| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"david ford" |
| Date: |
21 Jul 2004 08:08:29 PM |
| Object: |
on "order" and varieties of "complexity" |
Yockey, Hubert P. 1977. "A Calculation of the Probability of
Spontaneous Biogenesis by Information Theory" _Journal of
Theoretical Biology_ 67:377-398. Yockey is/was with the
Army Pulse Radiation Facility, Aberdeen Proving Ground,
Maryland, USA. On 382, 383:
In general, the more complex the pattern the longer the
message describing it. In the limit of complexity when
there is no discernable pattern, that is, when the sequence is
"aperiodic" one must specify each symbol in turn
indefinitely. Such a message is just as long as the sequence
it describes. This idea does not depend on the origin of a
sequence. .... We now realize that the sequences with the
longest algorithms have the largest entropy [this isn't a
reference to thermodynamic entropy] and are the most
complex. Therefore they also have the largest information
content. A random sequence is the most complex of all
since we cannot predict its future behavior on the basis of
past performance.
Definitions
"order" (low or no information content), seen in a crystal
Yockey, Hubert P. 1974. "An Application of Information
Theory to the Central Dogma and the Sequence Hypothesis"
_Journal of Theoretical Biology_ 46:369-406. On 374:
Once we know the nature of a crystal the arrangement of
the atoms carries no information at all....
Yockey, Hubert P. 1977. "A Calculation of the Probability of
Spontaneous Biogenesis by Information Theory" _Journal of
Theoretical Biology_ 67:377-398. On 383:
When these ideas are applied to consideration of the origin
of life we realize that we need an explanation not of the
generation of order but rather of complexity. Crystals are
ordered; informational biomolecules are "aperiodic" as
Schroedinger (1955) has said and therefore are complex. A
pursuit of the generation of order will end in
crystallography not in biology.
"complexity" (high information content), seen in an
arrangement of letters spelling out Longfellow's poems,
arrangement of letters spelling out a recipe for making
pound cake, arrangement of nucleotides spelling out a
recipe for making a human, arrangement of nucleotides
spelling out a recipe for making a salamander, as well as:
arrangements of letters, musical notes, the numbers 0-9,
nucleotides, and amino acids that had been generated by a
random letter/note/number/nucleotide/amino acid
generator.
All these arrangements display a high information content
and therefore have "complexity."
"meaning-or-utility-laden complexity" and
"random complexity"
Yockey, Hubert P. 1974. "An Application of Information
Theory to the Central Dogma and the Sequence Hypothesis"
_Journal of Theoretical Biology_ 46:369-406. On 371:
The vast majority of the sequences in the ensemble of all
sequences of length _N_, of letters of a written language
have no assigned meaning or specificity. The same is true
of sequences of digits zero through nine and of musical
notes. However, embedded in the ensemble of all such
sequences are, say, a play by Sophocles, the lost works of
Aristotle, the numbers {pie} and e. The ensemble of all
musical notes contains Beethoven's Fifth Symphony. It
also contains... forms of random noise. By the same token
the protein sequences of length _N_, which carry
specificity, are embedded in the ensemble of all amino
acids sequences of length _N_. Those sequences which
carry specificity are a tiny fraction of the ensemble.
My claim is that whenever we see "meaning-or-utility-laden
complexity," we can reasonably conclude that intelligence/mind
was responsible for the origination of that
meaning-or-utility-laden complexity (MOUL complexity).
A summary of the above:
info-wise, info-wise,
complexity (high info content) order (low or 0 info content)
/\
/ \
/ \
/ \
/ \
MOUL complexity random complexity
^---------------^ ^______________________________________________^
_only_ appears w/ usually appears via non-intelligence-directed
input of intelligence means, "usually" because intelligence has been
known to on occasion make
examples: Beethoven's examples of "random examples of
5th, Sophocles' plays, complexity": random noise; "order": crystals;
nucleotide sequences arrangement of letters, arrangement of
coding for a human numbers, amino acids, or letters reading
and for a salamander. nucleotides produced by a "AAAAAA..." or
Whenever we see random generator of such; "BTBTBTBTBT..."
