Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 107 (8738 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-28-2017 6:18 AM
415 online now:
Heathen, PaulK, XJTA (3 members, 412 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jayhawker Soule
Post Volume:
Total: 805,589 Year: 10,195/21,208 Month: 3,282/2,674 Week: 698/961 Day: 10/150 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev123
4
56Next
Author Topic:   the old improbable probability problem
Wounded King
Member (Idle past 1478 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Joined: 04-09-2003


(2)
Message 46 of 76 (661795)
05-10-2012 9:06 AM
Reply to: Message 45 by RAZD
05-09-2012 6:34 PM


Chirality strikes back
What problem?

In terms of chirality I suspect Zaius means that the products of the original Urey-Miller experiment occurred in a racemix mix with equal proportions of dextro and levo rotatory amino acids. Since in living organisms the amino acids are almost exclusively levorotatory this is often put forward as a problem for abiogenesis by creationists.

I know you are familiar with the argument so I assume that your question to Zaius was rhetorical or socratic in nature.

TTFN,

WK


This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by RAZD, posted 05-09-2012 6:34 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by RAZD, posted 05-10-2012 5:46 PM Wounded King has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18257
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 47 of 76 (661847)
05-10-2012 5:46 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by Wounded King
05-10-2012 9:06 AM


Re: Chirality strikes back
Hi Wounded King

I know you are familiar with the argument so I assume that your question to Zaius was rhetorical or socratic in nature.

Yes, more specifically, though, what I mean is that the presence of dextro rotatory amino acids does not mean that the levo rotatory amino acids are not available for the formation of life.

What we don't know is how the amino acids were filtered for what is used ... it could be that some other aspect of cell formation may have caused the selection of levo rotatory amino acids.

In terms of probability for the formation of life it is like drawing a card from a pack and then matching the color with the next one picked.

Enjoy.

Edited by RAZD, : added


we are limited in our ability to understand
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) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Wounded King, posted 05-10-2012 9:06 AM Wounded King has not yet responded

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 793 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 48 of 76 (661887)
05-10-2012 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by RAZD
05-09-2012 6:34 PM


Re: redirected post
RAZD…

I do not pretend to have written any papers or preformed any research. I can do some of the math but I do not posses a degree in the field. I am but a simple nonprofessional of average intelligence. Here is a paper that can dispel some of your fears about abiogenesis calculations. If there is anything in this paper that presents poser of a particular nature, please let’s talk.

Probability of one avenue of RNA World generation.

In the present paper, in order again to optimize the probability of cell formation by
random assembly, we restrict attention to the RNA-world. Then referring to eq. (11) in Part I, we see that, for a cell consisting of Np proteins, each of which is a polypeptide containing Na amino acids (aa), the probability of random assembly is 1 in 10b where

b = (Np +2) [ m log(Np) . qmax + qra ]

http://www.iscid.org/...lan_PrimitiveCellAddendum_022703.pdf


This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by RAZD, posted 05-09-2012 6:34 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Rahvin, posted 05-10-2012 7:26 PM zaius137 has not yet responded
 Message 50 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-10-2012 7:42 PM zaius137 has not yet responded
 Message 51 by RAZD, posted 05-10-2012 8:53 PM zaius137 has responded

  
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 570 days)
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 49 of 76 (661889)
05-10-2012 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by zaius137
05-10-2012 7:11 PM


Re: redirected post
random assembly, we restrict attention to the RNA-world. Then referring to eq. (11) in Part I, we see that, for a cell consisting of Np proteins, each of which is a polypeptide containing Na amino acids (aa), the probability of random assembly is 1 in 10b where

b = (Np +2) [ m log(Np) . qmax + qra ]

No actual proponent of abiogenesis suggests that cells randomly self-assembled.

You're thinking of spontaneous generation, the sudden and spontaneous generation of fully-formed modern-appearing life (like cells) from non-life. That hypothesis was disproven by Louis Pasteur, and bears no resemblance to modern abiogenesis thinking.

