I bought Dune at the airport not knowing anything about the story. It was a good read. I had fun and found myself picking up the book when I normally would have turned on the tv. I did look at the movie trailer online and... it looks really dated from a special effects aspect. Slightly disappointed; Star Wars IV set the bar really high didn't it?
I just bought Artemis but need to start it.
Mentioned in a thread on here a couple of weeks ago.
The Dresden Files.
I started with Cold Days, one of the later books in the series, picked up as a random on the shelf at the library. Very, very good. Went back to the beginning and enjoyed the whole series.
It's *sort of* like if harry potter grew up, moved to Chicago, and hung out his shingle as a private investigator. Lots of old folklore integrated into the world.
Signature in the Cell.
600+ page behemoth the makes the case for intelligent design.
I’m applying my statistical skills to test the Darwinian explanation for the origin of life and the book’s deep-dive on microbiology is just what I need to be able to crunch the numbers (yes, I know that Darwin specifically stated that his theory of evolution didn’t apply to the origin of life but neo Darwinist today operate on that assumption).
My efforts are somewhat redundant as a husband and wife team (he’s got a Ph.D. in statistics and she’s got a Ph.D. in microbiology) have already gone down the same road but I’m looking for any holes in the accepted constructs or opportunities to qualitatively improve the odds through various mechanisms like self-organization.
Spoiler Alert…if you resist the group think from the scientific community and do what a professional scientist is supposed to do (be receptive to what the data is telling you even if it doesn’t agree with your preconceptions) you’ll quickly realize how wildly, wildly inadequate the Darwinian explanation is.
I’m bending over backwards to give Darwin the best odds possible and yet I’m still seeing far less than a one in a trillion chance that a single, self-replicating organism could have ever self-assembled through the random chance assembly of various amino acids / proteins in the entire history of the universe.
It’d be great if Weary Microbe chimed in with his thoughts on the subject.
RossD said:I did look at the (Dune) movie trailer online and... Slightly disappointed
You won't know disappointment until you actually watch the movie. Dune is best left unwatched.
Just finished reading Rick Warren's "Purpose Driven Life." An older book, but good to help you find meaning and ... purpose... in life. Religious content, if you haven't heard of it. Might not be for everyone.
Currently reading:
As a father of two Autistic kids, and suspect Asperger's myself (suspect it's genetic, looking at dear old mumsie and her siblings, and granny.), it could be interesting.
RX Reven' said:Signature in the Cell.
600+ page behemoth the makes the case for intelligent design.
I’m still seeing far less than a one in a trillion chance that a single, self-replicating organism could have ever self-assembled through the random chance assembly of various amino acids / proteins in the entire history of the universe.
The universe is a very, very big place that is filled with many, many things and is really, really old.
I'm currently reading End Of Watch, which is Stephen King's 3rd installment in the Mr. Mercedes / Finders Keepers story arc. It's not bad, but sometimes I wish King would step away from the psychic / supernatural stuff and do a straightforward human psychological novel. He's clearly capable.
Before that, I read Blackbird: A History of the Untouchable Spy Plane by James Hamilton-Paterson. An OK overview, but really too short and undetailed to satisfy. I literally read it in about 2 hours.
Prior to that, I read Retribution: The Battle for Japan, 1944-45 by Max Hastings. This was a long but good read. Takes you through the Pacific end game, including a lot of the land war in China, Burma, Indochina, and Manchuria. A good mix of detail and strategic overview, with some pretty even-handed conclusions about both America and Great Britain, considering he's an English author. He's also pretty clear about what a trainwreck the Chinese were on both sides of the political spectrum, and fights hard against Japanese and Soviet revisionism. I read this a few months after reading Ian W. Toll's excellent Pacific Crucible: War at Sea in the Pacific, 1941-1942 and The Conquering Tide: War in the Pacific Islands, 1942-1944. Toll's books are frankly better, but he kind of left us hanging 2/3 of the way through the war. He may be working on the third book or not, I don't know, but I wanted to read through the end of the war while the rest of that was still relatively fresh in mind.
Duke said:RX Reven' said:Signature in the Cell.
600+ page behemoth the makes the case for intelligent design.
I’m still seeing far less than a one in a trillion chance that a single, self-replicating organism could have ever self-assembled through the random chance assembly of various amino acids / proteins in the entire history of the universe.The universe is a very, very big place that is filled with many, many things and is really, really old.
I’m fully aware of that…
There are 10 to the power of 80 atoms in the observable universe X 13.77 billion years X a consensus estimate for the frequency with which atoms randomly collide per unit of time = a whopping big number.
