Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Hello, My Name Is George


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 exit99

exit99

    Thinking

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts

Posted 17 June 2016 - 09:33 AM

I have a high school education, with one year of biology.
 
My career has been with IBM computers (from the 1401 to the AS400) 
providing technical support and data communications. 
I've been employed by companies in USA that manufactured objects.
 
Upon retiring, I learned programming on personal computers: Visual Basic.NET and JavaFX.
 
Recently I obtained a smartphone, which I view as a mobile computer. 
I'm impressed with these tools, because when I started my career, they were inventing the disk drive.
 
I've learned much about biology in the past several years by reading books and the internet.
 
I'm fascinated with biochemistry in which individual molecules work,
contrasted with chemistry where you mix a liter of this and a gram of that.
 
I'm impressed with protein molecules having the ability to do things.
Like helicase doing surgery on DNA and tubulin pushing and pulling chromsomes. 
 
With a background of computer programming, I'm looking for an operating system
or something that is directing, within the laws of physics.  
 
With a background in manufacturing where you need raw materials or components for assembly "just-in-time",
I ask: "How does the DNA-Polymerase obtain all those molecules (sugar-phosphate-base) and attach them accurately and rapidly?"  
 
My recent interest is in Developmental Biology and cell differentiation.
 
One example is the spinal cord.  
First there are the various vertebra sculptures that would be a challenge for 3D printers. 
Then there are integral active objects (e.g. blood vessels, nerves) strung through them. 
All of these must grow in proportional size.  
 
There must be something beyond "DNA-to-protein". 
 
George
 


#2 Cascabel

Cascabel

    Thinking

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts

Posted 17 June 2016 - 02:03 PM

It's either god or an intelligent designer, obviously..



#3 exchemist

exchemist

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2615 posts

Posted 17 June 2016 - 02:57 PM

 

I have a high school education, with one year of biology.
 
My career has been with IBM computers (from the 1401 to the AS400) 
providing technical support and data communications. 
I've been employed by companies in USA that manufactured objects.
 
Upon retiring, I learned programming on personal computers: Visual Basic.NET and JavaFX.
 
Recently I obtained a smartphone, which I view as a mobile computer. 
I'm impressed with these tools, because when I started my career, they were inventing the disk drive.
 
I've learned much about biology in the past several years by reading books and the internet.
 
I'm fascinated with biochemistry in which individual molecules work,
contrasted with chemistry where you mix a liter of this and a gram of that.
 
I'm impressed with protein molecules having the ability to do things.
Like helicase doing surgery on DNA and tubulin pushing and pulling chromsomes. 
 
With a background of computer programming, I'm looking for an operating system
or something that is directing, within the laws of physics.  
 
With a background in manufacturing where you need raw materials or components for assembly "just-in-time",
I ask: "How does the DNA-Polymerase obtain all those molecules (sugar-phosphate-base) and attach them accurately and rapidly?"  
 
My recent interest is in Developmental Biology and cell differentiation.
 
One example is the spinal cord.  
First there are the various vertebra sculptures that would be a challenge for 3D printers. 
Then there are integral active objects (e.g. blood vessels, nerves) strung through them. 
All of these must grow in proportional size.  
 
There must be something beyond "DNA-to-protein". 
 
George

 

There is: millions of years of trial and error and selection of what works better. 



#4 exit99

exit99

    Thinking

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts

Posted 17 June 2016 - 06:01 PM

Regardless of where it came from, I'm interested in how it works. 



#5 Essay

Essay

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 811 posts

Posted 18 June 2016 - 01:18 AM

Regardless of where it came from, I'm interested in how it works. 

 

It works much like a ball rolling down a hill, minimizing energy and maximizing entropy.  Or as someone once quipped, near the end of a semester of thermodynamics, "life is just nature's way of turning light into heat" ...increasing entropy, over the long term, in the big picture.

 

But on the smaller scale, it works by normal physical forces, from Brownian movement and diffusion, in various overlapping concentration gradients, which themselves can 'signal' other molecules or DNA, directly or indirectly through cascades of 'signals' that might cause conformational changes to certain chemicals and/or stimulate chemical reactions, and ...as was noted, "millions of years of trial and error and selection of what works better" ...to minimize (and store and transfer and otherwise convert) energy and maximize entropy--converting sunlight into sugar to burn--in the long term.

