Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: biotech_bull who wrote (84433)	9/14/2008 8:03:22 PM
From: epicure	Respond to of 544231

It requires belief to foreclose the possibility that a new way of looking at things can redefine the randomness we think we see in nature in chaos theory. Right now in mathematics we don't even know the products of some outcomes. With our limited state of knowledge, I just don't think we can make a judgment on Chaos, let alone God- and whether these are things that science can understand or not.

To: biotech_bull who wrote (84433)	9/14/2008 9:37:06 PM
From: Cogito	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 544231

>>The fields of Chaos, fractals and complexity have made unpredictability or inability to know with any degree of accuracy a part of Science's lexicon. If one takes a cell biologist - he might be very close to a rudimentary understanding of all the interacting pathways and networks but even with a supercomputer he is not able to integrate the mega-detail both spatially and temporally and account for the myriad tiny variations to make any reasonable prediction. But as any cell biologist will tell you, the tiny cell itself pulls this off effortlessly - the cell "knows" is a familiar phrase.<< BB - Of course, saying the cell "knows" is unscientifically anthropomorphic. It would be more accurate to say "the cell does what its genetic instructions tell it to do." Of course, that takes longer, which is probably they just say the cell knows. - Allen