6 ms·

Where did the entropy in the genome of any species come from? The data man, where did it come from? When everything in the universe degrades or rusts or tends

Where did the entropy in the genome of any species come from? The data man, where did it come from? When everything in the universe degrades or rusts or tends towards decreasing complexity. Edit: When I say entropy the first time I'm referring to algorithmic information theory entropy, whereas the second indirect reference is to physical entropy.

meindnoch 4y ago
It came from the energy that the Sun pumps into the system.
- mcphage 4y ago
  I don't know why so many people forget that the laws of thermodynamics are all about closed systems, which the Earth is very much not.
  - baremetal 4y ago
    I don't know why so many people forget to explain where _the complexity_ comes from and just drive right off the road assuming I don't know something basic and can distract from having to answer the real question about the complexity of the information in DNA and its origins. Not a very generous argument style you have there.
    - throwaway173738 4y ago
      Have you never heard the joke about a million monkeys typing on a million towers eventually producing the complete works of Shakespeare? Little by little variation is accumulated when it’s beneficial, and the organism dies fast when it’s not.
      - andrewflnr 4y ago
        This is also a bad argument. You probably know very well that if a cryptographer can force you to employ infinite monkeys on typewriters to guess their key, they'll declare victory. You need a mechanism that searches and focuses the space of possible chemistry, that forces life into being. If you look at the timeline for the emergence of life, I don't think it's one that supports an infinite monkey type of mechanism. It was too fast.
        anonymouskimmer 4y ago
        As posted in earlier articles and from what I have read: The basic buildings block of our life spontaneously form from the chemistry of the early Earth (our even the chemistry of space). Lipid membranes spontaneously form enclosed structures. This forces molecules together allowing fast and directional catalysis. RNA is directly catalytically active on itself and other molecules. That's just what I can recall. There's more about DNA/RNA and amino acids pairing, but I can't remember it off the top of my head.
        andrewflnr 4y ago
        Lipid membranes are pretty cool, but they're not life. Nucleobases and amino acids are letters, not sentences.
        kerkeslager 4y ago
        > You need a mechanism that searches and focuses the space of possible chemistry, that forces life into being. That's exactly what the infinite monkeys on a typewriter are a metaphor for. In literal terms, it's trillions of trillions of protein reactions happening along earth's coastlines. > If you look at the timeline for the emergence of life, I don't think it's one that supports an infinite monkey type of mechanism. It was too fast. If it literally was infinite monkeys, we'd expect life to emerge near-instantaneously. The reality is, of course, that it's not "infinite monkeys" but "a whole f-ing lot of monkeys"--the question is whether it's enough monkeys to produce life in the timeline. There's a lot of research that's been done on this, and we have pretty good data. I'm not an expert in this field, but my outside impression from the research I read is that the open question at this point is actually not why it happened so fast, but why it didn't happen faster. If you're actually interested in the numerical justifications for the timeline, the research is pretty well documented, but given you've ex-nihilo declared that the timeline is too fast, I suspect you aren't actually curious, and are instead leading into an argument you want to make.
    - kerkeslager 4y ago
      The question you are asking isn't a valid question, because it's based on the faulty assertion that "...everything in the universe degrades or rusts or tends towards decreasing complexity". That's just not true. And given you think it's true, the belief that you don't know something basic isn't an assumption. There isn't a way to answer questions based on faulty assumptions, like "Why did you murder JFK?" People have actually been quite kind in giving you "sort of" answers such as "It came from the energy that the Sun pumps into the system." I'll also point out that when people make the faulty assertion that everything tends toward decreasing complexity, they usually try to follow up with some intelligent design argument. You haven't done that in this post, but that is probably why you're getting answers that are a bit guarded or combative, because people are prepared for you to take this discussion to a truly ignorant place.
