Cell biology Intelligent Design Mathematics

Cells’ feedback circuitry is all in the math

Spread the love

Now that some enterprising researchers have figured out how they do it:

Vital as that negative feedback is, however, biologists have been hard pressed to explain how cells and more complex organisms implement feedback systems with the necessary responsiveness and precision. Only within the past couple of decades have they been able to sort out some of the fundamentals. Most recently, in an important advance this past summer, a team led by Khammash demonstrated a synthetic feedback system that could be installed in cells to help them adapt perfectly to disturbances, just like the robot. The work is backed by a mathematical proof that no simpler answer exists — a good indication that natural feedback systems probably work the same way …

Negative feedback is a powerful example of the remarkable similarities between biology and engineering. In 1948, the mathematician Norbert Wiener proposed that regulatory systems in both animals and machines should be studied together, in a field he named cybernetics (from the Greek kubernētēs, meaning “steersman”).

“What math and engineering and biology have in common, at least modern engineering, is enormous hidden complexity,” Doyle said. Take, for example, a cellphone. It seems simple to operate, but underneath, many layers of control circuits are built atop one another.

“Biology’s kind of like that,” he said. “We live day to day in the complexities of our bodies; unless we’re sick, it’s largely automatic and unconscious. We are hardly aware of it.”

XiaoZhi Lim, “Math Reveals the Secrets of Cells’ Feedback Circuitry” at Quanta

And the only other examples we know of are all acknowledged to be designed.

Hat tip: Philip Cunningham

See also: J. Scott Turner and the giant crawling brain Come to think of it, Turner was not banished for his 2017 non-Darwinian evolution book, Purpose and Desire: What Makes Something “Alive” and Why Modern Darwinism Has Failed to Explain It

Follow UD News at Twitter!

2 Replies to “Cells’ feedback circuitry is all in the math

  1. 1
    bornagain77 says:

    as to this comment from the article “that there’s really only one underlying topology that should be able to achieve this”:

    Cells’ Feedback Circuitry Is All In The Math – October 2, 2019
    Maintaining perfect stability through negative feedback is a basic element of electrical circuitry, but it’s been a mystery how cells could do it — until now.
    Excerpt: “It’s a legitimate question to ask whether, maybe, there is a simpler way,” Lillacci said. “And then it turns out that there isn’t.”
    Gupta found that the mathematical constraints for robust perfect adaptation were so huge, they restricted the circuit designs that would be stable in a noisy setting. All of them required an antithetical pair of controller molecules.
    Khammash and Gupta were elated at the mathematical proof that their approach, while arduous, was not just sound but inescapable. And for Aoki and Lillacci, who were already seeing signs that their cells could adapt to disturbances, the news kept them going.
    “To find out that there’s really only one underlying topology that should be able to achieve this is really, really quite amazing to me,” Aoki said.
    https://www.quantamagazine.org/math-reveals-the-secrets-of-cells-feedback-circuitry-20190918/

    In regards to that comment, this following research states, “There are a surprisingly limited number of ways a network could be constructed to perform perfect adaptation.”,,, Moreover, the “amazing and surprising” outcome of the study is applicable to any living organism or biochemical network of any size.,,,”

    Math sheds light on how living cells ‘think’ – May 2, 2018
    Excerpt: “Proteins form unfathomably complex networks of chemical reactions that allow cells to communicate and to ‘think’ –,,,
    “We could never hope to measure the full complexity of cellular networks — the networks are simply too large and interconnected and their component proteins are too variable.
    “But mathematics provides a tool that allows us to explore how these networks might be constructed in order to perform as they do.,,,
    Dr Araujo’s work has focused on the widely observed function called perfect adaptation — the ability of a network to reset itself after it has been exposed to a new stimulus.
    “An example of perfect adaptation is our sense of smell,” she said. “When exposed to an odour we will smell it initially but after a while it seems to us that the odour has disappeared, even though the chemical, the stimulus, is still present.
    “Our sense of smell has exhibited perfect adaptation. This process allows it to remain sensitive to further changes in our environment so that we can detect both very faint and very strong odours.
    “This kind of adaptation is essentially what takes place inside living cells all the time. Cells are exposed to signals — hormones, growth factors, and other chemicals — and their proteins will tend to react and respond initially, but then settle down to pre-stimulus levels of activity even though the stimulus is still there.
    “I studied all the possible ways a network can be constructed and found that to be capable of this perfect adaptation in a robust way, a network has to satisfy an extremely rigid set of mathematical principles. There are a surprisingly limited number of ways a network could be constructed to perform perfect adaptation.,,,
    Professor Lance Liotta, said the “amazing and surprising” outcome of Dr Araujo’s study is applicable to any living organism or biochemical network of any size.,,,
    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/05/180502094636.htm

