Moontanman Posted November 27, 2022 Report Share Posted November 27, 2022 4 hours ago, JeffreysTubes8 said: Have you ever considered becoming a social influencer? Have you ever considered something besides being an obfuscation freak? OceanBreeze 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted November 27, 2022 Report Share Posted November 27, 2022 3 hours ago, JeffreysTubes8 said: Nobody likes a negative Nancy! Turn that frown upside down! Cheer up and be well on your way! Few people seem to like the truth... you would appear to be one of the worst for ignoring reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halc Posted November 27, 2022 Report Share Posted November 27, 2022 I noticed that nobody (including the OP) actually posted anything relevant to this thread in 1.5 months. Just to pick the first response: On 10/8/2022 at 4:28 PM, atomsmasher said: Origin of life There are a few theories concerning the origin of life. [1] natural selection assumes that the weak die off and the more resilient carry on [2] random selection suggests that mutations take place, some succeed, and others fade away Neither of those is relevant. 1) Your statement assumes that there was already something 'alive' that could meaningfully 'die off', implying that life had already started. 2) Mutations assume there is something (DNA say) that was already there to mutate. Life existed long before there was something as complex as DNA. The theory of evolution is not a theory of abiogenesis. None of the posts seems to discuss any scientific theory of the origin of life, instead choosing to trade theological insults with each other. Only 20 some hours ago did write4u actually mention abiogenesis, linking to relevant summaries of some of the current scientific thinking on the issue. Pathetic that it took that long to make the first relevant post. write4u and Moontanman 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
write4u Posted November 28, 2022 Report Share Posted November 28, 2022 (edited) 3 hours ago, Halc said: The theory of evolution is not a theory of abiogenesis. None of the posts seems to discuss any scientific theory of the origin of life, instead choosing to trade theological insults with each other. The OP does not address the theory of Evolution. It addresses the theory of Abiogenesis or ; The Fountain of Life: Scientists Uncover the “Chemistry Behind the Origin of Life” i.e. a·bi·o·gen·e·sis noun Quote 1. the original evolution of life or living organisms from inorganic or inanimate substances. "to construct any convincing theory of abiogenesis, we must take into account the condition of the Earth about 4 billion years ago" 2. the gradual development of something, especially from a simple to a more complex form. "the forms of written languages undergo constant evolution" Oxford dictionary Many people have a narrow interpretation of the term, but we can easily posit that the universe itself evolved from the moment it became physically expressed. Quote According to the chaotic universe model, the universe oscillates in time with chaotic dynamics without repeating itself. In this universe model, there is no singularity, big crunch or big rip. The universe evolves depending on the competing between components. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-18681-4#: Edited November 28, 2022 by write4u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
write4u Posted November 28, 2022 Report Share Posted November 28, 2022 18 hours ago, Halc said: The theory of evolution is not a theory of abiogenesis. None of the posts seems to discuss any scientific theory of the origin of life, instead choosing to trade theological insults with each other. This got a little confusing. Let me clarify. Evolution is not a theory or result of Abiogenesis, but Abiogenesis is a theory and result of Evolution. Everything in the Universe is a product of evolution. Every element except hydrogen (unless evolved from conditions prior to the BB), is a product of evolutionary processes. Chemical Evolution of the Universe • Quote A major area of astrophysical research is understanding when stars and galaxies formed and how the elements are produced • With the exception of H and He (which are produced in the big bang) all the other elements (called metals in astrophysical jargon) are "cooked" in the centers of massive stars and supernova and then "ejected" by explosions or winds Quote – Chemical evolution • Most of the 'heavy' elements are in the hot x-ray emitting gas – Formation and evolution of cosmic structure • Feedback • Galaxy formation and evolution • Mergers – Cosmological constraints • Evolution of clusters is a strong function of cosmological parameters more...... https://www.astro.umd.edu/~richard/ASTR480/Clusters_Lec2_Astro480.pdf This entire chronology leads to the conclusion that Life is an evolved result and extension of Universal dynamical evolutionary processes, which according to Renate Loll et al, began with Causal Dynamical Triangulation (CDT) directly after the BB and the "expansion" (unfolding) of the spacetime fabric itself. Moontanman 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted November 28, 2022 Report Share Posted November 28, 2022 20 hours ago, JeffreysTubes8 said: Now look who’s trying to save face. Save face? I've dunked on you so many times its sad you even think you're relevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halc Posted November 29, 2022 Report Share Posted November 29, 2022 On 11/27/2022 at 7:30 PM, write4u said: The OP does not address the theory of Evolution. It addresses the theory of Abiogenesis The OP links to an article on the subject, but the OP does not otherwise seem to contribute anything to the discussion. I didn't click the link as I am not in the habit of clicking links in posts from people with nothing of their own to add. On 11/27/2022 at 7:30 PM, write4u said: Many people have a narrow interpretation of the term, but we can easily posit that the universe itself evolved from the moment it became physically expressed What term, evolution? The 'evolution', or change in the state of some system (a star say) over time is a completely different usage of the word than the one meant by 'the theory of evolution' (ToE), the popular reference to the modern state of Darwin's 'Origin of Species" theory, which is driven by natural selection. You seem to reference the former definition (which is synonymous with 'change over time') when making the statement that "Abiogenesis is a theory and result of Evolution". Yes, that was a change, and it took place over time, so I can't disagree if we're using that definition, but I'm not using that definition, and abiogenesis is not part of ToE (the 2nd definition). I personally have little to add to the wiki entry on abiogenesis, not being particularly educated in that field, but my daughter is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
write4u Posted November 30, 2022 Report Share Posted November 30, 2022 (edited) 4 hours ago, Halc said: What term, evolution? The 'evolution', or change in the state of some system (a star say) over time is a completely different usage of the word than the one meant by 'the theory of evolution' (ToE), the popular reference to the modern state of Darwin's 'Origin of Species" theory, which is driven by natural selection. Can we make a case that abiogenesis is also a product of natural selection? Robert Hazen demonstrates that increasingly complex forms of chemical polymers are also subject to natural selection, which suggests that all repeating patterns that change over time are products of natural selection or a mathematical guiding equation. And I believe that TOE/ToE stands for "theory of everything", which of course includes Darwinian Evolution. Quote A theory of everything (TOE[1] or TOE/ToE), final theory, ultimate theory, unified field theory or master theory is a hypothetical, singular, all-encompassing, coherent theoretical framework of physics that fully explains and links together all aspects of the universe.[2]: 6 Finding a theory of everything is one of the major unsolved problems in physics.[3] Quote a theory of everything may be defined as a comprehensive theory that, in principle, would be capable of describing all physical phenomena in this universe. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_everything I see "Life" as another expression of dynamical mathematical functions or as David Bohm posited as the emergent explicated (unfolded) forms of implicated (enfolded) potentials. (see "Wholeness and the Implicate Order, David Bohm). http://gci.org.uk/Documents/DavidBohm-WholenessAndTheImplicateOrder.pdf (free) Edited November 30, 2022 by write4u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halc Posted November 30, 2022 Report Share Posted November 30, 2022 1 hour ago, write4u said: Can we make a case that abiogenesis is also a product of natural selection? I'm open to it, but I suspect it just comes down to definitions and a fine line between life and not-life. 1 hour ago, write4u said: Robert Hazen demonstrates that increasingly complex forms of chemical polymers are also subject to natural selection, which suggests that all repeating patterns that change over time are products of natural selection or a mathematical guiding equation. Can you expand on this then? In what way are these polymers not already life, if something like natural selection is operating meaningfully on them? Do you have a definition of 'life'? That's a very hard one, and the one most people give presumes the one and only form of life they know. A good definition would not presume say Earth-style carbon based organisms. 1 hour ago, write4u said: And I believe that TOE/ToE stands for "theory of everything" The acronym indeed has multiple meanings, as do most acronyms, which is why I didn't use it without specifying how I meant it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
