Total Posts:15|Showing Posts:1-15
Jump to topic:

Life and information.

Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/10/2014 1:21:14 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Real information is the physical characteristics of chemicals. When chemicals react it is in accordance to their real inherent qualities.

Abstract information is a symbolic or representation of Real information.

Common man made example. You go the the store and buy mortar and brick. Those things are physical and stick to each other. If you put mortar and brick in a pile together, their physical contact will glue bricks in place. The pile will be a mess.

You also buy instructions. The words and pictures of the instructions are incapable of coming from the physical objects of brick or mortar. Instructions are Abstract information. In this example the Abstraction happened through human intelligence. Following the instructions the brick and mortar can be piled into a wall.

DNA is Abstract information. It describes things that are not results of physical objects. For instance in Animals DNA dictates for how long an organism's follicle should produce new hair growth. The Real information or physical characteristics of the hair do not provide feedback to the follicle on when to stop.

First the follicle is in an Anagen phase, where it produces hair.
Then the follicle is in a Catagen phase, where it is in transition.
Then the follicle is in the Telogen phase when the follicle is shut down till it goes back into the Anagen phase.

The amount of time the follicle stays in Anagen phase is determined by Genetic factors. This amount of time is recorded as Abstract information in the DNA code.

How did the physical quality of time influence the arrangement of nucleic Acids to store a sequence that when read in the biological system releases a chemical for only so long?

How does information from the physical real world get encoded in biological predecessors, which came first the DNA reader or the DNA writer?

Abstract information requires an intelligence to arrange and encode.

Therefore Life was original made by an intelligence.
slo1
Posts: 4,312
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2014 7:54:01 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/10/2014 1:21:14 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
Real information is the physical characteristics of chemicals. When chemicals react it is in accordance to their real inherent qualities.

Abstract information is a symbolic or representation of Real information.

Common man made example. You go the the store and buy mortar and brick. Those things are physical and stick to each other. If you put mortar and brick in a pile together, their physical contact will glue bricks in place. The pile will be a mess.

You also buy instructions. The words and pictures of the instructions are incapable of coming from the physical objects of brick or mortar. Instructions are Abstract information. In this example the Abstraction happened through human intelligence. Following the instructions the brick and mortar can be piled into a wall.

DNA is Abstract information. It describes things that are not results of physical objects. For instance in Animals DNA dictates for how long an organism's follicle should produce new hair growth. The Real information or physical characteristics of the hair do not provide feedback to the follicle on when to stop.

That is wrong. DNA and the process to form individual proteins to cause events in a living organism or split to form new cells is purely based upon the "real information", the chemical and physical properties which react with other chemicals and molecules.

If it were not that way then you would need a creator to orchestrate all the bio chemical and physical processes that allows your body to function. Is that what you are advocating?

I would assume that you don't agree to that an instead are a proponent that the arrangement of the real information of DNA and cellar objects was created by intelligence and once that arrangement is made it can function without further instruction than the initial arrangement.

There is a problem with that as we have empirical evidence that the instructions and arrangement of DNA do change due to random happenings because the real information of the molecules of DNA, RNA, and other objects are reactive and often dependent upon randomly bumping into other molecules in the cell.

If designed it would be like a programmer putting in code to randomly change the code at 20 year intervals and have the output the same generations later.

First the follicle is in an Anagen phase, where it produces hair.
Then the follicle is in a Catagen phase, where it is in transition.
Then the follicle is in the Telogen phase when the follicle is shut down till it goes back into the Anagen phase.


Just to reiterate, you give the phases of hair growth, don't provide any genetic data on the mechanism of how it changes phases then make an biased conclusion that since the arrangement of "real information" that makes it happen and change phases had to be arranged by an intelligent being.

In simpler terms you are using an analogy much like the brick and mortar analogy that does not have any bearing on whether it is possible to get the genetic real information organized in a manner which allows it to execute the hair phases without intelligence.

Both are poor analogies because they ignore the base question of how the DNA got arranged the way it is arranged and how much can that arrangement change.

You can surmise all day long that it is too complex to be random, but the complexity argument is baseless until there is significant examination to uncover how something complex may have come together randomly.

The amount of time the follicle stays in Anagen phase is determined by Genetic factors. This amount of time is recorded as Abstract information in the DNA code.

How did the physical quality of time influence the arrangement of nucleic Acids to store a sequence that when read in the biological system releases a chemical for only so long?

How does information from the physical real world get encoded in biological predecessors, which came first the DNA reader or the DNA writer?

