Forgot your password?

Comment: vastly stronger symmetry effect is already known (Score 1) 120

by goombah99 (#48003579) Attached to: Physicists Find Clue as To Why the DNA Double Helix Twists To the Right

As light passes by a sun it is subject to an asymmetric situation where the solar atmosphere is in a magnetice field closer to one pole than another, rotating and having a gradient both radially and with the azimuth. thus there's a strong symmetry breaking effect on this light. On average, for all light passing the sun it's an equal handed effect. But if your planet happens to be subject to light that cam from the left side of the sun versus the right, that light could have a net polarization.

this effect would likely be orders of magnitude greater than this weak force polarization effect.

Comment: their theory isn't provable (Score 1) 120

by goombah99 (#48003281) Attached to: Physicists Find Clue as To Why the DNA Double Helix Twists To the Right

All life we know about came from a single origin since all life is based on DNA, RNA and proteins. whatever the origin was it would have had left or right handed DNA and thus so did everything that followed. there's no reason to suppose the need for a bias for one or the other. one of them was going to win. it's like vhs and betamax.

Comment: because half the people with iphones (Score 1) 262

by goombah99 (#47953817) Attached to: Why the iPhone 6 Has the Same Base Memory As the iPhone 5

don't need 16Megs. People on slashdot criticize apple for forcing you to buy features you don't need. Now you critize apple for making the base model something not geek worthy. they are offering what their customers need. Chances are the number of songs or photos you want to keep stored on your iphone at any time isn't geoing with time. and that's the majority of the space usage on most people's phones. With icloud and beats streaming that need is going to dramatically shrink as well. The only thing likely to really be a space hog is more tricked out games and things that use the greater pixels of the large phones. But as I said, at the moment it's photos and music that dominate the storage needs and those will be going down not up.

Comment: Re:Alibaba's AliExpress store is ripe with fakes (Score 2, Interesting) 191

by goombah99 (#47952139) Attached to: Why a Chinese Company Is the Biggest IPO Ever In the US

Yes alibaba is a theives market. Alibaba does little to root this out too. Moreover the entire china small items trade competiveness relys on the rediculous postage rates (low) that allows delivery in the US for a mere $1 worth of postage. Finally all the small vendors lie about the item in the postage to evade customs charges.

Amazon could make great noises and will.

On the other hand who owns Alibaba's 120 billion? Americans now. If the congress sicks their dogs on ALibaba it's the same as pilfering 120 billion from investors.

Meanwhile amazon has a PE nearing 1000 (who are they kidding?). AMazon's 1000 PE is justifed only on the basis of their growth rate not their earnings. If their growth is threatened (enter alibaba) their stock price crashes. if it crashes to a P/E ratio of 30 or 100 then 90% of the stockholder calue is whiped out. Gone. Not transfered. Gone.

So what's your poor bribed congressman to do. Act on alibaba's theivery to save Amazon, or not?

tough choice.

Alibaba's stock price over the next year will be a race between their growth in value, and the trees Amazon and E-bay fell in their path. I predict it goes up for 1/4 then down in response to regulatory pressure after the elections. THen eventually back up if their revenues grow,.

Comment: Re:This won't amount to anything... (Score 1) 122

by goombah99 (#47934753) Attached to: Scientists Twist Radio Beams To Send Data At 32 Gigabits Per Second

I was going to say the same thing. It's total rubbish in it's claims. Being just yet-another-linear combination of MiMo modes it provides no additional channel capacity. But there is the possibility that the demodulation/modulation methodology is easier to implement than other fast modulation schemes.

Comment: Re:The definition of life? (Score 4, Interesting) 211

by goombah99 (#47871805) Attached to: Information Theory Places New Limits On Origin of Life

Since I seem to be dismissing that paper for trying to use thermodynamics to define the probability of a living system I wanted to quickly add that I am explicitly not dismission it. I'm dismissing the summary that conflating the definition of life with a lower bound on it's thermodynamic probability. Often times thermodynamic bounds are very useful in ruling out how something did not happen and to identify the high probability way something could have happened.

Take for example, the observation that most complex living systems are beautiful as well. Why are they beautiful to us. I think it is because they visually have organization. And the single most obvious facet of organization are symmetries at large scale. For example, atomically speaking your eyes are very far apart. Yet your body has this beautiful bilateral symmetry.