  - enkid 4y ago
    Even if the Earth was, the environments where life evolved very much are not. Vulcan and chemical processes are going to add and take away energy and matter from the molecular system that evolved into life.
  - andrewflnr 4y ago
    This is not, in general, a compelling answer. It's true that the second law is a red herring, but it remains true that in any system humans have measured, including open systems, huge gobs of complex information like even the simplest life do not spontaneously form. Saying "it's an open system, dummy" ignores this gap. The truth is we still haven't quite figured it out. We're getting there (Jeremy England's work is the big one in my mind), but we're not there yet.
- kevviiinn 4y ago
  And the energy from within the earth through geothermal vents
- baremetal 4y ago
  I understand we aren't a closed system. But that still doesn't explain to me where the complexity came from.
  - causi 4y ago
    Ultimately this question is the question of why the universe isn't completely isotropic in all directions with a completely uniform distribution of matter and energy. To the best of our knowledge this is due to quantum effects at the beginning of time creating a temporary asymmetry whose resulting "sloshing" created everything more complicated than evenly-distributed hydrogen gas. Life on earth is the tiniest swirl of complexity in the vast waterfall of "wasted" entropy that is the sun burning out.
    - evv555 4y ago
      >Ultimately this question is the question of why the universe isn't completely isotropic in all directions with a completely uniform distribution of matter and energy. I don't think it's a self-evident given that going against the grain of increasing entropy leads to complexity. The obvious but naieve opposite of increasing entropy is going towards something like relatively simple crystal structures.
    - baremetal 4y ago
      That is rather hand wavy and doesn't explain where the complexity in DNA comes from, you just swept that problem under the rug with a blanket explanation that lacks explanatory power.
      - anonymouskimmer 4y ago
        DNA is actually rather simple. It basically consists of about the fewest number of bases possible for encoding information (four), even though more bases are possible (and have been stably engineered into organisms). Even so, while these bases pair off well, there is some cross-talk possible (G-quadruplexes, G:T base-pairing).
      - causi 4y ago
mromanuk 4y ago
Life it's just a cooler way to speed up entropy.
COGlory 4y ago
I would encourage you to find a copy of (it's very expensive, but there are methods to acquire it, such as "libraries") Eugene Koonin's "The Logic of Chance", if this is a topic you're interested in. It basically goes through evolution from a molecular biology and information theory standpoint (and culminates in his own theory of "genesis").
- baremetal 4y ago
  Thank you, you are the only person that actually addressed my point in this thread. I just acquired the book.
- DoctorOetker 4y ago
  It seems to be available for download for free? 1st or second hit on google: http://www.evolocus.com/Textbooks/Koonin2011.pdf http://www.evolocus.com/Textbooks/Koonin2011.pdf
  - COGlory 4y ago
    Awesome! It wasn't the last time I checked.
    - DoctorOetker 4y ago
      I remember exploring a "traditional html with images" website about natural selection (I don't think it was interactive, but I do think the source code for each experiment was provided). I assume it was made by a mathematician / physicist. Do you by chance happen to know which site I have in mind? I (vaguely) recall a blueish gray background.
FeepingCreature 4y ago
Randomization plus selection. The big innovation of life is having a form of matter that can quine its own arrangement. Once you have that, the complexity that ensued was predictable.
Qem 4y ago
It comes from Death's sickle, prunning the random noise introduced by mutations to generate useful information. Natural selection. There's a paper where people put bounds in terms of bits/generation a species can acquire over time. Apparently sex developed as a workaround life found to inclease this bandwidth from about 1 bit/generation to much larger values: http://www.inference.org.uk/mackay/gene.pdf http://www.inference.org.uk/mackay/gene.pdf

