|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: coded information in DNA | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WordBeLogos Member (Idle past 5423 days) Posts: 103 From: Ohio Joined: |
Fellas,
Who is the "reader" / "listener" who agrees to the "symbols" in DNA? Your definition excludes all transfers of information that do not have a sentient receiver who can agree to the code. That means that it cannot apply to the chemistry of life. Try again. If your computer automatically logs onto Nortons website and downloads antivirus updates, communication takes place, but not between conscious minds. Parts of the machines communicate with other parts, to read and carry out the instructions. Therefore, communication is taking place. It’s just machines communicating via computer languages. By observation, all computer programs, all codes (TCP/IP etc.) and all symbolic communication systems outside the realm of life, (radio, tribal drum beats, thermometers etc) are all ultimately designed by conscious minds. -Word Edited by WordBeLogos, : No reason given. John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WordBeLogos Member (Idle past 5423 days) Posts: 103 From: Ohio Joined: |
Hi Son,
It would be more meaningful for you to try to rebute the different natural scenarios that could have given rise to DNA...So even if you were right about DNA being a code and not gravitation and all the stuffs you discussed about, the fact that all the codes you have seen being produced were the results of intelligence wouldn't mean there are no other way of producing codes. If you believe a naturalistic explanation is possible, that's fine. Can you please present the empirical data supporting that explanation? It still may be possible someday, but as of right now, we observe that no successful explanation has ever been produced.In the complete absence of any empirical support for a naturalistic cause, it requires assumptions that are empirically unsubstantiated and thus fails to qualify as a scientific statement. An explanation is not evidence. What we do know, without dispute, is that all codes we do know the origin of are designed by a intelligence. 100% of our experience tells us that naturalistic causes do not produce codes. -WOrd
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WordBeLogos Member (Idle past 5423 days) Posts: 103 From: Ohio Joined: |
Hello Bluejay and thanks,
For example, computers, radios and human languages are not inextricably tied to their substrates. You can download information onto a computer, adjust the reception of a radio and interpret several different languages, all without changing the chemical composition of your computer, radio or eardrum. However, you cannot change the information content of DNA without changing the chemical composition of the DNA. This suggests that the information content of DNA is just a chemical property of the molecule, and not an externally-enforced "message." This is a good point, I'll have to concider this abit more myself. But as for now, I'm seeing it like this, the code (information) in DNA is contained in the sequence of base pairs. So the information changes as the sequence changes. With a book, the message changes when we change the sequence of letters. With spoken language, different information produces a different sequence of soundwaves which enter the ear, thus producing a different sequence of vibrations on the ear drum, thus a different code / message. And likewise with computers. Nothing changes but the sequence of what the medium already consists of. Is this what you mean? I may not have understood you correctly. -Word
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WordBeLogos Member (Idle past 5423 days) Posts: 103 From: Ohio Joined: |
Hi Perdition,
If you include thermometers, then you're opening a whole new can fo worms. What about a water hole that raises and lowers based on atmospheric pressure? It's sending us messages about the atmospheric pressure, but it wasn't created by a conscious mind. Please refer to the prior posts. This does not qualify as coded information as per Shannon's comunication model. -Word
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WordBeLogos Member (Idle past 5423 days) Posts: 103 From: Ohio Joined: |
Hi Dr,
The empirical data supporting a naturalistic explanation is that everything we observe is consistent with the laws of nature. Except the sequencing of base pairs, producing coded information. Do you have an example other than DNA? DNA is the very thing in question. We have 100% of human observation that mind can produce coded information. 0% OBSERVATION that the laws of nature can. That's your belief. Not "empirical data supporting" it. Just because it is here today, isn't evidence HOW it got here.
On the contrary. 100% of our experience tells us that no code is produced by a violation of the laws of nature. This assumes the coded information in DNA *DID* arise through the laws of nature, this is what we are questioning. We wouldn't be having this discussion right now if we already knew. -Word
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WordBeLogos Member (Idle past 5423 days) Posts: 103 From: Ohio Joined: |
Hello NosyNed,
Stating it doesn't make it so. Why, exactly doesn't it qualify as per Shannon? Be very precise, please. Mr.Marshall explains....
pmarshall writes: If we say the temperature in the room is 70 degrees F, we have used a convention of symbols to describe a very real characteristic of air. However 70 degrees F" is the symbolic representation of a man-made encoding / decoding system; the air itself is just molecules in motion. Now if mercury is sitting in a tube (a naturally occurring thermometer, let’s say) and it rises when the temperature rises, we still do not yet have an encoding / decoding system. However, if we take a red pen and mark degree marks on the tube so that the rising of the mercury corresponds to a specific temperature, now we do have an encoding / decoding system, and when we read the thermometer, we have coded information. This is consistent with my definition of coded information" as a system of symbols used by an encoding and decoding mechanism, which transmits a message that is independent of the communication medium" -Word John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WordBeLogos Member (Idle past 5423 days) Posts: 103 From: Ohio Joined: |
Hey Percy,
Gotchya brother. I'll assume the quote for Nosy qualifies as an "un-lengthy-cut-n-paste." Peace. -Word John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WordBeLogos Member (Idle past 5423 days) Posts: 103 From: Ohio Joined: |
Hi lyx2no,
We have the observational evidence of DNA encoding information without violation of any known law of nature. It merely obeys the rules of chemistry. The *function* of the DNA molecule certainly does obey the laws of nature. The *functioning* of our computers certainly do obey the laws of physics. But hardware, it's properties and it's obeying of the laws of nature do not account for the software it contains.
