Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Mendel wasn't entirely right
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5032 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 61 of 65 (197459)
04-07-2005 12:22 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by commike37
03-23-2005 9:34 PM


catch the wave
In SCIENCE VOL 307 25 March 2005 NEWS OF THE WEEK/Genetics/Talking About a Revolution:Hidden RNA May Fix Mutant Genes by Elizabeth Pennisi ends with a prediction from Elliot Meyerowitz of CALTECH that "I am not sure the mechanism will turn out to be the right one,But I can't think of any [explanation ]that's much brighter than what they have"(bold added).
but
THERMODYNAMICS OF LIVING SYSTEM EVOLUTION,
ENTROPY AND GIBBS’ FREE ENERGY
G. P. Gladyshev

said
quote:
The selection of the principle of the substance stability gives the possibility to explain (unfortunately up to now only on a qualitative level) the reasons for the existence of the reverse thermodynamic connections between various hierarchies of the living matter. The possibility of the practically infinite development of the bioworld (on the time scale comparable with the time - the duration of biological evolution) may be also explained.
and he wrote in another place about the "interference" hierarchical thermodynamics "inputs" to phenotypic change. There might be in reality a brighter consequence after we rethink if this is REALLY non-Mendelian rather than only appearing so so as not to raise NeoDarwinist anticreationist babble. Do we reopen the Mendelian-Biometrician debate? It seems that biologists are not ready for such across the board explanations. Perhaps EVC being so fun is making this realization possible for the rest of the scientific community. That Georgi cited EVC in literature is a start. We just need a finishing technology.
I had actually recognized IN an Animal Science LAB@CU in 92 ofthe possibility of a non-DNA INFORMATION heritable circuit, that maintained the centriole. My references to "reverse information flow" here on EVC may be a subset of this newer news. I have known for years that the information from my grandparents WAS reliable but that from my parents has not been.
EvC Forum: How can evolution explain body symmetry?
http://EvC Forum: All about Brad McFall. -->EvC Forum: All about Brad McFall.
http://EvC Forum: All about Brad McFall. -->EvC Forum: All about Brad McFall.
http://EvC Forum: does it matter which is or not when there is value commercially? -->EvC Forum: does it matter which is or not when there is value commercially?
This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 04-07-2005 11:47 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by commike37, posted 03-23-2005 9:34 PM commike37 has not replied

  
Mr. Ex Nihilo
Member (Idle past 1337 days)
Posts: 712
Joined: 04-12-2005


Message 62 of 65 (198551)
04-12-2005 10:44 AM


That was a very interesting article.

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5032 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 63 of 65 (199042)
04-13-2005 6:45 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Minnemooseus
03-23-2005 11:29 PM


Re: Leaving it to the biologists, but I will mention...
I see now why I dont read "terry". It didnt get in the way of my understanding of Random natural selection in fact it has helped me to think I might be relating physics and biology more closely. I want to spend some effort responding to irrefutable Mike so I wanted to indicate something in this thread as I said I would. This is not all.
Weiner writes in "Cybernetics" about the change in physics that thinking about a quasi-erodic hypotheis or ergodicty by Koopman, Von Neumann and Birkoff as if it was an advance from the use implicitly by Gibbs and or as resolved by Lebesque.
The strange crossing of generations seems extremely interesting in that it might present a case where as Gibbs thought two types of averages (time and space) are related. I have begun to wonder in physicists have not abstracted too far by trying to move beyond the simple ergodic hypothesis that all coordinates in a volume can be reached by moving through a phase space.
I am not sure if I understand it correctly but it seemed to possible that a 1-D energy hypersurface was not suspect and so I began to think if biology is not a 1-D energy hypersurface connected by base pairs and their expressions. This lead me to think that biological change is an ergodic system and I wondered if the symbols A and a in Mendel (above and below the line at issue in these plants) do not form
TWO
ergodic paths out of phase. In otherwords this might assist in the problem of multiple alleomorphs that Wright noted by trying to compute the phase average of the alleomorphs...
Anyway the ball of flowers didnt need to put evolution or mendelism in question for me but the explanation such as this seems lacking in the nonevcliterature and i think it is because I still can not tell if collections of flowers inform the measure of it or if it is more physically the other way around despite the physcists move to weaker forms of the hypothesis. Anyway I have not figured out the entropy in this case.
This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 04-13-2005 05:47 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Minnemooseus, posted 03-23-2005 11:29 PM Minnemooseus has not replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5032 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 64 of 65 (205520)
05-06-2005 6:52 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by Wounded King
04-07-2005 8:19 AM


WK,
I dont think I will get much into this anytime soon as it appears the information I would describe has been at least indicated by a post in response to the e-paper on
polllen selection
you neatly cited.
quote:
Posted by: Dana R-S at April 29, 2005 12:27 PM
I, also am a PhD student. I did my undergraduate work in plant genetics/plant breeding, and worked in canola breeding for several summers. I’m now working on developmental cardiac genetics.
I have read a bit of Petr Gariaev’s work, via a rough translation/abstract he supplied me with, and some figures with a bit of explanation. Essentially, the Russian work is suggesting that DNA has quantum mechanics-compatible qualitites - ie. electromagnetic signals, in addition to the actual nucleotide sequence. Like the Lolle et al work, this seems pretty far fetched, and I’m not at all familiar with quantum mechanics physics, so I really can’t evaluate the claim. But the idea behind it would suggest that the reversion events that Lolle et al are seeing would be due to this electromagnetic memory of what nucleotide should be in a particular position.
So this would be an alternate explanation to the RNA cache. I don’t know if it’s any more plausible than an RNA cache or mutation. Perhaps it’s more of a directed mutation.
Have you heard of the ‘wave genetics’ theory before? I’m hesitant to make much out of a topic when i can’t read the primary literature, as most of the early work seems to be in Russian. On the other side of the coin, there seems to be so many questions that we aren’t finding answers for by simply looking at the genetic code, and some of the answers we do find are completely unexpected. Perhaps we need another depth to DNA/genetics. I don’t know.
I am still into this too dee bput you, the king, know etc. Perhaps after every one gets drunk listening to sNOop goD @CU I'llC to it later.
Home | Cornell Chronicle
rolling stones'

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Wounded King, posted 04-07-2005 8:19 AM Wounded King has not replied

  
wnope
Inactive Member


Message 65 of 65 (209215)
05-17-2005 11:19 PM


I recall that one
Yes, I remember hearing that article and I found it fascinating. We're learning new things about DNA every day. For instance, what we once considered junk DNA may actually contain a new form of RNA that regulates expression of extron genes.
As for this hurting evolution, it really doesn't. Understand that Mendelian principles, at least the ones in question, do not apply to most genes. Rarely is one trait coded by one gene, in which there is a recessive and dominant form. Usually a multitude of genes with various allele forms influence each other and work together, sometimes even hindering the expression of each other.
This doesn't impact Mendels most important rules, the Law of Segregation and Independant Inheritance. Just for kicks, scientists have already found counter-examples to each law (such as non-disjunction and linkage groups).

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024