MOUL complexity, arrangement of rocks in about
we infer that 1 cubic meter worth of gravel
intelligence was
involved in the
appearance of that
MOUL complexity.
more Yockey:
1991 John Horgan; 1999 Paul Davies, 1992 Hubert Yockey, & 1968
Michael Polanyi: [Davies]"life cannot be
'written into' the laws of physics" presently known
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0402152147.31e8cc6f%40posting.google.com
.
|
|
| User: "Klaus Hellnick" |
|
| Title: Re: on "order" and varieties of "complexity" |
21 Jul 2004 08:42:05 PM |
|
|
"david ford" <dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in message
news:b1c67abe.0407211714.53153989@posting.google.com...
Yockey, Hubert P. 1977. "A Calculation of the Probability of
Spontaneous Biogenesis by Information Theory" _Journal of
Theoretical Biology_ 67:377-398. Yockey is/was with the
Army Pulse Radiation Facility, Aberdeen Proving Ground,
Maryland, USA. On 382, 383:
In general, the more complex the pattern the longer the
message describing it. In the limit of complexity when
RIIIIIGGGHT! That would explain numbers like Pi, right? It only takes one
sentence to describe, yet it seems to be infinitely complex. Pi is the ratio
of the length of the circumfrance of a circle divided by the length of it's
diameter.
Klaus
there is no discernable pattern, that is, when the sequence is
"aperiodic" one must specify each symbol in turn
indefinitely. Such a message is just as long as the sequence
it describes. This idea does not depend on the origin of a
sequence. .... We now realize that the sequences with the
longest algorithms have the largest entropy [this isn't a
reference to thermodynamic entropy] and are the most
complex. Therefore they also have the largest information
content. A random sequence is the most complex of all
since we cannot predict its future behavior on the basis of
past performance.
Definitions
"order" (low or no information content), seen in a crystal
Yockey, Hubert P. 1974. "An Application of Information
Theory to the Central Dogma and the Sequence Hypothesis"
_Journal of Theoretical Biology_ 46:369-406. On 374:
Once we know the nature of a crystal the arrangement of
the atoms carries no information at all....
Yockey, Hubert P. 1977. "A Calculation of the Probability of
Spontaneous Biogenesis by Information Theory" _Journal of
Theoretical Biology_ 67:377-398. On 383:
When these ideas are applied to consideration of the origin
of life we realize that we need an explanation not of the
generation of order but rather of complexity. Crystals are
ordered; informational biomolecules are "aperiodic" as
Schroedinger (1955) has said and therefore are complex. A
pursuit of the generation of order will end in
crystallography not in biology.
"complexity" (high information content), seen in an
arrangement of letters spelling out Longfellow's poems,
arrangement of letters spelling out a recipe for making
pound cake, arrangement of nucleotides spelling out a
recipe for making a human, arrangement of nucleotides
spelling out a recipe for making a salamander, as well as:
arrangements of letters, musical notes, the numbers 0-9,
nucleotides, and amino acids that had been generated by a
random letter/note/number/nucleotide/amino acid
generator.
All these arrangements display a high information content
and therefore have "complexity."
"meaning-or-utility-laden complexity" and
"random complexity"
Yockey, Hubert P. 1974. "An Application of Information
Theory to the Central Dogma and the Sequence Hypothesis"
_Journal of Theoretical Biology_ 46:369-406. On 371:
The vast majority of the sequences in the ensemble of all
sequences of length _N_, of letters of a written language
have no assigned meaning or specificity. The same is true
of sequences of digits zero through nine and of musical
notes. However, embedded in the ensemble of all such
sequences are, say, a play by Sophocles, the lost works of
Aristotle, the numbers {pie} and e. The ensemble of all
musical notes contains Beethoven's Fifth Symphony. It
also contains... forms of random noise. By the same token
the protein sequences of length _N_, which carry
specificity, are embedded in the ensemble of all amino
acids sequences of length _N_. Those sequences which
carry specificity are a tiny fraction of the ensemble.
