quote:
quote:
I know how DNA works. That is why I raised the second difference: it is self-replicating. Something that no human code is.
DNA is the medium. The mRNA records info stored in DNA and then takes it to the ribosomes. The ribosomes reads this info and presto, the code is compleate.
A better way to put it. I (mRNA) go to a filing cabinet (DNA) and pull out a plan (code) for a model that our team (body) has been building and now requiers. Say it needs a bit of rebuilding in an area. I (mRNA) photo copy the file (code) taken from the filing cabinet (DNA) and take it to you (ribosome). You (ribosome) read (decode) the plan (code) and start building the model by physically replicating the intangible info (intent/idea) in the file (code). Your product is a tangilble model that the intangible info. (code) represented.
You just replicated. But to do so, you had to have the info/code brought to you and you had to decode/read it. You then, understanding the instructions laid out in the info/code, built an exact replica of the info.
This info stored in DNA isn't the actual outcome. A code for an arm isn't an arm. It represents an arm. You, the ribosome, had to read the code and build a model that the info represented.
That is code. For DNA to "replicate" itself, code is needed. Code in the sense I am talking of.
I think there is an important idea to that Modulous brought up that does need to be addressed in the terms of the definition of codes. (I have read the entire thread). I feel that your definition of code is far to encompassing because it encompasses 'codes' that contain extrememely different characteristics, in other words it over simplifies. 'Code' as I have seen it used in your writing encompasses both codes that are non-replicating, external codes (permanent codes) as well as self-replicating, internal (computer code in the sense of its programs and DNA/RNA).
To define non-replicating and external codes these require two distinct entites both the encoder (sender that encodes data), and reciever (observer/data processor decodes the data). I.e. as your frequently used example of blueprints and a home, someone or yourself, drew the blueprints (encoded blueprints) a set of data that can be used to build a house expressed in a symbol system. A second entity, someone else or yourself, is building the blueprints (observering and processing the blueprints) has a set rules or has made a set of rules that helps the entity to get to the data that was encoded into the blue prints. The prior examples uses a 'concious' decision maker for both end of the processes.
(Bear with me this next example of non-replicating and external might be a little difficult to understand because of the limitations of english in that I must use action verbs that imply conciousness and ability to decide to non-decision makers.)
In this example of a code as applied to rocks it involes a non-decision maker (source) and a decision maker(entity). The earth encodes physical conditions and compositions in which rocks were formed and created (earth as a system has encoded physical data). Then on the end of the reciever (man, observer and data processor) has set up a system of rules to interpret and decode the data present in the rock. This data decoded represents the chemical composition as well as physical processes that were involved in the formation of the rock. Same goes with light from stars. Because elements have a fixed emission spectra when electrons are jumping down orbitals an electron going to a lower orbital level encodes data for a particular emission of light. Man observes this emssion, having no idea what it is, decides to build a system that will help them interpret light in the way that it will report the composition of stars. (this also can be implied about the tree ring bit.)
All three of these examples demonstrate two distinct entities/sources one which encodes a particular set of data, environmental, housing, light etc. And then a decoder, an external source, that is attaching meaning to the encoded data. IOW there is an interpretive act present. These particular examples better flow from Percy's posting of wikipedia definition.
quote:
In communications, a code is a rule for converting a piece of information (for example, a letter, word, or phrase) into another form or representation, not necessarily of the same type. In communications and information processing, encoding is the process by which a source (object) performs this conversion of information into data, which is then sent to a receiver (observer), such as a data processing system. Decoding is the reverse process of converting data, which has been sent by a source, into information understandable by a receiver. (see Decoding methods) A codec is an implementation of that rule (or algorithm) for coding and decoding, for example MP3, which may be a hardware implementation or a software implementation, and which may include compression.
Internal and self-replicating codes are codes that have non-decision makers on both the encoding and recieving end. (stupid english I wish there was a word set that would imply action without assigning human characterists to the subjects). In particular with computer code it follows strict interpretive acts (this is why I feel it is a non-decision maker). (note all my understanding of computer code has been based on how I've understood computer code as it has been discussed on this forum so if it is wrong or to vague I'll try and put more thought into expanding it). Now to tackle have you have described DNA.
quote:
A better way to put it. I (mRNA) go to a filing cabinet (DNA) and pull out a plan (code) for a model that our team (body) has been building and now requiers. Say it needs a bit of rebuilding in an area. I (mRNA) photo copy the file (code) taken from the filing cabinet (DNA) and take it to you (ribosome). You (ribosome) read (decode) the plan (code) and start building the model by physically replicating the intangible info (intent/idea) in the file (code). Your product is a tangilble model that the intangible info. (code) represented.
When you brought up this particular point I feel you neglected to adequately address Modulous's point of self-replication. But what you did provide is a foundation for which to build upon.
I hope to better describe DNA we will start like this. DNA is the filing cabinet, mRNA is one half of the helical strand of DNA, either half can be used to rebuild the DNA strand, because of the 1:1 relationship between AT or AU and GC thus one half of DNA strand is split and can be made into 2 strands of DNA. The way, again as i understand it, that a ribosome "builds" a protein that will be later used by a body is that a ribosme has a fixed configuration, that forces a protein chain to be built in a SPECIFIC and FIXED way. IOW there is zero interpretive act involved within protein building because to build a particular protein requires a forced configuration. For any given mRNA strand there will only be one specific outcome because of the way it must conform on the ribosome. (again if this is a flawed understanding of how ribosomes work i'd ask the a biologist/biochemist kinda of clarify).
So what occurs, again to my understanding, is that in DNA replication and protein building that it is a system in which a chemical 'signal' produced in the body starts a particular protein to be built due to a change in the chemistry within the cell. After the chemical 'signal' is removed, taken care of and met. The protein 'building' stops.
Again if this needs to be more developed or clarified hopefully we can work it out.
Oh yes, and I would appreciate (and I am sure others would as well) if instead of vaguely referring to past messages where you say you have answered points by another poster, please post the specific message(s) that you feel are pertinent to your answer. This will help on both sides because it will make it a great deal easier to follow the discussion.
Edited by Discreet Label, : Streamlined post.
™ Version 4.2