Evolution in schools; legal trap (Introduction)

by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Monday, June 11, 2012, 23:40 (4549 days ago) @ xeno6696


> " Therefore, a living thing must be at least as complicated as the simplest computer."
> 
> The simplest computer--no joke--is a light switch. This also means that the orbit of a planet could be considered a "computation" and fire is also a computer.
> -IMHO A light switch is not a computer. It is a circuit, but it does not compute anything. It can not accept an input, and produce a variable output without the outside interference of a higher form of logic(i.e. someone playing with the dimmer switch). Arguments might be made that based on varying degrees of power input the bulb produces varying quantities of light, but to my mind that does not constitute a calculation. Fire is also not a computer in that it is not performing any form of information management. The idea that life has to be at least as complex as the simplest computer is because life has to take input from its environment and formulate a valid response to that input, contain a programmatic set of instructions that can be carried out in real time repeatedly, and the ability to transmit instructions to its offspring. -> This section has one "imperative."
> 
> "6. Self-monitor and repair its constantly deteriorating physical matrix of bioinstruction retention/transmission, and of architecture"
> 
> This is where I start to see an unnecessary bias towards cellullar life... 
> -> What about Virii and prions? Virii work by taking over a cellular host, by directly altering some physical structure. This process require energy... and meets all the other criterion of life.
> -Yes, there is a bias against Virii because Virii are not 'alive'. The do not do anything at all in the absence of living organisms aside from simply existing. They do not consume, reproduce, die, or ANY of the other biological functions unless, and only unless, they have been introduced into an existing living biological structure.-> Further, there is nothing I've read to counter the idea that virii didn't evolve from a more complex form... meaning that under this definition life can become animate nonlife--creating a category we've never dealt with.-Evolve or Devolve?

--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.