write4u Posted November 30, 2022 Report Share Posted November 30, 2022 (edited) Aww I had a whole post but lost it when looking for the Hazen video. Anyway he explains it better than I ever could. The whole lecture is truly worth watching. His mention of chemical evolution of biopolymers can be seen @ 24:25 and if you want to watch the whole lecture start watching @ 12:00 to avoid a lengthy introduction. This is good stuff. Edited November 30, 2022 by write4u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
write4u Posted November 30, 2022 Report Share Posted November 30, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, JeffreysTubes8 said: I don’t think mutation is random for organisms that have a brain. Compare the anatomical functionality of symmetry in limbs of organisms that move (have a brain) versus the asymmetry of branches and roots of organisms that grow in sedentary fashion (no brain). First, root and branch networks of trees are their brains., just as the Purkinje neural networks are the main part of the brain and are responsible for motor functions in the body. Neurons (Purkinje cells) located in the cerebellum Second; the human brain contains a network of 100 billion neurons, connected by 1000 trillion synapses and is not symmetric in any sense except at nano-scales . Note the branching networks in the cerebellum Quote 1. Introduction Purkinje fibers play a major role in electrical conduction and propagation of impulse to the ventricular muscle. Many ventricular arrhythmias are initiated in the Purkinje fiber conduction system (eg. [1,2]) since they are susceptible to the development of early and delayed afterdepolarizations and show both normal and abnormal automaticity. Here we will review properties of Purkinje fibers and cells, and compare them to those of ventricles. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4332524/ You have a wrong interpretation of physical symmetries which are not in any way connected to the brain but to the genetic growth coding in your DNA. The human brain itself is the result of a chromosomal mutation in a common ancestor with other great apes that resulted in increased brain growth and caused the split from all other apes. (humans are the only hominid with 23 pr chromosomes, whereas all other apes have 24 pr chromosomes.) Edited November 30, 2022 by write4u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halc Posted December 1, 2022 Report Share Posted December 1, 2022 (edited) 20 hours ago, write4u said: [Hazen] mention of chemical evolution of biopolymers This is good stuff. Watched the critical bit, but not in detail yet. Good stuff indeed. It reminds me of the CNO cycle that goes on in stars, especially the big ones. It's nuclear reactions, not chemical ones, but it's a stable cycle, a catalyst of sorts, feeding off the abundance of free protons in the plasma that makes up star interiors. C12 is hit with a free proton, becoming N13 which decays into C13 which is hit with a free proton, becoming N14 which is hit with a free proton, becoming O15 which decays into N15 which is hit with a free proton, breaking into C12 and Helium, thus completing the cycle. The two decay events change a proton into a neutron, positron and neutrino. But that isn't life (or is it??), at least not yet. I had asked before. When is it life? When is the line crossed? If they can get a closed stable system of self replicating molecules in the lab as Hazen describes, in what way might natural selection be able to operate on it? Can you envision life that doesn't utilize natural selection? I think I can, but it arguably isn't life. Edited December 1, 2022 by Halc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
write4u Posted December 1, 2022 Report Share Posted December 1, 2022 (edited) 13 hours ago, JeffreysTubes8 said: Compare the anatomical functionality of symmetry in limbs of organisms that move (have a brain) versus the asymmetry of branches and roots of organisms that grow in sedentary fashion (no brain). In addition to my above answer, your assumption that brainless fauna (apart from roots) exhibit asymmetrical growth is wrong. Almost all fauna that relies on photosynthesis follows a fibonacci growth pattern. This is because the Fibonnacci pattern of branch growth, leaf and petal surface distribution and seed packing, is the most efficient and yields maximum exposure of surface area to sunlight and efficient energy distribution. Quote Because of this prevalence of natural fractals, the human brain has evolved to respond favorably to fractals, and to do so in the blink of an eye. The human brain only needs 50 milliseconds to detect the presence of fractals. https://around.uoregon.edu/content/human-brain-would-rather-look-nature-city-streets FIBONACCI NUMBERS: THE SECRET FORMULA OF FLOWERS Does this mathematical code hold the key to nature? 3 Petals: lily, iris 5 Petals: buttercup, wild rose, larkspur, columbine 8 Petals: delphiniums 13 Petals: ragwort, corn marigold, cineraria 21 Petals: aster, black-eyed susan, chicory 34 Petals: plantain, pytethrum 55, 89 Petals: michelmas daisies, the asteraceae family Quote So next time you’re admiring a bouquet of flowers, take a closer look and you might just see the miracle of science as well as the beauty of nature. https://www.funnyhowflowersdothat.co.uk/fibonacci-numbers-secret-formula-flowers And for a pagefull of fractal fauna in nature, feast you eyes on this link; https://www.google.com/search?q=fractals+in+nature&sxsrf=ALiCzsbOCzzrslPKkWZoyWE6ynpYP4PbBg:1669877450351&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjDi_yh6tf7AhVwnGoFHSF1ATQQ_AUoAXoECAEQAw&biw=1280&bih=647&dpr=1.5 Edited December 1, 2022 by write4u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
