Category: Cybernetics and Mechatronics
Our Physicist and Computer Scientist from Russia — and each element of that balance is very relevant — is back, with more. MOAR, in fact. This time, he tackles the “terror-fitted depths” of thermodynamics and biosemiotics. (NB: Those needing a backgrounder may find an old UD post here and a more recent one here, helpful.) […]
|October 5, 2016||Posted by DLH under Biomimicry, Complex Specified Information, Cybernetics and Mechatronics, Design inference, Intelligent Design|
“three laureates discovered how to use molecules as components of tiny machines that can be controlled to perform specific tasks.”
|November 26, 2015||Posted by kairosfocus under brains and computation vs contemplation, Cybernetics and Mechatronics, Darwinist rhetorical tactics|
First, a happy thanksgiving. Then, while digesting turkey etc, here is something to ponder. One of the underlying issues surrounding the debates over the design inference is the question of responsible, rational freedom as a key facet of intelligent action, as opposed to blind chance and/or mechanical necessity. It has surfaced again, e.g. the WD400 […]
|March 15, 2015||Posted by kairosfocus under Cybernetics and Mechatronics, Functionally Specified Complex Information & Organization, ID Foundations, Molecular Animations, Selective Hyperskepticism, thermodynamics and information|
It seems to be time to call in the energy audit police. Let us explain, in light of an ongoing sharp exchange on “compensating” arguments in the illusion of organising energy thread. This morning Piotr, an objector (BTW — and this is one time where expertise base is relevant — a Linguist), at 288 dismissed […]
|January 26, 2015||Posted by niwrad under Biology, Cybernetics and Mechatronics, Informatics, Intelligent Design|
Sorry if this post is a bit for computer programmers, anyway I trust that also the others can grasp the overall picture. Evolutionists claim that what it takes to evolution to work is simply “a populations of replicators, random variations on them, and a competition for survival or resources”. Today we will try to partially […]
|January 13, 2015||Posted by niwrad under Cell biology, Cybernetics and Mechatronics, Intelligent Design|
John von Neumann, in his mid-1950s ground breaking studies about the mathematical theory of self-reproducing automata, argued that self-replication basically involves: — import of materials; — symbolic description/instructions; — memory; — constructor; — controller. He developed his theory before the discovery of DNA and the cellular machinery based on information processing. Here I will deal […]
|November 16, 2014||Posted by News under Cybernetics and Mechatronics, Naturalism, News|
It is easy for a clever but lazy writer to attack virtue. Especially unfashionable virtue. It is also easy to attack unfashionable facts.
|July 19, 2014||Posted by kairosfocus under Astronomy, Cybernetics and Mechatronics, Intelligent Design, News, Science|
This weekend, the Apollo 11 Moon Landing happened forty-five years ago to day and date. Video: embedded by Embedded VideoYouTube Direkt I remember sitting on the stone ledge of our patio after church on Sunday, July 20, 1969 sipping a drink as radio carried the story of the Apollo 11 Moon landing. Then, that evening […]
|June 13, 2014||Posted by kairosfocus under Artificial Intelligence, brains and computation vs contemplation, Cybernetics and Mechatronics, ID Foundations|
Design theory infers to design on inductive inference on tested reliable empirical signs. While many are disinclined to accept such inferences on matters linked to origins, that says more about lab coat clad materialist ideological a prioris and their cultural influences than it does about the actual balance of evidence on the merits. But also, […]
|May 15, 2014||Posted by kairosfocus under Animal minds, brains and computation vs contemplation, Cybernetics and Mechatronics, Darwinist rhetorical tactics|
One of the underlying debates linked to the design issue is the notorious mind-brain gap challenge. It keeps coming up, and on both sides of the ID debate. I would therefore like to spark a bit of discussion with a clip from a Scott Aaronson Physics course lecture: >> . . . If we interpret […]
Transcendence and the materialist hope for eternity, resurrection and paradise . . . but computation is not contemplation
|May 4, 2014||Posted by kairosfocus under Artificial Intelligence, Culture, Cybernetics and Mechatronics, Informatics, Science, worldview issues/foundations and society|
The UK Independent is noting how Stephen Hawking says of the Film on AI, Transcendence — plot summary here at wiki, that ‘Transcendence looks at the implications of artificial intelligence – but are we taking AI seriously enough?’ First off, I think “implications” is probably over the top — we seem to be more looking […]
|April 20, 2014||Posted by News under Cybernetics and Mechatronics, Intelligent Design, Mind, News|
Maybe they had better build the humanchine first, and it can then advise them on producing a film with a better box office.
