Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-27-2019 12:16 AM
25 online now:
PaulK, Pressie, Theodoric (3 members, 22 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Upcoming Birthdays: ooh-child
Post Volume:
Total: 854,843 Year: 9,879/19,786 Month: 2,301/2,119 Week: 337/724 Day: 0/62 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Natural selection forced complexity to increase?
Andya Primanda
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 13 (17058)
09-10-2002 5:57 AM


http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/97/9/4463

'We show that, because natural selection forces genomes to behave as a natural "Maxwell Demon," within a fixed environment, genomic complexity is forced to increase.'

I was referred to this article by some anticreationist website trying to refute W. Dembski's information challenge. However, I cannot grasp what this means. What the hell is a Maxwell Demon and why does it increases complexity?


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Peter, posted 09-10-2002 8:13 AM Andya Primanda has not yet responded
 Message 4 by Andya Primanda, posted 09-16-2002 5:06 AM Andya Primanda has not yet responded
 Message 6 by Brad McFall, posted 09-16-2002 12:14 PM Andya Primanda has not yet responded

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 2096 days)
Posts: 2160
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 2 of 13 (17075)
09-10-2002 8:13 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Andya Primanda
09-10-2002 5:57 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Andya Primanda:
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/97/9/4463

'We show that, because natural selection forces genomes to behave as a natural "Maxwell Demon," within a fixed environment, genomic complexity is forced to increase.'

I was referred to this article by some anticreationist website trying to refute W. Dembski's information challenge. However, I cannot grasp what this means. What the hell is a Maxwell Demon and why does it increases complexity?


I found this::

http://www.maxwellian.demon.co.uk/name.html


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Andya Primanda, posted 09-10-2002 5:57 AM Andya Primanda has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Dr_Tazimus_maximus, posted 09-10-2002 10:42 AM Peter has responded

    
Dr_Tazimus_maximus
Member (Idle past 1390 days)
Posts: 402
From: Gaithersburg, MD, USA
Joined: 03-19-2002


Message 3 of 13 (17082)
09-10-2002 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by Peter
09-10-2002 8:13 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Peter:
quote:
Originally posted by Andya Primanda:
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/97/9/4463

'We show that, because natural selection forces genomes to behave as a natural "Maxwell Demon," within a fixed environment, genomic complexity is forced to increase.'

I was referred to this article by some anticreationist website trying to refute W. Dembski's information challenge. However, I cannot grasp what this means. What the hell is a Maxwell Demon and why does it increases complexity?


I found this::

http://www.maxwellian.demon.co.uk/name.html


Cool paper and cool site on Maxwells Demon. My thanks to you both.

------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Peter, posted 09-10-2002 8:13 AM Peter has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Quetzal, posted 09-16-2002 7:18 AM Dr_Tazimus_maximus has not yet responded
 Message 7 by Peter, posted 09-26-2002 7:01 AM Dr_Tazimus_maximus has not yet responded

    
Andya Primanda
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 13 (17510)
09-16-2002 5:06 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Andya Primanda
09-10-2002 5:57 AM


bump

http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/97/9/4463

Anybody feeling vindicated or threatened by Adami et al.'s paper yet? They show that selection can minimize random information to produce complexity!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Andya Primanda, posted 09-10-2002 5:57 AM Andya Primanda has not yet responded

  
Quetzal
Member (Idle past 4045 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 5 of 13 (17518)
09-16-2002 7:18 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Dr_Tazimus_maximus
09-10-2002 10:42 AM


Hey, Dr. T:

Here are a couple of other interesting papers: Sequence Logos, Machine/Channel Capacity, Maxwell’s Demon, and Molecular Computers

Self-Organization of Template-Replicating Polymers and the Spontaneous Rise of Genetic Information

Evolution of Biological Complexity

Evolution of Biological Information.