Abstract information requires an intelligence to arrange and encode.

Therefore Life was original made by an intelligence.
Floid
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2014 11:55:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
As slo said the problem with your argument is that DNA operates by "the physical characteristics of chemicals" within the DNA. Therefore, when the chemicals in DNA react "it is in accordance to their real inherent qualities."

DNA is Abstract information. It describes things that are not results of physical objects.

This isn't true. What DNA describes is what was copied from previous DNA which is a result of a physical process. So what you are left with is trying to go back to the first DNA and claim that it couldn't have been created by a physical process but this is basically the difference in an evolution and an abiogenesis debate. DNA is created by a physical process, is used by physical processes, etc. Did this process start by random occurrence or did it have some divine help is mostly speculation.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2014 5:11:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/11/2014 7:54:01 AM, slo1 wrote:
At 7/10/2014 1:21:14 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
Real information is the physical characteristics of chemicals. When chemicals react it is in accordance to their real inherent qualities.

Abstract information is a symbolic or representation of Real information.

Common man made example. You go the the store and buy mortar and brick. Those things are physical and stick to each other. If you put mortar and brick in a pile together, their physical contact will glue bricks in place. The pile will be a mess.

You also buy instructions. The words and pictures of the instructions are incapable of coming from the physical objects of brick or mortar. Instructions are Abstract information. In this example the Abstraction happened through human intelligence. Following the instructions the brick and mortar can be piled into a wall.

DNA is Abstract information. It describes things that are not results of physical objects. For instance in Animals DNA dictates for how long an organism's follicle should produce new hair growth. The Real information or physical characteristics of the hair do not provide feedback to the follicle on when to stop.

That is wrong. DNA and the process to form individual proteins to cause events in a living organism or split to form new cells is purely based upon the "real information", the chemical and physical properties which react with other chemicals and molecules.

If it were not that way then you would need a creator to orchestrate all the bio chemical and physical processes that allows your body to function. Is that what you are advocating?

I would assume that you don't agree to that an instead are a proponent that the arrangement of the real information of DNA and cellar objects was created by intelligence and once that arrangement is made it can function without further instruction than the initial arrangement.

There is a problem with that as we have empirical evidence that the instructions and arrangement of DNA do change due to random happenings because the real information of the molecules of DNA, RNA, and other objects are reactive and often dependent upon randomly bumping into other molecules in the cell.

If designed it would be like a programmer putting in code to randomly change the code at 20 year intervals and have the output the same generations later.


First the follicle is in an Anagen phase, where it produces hair.
Then the follicle is in a Catagen phase, where it is in transition.
Then the follicle is in the Telogen phase when the follicle is shut down till it goes back into the Anagen phase.


Just to reiterate, you give the phases of hair growth, don't provide any genetic data on the mechanism of how it changes phases then make an biased conclusion that since the arrangement of "real information" that makes it happen and change phases had to be arranged by an intelligent being.

In simpler terms you are using an analogy much like the brick and mortar analogy that does not have any bearing on whether it is possible to get the genetic real information organized in a manner which allows it to execute the hair phases without intelligence.

Both are poor analogies because they ignore the base question of how the DNA got arranged the way it is arranged and how much can that arrangement change.

You can surmise all day long that it is too complex to be random, but the complexity argument is baseless until there is significant examination to uncover how something complex may have come together randomly.


There are 4 Nucleic Acids. These four nucleic acids are an instruction set to make the proteins through RNA. It is the arrangement of these acids that make the RNA.

This is abstract information because it is exactly like the alphabet having 26 letters and the arrangement of the letters make words.


The amount of time the follicle stays in Anagen phase is determined by Genetic factors. This amount of time is recorded as Abstract information in the DNA code.

How did the physical quality of time influence the arrangement of nucleic Acids to store a sequence that when read in the biological system releases a chemical for only so long?

How does information from the physical real world get encoded in biological predecessors, which came first the DNA reader or the DNA writer?

Abstract information requires an intelligence to arrange and encode.

Therefore Life was original made by an intelligence.
slo1
Posts: 4,312
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2014 5:22:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/11/2014 5:11:08 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 7/11/2014 7:54:01 AM, slo1 wrote:
At 7/10/2014 1:21:14 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
Real information is the physical characteristics of chemicals. When chemicals react it is in accordance to their real inherent qualities.

Abstract information is a symbolic or representation of Real information.

Common man made example. You go the the store and buy mortar and brick. Those things are physical and stick to each other. If you put mortar and brick in a pile together, their physical contact will glue bricks in place. The pile will be a mess.

