the molecules involved. If your mRNA molecule has a codon consisting of three adenine bases, these will narually bond to three uracil bases on a tRNA molecule, because that's how the chemistry of these molecules forces them to behave. The tRNA molecule will be bonded to the amino acid lysine; again, just because the chemistry and shape of the molecule means this is what it does. Sorry if this explanation is incomplete and confused, as I don't really understand it myself. The whole process involves a variety of other molecules like enzymes and the proteins and RNA that make up ribosomes, but it all works by undirected chemistry. Molecules fit together because of their shape and because of ionic bonds; and as different molecules fit together they change shape - all of this behaviour eventually leaves us with a protein. No design is necessary.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1425 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi Percy
Let's expand on this aspect:
But you included radio signals in your list, and the natural world has no trouble producing radio signals, so allow me to focus on that. If you're using a wireless router to connect to the Internet, then your computer's network card is using radio signals to exchange coded information with the router in the form of 0's and 1's. Clearly this fits your definition of a code, but that definition is taylored for the information age that at heart communicates in binary. But now turn on your AM radio, where sound is modulated into the amplitude of a radio signal. No symbols here, but somehow information is being encoded, communicated, and decoded. See the inherent inadequacy of your definition? Now imagine that instead of turning on your AM radio that you turn on your radio telescope and point it at the Large Magellanic Cloud, a satellite galaxy of the Milky Way. Now you're receiving and attempting to decode the information encoded in the radio signals from that galaxy. Where did the information come from? What did the encoding? Where did the encoding system come from? Whatever answers you come up with, unless your answers are all "God did it" then they will be natural answers based upon our understanding of the laws of the natural world. There are a number of different frequencies, so what makes these different "broadcasting stations" each sending out different coded information? We can also look at starlight, and in the patterns of light against frequencies we see bits of information coded in digital format - on and off - for certain segments of the spectrum. What causes that digital information to be encoded in the light spectrum? Enjoy. by our ability to understand Rebel American Zen Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. • • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Stile Member Posts: 4295 From: Ontario, Canada Joined: |
Stile writes: WordBeLogos writes: the challenge to the naturalist is to provide a single example of coded information that occurs naturally, outside the realm of life, outside the realm of DNA. All you need is one example. Gravity. Gravity is the natural code or language that describes the forces on objects due to other objects. Gravity still fits all your definitions. Just because you do not want to acknowledge it as such doesn't change any of the facts.
WordBeLogos writes: Definition of coded information - a system of symbols used by an encoding/ decoding mechanism which transmits a message representing a idea, plan or instructions etc., that are independent of the communication medium. With DNA, the chemical structures can be represented with certain symbols (C, G, T, A).With Gravity, the physical structures can be represented with certain symbols (m, a, c, f, p, time co-ordinates, position co-ordinates...) With DNA, the information is encoded/decoded by other chemical reactions (cell duplication, biological variablility).With Gravity, the information is encoded/decoded by other physical reactions (orbits, collisions, physical variability). With DNA the message transmitted is "how to grow."With Gravity, the message transmitted is "how to react." DNA and Gravity are both equally independant of their communication meduims... whatever that's supposed to mean.DNA is all chemical reactions, Gravity is all space-time. The formal definition of a code according to Perlwitz and Waterman is a set of symbols that uniquely map a point in space "A" to a point in space "B." Set of symbols for object 1: m, a, time, at point "A" in spaceSet of symbols for object 2: m, a, time, at point "B" in space The information about each object is transmitted to the other via gravity. Gravitational fields are fields, but not code, as it does not uniquely map a point in space A to a point in space B. You are wrong.I've shown just above that the gravitational field is a code which certainly does uniquely map a point in space A to a point in space B. Magma flows and layers of rock and ice, one might possibly argue that these things are encoding systems but they have no corresponding decoding system until someone shows up to inspect and interpret them... You are wrong.Whatever the magma flow is flowing over is decoding the information from the lava. People observing such are not required for the information to be decoded. Whether anyone is there or not does not affect the devastation caused by a magma flow. "The volcano's erupting!" "Save the village! Evacuate! If we're not here to decode the lava's information, everything will be fine!" ... yeah. Gravity and tornados and sand dunes and water molecules contain no code, no symbols, no encoding/decoding mechanisms. You are wrong.Symbols: m, a, f, p, time, co-ordinates Encoding/decoding mechanisms: space-time Code: gravitational equations that describe how the information is encoded and decoded by each object Does the description of gravity, 1/r^2, give us a big ellipse or a small one? An elongated one or a round one? An approximately parabolic path? Or a spiral, as the orbit comes closer and closer and the object crashes? Depends on all it's symbols: m, a, time...All of these are strictly defined if you have all the symbols and understand the gravitational equations. Does 1/r^2 describe the crash itself, which may be extraordinarily complex? Gravity may cause the object to burn up in the atmosphere and never reach the ground. Gravity makes cool air drop, so hot air rises. Gravity holds my chair to the ground and me to the chair. The possibilities that a gravitational field can give rise to are legion. It contributes to all of these things, but which of these outcomes does it specify in advance? Gravity specifys all of these outcomes in advace.Yes, there are many possibilities... just like there are with DNA. Yes, it may be difficult to get all the initial variables... just like it can be with DNA. Yes, the calculations may be complex and take a super-computer, or perhaps even be out of our current capabilities... just like it is with DNA. None of this takes away from the fact that all the initial variables are there... or that it is possible to calculate the exact final position, just like DNA. Of course, sometimes if you get too close to quantum probability-type stuff, the answers can become unclear. But, this happens exactly the same with DNA because of unpredictable mutations. The answer of course, is that it specifies none of these outcomes. It has no code that predetermines any single one of these things. It is simply one contributing force in all of them. Just because YOU don't know enough about gravity doesn't mean other's don't. Gravity, in fact, specifies ALL of these outcomes, the equations are indeed the code that predetermines each and every one of these things.
Why? because 1/r^2 describes the strength of the field as a function of radius from a single point, nothing more. That isn't the gravitational equation, it is merely one basic representation of it. There are many, many basic representations of the Gravity Code that make it easier to look at specific areas. However, they are all derived from the same set of symbols and the same space-time.
I'm just waiting for one naturalist to produce an actual empirical counterexample. You can ignore the Gravity Code all you want. You can't change the facts. The facts are that the definition of coded information you've provided includes the Gravity Code. You cannot form a defintion of code that includes DNA and excludes the Gravity Code, it's just not possible. Keep trying, though, I'm learning a lot about the Gravity Code by explaining it to you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
kuresu Member (Idle past 2533 days) Posts: 2544 From: boulder, colorado Joined: |
Correct, except here, we can observe Obama himself to know otherwise. Right. So why the special pleading regarding DNA?
the challenge to the naturalist is to provide a single example of coded information that occurs naturally, outside the realm of life, outside the realm of DNA. If we can use Obama to falsify the premise that all american presidents are white, why can we not use DNA to falsify the premise that all codes are created by a conscious mind? It also vaguely smacks of moving the goal post. That is, when we find what you're looking for, you claim it's not really the answer and define a new target for us. I, for one, certainly don't trust your conclusion because not only is your premise false, but you are engaging in fallacies which undermine the validity of any argument. Try again.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 305 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
If we can use Obama to falsify the premise that all american presidents are white, why can we not use DNA to falsify the premise that all codes are created by a conscious mind? Because in the first case we can disprove it by direct observation, whereas in the second case we can ... oh, OK, we can disprove it by direct observation. Still, he nearly had an argument.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024