What's the origin of information in the genome?

Tzar - Reality is objective.

Is that statement subjective to you or objective to reality? Don’t get me wrong, I couldn’t agree more! But objectively, who’s version of reality is objectively real? And more importantly why?

originally posted by: hopeisasound
Tzar - Reality is objective.

Is that statement subjective to you or objective to reality? Don’t get me wrong, I couldn’t agree more! But objectively, who’s version of reality is objectively real? And more importantly why?

This tangent is swiftly becoming a wild ontological goose chase. Let's try and simplify it somewhat. Objectively, it can be concluded that when the sun is at its zenith in your part of the world, everyone else can also see it. Objective reality. It can also be concluded that when you drink a bottle of water, it will not harm you because water doesn't spontaneously alter its properties. Anyone who drinks the same water from the same bottle will experience the same relationship. Subjectively, someone who nearly drowned might avoid a body of water that you swam in your whole life, and someone who has experienced severe dehydration frequently in their life might worship it as a divine resource and resent you for defacing it with your unclean person and your hideous rock n roll party lifestyle. I hope we both understand better what these terms represent.

But since you've touched on our tenous relationship with the art of true knowledge, nothing supplied by the OP is actually proof of anything except a fun thought experiment, a game played with a nebulous imaginary friend. Even this web page with all its coding and graphics is a theory at best, a very vivid and shared delusion. How long do we want to persist in questioning our sanity?

originally posted by: hopeisasound

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: neoholographic

What makes more sense, magic or genetic mutation? What makes more sense, humans are a recent member of the ape family or humans are demigods engineered to function as a therapy pet for a lonely wizard? What makes more sense, predicting the apocalypse or fabricating a society that entirely avoids the so called "end times" because that whole situation is unnecessarily violent and dramatic? What makes more sense, theocratic authoritarianism or a constitutional democracy?

What makes more sense?

Respectfully, everything is magic until you understand it. Every valid miracle of God could be scientifically understood if you fully understood science. We all have the same info do we not? It’s not like you have some hidden scientific knowledge that others are unaware of and visa versa. Everyone interprets the same info according to our own biases. No one is truly objective. That being said, how do we discover truth? Is reality subjective or objective?

Exactly and magic is nature originating information and causing the increase of information in the face of the 2nd law.

I can undersatand how intelligence can reduce uncertainty and increase information. We build civilization by encoding sequence with meaning and then building machinery to decode that sequence.

How did nature encode sequence with information and build modular molecular machinery to decode the information?

a reply to: neoholographic

Exactly and magic is nature originating information and causing the increase of information in the face of the 2nd law.

You're describing paganism.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: neoholographic

Exactly and magic is nature originating information and causing the increase of information in the face of the 2nd law.

You're describing paganism.

Exactly!

You would have to believe in Hobbits from middle earth or magic in a puddle of mud to believe that nature can reduce uncertainty and increase information through encoding sequence with information and giving that sequence meaning.

a reply to: neoholographic

Hmmm, magic in a puddle of mud or Arishem from the Marvel comics. I think I trust the mud better than I do space warlocks, especially if that warlock is predicting the apocalypse.

Ok - Tzar only likes scientific discussions based on empirical evidence. Got it. The problem is, science doesn’t address origin. Philosophy does. Don’t run out of the ontological kitchen just when it’s getting hot! Lol. I don’t blame you though. How can you trust (objectively) that your 5 senses are working properly in order to interpret scientific data? How do you know this isn’t all a bad dream right now? Lol.

But seriously. I love these kinds of discussions! I’m always waiting (as all of us are) to hear something that hasn’t already been said a million times over. Love the sound of souls reasoning together!

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: hopeisasound
Tzar - Reality is objective.

Is that statement subjective to you or objective to reality? Don’t get me wrong, I couldn’t agree more! But objectively, who’s version of reality is objectively real? And more importantly why?

This tangent is swiftly becoming a wild ontological goose chase. Let's try and simplify it somewhat. Objectively, it can be concluded that when the sun is at its zenith in your part of the world, everyone else can also see it. Objective reality. It can also be concluded that when you drink a bottle of water, it will not harm you because water doesn't spontaneously alter its properties. Anyone who drinks the same water from the same bottle will experience the same relationship. Subjectively, someone who nearly drowned might avoid a body of water that you swam in your whole life, and someone who has experienced severe dehydration frequently in their life might worship it as a divine resource and resent you for defacing it with your unclean person and your hideous rock n roll party lifestyle. I hope we both understand better what these terms represent.

