Re: Where does information come from?
- From: "wade" <wade.hines@xxxxxxx>
- Date: 31 May 2006 14:39:21 -0700
SRNissen wrote:
wade wrote:<<< snip >>>
SRNissen wrote:
r norman wrote:
On 31 May 2006 08:52:34 -0700, TomS <TomS_member@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Is information an "intenstive" or "extensive" property? If you
have two objects, each of which have X amount of information, how
much does the combination have - X (intensive), or 2X (extensive)?
If DNA duplicates, does it duplicate the amount of information?
Anybody who has taken freshman chemistry should have heard about
this.
I do love that line of argument.
And if one bacterium of volume 10^-9 mls has 1 bac (a unit of
information),
how much information (in units of bac) are there after the bacterium
undergoes fission and the daughter cells grow back to 10^-9 mls in
size.
Depends on whether or not you care about the location of the second
bacteria. If you don't, there's somewhere between 2-4 bits more
information, depending on how tightly it's coded. 1 bit is here defined
as 1 yes/no state. I don't know how much information there is in a "bac"
because you haven't told us anything about the bac unit except "it's the
amount of information in a random bacteria" and boy howdy, that's a
variable number let me tell you.
That would be one way to look at things.
Another equally viable method would say twice as much and
that's pretty much the thermodynamic sense.
How does you answer change if DNA replication is or is not perfect?
The above answer assumed perfect replication. I'm not good enough at the
math to tell you the _exact_ amount of additional information there is
in the system if, say, two base pairs change place, but it's somewhere
between 2 and 20 bits. But it really depends on how extensive the
mutation is. If the entire bacterial genome in the second bacteria is
scrambled truly randomly (let's assume the bacteria still survives this)
then the gain in information is significant - almost multiplied by two.
That puts an aweful lot of emphasis on DNA when there are far more
molecular differences expected between to daughter cells. However,
when it's information we don't "focus" on, we don't "see" it and _it_
doesn't seem to count. Ignore the man behind the curtain !!!
If an intelligent chemist mixes equal parts of preA and preB to form a
long polymer of ABAB(AB)n, how much information is created?
Not a lot. In fact, if he achieves a perfect mix of ABAB(AB)n, he has
_decreased_ the information in the system.
I would want to know if the reaction was endothermic or exothermic
plus if it was a simple condensation or if not what's the stoiciometry.
If an absent minded professor mistakenly mixes equal parts of
preA and preB to form a long polymer of ABAB(AB)n, how much
information is created?
Exactly the same amount as a above.
If an eathquake knocks over two bottles, one of preA and one of
preB, and a long polymer of ABAB(AB)n is formed, how much
information is created?
The same amount.
But you try telling that to the IDiots these days, and do they
listen, nope nope nope.
If "information" is related to entropy then it must be extensive. The
problem, of course, is that it becomes extremely difficult to pin down
exactly what is meant by "information" in a biological context,
especially as raised by some creationist demanding to know where it
comes from.
Genetic information isn't subject to entropy in the classic,
thermodynamic sense.
What do you suppose you've just said? It makes no sense to me.
I mean exactly what I said. Some creationists try to claim that that
information is subject to entropy; you can only get less of it as time
passes.
I don't know what "subject to entropy" is.
What is "subject to enthalpy" or "subject to mass""?
The phrasing is either jibberish or there's something implied and
not stated that is needed for it to make sense.
I think I recognize the implied part but it's gibberish too if it's
what I think it is.
This is true for regular old Shannon information, but since
genetic information should rarely be considered Shannon information,
it's rare that you're in a situation where it makes sense to talk about
entropy in the genetic information.
It's rare that people who talk about either actually know what
they are talking about. I see no problems in considering things
from any old perspective, as long as one doesn't shift meanings
between or during the consideration.
The biggest problems seem to occur when people reduce a
rich area of knowledge, like thermodynamics or information
theory, to a set of platitudes and then argue from them: reducing
J. Williard Gibbs to a bumbersticker and claiming victory
via sloganism.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Where does information come from?
- From: SRNissen
- Re: Where does information come from?
- Prev by Date: Re: New Gould Collection Coming Out
- Next by Date: Re: If the Bible is true.
- Previous by thread: Re: Where does information come from?
- Next by thread: Re: Where does information come from?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