    And as to this comment from the article

    Cells’ Feedback Circuitry Is All In The Math – October 2, 2019
    Excerpt: Mathematically speaking, negative feedback can correct an error in three ways: proportionally, by considering the size of the error; integrally, by considering the amount of error incurred over the length of its duration; or derivatively, by considering how quickly or slowly the error is changing. The electronic proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controllers widely used in industrial control systems combine all three.
    Of the three, integral feedback is the one that confers robust perfect adaptation; proportional and derivative feedback help mitigate disturbances but do not completely correct errors. The proof for this “is an old theorem in control theory,” said John Doyle, a mathematician at the California Institute of Technology. To work out how nature achieves robust perfect adaptation required a control theorist’s ability to spot a connection to integral feedback.,,,
    Khammash wasn’t the only one realizing nature uses integral feedback to achieve robust perfect adaptation. Earlier, in 2000, Doyle showed mathematically that the effectiveness of bacteria’s directed movements to find food was due to integral feedback. Later, El-Samad, Khammash and Doyle collaborated and showed that heat shock responses in bacteria — their production of protective “chaperone” molecules when overheated — are robust for the same reason.,,,
    https://www.quantamagazine.org/math-reveals-the-secrets-of-cells-feedback-circuitry-20190918/

    In regards to the mathematics behind “robust perfect adaptation”, here is a look at the fairly daunting mathematics that lay behind PID controllers:

    PID controller – Mathematical form
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PID_controller#Mathematical_form

    Moreover, the ‘engineering’ of feedback loops, and as the article also touched upon, extends down to proteins themselves. As the following article states, “A mathematical analysis of the experiments showed that the proteins themselves acted to correct any imbalance imposed on them through artificial mutations and restored the chain to working order.”

    Proteins with cruise control provide new perspective: – 2008
    “A mathematical analysis of the experiments showed that the proteins themselves acted to correct any imbalance imposed on them through artificial mutations and restored the chain to working order.”
    https://www.princeton.edu/news/2008/11/10/evolutions-new-wrinkle-proteins-cruise-control-provide-new-perspective

    It seems readily apparent to me that highly advanced mathematical information, PID control mathematics to be precise, must somehow reside ‘transcendentally’ along the entirety of the protein chain, in order to achieve such ‘cruise control’ of the overall protein structure. This fact gives us even more evidence that there is far more functional information residing along the entirety of a functional protein chain than meets the eye. Moreover this ‘oneness’ of cruise control, within the entire protein structure, can only be achieved through quantum computation/entanglement principles, and is inexplicable to the reductive materialistic paradigm that undergirds Darwinian thought. A paradigm which holds that the amino acids themselves are, basically, independent entities!

    And indeed Quantum criticality in now found in a wide range of important biomolecules

    Quantum criticality in a wide range of important biomolecules
    Excerpt: “Most of the molecules taking part actively in biochemical processes are tuned exactly to the transition point and are critical conductors,” they say.
    That’s a discovery that is as important as it is unexpected. “These findings suggest an entirely new and universal mechanism of conductance in biology very different from the one used in electrical circuits.”
    The permutations of possible energy levels of biomolecules is huge so the possibility of finding even one that is in the quantum critical state by accident is mind-bogglingly small and, to all intents and purposes, impossible.,, of the order of 10^-50 of possible small biomolecules and even less for proteins,”,,,
    “what exactly is the advantage that criticality confers?”
    https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/the-origin-of-life-and-the-hidden-role-of-quantum-criticality-ca4707924552

    Many times Darwinists and ID advocates will argue over the probability of random Darwinian processes finding functional proteins in sequence space. Yet, since quantum information is now shown to be its own independent entity that is separate from matter and energy, then the probabilities of finding various ‘specific’ configurations of amino acids to form functional proteins simply do not even apply, at all.

    The reason why probabilities don’t even apply anymore is because the ’cause’ of the non-local quantum information does not even reside within the material particles in the first place (i.e. falsification of hidden variables and of local realism; Alain Aspect, Anton Zeilinger etc.. etc..).

    Looking beyond space and time to cope with quantum theory – October 28, 2012
    Excerpt: “Our result gives weight to the idea that quantum correlations somehow arise from outside spacetime, in the sense that no story in space and time can describe them,” says Nicolas Gisin, Professor at the University of Geneva, Switzerland, and member of the team.
    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121028142217.htm

    Darwinian Materialism vs. Quantum Biology – Part II
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSig2CsjKbg

    Simply put, Darwinists, with their reductive materialistic framework, have no beyond space and time cause to appeal to in order to give an adequate explanation for the massive amount of non-local quantum entanglement/information that is now found pervasively throughout molecular biology. Whereas, on the other hand, Christian Theists do have a cause to appeal to:

    Colossians 1:17
    He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

  2. 2
    PaV says:

    It’s amazing what natural selection can bring about!

Leave a Reply