But, do you know what makes that whopping big number appear astronomically tiny…comparing it to the number of random assemblies of amino acids / proteins that are required to get something that can self-replicate…that number is trillions and trillions and trillions of times bigger.
In reply to RX Reven' :
At the risk of floundering... religion has always filled in whenever the collective knowledge is lacking on a subject. Why would now be any different?
RossD said:In reply to RX Reven' :
At the risk of floundering... religion has always filled in whenever the collective knowledge is lacking on a subject. Why would now be any different?
Hi Ross,
You raise a good point and it’s something I take into careful consideration myself.
I’m not so much an ID advocate as I am someone that questions why we consider the Darwinian explanation to be a done deal when, in its current form, absolutely does not work.
At a minimum, a huge game changing refinement to the theory will be needed for it to be plausible. I won’t be at all surprised if we discover that refinement but until that time, not being open to the alternatives is just another type of blind faith though the irony is apparently lost by the mainstream scientific community.
Anyway, I don’t want to flounder either so I don’t mind letting this go.
In reply to RossD :
I finished Artemis last week and if you have any interest in audio books that is one you should get. Rosario Dawson does the reading and does a fantastic job. Like if she wasn't beautiful and successful already she could make a living kind of fantastic job.
I also burned through Wil Wheaton's reading of Armada and while not as much fun as Ready Player 1 it's probably got a more widespread appeal and was still pretty entertaining.
Now I'm in the middle of Stephen King's The Outsider and it looks like I am going to have to go back and read through Finders Keepers and such for some back story. Still pretty decent but feels a bit formulaic. At one point I had read pretty much everything Mr. King had out up to that point but then I started Cujo and that awful rag turned me off books entirely for a couple of years. Still the only book I never finished, 13 pages from the end and I threw it in the trash.
Currently finishing my last loaned book, Welcome to Night vale.
Toyman01 said:Mentioned in a thread on here a couple of weeks ago.
I can't read that book. I got about 1/3 through it and my blood pressure rose to near lethal levels. Still can't pick it up even though it's on my shelf.
i just broke my brain reading a Corvette Forum thread. post 1 is guy from NY asking if there's an easy way to increase ride height on his all-season daily-driver C6. Posts 2 through 20 are guys in AZ and CA telling him that it will be worse, for the world as a whole, than Revelations. He bought the wrong car. He will destroy his handling. He will endanger himself and those around him. And on and on.
i heart GRM.
i'm also gonna break the corvette forum in Jan 2020 when i post pix of my lifted C6 on black steelies with Blizzaks, all Jeep'd up on a snow mountain in a Wal-Mart parking lot!
AngryCorvair said:i just broke my brain reading a Corvette Forum thread. post 1 is guy from NY asking if there's an easy way to increase ride height on his all-season daily-driver C6. Posts 2 through 20 are guys in AZ and CA telling him that it will be worse, for the world as a whole, than Revelations. He bought the wrong car. He will destroy his handling. He will endanger himself and those around him. And on and on.
i heart GRM.
i'm also gonna break the corvette forum in Jan 2020 when i post pix of my lifted C6 on black steelies with Blizzaks, all Jeep'd up on a snow mountain in a Wal-Mart parking lot!
Since you’ve got a single piece hatch, remove it and strap a dishwasher sized box in the back that’s labeled “Jeep Recover Equipment”.
RX Reven' said:I’m applying my statistical skills to test the Darwinian explanation for the origin of life and the book’s deep-dive on microbiology is just what I need to be able to crunch the numbers (yes, I know that Darwin specifically stated that his theory of evolution didn’t apply to the origin of life but neo Darwinist today operate on that assumption).
[...]
I’m bending over backwards to give Darwin the best odds possible and yet I’m still seeing far less than a one in a trillion chance that a single, self-replicating organism could have ever self-assembled through the random chance assembly of various amino acids / proteins in the entire history of the universe.
Darwininan theory REALLY doesn't apply to abiogenesis, so you're beating a dead horse with statistics because a few people insist that it's just resting. Nobody who tries to mix the two concepts would be taken seriously by the scientific community.
RX Reven' said:AngryCorvair said:i just broke my brain reading a Corvette Forum thread. post 1 is guy from NY asking if there's an easy way to increase ride height on his all-season daily-driver C6. Posts 2 through 20 are guys in AZ and CA telling him that it will be worse, for the world as a whole, than Revelations. He bought the wrong car. He will destroy his handling. He will endanger himself and those around him. And on and on.
i heart GRM.
i'm also gonna break the corvette forum in Jan 2020 when i post pix of my lifted C6 on black steelies with Blizzaks, all Jeep'd up on a snow mountain in a Wal-Mart parking lot!
