Biological organisms are [i]primarily[/i] Software Defined Lifeforms. - Yes or No?

A house is a software defined life form.

1) A house has a blueprint, which acts a program.
2) A house has doors. Doors have a function. Software has functions.
3) Houses can be copied, another house can be made using the same blueprint.
4) Houses are hierarchical, they have floors with rooms with windows.
5) Houses break the second law of thermodynamics.

There you have it. Houses are also software defined lifeforms.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

🙇

0 Replies

@farmerman,

You went through a lot of stuff there, most of which is absolutely true, but only the snippets here have any impact on my argument, and then only on the implications, not the naked premise of the OP.

Quote:

Nature glops all this together pretty much blindly and unknowingly into an (so far) almost unlimited number of genotypes from which lifes"pop-up toasters emerge".

True, all nature can do is glop things together randomly. The question is, can random processes produce the first biological life form and afterward, can it account for what we are calling Evolution of new species. We have a theory, but it has problems that are recognized even by leading biologists. So it can’t be stated factually that random evolution absolutely explains it. But first we have to define 'it' (the genome). The premise is that it is clearly very sophisticated software. Software more complex than anything we have ever written ourselves, according to Bill Gates, and some biologists who are not afraid to face that fact.

Quote:

So while were getting dmned close to creating a;gorithms that may (one day) mimic the code of life by standardized hook-ups and limited varieties of chemical species (like 20 amino acids), we are still pretty down far on the list.

I am not predicting that we will never accomplish such an astounding achievement. It may happen. I would only point out that it didn’t happen spontaneously and we can easily identify the 'programmer' in this case. It doesn’t take magic, but it will take a hell of a lot of carefully designed 'wet-ware' which is what some are calling biological software.

0 Replies

@Leadfoot,

But now you are talking of DNA as embedded in and in a 'dialogue' with a broader framework of information management, which is what I have been saying all along. And of course you can call any system for info management "software" but the comparison has its limits.

Most people do not usually cling so hard to ONE metaphor. They can freely compare the issue at hand with several other things. Why the fixation on software? Not all information systems use software.

A mechanical clock has no software and yet it can measure time, which an information management function. Likewise a mechanical computer does not need a software. The hardware is the software in their case.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Most people do not usually cling so hard to ONE metaphor. They can freely compare the issue at hand with several other things. Why the fixation on software? Not all information systems use software.

I stick to this one because nothing else fits it nearly as well. As I’ve already said, it is so close that the word 'metaphor' understates the similarity. The only difference is the media it is stored on and the 'language' it’s written in. There are Lots of books on biology with titles like 'The Language of Life' and ‘ The Language of God' inspired by this software similarity. (Written by biologists)

Your comparison to the watch is not nearly as close because it misses the programmability of the computer and the biological organism. We talk about 'designer babies' being possible because of this programmability of the genome and our new found ability to edit the DNA software via 'CRISPER'.

I suppose you could argue that the watch could be programmed for different day and hour length by having interchangeable gears but again, that is just software in the medium of brass gears. The medium is not important here, the programmability is the key feature being compared. The watch does not fit as well as software.

Do you have a better metaphor for DNA than a watch or software?

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

No, you stick to this one because it's the only comparable stuff you know. As you admitted, you know more about computers and software than about biology. I doubt you know much about the ancient art of clock making, but it's a fact that life and the universe around it have been compared to mechanical devices for centuries prior to the invention of electronic computers. Your ID programmer was then called "the watchmaker of the universe".

And there is value to the mechanical metaphor. Proteins can be both hardware (machines like enzymes) and software (messenger chemicals). Like mechanical clocks, life does not need an operation system. The hardware is its own software. DNA is a set of code to build and repair the biological machine. The machine has no code to operate itself on a real-time basis, no sequential sets of instructions or centralized hierarchy of codes to follow. Just a mess of contrary signals coming from various sub-systems competing for attention.

Likewise, nowhere in your DNA is there's a map or blueprint of your body, even though your DNA can be cloned into another body that looks a lot like yours. DNA is just a recipe book for proteins.

2 Replies

@Leadfoot,

Don't quit your day job.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

DNA is a set of code to build and repair the biological machine.

Yes it is. But you left out 'operate' in the list of functions. If it stops running, the biological machine will stop maintaining homeostasis and it dies. It must operate 24/7 to maintain all the many parameters that have to be kept within strict limits. The exceptions are those organisms that can suspend both hardware and software operations, I.e. ones that can tolerate freezing or dehydration. This would be similar to stopping the clock in sleep mode on a computer. The materials are all there when it is unfrozen or rehydrated, but if the DNA operations do not immediately start again, it’s dead.

Quote:

The machine has no code to operate itself on a real-time basis, no sequential sets of instructions or centralized hierarchy of codes to follow. Just a mess of contrary signals coming from various sub-systems competing for Attention ....

I can’t believe you even said this. Not only does it contradict everything I’ve read about cellular biology but it contradicts your own statement above. And Do you really think the process is that random and contrary?