The current set of hypotheses focuses on demonstrating the availability for plausible building-blocks for pre-life self-replicating molecules - in other words, the "first step" is not "cellular life." The first step is far more likely to look like a prion (a self-replicating protein; just a protein, only one, not a cell) or an RNA-based form of proto-life (like viruses, which bear some but not all of the characteristics of life and are not cells).


“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.”
- Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers

“A world that can be explained even with bad reasons is a familiar world. But, on the other hand, in a universe suddenly divested of illusions and lights, man feels an alien, a stranger. His exile is without remedy since he is deprived of the memory of a lost home or the hope of a promised land. This divorce between man and his life, the actor and his setting, is properly the feeling of absurdity.” – Albert Camus

"...the pious hope that by combining numerous little turds of
variously tainted data, one can obtain a valuable result; but in fact, the
outcome is merely a larger than average pile of shit." Barash, David 1995.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by zaius137, posted 05-10-2012 7:11 PM zaius137 has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15790
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 50 of 76 (661892)
05-10-2012 7:42 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by zaius137
05-10-2012 7:11 PM


Re: redirected post
Then referring to eq. (11) in Part I, we see that, for a cell consisting of Np proteins, each of which is a polypeptide containing Na amino acids (aa), the probability of random assembly is 1 in 10b where ...

And at that point, without looking at the "paper", I deduced that it was halfwitted creationist nonsense. And then I looked it up and found that I was right.

Do you know why this is very clearly the case, or shall I spoil the puzzle by telling you?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by zaius137, posted 05-10-2012 7:11 PM zaius137 has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18257
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 51 of 76 (661905)
05-10-2012 8:53 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by zaius137
05-10-2012 7:11 PM


probabiity problems
Hi again zaius137

b = (Np +2) [ m log(Np) . qmax + qra ]

That is one way one cell could be formed ....

How many other ways could it be formed?

How many cells could be formed with one different protein? two? three?

How many cells could be formed where one protein in the calculation is replaced by two different ones? three?

How many possible cell formations are there?

These questions and more need to be answered before the calculation can begin to be considered a valid representation of possibilities: you need to KNOW all the possibilities that can be formed, and how many could result in life of some kind, before you can begin to calculate probabilities.

Consider that I have a single di in my hand: what is the probability that I will throw a 6? If you don't know how many sides there are AND how it is marked, you cannot calculate the probability.

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
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) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by zaius137, posted 05-10-2012 7:11 PM zaius137 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by zaius137, posted 05-13-2012 2:11 AM RAZD has responded

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 793 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 52 of 76 (662168)
05-13-2012 2:11 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by RAZD
05-10-2012 8:53 PM


Re: probabiity problems
These questions and more need to be answered before the calculation can begin to be considered a valid representation of possibilities: you need to KNOW all the possibilities that can be formed, and how many could result in life of some kind, before you can begin to calculate probabilities.

I disagree with this statement. Do all the variables need to be quantified before any hypothesis can be formulated? If so, please name an area of science where strict adherence to this principle applies.

I suspect that if the conclusions of such an approach to calculating abiogenesis favored an optimistic possibility, evolutionists would not be so disturbed.

Did you hear the one about the statistician, evolutionists and the magician?

A magician performing before an audience of evolutionists produces two royal flushes in a row. The crowd stands to its feet in applause proclaiming, “Look improbable events happen all the time”. A single statistician, knowing the probability of pulling a royal flush is (649,350 : 1) and twice is (421,655,422,500 : 1) stands to his feet and yells fraud. The statistician is immediately ejected from the assembly as being closed minded to the possibility of very real magic.