All of these cover either some aspect of Maxwell's Demon or the evolution of biological complexity. Enjoy.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Dr_Tazimus_maximus, posted 09-10-2002 10:42 AM Dr_Tazimus_maximus has not yet responded

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 3206 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 6 of 13 (17534)
09-16-2002 12:14 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Andya Primanda
09-10-2002 5:57 AM


Nice link;
Another place I have to get back to and re or read;;

When I went into the Studio to Broadcast Locally c/e on TV I came out being confused what a sequence is that is not a series. I still do not understand this difference for the promotion for either c or e can not be even the context yet the business models seem to imply that the global ecomomy may so operate. I dunno. Maybe this time I will actually address neutral evolution directly.

You are absolutely correct to wonder how this article can be used *against* creationism for I was unable in the knoweledge we biologists actually posses to get beyond the thesis/antithesis in the first senetence as a $trend$ for the &cash [value]) of any evolution thinking has this being DISCUSSED by evolutuionists as "species selection" from which kimura's etc thought probably devolves if i was to very fy this by a reading beyond that LLoyd gives in The Structure and Confrimation of Evolutionary Theory ((for any difference of upward vs downward causation)) while agree more likely multiplicatvely rather than additively with lloyd that this speices underselection could be reduced without genic selection to a trend visible across what would in geologic time be multiple horizons but I have not put out my ideas a wrote up at home last semester on how phytons may havre gotten to warm eggs by eating e-fish and using 'elelctromotive force' for heating in Maxwell's analogy of attraction and heat for any repulsion the reading o Weiner may give an ant for a brain etc chaegeuxetc etc but my version is just as narrative and I prefer to keep my personal version private untill I derive results from it deductively and thus general. The word the evolutionst is using against one here is "trend" and I think that cone or not much of what Gould thinks is not a line IS but this requries to put and be put on the line that only you or I or someone else must to before it is... etc.

I got over this %dream* of (demon) by trying to read what was true in the book "The Human Use of Human Beings" by Norbert Wiener 1954 out of Houghton Mifflin with sub-title 'Cybernetics and Society

[This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 09-16-2002]

[This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 09-16-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Andya Primanda, posted 09-10-2002 5:57 AM Andya Primanda has not yet responded

    
Peter
Member (Idle past 2096 days)
Posts: 2160
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 7 of 13 (18335)
09-26-2002 7:01 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Dr_Tazimus_maximus
09-10-2002 10:42 AM


I've noticed sparse creationist response to this ... any
particular reason?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Dr_Tazimus_maximus, posted 09-10-2002 10:42 AM Dr_Tazimus_maximus has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by nos482, posted 09-26-2002 7:33 AM Peter has not yet responded
 Message 9 by peter borger, posted 09-27-2002 3:54 AM Peter has responded

    
nos482
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 13 (18340)
09-26-2002 7:33 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Peter
09-26-2002 7:01 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Peter:
I've noticed sparse creationist response to this ... any
particular reason?

Embarrassment?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Peter, posted 09-26-2002 7:01 AM Peter has not yet responded

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 5838 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 9 of 13 (18403)
09-27-2002 3:54 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Peter
09-26-2002 7:01 AM


Dear peter,

I think this articel is rather technical. Maybe you --or somebodey else-- can give a brief summary of the research conducted in this article, what results they got and how they draw the conclusions. And what the implications are for biological systems. I think that would really help a lot,

peter


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Peter, posted 09-26-2002 7:01 AM Peter has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Peter, posted 09-30-2002 7:32 AM peter borger has not yet responded

    
Peter
Member (Idle past 2096 days)
Posts: 2160
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 10 of 13 (18585)
09-30-2002 7:32 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by peter borger
09-27-2002 3:54 AM


The article addresses the issue of increasing complexity
within genomes.

It first defines complexity as the amount of information that
the genome contains. Information here is used to mean functional
portions of the genome. They state that this can only be an
approximate measure, since we cannot be 100% certain of a
lack of function for any segment.

