Starship Asterisk*

emc wrote: But I do not see how complex life forms could have evolved from a lower state… it seems too many systems have to be in place at the same time (not over long periods) for the creature to exist. That doesn’t make sense.

Ann wrote:As for intelligent design, which implies a creator, Carl Sagan once asked the following question:

Why should it be easier to believe in a creator, who has to arise out of nothing, than to believe in a creator-less universe which has to evolve to its present state (including us) on its own accord?

Ann

geckzilla wrote:

emc wrote: But I do not see how complex life forms could have evolved from a lower state… it seems too many systems have to be in place at the same time (not over long periods) for the creature to exist. That doesn’t make sense.

It does not make any more sense to invoke a magical being which would indeed be many times or infinitely more complex than the organism you find too complex to exist on its own.

zorts wrote:This is, indeed, a cool video clip - but I like it better when APOD sticks to straightahead astronomy.

Chris Peterson wrote:Question to anybody who got an ad- was it in the embedded video, or did you click through to the YouTube page and see the ad there?

neufer wrote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/researchers-write-book-using-dna/2012/08/19/9a84903c-e95b-11e1-a3d2-2a05679928ef_print.html wrote:
Researchers write book using DNA
By Hristio Boytchev, Washington Post: August 19

Researchers have encoded a full book in DNA, the largest amount of information stored on the biological medium yet.

Born in California, Adleman grew up in San Francisco, and attended the University of California, Berkeley, where he received his BA degree in mathematics in 1968 and his Ph.D. degree in EECS in 1976. In 1994, his paper Molecular Computation of Solutions To Combinatorial Problems described the experimental use of DNA as a computational system. In it, he solved a seven-node instance of the Hamiltonian Graph problem, an NP-complete problem similar to the travelling salesman problem. While the solution to a seven-node instance is trivial, this paper is the first known instance of the successful use of DNA to compute an algorithm. DNA computing has been shown to have potential as a means to solve several other large-scale combinatorial search problems.

In 2002, he and his research group managed to solve a 'nontrivial' problem using DNA computation. Specifically, they solved a 20-variable SAT problem having more than 1 million potential solutions. They did it in a manner similar to the one Adleman used in his seminal 1994 paper. First, a mixture of DNA strands logically representative of the problem's solution space was synthesized. This mixture was then operated upon algorithmically using biochemical techniques to winnow out the 'incorrect' strands, leaving behind only those strands that 'satisfied' the problem. Analysis of the nucleotide sequence of these remaining strands revealed 'correct' solutions to the original problem.

For his contribution to the invention of the RSA cryptosystem, Adleman, along with Ron Rivest and Adi Shamir, has been a recipient of the 1996 Paris Kanellakis Theory and Practice Award and the 2002 ACM Turing Award, often called the Nobel Prize of Computer Science. Adleman was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2006.

rstevenson wrote: I clicked the link " DNA: The Molecule that Defines You" in the first post at the top of this thread to open it in a Tab in my browser, and viewed the video there. As always, an ad popped up near the bottom of the video and I click the X to dismiss it. As always, a few ads came up in place of the video when it ended. The ads are put there by Youtube, as far as I can tell.

Boomer12k wrote:Evidently my other version of this post was not in compliance with some of the forums rules....so I have....shortened it....let us say....
Concepts are constant. Many things follow the same concept.
In order to fit in a cell, the six foot strand of DNA has to be wrapped, spun into a coil, and compressed, evidently several times, which reminds me of our intestines, which reminds me of packing a parachute. The cords and chute are wended back on themselves to conserve space. Just think how big a cell would have to be to hold the unfolded, unspun, untwisted, DNA strand.
Then in order to replicate, there are nano chemical machines that do the work. Like a textile factory. A piece comes in, and two pieces go out, and in this case, one is made backwards. Pretty good for just an accidental freak of nature.

We as a chemical factory are recreating ourselves. Cell are regenerating and replacing old ones that die off. Thus, our hair grows out, our nails, our skin sloughs off. Our internal organs, etc...we are a biological, electro-chemical power plants, and we are an organism of organized organizations of organs...all connected, that work synergistically as a whole. And all the while our Telemeres shorten. Get yourself some T-65.

No single science covers it all...you need all of them...no single religion or philosophy covers it all...
So...maybe combine CONCEPTS...make you a more complete person in your understanding.

Don't JUST KEEP LOOKING UP....you will fall into the manhole....

Things are going to change...We are going to change...the Universe will be a dark wasteland someday, with no stars in the sky, and just a bunch of burned out electrons...So, enjoy it while you can...


:---[===] *

Ann wrote:

Guest76 wrote:

The only way it could be inevitable is if the universe is infinite, and then you could say, 'life had to happen somewhere, and we're it'. But the universe does not seem to be infinite.

How do you know that the universe isn't infinite?

Ann

Boomer12k wrote:In order to fit in a cell, the six foot strand of DNA has to be wrapped, spun into a coil, and compressed, evidently several times, which reminds me of our intestines, which reminds me of packing a parachute. The cords and chute are wended back on themselves to conserve space. Just think how big a cell would have to be to hold the unfolded, unspun, untwisted, DNA strand. Then in order to replicate, there are nano chemical machines that do the work. Like a textile factory. A piece comes in, and two pieces go out, and in this case, one is made backwards. Pretty good for just an accidental freak of nature.

bystander wrote:Does anyone who does see ads have pop ups disabled?

emc wrote:
But I do not see how complex life forms could have evolved from a lower state… it seems too many systems have to be in place at the same time (not over long periods) for the creature to exist. That doesn’t make sense.

geckzilla wrote:
It does not make any more sense to invoke a magical being which would indeed be many times or infinitely more complex than the organism you find too complex to exist on its own.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Greatest_Show_on_Earth:_The_Evidence_for_Evolution wrote:
<<The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution is a 2009 book by British biologist Richard Dawkins. It sets out the evidence for biological evolution, and is Dawkins's 10th book, following his bestselling critique of religion The God Delusion (2006). Chapter eight: Here Dawkins cites an interaction between J.B.S. Haldane, a leading architect of neo-Darwinism, and an evolution skeptic. The skeptic poses a complex question of how, even given billions of years, a single cell could develop into a complicated human body that thinks and feels. Haldane’s one-liner response was, “But madam, you did it yourself. And it only took you nine months.”

neufer wrote:The skeptic poses a complex question of how, even given billions of years, a single cell could develop into a complicated human body that thinks and feels.

zorts wrote:This is, indeed, a cool video clip - but I like it better when APOD sticks to straightahead astronomy.

Ann wrote:

Guest76 wrote:

The only way it could be inevitable is if the universe is infinite, and then you could say, 'life had to happen somewhere, and we're it'. But the universe does not seem to be infinite.

How do you know that the universe isn't infinite?

Ann

GBDB wrote:REST ASSURED: The universe is infinite.

GBDB wrote:REST ASSURED: The universe is infinite.