05-11-2002 04:56									#61
	Put an end to popups!

Well there are a few reasons. One is that the sequence of DNA is unique to a biological organism or it is not living. A purely random order does not make life and there is nothing in the laws of physics that causes it to be anything but random. And there is certainly no law of physics that causes it to be divided into a three letter (chemical AGCT) code.

	05-11-2002 05:09									#62
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: In biology you have to look at every single detail.

You don't have to deal with the effect electron scattering on protons and impulses from light would affect biological systems. They are VERY abstracted.

quote: You can't begin to examine neurobiology and say: fine, skip half the facts, its not necessary.

You don't have to look at it at the same level of detail as if you were examining it to a physical level.

quote: Having taken both a class on quantum physics and neurobiology and not ebing a sciewnce major at all (hurrah for core requirements) I can say that both demanded a streneous look at the details.

No doubt. However, there are different levels of abstractions between the two subjects. And the systems you've studied in your physics class are undoubtedly less complex than a brain.

quote: When you study a house made of brics, it is key to understand bircks, their make-up and what they can tolerate: but there is still something more, something no longer based on the bricks, once you create the house, which is why we have both architects and structural engineers. I don't know anyone who would tell me that the study of arhcitecture is simply an simple abstraction of the stury of materials.

I'd say that being an architect is the study of building buildings. The architect doesn't need to know a number of lower level details that a physicist might need to know.

quote: Well there are a few reasons. One is that the sequence of DNA is unique to a biological organism or it is not living. A purely random order does not make life and there is nothing in the laws of physics that causes it to be anything but random. And there is certainly no law of physics that causes it to be divided into a three letter (chemical AGCT) code.

It's all very complex biology abstracted at a very high level. Just because there's no physical law that says DNA should be created a certain way doesn't mean that there aren't physical laws ultimately at the base of it.

	05-11-2002 05:16									#63
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

"Just because there's no physical law that says DNA should be created a certain way doesn't mean that there aren't physical laws ultimately at the base of it."

Well what are they?

	05-11-2002 05:19									#64
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Ramo I'd say that being an architect is the study of building buildings. The architect doesn't need to know a number of lower level details that a physicist might need to know.

To keep the analogy going: An architect need not know all the particulars of steel and glass making, just have an idea of their tolerance: but he must deal with countless problems of space management, lighting, movement of individuals, so forth and so on that are just as complex and difficult as the issue of steel making and glass making.

An archictect must know more than how to build a building: he must know how to make an effective and successful building.

I still see a huge amount of opinion based on bias, not fact.

	05-11-2002 05:21									#65
	Get a bigger avatar today!

"I'd say that being an architect is the study of building buildings. The architect doesn't need to know a number of lower level details that a physicist might need to know."

Yes, but I think you missed his point. Making a brick does not qualify one to build a building. Are you suggesting a divine architect here?

	05-11-2002 05:25									#66
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Predestination is a bit of a blind alley really. Its doesn't lead anywhere because in mainstream Christian belief only God knows the secret intentions of the heart and the state of someone's soul.

It was important in the melting pot of the reformation because it was used by some usually small extremist protestant groups to claim that they were right and everyone else was wrong. In other words, they were the "Elect" and everyone else was going to hell.

	05-11-2002 05:27									#67
	Remove this text

What Ramo is saying is that with 'near perfect' knowledge of the laws of physics and the states of matter you could build a building, or explain biological processes.

At each level of complexity emergent properties reveal themselves - with gas in a box they are things like temperature and pressure. It is far easier to work with temperature and pressure than it is with 10³⁰ molecules. It also yields results that are virtually identical to the molecular approach.

So too, biology and chemisty are emergent properties of physics. They are far simple to use, just as accurate, and work with different variables. They are still derivable from base physical principles, although it would be a gargantuan task to attempt such a proof.

	05-11-2002 05:33									#68
	Full PM-box? Change here!

YES, YES, YES!

If you must know, I'm Latter-day Saint, (better know as "Mormon") and we do NOT do Polygamy!

	05-11-2002 05:33									#69
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

"I'm really surprised the concept is still kicking around."

Maybe because it is true?? Missusing a truth does not turn it into a lie. Your first paragraph says it all though.

	05-11-2002 05:35									#70
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

But one does not need tho know any physics to build a magnificent building: just look at the Pyramids.