My claim is that whenever we see "meaning-or-utility-laden
complexity," we can reasonably conclude that intelligence/mind
was responsible for the origination of that
meaning-or-utility-laden complexity (MOUL complexity).
A summary of the above:
info-wise, info-wise,
complexity (high info content) order (low or 0 info content)
/\
/ \
/ \
/ \
/ \
MOUL complexity random complexity
^---------------^ ^______________________________________________^
_only_ appears w/ usually appears via non-intelligence-directed
input of intelligence means, "usually" because intelligence has been
known to on occasion make
examples: Beethoven's examples of "random examples of
5th, Sophocles' plays, complexity": random noise; "order": crystals;
nucleotide sequences arrangement of letters, arrangement of
coding for a human numbers, amino acids, or letters reading
and for a salamander. nucleotides produced by a "AAAAAA..." or
Whenever we see random generator of such; "BTBTBTBTBT..."
MOUL complexity, arrangement of rocks in about
we infer that 1 cubic meter worth of gravel
intelligence was
involved in the
appearance of that
MOUL complexity.
more Yockey:
1991 John Horgan; 1999 Paul Davies, 1992 Hubert Yockey, & 1968
Michael Polanyi: [Davies]"life cannot be
'written into' the laws of physics" presently known
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0402152147.31e8cc6f%40posting.google.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "nobody" |
|
| Title: Re: on "order" and varieties of "complexity" |
22 Jul 2004 04:57:13 AM |
|
|
"Klaus Hellnick" <khellnicknospam@houston.rr.com> wrote:
RIIIIIGGGHT! That would explain numbers like Pi, right? It only takes one
sentence to describe, yet it seems to be infinitely complex. Pi is the ratio
of the length of the circumfrance of a circle divided by the length of it's
diameter.
Does it really take one sentence? Did you define ratio, length,
circumference, circle, diameter..., let alone the Courier font, Latin
alphabet, English language?
Is "Beethoven's Fifth" the same as Beethoven's Fifth?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Puck Greenman" |
|
| Title: Re: on "order" and varieties of "complexity" |
22 Jul 2004 10:07:04 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 09:57:13 +0000 (UTC), nobody <nobody@here.com>
with calm deliberation, and malace aforethought, wrote:
"Klaus Hellnick" <khellnicknospam@houston.rr.com> wrote:
RIIIIIGGGHT! That would explain numbers like Pi, right? It only takes one
sentence to describe, yet it seems to be infinitely complex. Pi is the ratio
of the length of the circumfrance of a circle divided by the length of it's
diameter.
Does it really take one sentence? Did you define ratio, length,
circumference, circle, diameter..., let alone the Courier font, Latin
alphabet, English language?
Well, no, he didn't.
Nor did he mention any of the other languages in which it might be
expressed.
He seems to have made the common error, of assuming that if you have
the bare modicum of intelligence needed, to get on the usenet, you
have enough intelligence to understand the language you are writing
in.
Is "Beethoven's Fifth" the same as Beethoven's Fifth?
Not necessarily.
On Tuesday evening, Beethoven was "doing the top shelf", and his
"fifth", was Creme de Menthe.
On Saturday night, Beethoven was playing Skittles, and drinking with
the boys, his "fifth", was a pint of Tinners.
Puck Greenman
#162
BAAWA Knight.
Blesed is the self righteous xtian,
for his is the sure and certain knowledge
that no matter what load of tripe he
comes out with:
God told him to say it.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Victor Eijkhout" |
|
| Title: Re: on "order" and varieties of "complexity" |
22 Jul 2004 07:56:58 AM |
|
|
nobody <nobody@here.com> wrote:
RIIIIIGGGHT! That would explain numbers like Pi, right? It only takes one
sentence to describe, yet it seems to be infinitely complex. Pi is the ratio
of the length of the circumfrance of a circle divided by the length of it's
diameter.
Does it really take one sentence? Did you define ratio, length,
circumference, circle, diameter..., let alone the Courier font, Latin
alphabet, English language?
Assuming that the other guys also need to define adding and multiplying,
then: "twice the smallest positive zero of sin(x), which is sum over odd
values of n from 1 to infinity of (-1)^{n-1}x^n/n!". That's it. The
infinity can be eliminated with another sentence of epsilon/delta stuff.
V.
--
email: lastname at cs utk edu
homepage: cs utk edu tilde lastname
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "dkomo" |
|
| Title: Re: on "order" and varieties of "complexity" |
22 Jul 2004 09:54:55 AM |
|
|
Klaus Hellnick wrote:
"david ford" <dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in message
news:b1c67abe.0407211714.53153989@posting.google.com...
Yockey, Hubert P. 1977. "A Calculation of the Probability of
Spontaneous Biogenesis by Information Theory" _Journal of
Theoretical Biology_ 67:377-398. Yockey is/was with the
Army Pulse Radiation Facility, Aberdeen Proving Ground,
Maryland, USA. On 382, 383:
In general, the more complex the pattern the longer the
message describing it. In the limit of complexity when
RIIIIIGGGHT! That would explain numbers like Pi, right? It only takes one
sentence to describe, yet it seems to be infinitely complex. Pi is the ratio
of the length of the circumfrance of a circle divided by the length of it's
diameter.
Klaus
What's so special about Pi? The square root of 2 produces a number of
equal complexity and is even easier to describe.
--dkomo@cris.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Walter Bushell" |
|
| Title: Re: on "order" and varieties of "complexity" |
22 Jul 2004 09:14:42 PM |
|
|
In article <r4ydndVpBp84S2LdRVn-rQ@comcast.com>,
doom <dkomo871@comcast.net> wrote:
Klaus Hellnick wrote:
"david ford" <dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in message
news:b1c67abe.0407211714.53153989@ posting.google.com...
Yockey, Hubert P. 1977. "A Calculation of the Probability of
Spontaneous Biogenesis by Information Theory" _Journal of
Theoretical Biology_ 67:377-398. Yockey is/was with the
Army Pulse Radiation Facility, Aberdeen Proving Ground,
Maryland, USA. On 382, 383:
In general, the more complex the pattern the longer the
message describing it. In the limit of complexity when
RIIIIIGGGHT! That would explain numbers like Pi, right? It only takes one
sentence to describe, yet it seems to be infinitely complex. Pi is the ratio
of the length of the circumference of a circle divided by the length of it's
diameter.
Klaus
What's so special about Pi? The square root of 2 produces a number of
equal complexity and is even easier to describe.
--dkomo@cris.com
No, Pi does not lie in any algebraic extension of the rational numbers,
where as the equation x^2-2=0 has the square root of 2 as one of its
roots.
--
Guns don't kill people; automobiles kill people.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Earle Jones" |
|
| Title: Re: on "order" and varieties of "complexity" |
24 Jul 2004 07:38:53 PM |
|
|
In article <proto-BF31CE.22222422072004@reader2.panix.com>,
Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> wrote:
In article <r4ydndVpBp84S2LdRVn-rQ@comcast.com>,
doom <dkomo871@comcast.net> wrote:
Klaus Hellnick wrote:
"david ford" <dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in message
news:b1c67abe.0407211714.53153989@ posting.google.com...
Yockey, Hubert P. 1977. "A Calculation of the Probability of
Spontaneous Biogenesis by Information Theory" _Journal of
Theoretical Biology_ 67:377-398. Yockey is/was with the
Army Pulse Radiation Facility, Aberdeen Proving Ground,
Maryland, USA. On 382, 383:
In general, the more complex the pattern the longer the
message describing it. In the limit of complexity when
RIIIIIGGGHT! That would explain numbers like Pi, right? It only takes one
sentence to describe, yet it seems to be infinitely complex. Pi is the
ratio
of the length of the circumference of a circle divided by the length of
it's
diameter.
Klaus
What's so special about Pi? The square root of 2 produces a number of
equal complexity and is even easier to describe.