:innocent: 



#6 exit99

exit99

    Thinking

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts

Posted 18 June 2016 - 10:52 AM

It works much like a ball rolling down a hill, minimizing energy and maximizing entropy.  ... But on the smaller scale, it works by normal physical forces...

:innocent: 

Thanks Essay.

All of this may be true. And I imagine the DNA-to-protein system could be explained that way.  

But many persons have explained that system in simpler terms.

 

In my initial post, I asked questions about DNA and histones. 

Will the answer simply be:  "As the ball rolls down a hill light turns into heat." or "it's the best system after millions of years"?

These are not the kind of answers I'm looking for. 



#7 exchemist

exchemist

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2615 posts

Posted 18 June 2016 - 11:25 AM

Thanks Essay.

All of this may be true. And I imagine the DNA-to-protein system could be explained that way.  

But many persons have explained that system in simpler terms.

 

In my initial post, I asked questions about DNA and histones. 

Will the answer simply be:  "As the ball rolls down a hill light turns into heat." or "it's the best system after millions of years"?

These are not the kind of answers I'm looking for. 

No the answer will be very complicated and you will need to read a lot of books and possibly talk to tutors to understand a process like that. Biochemical processes are very intricate indeed, with many steps and many molecules participating. I do not know the answer myself, not being a biochemist. 

 

What is for sure, though, is that you do not have a right to expect it to be simple. It seems to me that anybody offering a simple explanation for it is likely to be in reality offering a non-explanation that kicks the can down the road in some way, or just dodges the issue with a deus ex machina of some kind. So when you say "many persons have explained that system in simpler terms", I start to have a horrible suspicion that you may be posting in bad faith, that is, pretending to be an innocent seeker after scientific explanations when in fact you have a hidden agenda of - oh, I don't know - creationism or something. I would feel a lot happier if you could tell me I am wrong about that. :) 


Edited by exchemist, 18 June 2016 - 11:28 AM.


#8 exit99

exit99

    Thinking

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts

Posted 18 June 2016 - 08:51 PM

(1) What is for sure, though, is that you do not have a right to expect it to be simple.

What is sure is that you misunderstand my definition of simple (the first in dictionaries): Easy To Understand.
I didn't say the "DNA-to-protein system" was simple.
I said "many persons have explained that system in simpler terms (than what Essay offered)."
These "many persons" include science books used in schools and colleges.
That's the purpose of books and classes - to make things Easy To Understand.

And I thought it was the purpose of science forums, to share information with the objective of making things simple, that is EASY TO UNDERSTAND.
Yes I expect to continue obtaining information that's easy to understand. If not here, then elsewhere.


(2) It seems to me that anybody offering a simple explanation for it is likely to be in reality offering a non-explanation that kicks the can down the road in some way, or just dodges the issue with a deus ex machina of some kind.

So then you discredit all the ways in which students learn about mysterious subjects so they can understand?


(3) So when you say "many persons have explained that system in simpler terms", I start to have a horrible suspicion that you may be posting in bad faith, that is, pretending to be an innocent seeker
after scientific explanations when in fact you have a hidden agenda of - oh, I don't know - creationism or something.

I would hate to have you as a parent or a teacher!
The idea of you having horrible suspicions of someone asking for help!!!
This personal attack really is a great disappointment.

I have QUESTIONS.
Why does "QUESTIONS" = "AGENDA"?
Did you ever have a question? Did your professor say "Mr. exchemist, I have a horrible suspicion you have an agenda!"


(4) I would feel a lot happier if you could tell me I am wrong about that.

You, sir/madam, are wrong on every count. So please go somewhere and be a lot happier.


I'm not impressed by comments from anyone in this Introductions post, after I provided personal background.
You should really try to improve your welcoming skills.
  • sanctus likes this

#9 exit99

exit99

    Thinking

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts

Posted 19 June 2016 - 01:42 PM

Correction; I do have an agenda:
Learn about scientific studies and observations, with a secondary objective to teach others.

I'm a scientist at heart but I got sidetracked by computers.
There are so many fields of science, I'm divided as to which one I would have selected as a career.

I know I've jumped past basic chemistry but I really am impressed with molecules in life.
Scientists have opened the black boxes of DNA, replication, and many other "systems".
Many thanks for all their time and effort as they learned.
And then making images and explaining these systems in simple terms so a 5th grader can understand.

But I think there's much more to learn than "DNA-to protein".

