So what? You still do not know what builds 3d structures.
Yes, Abd my statement still stands. it is useless without a full key.
What else would you call it?
Why can’t you see that science is dancing around DNA and what it produces but are still no closer to understanding the true meaning of it all.
Until or unless you come up with the way the information from DNA build 3d structures you are just feeling around in the mist or the dark. You get glimpses of something but it is, as yet, unidentifiable.
The Net result is that ToE can only go so far. It is missing a major chunk of knowledge and understanding, yet you cling to it like there is no tomorrow
I think you can get off your high horse now. It has no movable legs, it just rocks back and forth.
I’d say so. I’m thinking of the times I went through lifeguard training. The two best instructors drilled us until we didn’t have to think, all the moves came from muscle memory. For one part of the final was to jump blindfolded from the 10-meter platform with six trained lifeguards below waiting to swarm you with all the different things drowning victims have been known to do. They came so fast, one or two at a time, there was no way to keep from being “captured” if you had to think about it, it had to be immediate – a hand grabs here, your muscles have to know the correct evasion; an arm connects there, your muscles have to know the correct escape; you get kicked on the hip . . . one after another until you’ve run through every drilled evasion and escape at least twice each (I remember my first final in that test: thirty seconds of apprehension from climbing to the platform to my feet hitting the water, two seconds of panic as six big forms lurched towards me, then a feeling of wonder as my muscles reacted leaving my mind free to plan ahead, followed by what seemed like ten minutes of evading and escaping, finished by one of the guys towing me to the pool side, so exhausted I couldn’t even climb out – and next time I got into a lifeguard chair I had a confidence I’d never thought possible).
I figure that if muscles can remember, then so can DNA, so instinct builds up from little snippets of learned improvement and become part of muscle memory and DNA memory. Maybe the memory is in the structure of the muscles themselves!
Once after a group jump skydiving one gal said she’d seen a butterfly at 7,000 feet. Everyone but me laughed; I said “Awesome” and made a mental note to look it up. Turned out that they’ve been seen above 10,000 feet.
My niece joined an online crowd-sourced project concerning the folding of proteins. The group was given around a hundred proteins to work with, and with all the different minds working on the problem they churned through those in like six months, astonishing the research team who’d been hoping to maybe get solved a dozen or so. I remember when my mom was in the hospital my niece was there and she talked about it; some of the heavy lifting had been done by a handful of people who wrote software for the task, which had been tested with proteins with known folding and refined through group feedback. Apparently the software wasn’t all that great at predicting folding possibilities but was pretty effective at ruling out a lot.
[My niece said “It’s just geometry”.]
That’s like saying that since what ants do in the nest is a mystery then it’s a grand assumption that they can build nests. We can observe a process happen without knowing the mechanics – in fact if we didn’t observe it happen there would be no reason to look for the mechanics!
Nope – since my niece was part of that one project I’ve kept an eye on the protein thing and the hardest part really is how they fold. Contrary to my niece’s blithe assertion that it’s just geometry, it’s geometry arranged by the various kinds of molecular bonds, and with long protein chains that quickly gets quite complex.
First notion? Yes, and maybe second and third. It’s the fourth and higher notions that are the hard part.
Has anyone figured out how to trigger a cell to become/make bone?
Yep. You can grow bone in a petri dish if you so choose. Here is a link for purchasing the primary cell line and the media needed for cell differentiation and mineralization.
Every now and then at a swimming hole in late summer there a biting horse flies. I’ve earned free beers by watching the flies, then picking a spot in the river to stand and wait. I got good enough at one point I could tell one was coming in to land on me and my hand hit it as it did – apparently once they’re in actual landing mode they can’t change course. Usually, though, I’d have to let them land, but the movement of their feet told me they were getting ready to bite and that was when I slapped them.
I remember one day when I realized they were territorial; I killed three in one spot and though there were some still bothering people upstream no more showed up where I was. I spent about an hour migrating slowly upstream, taking out the local flies as I went. I killed about thirty flies and only got bit once (two hit me at the same time and I couldn’t get my body motions right to kill them both). One couple who watched me said I looked like a stature then like I was doing a strange dance then turned back to a statue, which was interesting because I was so concentrated on attracting and killing flies I had no idea what my movements looked like.
As for brains to catch them . . . out of forty or so people at the swimming hole that day, no one but me managed to kill one except a kid who saw one landing on his friend’s back and slapped immediately – which was fun because he didn’t immediately kill the fly, only stunned it and broke a wing; death came to it from a fish that noticed the buzzing on the water surface. I only managed because I sat on a rock and watched the flies as they attacked people – those horseflies are fast when they evade, too fast to catch since in the air they will evade differently depending on variables I couldn’t figure out, so I figured out their approach patterns.
Then there’s my younger brother, who can stand in the middle of a room waiting for the right moment and snatch those lazy circling flies out of the air; he also taught several of us one evening at miniature golf how to catch mosquitoes.
3-D structures aren’t that hard once you know how proteins fold. In my understanding it’s like having a bunch of different shapes that fit togther in only one or a few ways, and lock together when they fit, so it’s like shaking a bag with such pieces and letting them make the 3-D shapes just by jostling around. But then if you supply the pieces one by one, the order they come in will determine the shape being built.
What still puzzles me on the cellular level is how the cell nucleus ‘knows’ what shape is needed next.
Also how does a growing fetus’ genes ‘know’ what shape the different organs are supposed to be? For the heart and lungs I figure form follows function, but beyond that I don’t even want to guess.
