Re: Sarah Palin - hot or not?
- From: John Larkin <jjlarkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 08:55:29 -0700
On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 15:16:14 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
<dirk.bruere@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
John Larkin wrote:
On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 01:18:07 -0700 (PDT), Martin Brown
<|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
On Sep 16, 3:04 pm, John Larkin
<jjlar...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 01:49:01 -0700 (PDT), Martin Brown
<|||newspam...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sep 15, 3:12 pm, John Larkin
<jjlar...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Behe suggests - and I conjectured this too - that the original life inThe scaffolds and redundant systems that sort of worked to bootstrap
the universe may have evolved in a Darwinian manner, by incremental
steps, without irreducable complexity. Some sort of quantum computing
life are mostly long gone or possibly still lurking partially in the
"junk" genetic codes. It is not and never was a linear process. I'd be
looking at the extremophiles and archaea for clues - and I understand
that several research programmes are doing just that (including
commercial interests looking for high temperature stable enzymes). eg
http://artedi.ebc.uu.se/molev/resarch/archaea.html
All the self organising reactions known to date require a self
catalytic agent (like an enzyme). The simplest known is the B-Z
reaction which is demonstrable in a petri dish on a school OHP. The
ceric-cerous periodic redox clock reaction. Cute online demo of it - a
Wolfram style CA running in real chemical form at:
http://nylander.wordpress.com/2007/05/10/belousov-zhabotinsky-bz-reac...
inside a gas giant maybe? Some Conway game of life thing? That'sIt may be enough that the values of our constants of nature create the
believable, with no showstoppers. That life may have designed us.
universe that we see with all its complexity. In a sense a handful of
numbers determines what the universe looks like. I suggest you read
Prof Sir Martin Rees book "Just 6 Numbers".
Fuzzy hand-waving about mechanisms can't dismiss three greatI am not trying to dismiss them. Modern cosmology is pretty close to a
mysteries:
What was the origin of the universe?
What was the origin of life?
What is the nature of consciousness?
good answer to the first one and here's a hint: it doesn't involve a
monotheistic deity working a seven day week.
We stand a fair chance with both of the other two as well. Chemists
are getting pretty good at making self assembling polymer
microstructures and lipid membranes I expect we will see progress as
spin off from that.
And I hope to see the first artificially sentient computer if Moores
law can be made to hold up for long enough to get a digital super
computer with sufficient capacity to simulate a human brain.
That would be around 2012 when supercomputers hit 10 PFLOPS
But if you're pessimistic then you'll have to wait another 5-10 years
for the exascale computers being planned now.
The Blue Brain project aims to do a complete Human brain simulation
eventually.
http://bluebrain.epfl.ch/page18924.html
At current rates of progress this would be around 2020
How can a deterministic machine simulate a human brain? Pretty much by
definition, if a computer and a program don't produce exactly
repeatable outputs for identical inputs, they're broken.
Nobody has a clue as to how the brain actually works, so how can
anybody simulate it?
Try something easier first, like getting a computer to play a
competitive game of tennis, or drive a NASCAR race, or design a
non-trivial electronic circuit, or translate a language accurately.
John
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Sarah Palin - hot or not?
- From: MooseFET
- Re: Sarah Palin - hot or not?
- References:
- Re: Sarah Palin - hot or not?
- From: Kris Krieger
- Re: Sarah Palin - hot or not?
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Sarah Palin - hot or not?
- From: Martin Brown
- Re: Sarah Palin - hot or not?
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Sarah Palin - hot or not?
- From: Martin Brown
- Re: Sarah Palin - hot or not?
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Sarah Palin - hot or not?
- From: Martin Brown
- Re: Sarah Palin - hot or not?
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Sarah Palin - hot or not?
- From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
- Re: Sarah Palin - hot or not?
- Prev by Date: Re: Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae Political Contributions
- Next by Date: Re: Thoughts on current US Economic condition
- Previous by thread: Re: Sarah Palin - hot or not?
- Next by thread: Re: Sarah Palin - hot or not?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|