Yes, physics is the base of everything, but to think we need to know all about sub-atomic particles and quantum physics to understand biological or chemical systems is not wholly correct. Which is why all this new knowledge of physics has NOT lead to inproved knowledge of biology. figuring out all about physics will not cure cancer or AIDS. at best, highly detailed knowledge of physics gives us better tools to examine biological systems: they do not explain them.

Lincoln: At least you see the point, though I do not agree with the need for a divine arhcitect. After all, if some Eastern relgions are correct, this world is just an ilusion of suffering to which you are attached.

	05-11-2002 05:38									#71
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Sagacious Dolphin What Ramo is saying is that with 'near perfect' knowledge of the laws of physics and the states of matter you could build a building, or explain biological processes. At each level of complexity emergent properties reveal themselves - with gas in a box they are things like temperature and pressure. It is far easier to work with temperature and pressure than it is with 1030 molecules. It also yields results that are virtually identical to the molecular approach. So too, biology and chemisty are emergent properties of physics. They are far simple to use, just as accurate, and work with different variables. They are still derivable from base physical principles, although it would be a gargantuan task to attempt such a proof.

Someone who uses a chain saw to cut down a tree isn't necessarily qualified to build a bridge. A biological organism cannot be reduced to the laws of physics except on a micro level. What law causes AGCTCCGTAAA not to be GCCATTCAGGA?

	05-11-2002 05:40									#72
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by GePap Yes, physics is the base of everything, but to think we need to know all about sub-atomic particles and quantum physics to understand biological or chemical systems is not wholly correct. Which is why all this new knowledge of physics has NOT lead to inproved knowledge of biology. figuring out all about physics will not cure cancer or AIDS. at best, highly detailed knowledge of physics gives us better tools to examine biological systems: they do not explain them.

I don't disagree. What I do say is that the biology and pyramid building must conform to the laws of physics. The laws of physics do not say you can't cure cancer - however they do say that the there is no such thing as free-will.

	05-11-2002 05:42									#73
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by GePap Lincoln: At least you see the point, though I do not agree with the need for a divine arhcitect. After all, if some Eastern relgions are correct, this world is just an ilusion of suffering to which you are attached.

I agree with the suffering part but I am not sure it is an illusion. I think that Buddah was a man of wisdom though. I just can't seem to find nirvana...

	05-11-2002 05:47									#74
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: To keep the analogy going: An architect need not know all the particulars of steel and glass making, just have an idea of their tolerance: but he must deal with countless problems of space management, lighting, movement of individuals, so forth and so on that are just as complex and difficult as the issue of steel making and glass making. An archictect must know more than how to build a building: he must know how to make an effective and successful building. I still see a huge amount of opinion based on bias, not fact.

You're completely missing what I'm getting at. Aesthetics and whatnot are derivable from a physical analysis of the brain (assuming total knowledge), and from simple optimization problems.

	05-11-2002 05:48									#75
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Lincoln Someone who uses a chain saw to cut down a tree isn't necessarily qualified to build a bridge.

I don't see the relevance of the analogy. Could you explain it.

quote: A biological organism cannot be reduced to the laws of physics except on a micro level.

I would argue they can. But doing so would be extremely time-consuming. In practice it would never be done. Just as you don't reduce a hurricane to its base laws of physics.

quote: What law causes AGCTCCGTAAA not to be GCCATTCAGGA?

What law causes a die to come up 6 instead of 1? Its all about original conditions and time evolution. The laws governing it would be the laws pertaining to electromagnetic forces.

	05-11-2002 05:48									#76
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Lincoln "I'm really surprised the concept is still kicking around." Maybe because it is true?? Missusing a truth does not turn it into a lie. Your first paragraph says it all though.

Basically its nonsense based on a very selective reading of mainly Saint Paul. It only really appeals to Christian fringe dwellers and cultists who want to believe they are right and everyone else is wrong because they are the "elect".

David Koresh believed in predestination. I rest my case

	05-11-2002 05:50									#77
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: A biological organism cannot be reduced to the laws of physics except on a micro level.

Assuming almost total knowledge, and plenty of time/computing resources, etc., the behavior at the macro-level can be extrapolated from physical laws.

Edit: Misread the post.

	05-11-2002 05:56									#78
	Inflate your Upload Space

O good. Now you all and Ramo argue this out.

	05-11-2002 05:59									#79
	Got spare money?

quote: I'd say that being an architect is the study of building buildings. The architect doesn't need to know a number of lower level details that a physicist might need to know.