Funny if the statistician was a creationist but tragic if he wasn’t.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by RAZD, posted 05-10-2012 8:53 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-13-2012 3:54 AM zaius137 has not yet responded
 Message 54 by Tangle, posted 05-13-2012 3:58 AM zaius137 has responded
 Message 55 by PaulK, posted 05-13-2012 4:40 AM zaius137 has not yet responded
 Message 56 by Panda, posted 05-13-2012 6:14 AM zaius137 has not yet responded
 Message 57 by frako, posted 05-13-2012 6:52 AM zaius137 has not yet responded
 Message 58 by RAZD, posted 05-13-2012 7:33 AM zaius137 has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15790
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 53 of 76 (662174)
05-13-2012 3:54 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by zaius137
05-13-2012 2:11 AM


Re: probabiity problems
I disagree with this statement. Do all the variables need to be quantified before any hypothesis can be formulated? If so, please name an area of science where strict adherence to this principle applies.

In all areas of science, calculations of probability are made based on the facts and not on things that creationists have made up.

A magician performing before an audience of evolutionists produces two royal flushes in a row. The crowd stands to its feet in applause proclaiming, “Look improbable events happen all the time”. A single statistician, knowing the probability of pulling a royal flush is (649,350 : 1) and twice is (421,655,422,500 : 1) stands to his feet and yells fraud. The statistician is immediately ejected from the assembly as being closed minded to the possibility of very real magic.

And if evolutionists were wrong about probability theory in real life, it would not be necessary for you to make up a fictional story to illustrate your point, because then your point would be true and you could illustrate it with something that wasn't made up.

Funny if the statistician was a creationist ...

For some reason, however, creationists tend to be pig-ignorant of statistics. Who can say why.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by zaius137, posted 05-13-2012 2:11 AM zaius137 has not yet responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 4546
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.2


(1)
Message 54 of 76 (662175)
05-13-2012 3:58 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by zaius137
05-13-2012 2:11 AM


Re: probabiity problems
zaius writes:

Funny if the statistician was a creationist but tragic if he wasn’t

You've just proved Raz's case. The statistician knew how many cards there are in a deck and how many of each suit. Without that information he could not calculate the odds.


Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by zaius137, posted 05-13-2012 2:11 AM zaius137 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by zaius137, posted 05-14-2012 1:11 AM Tangle has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 12575
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 55 of 76 (662177)
05-13-2012 4:40 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by zaius137
05-13-2012 2:11 AM


Re: probabiity problems
quote:

I disagree with this statement. Do all the variables need to be quantified before any hypothesis can be formulated? If so, please name an area of science where strict adherence to this principle applies.

There's a clear equivocation there. The point you were responding to was about producing a valid probability calculation, not merely formulating a hypothesis. Obviously proving a hypothesis requires much more evidence than merely formulating one.

As for your little story I will just comment that it is nasty, dishonest and insulting.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by zaius137, posted 05-13-2012 2:11 AM zaius137 has not yet responded

    
Panda
Member (Idle past 1096 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


(1)
Message 56 of 76 (662178)
05-13-2012 6:14 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by zaius137
05-13-2012 2:11 AM


Re: probabiity problems
zaius137 writes:

A magician performing before an audience of evolutionists produces two royal flushes in a row. The crowd stands to its feet in applause proclaiming, “Look improbable events happen all the time”. A single statistician, knowing the probability of pulling a royal flush is (649,350 : 1) and twice is (421,655,422,500 : 1) stands to his feet and yells fraud. The statistician is immediately ejected from the assembly as being closed minded to the possibility of very real magic.


You seem to think that magicians doing card tricks are actually doing "very real magic".
Do you really think a card trick is magic?

This is what you should have written:

quote:
A magician performing before an audience of evolutionists produces two royal flushes in a row. The crowd stands to its feet in applause proclaiming, “That was entertaining!”. A single statistician, knowing the probability of pulling a royal flush is (649,350 : 1) and twice is (421,655,422,500 : 1) knows that slight of hand required to produce two royal flushes. No-one in the assembly believes they have just witnessed a display very real magic.

