RE: Dembski and Caesar cyphers

From: Dawsonzhu@aol.com
Date: Tue Nov 19 2002 - 11:54:29 EST

  • Next message: Glenn Morton: "RE: Dembski and Caesar cyphers"

    Glenn Morton wrote:

    > But one must realize that the assignment of symbols to a given sound
    > is merely an accident of history. In alternative histories, it would be
    > quite possible that the above sequence would be readable and the lower
    > looking random. Because of this there is no objective definition of design.
    >

    Glenn, I think we would have a lot of trouble
    pronouncing "xfbtfm". <grin>

    But on a bit more of a serious note, I would
    expect that there are constraints on natural
    language that restrict the types of sound
    constructions that can be made.

    There are also
    factors like the laziness of the tongue so
    some regional accents (like mine) say "wash"
    as "warsh". If you pay attention to the glide
    of the tongue, and you don't stop the flow of
    air as you move from "wa" to "sh", you will find
    your tongue passing through the region where the
    sound "r" comes out. Likewise, in Greek the
    letter "Beta" is now pronounced "veta". That is
    because "b" and "v" involve similar positions
    of the lips. So not only the types of sounds
    but even their direction of alteration (mutation)
    will tend toward rules of efficiency (I suspect).

    So the short form is that I think there are restrictions that limit
    what sorts of letter
    sequences will be allowed in natural language.

    To take this a bit further....
    Frankly, I'm not as convinced that _any_ old
    amino acid sequence will give you a functional
    protein is some relative context either. I
    think the problem is that the thermodynamics
    of protein folding have been badly mucked up.
    When you get the thermodynamics right, you also
    start getting sensible predictions. What function
    a given protein "serves", _might_ be somewhat
    arbitrary, but thermodynamics rules (as always)
    and that will set limits on what structures can be
    "meaningful" in that "some context". In short,
    I suspect the free energy landscape is a bit more
    restricted than some people have been claiming.

    by Grace we proceed,
    Wayne



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Nov 19 2002 - 17:45:36 EST