You also buy instructions. The words and pictures of the instructions are incapable of coming from the physical objects of brick or mortar. Instructions are Abstract information. In this example the Abstraction happened through human intelligence. Following the instructions the brick and mortar can be piled into a wall.

DNA is Abstract information. It describes things that are not results of physical objects. For instance in Animals DNA dictates for how long an organism's follicle should produce new hair growth. The Real information or physical characteristics of the hair do not provide feedback to the follicle on when to stop.

That is wrong. DNA and the process to form individual proteins to cause events in a living organism or split to form new cells is purely based upon the "real information", the chemical and physical properties which react with other chemicals and molecules.

If it were not that way then you would need a creator to orchestrate all the bio chemical and physical processes that allows your body to function. Is that what you are advocating?

I would assume that you don't agree to that an instead are a proponent that the arrangement of the real information of DNA and cellar objects was created by intelligence and once that arrangement is made it can function without further instruction than the initial arrangement.

There is a problem with that as we have empirical evidence that the instructions and arrangement of DNA do change due to random happenings because the real information of the molecules of DNA, RNA, and other objects are reactive and often dependent upon randomly bumping into other molecules in the cell.

If designed it would be like a programmer putting in code to randomly change the code at 20 year intervals and have the output the same generations later.


First the follicle is in an Anagen phase, where it produces hair.
Then the follicle is in a Catagen phase, where it is in transition.
Then the follicle is in the Telogen phase when the follicle is shut down till it goes back into the Anagen phase.


Just to reiterate, you give the phases of hair growth, don't provide any genetic data on the mechanism of how it changes phases then make an biased conclusion that since the arrangement of "real information" that makes it happen and change phases had to be arranged by an intelligent being.

In simpler terms you are using an analogy much like the brick and mortar analogy that does not have any bearing on whether it is possible to get the genetic real information organized in a manner which allows it to execute the hair phases without intelligence.

Both are poor analogies because they ignore the base question of how the DNA got arranged the way it is arranged and how much can that arrangement change.

You can surmise all day long that it is too complex to be random, but the complexity argument is baseless until there is significant examination to uncover how something complex may have come together randomly.


There are 4 Nucleic Acids. These four nucleic acids are an instruction set to make the proteins through RNA. It is the arrangement of these acids that make the RNA.

This is abstract information because it is exactly like the alphabet having 26 letters and the arrangement of the letters make words.

That is what I told you. Your analogies fail, because you are arguing that the arrangement of the chemicals has to be designed. I gave you and example of proven empirical evidence of how random factor change the arrangement thus the instructions. Who in their right mind intelligently designs words where the arrangement of letters to make the word changes randomly? It is such a silly proposition that it can't be taken seriously.



The amount of time the follicle stays in Anagen phase is determined by Genetic factors. This amount of time is recorded as Abstract information in the DNA code.

How did the physical quality of time influence the arrangement of nucleic Acids to store a sequence that when read in the biological system releases a chemical for only so long?

How does information from the physical real world get encoded in biological predecessors, which came first the DNA reader or the DNA writer?

Abstract information requires an intelligence to arrange and encode.

Therefore Life was original made by an intelligence.
Installgentoo
Posts: 1,420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2014 6:01:19 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/11/2014 11:55:27 AM, Floid wrote:
As slo said the problem with your argument is that DNA operates by "the physical characteristics of chemicals" within the DNA. Therefore, when the chemicals in DNA react "it is in accordance to their real inherent qualities."

How on earth do you know that, moron?


DNA is Abstract information. It describes things that are not results of physical objects.

This isn't true. What DNA describes is what was copied from previous DNA which is a result of a physical process. So what you are left with is trying to go back to the first DNA and claim that it couldn't have been created by a physical process but this is basically the difference in an evolution and an abiogenesis debate. DNA is created by a physical process, is used by physical processes, etc. Did this process start by random occurrence or did it have some divine help is mostly speculation.

Except for you guys you have to make a hypothesis-of-the-gaps assumption that DNA just randomly formed one day by chance.
Floid
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2014 8:07:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/11/2014 6:01:19 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 7/11/2014 11:55:27 AM, Floid wrote:
As slo said the problem with your argument is that DNA operates by "the physical characteristics of chemicals" within the DNA. Therefore, when the chemicals in DNA react "it is in accordance to their real inherent qualities."

How on earth do you know that, moron?