Tradition and heritage are all dead people's baggage. Stop carrying it!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by zaius137, posted 05-13-2012 2:11 AM zaius137 has not yet responded

  
frako
Member
Posts: 2684
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 57 of 76 (662179)
05-13-2012 6:52 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by zaius137
05-13-2012 2:11 AM


Re: probabiity problems
A magician performing before an audience of evolutionists produces two royal flushes in a row. The crowd stands to its feet in applause proclaiming, “Look improbable events happen all the time”. A single statistician, knowing the probability of pulling a royal flush is (649,350 : 1) and twice is (421,655,422,500 : 1) stands to his feet and yells fraud. The statistician is immediately ejected from the assembly as being closed minded to the possibility of very real magic.

There is a man who won the lottery 7 times duno about American odds at winning the lottery but ours are 1:15380937 my guess is yours are worse because we only have a population of 2 million people. But lets say this man Richard Lustig played with our odds.

the chance of him gettin 7 grand prizes would be using your creationist math would be
1: 203.647.720.442.724.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000


Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand

Click if you dare!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by zaius137, posted 05-13-2012 2:11 AM zaius137 has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18257
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 58 of 76 (662183)
05-13-2012 7:33 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by zaius137
05-13-2012 2:11 AM


Re: probabiity problems, the multi-sided di issue
Hi again zaius137,

To add to what the others have said

I disagree with this statement. ...

Curiously, I note that you did not tell me what the probability of my throwing a 6 was:

quote:
Message 51: Consider that I have a single di in my hand: what is the probability that I will throw a 6? If you don't know how many sides there are AND how it is marked, you cannot calculate the probability.

If you disagree then you should be able to make the probability calculation for throwing a 6, and if you cannot make that calculation then you de facto agree with the statement.

... Do all the variables need to be quantified before any hypothesis can be formulated?

An hypothesis is a guess, not a calculation. It may be an educated guess, based on partial knowledge, as is normally the case in science (where the purpose of the hypothesis is to make predictions to enable testing the hypothesis for validity), but it certainly is not a calculation of any probability.

For instance I could hypothesize that the di in question had at 6 sides and that it was numbered sequentially from 1 up, as is normally observed in most games. If during the course of a number of test throws the numbers 1 through 5 occurred that would tend to validate the hypothesis, although it could be a six-sided di numbered 0 through 5 or an eight-sided di (or one of the other game di available). If I throw either a 0 or a 12, or a letter A, then the hypothesis is invalidated.

Interestingly, I recently found a di in the walls of my house (I am remodeling a circa 1795 colonial cape cod style housee), but the di is of fairly recent vintage: it has a blue square on two sides, a red circle on one side, an "S" on two sides, one in a blue square and the other in a red circle, an "X" on the last side, in a black square. No 6's, so the probability of throwing a 6 with this di is zero.

Enjoy.

ps -- anyone know what game this goes to?


we are limited in our ability to understand
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) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by zaius137, posted 05-13-2012 2:11 AM zaius137 has not yet responded

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 793 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 59 of 76 (662240)
05-14-2012 1:11 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by Tangle
05-13-2012 3:58 AM


Re: probabiity problems
You've just proved Raz's case. The statistician knew how many cards there are in a deck and how many of each suit. Without that information he could not calculate the odds.

Exactly, biologists know which proteins are common to all life, the Chirality, the amino acid components and a great number of other facts about the genome… in essence they know what the cards are… this only goes to show a estimation of a probability can be made.

Edited by zaius137, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Tangle, posted 05-13-2012 3:58 AM Tangle has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by PaulK, posted 05-14-2012 1:21 AM zaius137 has responded
 Message 62 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-14-2012 2:03 AM zaius137 has not yet responded
 Message 65 by RAZD, posted 05-14-2012 7:58 PM zaius137 has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 12575
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 60 of 76 (662241)
05-14-2012 1:21 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by zaius137
05-14-2012 1:11 AM


Re: probabiity problems
So basically creationists argue that the magician must have worked real magic because we can't consider any alternatives to that, other than pure chance...
This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by zaius137, posted 05-14-2012 1:11 AM zaius137 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by zaius137, posted 05-14-2012 1:45 AM PaulK has responded

    
Prev123
4
56Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017