Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8 9 10
Results 91 to 97 of 97

Thread: Sekret Machines - Tom Delong - Dawn of Disclosure

  1. #91
    Yes Panspermia they also mention Crick as in 'Crick and Watson' who discovered the DNA double helix.
    Crick thought panspermia a possibility, he suggested that as DNA needed a lot of Molybdenum, in its manufacture, it was highly likely it came from a Molybdenum rich world, ours is not.

    Dr Garry Nolan has mentioned that DNA seems to follow Moore's Law but instead of semiconductor speeds it's DNA complexity that has grown. He says if you extrapolate back in time the t=0 is earlier than the planet.

    Who knows where the creators are or who created them.

  2. #92
    Book signing with TDL and Peter Levanda


  3. #93
    Found link this Moore's Law for the origin of DNA, something Garry Nolan has mentioned previously
    Full article on site

    https://www.technologyreview.com/s/5...rigin-of-life/

    These guys argue that it’s possible to measure the complexity of life and the rate at which it has increased from prokaryotes to eukaryotes to more complex creatures such as worms, fish and finally mammals. That produces a clear exponential increase identical to that behind Moore’s Law although in this case the doubling time is 376 million years rather than two years.

    That raises an interesting question. What happens if you extrapolate backwards to the point of no complexity–the origin of life?

    Sharov and Gordon say that the evidence by this measure is clear. “Linear regression of genetic complexity (on a log scale) extrapolated back to just one base pair suggests the time of the origin of life = 9.7 ± 2.5 billion years ago,” they say.

    And since the Earth is only 4.5 billion years old, that raises a whole series of other questions. Not least of these is how and where did life begin.

  4. #94
    Lead Moderator calikid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    9,018
    Blog Entries
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Longeyes View Post
    Found link this Moore's Law for the origin of DNA, something Garry Nolan has mentioned previously
    Full article on site

    https://www.technologyreview.com/s/5...rigin-of-life/

    These guys argue that it’s possible to measure the complexity of life and the rate at which it has increased from prokaryotes to eukaryotes to more complex creatures such as worms, fish and finally mammals. That produces a clear exponential increase identical to that behind Moore’s Law although in this case the doubling time is 376 million years rather than two years.

    That raises an interesting question. What happens if you extrapolate backwards to the point of no complexity–the origin of life?

    Sharov and Gordon say that the evidence by this measure is clear. “Linear regression of genetic complexity (on a log scale) extrapolated back to just one base pair suggests the time of the origin of life = 9.7 ± 2.5 billion years ago,” they say.

    And since the Earth is only 4.5 billion years old, that raises a whole series of other questions. Not least of these is how and where did life begin.

    Having a hard time wrapping my head around this "DNA complexity doubling every 376 million years" hypothesis.
    We can't even find DNA samples from dinosaurs 65million years old, to fragile/degradated. Barely able to sequence Mamoth DNA from last ice age.
    Questions worth asking, but sounds like conjecture to me. Without samples, no way to tell if the the base line holds steady (like Moore' Law), or if there were dormant and accelerated phases of DNA evolution/complexity during those years.
    Like the theory of random Gamma Radiation pinging off the occassional DNA chain and causing a postive mutation that is then reproduced in future offsping, hard to put a clock on that.

    "...where did life begin". The BIG question eh?
    The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
    progress. -- Joseph Joubert
    Attachment 1008

  5. #95
    I think the point is they have living examples of organisms today and knowledge of where it appeared in the fossil record. It's an inexact science but you can trace a measure of genetic diversification from the first eucaryotes to today.

    The obvious massive assumption is that this is a law, rather than just happened this way on this planet. Does the number of extinction level events affect this speed, or the elements available and environment? Without other evolutionary timelines to look at I am not sure how they can determine it is an applicable law.

  6. #96
    Yep some of the more primitive forms of life are still around ie bacteria, viruses moulds, fungi, plants, cuttle fish, squids, fish...
    And you can work out how they evolved from look at their genome at the moment. You can see how they branched out for the development of certain characteristics, like different eyes, legs, fins etc

    It's just a decently researched Physics paper you can download the original here:
    https://arxiv.org/abs/1304.3381

    My problem is DNA's nothing like a transistor and who's to say the first part isn't even faster for DNA it then dies down once its established?
    But I'm no expert, but it's another thing pointing towards panspermia, that DNA could have evolved on another world.

  7. #97
    Lead Moderator calikid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    9,018
    Blog Entries
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Longeyes View Post
    Yep some of the more primitive forms of life are still around ie bacteria, viruses moulds, fungi, plants, cuttle fish, squids, fish...
    And you can work out how they evolved from look at their genome at the moment. You can see how they branched out for the development of certain characteristics, like different eyes, legs, fins etc

    It's just a decently researched Physics paper you can download the original here:
    https://arxiv.org/abs/1304.3381

    My problem is DNA's nothing like a transistor and who's to say the first part isn't even faster for DNA it then dies down once its established?
    But I'm no expert, but it's another thing pointing towards panspermia, that DNA could have evolved on another world.
    20 pages of heavy reading, and another half-dozen pages of references.
    Just browsing through they have some interesting points, but IMHO also reads like a few suppositions/assumptions were used to make the theory float.
    Thanks for sharing, I'll have a deeper look at "Life before earth" as time pemits.
    The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but
    progress. -- Joseph Joubert
    Attachment 1008

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •