Arguing Against Intelligent Design

[Thunderbird]

True. We are pretty much assuming that the ancient eukaryotes had about the same complexity as the current ones. Could be an incorrect assumption.I think we are agreeing this happened. This issue it how? My argument is that it is difficult to argue (from the data) that it was gradual, serial mutation.

 

Did you read post 251 on "Darwin re-visited"

 

 

I P.M. you on this post... I would be very interested in more of your perspective this possible senerio. I have been working on this fossil discovery for many years.

I am sorry the info is quite condensed, but I am hoping to expand it to a more cohrent form.

[Biochemist]

Did you read post 251 on "Darwin re-visited"

I did. I think I understand the gist of your argument, but I don't think the oolites (and the framework you described) significantly decrease the probabilistic issue I framed above. You did have some interesting evidence, and I would be the last guy to throw out any interesting factoid.

 

I confess I don't really understand (based on my exposure to biochemistry) any relationship between a pre-existing matrix structure (organic or inorganic) and development of "life" components (e.g., DNA replication machinery, cell membranes, organelles, etc). But my lack of understanding certainly does not preclude the possibility.

[Thunderbird]

I did. I think I understand the gist of your argument, but I don't think the oolites (and the framework you described) significantly decrease the probabilistic issue I framed above. You did have some interesting evidence, and I would be the last guy to throw out any interesting factoid.

 

I confess I don't really understand (based on my exposure to biochemistry) any relationship between a pre-existing matrix structure (organic or inorganic) and development of "life" components (e.g., DNA replication machinery, cell membranes, organelles, etc). But my lack of understanding certainly does not preclude the possibility.

 

 

 

This seems to confuse everybody, Keep in mind this is about the an architecture for the cells to express their genetic capabilities within a bounded space. This has nothing to do with abiogenesis but everything to do with Morphogenesis.

 

The elemental components formed around a logarithmic architecture built within the dynamic constraints of cyclical wave dynamics. This geometry is expressed as the wave curls the mat in on itself, redirecting a linear flow into a recursive circular one. Once the micro-environment had reached an energetic threshold, the components of the environment ( oolitic spheres, cyanobacterial filaments, eukaryote cells ) assemble into these spiraling architectural patterns. The oolitic spheres and cyanobacterial filaments are rolled into a recursive, concentric contained form. This layered circular mass begins to act not only as an architectural framework, but also as a bridge, connecting fluid dynamics and a life support system for a self-organizing autopoetic symbiotic eukaryote system on the micro level. It is a bridge that connects two separate environmental domains.

 

Simply put...

Macro-dynamics long frequency tide pulses construct and assemble these Micro-components, that then capture and internalize high frequency wave pulse as a cyclical respiratory system.

 

The wave pulse was the breath of life that the components formed around. At the time of this realization I was cognitive of this answer but blissfully unaware of the question. Life it turns out.... is based firstly on a flow of energy and secondly on the physical components contained in this flow, and this flow pattern is based on a logarithmic curve, or more well known as, The geometry of phi within a dissipative structure. Every cyclical breath of this engine takes will loses some mass and gain in complexity, as the eukaryotes cells organize themselves into domains of symbiotic relationships.

 

 

This may be a solution to some lose ends in our present understanding the development of complex morphology.

 

The answer it appears is the architectural framework formed first, from wave dynamics working from the outside inward, while the interior design of genetics, worked from the inside out.

 

Presently most research is focused solely on genetic controls in the formation of complex morphology. The answer it appears is that nature hired its architect first {wave dynamics} its interior designer second, {genetic probabilities} Just as we would in building a structure.

[Biochemist]

...This has nothing to do with abiogenesis but everything to do with Morphogenesis.

 

The elemental components formed around a logarithmic architecture built within the dynamic constraints of cyclical wave dynamics. This geometry is expressed as the wave curls the mat in on itself, redirecting a linear flow into a recursive circular one.

T-Bird-

 

I do appreciate your attempts to bring us up to speed on this, but I can't really figure out what you are saying. If I understand your point about "morphogenesis" you are suggesting something sort of Lamarckian, in that arranging tissue in a "shape" (driven by your suggested oolite structure) will drive biologic function. This, in turn, will be passed to future generations (somehow- the is the part that sounds Lamarckian).

 

But I can't make the sentence I pulled out of your post (above) make any sense. It might be that this is just not an area of my expertise (certainly true).

 

Bio

[Biochemist]

Macro-dynamics long frequency tide pulses construct and assemble these Micro-components, that then capture and internalize high frequency wave pulse as a cyclical respiratory system.

 

The wave pulse was the breath of life that the components formed around.

Talk to me about how a "wave pulse" can be a breath of life.

[Thunderbird]

Talk to me about how a "wave pulse" can be a breath of life.

 

 

 

This is a difficult concept to get across directly, so you will forgive me if I have to circle around the concept.

 

First of all forget the physical components for now, and I will focus on the dynamics using a clock for an analogy for an organism.

 

Note the following has nothing to do with the blind watch maker analogy.

 

An organism can be seen as a clock, in that it has a cycle, a circular breath, a heart beat. This is the essence of morphogenesis, Cycles.

 

The next most important step is the geometry of this cycles that are expressed as a circular patterns of flow.

Then the crystallization of physical components around this flow. That's were the oolitic spheres come in.

 

 

Genetic components are not primary but secondary. This clockwork structure forms around........ a principle that is not usually taken it to account as an architect of form .

 

So you have to ask the question what makes this clockwork ?

 

What fundamentally force makes a clock?

 

All clocks for that matter.

 

One word.

[Biochemist]

First of all forget the physical components for now, and I will focus on the dynamics using a clock for an analogy for an organism....An organism can be seen as a clock, in that it has a cycle, a circular breath, a heart beat. This is the essence of morphogenesis, Cycles.

