Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,909 Year: 4,166/9,624 Month: 1,037/974 Week: 364/286 Day: 7/13 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   ID, Information, and Human Perception
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 49 (91608)
03-10-2004 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Yaro
03-10-2004 1:40 PM


Using the alphabet soup analogy, this is pretty close to what scientists find in amino acid sequences.
J Theor Biol. 2000 Oct 7;206(3):379-86.
Information content of protein sequences.
Weiss O, Jimenez-Montano MA, Herzel H.
Institute for Theoretical Biology, Humboldt University Berlin, Invalidenstr. 43, Berlin, D-10115, Germany.
The complexity of large sets of non-redundant protein sequences is measured. This is done by estimating the Shannon entropy as well as applying compression algorithms to estimate the algorithmic complexity. The estimators are also applied to randomly generated surrogates of the protein data. Our results show that proteins are fairly close to random sequences. The entropy reduction due to correlations is only about 1%. However, precise estimations of the entropy of the source are not possible due to finite sample effects. Compression algorithms also indicate that the redundancy is in the order of 1%. These results confirm the idea that protein sequences can be regarded as slightly edited random strings. We discuss secondary structure and low-complexity regions as causes of the redundancy observed. The findings are related to numerical and biochemical experiments with random polypeptides. Copyright 2000 Academic Press.
I wonder what mechanism could slightly edit amino acid sequences? Hmmm, could it be . . . random mutation and natural selection?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Yaro, posted 03-10-2004 1:40 PM Yaro has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Saviourmachine, posted 03-15-2004 10:32 AM Loudmouth has not replied

  
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 31 of 49 (92954)
03-17-2004 4:27 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by Saviourmachine
03-17-2004 3:31 PM


Re: The existence of information
quote:
The existence of information
What I want to stress is that there is structure and self-organizing even without human observers. I regard self-organizing as a kind of probing, a primitive kind of observing. To assign the term information to that particular data set is a small step by then.
Self-organization -> probing -> observing -> interpreting -> information
I agree that there is organization and structure independent of human observation. However, this organization and structure occurs independent of the presence of an intelligence. It is a consequence of physics and chemistry, not foresight. The organization that humans create is non-reproductive, such as watches or automobiles. Their constructions relies solely upon our action. For organisms, they already contain the necessary mechanisms for replication without outside help, other than chemicals they need for replication. Also, the "information" that they need for doing this is also chemical in nature. This type of information is different than information created by intelligence. For example, it is not the composition of the ink (chemical) that matters, but rather the abstract forms of the ink stain. In cells, the "chemical makeup of the ink" does matter, with DNA being the ink.
A cell can only probe, observe, and interpret within the guidelines set out within it's DNA. If A happens, B HAS to happen. There is no decision making process. The real information within DNA is which mutations are selected for by the environment, or rather the shaping of the DNA sequence by evolutionary mechanisms.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Saviourmachine, posted 03-17-2004 3:31 PM Saviourmachine has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Saviourmachine, posted 03-20-2004 6:13 AM Loudmouth has not replied

  
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 45 of 49 (105987)
05-06-2004 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by Saviourmachine
05-06-2004 7:07 AM


Re: The existence of information
quote:
DNA does even have semantics, not any sequence is valid, just as human writings.
This isn't true. The syntax for DNA sequences is the environment. The validity of the sequence depends on its benefice WITHIN an environment. Human writing has an agreed on abstraction that allows us to interpret language. Language is also forward looking. DNA has no such level of abstraction, but rather a trial and error system through the environment that communicates information to the genome. Also, DNA is not looking at future events, only what is affecting it now. DNA and human language are quite different, and they do not share a common definition of "syntax".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Saviourmachine, posted 05-06-2004 7:07 AM Saviourmachine has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024