--dkomo@cris.com
No, Pi does not lie in any algebraic extension of the rational numbers,
where as the equation x^2-2=0 has the square root of 2 as one of its
roots.
*
By the way, pi is real and *not* complex -- not in any mathematical
sense that I know about.
Pi is interesting to me, not just because of its plane geometry
characteristics, but because it is the ratio of log(-1) to sqrt(-1),
both of which are imaginary!
earle
*
--
__
__/\_\
/\_\/_/
\/_/\_\ earle
\/_/ jones
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "dkomo" |
|
| Title: Re: on "order" and varieties of "complexity" |
22 Jul 2004 10:09:15 PM |
|
|
Walter Bushell wrote:
In article <r4ydndVpBp84S2LdRVn-rQ@comcast.com>,
doom <dkomo871@comcast.net> wrote:
Klaus Hellnick wrote:
"david ford" <dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in message
news:b1c67abe.0407211714.53153989@ posting.google.com...
Yockey, Hubert P. 1977. "A Calculation of the Probability of
Spontaneous Biogenesis by Information Theory" _Journal of
Theoretical Biology_ 67:377-398. Yockey is/was with the
Army Pulse Radiation Facility, Aberdeen Proving Ground,
Maryland, USA. On 382, 383:
In general, the more complex the pattern the longer the
message describing it. In the limit of complexity when
RIIIIIGGGHT! That would explain numbers like Pi, right? It only takes one
sentence to describe, yet it seems to be infinitely complex. Pi is the ratio
of the length of the circumference of a circle divided by the length of it's
diameter.
Klaus
What's so special about Pi? The square root of 2 produces a number of
equal complexity and is even easier to describe.
No, Pi does not lie in any algebraic extension of the rational numbers,
where as the equation x^2-2=0 has the square root of 2 as one of its
roots.
Prove it. ;>p
The fact that Pi is a transcendental number does not make it special in
any way, because there is a nondenumerable infinity of other
transcendental numbers.
In any case, because Pi is transcendental does not make it more
*complex* than the square root of 2. Both numbers have an infinite
number of non-repeating decimal digits. In that sense, they are both
simply non-rational numbers.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Richard Forrest" |
|
| Title: Re: on "order" and varieties of "complexity" |
22 Jul 2004 01:06:21 PM |
|
|
dkomo <dkomo871@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<r4ydndVpBp84S2LdRVn-rQ@comcast.com>...
Klaus Hellnick wrote:
"david ford" <dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in message
news:b1c67abe.0407211714.53153989@posting.google.com...
Yockey, Hubert P. 1977. "A Calculation of the Probability of
Spontaneous Biogenesis by Information Theory" _Journal of
Theoretical Biology_ 67:377-398. Yockey is/was with the
Army Pulse Radiation Facility, Aberdeen Proving Ground,
Maryland, USA. On 382, 383:
In general, the more complex the pattern the longer the
message describing it. In the limit of complexity when
RIIIIIGGGHT! That would explain numbers like Pi, right? It only takes one
sentence to describe, yet it seems to be infinitely complex. Pi is the ratio
of the length of the circumfrance of a circle divided by the length of it's
diameter.
Klaus
What's so special about Pi? The square root of 2 produces a number of
equal complexity and is even easier to describe.
--dkomo@cris.com
This could end up being a circular argument ....
RF
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tracy Hamilton" |
|
| Title: Re: on "order" and varieties of "complexity" |
22 Jul 2004 10:45:02 AM |
|
|
"david ford" <dford3@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in message
news:b1c67abe.0407211714.53153989@posting.google.com...
