User Controls
Yes psychos, all the ¡Science! shows masks do help stop viruses
-
2020-07-08 at 5:52 PM UTC
-
2020-07-08 at 5:54 PM UTC
-
2020-07-08 at 6:25 PM UTC
Originally posted by Greek Style So what's the difference between RNA and DNA at the functional level?
Basically DNA carries the information while RNA is how that information is carried out as instructions and encoded into proteins. Although there are many different RNAs used for different things, let's stick to protein synthesis.
You know how DNA has ATCG base pairs, and they are arranged in a helix with the "other sides" always as the opposite pairs? In DNA, A binds to T. But in RNA it binds to U (uracil). Imagine unzipping the DNA down the middle of a section that needs to be replicated. m(essenger)RNA slides in the gap, schlurps up one of the pairs' information (doesn't matter which one, it's the same in the end), and zips off to the ribosomes to pair with another RNA and make a protein.
Basically DNA stores the information and RNA helps carry out the instructions. -
2020-07-08 at 6:27 PM UTCThat's in the human body though.
-
2020-07-08 at 6:27 PM UTC
-
2020-07-08 at 6:39 PM UTC
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny and therefore it has an interest to live, breed and thrive.
No it doesn't, any more than an iron nail "has an interest" in accreting rust or a seed crystal has "an interest" in growing. Only difference is that sometimes they break in half and can repeat the process.
It has no ability to influence it's environment to attain energy. It will pair with whatever molecule floats along and is viable, whether it leads to survival or replication or not.how do you think we came to this planet in the first place ?
Evolution is an environmental phenomenon. Random nucleotides don't have interests. -
2020-07-08 at 6:40 PM UTC
-
2020-07-08 at 6:41 PM UTC
Originally posted by ORACLE Basically DNA carries the information while RNA is how that information is carried out as instructions and encoded into proteins. Although there are many different RNAs used for different things, let's stick to protein synthesis.
You know how DNA has ATCG base pairs, and they are arranged in a helix with the "other sides" always as the opposite pairs? In DNA, A binds to T. But in RNA it binds to U (uracil). Imagine unzipping the DNA down the middle of a section that needs to be replicated. m(essenger)RNA slides in the gap, schlurps up one of the pairs' information (doesn't matter which one, it's the same in the end), and zips off to the ribosomes to pair with another RNA and make a protein.
Basically DNA stores the information and RNA helps carry out the instructions.
An then atheists will insist a process that advanced and remarkable could just occur all by itself. -
2020-07-08 at 6:42 PM UTCDoesn't DNA encode RNA and occasionally vice versa?
-
2020-07-08 at 6:44 PM UTC
-
2020-07-08 at 6:48 PM UTC
Originally posted by ORACLE No it doesn't, any more than an iron nail "has an interest" in accreting rust or a seed crystal has "an interest" in growing. Only difference is that sometimes they break in half and can repeat the process.
a nail doesnt replicate itself or try to evolve to rust faster with less oxygen.It has no ability to influence it's environment to attain energy. It will pair with whatever molecule floats along and is viable, whether it leads to survival or replication or not.
no, the fact that viruses can evolve to be more infectious and jump across specieses of different organism is proof that they can proactively change themselves to reproduce better and to thrive.
they adapt to their environmemts.Evolution is an environmental phenomenon. Random nucleotides don't have interests.
environmemt cant make rocks and pakis evolve. -
2020-07-08 at 6:49 PM UTC
Originally posted by -SpectraL An then atheists will insist a process that advanced and remarkable could just occur all by itself.
Why not? You can reductively understand every part of the process and see how it is physically possible without any interference. Then factor in the fact that the times when it didn't work well just do not continue to exist.
That's why we currently see the times when it did work continuing to exist.
It really is that simple. -
2020-07-08 at 6:49 PM UTC
-
2020-07-08 at 7:12 PM UTC
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny
a nail doesnt replicate itself or try to evolve to rust faster with less oxygen.
