RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (13) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Southstar's thread< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3304
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 11 2011,22:25   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Nov. 11 2011,20:56)
Durston et al.:

Quote

For example, if we find that the Ribosomal S12 protein family has a Fit value of 379, we can use the equations presented thus far to predict that there are about 1049 different 121-residue sequences that could fall into the Ribsomal S12 family of proteins, resulting in an evolutionary search target of approximately 10^-106 percent of 121-residue sequence space.


Durston has a habit of thinking that what is in the protein databases comprises the universe of functional proteins. To get the sort of number he wants, he'd have to do an exhaustive assay to validate it. Instead, he "predicts" exactly the sort of tiny numbers he wants, and seems to be satisfied that he has demonstrated something. It's conceptually no better than the "cost of search" thing Dembski and Marks came up with a few years ago.

Luisi has an interesting comment on that.  He says that there are roughly 10^54 possible proteins (not counting a large number that cannot be produced due to energy reasons).

Yet life on Earth only uses 10^13 - 10^15 proteins.

Doesn't really help anything, but I found that interesting and hadn't considered it before.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
  366 replies since Nov. 08 2011,06:46 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (13) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]