Since you’ve got a single piece hatch, remove it and strap a dishwasher sized box in the back that’s labeled “Jeep Recover Equipment”.
damn, that's awesome. not sure i'll actually do it, but it is awesome nonetheless.
GameboyRMH said:RX Reven' said:I’m applying my statistical skills to test the Darwinian explanation for the origin of life and the book’s deep-dive on microbiology is just what I need to be able to crunch the numbers (yes, I know that Darwin specifically stated that his theory of evolution didn’t apply to the origin of life but neo Darwinist today operate on that assumption).
[...]
I’m bending over backwards to give Darwin the best odds possible and yet I’m still seeing far less than a one in a trillion chance that a single, self-replicating organism could have ever self-assembled through the random chance assembly of various amino acids / proteins in the entire history of the universe.
Darwininan theory REALLY doesn't apply to abiogenesis, so you're beating a dead horse with statistics because a few people insist that it's just resting. Nobody who tries to mix the two concepts would be taken seriously by the scientific community.
Hi GameboyRMH,
I’m not supporting or refuting any particular position, I’m just acknowledging that some as yet undiscovered form of self-organization must be in play to avoid the unprovable explanations such as intelligent design, multiverse, etc. given that the popularized random chance explanation is wildly, wildly inadequate (i.e., there have only been 10 to the power of 40 organisms in the history of our planet and yet it takes 10 to the power of 193 random chance pairings of amino acids to just get one relatively simple protein to come into existence – not to mention that it would be completely useless by itself instead requiring many other wildly improbable things to occur in conjunction with it to serve any functional purpose).
Instead, I’m using Monte Carlo simulations to estimate the various mutation rates over time that yield the best likelihood for life to originate and evolve to its current state. Essentially, I’m going after the whole DNA First – RNA First - Protein First, Something that’s yet to be Discovered First question by simply asking what mutation rates are optimal (too slow and you don’t have sufficient change – too fast and you don’t have sufficient stability for any benefit that occurs to survive the destructive effects coming from other changes). This number isn’t a constant, rather it morphs from a high rate of change when you’re looking for a scenario that just allows for the establishment of self-replication to a slow rate when you’re looking for a scenario that allows for relatively complex organisms to evolve further.
So, I am using my math skills but not in an effort to prove or disprove anything, I’m just using them to say IF there is an answer, it probably lies within a certain defined region. From there, it would be up to microbiologist, organic chemist, etc. to apply the insight to better focus their investigations.
Just finished the book on the left and just started the one on the right a few days ago... Both are highly enlightening and quick reading.
AngryCorvair said:i just broke my brain reading a Corvette Forum thread. post 1 is guy from NY asking if there's an easy way to increase ride height on his all-season daily-driver C6. Posts 2 through 20 are guys in AZ and CA telling him that it will be worse, for the world as a whole, than Revelations. He bought the wrong car. He will destroy his handling. He will endanger himself and those around him. And on and on.
i heart GRM.
Though it's significantly better than it used to be this forum is not immune to that kind of thing. Think of some of the towing threads of yore.
The only time I went on a Corvette forum was when I was looking for one and the classifieds were bad enough that I stopped looking there.
My experiences with domestic car forums is that they're 10 times worse than the worst import forums. Sad but true.
In reply to RX Reven' :
How would the numbers change if we discovered life, let alone "intelligent" or more "advanced" life?
I've read a lot from physicists, biologists, astrophysicists, ancient alien people, religious people both zealots and more (i don't want to use this word but it's the best descriptor I know) "liberal" religious people, but I've never really had the chance to read or talk to a statistician or a mathematician about it. I think it would be an interesting point of view if I knew the kinds of questions to ask.
To get back on topic, I've started reading through "Food of the Gods" again. It doesn't feel as "edgy" or "counter culture" as it did reading it in high school, but with more life experience under my belt, it's almost a refreshing take on how human life has gotten to where it is, especially in today's world where "news" is more fitting for tabloids than something meant to educate and inform.
Suprf1y said:AngryCorvair said:i just broke my brain reading a Corvette Forum thread. post 1 is guy from NY asking if there's an easy way to increase ride height on his all-season daily-driver C6. Posts 2 through 20 are guys in AZ and CA telling him that it will be worse, for the world as a whole, than Revelations. He bought the wrong car. He will destroy his handling. He will endanger himself and those around him. And on and on.
i heart GRM.