|April 20, 2014||Posted by News under Culture, Cybernetics and Mechatronics, Intelligent Design, News, Religion|
Remember this when people tell you that traditional faiths feature unreasonable beliefs.
|April 16, 2014||Posted by kairosfocus under academic freedom, Big Bang, Cell biology, Cybernetics and Mechatronics, Darwinist rhetorical tactics, ID Foundations, Science, worldview issues/foundations and society|
I think we need to watch a video by Friend of UD, Kirk Durston. But first, a loop-back note: I have been rather busy elsewhere with issues like AS-AD, Kondratiev waves, Hayek’s investment triangle, SD and Schumpeterian creative destruction.(Pardon the resulting absence.) BTW, this line of thought leads me to hold that the oh- so- […]
|April 15, 2014||Posted by scordova under Cybernetics and Mechatronics, Humor, News|
The fallacious results of the Avida computer simulation were used in the infamous Kitmiller vs. Dover trial to argue in favor of Darwinian evolution. Using the evidence from the Avida simulation and other testimony, Judge Jones ruled that it is illegal to contest Darwinism for all time. Prosecution witness Robert Pennock claimed in sworn testimony […]
|January 13, 2014||Posted by niwrad under Cybernetics and Mechatronics, Darwinism|
In automatic control theory “homeostasis” is defined as the property of a system in which variables are regulated so that internal conditions remain stable and relatively constant. Homeostasis is a fundamental concept in biology because is what allows the life of organisms. In fact, it maintains the stability of the organisms in response to changes […]
|October 2, 2013||Posted by News under Cybernetics and Mechatronics, Darwinism, News|
In short, , like we said, Darwinism provides no insight or guidance whatever.
REFERENCE: The Smith Model, an architecture for cybernetics and mind-body/ free will/ determinism/ compatibilism analysis . . .
|June 4, 2013||Posted by kairosfocus under Animal minds, Atheism, Cybernetics and Mechatronics, Evolutionary psychology, Human evolution, ID Foundations, Neuroscience, Science, worldview issues/foundations and society|
Since the issue of agent freedom and cause has again come up, it is worth the while to post the following summary on the Smith Model for agent cause and cybernetics, from the IOSE unit on minds etc: __________ >>(c) Of neurons, brains and minds The neuron (in its various types) is the key building […]
|June 3, 2013||Posted by niwrad under Cybernetics and Mechatronics, Informatics, Intelligent Design, Mind, Science fiction|
The so called “strong Artificial Intelligence” (AI) has some relations with evolutionism because both imply a “more” coming from a “less” and both are products of a materialist reductionist worldview. In evolutionism they believe that life arises from non life, and, similarly, in AI they believe that the intelligent comes from the non intelligent, that […]
|January 23, 2012||Posted by kairosfocus under Cell biology, Cybernetics and Mechatronics, Functionally Specified Complex Information & Organization, ID Foundations, Intelligent Design, Irreducible Complexity, Molecular Animations, Video|
For some months now, I have been having a behind the scenes correspondence with a regular viewer of UD, whom we shall call EP. He works with industrial robots, and has been fascinated by the way the ribosome works as a nano-scale automated machine cell. Accordingly, a process sequence diagram (‘map”) has been developed, based […]
To fully understand this system a map of physical components in not enough. Another map, one showing steps of process flow is necessary. To produce this kind of map, repetitive interactions between ribosome subunits and subunit components should be studied and recognized and presented in the form of a process flow chart.
Fig. 4: The EP ribosome process sequence chart, reduced to the size of this page. Pardon, to see the full sized chart, please click here, then click on the image to go to the PNG in your browser window, then click to magnify. It may be useful to simply save and print the image on a sheet of paper. (Alternate site.)
Sequences of interactions, energy and material usage and error control are all easily recognizable on the flow chart type of representation. The advantage of visualizing the process is an instant general overview and easy understanding of process organization.
The process flow is enforced by chemical interactions of ribosome’s components. Interactions in turn are achieved by special arrangements of ribosomal proteins and RNA. Some sections of ribosomal proteins and RNA are coupled to proper influx of energy and material.
During ribosome’s main mode of operation matching amynoacyl tRNA (material deliverer) are accurately attracted from the crowded conditions around ribosome’s A site. Error control is capable of rejecting accidentally attracted non-matching amynoacyl tRNA so that should be the secondary mode of operation. A high error rate would slow protein production.
1. Basic principles of mapping interactions are the same regardless of the domain being mechanical, electro-mechanical or biochemical and regardless of sizes. Interactions of interest are sequential, logical in relation with each other and repetitive. Interactions may proceed in series, in parallel or the combination of two, depending on the components arrangement.
2. Diagram describing ribosome process is Sequential Function Chart (SFC) standard IEC 61131, one of the automation programming languages. Most of the main steps of ribosome’s process were included but some corrections are needed. It is possible to go further and include details down to the last molecule involved. Unfortunately, high detail would make the chart enormous. That was not the purpose of this exercise. Instead, the purpose was meeting a challenge of combining two different fields, biology and automation.
3. Monitoring of third codon-anticodon position is not included in the chart. Scientists explain in the reference article0 “third position is monitored less stringently “.
4. (Musings). It is mindboggling how ribosome manages to accurately attract matching tRNA from crowded conditions in front of A site. All 20 different tRNAs must be available for ribosome’s operation otherwise it will have to pause often. Fortunately, pausing is not costly in terms of energy usage as the elongation factor9 EF Tu delays hydrolyzing of GTP.
Physicist Vlatko Vedral and his team investigated quantum entanglement effects which influence the shape of DNA. I can speculate there is a possibility of the same effects in high accuracy of complementary tRNA attraction. Another possibility is there is a form of amplification of mRNA template codon’s chemical forces via ribosome sub units. >>
The process sequence map, of course, is a nodes and arcs map, and itself reveals an astonishing functionally specific complex organisation, with implied information.
The ribosome is not merely analogous to a process unit, it is a process unit, only, with a degree of miniaturisation we can only dream of accomplishing. Just for fun, let us compare the innards of a Spinning reel (which is far less complex):
For even more fun, let us look at an exploded view — which is of course a nodes and arcs diagram — of a classic Abu Cardinal:
Fig 6: An exploded view of a classic ABU Cardinal [Fair use, sadly, these babies are no longer made so far as I know . . .], showing how functionality arises from a highly specific, tightly constrained complex arrangement of matched parts according to a Wicken “wiring diagram.” Such wiring diagrams are objective (the FSCO/I on display here that we may become consciously aware of when we see the reel work or fail, is certainly not “question-begging,” as some — astonishingly — are trying to suggest!), and if one is to build or fix such a reel successfully, s/he had better pay close heed. Taking one of these apart and shaking it in a shoe-box is guaranteed not to work to get the reel back together again. As for tornadoes in a junkyard over in Sweden assembling one of these classic babies, not a chance. (That is, even the assembly of such a complex entity is functionally specific and prescriptive information-rich. FSCO/I is objectively real, get over it.)”]
So, now let us ask ourselves, soberly: on our experience of (i) searching for needles in haystacks, and (ii) the routinely observed source of such FSCO/I, what best explains the cell’s protein factory — BTW, the observed source of bio-functional proteins?
Then also, let us ask ourselves a few pointed questions:
1 –> If proteins are reasonably likely to spontaneously form, why would we end up with such an almost Rube Goldbergian apparatus for making proteins in the cell, in a controlled fashion?
2 –> And, given the mRNA code tape that drives the whole process, stored in DNA, then transcribed, snipped up and stitched together [in eukaryotes], then passed to the ribosome, then going through such a complex assembly process, how can we best explain the origin of codes, algorithms, data structures and algorithms implied in that code tape?
3 –>What is all of this trying to tell us about he best explanation for the origin of the metabolising, self-replicating C-chemistry aqueous medium living cell? (Given, that this is the protein-making factory used in the cell hijacked by viri when they want to replicate themselves.)
Then, let us reflect on what our answers tell us about our worldviews and how open we are to reflect on what empirical evidence is revealing to us. END