But since you've touched on our tenous relationship with the art of true knowledge, nothing supplied by the OP is actually proof of anything except a fun thought experiment, a game played with a nebulous imaginary friend. Even this web page with all its coding and graphics is a theory at best, a very vivid and shared delusion. How long do we want to persist in questioning our sanity?

a reply to: hopeisasound

Philosophy doesn't answer origin, it answers psychology or the study of human patterns and devices from whenever we started building a social community. You can talk about what people think and why they think and what thinking even (philosophy) or you can talk about culture and revolutions and breakthroughs and environmental relationships and indications buried and recovered pointing to a sequence of events that can be reverse engineered to reconstruct a model of our world from centuries or millions of years ago (science) which will eventually give you the origin. Perhaps you can see how one answer might be more apparent than a different answer. Finding the da Vinci code in human DNA isn't exactly the answer to our place in the universe even if we're being optimistic.

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: The GUT
And then we have the weightless, massless phenomena responsible for all societal achievement: Consciousness. And by that I refer to kind of consciousness capable of abstraction & self-awareness.

The blind-faith believing priests of materialism either admit they can't explain it, or proffer a lot of double-speak that essentially affirms they can't explain it but hope you don't notice. Doofy one-liners are also endemic to that type.

You glossed over the part where no one on this site or anywhere else in the world has in fact answered the mystery of consciousness and its causes or ultimate "purpose".

That is totally false. But it isn't false just for you. You're need to cast yourself into a group that includes "everyone" makes it easier for you because misery loves company.
The truth is that YOU haven't discovered your answers to your questions you mentioned. These things work on an individual basis.

Good points!

The truth is, evolution is a big lie. It's used to separate people from God and their spiritual nature. It's a strong delusion.

How can random mutations behave like intelligence and give sequence syntax and semantics?

I can say the sequence of the word asinine means extremely stupid or foolish. I can use my intelligence to see the syntax and semantics of the word asinine.

How can a random mutation create new information from a code that already is coded for 20 amino acids before the mutation occurred? What's in the nature of a random mutation that gives it the intelligence to give syntax and semantics to a sequence of DNA letters?

I will answer the question, NOTHING! It's impossible and defies logic.

a reply to: neoholographic

Can you pick a strand of DNA and translate it into a coherent command script for us?

If the da Vinci code was found in human dna would you accept it?

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: hopeisasound

Philosophy doesn't answer origin, it answers psychology or the study of human patterns and devices from whenever we started building a social community. You can talk about what people think and why they think and what thinking even (philosophy) or you can talk about culture and revolutions and breakthroughs and environmental relationships and indications buried and recovered pointing to a sequence of events that can be reverse engineered to reconstruct a model of our world from centuries or millions of years ago (science) which will eventually give you the origin. Perhaps you can see how one answer might be more apparent than a different answer. Finding the da Vinci code in human DNA isn't exactly the answer to our place in the universe even if we're being optimistic.

originally posted by: hopeisasound
If the da Vinci code was found in human dna would you accept it?

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: hopeisasound

Philosophy doesn't answer origin, it answers psychology or the study of human patterns and devices from whenever we started building a social community. You can talk about what people think and why they think and what thinking even (philosophy) or you can talk about culture and revolutions and breakthroughs and environmental relationships and indications buried and recovered pointing to a sequence of events that can be reverse engineered to reconstruct a model of our world from centuries or millions of years ago (science) which will eventually give you the origin. Perhaps you can see how one answer might be more apparent than a different answer. Finding the da Vinci code in human DNA isn't exactly the answer to our place in the universe even if we're being optimistic.

It's a play on the idea that a series of clues were planted to play a game. In the novel, those clues were hidden to keep secrets from a very dangerous person and to keep society from solving the mystery. The code was just a gimmick, the real lesson was about our leaders deceiving the world and suppressing what they had no right to. The allegory is equally cutting to both science and theocracy.

The actual answer to your question is yes, I would accept it. But my values wouldn't change and my distrust would demand better answers.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: neoholographic

Can you pick a strand of DNA and translate it into a coherent command script for us?

I'm glad you asked because this illustrates my point even more:

From Wiki:

In context|computing|lang=en terms the difference between command and script is that command is (computing) a directive to a computer program acting as an interpreter of some kind, in order to perform a specific task while script is (computing) a file containing a list of user commands, allowing them to be invoked once to execute in sequence.

wikidiff.com...

This is exactly what happens with DNA. It's why we can encode DNA with books and PDF files but we can't do the same thing with a snowflake.

DNA used to encode a book and other digital information

A team of researchers in the US has successfully encoded a 5.27 megabit book using DNA microchips, and they then read the book using DNA sequencing. Their experiments show that DNA could be used for long-term storage of digital information.
phys.org...

This was back in 2012.

What makes DNA more powerful is encoded in the sequence of DNA is also the modular molecular machinery that reads the information from the code then that information is interpreted and made into a polypeptide chain that folds into a protein!

INTELLIGENT DESIGN!!

Here's a video that illustrates this:



Look at a gene sequence then look at the video on scrip commands:





This is how DNA is translated and it's why we can encode it with books and DVD's and then read it.