[snip much that is not new, or even controversial]
Yockey, Hubert P. 1974. "An Application of Information
Theory to the Central Dogma and the Sequence Hypothesis"
_Journal of Theoretical Biology_ 46:369-406. On 371:
The vast majority of the sequences in the ensemble of all
sequences of length _N_, of letters of a written language
have no assigned meaning or specificity. The same is true
of sequences of digits zero through nine and of musical
notes. However, embedded in the ensemble of all such
sequences are, say, a play by Sophocles, the lost works of
Aristotle, the numbers {pie} and e. The ensemble of all
musical notes contains Beethoven's Fifth Symphony. It
also contains... forms of random noise. By the same token
the protein sequences of length _N_, which carry
specificity, are embedded in the ensemble of all amino
acids sequences of length _N_. Those sequences which
carry specificity are a tiny fraction of the ensemble.
My claim is that whenever we see "meaning-or-utility-laden
complexity," we can reasonably conclude that intelligence/mind
was responsible for the origination of that
meaning-or-utility-laden complexity (MOUL complexity).
Unsupported, of course. When one realizes that utility is a
*property* of the structure, then one needs to consider what
process can distinguish (or favor) one structure out of many based on the
particular property. Only then can a convincing argument be made
for how (including mind/intelligence as one explanation).
Let us consider a case where the process is known and reported
in great detail, therefore making it much easier for you to make your case.
In molecular evolution experiments, where
random sequences are generated, selection is made by chemical
ractions, yet the final sequence is not one of the
initial ones, nor was it designed to be that particular sequence. Details
on the
process are given in literature papers. Feel free to explain exactly where
mind/intelligence comes into the process.
Everything you want to know about SELEX but were afraid to ask:
http://www.lmb.uni-muenchen.de/groups/famulok/SELEX.html
[snip]
Tracy P. Hamilton
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Vreeland" |
|
| Title: Re: on "order" and varieties of "complexity" |
23 Jul 2004 01:50:22 AM |
|
|
(david ford) wrote in message news:<b1c67abe.0407211714.53153989@posting.google.com>...
Yockey, Hubert P. 1977. "A Calculation of the Probability of
....
A random sequence is the most complex of all
since we cannot predict its future behavior on the basis of
past performance.
Clearly incorrect. Random sequences contain no information other than
their size and statistical properties. This assumes, of course, that
they contain no other useful information worth preserving. If you
come across a random information stream and decide to preserve a
portion of it, either through your concious will or through some
accidental law of of nature, then you are adding information where it
did not previously exist. Again, this can occur through through
intelligent action or through an unintelligent selection process.
Otherwise, your theory that information can only be created by an
intelligence is demonstrably false. The creation of information
through the mechanism of unintelligent actors is now the basis for an
entire industry: evolutionary computation, or the use of genetic
algorithms for engineering, which are far better at searching large
solution spaces than mere human engineers. Through this method very
simple programs are used to automatically dicover far more complex
engineering designs which meet a specific criteria. The method is
virtually identical to that fundamental process of evolution by
natural selection, which involves inheritance, mutation, and
selection.
Those who argue that natural selection cannot work because it violates
some sort of information law are arguing that modern aircraft cannot
fly, because they use the same design techniques. Some electronic
circuits are now designed this way, and Microsoft is investigating
using the process to design its software.
There is a horde of other examples. Check the web.
Jack V
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "dkomo" |
|
| Title: Re: on "order" and varieties of "complexity" |
21 Jul 2004 08:53:53 PM |
|
|
david ford wrote:
Yockey, Hubert P. 1977. "A Calculation of the Probability of
Spontaneous Biogenesis by Information Theory" _Journal of
Theoretical Biology_ 67:377-398. Yockey is/was with the
Army Pulse Radiation Facility, Aberdeen Proving Ground,
Maryland, USA. On 382, 383:
In general, the more complex the pattern the longer the
message describing it. In the limit of complexity when
there is no discernable pattern, that is, when the sequence is
"aperiodic" one must specify each symbol in turn
indefinitely. Such a message is just as long as the sequence
it describes. This idea does not depend on the origin of a
sequence. .... We now realize that the sequences with the
longest algorithms have the largest entropy [this isn't a
reference to thermodynamic entropy] and are the most
complex. Therefore they also have the largest information
content. A random sequence is the most complex of all
since we cannot predict its future behavior on the basis of
past performance.
