A code is an instance of foreknowledge. In every case where the origin of a code (defined as a communication channel with an input alphabet A and an output alphabet B) is known, it is the result of foreknowledge. DNA code is a encoding / decoding mechanism isomorphic with Shannon's model. The DNA molecule represents something other than itself. It is reasonable therefore to infer as a defeasible hypothesis that it too, is the product of intelligence.
The hypothesis of invention by incremental change than you mentioned in your #279 as a possible source for chemistry evolving by 'trial' and 'error' an instance of a structure that can continue evolving, eventually into the staggering specified complexity of a genetic code, would come at a cost; namely, a huge amount of time (not to mention other insurmountable costs such as genetic load and biological constraints)
Even given an astoundingly fortuitous series of concatenations of atoms and molecules that would be necessary to eventually produce a genetic code, if such a thing were possible, consider all the types and varieties of codes under the sun in the animal kingdom that are themselves derivatives of genetic code. Bee waggle dance code; pheromone codes, variously operating by smell or contact reception; acoustic signals code, as in bird songs; electrical signals code, in with sharks and some fish, etc. What the law of invention would require is for chemistry to evolve not only DNA code, but then DNA code evolving these many other types of codes independently!
I think the sun would have already suffered heat death before these derivative DNA codes that we observe would ever have come to pass, without some higher force or power than mutation noise plus blind trial and error at work.
Cordially,
I'm not sure I understand you here. Are you saying that a code can predict the future?
In some way other than incorporating rules for dealing with regular or recurrent phenomena?