Exactly. RNA doesn't "try to evolve" or "try" to replicate either. In fact nothing "tries to evolve" (except I guess humans who want to do gene modification.) Your baby will have random variations on your and the mother's DNA, and if they confer an advantage to it over the level of the rest of the population, then it will be better adapted. If not, and it has some terrible genetic disease, then it won't.
It just breaks apart which causes it to do the same process again, which can vary. If that doesn't happen, it doesn't replicate.
It would be no different than if there was some form of seed crystal that broke in half randomly every time it reached a critical size, then the halves filled in their missing sides with more salt or whatever.no, the fact that viruses can evolve to be more infectious and jump across specieses of different organism is proof that they can proactively change themselves to reproduce better and to thrive.
Nope. None of this is done with intention.
Viruses simply spread wherever they are guided by environmental conditions. The fact that an adaptation takes place is a matter of chance because it is the one that works (results in replication).
You are thinking of some top-down direction rather than the actual bottom-up "sifting" that takes place in evolution.
For a simple demonstration of this idea, take a look at this video where deep learning is used to train an AI car to solve a track. Each car is spawned with random variations, and the ones that get furthest are selected to replicate and vary upon.
In this video the "selection mechanism" (that chooses which car is replicated) is the condition of getting furthest down the track.
Simply by having a selection factor for the environment and heritable variance, the environment can shape a car that can navigate that track.
But if the track is different, a different "family tree" will form because the cars really have no control over their environment and different ones will "die" and "spawn". And that will be a matter of pruning different branches of the "tree", not because the "tree" or any particular car has any agency.they adapt to their environmemts.
No "they" individually don't. Their species adapts because of differential replication.environmemt cant make rocks and pakis evolve.
Depends on the environment. -
2020-07-08 at 7:13 PM UTC
-
2020-07-08 at 8:18 PM UTC
Originally posted by ORACLE Exactly. RNA doesn't "try to evolve" or "try" to replicate either. In fact nothing "tries to evolve" (except I guess humans who want to do gene modification.) Your baby will have random variations on your and the mother's DNA, and if they confer an advantage to it over the level of the rest of the population, then it will be better adapted. If not, and it has some terrible genetic disease, then it won't.
It just breaks apart which causes it to do the same process again, which can vary. If that doesn't happen, it doesn't replicate.
It would be no different than if there was some form of seed crystal that broke in half randomly every time it reached a critical size, then the halves filled in their missing sides with more salt or whatever.
RNAs by themselves dont. but viruses are nont just made up of RNAs, its the entire package. and by maintaining traits that are favorable to its replication and propagation and dropping traits that dont, viruses are actively trying to evolve.
to be a something thats better at proliferation of itself.Nope. None of this is done with intention.
Viruses simply spread wherever they are guided by environmental conditions. The fact that an adaptation takes place is a matter of chance because it is the one that works (results in replication).
You are thinking of some top-down direction rather than the actual bottom-up "sifting" that takes place in evolution.
For a simple demonstration of this idea, take a look at this video where deep learning is used to train an AI car to solve a track. Each car is spawned with random variations, and the ones that get furthest are selected to replicate and vary upon.
In this video the "selection mechanism" (that chooses which car is replicated) is the condition of getting furthest down the track.
Simply by having a selection factor for the environment and heritable variance, the environment can shape a car that can navigate that track.
But if the track is different, a different "family tree" will form because the cars really have no control over their environment and different ones will "die" and "spawn". And that will be a matter of pruning different branches of the "tree", not because the "tree" or any particular car has any agency.
NO, your anal-logy is flawed.
you did not account for the PURPOSE its AI codes were written.
if what happened with that AI car was the result of random strings of letters and numbers
then ok, fine. but it is not. its AI codes were written specifically with the purpose of thriving in its environemt, by keeping acts that let them thrive in their new environemnt and dropping acts that dont.
its not the environment that help it evolve, its the AI code. thats what selection is all about and where iy begins. -
2020-07-08 at 8:18 PM UTC
-
2020-07-08 at 8:38 PM UTC
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny RNAs by themselves dont.
Virus don't either.but viruses are nont just made up of RNAs, its the entire package. and by maintaining traits that are favorable to its replication and propagation and dropping traits that dont, viruses are actively trying to evolve.
