Antievolution.org - Antievolution.org Discussion Board -Topic::The Gang of Four at the Gateway of Life

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,17:06

Quote (charlie wagner @ Sep. 11 2008,16:02)

Quote

Glad to see Charlie's solved the Halting Problem. Get that Fields Medal ready.

The question is, given a program and an input to the program, whether the program will eventually halt when run with that input. In this abstract framework, there are no resource limitations of memory or time on the program's execution; it can take arbitrarily long, and use arbitrarily much storage space, before halting. The question is simply whether the given program will ever halt on a particular input.
But with the halting problem, there is only one input. In nature, there are an unlimited number of inputs available to the program.
It's early on in this work. It seems significant to me that the
"instruction manual", the part that controls the functioning of the
genes is many times larger than the coding sequences themselves. The
idea that this non-coding region of the genome was "junk, left over from
evolution", is most likely wrong. The really important instructions may
well reside in the non-coding regions, rather than in the coding regions.
I believe the genome is
dynamic and responsive, rather than static and passive. I believe that
the mechanism is present for dynamic modifications to occur. The genome,
whether each individual genome or some kind of universal genome, made up
of a pool of all of the instructions that can be exchanged among
participants, is nothing short of a universal automaton. It can
manufacture any other biochemical machine, no matter how complex it is,
from the basic functional units, proteins, which can be manufactured in
infinite numbers and varieties. All that is needed is the correct
information and the basic functional units.

What are you doing about it then?

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger�s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

Lowell

Posts: 101
Joined: Mar. 2008

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,17:13

Nice cut-and-paste from wikipedia, Charlie:

Quote

The question is, given a program and an input to the program, whether the program will eventually halt when run with that input. In this abstract framework, there are no resource limitations of memory or time on the program's execution; it can take arbitrarily long, and use arbitrarily much storage space, before halting. The question is simply whether the given program will ever halt on a particular input.

--------------
The resurrection of Jesus Christ is one of the most well documented events of antiquity. Barry Arrington, Jan 17, 2012.

Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,17:42

Ouch. Straight up plagiarism to go along with his main course of hand waving.

Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,17:53

Quote (charlie wagner @ Sep. 11 2008,17:02)

It's early on in this work. It seems significant to me that the
"instruction manual", the part that controls the functioning of the
genes is many times larger than the coding sequences themselves...

None of which is responsive, in the slightest degree, to the questions I posed here.

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

Louis

Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,18:01

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Sep. 11 2008,23:53)

Quote (charlie wagner @ Sep. 11 2008,17:02)

It's early on in this work. It seems significant to me that the
"instruction manual", the part that controls the functioning of the
genes is many times larger than the coding sequences themselves...

None of which is responsive, in the slightest degree, to the questions I posed here.

I do hope, for the sake of my appreciation of your intellectual contributions, that you are not SURPRISED by this. ;-)

Louis

--------------
Bye.

Wesley R. Elsberry

Posts: 4991
Joined: May 2002

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,18:24

Quote (dvunkannon @ Sep. 05 2008,13:00)

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Sep. 04 2008,21:43)

�

Quote (charlie wagner @ Sep. 04 2008,19:24)

Pre-programming would not require a knowledge of future events...[major snippage of irrelevant passages borrowed from Charlie's website]

Let's see if I can accurately parse what you are saying.

Earlier you stated: "An algorithm is a finite set of well-defined instructions for accomplishing some task which, given an initial state, will terminate in a defined end-state."

Glad to see Charlie's solved the Halting Problem. Get that Fields Medal ready.

Maybe I'm slow today, but could you step through how Charlie's quote (of Wikipedia, yet again) implies solution of the halting problem?

There are any number of issues on which Charlie needs correction, and certainly plagiarism is no sign of virtue, but I'm not sure the charge laid above is justified.

ETA: OK, I can see that the no-knowledge pre-programming comment combined with the definition can lead to that implication. Never mind.

Edited by Wesley R. Elsberry on Sep. 11 2008,18:36

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

Venus Mousetrap

Posts: 201
Joined: Aug. 2007

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,18:28

Charlie: nice, but the evidence shows that it's junk... occasionally easily identifiable junk which allows us to predict evolutionary relationships, exactly as if they had evolved. Do we just ignore that?

Not only that, but the theory of evolution gives the perfect reason for junk to be there at all - you try programming an evolutionary algorithm, and I bet you junk will form spontaneously. You'd actually have to specifically remove it if you didn't want any. Do we just ignore that and go with your reasoning, which has no evidence whatsoever?

Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,18:38

I think dvunkannon was confusing 'algorithm' with 'any finite program'. Easy error to make.

Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,18:43

of course, i'm not an expert in those fields so the error could be mine.

charlie wagner

Posts: 24
Joined: Aug. 2008

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,18:43

Quote

What are you doing about it then?

Making pretty fractals...

and pies!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HC7KABegj0

charlie wagner

Posts: 24
Joined: Aug. 2008

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,18:46

Quote

Nice cut-and-paste from wikipedia, Charlie:

Yes...So what?

charlie wagner

Posts: 24
Joined: Aug. 2008

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,18:55

Quote

Straight up plagiarism to go along with his main course of hand waving.

Gosh, you sound just like a Republican!!

Use a red-herring to divert attention from the real issue.

[

Quote

Fair use is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as use for scholarship or review. It provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test. It is based on free speech rights provided by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The term "fair use" is unique to the United States, and recently to Israel and the UK as well; a similar principle, fair dealing, exists in some other common law jurisdictions. Civil law jurisdictions have other limitations and exceptions to copyright.

United States trademark law also incorporates a "fair use" defense, which also stems from the First Amendment of the U.S. constitution.

Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,18:56

Quote (Louis @ Sep. 11 2008,19:01)

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Sep. 11 2008,23:53)

Quote (charlie wagner @ Sep. 11 2008,17:02)

It's early on in this work. It seems significant to me that the
"instruction manual", the part that controls the functioning of the
genes is many times larger than the coding sequences themselves...

None of which is responsive, in the slightest degree, to the questions I posed here.

I do hope, for the sake of my appreciation of your intellectual contributions, that you are not SURPRISED by this. ;-)

Louis

I'll admit I was hoping for an answer that was at least wrong.

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

charlie wagner

Posts: 24
Joined: Aug. 2008

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,19:00

Quote

Charlie: nice, but the evidence shows that it's junk... occasionally easily identifiable junk which allows us to predict evolutionary relationships, exactly as if they had evolved. Do we just ignore that?

Not only that, but the theory of evolution gives the perfect reason for junk to be there at all - you try programming an evolutionary algorithm, and I bet you junk will form spontaneously. You'd actually have to specifically remove it if you didn't want any. Do we just ignore that and go with your reasoning, which has no evidence whatsoever?

With all due respect, you are about 10 years behind the curve. Start here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetics

Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,19:01

Quote (charlie wagner @ Sep. 11 2008,19:55)

Quote

Fair use blah blah blah

You weren't accused of copyright violation numbnuts, you were accused of plagiarism.

Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,19:02

I retract the word 'numbnuts'. It was undignified.

rhmc

Posts: 340
Joined: Dec. 2007

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,19:05

Quote (stevestory @ Sep. 11 2008,20:02)

I retract the word 'numbnuts'. It was undignified.

but highly accurate.

Arden Chatfield

Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,19:05

Quote (stevestory @ Sep. 11 2008,17:01)

Quote (charlie wagner @ Sep. 11 2008,19:55)

Quote

Fair use blah blah blah

You weren't accused of copyright violation numbnuts, you were accused of plagiarism.

Wow. So according to Charlie, if some undergrad gets nailed for plagiarism on a term paper, it's okay because it's 'fair use'?

There's nothing that magical term won't cover!

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

Arden Chatfield

Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,19:06

Quote (stevestory @ Sep. 11 2008,17:02)

I retract the word 'numbnuts'. It was undignified.

Is 'dumbass' closer to what you're trying to evoke?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,19:28

Charlie!

(The Flying Spaghetti Monster shown to be fractal.)

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

charlie wagner

Posts: 24
Joined: Aug. 2008

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,19:34

Quote

Let's see if I can accurately parse what you are saying.

Earlier you stated: "An algorithm is a finite set of well-defined instructions for accomplishing some task which, given an initial state, will terminate in a defined end-state."

Correct.

Quote

You also earlier stated: "What you call evolution is the dynamic unfolding of these pre-existing algorithms."

If I understand you correctly, you are postulating the storage of algorithms consisting of well-defined instructions that, given specific initial states, terminate in defined end-states.

Correct. But the "end states" are the cellular machinery and the basic body plans. (homeobox, etc).

Quote

You don't state whether those initial states are also stored with the algorithms.

Most are, but there is epigenetic inputs as well, which
probably originate in the ambient environment.

Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,19:40

Quote (charlie wagner @ Sep. 11 2008,20:34)

Quote

Let's see if I can accurately parse what you are saying.

Earlier you stated: "An algorithm is a finite set of well-defined instructions for accomplishing some task which, given an initial state, will terminate in a defined end-state."

Correct.

Quote

You also earlier stated: "What you call evolution is the dynamic unfolding of these pre-existing algorithms."

If I understand you correctly, you are postulating the storage of algorithms consisting of well-defined instructions that, given specific initial states, terminate in defined end-states.

