Natural Selection

[Ziggurat]

At the risk of derailing and confusing timf1234, I'm going to interject and say that the above isn't true. Radioactive decay is very much dependent on the uncertainty principle (in the deltaE*deltat~hbar form). It plays a huge role in determining the lifetime of an unstable atomic nucleus against alpha and/or beta decay. Eg in alpha decay the alpha particle has to tunnel through the potential barrier of the residual nucleus. The probability of tunneling is dependent on the height of the barrier (and hence the energy that needs to be 'borrowed') and the extent of the barrier (hence the time said energy needs to be borrowed for).

This is a common but incorrect interpretation of the energy/time uncertainty relationship, which (in non-relativistic QM) is completely distinct from all the other uncertainty relationships. deltaE does not represent borrowed energy (it isn't borrowed), but merely the standard deviation for measurements of the energy. deltat does not represent the time that energy is borrowed for, but the time it takes for an observable (such as position) to change by one standard deviation. It is true that this relationship is relevant to radioactive decay (the particle's expectation position can change because it's not in an energy eigenstate, and the greater the spread in energies, the faster that change can happen), but your understanding of that relationship is wrong.

 

[Tubbythin]

Good job I don't teach QM. I should have just said "radioactive decay is dependent on QM tunneling" and left it at that.

 

[temporalillusion]

Ok that makes sense, thanks guys, I appreciate the correction.

 

[temporalillusion]

At higher level computer code is abstract but at lower level these codes are stored in memory in differences in voltage (charge). Computer language, English language (although imprecise), and the language of nature (such as electron has negative charge, laws of gravity, atomic properties etc.) are languages nevertheless. Our thought creates physical changes in our brain and vice-a-versa.
Nature will not tolerate illogic except small variation that is allowed by quantum mechanics.

I think the code in DNA is translatable in binary, or hexadecimal, or mathematical, or even in imprecise English language. Code and translation has to be consistent and accurate. The key word is "Consistency". Consistency is the prerequisite for the real world.

Sure you can translate DNA into whatever form you want, but that doesn't mean DNA is code in the sense computer code is code.

Computer code is abstract symbols, with a transmitter to abstract and generate those codes and a receiver to interpret those codes. The code has to be interpreted to get it to the changes in voltages level.

DNA has none of this, it isn't an abstraction of anything, it's just a molecule that is used directly in a chemical process to create proteins.

Not that that's really relevant to natural selection, but some people try to use a DNA = code therefore God argument.

A lot of thing is happening at cell level. But all these reactions is happening under the supervison of current scheme of entire DNA code. It doesn't have to be like that. In principle, (may be 500 years from now) we will alter entire sequence of genetic code where a cell will not become cancerous even after living 1000 years. Or, yes, we might have to alter the cell itself.

Obviously, at this time we are just scratching the surface.

Sure, probably less than 500 years from now too. Genetically modification is a staple of SciFi and I'm an avid SciFi reader

 

[godless dave]

Your thought, explanation will be greatly appreciated.

Is the long neck of giraffe is the result of giraffe trying hard to reach high branches of tree to feed itself or is it that nature just randomly produced short neck, medium neck, long neck and anything in between and it happened to be that long neck survived due to its match with the natural envirnment.

The latter.

Another way to put it, is the improvement in health due to rigorous athletic practice heritable? could the benefit of 10 or 20 years of swimming practice can be passed on to its off spring?

No.

IS the reconfiguration of human mind due to extreme religious belief heritable?

No.

But it seems to me that there is no learning process the method of raw nature. Natural selection is extremely inefficient and wasteful.

Yep.

To survive Monkeys were forced to stand erect so that it can see over the bushes to notice the predators. As a result homosapient walk erect straight up.

Nope. Where did you hear that?


Edited to add: I see I'm very much behind here. Carry on.