Question for you.

Show me how we can encode digital information on a snowflake and then decode that information?

a reply to: neoholographic

Okay, your response demonstrates that genetic material serves as a storage device and can hold either instructions to perform assigned tasks or preserve a variety of media. That's important because configuration suggests "factory settings" are optimal and jailbreaking isn't. The ability to exploit the natural order, isn't something to brag about.

a reply to: TzarChasm

I answered your question but you dodged mine! Typical.

How is this the natural order?

You can store 100 million DVD's on DNA the size of a pencil erasure. We can do this because there's a code that already stores and decodes information. This is why you avoided this:

Show me how we can encode digital information on a snowflake and then decode that information?

Also:

If it's the natural order tell me how and why the sequence GTC would code for Valine instead of Leucine?Also, why did nature use the tools of information theory to code for proteins instead of proteins just being the result of amino acids in their lowest entropy state?

Will you dodge the questions again?

Why not just draw that back as far as possible and ask what the origin of the thermodynamic law existing in the universe is? Ask why disorder is programmed to increase. Why the laws of the universe are what they are.

If you reduce the priori assertion to that infinite reduction paradox you can always infer a lack of explanation is a glut of explanation.

But I'll answer this one:

How did nature create a genetic code that included amino acids that a human would need before humans even existed?

Studies have found glycine exists naturally in interstellar clouds. Just like a pool of muck it has the correct primordial soup. Newest data is suggesting the laws of the universe, particularly those governing interstellar clouds, promotes ubiquitous panspremia everywhere stars are born.

You don't make god complex or ultimate enough. Intervention that far down the chain of cause should be irrelevant.

I think a protointelligence would need to act more like programmer writing base code. And the infinite superdeterminism of its program wouldn't have to pay attention to specifics because it's infallibilibility could get it right to run itself with the first encoding. Meaning it wouldn't need to create anything but the energy and rules to eventually form molecular structure, and later life.

And that's a long program. Taking billions of years. With several stages. In the beginning the universe was almost all hydrogen and it took supernovae to bring about the heavier elements, like oxygen (water), necessary for said amino acids to beget life.

originally posted by: hopeisasound
If the da Vinci code was found in human dna would you accept it?

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: hopeisasound

Philosophy doesn't answer origin, it answers psychology or the study of human patterns and devices from whenever we started building a social community. You can talk about what people think and why they think and what thinking even (philosophy) or you can talk about culture and revolutions and breakthroughs and environmental relationships and indications buried and recovered pointing to a sequence of events that can be reverse engineered to reconstruct a model of our world from centuries or millions of years ago (science) which will eventually give you the origin. Perhaps you can see how one answer might be more apparent than a different answer. Finding the da Vinci code in human DNA isn't exactly the answer to our place in the universe even if we're being optimistic.

Good question and it goes to the core of the situation.

Why would nature create a code where you can store information in the sequence of a storage medium?

It makes absolutely no sense from a natural standpoint. Why would nature and how would nature use all of the tools from information theory that we use to build modern civilization? Yockey said this:

The book Information Theory, Evolution and the Origin of Life is written by Hubert Yockey, the foremost living specialist in bioinformatics. The publisher is Cambridge University press. Yockey rigorously demonstrates that the coding process in DNA is identical to the coding process and mathematical definitions used in Electrical Engineering. This is not subjective, it is not debatable or even controversial. It is a brute fact:

“Information, transcription, translation, code, redundancy, synonymous, messenger, editing, and proofreading are all appropriate terms in biology. They take their meaning from information theory (Shannon, 1948) and are not synonyms, metaphors, or analogies.” (Hubert P. Yockey, Information Theory, Evolution, and the Origin of Life, Cambridge University Press, 2005)

evo2.org...

Now, as intelligent beings, we understand why you would store information on the genetic code. This is because you want the information to be passed down through the years and this is information that doesn't occur naturally. Intelligence does this all of the time.

Nature can give you diamonds which are in a low entropy state. But intelligence can manipulate information to give you diamond watches or earrings. It can use diamonds for cutting in a factory.

The proteins in your body come from information not nature!

Let me repeat:

The proteins in your body come from information not nature!

This is clearly an intelligent design!

Intelligence can create things from information. A building, a TV, a car isn't a natural construct. It's designed by intelligence being able to have knowledge of information like I showed with the deck of cards example earlier.

So why would nature use the tools of information theory?

The answer is, it wouldn't and it couldn't. Nature can give you diamonds and snowflakes but it can't reduce uncertainty and increase information with a code that gets passed the second law.

So nature in an open system would reduce amino acids to their lowest entropy state and viola! Proteins. Instead of this, intelligence would find a durable storage medium and encode its sequence with information and build machinery to decode this information.

