I think the advantage of thinking of DNA as some kind of program code is that we can draw inspiration about what can/can't be done from IT. And the other way around, nature's DNA code might give inspiration to computer language development.
DNA is a long molecule that is made of many individual smaller molecules (called nucleotids) that come in four variants (called A, T, G, C). So a DNA molecule is a sequence that can be represented as ATGCTGCCTA...
This is a sequence of characters in this representation, but it's also a sequence of something resembling characters in reality. The cell has a component called "ribosome" that can take this sequence of characters as input and uses it kinda like a blueprint, and produces a protein (enzyme) depending on the blueprint. That enzyme can have many varying functions. So yes, this is a complex system.
The flow of information goes mostly in one direction: that is, from the cell nucleus's DNA to mRNA (intermediary step) and then to the ribosomes, where proteins are produced. Still, many parts of this process resemble script and communication (the transport of information), which I call "language".
Thanks for elaborating. I think you have some interesting thoughts in that.
Perhaps we’ll nail down entropy as a real property instead of just a statistical observation.
I like this one. I have been thinking about how we have introduced imaginary things like magnetic field as something real in the past, in order to find a missing link to explain interactions.
But maybe we’ll find that causality isn’t so solid, with time-like paths everywhere, and determinism only at medium scales.
Especially this one hits.
I have been thinking about these "chains of causes" for a bit now, and I've come to jokingly call them "threads of fate" or more provokingly "world lines". I like the idea that much of the world is in chaos, but sometimes, strong causal links relate some parts of the past with some parts of the future, just like an invisible chain; just like a ray of sunlight through all the fog.
well, I have experienced similar things myself. When I find myself in stressful situations, I just switch off my mind and go forward, because I know that that way I will eventually find a solution to my problems. For example when I have a lot of work to do. If I start doubting, I won't get anywhere. So I have to switch off my mind. And in fact, in retrospect I rarely remember the difficulties that I went through. Maybe, though, that's just my personal experience. Maybe for other people it doesn't work that way.
Yeah well I guess it depends on whether you call bytes on a computer a language.
What if those bytes represent characters that compose language that carries meaning? Because precisely that happens in DNA. An individual fraction of DNA might not carry much meaning, but in its sequence (ATGCCAT...) it encodes blueprints, and therefore meaning.
In fact, not even everybody has to understand it. If I say something that I think is true, but in a language that only I can speak, then it would be okay for me to say it anyways, even if nobody understands it. That is because while it's important to always speak the truth, it's not always important to be understood by others.
Sorry for taking so long to write a response. I had to think a bit about this.
So, I don't think it feels very satisfying to the average physicist to just say "well, atoms sometimes just spontaneously emit photons". It's a model that correlates well with our measurements, but there's no proof that it is true.
In some sense, the purpose of science is to make sense of the world, and it surely isn't the most satisfying thing to be left without an ulterior explanation. That is why I think it is important to repeatedly ask why, until one finds the primordial source of causality.
I remember that time when a girl I have never seen before in my life just randomly hugged me. It was fine, and she was nice, I was just so perplexed that I couldn't speak for like 10 minutes, and by the time I realized what just happened, she was already gone. Sad. I miss her.
Did you even read the article? It says in the article that the mercury waste is actually way below the legal threshhold.
One of the major initial concerns—the wastewater’s mercury content—stems from what experts believe may be egregious typos within SpaceX’s records. Lab reports indicate polluted waters contained 0.113 μg/L of mercury, while subsequent summaries appear to misplace the decimal point to show 113 μg/L. If the former measurement is accurate, then Starship’s wastewater contains roughly 1/17th the legal mercury limit.
About people just mindlessly hating on SpaceX: SpaceX is really important for the US society as it provides vision and a specific type of stimulation that would otherwise be hard to get. What makes you think the moon landings of 1960s/1970s were great achievements, but spaceflight today is not?
You telling SpaceX to stop operation is like a fish telling a bird to stop flying, because swimming is sooo much better.
I think the argument is, that you will only remember activities, but not idling. So if you're busy during the flight, then you will remember that. But if you do nothing at all, then you won't remember anything. If you don't like flying, that's an advantage, because you won't remember the flight.
may i ask, what makes you so sure he was an asshole way back? maybe you just want to see it that way, because you want to see all billionaires in a bad light?
gandalf_der_12te @ gandalf_der_12te @lemmy.blahaj.zone Posts 17Comments 349Joined 1 yr. ago
But mirrored light does not affect vampires?