They cannot maintain or "drop" traits, they don't know what is favourable for their replication. Mutations are a mistake of replication, you cannot just change your own DNA. The ones with favourable traits live and the ones without favourable traits die (or don't replicate as fast as the favourable ones and eventually drop out of existence). This happens over and over. No particular virus has any idea what is going on or any control over what trait is passed on or "dropped"to be a something thats better at proliferation of itself.
No it will simply proliferate. A vast majority won't have any genetic change, it happens randomly due to a failure in (imperfect) replication.NO, your anal-logy is flawed.
No it isn't, your understanding of it is just trash.you did not account for the PURPOSE its AI codes were written.
The AI isn't pre coded, it is built gradually from differential replication based on some success criteria. The AI is represented by the neural network at the top corner, it starts untrained by default and only has a general structure to accommodate the simulation. And that's it. That's literally the point of the video.
The function of the cars is randomly generated, the selection is based solely on progress down the track. There is no top-down "intent" by the program nor the AI (which is not the whole system, it is the neural net you see at the top corner of the screen) to do anything. There is just a simple set of rules and variation.if what happened with that AI car was the result of random strings of letters and numbers
then ok, fine. but it is not.
Except it is. The only variation that happens is random, and based entirely on the environment and that random variation, it can build up a car that can navigate the track. That's why the neural net at the top develops. There is no programmatic difference between the start and end state, the only difference is that the variation is stored in the network and used to seed the next generation.its AI codes were written specifically with the purpose of thriving in its environemt, by keeping acts that let them thrive in their new environemnt and dropping acts that dont.
No it is not: a vast majority of the cars don't get to replicate or thrive. Just whichever one makes it furthest along the track.its not the environment that help it evolve, its the AI code. thats what selection is all about and where iy begins.
No it is not. QED. -
2020-07-08 at 8:39 PM UTC
-
2020-07-09 at 5:05 AM UTC
Originally posted by ORACLE Virus don't either.
no, virus as a package do.They cannot maintain or "drop" traits, they don't know what is favourable for their replication. Mutations are a mistake of replication, you cannot just change your own DNA. The ones with favourable traits live and the ones without favourable traits die (or don't replicate as fast as the favourable ones and eventually drop out of existence). This happens over and over. No particular virus has any idea what is going on or any control over what trait is passed on or "dropped"
if this is true then there will be no such thing as recessitivity. (not that i know what the word means) unfavorable traits arent not dropped completely, they lies dormant when the organism CHOOSES not to deploy them.No it will simply proliferate. A vast majority won't have any genetic change, it happens randomly due to a failure in (imperfect) replication.
thats what it seems like without researches and statistics. many things seems to be happening at a random without any intelligent design until you look at them and start thinking about them.No it isn't, your understanding of it is just trash.
no u !The AI isn't pre coded, it is built gradually from differential replication based on some success criteria. The AI is represented by the neural network at the top corner, it starts untrained by default and only has a general structure to accommodate the simulation. And that's it. That's literally the point of the video.
The function of the cars is randomly generated, the selection is based solely on progress down the track. There is no top-down "intent" by the program nor the AI (which is not the whole system, it is the neural net you see at the top corner of the screen) to do anything. There is just a simple set of rules and variation.
:picard.
thats not how AI codes are written.Except it is. The only variation that happens is random, and based entirely on the environment and that random variation, it can build up a car that can navigate the track. That's why the neural net at the top develops. There is no programmatic difference between the start and end state, the only difference is that the variation is stored in the network and used to seed the next generation.
but not the code used to process these difference in the environment.No it is not: a vast majority of the cars don't get to replicate or thrive. Just whichever one makes it furthest along the track.
they 'thrive' when they dont end up in crashes as a pile of plastic and metals and their factory decides to produce more of them.
replication success.No it is not. QED.
yes it is.
Originally posted by ORACLE They don't have a purpose, it's just a molecule that reacts a particular way.
thats due to your lack of understanding of the world just like when you're a child and a lot of things adults do didnt seem to have a purpose or function,
like those times your paki father made you dance naked in front of all his bushy bearded paki friends.
