bob b, Re: 'Increasing Genetic Information'

[ThePhy]

[

The definition I've used before was "An instruction that when communicated is properly understood", so let's go with that and see where it takes us.

If we were speaking of information in the more commonly understood realm – such as you transmitting a message to me, then I would think your definition is a good starting point. But if I think of myself as a germ cell, the idea of “sending an instruction that is going to be properly understood” is a bit nebulous. Can I, a germ cell, undergo a “mutation” that I will pass on that will give some survival advantage to my offspring?

Specifically how does this thing called “information” preclude such from happening?

 

[Greenrage]

No. Energy input will always break down information carrrying media. Perhaps you are confusing "organization of matter" with "information carrying media".

No, you seemed confused. Energy sustains both organized matter and information. Thus, a hole in the ground with sticks over it (ie a filter) organizes matter and carries information as only items of a certain size can get into the hole. To work you need energy (wind blowing leaves or people kicking rocks). The result is both the organization of matter and information. It's pretty hard to conceive the latter without the former.

Ah, the stupid snowflake argument.

Translated, you can't refute the example and you lose.

No, the organism cannot sustain reproduction when the information it relies on to describe the machines that control the energy that sustain the information carrying media starts to break down.

Hint: energy can repair information systems. And systems that incorporate energy to repair and maintain information are exactly those types of systems that reproduce. Hey, I think its called DNA!

Yes, it's the Second Law argument and it's really bad for evo.

I guess I need to drag out the definition of "evo" again now.

 

[Greenrage]

Yes, it's the Second Law argument and it's really bad for evo

This is always a sure sign of somebody who doesn't understand the 2nd Law, since nothing in the law in any way contradicts evolutionary theory.

But let's give the little rodent a chance: define the 2nd law and tell us how it contradicts evolution (in a world orbiting around a giant ball of plasma emitting huge amounts of energy)

Just try.

 

[eisenreich]

This is always a sure sign of somebody who doesn't understand the 2nd Law, since nothing in the law in any way contradicts evolutionary theory.

But let's give the little rodent a chance: define the 2nd law and tell us how it contradicts evolution (in a world orbiting around a giant ball of plasma emitting huge amounts of energy)

Just try.

[fundie] "The Sun... Doh!" "Throws argument in trashcan." [/fundie]

or this could be another response:

"One of the most basic laws in the universe is the Second Law of Thermodynamics. This states that as time goes by, entropy in an environment will increase. Evolution argues differently against a law that is accepted EVERYWHERE BY EVERYONE. Evolution says that we started out simple, and over time became more complex. That just isn't possible: UNLESS there is a giant outside source of energy supplying the Earth with huge amounts of energy. If there were such a source, scientists would certainly know about it."

more fun at fundies say the darndest things!

 

[Greenrage]

[fundie] "The Sun... Doh!" "Throws argument in trashcan." [/fundie]

or this could be another response:

"One of the most basic laws in the universe is the Second Law of Thermodynamics. This states that as time goes by, entropy in an environment will increase. Evolution argues differently against a law that is accepted EVERYWHERE BY EVERYONE. Evolution says that we started out simple, and over time became more complex. That just isn't possible: UNLESS there is a giant outside source of energy supplying the Earth with huge amounts of energy. If there were such a source, scientists would certainly know about it."

more fun at fundies say the darndest things!

Great site, eisenreich. Here's another gem from the site, which bob I'm sure agrees with.

"Dinos were real in the bible. they were called dragons. They did exist but only a few thousand years ago.

You need millions of years for your "THEORY" to have happened and that's simply not the case.

You people see only what you want to see. That's not reality!
"

 

[Yorzhik]

Again that is only because you do not accept any refutation in the form of a critique of your argument. You simply block your ears and say "Na Na Na, I'm not listenting." I say this based on my experience with you on this site.

You're kidding, right? I may have missed a response, but I don't think I've ever blown off a serious response.

 

[Yorzhik]

[ If we were speaking of information in the more commonly understood realm – such as you transmitting a message to me, then I would think your definition is a good starting point. But if I think of myself as a germ cell, the idea of “sending an instruction that is going to be properly understood” is a bit nebulous. Can I, a germ cell, undergo a “mutation” that I will pass on that will give some survival advantage to my offspring?

Specifically how does this thing called “information” preclude such from happening?

