From: me22over7@gmail.com   
      
   On 30/01/2026 3:17 pm, John Harshman wrote:   
   > On 1/29/26 7:57 PM, MarkE wrote:   
   >> On 30/01/2026 2:10 pm, John Harshman wrote:   
   >>> On 1/29/26 6:40 PM, MarkE wrote:   
   >>>> On 30/01/2026 12:50 pm, John Harshman wrote:   
   >>>>> On 1/29/26 5:31 PM, MarkE wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 30/01/2026 11:20 am, John Harshman wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On 1/29/26 3:37 AM, MarkE wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On 27/01/2026 11:41 am, John Harshman wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> On 1/24/26 3:28 AM, MarkE wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> On 24/01/2026 1:54 am, John Harshman wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> On 1/22/26 6:15 PM, MarkE wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> On 23/01/2026 1:31 am, John Harshman wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/21/26 9:18 PM, MarkE wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 22/01/2026 3:22 am, John Harshman wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> ...   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> Now if you're interested in what makes an organism, without   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> much regard for what kind of organism, you have a point   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> that the ovum has various bits that must be in place in   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> order to get the process of development going, and that   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> there are many interactions between cells that are not   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> directly controlled by the genome. But the source of the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> bits that interact is still the genome, at first the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> maternal genome and later the zygote's.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Certainly all proteins in the cell are produced from gene   
   >>>>>>>>>> coding. However, doesn't the following (for example)   
   >>>>>>>>>> demonstrate that the cytoplasm is in control and telling the   
   >>>>>>>>>> DNA what to do (so to speak):   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> "It is concluded that whenever nuclei are introduced   
   >>>>>>>>>> experimentally into the cytoplasm of another cell, they very   
   >>>>>>>>>> quickly assume, in nearly every respect, the nuclear activity   
   >>>>>>>>>> characteristic of the host cell. In many instances, altered   
   >>>>>>>>>> function has been demonstrated in nuclei which subsequently   
   >>>>>>>>>> support normal development." [1]   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Sure, that's because various transcription factors and such are   
   >>>>>>>>> in the cytoplasm, having been transcribed and translated from   
   >>>>>>>>> the previous nucleus. Differences between genomes result in   
   >>>>>>>>> differences in expression.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Here's the critical logic: if the direction of control flow is   
   >>>>>>>>>> bi- directional, then to resolve a chicken-and-egg paradox, we   
   >>>>>>>>>> must conclude that information is initially present in both   
   >>>>>>>>>> the nucleus and extra-nuclear, in effectively digital and   
   >>>>>>>>>> analogue form respectively.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> "Digital" and "analog" are empty buzzwords in this context. But   
   >>>>>>>>> yes, proteins contain information, if that's what you mean. But   
   >>>>>>>>> that information is inherited, over the long term, in the form   
   >>>>>>>>> of DNA.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> On what basis do you deem these "empty buzzwords"?   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> A digital information medium stores heritable information in   
   >>>>>>>> discrete symbolic sequences that are copied and decoded by rule-   
   >>>>>>>> based molecular machinery. The human genome at 3.2 billion base   
   >>>>>>>> pairs can be simply mapped into 6.4 billion bits of digital   
   >>>>>>>> information. Are we agreed that DNA can be accurately described   
   >>>>>>>> as *digital* information? (Along with its chemical and   
   >>>>>>>> structural/ physical properties and interactions.)   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> That's an analogy. It's not a hopeless one, but it's still an   
   >>>>>>> analogy.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> No, it's not an analogy, it's a legitimate application of a   
   >>>>>> definition and identification of actual digital information, and   
   >>>>>> large amount of it at that.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> What do you imagine would not be an analogy? Cut open an alien   
   >>>>>> lifeform and see 0s and 1s pour out?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I'm interested to hear your response to this.   
   >>>   
   >>> I thought it was a silly rhetorical gibe. What would not be an   
   >>> analogy? Computer memory. I suppose that a written sequence of As,   
   >>> Gs, Cs, and Ts would also be digital information.   
   >>   
   >> To recap:   
   >>   
   >> You: "Digital" and "analog" are empty buzzwords in this context."   
   >>   
   >> I challenged that dismissive remark with "On what basis do you deem   
   >> these 'empty buzzwords'? A digital information medium stores heritable   
   >> information in discrete symbolic sequences that are copied and decoded   
   >> by rule-based molecular machinery...Are we agreed that DNA can be   
   >> accurately described as *digital* information?" To which you responded:   
   >>   
   >> "That's an analogy. It's not a hopeless one, but it's still an analogy."   
   >>   
   >> We're making progress, but still not there. I challenged again with:   
   >> "No, it's not an analogy, it's a legitimate application of a   
   >> definition and identification of actual digital information, and large   
   >> amount of it at that."   
   >>   
   >> You finally gave this grudging concession: "I suppose that a written   
   >> sequence of As, Gs, Cs, and Ts would also be digital information."   
   >>   
   >> Which is revealing. Why did I need to drag this out of you? My   
   >> impression is you're more than able to understand these concepts   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)