Sorry, but it doesn’t work that way. If it did, then figuring out ancestry trees would have been impossible using just morphology, yet most of those morphology-based trees turned out to match DNA analysis.
It’s no different than volcanology – we knew the different ways that different lava types flowed and the differences that meant for geographical features before doing chemical analysis, and we knew chemical composition before figuring out the molecular/mineral mechanics.
Or meteorology – people were making forecasts for snow or wind or lightning well before we even knew how rain forms in clouds, let alone snow and lightning!
Why not admit your reading comprehension here is poor: First comes before second and third, and fourth and fifth come next.
And yes, sometimes in a process you can be analyzing one step without completely knowing the previous one – I learned that in glaciology class; there were behaviors of glaciers where the chain of understanding worked backwards (come to think of it, that’s true in volcanology as well).
Yes, and much is known and we have a pretty good idea where to look for the rest.
Are you expecting me to teach you material that covers about 5 different 300/400 level undergrad classes in an internet forum about theology?
If you want to learn about these processes then start putting questions into Google and start reading. Most importantly, don’t assume your ignorance of biology is shared by biologists. Like I have said before, your level of knowledge in biology is comparable to any other person off the street, but it is nowhere close to what biologists know about biology. The same would apply for any specialization, be it software design or car repair. I don’t pretend to know as much as my car repair guide, and I certainly wouldn’t feel the need to lecture my car repair guy on what he doesn’t know about cars.
That’s what I was thinking, but he needs to catch up on high school biology and then 101 thru 103, followed by 201 thru 203, before he could even begin to understand 300- & 400-level courses. I got into the 300 level in botany, but I suspect that what was 300-level then is now 200-level.
I sort of lectured a car-repair guy once. The motor was misbehaving and from the nature of that misbehavior I knew where in the system the problem must have been. I told him where to look, and he said if I knew where to look why didn’t I do it myself. My response was that I knew the theory behind an internal combustion engine and its systems but I would have no idea even where to start looking for the actual part. He asked several questions about possibilities for the problem and I rejected them on the basis of theory. Finally he went to where I said the problem must be, and sure enough there it was. So he wanted to know just how theory told me where the problem was – and I gave a little lecture.
What was pretty kool was he decided he was going to take a course at the community college nearby on whatever physics applied. I happened to have a course catalog in my truck and we found out that the trades school at the college had a two-course sequence on the physics of internal combustion engines just for mechanics.
Cancer is a condition where cells in a specific part of the body grow and reproduce uncontrollably. The cancerous cells can invade and destroy surrounding healthy tissue, including organs. NHS.uk
Which is basically what I said.
Richard
PS I don’t need this.perpetual insulting I am finished with the Scientific element of this thread as well
Unsurprisingly, simpler organisms have more basic versions of many of these features. For example, cells know where they are within a multicellular organism based on the concentrations of signaling chemicals produced at one end or one side of the body. This is shown in a simple system by regeneration in Hydra or planarians. If the ends are cut off, the animal regenerates the correct ends. But if a narrow enough slice is cut that the front and back of the piece trying to regrow don’t have much difference in signal concentration, it may grow the same end in both directions. A narrow slice from the “neck” of a planarian may grow a two headed worm, whereas a slice from near the tail grows a two tailed worm.
Protein folding builds up from the basic rules of molecular structure. Particular atoms form bonds in particular patterns, But proteins are long enough that the molecule can bend in many ways, and there are various possible chemical interactions between the parts of a protein. It should not be surprising that characterizing the folding pattern of a molecule with thousands of atoms gets complicated. While generative AI is not to be trusted, training a computer with verified data and then letting it tackle new examples can work quite well for certain problems. If you can get a protein crystallized, then zapping it with X rays and seeing how they scatter will give a detailed picture of the protein structure. So we do have some known structures for reference. And we do know the chemistry of the various interactions shaping the bending of the molecule. But it is extremely complex; many proteins do not crystallize well.
What builds 3d structures? What doesn’t? Gravity builds 3d structures, and all the other forces of nature. So the fact that living organisms also build 3d structures is hardly very surprising.
As for proteins? They are both 3d and linear at the same time… like a ribbon tied in a bow. Proteins are basically linear because of the how they are made by a linear nucleic acid chain, and then electromagnetic forces in the molecule causes them to fold up like a metal wire puzzle.
Getting back to the topic…
My church has been going over their articles of faith and I definitely feel like they have become unnecessarily complicated. And we have been looking in to the reasons why. I see evidence of backtracking from an exaggerated position. The cause seems to be a human tendency to go back and forth between extremes – reacting to one extreme by tending a bit too far to an opposite extreme.
The pastor described it as a tension between crisis and process. Too much emphasis on process (being conformed to the image of the Son endlessly) and people tend to just rely on forgiveness, but relying on forgiveness becomes indulgence. That is no good because the Bible says the whole point of forgiveness is to change. Too much emphasis on crisis (instant transformation) and people rely on a notion of their completed transformation, but that becomes entitlement. And that is even worse.
I agree, and it also missed he point. comparing a strand of protein with a bone or a heart would be like comparing an amoeba to a human.
Refreshing
I think we try and analyse and/ or dictate what amounts to a religious experience as if we can somehow make it happen.
Theology is not about converting, or identifying Christians (Or any other faith) At best it is s description of what we beleive, yet it faails due to personal differences and understanding. Most f the historical problems have been when someone has tried to dictate and enforce a specific doctrine or beleif. In truth you do not need to know anyy theology other than the existence of God and a way to rellate to Him (She,it). As with many things, the Devil is in the details.