|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
posted June 18, 2009 02:02 AM |
|
Edited by TheDeath at 02:04, 18 Jun 2009.
|
Thank you for the detailed analysis (wasn't expecting it), the reason I picked the Big Bang is because it was in a very tight space so quantum effects were probably significant. (I realize most of what I said were assumptions and very inconclusive as it requires perfect knowledge about the Universe and how it works, so I wasn't really expecting you to so seriously reply to it.  ).
Quote:
Ok, you don’t like the scientific explanation. Consider the analogy of language.
Actually I liked the chemistry explanation much better 
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted June 18, 2009 02:16 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Thank you for the detailed analysis (wasn't expecting it), the reason I picked the Big Bang is because it was in a very tight space so quantum effects were probably significant. (I realize most of what I said were assumptions and very inconclusive as it requires perfect knowledge about the Universe and how it works, so I wasn't really expecting you to so seriously reply to it. ).
Well, physicists don't really fully understand how QM behaves in a singularity yet (relativisitic effects, and all) and that's a major direction of modern theoretical physics.
Quote:
Actually I liked the chemistry explanation much better
Well there you go then.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
Rarensu
Known Hero
Formerly known as RTI
|
|
posted June 18, 2009 10:27 AM |
|
|
Dear Corribus,
You're absolutely right. It is naive to assume that amino acids have no preference as to how they form polypeptides. Let's suppose that 99.999999999999999999% of the amino acid combinations are impossible.
number of combinations for a 500-chain
20^500 =
10^650
number of possible combinations for a 500-chain
10^650 * 10^-20 =
10^630
You're also right about how horrifying creationism is. However, I'm not a creationist.
Why are we even having this argument? Neither of us believes that the first cell was assembled randomly. Instead, we should be arguing over which non-random natural process assembled the first cell.
____________
Sincerely,
A Proponent of Spelling, Grammar, Punctuation, and Courtesy.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 18, 2009 10:55 AM |
|
|
I would rather like to know why everyone thinks that a cell is so special. Or, to use another term. Far-fetched. Why is a cell far-fetched? The term "life" or "living" for a cell does have a certain meaning, but of course a cell is as far away from a complex organism as a human as it gets.
So. Why is a cell - with the properties it has that amounts to calling it the first building block pf "life" so far-fetched?
|
|
Rarensu
Known Hero
Formerly known as RTI
|
|
posted June 18, 2009 11:04 AM |
|
Edited by Rarensu at 11:06, 18 Jun 2009.
|
A cell is not the first building block of life.
If you dissect a human cell under a microscope, you will discover that it is as beautiful and complicated as rest of the human body is. It has structures as detailed as a skeleton, components as specialized as a heart. A cell is nowhere near the level of ultimate simplicity.
What, then, you might ask, is the first building block of life?
*shrug*
We've never seen anything simpler than a cell, that could reasonably be called "alive", so it isn't really possible to answer the question.
____________
Sincerely,
A Proponent of Spelling, Grammar, Punctuation, and Courtesy.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 18, 2009 11:44 AM |
|
|
|
But then you wouldn't know or have an idea how "natural" or probable or random the development of a cell is.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted June 18, 2009 02:41 PM |
|
|
"Aliveness" is a rather arbitrary categorization. Scientists have been arguing over the definition of this term for... well, forever.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted June 18, 2009 09:26 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I would rather like to know why everyone thinks that a cell is so special. Or, to use another term. Far-fetched. Why is a cell far-fetched? The term "life" or "living" for a cell does have a certain meaning, but of course a cell is as far away from a complex organism as a human as it gets.
Are you joking? You are just drawing completely arbitrary lines. A cell has all the information needed to create a full-sized human given enough "food" (energy or whatever).
May I ask what makes full-sized humans special?
Certainly not the information of the chemicals they represent -- that's stored in a single cell.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted June 18, 2009 09:29 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Certainly not the information of the chemicals they represent -- that's stored in a single cell.
