Replies

I forgot to mention that random mutation happenings should be factored into probabilistic genetic studies — mutations happen frequently.

Well maybe they should. But the statement "mutations happen frequently" does not address the problem of whether they add any new information to DNA such that "natural selection" can capitalize on them in positive, "creative" ways; e.g., improvement in survival fitness. Usually mutations are deleterious to the organism.

So if you're going to factor random mutations into probabilistic genetic studies, can this tell you anything about evolution per se, or only give you readings on likely morbidity/mortality outcomes respecting various types of genetic inheritance?

What does Steve Jones expect to find?

Well maybe they should. But the statement "mutations happen frequently" does not address the problem of whether they add any new information to DNA such that "natural selection" can capitalize on them in positive, "creative" ways; e.g., improvement in survival fitness. Usually mutations are deleterious to the organism.

Betty, EVERY mutation adds new information to DNA that is then subject to the Natural Selection process: If "bad," for any of multiple ways, holders of "bad" DNA will die off. If "good," the DNA sequence will probably pass on to subsequent generations.

This section of Jone's book is good reading on pages 111 to 115.

In Shannon's mathematical theory of communication - the foundation of the branch of mathematics called "information theory" - "noise" is but one of several elements involved in successful communication.

Other elements are message, source, encoding, channel, decoding, receiver.

Information (successful communication) is the reduction of uncertainty (Shannon entropy) in the receiver (or molecular machine) as it goes from a before state to an after state. It is not the message.

The unopened letter in your inbox is a message, information happens when you decode the message and become "informed." Coffee spilled on the letter would be "noise" in that channel, affecting your ability to decode the message.

In information theory as applied to molecular biology (Schneider, et al) "noise" is the path whereby biological mutations are introduced.

But physical "noise" in a channel is not encoded. It is gibberish that cannot be decoded. That was the point betty boop raised. It cannot add to the message.

In order for whatever is received as "noise" to add to the message, it must be encoded. In short, it must be a broadcast (non-autonomous) encoded message. For instance, a radio message being received by your television.

H.H. Pattee (syntactical autonomy) and Rocha have both commented on this very point. In order for information content to accumulate in an RNA world, objects must toggle back and forth between autonomous and non-autonomous. Even so, the encoding of the noise must be explained.