So, "morphogenesis" does NOT mean creating a form? What does it mean? Could you define the term?

The next most important step is the geometry of this cycles that are expressed as a circular patterns of flow....Genetic components are not primary but secondary.

Are you suggesting that genetics were NOT primarily responsible for reproducing this effect in subsequent generations?

[Thunderbird]

So, "morphogenesis" does NOT mean creating a form? What does it mean? Could you define the term?

 

 

It does mean creating a form.

 

Are you suggesting that genetics were NOT primarily responsible for reproducing this effect in subsequent generations

No.

 

 

The force I speaking of is...... TIME, But not in the sense of chances over a period of time, or randomness over a period of time, but time itself.

 

So the answer to the question that I posed is ..time. .

[Biochemist]

The force I speaking of is...... TIME

This seems a little metaphysical to me. How is time a "force" in any sense that we might use in physics?

[Thunderbird]

This seems a little metaphysical to me. How is time a "force" in any sense that we might use in physics?

 

 

 

 

 

Time can be defined in a broad “Evolution of the universe” as the division of the fabric of space time. When studying the physics underlying all natural phenomena we can see the wave or quanta. This is the essence of time. With out these oscillations in this fabric there would be nothing, no here and there and now and then. No things, no things interacting with other things to make even more things.

 

In my model one can see one long frequency wave making one thing out of many separate things. That thing then captures and divides another short frequency wave to make two things inside the one thing that causes those two things to oscillate inside the one, these two things than connect into one thing that was formerly no thing.

 

Its not Metaphysics, its Quantum Physics.

 

 

 

 

The fundamental quantum structure of our universe emerges as a dynamic, fundamentally harmonic phenomenon with its center ħ=c=1 everywhere and its circumferences clearly definable by its intrinsic, unique and comprehensive coordinate system and by its intervals being our measuring rods -- whose metric value was deciphered by threesmalizing our currently used decimal system, by reducing it to a system pertaining tothirds or to a number 3. The principal conclusion of our proposals, though only in broad outlines is, that many of the physical concepts including limitless continuity, the indeterminate notion of a point particle, the space composed of points, the patchwork of the bounding surfaces and coordinates of the Cartesian system, the essence of the material body -- that is extension itself and its universal non-local connections are resolved as the foamy veil of shadows in a cave, as in Plato's simile, disappears. The reverberations of the resonances of the creation become visualizible, discernible and physical when quantum spacetime and the quantum theory of gravity are unified. Consequently, it is not hard to conceive of a photon that travels along the null lines of relativity carrying within and with it the realm of zero time, where nothing separates an observer and participant from its source, be it in the sparkle of life in the eye of humanity, the glistening crystals of snow in the moonlight, a gleam from the farthest galaxy or quasar -- the realm of comprehensiveness. The relationship of space to matter and light to time are being clearly identified, revealing the first principle or the first cause and the rational order of the cosmos of intelligible beings.

 

 

 

The quantum structure of spacetime

 

Alexander Esih Muvrin

 

 

Geometry of the quantum structure of spacetime

[REASON]

T-Bird,

 

What and who is the source of the quote in your post above?

 

Just curious.

[Thunderbird]

:DJust give me time.

[Biochemist]

Time can be defined in a broad “Evolution of the universe” as the division of the fabric of space time. When studying the physics underlying all natural phenomena we can see the wave or quanta. This is the essence of time. With out these oscillations in this fabric there would be nothing, no here and there and now and then. No things, no things interacting with other things to make even more things.

I am sorry, T-Bird. I read this post (including that quote from Muvrin) and I can't read this as science. Philosophy, perhaps. I guess I am the wrong guy to appreciate this.

[Thunderbird]

I am sorry, T-Bird. I read this post (including that quote from Muvrin) and I can't read this as science. Philosophy, perhaps. I guess I am the wrong guy to appreciate this.

 

 

Well as someone once said. "Anyone who say's they actually understand quantum mechanics is said not to really understand it at all". To me however it, just like the organizing capabilities it creates, creates for me the principles I needed to make sense out of the world.

[InfiniteNow]

T-Bird,

 

What and who is the source of the quote in your post above?

 

Just curious.

 

:DJust give me time.

 

Google tells me it's this, quantumspacetime.net, as linked after the fact by Thunderbird:

 

Geometry of the quantum structure of spacetime

 

 

It's written by someone named Alexander Esih Muvrin. I tried his name on google scholar, and the only result returned was this:

 

GRIN Verlag: Von der Geheimzahl Sieben zur Mythologie - Forschungsarbeit

[tmaromine]

It doesn't look like it's been said, and I'd say it's the easiest non scientific answer:

 

then the designer needs a designer, ad infinitum.

 

It's possible s/he'll come up with some "caused uncaused" wahteverrubbish, but if so, then just tell them that it's also possible for the universe to 'uncausedly be caused' (whatever the logic is in that phrase, if any...) without a designer.

 

To me, it seems much more realistic that a no-caused universe could come into existence than a no-caused omniscient-being coming into existence.

 

Always trying to pull knowledge out of nothingness they are.

[Biochemist]

then the designer needs a designer, ad infinitum.

 

It's possible s/he'll come up with some "caused uncaused" wahteverrubbish, but if so, then just tell them that it's also possible for the universe to 'uncausedly be caused'...without a designer.

The fact that both frameworks (intelligent design and Darwinian evolution) rely on "uncaused" events isn't really a differentiator. ID infers (but does not require) a Creator. Darwinian evolution infers (but does not require) abiogenesis. I am not clear how that is an argument in favor or against either position. Could you clarify?