Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Gitt’s First Law of Information.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    To you pro-"ID" ding-dongs, what the hell is "intelligence" anyway??

    Isn't THAT the crux of the issue???

    K54
    Last edited by klaus54; 10-29-2014, 11:00 PM. Reason: THAT!!!!

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Alsharad View Post
      These examples would be data, not encoding. There must be a transmitter and receptor along with a medium.
      That is not the only definition of encoding.

      At this point, all you have is properties that have been run through a knowledge matrix. I apparently have not been clear in my explanation of the subtle difference between data and information. By encoding, I mean that data has to be translated into a common "language" that the sender and receiver have to both understand. Also we can assess data from non-physical things, like ideas and dreams.
      No. In simplest terms encoding is any process where outputs can be mapped to inputs. It can be used in communication between a sender and receiver to pass a message using encoded symbols that abstractly represent other information but it doesn't have to be. All the examples I gave are perfectly valid instances of physical processes that encode information.

      In regards to not proving a negative, information is non-physical in that itself cannot be measured. While it is immaterial, it seems that the laws of logic still apply and you can prove a negative with logic. However, I can rephrase this way:

      Can you demonstrate that the encoding systems in evolution necessarily arose without intelligence?
      Reworded the question is still asking us to prove a negative.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Alsharad
        These examples would be data, not encoding. There must be a transmitter and receptor along with a medium. At this point, all you have is properties that have been run through a knowledge matrix. I apparently have not been clear in my explanation of the subtle difference between data and information. By encoding, I mean that data has to be translated into a common "language" that the sender and receiver have to both understand.
        Originally posted by Alsharad
        DNA replication is an encoding system.
        Then please identify, for DNA replication,
        - the transmitter
        - the sender (if different)
        - the receptor
        - the receiver (if different)
        - the medium
        - the common "language" that the sender and receiver both understand.

        If you cannot, then DNA replication is not an encoding system according to your own criteria.

        Roy
        Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

        MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
        MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

        seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by HMS_Beagle View Post
          That is not the only definition of encoding.
          No, but it is mine, for the purposes of my argument. And it is closer to what I find in different definitions and my own personal experience than what you stated in your examples.

          No. In simplest terms encoding is any process where outputs can be mapped to inputs. It can be used in communication between a sender and receiver to pass a message using encoded symbols that abstractly represent other information but it doesn't have to be. All the examples I gave are perfectly valid instances of physical processes that encode information.
          I can't find any definitions for encoding that followed. All of the definitions that I found had something to do with sending messages of some kind. There was no message transmitted. We can draw conclusions from data, but that doesn't mean that it was encoded.

          And why do you say that "it doesn't have to be"? Is there a definition of encoding that doesn't involve preparing data for transmission?

          Reworded the question is still asking us to prove a negative.
          Irrelevant. Question has been reworded as a logical puzzle. You can prove a negative in logic:

          Prove that I am not there.

          If I am here, then I am not there.
          I am here.
          Therefore, I am not there.

          Negative. Proven.

          If I am posting on T-Web, then I am on the internet.
          I am not on the internet.
          Therefore, I am not posting on T-Web.

          Negative proven again.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Alsharad View Post
            No, but it is mine, for the purposes of my argument.
            If you get to pick your own narrow definition then I get to pick my own narrow conclusion.

            I conclude that Alsharad's argument is nonsensical and has been refuted.

            Gee, that was easy enough.

            Any other claims of yours you want me to refute?

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Roy View Post
              Then please identify, for DNA replication,
              - the transmitter
              - the sender (if different)
              - the receptor
              - the receiver (if different)
              - the medium
              - the common "language" that the sender and receiver both understand.

              If you cannot, then DNA replication is not an encoding system according to your own criteria.

              Roy
              DOH!

              You are correct, DNA replication wouldn't be an encoding system under my criteria any more than making a photocopy would be. I wouldn't think that duplication would count as encoding.

              However, in protein building:
              -Sender - DNA
              -Receptor - Ribosome(s)
              -Medium - mRNA
              -Common "language" - Not sure if "the Genetic Code" is sufficient enough for you, but it will have to do. Codons are effectively the "words" of the language as they dictate what will be built. Both sides are able to use the encoding/decoding process to manufacture the proteins that the cell needs.

              DNA transcription and translation occur are more complicated than the above, but I believe that the information is essentially correct (not a biologist, so I am going from memory/internet). I do find it interesting that the words that scientists use to describe the processes are words we use to describe manipulating or working in a language.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by hms_beagle View Post
                if you get to pick your own narrow definition then i get to pick my own narrow conclusion.

                I conclude that alsharad's argument is nonsensical and has been refuted.

                Gee, that was easy enough.

                Any other claims of yours you want me to refute?
                FOILED AGAIN, and SO EASILY!!

                I honestly tried for as broad a definition as I can find based on dictionaries, very limited research, and my experience. I suppose I can make up a new word to describe what I am talking about, then no one can argue definitions with me!

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Alsharad View Post
                  FOILED AGAIN, and SO EASILY!!

                  I honestly tried for as broad a definition as I can find based on dictionaries, very limited research, and my experience. I suppose I can make up a new word to describe what I am talking about, then no one can argue definitions with me!

                  Good Gawd, Al-sha-bah,

                  Of course information is passed along in every process involving energy. That's what energy means. LOL

                  Now why is genetic information "special" since it involves chemical bonding and the complex actions going on in cells.

                  Is there an "intelligence" behind it other that, let's say, and intelligence behind the creation of the Appalachian complex?

                  K54

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
                    Good Gawd, Al-sha-bah,

                    Of course information is passed along in every process involving energy. That's what energy means. LOL
                    Wha? I have never heard of energy being defined that way.