THe obvious question is whether symmetries in living systems occur because living systems select for symmetry because there is an evolutionary advantage to it or because of thermodynamics.

to see this take something simpler. The packing of seeds in a sunflower is optimal in some sense (fibonaci) yet one might believe there's a chance it's just a thermodynamic accident not a careful selection.

In fact drill down a little more and consider the fact that nearly all proteins in your body form homo dimers that are symmetric.

an interesting paper

comes to the stunning conclusion that this symmetry is not from evolutionary selection! it's overwhelmingly improbable that function can arise from random collisions between proteins, and the only likely way two proteins can collide and form a low energy conformation that last long enough to perform a function is for collisions that form a symmetrical arrangement. Almost all other collisions wont last long enough for the dimer to perform a function (such as catalyzing production of a useful metabolite). Since Natural selection cannot operate on anything that doesn't do something to increase fitness this means that assymetric collisions are completely invisible to the organism. Therefore thermodynmics can rightfully claim that nearly all protein symmetry arrises simply from thermodynamic probability not from natural selection having a prefernce for symmetry. This is not to say that symmetry has no selectable characteristics. It's just that at the molecular level, those selectable characteristics are not required to explain the emergence of symmetry as we observe it. The frequency that we observe symmetric versus asymmetric homo dimers of proteins is exactly the frequency we would expect at random due to thermodynamics.

Thus the interesting thing about this new work in thermodynamics is it sets a lower bound on the conditions needed for life to emerge. It does not however define the probability of life emerging.

Comment: The definition of life? (Score 5, Interesting) 211

by goombah99 (#47871517) Attached to: Information Theory Places New Limits On Origin of Life

If we define life as the ability to organize and propopagate information then the highest form of life is a salt crystal or any self propagating organization of atoms with long range order. A diamond has far lower entropy than any living system. Like wise if we define it as system that processes energy to propogate itself then we have Fire as the ultimate for of life.

clearly gasses (disorded are dead) and crystals are dead. SO is life a liquid (in the middle of the two)? Again obviously not.

The best definition of a living system in terms of information tehory concepts I have come across is the one by David Wolpert who coined in the term self-dissimilarity in reaction to the vogue study of self-similarity in self-organizing systems. For example, a pile of sand is self-organizing system that is ever changing but also ever-self simmilar. it's not alive either

so solids, liquids, gasses and self-simmilar self organizing systems are all bankrupt as a informational definition of life. What's self-dissimilarity then?

It's the concept that the organizational principles of a system can suddenly change as one crosses scales.

imagine one zooms out from a microsope from the atomic scale. at first you see the atom and it has some interesting symmetires in the way the electron oribits have some simmilarities. at a higher scale we see the molecule. then the collection of molecules. soon we see the patterning of molecules.
we observe that this is infact cell. then many cells. then it's an organ. then its many organs. then an animal. then a school of fish. then zooming our we see schools of fish separated across the ocean.

the key insight is this. at each scale everything you infer about the information content and predictibitly of adjaceny in the pattern works to predict the patterns propoagation at a slightly larger zoom. Up until it suddenly fails. you reach the edge of the liver or the edge of the cell or the edge of the animal. then the lower scale is useless in predicting how the next scale up is organized.

these abrupt steps in dissimilarity is a halmark of living systems. the degree of information gain at the step is phenomenal. this is different than saying for example that a composite rock is alive. the difference is that the system is processing information and energy across these organizational boundaries. that's pretty much the best definition of life interms of a single defintion that can be plotted on a graph. the x-axis is the zoom, and the y-axis is the predictability of the next larger scale from the lower one. you see steps. that plus the processing of information across steps is a living system. If you accept this you might feel like their are non-traditional defintiions of life as well. for example, if a bacteria is living thing, is it possible that a community of bacteria is also a lvifing thing. Perhaps the earth is too.

What's intriguing here is that systems with this property may imprint themselves on other systems. you might for example be able to spot radio emissions or atmospheric molecular composition that displays the imprint of dissimilar steps in it's self organization.

SO unless this theory considers this, I'm skeptical about it. Salt is self organizing but it's not alive. It is however highly probable. Indeed eutectic separation is highly propable but it's just physics not life.

If Machiavelli were a hacker, he'd have worked for the CSSG. -- Phil Lapsley