A combination of basic reading comprehension and the desire to read the results of decades of research on how DNA works.
Floid
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2014 8:09:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/11/2014 6:01:19 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 7/11/2014 11:55:27 AM, Floid wrote:
This isn't true. What DNA describes is what was copied from previous DNA which is a result of a physical process. So what you are left with is trying to go back to the first DNA and claim that it couldn't have been created by a physical process but this is basically the difference in an evolution and an abiogenesis debate. DNA is created by a physical process, is used by physical processes, etc. Did this process start by random occurrence or did it have some divine help is mostly speculation.

Except for you guys you have to make a hypothesis-of-the-gaps assumption that DNA just randomly formed one day by chance.

And you have to rely on a divine creator who happens to exist by chance. We are both stuck with the same basic problem. At some point something came from nothing or something has always existed both of which seem illogical. You just add an extra layer to the issue.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2014 12:00:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/11/2014 5:22:22 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 7/11/2014 5:11:08 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 7/11/2014 7:54:01 AM, slo1 wrote:
At 7/10/2014 1:21:14 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
Real information is the physical characteristics of chemicals. When chemicals react it is in accordance to their real inherent qualities.

Abstract information is a symbolic or representation of Real information.

Common man made example. You go the the store and buy mortar and brick. Those things are physical and stick to each other. If you put mortar and brick in a pile together, their physical contact will glue bricks in place. The pile will be a mess.

You also buy instructions. The words and pictures of the instructions are incapable of coming from the physical objects of brick or mortar. Instructions are Abstract information. In this example the Abstraction happened through human intelligence. Following the instructions the brick and mortar can be piled into a wall.

DNA is Abstract information. It describes things that are not results of physical objects. For instance in Animals DNA dictates for how long an organism's follicle should produce new hair growth. The Real information or physical characteristics of the hair do not provide feedback to the follicle on when to stop.

That is wrong. DNA and the process to form individual proteins to cause events in a living organism or split to form new cells is purely based upon the "real information", the chemical and physical properties which react with other chemicals and molecules.

If it were not that way then you would need a creator to orchestrate all the bio chemical and physical processes that allows your body to function. Is that what you are advocating?

I would assume that you don't agree to that an instead are a proponent that the arrangement of the real information of DNA and cellar objects was created by intelligence and once that arrangement is made it can function without further instruction than the initial arrangement.

There is a problem with that as we have empirical evidence that the instructions and arrangement of DNA do change due to random happenings because the real information of the molecules of DNA, RNA, and other objects are reactive and often dependent upon randomly bumping into other molecules in the cell.

If designed it would be like a programmer putting in code to randomly change the code at 20 year intervals and have the output the same generations later.


First the follicle is in an Anagen phase, where it produces hair.
Then the follicle is in a Catagen phase, where it is in transition.
Then the follicle is in the Telogen phase when the follicle is shut down till it goes back into the Anagen phase.


Just to reiterate, you give the phases of hair growth, don't provide any genetic data on the mechanism of how it changes phases then make an biased conclusion that since the arrangement of "real information" that makes it happen and change phases had to be arranged by an intelligent being.

In simpler terms you are using an analogy much like the brick and mortar analogy that does not have any bearing on whether it is possible to get the genetic real information organized in a manner which allows it to execute the hair phases without intelligence.

Both are poor analogies because they ignore the base question of how the DNA got arranged the way it is arranged and how much can that arrangement change.

You can surmise all day long that it is too complex to be random, but the complexity argument is baseless until there is significant examination to uncover how something complex may have come together randomly.


There are 4 Nucleic Acids. These four nucleic acids are an instruction set to make the proteins through RNA. It is the arrangement of these acids that make the RNA.

This is abstract information because it is exactly like the alphabet having 26 letters and the arrangement of the letters make words.

That is what I told you. Your analogies fail, because you are arguing that the arrangement of the chemicals has to be designed. I gave you and example of proven empirical evidence of how random factor change the arrangement thus the instructions. Who in their right mind intelligently designs words where the arrangement of letters to make the word changes randomly? It is such a silly proposition that it can't be taken seriously.




The amount of time the follicle stays in Anagen phase is determined by Genetic factors. This amount of time is recorded as Abstract information in the DNA code.

How did the physical quality of time influence the arrangement of nucleic Acids to store a sequence that when read in the biological system releases a chemical for only so long?

How does information from the physical real world get encoded in biological predecessors, which came first the DNA reader or the DNA writer?

Abstract information requires an intelligence to arrange and encode.