write4u Posted December 1, 2022 Report Share Posted December 1, 2022 (edited) 14 hours ago, Halc said: Can you envision life that doesn't utilize natural selection? I think I can, but it arguably isn't life. AFAIK, all life is subject to natural selection. There is no choice involved. Everything we see is a product of natural selection. It is how the universe works. I cannot think of anything that would be exempt, except perhaps gold. I see natural selection in a broader scope. Why does a pattern have to be alive to be selected by natural mathematics based on inherent values of the component parts and possible additions or changes by environmental pressures for an even more or less complex durable pattern. Why do we see spiral galaxies? Is it not because natural mathematics form these pattern depending on initial states and available resources? But then what happens when 2 galaxies collide? A new more complex galaxy emerges from the joining. Is that not an example of increased complexity via natural selection. Natural selection is a stochastic process, based on probabilities of a "Large Number of Rare Event" (LNRE) distribution. This applies not only to human genetic mutations (alteration) but to all accidental changes that produce a new durable pattern everywhere in the universe. Natural selection is not by design or agency, it is by mathematical probability, a result rather than a cause. Edited December 1, 2022 by write4u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
write4u Posted December 1, 2022 Report Share Posted December 1, 2022 15 hours ago, JeffreysTubes8 said: Gestalt means, greater than the sum of it's parts. In essence, the brain. No, in short Gestalt means "conscious mind", the emergent property of the brain that is greater than the sum of its parts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
write4u Posted December 1, 2022 Report Share Posted December 1, 2022 32 minutes ago, JeffreysTubes8 said: Symmetry has nothing to do with fractals. Trees don’t have any symmetry and they do not move. I just showed you that symmetry has nothing t do with brains. It is an effiecient pattern, identical opposites. The brain does not require symmetry, it requires fractalityin order to form information networks. Trees communicate via their roots. Plants use their roots to “listen in” on their neighbours, according to research that adds to evidence that plants have their own unique forms of communication. Quote The study found that plants in a crowded environment secrete chemicals into the soil that prompt their neighbours to grow more aggressively, presumably to avoid being left in the shade. https://www.silvanfoundation.org/post/plants-talk-to-each-other-through-their-roots?gclid=Cj0KCQiAvqGcBhCJARIsAFQ5ke45mqHd5sqoxN2fkytNfaiQ2zSzlRzyYOV1cYpZkmY-sOyHvRWkRbUaAg5KEALw_wcB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
write4u Posted December 1, 2022 Report Share Posted December 1, 2022 47 minutes ago, JeffreysTubes8 said: Which is not random mutation it’s selective, for instance I changed my somatotype by creating necessity. My genes didn’t do it. My mind recognized hunger and the cells reorganized the fat to feed the body through nerve cell recipiency to the brain which controls genetic changes apparently. Natural selection is not connected to the brain in any way. Natural selection is a stochastic change in pattern formation. If the pattern is durable and repetitive it is said to have evolved via natural selection. This is clearly observable in biology, but IMO, it is also present in the chemical world as Hazen demonstrated and at all scales in the universe where dynamical conditions produce different patterns based on simple mathematical patterns such as Platonic solids. A spiral galaxy is an evolved system via natural selection by a mathematical guiding equation. i.e. the Golden Mean. What is the golden mean in nature? Quote The golden ratio is 1.618, represented by the Greek letter 'phi', is said to be is a mathematical connection between two aspects of an object. It is also called the Fibonacci sequence and it can be found across all of nature: plants, animals, weather structures, star systems – it is ever-present in the universe.Apr 13, 2021 And then there is the "fine structure constant". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.