Category: info in nature & the future of Sci-Tech
One of the key ideas and driving assumptions of modern evolutionary materialistic scientism is that mind can be explained on brain without residue. In an extreme form, we can see it in Crick’s the Astonishing Hypothesis (1994): . . . that “You”, your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of […]
The Voynich manuscript has long been a mysterious object, seemingly a medicinal or magical survey of plants, or someone’s play on such documents, but written in an unknown alphabetic script: AI is now being brought to bear on the matter. According to phys dot org: >>U of A computing science professor Greg Kondrak, an expert […]
Maxwell’s Demon (sometimes, “Max”) has long been a fictional device for discussing how if we have access to information we can manipulate molecular scale particles to extract work. Now, physics dot org is discussing a case: >>Physicists have experimentally demonstrated an information engine—a device that converts information into work—with an efficiency that exceeds the conventional […]
|November 20, 2017||Posted by kairosfocus under info in nature & the future of Sci-Tech, Science, Stirring the pot (tentative thoughts/explorations), UD's Sci-Tech watch, Video|
This needs to go in the Sci-tech watch department for UD: Not directly relevant to ID debates, but a glimpse at the wonders of our world that are well worth pondering. END
A few days back, I headlined a clip from Crick’s letter to his son Michael, March 19, 1953: The main text is accessible here (with page scans). Sans diagrams: >>My Dear Michael, Jim Watson and I have probably made a most important discovery. We have built a model for the structure of des-oxy-ribose-nucleic-acid (read it […]
8: Does this not place intelligently directed configuration as the most credible candidate to account for cell based life, given the centrality of proteins in such life forms and the chicken or egg first implication of the system just described?
9: Can one algorithmic process of significant complexity, generally speaking, be readily incrementally converted into another stepwise, functional all the way? (That is, is not the phenomenon of islands of function in a large configuration space the NORMAL implication of FSCO/I as described?)
10: What, then, does this presence of textual information and of linked algorithmic processing with associated molecular nanotech execution machinery tell us about the most credible origin “mechanism” of cell based life? Its diversification across the space of body plans from microbes to man? (Where, design can be briefly defined: intelligently directed configuration.)
11: What, then, is the significance of information in the world of cell based life?
12: Where does this point onward for our investigations of the world around us, and our application of our findings to C21 industrial civilisation? (As in, what is the significance of the demonstrated potential of von Neumann, kinematic self replicating systems — at nanotech and “clanking” scales alike — for transforming the world of technology?
13: As in, does Marcin Jakubowski have a point when he speaks of a global village construction set?
14: Where does this point for transformation of industrial technology, development transformation and onward — over the next 100 – 200 years — for solar system colonisation? [Likely: Moon, Mars, Asteroid belt, possibly gas giant moons. Eventually, perhaps, outposts in the trans Neptunian cloud, especially on dwarf planets.]
15: In such light, is it a fair assessment or assumption, that a design inference framework is a science, thought, technology and progress stopper?
16: Why, then (given the history of modern science and the specific impact of the Judaeo-Christian worldview framework on it), has this been touted by supposedly well informed and educated people and their organisations? Why has such been taken seriously by many others?
17: What can we now see about the significance of information, information-rich organisation and a design based approach to understanding our world in a sci-tech context?
18: Is the import of the above not more than sufficient motivation — almost, a manifesto in outline — to follow up scientifically on this perspective?>>
What do you think? Why? On what grounds? END