Telic Thoughts is an independent blog about intelligent design.


« Secret Message for Paul Nelson
The Chamberlainites and the Churchillians: Two Sides of the Same Coin? »

Top Ten From September 2007

by MikeGene

From ethics to pain, from engineering to Darwin Day, from SciFi to science, all with Toxic Bunnies. Where else but at Telic Thoughts! Pity your friends who don't read this site. :mrgreen:

1. The Ethics of Intelligent Design

2. Pain

3. Combinatorial Dependencies

4. Just don't

5. Updating Robert Marks and Baylor

6. Why I Am Not a Critic

7. An Interview with Elisabet Sahtouris

8. SciFi and ID

9. The Neglected Elements of Scientific Discovery

10. The Amazing Toxic Asexual Bunny Mutation Simulator

[Congrats to TP for two months in a row at #1!]

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Mixx
  • StumbleUpon
  • YahooMyWeb
  • del.icio.us

This entry was posted on Friday, September 28th, 2007 at 6:17 pm and is filed under Metatalk. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. The trackback link is: http://telicthoughts.com/top-ten-from-september-2007/trackback/

2 Responses to “Top Ten From September 2007”

  1. Thought Provoker Says:
    September 29th, 2007 at 11:36 am

    Hi Mike,

    Thank you for the recognition and for your efforts towards making Telic Thoughts the diverse blog it is.

    Pardon me for pushing out my October submittal early, but it has a time-sensitive aspect to it…

    A Voice from the Middle Ground

    On October 4th, Paul Nelson and Michael Ruse are schedule to have an "un-debate". The idea is to discuss what it would take to convince the other to switch sides in the ID/Darwin debate.

    Predictions of a non-outcome to the un-debate have already been made. The presumption is that Paul Nelson is going to be asking for the equivalent of the random assembly of a 747 from a pile of junk and Michael Ruse is going it look for an Intelligent Designer saying "I am" accompanied by a pyrotechnical display of local shrubbery.

    In other words, the basic conflict is expected to be about randomness verses a designer.

    There is a lot of ground between these two extremes. What would it take to convince both Paul and Michael to give up their scientific presumptions of either randomness or a designer?

    What would it take to convince both sides that a middle ground hypothesis that presumes neither randomness nor a designer is not only plausible but likely?

    I have previously presented the concept that there is no such thing as randomness in a post titled The Magic of Intelligent Design. This post has appeared in Telic Thoughts and in After the Bar Closes. For a proposed design agency, I have offered the orchestrating properties of quantum effects generally outlined in the Penrose-Hameroff model called Orchestrated Objective Reduction or Orch OR for short.

    What would it take to convince Paul and Michael that quantum effects are interconnected?

    How about seven decades of physicists performing experiments demonstrating non-local behavior and paradoxical behavior that can only be explained if nature is "entangled" at the quantum level?

    What would it take to convince Paul and Michael that life is directly dependent on quantum effects?

    How about if respectable scientists at Berkeley lab reported something like"¦
    Early in 2007 a team of Berkeley Lab and UC Berkeley researchers identified quantum mechanical effects as the key to the astonishing ability of photosynthesis to utilize nearly all the photons absorbed by the leaves of green plants. Now a different team has found new evidence that points to a closely packed pigment-protein complex of the photosystem as the key to those quantum mechanical effects. …
    How nature manages to pull off this stunt was a long-standing mystery until the spring of 2007, when a study led by Graham Fleming, Deputy Director of Berkeley Lab and a UC Berkeley chemistry professor, found the first direct evidence of what he calls a "remarkably long-lived wavelike electronic quantum coherence." Quantum-mechanical effects enable a plant's photosystem to simultaneously sample all the potential energy pathways from pigment molecules to reaction centers and choose the most efficient one. link
    …?

    What would it take to convince Paul and Michael that evolution is under the control of interconnected quantum effects?

    What if it turned out the DNA search function is a quantum algorithm that requires quantum-like superposition?

    From Patel's Quantum Algorithms and the Genetic Code…
    Replication of DNA and synthesis of proteins are studied from the view-point of quantum database search. Identification of a base-pairing with a quantum query gives a natural (and first ever!) explanation of why living organisms have 4 nucleotide bases and 20 amino acids. It is amazing that these numbers arise as solutions to an optimisation problem. Components of the DNA structure which implement Grover's algorithm are identified, and a physical scenario is presented for the execution of the quantum algorithm. It is proposed that enzymes play a crucial role in maintaining quantum coherence of the process.

    From Patel's Towards Understanding the Origin of Genetic Languages…
    The initial and final states of Grover's algorithm are classical, but the execution in between is not. In order to be stable, the initial and final states have to be based on a relaxation towards equilibrium process. For the execution of the algorithm in between, the minimal physical requirement is a system that allows superposition of states, in particular a set of coupled wave modes.

    There is more support for the possibility of life's direct dependence on interconnected quantum effects for functions like cellular awareness (i.e. consciousness) as an artifact of quantum computation in microtubules. "Bio-quantum physics" appears to be an emerging science. While it is still speculative, that is not the point.

    The question is"¦ What would it take to convince the ID/Darwin extremists to agree on a scientific hypothesis that supports neither philosophical agenda?

    BTW, a quantum mechanical explanation can be thought of as a tool of an intelligent designer just as much as the result of a non-teleological universe that occurred "randomly" from multiple universes. However, these are metaphysical concerns, not scientific ones.

  2. Comment by Thought Provoker — September 29, 2007 @ 11:36 am

  3. MikeGene Says:
    October 1st, 2007 at 11:41 pm

    Whoa! I jumped the gun. The Front-loading with Homeodomains entry surged all the way to #3! :shock:

  4. Comment by MikeGene — October 1, 2007 @ 11:41 pm

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

  • Featured Books


    The Design Matrix: A Consilience of Clues by Mike Gene
    Your Inner Fish: A Journey into the 3.5-Billion-Year History of the Human Body

    Catalyzing Inquiry at the Interface of Computing and Biology

    System Modeling in Cellular Biology: From Concepts to Nuts and Bolts

    The Plausibility of Life By Marc W. Kirschner and John C. Gerhart

    Agents Under Fire by Angus Menuge

    Life's Solution by Simon Conway Morris

    Information Theory, Evolution and the Origin of Life by Hubert P. Yockey

    The Fifth Miracle by Paul Davies

    Nature, Design, and Science by Del Ratzsch

    Origination of Organismal Form by Muller & Newman

    Biased Embryos and Evolution by Wallace Arthur

    Rare Earth by Peter Ward and Donald Brownlee

    The Privileged Planet by Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay Richards

    The Way of the Cell by Franklin Harold

    The Volitional Brain by Benjamin Libet

    Evolution in Four Dimensions by Eva Jablonka & Marion Lamb

    The Evolution-Creation Struggle by Michael Ruse




Telic Thoughts is proudly powered by WordPress
Hosting provided by College Crunch.

Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).