Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
1,327 bytes added ,  22:21, February 17, 2009
Line 67: Line 67:     
:Thank you, for your summary.  I will take some time out to read some of these recommendations.  I believe the issue at the base of all of this is the term '''information'''.  I do not know if the issue with this term is the fact that the encoded proteins are not just the result of the code from the DNA, thereby making the term '''information''' an oversimplification or if it is the inference of some needed form of result due to the order of the code.  I will write more on this at a later date, I am a bit behind this week.--[[User:Able806|Able806]] 15:33, 17 February 2009 (EST)
 
:Thank you, for your summary.  I will take some time out to read some of these recommendations.  I believe the issue at the base of all of this is the term '''information'''.  I do not know if the issue with this term is the fact that the encoded proteins are not just the result of the code from the DNA, thereby making the term '''information''' an oversimplification or if it is the inference of some needed form of result due to the order of the code.  I will write more on this at a later date, I am a bit behind this week.--[[User:Able806|Able806]] 15:33, 17 February 2009 (EST)
 +
 +
:: I should have said a bit about the definition of ''information'' itself.  The following comments are my understanding, although I've not read much of Dembski.
 +
 +
:: '''Claude Shannon''' studied information from the point of view of how much capacity was needed to hold it.  Like how many bytes it takes to store a given amount of data.  Thus compression techniques etc. are relevant.  However, Shannon's "information" ignored the ''meaning'' of the data.  Thus purely random bits take more space to store than meaningful data, because the meaningful data has redundancies that can be compressed, whereas random bits can not be compressed (much) at all.
 +
 +
:: '''Gitt''' defines information in "structural" (my word) terms, talking about its ''syntax'', ''semantics'', etc. See [[information]] for a summary.
 +
 +
:: '''Dembski''' et. al. describe information in a more "mathematical" manner, looking at "specified complexity"; trying to measure the specific complexity of some data and thereby determine whether it has more or less ''information'' than some other data.  (In other words, does a mutation increase or decrease the specific complexity of the gene.)
 +
 +
:: I'm not sure that I understand your penultimate sentence, so I won't comment on that.
 +
:: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 17:21, 17 February 2009 (EST)
nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254

edits

Navigation menu