Yeah, but all that information is not expressed/utilized in every cell.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted June 18, 2009 09:35 PM |
|
|
Of course not, if it was, then they would randomly assemble. The reason they don't is because of the information itself.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted June 18, 2009 09:42 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Of course not, if it was, then they would randomly assemble. The reason they don't is because of the information itself.
Right. So... what was the question again?
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 18, 2009 10:11 PM |
|
|
What I want to know is, what makes cells, life, human and so on so special
What makes them more special, for example, than the fact that big lumps of matter cirvle round giant energy proiders, and that one of those lumps seem to have had a convenient collision with a pretty bi object, making sure that the self-rotation was sped up enough to provide the right climate, bit not to fast, which the lump made sure that the collision split off? Earl in the history of this system.
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted June 18, 2009 11:31 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Right. So... what was the question again?
I don't know. I think something that the entire human information is needed in a single cell, not the full body. After all, that's what makes us human, the information. Otherwise we would be just random atoms. (not even resembling a human, maybe air atoms, food atoms, whatever grows into the human and arranges given the information ).
Quote:
What I want to know is, what makes cells, life, human and so on so special
Ah I must have misunderstood you then. I thought you said that full-scale "complex" humans are more special than cells. Sorry again, my bad.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted June 19, 2009 01:13 AM |
|
|
what if you could visualize knowledge like an imagery and tappable by certain keys of pre existing knowledge!!
I am not saying whether or not I can or do, as knowing one can would not be revealed sometimes, but I say that in no way to know that I am knowing!
Anyways, would that be, paranormal? I personnel think it would be to a regular path of degree (IE human conception ability), and even on some levels of simplistic degree.
____________
What are you up to
|
|
Rarensu
Known Hero
Formerly known as RTI
|
|
posted June 19, 2009 02:17 AM |
|
Edited by Rarensu at 02:19, 19 Jun 2009.
|
Quote:
A cell has all the information needed to create a full-sized human given enough "food" (energy or whatever).
Back in 1990, we started the "human genome project". Everyone was so excited about all the wonderful things we would be able to do once we knew where the genes were. Whatever happened to that?
We finished it, and it was a big embarrassment to biologists everywhere. The human body has a lot of different proteins; at least 50,000; possibly as many as 2,000,000. Biologists thought that they needed 70,000 genes for 70,000 proteins, and then about 30,000 genes to regulate them (since regulators are so simple, often they get used more than once). But we only found 25,000 genes for proteins and 10,000 regulators.
Wait. What? We have to build a human and we only get HALF the information we need? What's up with that?
There are four possible conclusions to draw from this.
1) Genetics is a HELL of a lot more complicated than we thought. I'm talking sundials to digital watches here. [whine]But if it gets any more complicated then we'll NEVER understand it...[/whine]
2) The missing genes are somewhere else in the cell, instead of in the DNA like we thought it would be. [incredulous]But where else could it be? RNA? That's a laugh.[/incredulous]
3) An individual cell does not contain all the information necessary to build the organism. [WTF?]NO WAI!!!1[/WTF?]
4) Those guys down in the Genome labs pulled a 3-billion dollar FAIL. [stupid]LOLz[/stupid]
I don't know, none of those options look really good to me. Why can't we just have a nice neat theory that works too?
Quote:
what if you could visualize knowledge like an imagery and tappable by certain keys of pre existing knowledge!!
Could you please rephrase the question? In a form that regular humans can understand?
____________
Sincerely,
A Proponent of Spelling, Grammar, Punctuation, and Courtesy.
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted June 19, 2009 02:21 AM |
|
Edited by TheDeath at 02:22, 19 Jun 2009.
|
Quote:
Back in 1990, we started the "human genome project". Everyone was so excited about all the wonderful things we would be able to do once we knew where the genes were. Whatever happened to that?