Definitions
"order" (low or no information content), seen in a crystal
Yockey, Hubert P. 1974. "An Application of Information
Theory to the Central Dogma and the Sequence Hypothesis"
_Journal of Theoretical Biology_ 46:369-406. On 374:
Once we know the nature of a crystal the arrangement of
the atoms carries no information at all....
Yockey, Hubert P. 1977. "A Calculation of the Probability of
Spontaneous Biogenesis by Information Theory" _Journal of
Theoretical Biology_ 67:377-398. On 383:
When these ideas are applied to consideration of the origin
of life we realize that we need an explanation not of the
generation of order but rather of complexity. Crystals are
ordered; informational biomolecules are "aperiodic" as
Schroedinger (1955) has said and therefore are complex. A
pursuit of the generation of order will end in
crystallography not in biology.
"complexity" (high information content), seen in an
arrangement of letters spelling out Longfellow's poems,
arrangement of letters spelling out a recipe for making
pound cake, arrangement of nucleotides spelling out a
recipe for making a human, arrangement of nucleotides
spelling out a recipe for making a salamander, as well as:
arrangements of letters, musical notes, the numbers 0-9,
nucleotides, and amino acids that had been generated by a
random letter/note/number/nucleotide/amino acid
generator.
All these arrangements display a high information content
and therefore have "complexity."
"meaning-or-utility-laden complexity" and
"random complexity"
Yockey, Hubert P. 1974. "An Application of Information
Theory to the Central Dogma and the Sequence Hypothesis"
_Journal of Theoretical Biology_ 46:369-406. On 371:
The vast majority of the sequences in the ensemble of all
sequences of length _N_, of letters of a written language
have no assigned meaning or specificity. The same is true
of sequences of digits zero through nine and of musical
notes. However, embedded in the ensemble of all such
sequences are, say, a play by Sophocles, the lost works of
Aristotle, the numbers {pie} and e. The ensemble of all
musical notes contains Beethoven's Fifth Symphony. It
also contains... forms of random noise. By the same token
the protein sequences of length _N_, which carry
specificity, are embedded in the ensemble of all amino
acids sequences of length _N_. Those sequences which
carry specificity are a tiny fraction of the ensemble.
My claim is that whenever we see "meaning-or-utility-laden
complexity," we can reasonably conclude that intelligence/mind
was responsible for the origination of that
meaning-or-utility-laden complexity (MOUL complexity).
Nonsense. Using the same argument as Yokey made above, consider the
sequences of all possible chemical elements of length _N_. For example,
if _N_ is 3, H-O-H and H-Cl-Cl and H-H-H are members of this ensemble.
How many of these members specify actual chemical compounds? A tiny
fraction at best. Yet, we can't claim that intelligence/mind
was responsible for the origination of H2O (water), for example, because
molecules like these are easily explained by the action of simple
chemical forces.
Take your ideas back to the drawing board. You lose again.
A summary of the above:
info-wise, info-wise,
complexity (high info content) order (low or 0 info content)
/\
/ \
/ \
/ \
/ \
MOUL complexity random complexity
^---------------^ ^______________________________________________^
_only_ appears w/ usually appears via non-intelligence-directed
input of intelligence means, "usually" because intelligence has been
known to on occasion make
examples: Beethoven's examples of "random examples of
5th, Sophocles' plays, complexity": random noise; "order": crystals;
nucleotide sequences arrangement of letters, arrangement of
coding for a human numbers, amino acids, or letters reading
and for a salamander. nucleotides produced by a "AAAAAA..." or
Whenever we see random generator of such; "BTBTBTBTBT..."
MOUL complexity, arrangement of rocks in about
we infer that 1 cubic meter worth of gravel
intelligence was
involved in the
appearance of that
MOUL complexity.
more Yockey:
1991 John Horgan; 1999 Paul Davies, 1992 Hubert Yockey, & 1968
Michael Polanyi: [Davies]"life cannot be
'written into' the laws of physics" presently known
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0402152147.31e8cc6f%40posting.google.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
