POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.off-topic : Molecular biology : Re: Molecular biology Server Time
3 Sep 2024 13:16:12 EDT (-0400)
  Re: Molecular biology  
From: Invisible
Date: 7 Jan 2011 10:37:27
Message: <4d273337$1@news.povray.org>
>> But more to the point, the DNA doesn't
>> contain a diagram that says "this is what the result should look like",
>> and contains something more like assembly instructions.
>
>    I think that the best concept that describes it emergent behavior.

Yes, quite. DNA states what proteins to build (and, indirectly, when to 
build them). This results in a huge range of phenomena, ultimately that 
which we call "life".

As I wrote elsewhere, I also rather suspect that a strip of DNA by 
itself won't do very much. Quite apart from needing lots of supporting 
chemistry for transcription, etc., it tends to have all sorts of 
regulatory molecules binding to and unbinding from it. I suspect that a 
"blank" DNA molecule with none of these would just lead the the 
uncontrolled synthesis of /everything/, which wouldn't work very well.

>    Emergent behavior is a rather interesting topic all in itself, and goes
> deep down to the very basic foundations of what makes the universe like
> it is.

Indeed, by its very definition, emergent behaviour appears at many, many 
levels. Particle physicists study subatomic particles. If you assemble 
those in certain specific ways, you get atoms, which chemists study. 
Certain chemicals have the surprising ability to self-assemble into very 
specific 3D structures, or to make ticking chemical clocks, or to do a 
huge variety of other things. And many of those things are involved with 
that mystery that we call life. And then you look at a hill of ants, 
each of which has a brain so minute that it makes you wander how it can 
even walk in a straight line. And yet, the colony as a whole can 
function in fantastically complex ways, which no obvious central point 
of control.

Obligatory XKCD reference: http://xkcd.com/435/

>> Intelligent Design? I think not. But apparently, on New Guinea, there's
>> nothing that can climb trees any better, so they survive.
>
>    That kind of argument is not going to convince any young earth
> creationist, so it's futile to even try.

Oh, sure, I don't really give a hoot what those nuts believe. I was just 
pointing out to all the *thinking* people how absurd such beliefs are. ;-)


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.