We finished it, and it was a big embarrassment to biologists everywhere. The human body has a lot of different proteins; at least 50,000; possibly as many as 2,000,000. Biologists thought that they needed 70,000 genes for 70,000 proteins, and then about 30,000 genes to regulate them (since regulators are so simple, often they get used more than once). But we only found 25,000 genes for proteins and 10,000 regulators.
Wait. What? We have to build a human and we only get HALF the information we need? What's up with that?
There are four possible conclusions to draw from this.
1) Genetics is a HELL of a lot more complicated than we thought. I'm talking sundials to digital watches here. [whine]But if it gets any more complicated then we'll NEVER understand it...[/whine]
2) The missing genes are somewhere else in the cell, instead of in the DNA like we thought it would be. [incredulous]But where else could it be? RNA? That's a laugh.[/incredulous]
3) An individual cell does not contain all the information necessary to build the organism. [WTF?]NO WAI!!!1[/WTF?]
4) Those guys down in the Genome labs pulled a 3-billion dollar FAIL. [stupid]LOLz[/stupid]
I don't know, none of those options look really good to me. Why can't we just have a nice neat theory that works too?
It may not be stored in DNA, but it is somewhere in the cell. How can you explain cloning otherwise? It's ridiculous to think that the external environment information was the same at both cases -- the other is to assume that everything is in the starting process, a cell.
After all, we all start from a cell or a few cells.
Cells are like nanobots
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Rarensu
Known Hero
Formerly known as RTI
|
|
posted June 19, 2009 02:28 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Cells are like nanobots
Other way around, man. Nanobots are like cells.
____________
Sincerely,
A Proponent of Spelling, Grammar, Punctuation, and Courtesy.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted June 19, 2009 04:07 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Back in 1990, we started the "human genome project". Everyone was so excited about all the wonderful things we would be able to do once we knew where the genes were. Whatever happened to that?
Money, for one thing. Time, for another. The project hasn't been an embarassment to anyone; I don't know what orifice you pulled that out of.
And besides - you ask the question as if it's been centuries since the project was completed. It's like if you spend years and years and millions and millions of dollars on a super rocket ship able to travel to other galaxies, and then seconds after the last heat tile is pasted on, you're like, "Well, we were promised if we built this ship, it'd take us somewhere, but look, we're still standing here on earth."
Maybe you should try doing a little real science before you criticize it for not immediately having all the answers. Maybe you'll get a feel for how difficult, time consuming, and expensive it is.
Quote:
Other way around, man. Nanobots are like cells.
Except that cells are not really nanoscale.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted June 19, 2009 04:19 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Money, for one thing. Time, for another. The project hasn't been an embarassment to anyone; I don't know what orifice you pulled that out of.
And besides - you ask the question as if it's been centuries since the project was completed. It's like if you spend years and years and millions and millions of dollars on a super rocket ship able to travel to other galaxies, and then seconds after the last heat tile is pasted on, you're like, "Well, we were promised if we built this ship, it'd take us somewhere, but look, we're still standing here on earth."
Maybe you should try doing a little real science before you criticize it for not immediately having all the answers. Maybe you'll get a feel for how difficult, time consuming, and expensive it is.
Money is the biggest problem. It also shows the unfortunate bias in science. No I do not mean science method, but the scientific community. No funding = no ability to even TEST your hypothesis if it sounds "ridiculous" to them. So much for the nice idea of it. oh well 
Quote:
Except that cells are not really nanoscale.
Well nanobots aren't really nanoscale, but they assemble things at nanoscale and can duplicate themselves given only information from within themselves. But they aren't nanoscale as such complexity would surely require to be of greater sizes
Not to mention a nanoscale nanobot would be too powerless to assemble anything.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted June 19, 2009 04:21 AM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 04:22, 19 Jun 2009.
|
Well, I was thinking more along the lines of viruses, which (for the most part) are nanoscale.
And yes, money slows things down. But it's not an insurmountable roadblock. Eventually unpopular ideas DO gain support, if they have merit.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