They've done the genomic project.
I'd like to see projects about cell types; we have hundreds of them.
One aspect is the development of cell types - the paths starting from the first cell.
Another aspect is the makeup of each cell type .e.g. the genes expressed in a heart cell.
What proteins are responsible for the automatic movement of heart muscle?
Is there a synthetic source of energy there?

The idea of gene identification by epigenetics is still being studied.
Although something apparently is needed (above DNA), the recent explanations by a person in ScienceAlert didn't make sense.
I was hoping someone else was interested and nice enough to explain.

So yes, I have this agenda. But time is running out for me.
If anyone knows other sources of information, please let me know.

George

#10 A-wal

A-wal

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1311 posts

Posted 19 June 2016 - 03:56 PM

This reminds me of something that I heard recently, that DNA is not in any way an explanation for how life can know what it should do. It's a blueprint, an instruction manual that needs something else that haven't figured out yet to apply it.



#11 exchemist

exchemist

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2615 posts

Posted 20 June 2016 - 04:06 AM

Correction; I do have an agenda:
Learn about scientific studies and observations, with a secondary objective to teach others.

I'm a scientist at heart but I got sidetracked by computers.
There are so many fields of science, I'm divided as to which one I would have selected as a career.

I know I've jumped past basic chemistry but I really am impressed with molecules in life.
Scientists have opened the black boxes of DNA, replication, and many other "systems".
Many thanks for all their time and effort as they learned.
And then making images and explaining these systems in simple terms so a 5th grader can understand.

But I think there's much more to learn than "DNA-to protein".

They've done the genomic project.
I'd like to see projects about cell types; we have hundreds of them.
One aspect is the development of cell types - the paths starting from the first cell.
Another aspect is the makeup of each cell type .e.g. the genes expressed in a heart cell.
What proteins are responsible for the automatic movement of heart muscle?
Is there a synthetic source of energy there?

The idea of gene identification by epigenetics is still being studied.
Although something apparently is needed (above DNA), the recent explanations by a person in ScienceAlert didn't make sense.
I was hoping someone else was interested and nice enough to explain.

So yes, I have this agenda. But time is running out for me.
If anyone knows other sources of information, please let me know.

George

The problem for anyone attempting to respond is the sweeping nature of your questions. That's why I suspected a creationist or something like that - i.e. person who does not understand science and wants to knock lumps out of it without trying. (I'm delighted I was wrong to suspect that, by the way.) But really, how can anyone try to answer what you are now asking? It's so broad.

 

The only bit I think I can get to grips with is the idea of a "synthetic energy source" in heart muscle. That, I think, is fairly well understood. Heart muscle, like all muscle, uses energy from the cellular respiration process: https://en.wikipedia...lar_respiration  There is no "synthetic energy source". The fuel is glucose and the oxidiser is oxygen. (Without enough oxygen for the heart muscle, you have a heart attack of course.) 

 

The automatic rhythm is governed by the electrical impulses in the nervous system of the heart: https://en.wikipedia...Sinoatrial_node  and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_conduction_system_of_the_heart  Interestingly (to me at least), this electrical regulation does not rely on nerves within the heart to transmit the signal.

 

That at least would be my opening shot at trying to reply. If it is not what you are after perhaps I can have another go, if you can explain in more detail what you want.

 

If you can break down some of your other questions into manageable chunks, maybe someone can get to grips with those, too.



#12 exit99

exit99

    Thinking

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts

Posted 26 July 2016 - 11:30 AM

Thanks for the info about heart muscle, which I find interesting.
I don't mean to pursue this here, but it's obvious that heart cells/tissue operate in a different fashion than others.
At this point, I don't think we can say what unique genes are expressed to make heart cells.
At one time we didn't have the maps of genes for various organisms.
I'm suggesting that in the future, perhaps they'll be a map of cell type development, starting with the zygote.

In this intro, I'm not asking questions how to do that or anything else.

But I do have specific questions in Biology: Dna Second Layer Of Information.

#13 exchemist

exchemist

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2615 posts

Posted 24 May 2017 - 01:21 AM

Hello

 

That's really great achievement.

 

Welcome to the forums and hope you enjoy.

 

Cheers!

Sarah, it is worth checking the date of these threads before you respond. This person last contributed to the thread getting for a year ago, so it's a bit late to issue a welcome now. 


  • sanctus likes this