Yockey writes: The reason that there are principles of biology that cannot be derived from the laws of physics and chemistry lies simply in the fact that the genetic information content of the genome for constructing even the simplest organisms is much larger than the information content of these laws. The existence of a genome and the genetic code divides living organisms from nonliving matter. There is nothing in the physico-chemical world that remotely resembles reactions being determined by a sequence and codes between sequences. -Word Edited by WordBeLogos, : No reason given. Edited by WordBeLogos, : No reason given. John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WordBeLogos Member (Idle past 5423 days) Posts: 103 From: Ohio Joined: |
Son,
Son writes: Those are the ones you should try to rebute by explaining why they are impossible. It's not impossible that the laws of conservation of matter and energy might be wrong. But, as of now, we have no evidence to the contrary. I'm using the same reasoning here, all of human observation tells us that matter and energy cannot be destroyed. The same thing is true with coded information systems such as DNA, but with one exception, we observe that minds do produce coded information systems. Natural processes do not. -Word Edited by WordBeLogos, : No reason given. John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WordBeLogos Member (Idle past 5423 days) Posts: 103 From: Ohio Joined: |
Hey Dr,
Dr writes: Show me one thing in the replication, transcription, and translation of DNA that is not explicable in terms of the chemistry of the molecules involved. There is none. The question that we can’t answer, is where the code came from in the first place. The question of where the molecule came from and how it operates is an important one but not relevant to the discussion at hand. -Word John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WordBeLogos Member (Idle past 5423 days) Posts: 103 From: Ohio Joined: |
bluegenes,
That doesn't answer my question. Read it carefully. Note the word "agreed" in your definition, and the word "sentient" in the lines you quote from me. Computers do not "agree" to anything. Life forms do not "agree" to read the code in DNA. But who is actually agreeing through the two machines? Prior minds, through programming.
pmarshall writes: "You could say the same thing about a computer, where the ability to interpret instructions also depends on instructions. There’s nothing fundamentally mysterious about how the instructions are followed, the only puzzle about any of this is the question of where the instructions came from in the first place. Nobody puzzles over the computer because we know it’s designed." -Word John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WordBeLogos Member (Idle past 5423 days) Posts: 103 From: Ohio Joined: |
Just got called into work guys, gtg, peace.
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WordBeLogos Member (Idle past 5423 days) Posts: 103 From: Ohio Joined: |
Hello Bluejay,
Bluejay writes: Right. And, the medium in the DNA code is different from the medium of all the human-made codes. The medium of the DNA code is the same as the medium of the pebble code and the gravity code: inherent physical/chemical properties that line up according to "laws of nature." When we see an arrangement of pebbles that say "It is appointed unto man once to die, then after this the judgment," is this just the inherent physical properties of pebbles lining up according to "laws of nature?" What does this arrangment of pebbles now contain that they didn't while just lying around randomly? Still the same pebbles. Still the same properties. Still the same laws of nature. They now contain information (a message) which did not originate from the laws of nature or the properties of the pebbles. Precisely the case in DNA. Edited by WordBeLogos, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WordBeLogos Member (Idle past 5423 days) Posts: 103 From: Ohio Joined: |
Guys, gotta run again, time is very limited these days...i'll catch back in a bit.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WordBeLogos Member (Idle past 5423 days) Posts: 103 From: Ohio Joined: |
Michamus writes: WordBeLogos writes:
But as for now, I'm seeing it like this, the code (information) in DNA is contained in the sequence of base pairs. So the information changes as the sequence changes. With a book, the message changes when we change the sequence of letters. The huge difference here is you can arbitrarily change those words anyway you want, and it not affect the message at all. An example would be if you read the words "Sit down". You then write the words as 'Kehna'. If a person who understands English and Pashtu read the words you wrote, he would know that it meant the same thing as 'Sit down', and thus nothing has really changed. The communication is independent of the medium completely.Whereas with DNA, things change completely. If you decide to change the symbols being used for DNA, you haven't actually changed the DNA itself. DNA requires that the molecular structure be a certain way, for it to function a certain way. Change the molecules, and you change the message entirely. As an example, if you were to change ACACGT to ACGTAC the entire function has changed. DNA is not independent of the medium, as it IS the medium. But the difference here is, as you said, "If a person who understands English *AND* Pashtu." The fact remains, both languages use a unique set of agreed upon symbols which represent the same thing. That's all. Each langauge agrees on the same set of symbols. DNA language agrees on the same set of symbols likewise. English agrees with english symbols. Pashtu agrees with Pashtu symbols. DNA agrees with DNA symbols. -Word John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024