Correct. But the "end states" are the cellular machinery and the basic body plans. (homeobox, etc).

Quote

You don't state whether those initial states are also stored with the algorithms.

Most are, but there is epigenetic inputs as well, which
probably originate in the ambient environment.

Fine.

Now address my question regarding how this postulated combination of stored algorithms and mostly (but not entirely) stored inputs manages to generate organisms that are adapted to highly contingent, unforeseeable environments that arise millions and/or billions of years after the pre-storage of those algorithms.

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

Jkrebs

Posts: 590
Joined: Sep. 2004

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,20:13

What a beautiful fractal - is it from the Mandelbrot set, or do you know?

Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,20:29

Quote (Jkrebs @ Sep. 11 2008,21:13)

What a beautiful fractal - is it from the Mandelbrot set, or do you know?

It is a chunk of the Mandelbrot. Taken from a spiral that can be seen at:

x = -1.941558464320810

y = 0.000112771806258

w = 0.000000382674917

If you have the Mandelbrot on Cocoa application it is the gallery image entitled, aptly enough, "double helix."

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,20:32

ETA: The Flying Spaghetti Monster family clasping appendages.

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

BWE

Posts: 1902
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,22:26

Quote (stevestory @ Sep. 11 2008,19:02)

I retract the word 'numbnuts'. It was undignified.

Steve, I'm shocked! You are normally so proper and dignified. What happened?

Was it the idea that plagerism and copyright violations are not the same thing? Was it the support from wiki in the following link? What?

--------------
Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered
When wished on the morning star
Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it
Look what it's done so far

The Daily Wingnut

dvunkannon

Posts: 1377
Joined: June 2008

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,22:55

Quote (stevestory @ Sep. 11 2008,19:38)

I think dvunkannon was confusing 'algorithm' with 'any finite program'. Easy error to make.

Hi Steve,

Charlie's definition of algorithm (which I was criticising via crushing satire) equaled finite program, as does the Wikipedia "an algorithm is a sequence of finite instructions". It's exactly that point which makes the claim in his definition so funny that algorithms are known to halt (or not). If there is another rigorous definition of algorithm that includes inifinite sequences, I'm unaware of it.

In passing I'll mention WB Langdon's paper I cited on the Sciency thread a couple days ago in which he shows that on a statistical basis, the answer to the Halting Problem is No, as algorithms get longer and longer.

Cheers,
David

--------------
I�m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter
I�m not an evolutionist, I�m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima

dvunkannon

Posts: 1377
Joined: June 2008

Posted: Sep. 11 2008,23:50

Quote (charlie wagner @ Sep. 11 2008,17:02)

The genome,
whether each individual genome or some kind of universal genome, made up
of a pool of all of the instructions that can be exchanged among
participants, is nothing short of a universal automaton. It can
manufacture any other biochemical machine, no matter how complex it is,
from the basic functional units, proteins, which can be manufactured in
infinite numbers and varieties. All that is needed is the correct
information and the basic functional units.

That is just so much handwaving BS.

The genome (a string of DNA) of any creature is not an automaton. You could argue that a ribosome is an automaton. DNA is a sequence of instructions, but the instructions set in not "Turing complete" because there is no looping construct. There is no way to tell the ribosome to go back thirty codons or forward five.

The ribosomal automaton reading the DNA sequence cannot make any other biochemical machine. It can make linear strings of 20 amino acids. Many drugs are not proteins. Sugars and fats are not proteins. All biochemistry does not equal protein chemistry.

Further, these amino acids are not infinite in variety. They are 20 out of many many more. We can create biochemical machines that use amino acids that no genome codes for, no tRNA transcribes.

The analogy of computers to biology is often overstated. You have done so.

--------------
I�m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter
I�m not an evolutionist, I�m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima

Louis

Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Sep. 12 2008,02:51

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Sep. 12 2008,00:56)

Quote (Louis @ Sep. 11 2008,19:01)

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Sep. 11 2008,23:53)

�

Quote (charlie wagner @ Sep. 11 2008,17:02)

It's early on in this work. It seems significant to me that the
"instruction manual", the part that controls the functioning of the
genes is many times larger than the coding sequences themselves...

None of which is responsive, in the slightest degree, to the questions I posed here.

I do hope, for the sake of my appreciation of your intellectual contributions, that you are not SURPRISED by this. ;-)

Louis

I'll admit I was hoping for an answer that was at least wrong.

Pauli's "ganz falsch" applies to many things, but we encounter it most clearly in the various species of creationism.

Love your optimism. ;-)

Louis

--------------
Bye.

charlie wagner

Posts: 24
Joined: Aug. 2008