meindnoch 4y ago

It came from the energy that the Sun pumps into the system.

mcphage 4y ago
I don't know why so many people forget that the laws of thermodynamics are all about closed systems, which the Earth is very much not.
- baremetal 4y ago
  I don't know why so many people forget to explain where _the complexity_ comes from and just drive right off the road assuming I don't know something basic and can distract from having to answer the real question about the complexity of the information in DNA and its origins. Not a very generous argument style you have there.
  - throwaway173738 4y ago
    Have you never heard the joke about a million monkeys typing on a million towers eventually producing the complete works of Shakespeare? Little by little variation is accumulated when it’s beneficial, and the organism dies fast when it’s not.
    - andrewflnr 4y ago
      This is also a bad argument. You probably know very well that if a cryptographer can force you to employ infinite monkeys on typewriters to guess their key, they'll declare victory. You need a mechanism that searches and focuses the space of possible chemistry, that forces life into being. If you look at the timeline for the emergence of life, I don't think it's one that supports an infinite monkey type of mechanism. It was too fast.
      - anonymouskimmer 4y ago
        As posted in earlier articles and from what I have read: The basic buildings block of our life spontaneously form from the chemistry of the early Earth (our even the chemistry of space). Lipid membranes spontaneously form enclosed structures. This forces molecules together allowing fast and directional catalysis. RNA is directly catalytically active on itself and other molecules. That's just what I can recall. There's more about DNA/RNA and amino acids pairing, but I can't remember it off the top of my head.
        andrewflnr 4y ago
        Lipid membranes are pretty cool, but they're not life. Nucleobases and amino acids are letters, not sentences.
      - kerkeslager 4y ago
        > You need a mechanism that searches and focuses the space of possible chemistry, that forces life into being. That's exactly what the infinite monkeys on a typewriter are a metaphor for. In literal terms, it's trillions of trillions of protein reactions happening along earth's coastlines. > If you look at the timeline for the emergence of life, I don't think it's one that supports an infinite monkey type of mechanism. It was too fast. If it literally was infinite monkeys, we'd expect life to emerge near-instantaneously. The reality is, of course, that it's not "infinite monkeys" but "a whole f-ing lot of monkeys"--the question is whether it's enough monkeys to produce life in the timeline. There's a lot of research that's been done on this, and we have pretty good data. I'm not an expert in this field, but my outside impression from the research I read is that the open question at this point is actually not why it happened so fast, but why it didn't happen faster. If you're actually interested in the numerical justifications for the timeline, the research is pretty well documented, but given you've ex-nihilo declared that the timeline is too fast, I suspect you aren't actually curious, and are instead leading into an argument you want to make.
  - kerkeslager 4y ago
    The question you are asking isn't a valid question, because it's based on the faulty assertion that "...everything in the universe degrades or rusts or tends towards decreasing complexity". That's just not true. And given you think it's true, the belief that you don't know something basic isn't an assumption. There isn't a way to answer questions based on faulty assumptions, like "Why did you murder JFK?" People have actually been quite kind in giving you "sort of" answers such as "It came from the energy that the Sun pumps into the system." I'll also point out that when people make the faulty assertion that everything tends toward decreasing complexity, they usually try to follow up with some intelligent design argument. You haven't done that in this post, but that is probably why you're getting answers that are a bit guarded or combative, because people are prepared for you to take this discussion to a truly ignorant place.
- enkid 4y ago
  Even if the Earth was, the environments where life evolved very much are not. Vulcan and chemical processes are going to add and take away energy and matter from the molecular system that evolved into life.
- andrewflnr 4y ago
  This is not, in general, a compelling answer. It's true that the second law is a red herring, but it remains true that in any system humans have measured, including open systems, huge gobs of complex information like even the simplest life do not spontaneously form. Saying "it's an open system, dummy" ignores this gap. The truth is we still haven't quite figured it out. We're getting there (Jeremy England's work is the big one in my mind), but we're not there yet.
kevviiinn 4y ago
And the energy from within the earth through geothermal vents
baremetal 4y ago
I understand we aren't a closed system. But that still doesn't explain to me where the complexity came from.
- causi 4y ago
  Ultimately this question is the question of why the universe isn't completely isotropic in all directions with a completely uniform distribution of matter and energy. To the best of our knowledge this is due to quantum effects at the beginning of time creating a temporary asymmetry whose resulting "sloshing" created everything more complicated than evenly-distributed hydrogen gas. Life on earth is the tiniest swirl of complexity in the vast waterfall of "wasted" entropy that is the sun burning out.
  - evv555 4y ago
    >Ultimately this question is the question of why the universe isn't completely isotropic in all directions with a completely uniform distribution of matter and energy. I don't think it's a self-evident given that going against the grain of increasing entropy leads to complexity. The obvious but naieve opposite of increasing entropy is going towards something like relatively simple crystal structures.
  - baremetal 4y ago
    That is rather hand wavy and doesn't explain where the complexity in DNA comes from, you just swept that problem under the rug with a blanket explanation that lacks explanatory power.
    - anonymouskimmer 4y ago
      DNA is actually rather simple. It basically consists of about the fewest number of bases possible for encoding information (four), even though more bases are possible (and have been stably engineered into organisms). Even so, while these bases pair off well, there is some cross-talk possible (G-quadruplexes, G:T base-pairing).
    - causi 4y ago

mromanuk 4y ago

Life it's just a cooler way to speed up entropy.

COGlory 4y ago

I would encourage you to find a copy of (it's very expensive, but there are methods to acquire it, such as "libraries") Eugene Koonin's "The Logic of Chance", if this is a topic you're interested in. It basically goes through evolution from a molecular biology and information theory standpoint (and culminates in his own theory of "genesis").

baremetal 4y ago
Thank you, you are the only person that actually addressed my point in this thread. I just acquired the book.
DoctorOetker 4y ago
It seems to be available for download for free? 1st or second hit on google: http://www.evolocus.com/Textbooks/Koonin2011.pdf http://www.evolocus.com/Textbooks/Koonin2011.pdf
- COGlory 4y ago
  Awesome! It wasn't the last time I checked.
  - DoctorOetker 4y ago
    I remember exploring a "traditional html with images" website about natural selection (I don't think it was interactive, but I do think the source code for each experiment was provided). I assume it was made by a mathematician / physicist. Do you by chance happen to know which site I have in mind? I (vaguely) recall a blueish gray background.

FeepingCreature 4y ago

Randomization plus selection. The big innovation of life is having a form of matter that can quine its own arrangement. Once you have that, the complexity that ensued was predictable.

Qem 4y ago

It comes from Death's sickle, prunning the random noise introduced by mutations to generate useful information. Natural selection. There's a paper where people put bounds in terms of bits/generation a species can acquire over time. Apparently sex developed as a workaround life found to inclease this bandwidth from about 1 bit/generation to much larger values: http://www.inference.org.uk/mackay/gene.pdf http://www.inference.org.uk/mackay/gene.pdf