The "Threat" of Creationism, by Isaac Asimov

Internet ^ | 1984 | Isaac Asimov

[Southack]

"Regardless of how DNA operates it does not process information (this means it is not a program).

"Oh, that's just too rich!  You are good for a few laughs!

 

DNA computer

Last modified: Monday, December 17, 2001 

A nanocomputer that uses DNA (deoxyribonucleic acids) to store information and perform complex calculations.

In 1994, University of Southern California computer scientist Leonard Adelman suggested that DNA could be used to solve complex mathematical problems. Adelman found a way to harness the power of DNA to solve the Hamiltonian path problem (the traveling salesman problem), whose solution required finding a path from start to end going through all the points (cities) only once.

Each city was encoded as its own DNA sequence (DNA sequence consists of a series of nucleotides represented by the letters A, T, G, C).

The DNA sequences were set to replicate and create trillions of new sequences based on the initial input sequences in a matter of seconds (called DNA hybridization). The theory holds that the solution to the problem was one of the new sequence strands. By process of elimination, the correct solution would be obtained.

Adelman's experiment is regarded as the first example of true nanotechnology.

The main benefit of using DNA computers to solve complex problems is that different possible solutions are created all at once. This is known as parallel processing. Humans and most electronic computers must attempt to solve the problem one process at a time (linear processing). DNA itself provides the added benefits of being a cheap, energy-efficient resource.

In a different perspective, more than 10 trillion DNA molecules can fit into an area no larger than 1 cubic centimeter. With this, a DNA computer could hold 10 terabytes of data and perform 10 trillion calculations at a time.

[Sentis]

Yes the "DNA computer" Humans using a natural product like silicon crystals, To create a computer. Read what I wrote DNA is a template not a program unless a human uses that way it does not process information neither do crystals. Your debate is without meaning. Please read my posts before replying.


What is the difference between a man using a crystal structure as a computer or DNA as a computer?

WHo is it being hostile now? LOL

[Southack]

"Regardless of how DNA operates it does not process information (this means it is not a program). ... However they can be used to process information and to store data the same way DNA does." - Sentis

... and you wonder why I said that you were out of your depth in this discussion?!

You can't even go three paragraphs without contradicting yourself. Sad.

[Lev]

No, if the stream is being guided by a fireman at a fire, then it is being intelligently directed/guided.
On the other hand, if no intelligent entity is controlling it, then it is unguided.

We agree on this - the test for 'guidedness' is whether there is an intelligent 'guide'. Is this stream guided? Ok, let's see if there is a fireman directing it.
Which leads to the following question - when we ask about evolution why shouldn't the test be whether there is an intelligent 'guide' controlling it?

[Southack]

"Which leads to the following question - when we ask about evolution why shouldn't the test be whether there is an intelligent 'guide' controlling it?"

Why shouldn't we? Why? Simple: because Evolution hasn't been proven yet (if ever).

You don't ask such a follow-on question until after you are sure that the thing in question is responsible for the behavior under examination...

[VOA]

bump

[Sentis]

DNA doesn't process information without an outside force such as a Man using it to process information. Does a natural crystal process information or does it merely express it? In the same way DNA doesn't process it merely expresses it takes a person using it as a computer or information storage to process information. I think what I wrote was very clear and I did not contradict myself. You Don't answer my questions you are merely cutting and pasting what I say out of context. Could that be because you can't answer my questions.

[edsheppa]

AM: No. I meant that one being can be contingent on another, both existing simultaneously.
JP: What does that mean, exactly? Can you give me an example?

Quantum entanglement?

[Southack]

"In the same way DNA doesn't process it merely expresses it takes a person using it as a computer or information storage to process information. I think what I wrote was very clear and I did not contradict myself."

Nonsense! First, you DID contradict yourself by saying that DNA doesn't process information and then turning around and claiming that DNA does process information.

Second, a DNA computer processes information whether a human is involved or not.

Moreover, DNA itself processes the information coded in genes by the A, C, G, and T base pairs of nucleotides, and this is HOW different life forms are created, based upon the different data stored inside the various genes of particular DNA strands.

Amazingly, you've gotten EVERY SINGLE aspect of DNA wrong in EVERY ONE of your posts!

You've even contradicted yourself time and again, to boot!

You are a piece of work. You are completely out of your depth. This debate is entirely over your head.

I mean, sheesh, WHO in this modern day and age still denies that DNA processes information?!

What a riot!

[Sentis]

I think its you who are out of your depth. You don't seem to understand the difference between processing and expressing information. What the DNA computer did in your example could be done in a much slower way by assigning each city to a particular dog and breeding all dogs together in all possible combinations to provide similar information. Would you call this "Dog" computer evidence for the existence of "GOD" or a programmer or is it proof for the existence of a human programmer?

[Lev]

But what it does not do is account for how specifically human consciousness can have arisen from lower forms which appear not to possess consciousness of other than the most rudimentary sort, if even that.

Hi Betty,
when I observe different representatives of those 'lower forms' I see that some of them are a whole lot 'higher' than others (e.g. primates). This tells me that human consciousness is most likely the result of a progression, and not something radically different, appearing out of the blue.

Regards,
Lev

[Southack]

"You don't seem to understand the difference between processing and expressing information."

Oh, by all means PLEASE explain the precise DIFFERENCE between "processing" information and "expressing" information.

This should be good for a couple more laughs, at the very least...

[Junior]

Placemarker.

[Sentis]

I said DNA can process information if it is induced to by a Human programmer see my previous post. DNA does not process information naturally no more than a crystal does as they work in similar ways. I notice you don't mention the crystals in any of your posts. Why because the contain information in the same way DNA does?

Different forms of life are created from DNA because DNA is expressing the information that is stored within it. Different Crystals form because the information stored in them is expressed in the same way.


You have no clue how DNA functions.


DNA does not process information it merely stores and expresses it.



WHo in this day and age does know how chemical reactions work?

[Southack]

You are dodging the question. You had the nerve to claim that I didn't comprehend the difference between processing and expressing information, yet you can't seem to explain such a difference (if one even exists).

PLEASE explain the precise DIFFERENCE between "processing" information and "expressing" information, or else admit that you are just babbling because you are out of your depth in this debate.

[PatrickHenry]

Placemarker.

[Lev]

Why shouldn't we? Why? Simple: because Evolution hasn't been proven yet (if ever).

Ok, let's replace Evolution with whatever process you claim an intelligent programmer is responsible for (change in genomes over time?). In case of a stream we look for intelligent guide to determine whether it's guided. In case of this process you state that it's guided without looking for the guide. Seems like a different standard.

[Southack]

"I notice you don't mention the crystals in any of your posts. Why because they contain information in the same way DNA does?"

Are you now claiming that crystals contain A, C, G, and T nucleotide sequences just like DNA does?!

And if you aren't, then what is your point?

[Southack]

"In case of this process you state that it's guided without looking for the guide."

I must have missed that. In which post did I say that, or have you confused me with another poster?

[Sentis]

I will refer to my previous post about the "DOG computer to explain the difference between processing and expressing. The dogs contain certain traits these are expressed traits. Each city is given a specific dog with specific traits. When the dogs are bred these traits are mixed (In the dna computer the dna replicates with different combinations). The outside force (the human Programmer) then correlates these traits giving him processing the information. The dogs merely replicated they did not process the information the human programmer processed it into a usable format. There is no difference between how the dna computer works and how the dog computer worked other than each of the dogs should have each had four specific traits as DNA does.


This is not evidence of a creator programmer merely a human programmer.