Though it's significantly better than it used to be this forum is not immune to that kind of thing. Think of some of the towing threads of yore.
The only time I went on a Corvette forum was when I was looking for one and the classifieds were bad enough that I stopped looking there.
My experiences with domestic car forums is that they're 10 times worse than the worst import forums. Sad but true.
I dunno... I'd say they're bad in different ways. I personally think it is worse the higher upmarket that you go. Wanna have some fun? Go read a Lexus forum about installing a tow hitch on a[ny] sedan. You'd think the world is ending, but somehow the suggestion to buy an RX (AKA tall Camry) always comes up.
RevRico said:In reply to RX Reven' :
How would the numbers change if we discovered life, let alone "intelligent" or more "advanced" life?
Folks, this super long winded reply is just for RevRico…by all means, just pull a TL;DR.
They wouldn’t.
The numbers are what is commonly referred to as the “probabilistic resource” which is the number of opportunities “think dice rolls” that have occurred in the history of the universe. This number is a function of the number of atoms in the universe times the age of the universe times the number of random pairings of atoms per unit of time.
Atoms…The estimate for the number of atoms in the “visible” universe has been fairly stable over time and pretty broadly agreed upon and we clearly don’t need to concern ourselves with the non-visible universe since if even light can’t interact with us, there’s no chance that physical matter such as genetic code could. Although it’s known that the vast majority of the matter in the universe is in the form of hydrogen & helium gas (have fun trying to assemble genetic code with that) not to mention that much of it is sequestered within stars and black holes, we ignore these limitations and give full credit for all matter in the universe contributing to the probabilistic resource.
Time…this is an easy number to plug in as there’s broad agreement that the universe is about 13.77 billion years old and the number hasn’t moved more than a few decimal places in a long time.
Pairings per unit of time…this is by far the most difficult number to estimate so to ensure we’re giving the Neo-Darwinist the most generous chance possible, we apply what are known as Planck minimums for time (5.39 X 10 to the minus 44) and distance (1.62 X 10 to the minus 35). Essentially this represents the number of interactions that would occur per unit of time if every atom in the universe were as close to each other as physically possible and they were all pairing up at the speed of light.
As Duke pointed out, this is a mind bogglingly huge number but given how many dice rolls are required to produce just one single fairly simple protein anywhere in the universe throughout its entire history, the odds work out to be a trillion, trillion, trillion to one.
To understand why, just place the probabilistic resource in the numerator and get to work calculating the denominator which is the number of random pairings required to code for that one lone protein. The code contained in DNA is based on four amino acids (A-T-C-G) and there are ~150 base pairs required to code for a relatively simple protein (the average is up around 350). Alright, use the formula “L” to the power of “K” where “L” represents levels in this case being 4 (A-T-C-G) and “K” represents factors in this case being 150 for the number of base pairs required to code for a simple protein and you get 10 to the power of 196.
I know these numbers can be overwhelming so just think about a simple combination lock with 4 tumblers each having ten digits (0 to 9). “L” to the “K” gives us 10 to the power of 4 or 10,000 combinations (0 to 9,999).
Of course, there could be many other ways to store genetic code than A-T-C-G but we’ve already accounted for that by having our probabilistic resource include every atom in the universe so the calculation is valid regardless of what type of matter is used.
The real question is what is the smallest amount of information required to get something that can self-replicate, mutate, and has no barrier to evolving into the life we see today. Answering that questions is way above my pay grade but the consensus among top researchers including Nobel prize winners that have been experimenting for decades is that it’s wildly greater than what is required for our little protein that requires 150 base pairs of code which again, stands only a trillion, trillion, trillion to one chance.
RossD very correctly pointed out that religion has always filled in where science is lacking or as one famous Intelligent Design refuter said “ID is just theology in a cheap suit”.
Well, I’m not an ID proponent, I’m agnostic on the subject so that’s a strawman argument in my case as it is the case for a big percent of the others that are looking at this.
Yesterday, I posted in the Minor Rant thread…”if you don’t know the price, don’t tell people the price.”
It’s the same with Neo-Darwinism…I won’t be at all surprised if we one day make a discovery that greatly reduces the information required to get something that again can…self-replicate, mutate, and has no barrier to evolving into the life we see today.
Until such time though, Neo-Darwinist have no business spiking the ball in victory and they sure shouldn’t be scoffing at those that realize that their current theory can’t possibly be right.
As that little old lady in the commercial said “it doesn’t work that way, none of it works that way”
Anyway, if you want to learn more, I suggest you search on these key terms:
You'll need to log in to post.