Therefore Life was original made by an intelligence.

You have not given such an example.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2014 12:01:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/11/2014 8:09:44 PM, Floid wrote:
At 7/11/2014 6:01:19 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 7/11/2014 11:55:27 AM, Floid wrote:
This isn't true. What DNA describes is what was copied from previous DNA which is a result of a physical process. So what you are left with is trying to go back to the first DNA and claim that it couldn't have been created by a physical process but this is basically the difference in an evolution and an abiogenesis debate. DNA is created by a physical process, is used by physical processes, etc. Did this process start by random occurrence or did it have some divine help is mostly speculation.

Except for you guys you have to make a hypothesis-of-the-gaps assumption that DNA just randomly formed one day by chance.

And you have to rely on a divine creator who happens to exist by chance. We are both stuck with the same basic problem. At some point something came from nothing or something has always existed both of which seem illogical. You just add an extra layer to the issue.

God does not exist by chance but by necessity. For all this around us to happen God must exist.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2014 12:24:19 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/11/2014 8:07:46 PM, Floid wrote:
At 7/11/2014 6:01:19 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 7/11/2014 11:55:27 AM, Floid wrote:
As slo said the problem with your argument is that DNA operates by "the physical characteristics of chemicals" within the DNA. Therefore, when the chemicals in DNA react "it is in accordance to their real inherent qualities."

How on earth do you know that, moron?

A combination of basic reading comprehension and the desire to read the results of decades of research on how DNA works.

I comprehend how it works.

https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...

A space shuttle or super computer are made out of physical molecules. It is the arrangement of those physical parts that speaks of design.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2014 12:29:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Here is a narration

https://www.youtube.com...

DNA has has the information to produce every cell structure, of every cell, in the body.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2014 12:36:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/12/2014 12:29:54 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
Here is a narration

https://www.youtube.com...

DNA has has the information to produce every cell structure, of every cell, in the body.

And that is just 8 minutes and awesome process to describe a white blood cell moving to an inflamed area.
Floid
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2014 5:30:01 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/12/2014 12:01:47 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 7/11/2014 8:09:44 PM, Floid wrote:
At 7/11/2014 6:01:19 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 7/11/2014 11:55:27 AM, Floid wrote:
This isn't true. What DNA describes is what was copied from previous DNA which is a result of a physical process. So what you are left with is trying to go back to the first DNA and claim that it couldn't have been created by a physical process but this is basically the difference in an evolution and an abiogenesis debate. DNA is created by a physical process, is used by physical processes, etc. Did this process start by random occurrence or did it have some divine help is mostly speculation.

Except for you guys you have to make a hypothesis-of-the-gaps assumption that DNA just randomly formed one day by chance.

And you have to rely on a divine creator who happens to exist by chance. We are both stuck with the same basic problem. At some point something came from nothing or something has always existed both of which seem illogical. You just add an extra layer to the issue.

God does not exist by chance but by necessity. For all this around us to happen God must exist.

If a creator is a necessity then a creator of the creator is a necessity and thus infinite regress. You can't define a creator into existence... it logically doesn't work out.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2014 7:15:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/12/2014 5:30:01 PM, Floid wrote:
At 7/12/2014 12:01:47 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 7/11/2014 8:09:44 PM, Floid wrote:
At 7/11/2014 6:01:19 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 7/11/2014 11:55:27 AM, Floid wrote:
This isn't true. What DNA describes is what was copied from previous DNA which is a result of a physical process. So what you are left with is trying to go back to the first DNA and claim that it couldn't have been created by a physical process but this is basically the difference in an evolution and an abiogenesis debate. DNA is created by a physical process, is used by physical processes, etc. Did this process start by random occurrence or did it have some divine help is mostly speculation.

Except for you guys you have to make a hypothesis-of-the-gaps assumption that DNA just randomly formed one day by chance.

And you have to rely on a divine creator who happens to exist by chance. We are both stuck with the same basic problem. At some point something came from nothing or something has always existed both of which seem illogical. You just add an extra layer to the issue.

God does not exist by chance but by necessity. For all this around us to happen God must exist.

If a creator is a necessity then a creator of the creator is a necessity and thus infinite regress. You can't define a creator into existence... it logically doesn't work out.

I did not say everything that exists needs a creation. I said "all this around us to happen". The Law of Causation is the effect follows a cause. This is an action. So the cause to everything else that happens must be eternal and never have happened but always was. So the creator does not have to have a creator as well.

Unless you want to argue that something can create itself. Which is illogical.