Re: Genome Project

From: Kenneth Van Oost (Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be)
Date: Tue Feb 20 2001 - 20:20:36 GMT

  • Next message: Kenneth Van Oost: "Re: Lesser genes than expected"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id TAA15599 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Tue, 20 Feb 2001 19:46:29 GMT
    Message-ID: <000b01c09b7a$b03a4ca0$8502bed4@default>
    From: "Kenneth Van Oost" <Kenneth.Van.Oost@village.uunet.be>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    References: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D3101745C64@inchna.stir.ac.uk> <000701c09857$675d0520$400abed4@default> <20010217090353.A586@reborntechnology.co.uk> <001401c0999f$5b8d2380$0d0fbed4@default> <20010219103359.A786@reborntechnology.co.uk>
    Subject: Re: Genome Project
    Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 21:20:36 +0100
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
    X-RBL-Warning: (orbs.dorkslayers.com) 
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    Hi Robin,
    I wrote,
    > > IMO, still, gene products can be permeable with things like memetic
    info.
    > > That info allowes the gene to " mutate " and that cell is than to be
    > > inherited by the progeny.
    You wrote,
    > I'm sorry, this seems like sheer nonsense to me. Genes do not need
    > information, they are not computers, if there's any "editing" going on,
    > it is certainly not of that sort.

    << I didn't say they were !
    My point is when genes were to be multiple functional they have to have
    a inbedded ability to ' choose ' or to switch from one function to another
    in order to respond to the stimuli. And I understand that they can do that,
    willingly and without asking question.

    I better have used the term ' input' instead of info.
    But anyway, to switch to the matter in question genes needs ' input',
    something that makes it ' choose '_ and that can be IMO memetical in
    origin, even though that other genes contribute to this process, the
    ' input ' can be memetical. Memes drives genes, remerber !?

    Genes mutate because something was added or is removed. In both
    cases it is some kind of info ( that something ), or are all mutations due
    to either self- organization and pure randomness !?
    And even then, is there no change in what kind of info the gene possesses !?
    I always thought, that you can take the meme- concept to its extremes,
    but like the genome rapport shows us now, not anymore the genes- con-
    cept.

    Genes can 't be that selfish anymore due to their multi- functional
    attitude.
    The result of a multiple- functional gene mutating has to show itself as
    more
    differences than we today into a population.
    And we humans, are not that genetical different at the species level.
    Our differences are due to memetical interactions with the environment.

    Best,

    Kenneth

    ( I am, because we are)

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 20 2001 - 19:48:44 GMT