The segments that do not contain 'information' in this sense
are referred to as 'entropy' (from Shannon information
theory).

The 'entropy' is considered 'blank tape' upon which new function
can be recorded by random mutation + selection.

Selection acts as a 'measure' by which changes in the genome
are filtered such that an increase in entropy (or corruption
of information) are filtered out due to the resulting lack
of fitness.

Since only changes that decrease the entropy are allowed through
the filter, complexity (in the context defined in the article)
is forced to increase.

As to research approach ... the authors appear to have applied
mathematical approaches from information theory to define
complexity within the genome.

The major assumption they appear to have made is that the
'entropy' is indeed non-functional (an assupmtion that PB
has also made here).

That's how I read the article, and would tend to agree that
with selection causeing a bias towards keeping 'functional'
DNA that any mutations that 'broke' functional DNA would
be removed (by death probably) while any that caused a non-functional
section to become functional would be likely to be retained
should it make the organism more fit (in the context of
it's environment).

Note the article makes no claim that genomic complexity is
related to structural complexity.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by peter borger, posted 09-27-2002 3:54 AM peter borger has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Brad McFall, posted 09-30-2002 11:56 AM Peter has responded
 Message 13 by Andya Primanda, posted 10-07-2002 6:49 AM Peter has not yet responded

    
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 3206 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 11 of 13 (18600)
09-30-2002 11:56 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Peter
09-30-2002 7:32 AM


Franics Crick once wrote with regard to biology " A rock is much less ordered". It seems to me that on some notion of information a rock could be more ordered than a virus able to mutate and "evolve"

We seem to be confusing the statistics of the matter from the noise in the signal. Mandelbrot KNEW that something other than a normal distribution could be the nature of the noise in the telephone pattern but we have not a genetic science able to investigate the many more than the already perhpas too many chemical combinations to investigate in the time it takes ATT to change it's TV commerical. Apes can not dial down this centerd slow.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Peter, posted 09-30-2002 7:32 AM Peter has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Peter, posted 10-01-2002 3:11 AM Brad McFall has not yet responded

    
Peter
Member (Idle past 2096 days)
Posts: 2160
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 12 of 13 (18686)
10-01-2002 3:11 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by Brad McFall
09-30-2002 11:56 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Brad McFall:
Franics Crick once wrote with regard to biology " A rock is much less ordered". It seems to me that on some notion of information a rock could be more ordered than a virus able to mutate and "evolve"

It depends largely what one means by 'ordered'.

I think I would tend to agree that something like a rock, or
a metal is much more ordered than any biological system in
the sense that organisms are somewhat mutable.

quote:
Originally posted by Brad McFall:

We seem to be confusing the statistics of the matter from the noise in the signal. Mandelbrot KNEW that something other than a normal distribution could be the nature of the noise in the telephone pattern but we have not a genetic science able to investigate the many more than the already perhpas too many chemical combinations to investigate in the time it takes ATT to change it's TV commerical.

That was why I brought out the assumption made in the article
that the non-functional sections are indeed non-functional. We
do not actually know this for sure.

Iff they are, then the article makes a good suggestion for how
genomic complexity could be forced to increase via selection.

quote:
Originally posted by Brad McFall:

Apes can not dial down this centerd slow.

Are you sure about that?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Brad McFall, posted 09-30-2002 11:56 AM Brad McFall has not yet responded

    
Andya Primanda
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 13 (19199)
10-07-2002 6:49 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Peter
09-30-2002 7:32 AM


Seriously, this thread is underdiscussed.

These approaches should be considered theoretical, because they use digital organisms. Are any of you aware of other papers which show the increase in complexity in vitro not in silico?

Peter Borger, you replying to this?

Admins, can I promote this thread as this month's Topic of The Week?

[This message has been edited by Andya Primanda, 10-07-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Peter, posted 09-30-2002 7:32 AM Peter has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019