                    Now why is genetic information "special" since it involves chemical bonding and the complex actions going on in cells.

                    Is there an "intelligence" behind it other that, let's say, and intelligence behind the creation of the Appalachian complex?

                    K54
                    Whoa cowboy! I am not making any claims as to whether biological systems come from intelligent origins. Or even that they are "special", as you put it. This is just a little thought exercise (for me, anyway) looking into Gitt's theories. I don't agree with what he wrote, but I think that there might be a nugget of truth in what he is getting at. I am just looking. I don't necessarily believe one way or the other at this point. I plead the devil's advocate because people are disagreeing with me. If we all agreed, then what's the point of discussing?

                    If I am coming off any other way, please let me know. I know that sometimes levity and good-natured ribbing can get unintended reactions in forums. I definitely do not want to come across like a know-it-all that refuses to be corrected.









                    Like evolutionists!

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Alsharad View Post
                      Wha? I have never heard of energy being defined that way.



                      Whoa cowboy! I am not making any claims as to whether biological systems come from intelligent origins. Or even that they are "special", as you put it. This is just a little thought exercise (for me, anyway) looking into Gitt's theories. I don't agree with what he wrote, but I think that there might be a nugget of truth in what he is getting at. I am just looking. I don't necessarily believe one way or the other at this point. I plead the devil's advocate because people are disagreeing with me. If we all agreed, then what's the point of discussing?

                      If I am coming off any other way, please let me know. I know that sometimes levity and good-natured ribbing can get unintended reactions in forums. I definitely do not want to come across like a know-it-all that refuses to be corrected.









                      Like evolutionists!

                      Do you know what energy is Al-Sha-Bab?

                      I don't think you do.

                      And I don't think you understand the relationship of the complexity of natural processes to "intelligence" in the sense of design.

                      Care to regale us with your virtuosity?

                      Maybe you can write a best seller in the Fundy Christian-Muslim market.

                      K54

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Alsharad View Post
                        DOH!

                        You are correct, DNA replication wouldn't be an encoding system under my criteria any more than making a photocopy would be. I wouldn't think that duplication would count as encoding.

                        However, in protein building:
                        -Sender - DNA
                        -Receptor - Ribosome(s)
                        -Medium - mRNA
                        -Common "language" - Not sure if "the Genetic Code" is sufficient enough for you, but it will have to do. Codons are effectively the "words" of the language as they dictate what will be built. Both sides are able to use the encoding/decoding process to manufacture the proteins that the cell needs.
                        Do DNA strands actually understand the genetic code? Obviously they don't understand it in the way we do, being mere molecules, but I'm not aware of anything in either DNA or the molecules that interact with DNA directly that works with codons. If there isn't, then the genetic code is only used by the receiver, not by the transmitter, and protein building isn't an encoding under your criteria either.

                        Roy
                        Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                        MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                        MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

                        seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Gitt is wrong about what information is. Information is not independent of the stuff on which it is encoded. It can be moved and copied between different stuffs but never exists independently of the stuff. So it is always a state and states change but stuff is never stateless. Because information is not self contained it is not an entity.
                          “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
                          “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
                          “not all there” - you know who you are

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Roy View Post
                            Do DNA strands actually understand the genetic code? Obviously they don't understand it in the way we do, being mere molecules, but I'm not aware of anything in either DNA or the molecules that interact with DNA directly that works with codons. If there isn't, then the genetic code is only used by the receiver, not by the transmitter, and protein building isn't an encoding under your criteria either.

                            Roy
                            I don't know if anyone knows if DNA "understands" the code. However, at some point, something in the cell knows that if Protein X is needed, transcription and translation occur for the sections of DNA that code for that particular protein. However, the container of the data doesn't need to know the code. An external source can encode the data for transmission. All that is required is that data is encoded into a medium from a sender to a receiver. Perhaps "source" and "destination" would be better terms that "sender" and "receiver"? In any case, the codons exist in mRNA, not in DNA. DNA is accessed to produce mRNA, which carries the necessary protein instructions to the ribosomes that then construct the appropriate proteins. DNA is the sender/source, mRNA is the medium, ribosomes are the receiver/destination. It still seems to be encoding under my criteria.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              My extremely limited understanding is that the encoding involved here is much like the encoding involved when one boxer jabs another in the face. The arm is the source, the fist is the medium, the opponent's face is the receiver. Only the receiver decodes the message, but the encryption is inherent in the impact.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Alsharad View Post
                                I don't know if anyone knows if DNA "understands" the code. However, at some point, something in the cell knows that if Protein X is needed, transcription and translation occur for the sections of DNA that code for that particular protein. However, the container of the data doesn't need to know the code. An external source can encode the data for transmission. All that is required is that data is encoded into a medium from a sender to a receiver. Perhaps "source" and "destination" would be better terms that "sender" and "receiver"? In any case, the codons exist in mRNA, not in DNA. DNA is accessed to produce mRNA, which carries the necessary protein instructions to the ribosomes that then construct the appropriate proteins. DNA is the sender/source, mRNA is the medium, ribosomes are the receiver/destination. It still seems to be encoding under my criteria.
                                No. It fails your criteria that the sender/source understands the "language".

                                Roy
                                Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                                MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                                MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

                                seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-18-2024, 12:15 PM
                                48 responses
                                135 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Sparko
                                by Sparko
                                 
                                Started by Sparko, 03-07-2024, 08:52 AM
                                16 responses
                                74 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by rogue06, 02-28-2024, 11:06 AM
                                6 responses
                                46 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Working...
                                X