| | | "A white rabbit suddenly materializing" is an idea that we understand doesn't work with the laws of physics as we know them. The understanding could be wrong (in general terms it is wrong, human understanding isn't and probably never will be perfect), but it probably isn't wrong on this specific thing, at least not in most situations, if its wrong it would be some sort of special case that current theory doesn't cover. And update to cover it if it was going to be something that can and will happen would be somewhat like Einstein's ideas taking over from Newton's. In a sense Newton wasn't wrong, or not very wrong, his ideas are right in a special case, and a "special case" that turns out to cover most of ordinary human experience.
Short form - A white rabbit suddenly materializing in front of me" is something that probably couldn't happen under our understanding of the universe.
That's different then "life originating". Out understanding of physics, biology, and chemistry does not suggest life can't form out of non-life. It gives us no reason to think that such a thing is impossible, or even (given enough time, and a big enough area with the right conditions) extremely unlikely. It obviously is rate, there is no sign of it happening every day, or even at all in human history. But that just means "enough time" is at least many millions of years.
In fact to get a strong implication that it [ apply this to the white rabbit ] is impossible you would have to have a greater degree of understanding then we have.
We probably have a greater degree of understanding of rabbits, then we do about the origin of life. I'd say much greater, even enormously greater. If the appearance could extend beyond the properties of the rabbit itself, say someone used some sort of teleportation device to make it appear. Well yes we would have to have a greater degree of understanding to say such a device is impossible. Some sort of wormhole travel might be possible, so even going just with our general current understanding of physics it may be possible, and that's not even including ways in which our understanding of physics may be woefully incomplete or even flat our wrong in some ways.
Human DNA is like a computer program
DNA could be considered software or software like. In some ways its more of a blue print then a program (although a very commplex blue print); but, at least in the context of the RNA and proteins that interact with the DNA, it has the program for selecting which genes or going to be expressed, and a program for making copies of itself.
Whether its more complex or more advanced then anything humans have created is a complex question. In terms of data represented by a human diploid genome, I understand that it can fit on a DVD with room to spare, maybe even on a CD. OTOH the amount of data in bytes is only one measure of complexity, and the human brain that develops from the information encoded in that DNA could reasonably be said to be more advanced then any computer in a number of ways. Certainly much more parallel (if running at a much lower "clock rate"). So I don't object to or distincly disagee with "far more advanced than any software we've ever created".
biological things are better than electronic devices
Again what does that even mean? Better can mean a lot of different things. For me personally my laptop is better then some horrible plague. Man made vehicles are faster then any animals. A nuclear power plant is better at powering a city then any life form. Of course I could similarly create a list of ways various biological things are better then many, or even any technological item. "Better" without qualification or context is just too vague to mean much.
and I'm talking about God, doesn't make it really unthinkable
I certainly wouldn't consider God unthinkable.
These two new genes appeared almost immediately, perhaps literally immediately, with the beginning of nylon manufacture
1 - How would anyone know that? An unexpressed gene, an expressed but useless gene (because such products did not exist), even an existing life form with that ability (whether or not it was useful) could have already existed.
2 - Bacteria have very short generations and rapid evolution. If it was indeed new, I don't see why that would be shocking. |
|