Here's a great video to watch on this:



You can store 100 million DVD's on DNA the size of a pencil erasure!!!

They even encoded the song "It's A Small World" into the DNA of Conan the Bacterium in a lab! This encoding lasted for 100 generations before there was data loss. This is because of the powerful genetic code which allows us to manipulate the sequence of the code to store digital information and create glow in the dark cats:



This can't be done on a snowflake because a snowflake is a pretty design but information isn't encoded on its sequence. That takes INTELLIGENCE!

originally posted by: neoholographic

originally posted by: hopeisasound
If the da Vinci code was found in human dna would you accept it?

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: hopeisasound

Philosophy doesn't answer origin, it answers psychology or the study of human patterns and devices from whenever we started building a social community. You can talk about what people think and why they think and what thinking even (philosophy) or you can talk about culture and revolutions and breakthroughs and environmental relationships and indications buried and recovered pointing to a sequence of events that can be reverse engineered to reconstruct a model of our world from centuries or millions of years ago (science) which will eventually give you the origin. Perhaps you can see how one answer might be more apparent than a different answer. Finding the da Vinci code in human DNA isn't exactly the answer to our place in the universe even if we're being optimistic.

Good question and it goes to the core of the situation.

Why would nature create a code where you can store information in the sequence of a storage medium?

It makes absolutely no sense from a natural standpoint. Why would nature and how would nature use all of the tools from information theory that we use to build modern civilization? Yockey said this:

The book Information Theory, Evolution and the Origin of Life is written by Hubert Yockey, the foremost living specialist in bioinformatics. The publisher is Cambridge University press. Yockey rigorously demonstrates that the coding process in DNA is identical to the coding process and mathematical definitions used in Electrical Engineering. This is not subjective, it is not debatable or even controversial. It is a brute fact:

“Information, transcription, translation, code, redundancy, synonymous, messenger, editing, and proofreading are all appropriate terms in biology. They take their meaning from information theory (Shannon, 1948) and are not synonyms, metaphors, or analogies.” (Hubert P. Yockey, Information Theory, Evolution, and the Origin of Life, Cambridge University Press, 2005)

evo2.org...

Now, as intelligent beings, we understand why you would store information on the genetic code. This is because you want the information to be passed down through the years and this is information that doesn't occur naturally. Intelligence does this all of the time.

Nature can give you diamonds which are in a low entropy state. But intelligence can manipulate information to give you diamond watches or earrings. It can use diamonds for cutting in a factory.

The proteins in your body come from information not nature!

Let me repeat:

The proteins in your body come from information not nature!

This is clearly an intelligent design!

Intelligence can create things from information. A building, a TV, a car isn't a natural construct. It's designed by intelligence being able to have knowledge of information like I showed with the deck of cards example earlier.

So why would nature use the tools of information theory?

The answer is, it wouldn't and it couldn't. Nature can give you diamonds and snowflakes but it can't reduce uncertainty and increase information with a code that gets passed the second law.

So nature in an open system would reduce amino acids to their lowest entropy state and viola! Proteins. Instead of this, intelligence would find a durable storage medium and encode its sequence with information and build machinery to decode this information.

Here's a great video to watch on this:

You can store 100 million DVD's on DNA the size of a pencil erasure!!!

They even encoded the song "It's A Small World" into the DNA of Conan the Bacterium in a lab! This encoding lasted for 100 generations before there was data loss. This is because of the powerful genetic code which allows us to manipulate the sequence of the code to store digital information and create glow in the dark cats:

This can't be done on a snowflake because a snowflake is a pretty design but information isn't encoded on its sequence. That takes INTELLIGENCE!

To my senses and intellect, this only proves that humans are doing their best to reinvent god, as opposed to identifying your god and welcoming him home. On a certain level that outcome makes sense because inevitably society is going to evaluate such an entity as falling short of our requirements and in need of being "upgraded" or even replaced outright. Who better to do so than the demigods of planet Earth? It's what we intended all along.

a reply to: TzarChasm

I said:

Will you dodge the questions again?

And of course you did. What did I ask?

Show me how we can encode digital information on a snowflake and then decode that information?

Also:

If it's the natural order tell me how and why the sequence GTC would code for Valine instead of Leucine? Also, why did nature use the tools of information theory to code for proteins instead of proteins just being the result of amino acids in their lowest entropy state?

You asked me a question and I answered it. I ask you a question and you respond with a vacuous statement that has no scientific value.

So from now on I will respond to you with the same questions until you offer something in the way of science that attempts to respond to what I'm saying.

Think on this!
If god is real, and you cut bits out of DNA.
witch is gods design for a humans.
then you are no longer part of gods plan!

Evolution has been building humans to some End plan.
If we mess it up, we will die off.

I just hope evolution has the DNA code running on other planets.
as we have Realy f up this one.