Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   genes, proteins and self-organisation
semilanceata
Junior Member (Idle past 5287 days)
Posts: 12
Joined: 04-21-2008


Message 1 of 14 (513052)
06-24-2009 1:44 PM


I have some questions and would appreciate any non-complex replies (or at least not too complex!). First off: I understand that the majority of genes code for proteins. What do *most* of the non-protein coding genes code for?
My second question is: It seems to me that proteins are far more interesting in trying to get at the heart of life than genes. If proteins are the building blocks of living things (akin to, say, orgainic Lego bricks), then what makes millions of proteins organise themselves so exquisitely? Whilst I accept that self-organisation according to chemical and physical laws (charge affinities and such) must be crucial here, I cannot for the life of me grasp how conglomerates of proteins further and further organise themselves - and how, on a macroscopic level, it all hangs together so to speak. What I keep thinking is that there must be 'self-organising loops' in operation, or something, almost like there is a 'field' at work (like the way a magnetic field wil organise iron filings). Does anyone else ponder these type of questions? Does anyone care? Or is it 'been there, done that, old hat'?

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-24-2009 11:01 PM semilanceata has not replied
 Message 4 by Wounded King, posted 06-25-2009 4:39 AM semilanceata has not replied
 Message 5 by Dr Jack, posted 06-25-2009 4:43 AM semilanceata has replied

  
semilanceata
Junior Member (Idle past 5287 days)
Posts: 12
Joined: 04-21-2008


Message 6 of 14 (513151)
06-25-2009 2:39 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Dr Jack
06-25-2009 4:43 AM


Thanks for the prompt and cogent replies - I will ponder on them and get back to you. I am hungry for new learning.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Dr Jack, posted 06-25-2009 4:43 AM Dr Jack has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by semilanceata, posted 06-25-2009 2:44 PM semilanceata has not replied

  
semilanceata
Junior Member (Idle past 5287 days)
Posts: 12
Joined: 04-21-2008


Message 7 of 14 (513152)
06-25-2009 2:44 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by semilanceata
06-25-2009 2:39 PM


Incidentally, the logo/icon at the top of the page is arguably misleading. For surely evolution is creation in action - in that life is, willy-nilly, an on-going creation, albeit natural and not supernatural. Would not a better logo be natural creation versus supernatural creation?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by semilanceata, posted 06-25-2009 2:39 PM semilanceata has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Blue Jay, posted 06-25-2009 3:10 PM semilanceata has replied

  
semilanceata
Junior Member (Idle past 5287 days)
Posts: 12
Joined: 04-21-2008


Message 9 of 14 (513160)
06-25-2009 4:20 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Blue Jay
06-25-2009 3:10 PM


protein behaviour
Mr Jack - part of your reply about precise protein movement reminded me of a rather fantastic clip I once saw on Youtube. It was a computer animation showing, I think, just the sort of processes you describe, with proteins being escorted in a Tron-like (i.e the movie Tron) fashion outside of the cell. I recall that the narration was almost unreal - even Darwin himself would have fainted from astonishment.
Anyhow, another question occurs (and it is at least partly on topic as it relates to my original question). Do you, or others here, ever consider that life processes (such as protein synthesis/transport etc) represent a natural technology? Obviously 'technology' is a word we generally use only for man-made systems, but it seems that the systems evolved by Nature are, in many ways, more 'technologically' marvelous than those we may fashion, especially when you consider that much of this 'natural technology' operates on a nanotechnological level (and can even self-repair). In other words then, referring to life as a natural technology running on the Universe seems sound to me. Any thoughts?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Blue Jay, posted 06-25-2009 3:10 PM Blue Jay has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Dr Jack, posted 06-25-2009 4:27 PM semilanceata has replied

  
semilanceata
Junior Member (Idle past 5287 days)
Posts: 12
Joined: 04-21-2008


Message 11 of 14 (513162)
06-25-2009 4:55 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Dr Jack
06-25-2009 4:27 PM


Re: protein behaviour
I did not mean to infer that 'natural technology' mimics our own. Only that 'natural technology' seems an apt appraisal of living processes. After all, we all talk about natural selection - and selection is usually a human-based term.
And what about, say, an alien technology? If we discovered such (and maybe it might take us decades to fathom it), it would surely still be described as a technology. In my opinion, 'natural technology' seems a fair enough term. In a similar way, is a ribosome a tool? I say all this because I reckon that our appraisals of life and living systems leave a lot to be desired. Indeed, maybe many religious persons are against evolution because of the way evolution is appraised and described...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Dr Jack, posted 06-25-2009 4:27 PM Dr Jack has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Dr Jack, posted 06-25-2009 5:05 PM semilanceata has replied

  
semilanceata
Junior Member (Idle past 5287 days)
Posts: 12
Joined: 04-21-2008


Message 13 of 14 (513211)
06-26-2009 10:08 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by Dr Jack
06-25-2009 5:05 PM


life's technology
Mr Jack - well, life has many different needs than us (or an alien species). Life's technology has evolved solutions to living and being, our technology embodies solutions to other problems. In any case, what if we mimic life's technology as in the biomimicry movement? What we construct will obviously be described as technology. So surely its source, what it is copying, is also (natural) technology....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Dr Jack, posted 06-25-2009 5:05 PM Dr Jack has not replied

  
semilanceata
Junior Member (Idle past 5287 days)
Posts: 12
Joined: 04-21-2008


Message 14 of 14 (513212)
06-26-2009 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Dr Jack
06-25-2009 4:27 PM


Re: protein behaviour
Mr Jack - also, describing say, your organism or your cat, as consisting of 'stuff what does things' seems to me to devalue life! In any case, I think I may start a new thread about the manner in which we appraise life and the process of evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Dr Jack, posted 06-25-2009 4:27 PM Dr Jack 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