The Cell’s Importance Of Optimizing And Repair

A car gasoline engine cannot be bigger and faster while getting better gas mileage than smaller cars. A computer cannot run more components without using more electricity. Thus, it is not always possible to have all the elements of a product be ideal.  Recent recent research shows a unique combination of the two.

The title of the PNAS paper says the “Genetic code translation displays a linear trade-off between efficiency and accuracy of tRNA selection.”  There are competing forces the paper admits, “Translation of the ancient and universal genetic code into protein on ribosomes requires precise mRNA decoding by aminoacyl-tRNAs (aa-tRNAs) and rapid formation of nascent peptide chains.”   Accuracy and speed are required for the cell to survive and since this is the case with the limitations of time and space, how do they work together for the benefit of the cell?

When it comes to the transfer of  RNA, the  anticodon must find the right codon within a certain time frame. The article says  in regards to this, “Codon reading by aa-tRNAs ultimately relies on the specificity of cognate in relation to noncognate codon–anticodon interactions, but two ribosome-dependent specificity enhancements greatly improve mRNA decoding.”

There is not one but incredibly two well-designed mechanisms that act like an editor whose job is to proofread to make sure the job is done right, ” “the ribosome enhances the accuracy of codon reading by a twostep mechanism in which initial codon selection by a tRNA is followed by a proofreading step.”  The speed is accomplished by the tRNA matching up initially with its cognate, but “editors” in the ribosome during translation clean up any mistakes.

Then the authors looked for optimizing by examining the “maximal possible discrimination between a cognate and a noncognate codon–anticodon interaction: the ‘d value’,”  Just tentative numbers, further study is required for a better conclusion. Not surprisingly, the article then gives credit to evolution where it says,Finally, we propose that quantitative estimates of the d values of the genetic code in conjunction with the remarkably simple efficiency-accuracy trade-off revealed by the present experiments will clarify how the accuracy in living cells has been evolutionarily tuned for maximal fitness of growing bacteria.”

It really doesn’t explain evolution other than the authors believe in it rather this is amazing observational science. Darwinism actually hinders the science with a better understanding that comes from  intelligent design. The designs we see in nature come from a mind not a non-thinking process. These designs are highly advanced and require much study for us mere humans to understand.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “The Cell’s Importance Of Optimizing And Repair

  1. A car gasoline engine cannot be bigger and faster while getting better gas mileage than smaller cars. A computer cannot run more components without using more electricity.
    /blockquote>

    We might wonder what rock Michael has been living under.

    My son’s Ford Model A had 40HP, and ran a little over 20 miles per gallon. My 2007 GTI Fahrenheit has 220HP and gets 25MPG. (And i get 0-60 in 6.8 seconds, while the Model A can’t even reach 60mph.The GTI is more reliable, more agile, and much easier to operate.) The ENIAC computer had 3.5 THOUSAND vacuum tubes and sucked down 50 kilowatts of power. An Intel Lynnfield quad-core processor chip has 774 MILLION transistors, and sips 82 Watts. (And the ENIAC operated at a 1.0MHz clock speed, while the Lynnfirld zips along at 2.7GHz — 2700 times as fast. It’s more reliable , as well.)

    The reason for the overall improvement is clear: Cars and computers have EVOLVED.

    We can now understand the reason for Michael’s error..He forgot about evolution.

  2. It really doesn’t explain evolution [0] other than the authors believe in it [sic] rather this is amazing observational science

    Michael is amazed that genetic repair processes involve a trade-off between efficiency and accuracy. It’s been 55 years since my introductory course on control theory.[1] But one of the first principles is that every control system trades off efficiency/speed for accuracy. We used operational calculus to show this, but, if you stop to think about it, the result should be intuitively obvious: shoot faster, miss more.

    Michael is amazed at all the wrong things. Not having any discernible qualifications in science, he marvels at elementary mathematical results of control theory, considers oscillating chemical reactions the height of complexity, and marvels at the biological structure of zinc. Zinc.

    Meanwhile, the truly awesome escapes him entirely.

    But perhaps this is understandable. Michael believes that everything in the universe is micromanaged through inscrutable magic by God. In terms of scientific explanation, there is a vast gulf between tradeoffs in control systems and the structure of the ribosome. In terms of magic, however, there is no difference at all—magic is magic.

    ==================
    [0] Michael has it backwards. Physical facts do not “explain” scientific theories. Rather, the theories explain the facts. Yet another fundamental misunderstanding of what science is all about.

    [1] In the day, we considered only analog control systems, because that’s all there were. Except for Leon Chua, we also considered only linear systems, because we couldn’t do the math for non-linear cases.

  3. Darwinism actually hinders the science with a better understanding that comes from intelligent design. The designs we see in nature come from a mind not a non-thinking process. These designs are highly advanced and require much study for us mere humans to understand.

    Like everything else, Michael has this one exactly backward. Intelligent design not only does not explain anything, it cannot explain anything. It’s thesis, that things are designed, implies only that things are the way they are because they are the way they are.

    Intelligent design actively refuses to speculate upon the characteristics, abilities, motivations, or identity of its Designer.. Without some handle on these aspects, it is inherently unable to inquire of any particular phenomenon: (a) how it was designed, or (b) why it was designed in the way it was. That is, ID can say no more than that a physical entity is the way it is because it is the way it is. ID could “study” it, but it is powerless to “explain” it in terms of anything else.

    Ask an ID disciple to explain electricity in terms of intelligent design. Why does electricity produce the effects it does? How does it produce those effects? How does it relate to other phenomena, such ad magnetism?

    .

    Then ask a scientist to explain electricity. He will tell you about electrons and fields. He will show you how Maxwell’s equations relate electricity to magnetism—which is the basis for all electrical motors and generators. He can demonstrate4 how Maxwell’s equations PREDICTED radio waves—a phenomenon that no one had even guessed might exist before this scientific explanation.

    All of science is grounded upon explanation in terms of natural law, not supernatural causation. Whereas design tells you only that what is is, science offers.relationships to the rest of the world, and opportunities for control over the world.

    Michael is correct in saying that both ID believers and scientists can “study”. things. However, when they have finished taking apart the object of study, the scientist has a basis for relating it to other phenomena, and a guide for further understanding. Whereas the design believer is left only with a pile of unrelated facts.

    Setting aside the question of whether or not something is in fact “designed,” design produces no useful result. It is vacuous.

    In evolution, design tells us only that things are the way they are because they just are. Evolution tells us that things are the way they are because they got that way. THEN we can dig deeper, and ask,HOW did they get that way.

    That is, we can “explain” them.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s