"Darwinists" appear to have (at least) four hands ...

Ilion

... two with which to cover their eyes, and two with which to cover their ears. News at Princeton: Evolution's new wrinkle: Proteins with cruise control provide new perspective[^]

A team of Princeton University scientists has discovered that chains of proteins found in most living organisms act like adaptive machines, possessing the ability to control their own evolution. The research, which appears to offer evidence of a hidden mechanism guiding the way biological organisms respond to the forces of natural selection, provides a new perspective on evolution, the scientists said. The researchers -- Raj Chakrabarti, Herschel Rabitz, Stacey Springs and George McLendon -- made the discovery while carrying out experiments on proteins constituting the electron transport chain (ETC), a biochemical network essential for metabolism. A mathematical analysis of the experiments showed that the proteins themselves acted to correct any imbalance imposed on them through artificial mutations and restored the chain to working order. "The discovery answers an age-old question that has puzzled biologists since the time of Darwin: How can organisms be so exquisitely complex, if evolution is completely random, operating like a 'blind watchmaker'?" said Chakrabarti, an associate research scholar in the Department of Chemistry at Princeton. "Our new theory extends Darwin's model, demonstrating how organisms can subtly direct aspects of their own evolution to create order out of randomness." . . The authors sought to identify the underlying cause for this self-correcting behavior in the observed protein chains. Standard evolutionary theory offered no clues. Applying the concepts of control theory, a body of knowledge that deals with the behavior of dynamical systems, the researchers concluded that this self-correcting behavior could only be possible if, during the early stages of evolution, the proteins had developed a self-regulating mechanism, analogous to a car's cruise control or a home's thermostat, allowing them to fine-tune and control their subsequent evolution. The scientists are working on formulating a new general theory based on this finding they are calling "evolutionary control." . . The scientists do not know how the cellular machinery guiding this process may have originated, but they emphatically said it does not butt

soap brain

The actual paper[^]

Redox potential extremization can be quantified by computing the probability of observing a mutation that shifts the potential to the opposite side of the putative extremum (wild-type, εwt = 0), under suitable parametric or nonparametric model distributions.

...Optimal control theory provides an explanation for the observed behavior that is fully consistent with current evolutionary theory, based on minimal additional assumptions. In order to apply OC, it is first necessary to formulate the dynamical equations governing the evolution of the ETC. The terminal oxidation stage of the electron transport chain consists of a linked set of protein-catalyzed substrate oxidation steps, several of which are coupled to protein-catalyzed proton pump steps. As described above, electron transfer to the redox centers alters the pKa of amino acids involved in proton transport and hence indirectly impacts the efficiency of the proton pumps. The i-th enzyme acts on its substrate through a redox process specified by the potential εi(t) as a function of evolutionary time t. The role of this i-th enzyme in the fitness measure can be characterized by its current evolutionary state xi (i.e., the proton gradient produced by its associated proton pump) prescribing the functional utility of the enzyme for the energy transduction process. Since the efficiency of the proton pumps is a function of the redox potentials, it is natural to view the network as an input-output control system, with the controls consisting of ~ε(t) = (ε1(t), ε2(t), · · · , εN(t)) and the output being the system state vector x(t) = (x1(t), x2(t), · · · , xN(t)). Evolution is assumed to be maximizing a biologically beneficial function Φ(x) of the chain’s state (i.e., the total amount of ATP produced) both directly with respect to the state x as well as indirectly through the controls ~ε(t).

soap brain

Sorry, I forgot to ask: which part, exactly, are you having moral issues with? Ooh, don't tell me! I bet it was their use of the cumulative distribution function for the chi square density, right? F(ε; ν; ε0) = γ(ν/2, (ε − ε0)/2)/Γ(ν/2) I mean, look at it. Jesus doesn't appear in it at all!

73Zeppelin

:laugh: :laugh: :thumbsup:

soap brain

Odd. He's gone mute. I thought he'd gleefully show us how much he knows about evolution.

Ilion

Ravel H. Joyce wrote:

Odd. He's gone mute. I thought he'd gleefully show us how much he knows about evolution.

What fools you children are.

Ilion

73Zeppelin wrote:

:laugh: :laugh: :thumbsup:

What fools you children are.

soap brain

You're right, of course - I never thought that. I just wanted to show you how much science there actually IS in evolution.

Dalek Dave

Go Boy! Now discuss burst theory and convergent evolution, that would make his frontal lobe quake!

------------------------------------ "Will you marry me? Are you rich?, Don't answer in that order" Groucho Marx

soap brain

Dalek Dave wrote:

Go Boy!

What am I, a puppy dog?

Dalek Dave wrote:

Now discuss burst theory and convergent evolution, that would make his frontal lobe quake!

Meh. I just want to know when he's getting his Nobel Prize for disproving evolution.

Dalek Dave

No, Darwins Bulldog!

Ravel H. Joyce wrote:

I just want to know when he's getting his Nobel Prize for disproving evolution.

The day he figures out what an Arse he is?

------------------------------------ "Will you marry me? Are you rich?, Don't answer in that order" Groucho Marx

soap brain

Dalek Dave wrote:

No, Darwins Bulldog!

Ohhh, but bulldogs are fugly. Puppy dogs[^] are way cooler. :cool:

Dalek Dave wrote:

The day he figures out what an Arse he is?

Did you know that the presence of a human sexually arouses ostriches?

Dalek Dave

Ravel H. Joyce wrote:

Did you know that the presence of a human sexually arouses ostriches?

Is that for real? Cos if it is I will be using it! :)

------------------------------------ "Will you marry me? Are you rich?, Don't answer in that order" Groucho Marx

soap brain

Dalek Dave wrote:

Is that for real? Cos if it is I will be using it!

Yeah, it's real. I knew you'd appreciate it! :)

Lost User

How does your lot feel about Newton now? Any of his philosophy acceptable yet?

Bob Emmett

73Zeppelin

Ilíon wrote:

What fools you children are.

:zzz:

Ilion

Bob Emmett wrote:

How does your lot feel about Newton now? Any of his philosophy acceptable yet?

Ah, yes, the old ""evolution" (whatever that word means) is as well "proven" (which word your set also avoids understanding) as gravity" gambit. Oddly enough, we *never* see physicists saying things like "gravitation is as well proven as 'modern evolutionary theory'" Also, and oddly enough, I notice that you seem to be under the wild misunderstanding that your lame attempt to mock my mockery of your mock-worthy beliefs is on an equaly footing.

Oakman

Ravel H. Joyce wrote:

I knew you'd appreciate it!

Did you respect the ostrich in the morning?

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

soap brain

Oakman wrote:

Did you respect the ostrich in the morning?

Did I...what? Is this some sort of sexual euphemism? :confused:

James L Thomson

Ilíon wrote:

Oddly enough, we *never* see physicists saying things like "gravitation is as well proven as 'modern evolutionary theory'"

2 reasons: 1) The Theory of Gravity is not as well supported as modern evolutionary theory. 2) You don't have a large enough group of ignoramuses saying things like "Gravity is wrong because the moon stays up there without falling".