Sorry, all this talk made me recall an old joke. Three students majoring in architecture, chemistry and physics respectively are asked one and the same question:

What do you think when you stare at a brick?

The following answers were obtained:

Architect: I just think about all nice buildings that can be built of bricks.

Chemist: I think about how complex the molecular structure of a brick must be.

Physicist: I think about a woman.
Interviewer: Oh really? Why??
Physicist: I always think about her.


I apologize for this small threadjacking. I hope you'll forgive me.

	05-11-2002 06:01									#80
	Put an end to popups!

Well that is a lot of assuming you are doing Ramo. But anyway no one has answered my question. SG got it wrong. What law of physics causes me to say "how are you" as opposed to saying "have a nice day"? Where does the information come from -- what law?

	05-11-2002 06:05									#81
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

wow Lincoln..

You and i agreeing against the forces of deterministic physics...

	05-11-2002 06:09									#82
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Lincoln SG got it wrong.

Then what is your answer?

	05-11-2002 06:10									#83
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

I agree that to accept freewill there has to be some sort of soul. Freewill can only operate on a level that is not physical. If it is physical, then it is bound by the laws which govern physical interaction, and not free at all.

Of course, whatever a soul consists of would be bound by the laws which govern spiritual interactions... I can't see any room for freewill to exist. The only way you can break out of causality is to introduce a truely random (ie. non-predictable even in the face of omniscience) element, which even if it could exist can only add randomness to the equation, which isn't freewill either.

	05-11-2002 06:14									#84
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

If we can't ever see the 'laws' that make us not have free will, then the 'illusion' of one works and we can just move on with our lives pretending it is here.

Just like the fact that the real world is nothing but an illusion doen't stop many buddhist from enjoying themselves a nice meal of illusionary meat.

	05-11-2002 06:15									#85
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Well that is a lot of assuming you are doing Ramo.

Why? Our physical laws are currently remarkably accurate. It seems like a very reasonable assumption.

quote: Where does the information come from -- what law?

Primarily, the current theories on the electromagentic force, I imagine.

	05-11-2002 06:16									#86
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

I believe in extremely limited freewill. We have the power to choose what cereal we eat for breakfast, or the type of transport we take to work. But we don't have control over the really important things in life, like our sexuality, or our eternal destination.

Bkeela.

	05-11-2002 06:17									#87
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

The answer is that information is not based upon the laws of physics. If information was based on the laws of physics then there could be no information because we would always find the same order. For example I can arrange these letters to form any order but the laws of physics do not cause any order to be typed. The laws of physics provide only for a random arrangement.

	05-11-2002 06:19									#88
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Lincoln The answer is that information is not based upon the laws of physics. If information was based on the laws of physics then there could be no information because we would always find the same order. For example I can arrange these letters to form any order but the laws of physics do not cause any order to be typed. The laws of physics provide only for a random arrangement.

It appears you are talking about statistical mechanics, which is derivable from the laws of physics.

	05-11-2002 06:25									#89
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by GePap If we can't ever see the 'laws' that make us not have free will, then the 'illusion' of one works and we can just move on with our lives pretending it is here.

Who said we can't ever see these laws? Pretending that they don't exist would just be a self imposed barrier to furthering our understanding of how the human mind functions. We have made great strides in just the past few decades in this field. Mental disorders are much better treated now than they were. Why should we just abandon hope of learning anything more?

quote: Just like the fact that the real world is nothing but an illusion doen't stop many buddhist from enjoying themselves a nice meal of illusionary meat.

This doesn't have anything to do with whether or not we experience things, or make choices, it is obvious that we do. Rather, this is about understanding the mechanism by which we experience those things, and make those choices. Understanding that can only lead us to making better choices, and having better experiences.

	05-11-2002 06:31									#90
	Tired of ads?

No, I am talking about meaningful information not order that has no meaning. In a living organism the DNA is effectively divided into a 3 letter code and that code is translated and understood by the machinery that uses the information to actually make something that works and lives. It is meaningful inofrmation that has meaning to the various parts of the machine that uses the information and reads the instructions provided in coded form. No law of physics forces this to happen.

The laws of physics are applicable only on a micro level. The existence of the overall machinery is not explained by those laws anymore than an automatic transmission is. Gears thrown into a gear box do not organize themselves into a transmission because they must be specificially instructed. Life is not simply random proteins. It is organized and ordered according to instructions contained in DNA in coded form.