And just a few posts ago you were stressing how coordinated the DNA was with the rest of the organism, the numerous feedback loops needed etc. Now it’s all random, uncoordinated and competing with itself.

And I’m still waiting for a better metaphor than software. If that one is so bad, it ought to be easy to do better. Max's last one wasn’t even worth the keystrokes to reply to.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

DNA is just a recipe book for proteins.

Your biology is out of date. It used to be the belief that only the protein encoding genes ( less than 2 percent of the genome) were active and the rest was so called 'Junk DNA'. The 'junk' was supposedly non functional stuff left over from evolution, it was said to be proof of evolution.

That 'proof' got egg all over the evolutionists face when it was later determined that the non protein coding sections of code are active and needed. I think science has identified functions for over 60% of the genome now. Still lots we don’t know about the software language DNA is written in.

0 Replies

@Leadfoot,

A cell can operate without DNA; eg the red blood cell. You're not paying attention.

1 Reply

Interesting article on how one particular broken gene migjt have helped proto humans evolve into good runners.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Forgot the link...
https://www.zmescience.com/science/genetics-running-cmah-92523525/amp/

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

A cell can operate without DNA; eg the red blood cell. You're not paying attention.

I think it was you that weren’t paying attention.

I replied to your RBC post before. The RBC is apparently the only enucleated cell and because of that it has a very short lifespan because the software is not there to maintain the cell. When the hemoglobin protein is worn our it must be replaced. So your argument supports my contention that the DNA software is vital to cell maintenance. RBCs only last 8 - 10 weeks because of this. I said 'last' because they are not actually 'alive'. They cannot reproduce or repair themselves. They are just packets of hemoglobin protein.

This presents yet another obstacle for evolution. I’m sure an evolutionary storyline could be concocted for how this clever mechanism of a separate factory for RBCs without nucleus came about, but it will be yet another 'just so' story with no actual proof or experimental data.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Quote:

it has a very short lifespan because the software is not there to maintain the cell

Maintain, yes. Operate, no. A call does not need DNA for normal day to day operations. It only needs it for maintainance.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Maintain, yes. Operate, no. A call does not need DNA for normal day to day operations. It only needs it for maintainance.

That is simply not true. The cell is constantly replacing and making new proteins. The proteins themselves have limited lifespans. There are literally hundreds of cellular activities going on constantly that require the operational code in the DNA. I thought farmer said you worked in the bio field. Is that really true?

Here's a sample google search answering that issue from an impartial 3rd party.

Quote:

How do cells make proteins?
Proteins are large, complex molecules, which all your cells are making continuously. Each protein is made up of many amino acids which must join together in the correct order for the protein to work properly. Imagine a car assembly line: to end up with a working car, the workers must know when and where to add each part. Likewise, the cell needs a set of commands for making proteins. This instruction manual is in your genes - found in the cell nucleus.

http://whoami.sciencemuseum.org.uk/whoami/findoutmore/yourbody/whatdoyourcellsdo/howdocellsmakeproteins

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

LOL.... Your third party says exactly what I say: DNA is a recipe book for proteins. It's not a set of instructions to operate the cell. But you will never be able to understand that, nor even to contemplate the idea, since you are glued to your misleading metaphor.

So let me change track. You know best, Footy, and nobody understands life as well as you do. There's a ID above who cares so much about life on our particular planet that He constantly fine-tunes and edits it over the billions of years (the guy is a tad slow I guess). In particular, He cares so very very much for our own species, Homo sapiens, and much less about the bisons and the ants and the eagles and the ferns, that He created though but He doesn't really care for them anymore... And you know what else? Among humans, He cares for you the most, Footy. You and your American way of life.

You see? Life has exactly the kind of meaning you crave for: the whole universe circles around you. Happy now?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

I will assume that is your concession speech.

The thing I was showing in that link is that protein construction and replacement is a continuous process. If it stops, the cell is dead. Cells have lifespans of from 2 days to 100 years (full human lifespan). None of them would last a day without constant DNA driven processes in operation with the sole exception of RBCs.

You raised more good arguments than anyone else though, so thanks.

2 Replies

@Leadfoot,

Perhaps you could define how you're using the word "software," because what you're saying doesn't match any definition I recognize.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

Software is a symbolic language encoded on any substrate used to control a functional mechanism.

That’s off the top of my head, but I don’t think you can refute it.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

You won't consider nor understand my arguments one bit but will pat me on the back for telling them.

In mammals, enzymes tend to have a half-life of 1 or 2 days, although structural proteins last much longer. It means a cell without a functional DNA would die in a matter of 3 or 4 days by general dysfunctionment. It's a small time but no doubt this duration varies a lot, as the RBC case shows, and it's enough to point at a significant difference with software. Take away the software of a computer, and it doesn't go on for a few days seemingly unaffected, though increasingly sick. It just stops working, period, because it needs a software to tell it what to do. An enzyme doesn't need anyone to tell her what to do.

In contrast, no computer software in existence is capable of reparing the hardware it runs on, which is what DNA does, day and night...

1 Reply

Biological organisms are [i]primarily[/i] Software Defined Lifeforms. - Yes or No?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know