Sure, a germ cell might get a mutation that will be transmitted to the next generation that will give a survival advantage. However, if the original message was changed, then loss of the original message must come at some kind of cost to the next generation.

 

[Yorzhik]

Translated, you can't refute the example and you lose.

It isn't too complicated. The examples you've given so far are only the SLoT in action. The trick isn't to get energy to go from high to low, the trick (in one example) is to get an amino acid together with other amino acids using the same energy as that which created the amino acids in the first place. And THAT would require a violation of the SLoT.

But there are other things you have to overcome wherein the SLoT is a problem. And one of those things is the information carrying media has to have its information transmitted (as the information had to be transmitted in order to make the information on the information carrying media in the first place), and the path of transmission is very tenuous, because the information is at high energy and it is ready to fall to a lower energy given any opportunity - which would lose that information forever (unless there is another mechanism, a more complicated information system, that is made just to rebuild some information in a subsystem).

And maintaining information carrying media is another problem that the SLoT will cause problems with.

Hint: energy can repair information systems. And systems that incorporate energy to repair and maintain information are exactly those types of systems that reproduce. Hey, I think its called DNA!

Energy will always break down information carrying media unless you have machines to maintain such.

 

[Yorzhik]

[fundie] "The Sun... Doh!" "Throws argument in trashcan." [/fundie]

or this could be another response:

"One of the most basic laws in the universe is the Second Law of Thermodynamics. This states that as time goes by, entropy in an environment will increase. Evolution argues differently against a law that is accepted EVERYWHERE BY EVERYONE. Evolution says that we started out simple, and over time became more complex. That just isn't possible: UNLESS there is a giant outside source of energy supplying the Earth with huge amounts of energy. If there were such a source, scientists would certainly know about it."

more fun at fundies say the darndest things!

The sun won't help you.

 

[noguru]

It isn't too complicated. The examples you've given so far are only the SLoT in action. The trick isn't to get energy to go from high to low, the trick (in one example) is to get an amino acid together with other amino acids using the same energy as that which created the amino acids in the first place. And THAT would require a violation of the SLoT.

But there are other things you have to overcome wherein the SLoT is a problem. And one of those things is the information carrying media has to have its information transmitted (as the information had to be transmitted in order to make the information on the information carrying media in the first place), and the path of transmission is very tenuous, because the information is at high energy and it is ready to fall to a lower energy given any opportunity - which would lose that information forever (unless there is another mechanism, a more complicated information system, that is made just to rebuild some information in a subsystem).

And maintaining information carrying media is another problem that the SLoT will cause problems with.


Energy will always break down information carrying media unless you have machines to maintain such.

Are you referring to ultraviolet degradation?

 

[Stripe]

hes probably referring to the idea that if you have a whole lot of mutations trying to be naturally selected then pointing a bright light at them wont make them any more viable for generating a new species...

 

[noguru]

hes probably referring to the idea that if you have a whole lot of mutations trying to be naturally selected then pointing a bright light at them wont make them any more viable for generating a new species...

Well that is true. But that is not an accurate explanation of how the sun's energy enters a biome and becomes useful to living things.

 

[Stripe]

Well that is true. But that is not an accurate explanation of how the sun's energy enters a biome and becomes useful to living things.

er ... the sun doesnt shine a bright light on things?

i want to start a new thread because really .. i dont know what im talking about ... so .. new thread time .. with rules (mostly for me)



grants first ever smilie on TOL. its the end of the world ...

 

[ThePhy]

Sure, a germ cell might get a mutation that will be transmitted to the next generation that will give a survival advantage. However, if the original message was changed, then loss of the original message must come at some kind of cost to the next generation.

Why? If the message was “improved”, why does that require any “cost”? And, if the improvement is of more value than any associated cost, so what? Isn’t that still a net improvement?

 

[ThePhy]

The trick isn't to get energy to go from high to low, the trick (in one example) is to get an amino acid together with other amino acids using the same energy as that which created the amino acids in the first place. And THAT would require a violation of the SLoT.

To violate the SLoT, one needs to be talking about a closed system. How does the creation or modification of amino acids qualify as a closed system?

But there are other things you have to overcome wherein the SLoT is a problem. And one of those things is the information carrying media has to have its information transmitted (as the information had to be transmitted in order to make the information on the information carrying media in the first place), and the path of transmission is very tenuous, because the information is at high energy and it is ready to fall to a lower energy given any opportunity - which would lose that information forever (unless there is another mechanism, a more complicated information system, that is made just to rebuild some information in a subsystem).

