I've been reading that the role of DNA, beyond the initiation of life's chemistry, could be to generate and maintain particular structures and processes in biological systems using information and energy to lower entropy, for a period of time.
This is likened to a parent using information to direct effort (energy) to bring about order in a teenager's desk area - see attachment.
The deduction is that DNA is the prime cause or source of biological order and the resolution of the paradox posed by the second law of thermodynamics.
I read about it here: Understanding the Thermodynamics of Biological Order | The American Biology Teacher | University of California Press
This is likened to a parent using information to direct effort (energy) to bring about order in a teenager's desk area - see attachment.
The deduction is that DNA is the prime cause or source of biological order and the resolution of the paradox posed by the second law of thermodynamics.
I read about it here: Understanding the Thermodynamics of Biological Order | The American Biology Teacher | University of California Press
Attachments
The Quanta article is excellent Galu. I’ll get round to reading the one above a bit later. Had my head buried in Motion Mountain and Symmetry for the last hour.
🙂
🙂
Bonsai; How do highly ordered systems arise out of disorder? And why would evolution (life as we know it) move in the opposite direction to that of entropy?[/QUOTE said:
Although, there is no paradox. 2nd law only refers to long term averages, it doesn't outlaw short term reversals of entropy.
No there wasn't. These cycles are the only true infinite physical entity. Have been and will go on for ever.
//
No but they have energy - so the end (big crunch) ends up in a giant mass->energy transfer... E=mcc... and the beginning the reversed; energy -> mass i.e. the big bang.
//
I was expanding on the "Ignorance is bliss" reference from Galu, and hypothesizing as to why we're, still, to this date, seemingly stuck with the basest of instincts as the major driving factors for existence.
I guess it's fairly self explanatory what happens if some smug know-it-all brings up a witty comment in the wrong setting, we've all been there at some point.
No wonder we're still behaving as neanderthals, for a quite large number of people it's always important to be better than your neighbours and peers some way or another.
Sort of explains itself as the vast majority of the population is chasing specific genetic physiologic traits.
So, that's what I meant. I merely try to condense the text, to remove the superfluous content as much as possible and be left with just the very core of it. Not a message intended for any specific individual.
I didn't think your remark was directed at me, KaffiMann - not that I'd take umbrage if it had been! I simply made a 'witty' comment based on your mention of natural selection.
P.S. I can't count the number of times I've made a witty comment in the wrong setting. I now abstain from public speaking, but am willing to risk my arm on this forum! 😉
P.S. I can't count the number of times I've made a witty comment in the wrong setting. I now abstain from public speaking, but am willing to risk my arm on this forum! 😉
Cue 'The Endless Universe'!
The Endless Universe: A Brief Introduction
There are several cyclic cosmological models: Cyclic model - Wikipedia
Haha - yes Galu. I just waited to hear that - now I can rest in peace ;-D and stop iterating it.
Promise.
//
Promise.
//
Energy doesn’t behave like physical entities with mass ie energy doesn’t attract energy unlike objects with mass attract each other.
But, this is 10 Billion Trillion Trillion yrs into the future. Relax!
(let’s see if I can get this right: 10 000000000 000000000000 00000000000 years - if I missed a zero out it’s because I’m cross-eyed after 3 wines)
Last edited:
A thought just occurred to me. How is there expansion in space when there's no heat to allow movement?
of space itself
of space itself
It’s not momentum. We currently do not know why the universe is expanding. It seems there are a number of competing theories, none of which appears to have gained universal acceptance:-
Dark energy - Wikipedia
Read it and you quickly end up going down the rabbit hole of theoretical physics.
Dark energy - Wikipedia
Read it and you quickly end up going down the rabbit hole of theoretical physics.
How does the lack of that knowledge ( I mean the lack of heat to enable motion) affect the legitimacy of the standard model? Or is there measurable residual heat in space?
The residual heat is what is left after the Big Bang and is about 3 degrees above absolute zero and called the cosmic microwave background’ or CMB discovered by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson in the 1960’s. But, that is not what is driving the expansion of the universe. ‘Dark Energy’ is responsible for that, but exactly what it is not known. The CMB became the dominant cosmic force between 7 and 9 billion yrs ago (exact figure depending on who you read). What is known is that it is very smooth throughout the cosmos, unlike CMB and gravity which are quite ‘lumpy’ or anisotropic to use the technical term.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.