I am concerned that this intimate connection you continually refer to between the SLoT and information may in fact not be valid. Are you aware, for example, of the ideas along this line discussed in this article in the Journal of Chemical Education?

Energy will always break down information carrying media unless you have machines to maintain such.

Isn’t that part of what biological systems are – they take chemicals and organize them into immense and highly organized specialized systems, complete with repair, reproduction, and self-improvement capabilities.

 

[Greenrage]

hes probably referring to the idea that if you have a whole lot of mutations trying to be naturally selected then pointing a bright light at them wont make them any more viable for generating a new species...

More confusion between two distinct concepts (like creationists are able to understand them)

Concept #1: Mutations occur. We can observe them and even measure their rate. Over a long period of time some produce phenotypes that have a reproductive edge in a given environment. Hence the come to dominate the gene pool.

Concept #2: Entropy is forestalled by the input of energy. This rebuts your bizarre claim that information systems shoudl be "degenerating" on earth due to the 2LOT. See there's this big ball of plasma about 93M away and it's pumping in a lot of energy to living things, who thereby can sustain their DNA organization.

The two concepts are unrelated.

NEXT!

 

[Greenrage]

It isn't too complicated. The examples you've given so far are only the SLoT in action. The trick isn't to get energy to go from high to low, the trick (in one example) is to get an amino acid together with other amino acids using the same energy as that which created the amino acids in the first place. And THAT would require a violation of the SLoT.

According this misinterpretation of the SLOT, machines and animals don't exist because they violate the SLOT. Geesh. Hint: organisms use energy from the sun to maintain their reproductive mechanisms (i.e., DNA).

But there are other things you have to overcome wherein the SLoT is a problem. And one of those things is the information carrying media has to have its information transmitted (as the information had to be transmitted in order to make the information on the information carrying media in the first place), and the path of transmission is very tenuous, because the information is at high energy and it is ready to fall to a lower energy given any opportunity - which would lose that information forever (unless there is another mechanism, a more complicated information system, that is made just to rebuild some information in a subsystem).

See above. According to this misinterpretation of the SLOT, animals and machines don't exist. But I assure you they do. And they do by using the energy of the sun to maintain their reproductive systems. Those not good at this fall by the way side. It's called evolution.

And maintaining information carrying media is another problem that the SLoT will cause problems with.Energy will always break down information carrying media unless you have machines to maintain such.

We have such "machines." They're called organisms and they are really good at using the energy from the sun to maintain their DNA.

 

[Yorzhik]

Are you referring to ultraviolet degradation?

I don't think so. Ultraviolet breaks down plastic. I imagine it breaks down other things too. Is this what you might think I'm referring to?

 

[Yorzhik]

Why? If the message was “improved”, why does that require any “cost”? And, if the improvement is of more value than any associated cost, so what? Isn’t that still a net improvement?

How would we measure "improved"? By a measure Shannon would use?

If one adds to a message, then there must be additional processing to understand it. If one replaces a message, then the cost is the loss of the original message. One way or another, there is a cost.

Of course there can be net improvements. Can you provide an example?

 

[Yorzhik]

To violate the SLoT, one needs to be talking about a closed system. How does the creation or modification of amino acids qualify as a closed system?

So when Miller/Urey created amino acids they were in a closed system and we can apply the SLoT. That's great, we can keep the discussion in that context.

Just as a side note, can we apply the SLoT to anything that spontaneously goes from high energy to low energy. Right?

I am concerned that this intimate connection you continually refer to between the SLoT and information may in fact not be valid. Are you aware, for example, of the ideas along this line discussed in this article in the Journal of Chemical Education?

Yes, I'm aware of those ideas. I see problems with both information and also with energy for evolution. If you want to stick with one, then we can stick with the energy problem.

Isn’t that part of what biological systems are – they take chemicals and organize them into immense and highly organized specialized systems, complete with repair, reproduction, and self-improvement capabilities.

Yes, they are complicated systems of machines that control the energy that is ultimately available from the sun. The problem is that without the control of the energy (without the machines), uncontrolled energy (like that which comes from the sun) will destroy information carrying media, and then the information will be lost forever (2 steps - one for energy, and another for information).