How do cells come up with their programming language?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 июл 2024
- To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/NanoRooms
The first 200 of you will get 20% off Brilliant’s annual premium subscription.
Cited articles
The four hypothesis and their conclusion
Noda-Garcia, L., Liebermeister, W., & Tawfik, D. S. (2018). Metabolite-enzyme coevolution: from single enzymes to metabolic pathways and networks. Annual Review of Biochemistry, 87, 187-216.
Protein evolution experiment
Campbell, E. C., Correy, G. J., Mabbitt, P. D., Buckle, A. M., Tokuriki, N., & Jackson, C. J. (2018). Laboratory evolution of protein conformational dynamics. Current opinion in structural biology, 50, 49-57.
Campbell, E., Kaltenbach, M., Correy, G. J., Carr, P. D., Porebski, B. T., Livingstone, E. K., Tokuriki, N., ... & Jackson, C. J. (2016). The role of protein dynamics in the evolution of new enzyme function. Nature chemical biology, 12(11), 944-950.
PDB files: 4PCP, 4PCN, 1G03, and all of pdb101.rcsb.org/motm/154
3D animation library created by @BradyJohnston big thanks!
To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/NanoRooms . The first 200 of you will get 20% off Brilliant’s annual premium subscription.
Enzymes can make video thank to your local neighborhood enzyme
You are too petty to think biochemestry can be resume to logic gates and conformation, you keep pushing this INDUSTRIAL VIEW OF CELL that is old and fancy, forgeting 'harmony' of the spheres,forgeting entropic princiiples, forgeting smal violation of thermodinamic systhems, fogeting kassiimir effects, forgeting quantum fluctuations, forgeting entanglement, forgeting proteome mutations, etc.... etc.. all to cell your brilhant course's who don't have ANY CLINICAL VALUE for medicine or treatment of patients just PROVEE IMBETTER BY CONFING people and making them miserable be not CONSEPTIALIZING the cosntant mutation and low probability syntheis of molecules!
I am on day 408 in a row on Brilliant, something I have never been able to do before this format.
I have no vested interest, I just honestly wanted to endorse brilliant…really cool and fun way to learn a bunch of stuff. Well worth the money!
.
It’s just a message O people protect yourselves from the Hellfire. It is extremely painful, dark, and terrifying. God sent prophets to all nations for the truth. It’s better for us to believe in God, repent to Him and do good deeds for Him. There is nothing after death except Hellfire or Paradise. This life is very short and full of hardships and trials. This life is test form God. Don’t let Satan using your desires to mislead you from the path of God. God promised righteous people with a very beautiful life in the heaven. It is a great life full of joy, peace, and happiness. All prophets were sent to guide people to the truth (pure and clear monotheism). That is the straight way, the truth, and the real life. Say, He is Allah, the one. Allah is eternal. He begets not, nor was He begotten. And there is nothing comparable to Him. (holy Quran, original holy Bible, & all true Revelations). FACT.
It’s just a message O people protect yourselves from the Hellfire. It is extremely painful, dark, and terrifying. God sent prophets to all nations for the truth. It’s better for us to believe in God, repent to Him and do good deeds for Him. There is nothing after death except Hellfire or Paradise. This life is very short and full of hardships and trials. This life is test form God. Don’t let Satan using your desires to mislead you from the path of God. God promised righteous people with a very beautiful life in the heaven. It is a great life full of joy, peace, and happiness. All prophets were sent to guide people to the truth (pure and clear monotheism). That is the straight way, the truth, and the real life. Say, He is Allah, the one. Allah is eternal. He begets not, nor was He begotten. And there is nothing comparable to Him. (holy Quran, original holy Bible, & all true Revelations). FACT.
The basic principle of biology is that once you understand something, you only understand half of it, but even this theorem is incomplete.
Half!?! How prideful.
@@GRAYgaussif u think u know more than 23.47% ur out of your freaking mind. The hubris of some biologists.😢❤😊🎉😂
I am curious as where you arrived at 23.47%... Personally, sure, it seems like a lot to know for each subjective and finite mind, but what the human race knows compared to what can be known is literally an infinitesimal next to nothing. If we were to take every subject we knew of and called that 100%, we don't even have 1% of that. We know of proteins, and haven't the slightest clue at the inner works and I assure you they have even more complicated workings than we're aware of. Glycobiology has only recently picked up in the past 20 years and again, we know about as much as a script kiddie "hacking" a website. There are so many things to speak of just what we defined, we create more questions than we answer even among what we think we know. For everything defined there's are far more unknowns left untouched, that will be even more complicated when discovered by the understanding you just integrated... If we had just 1% understanding of biology, we'd probably have immortality and mental illness solved. @@AllMyGabens
@@AllMyGabens23.47 ??! How arrogant.
That sucks 😢
I come from a molecular biology background and am currently a swe. I never thought of cell pathways as directed graphs. Pretty neat !
I suggest you to take a look at some Systems Biology studies and interactome papers. For me, it is quite breathtaking
When one looks at an enzyme with a visualization where that instead of that noodley thing you use the shape of the actual "electronic fuzz", it looks more like a little stone. Like any stone, there are little irregularities, different valleys and hills. The notional enzyme "active sites" then don't really "feel" _vastly_ different from other parts - less like locks and keys and more like oddly particular valleys on the surface of a small rock. A rough, "natural" surface. When you see this, that the enzyme is like a "stone nanomachine", you can understand how that other little valleys just might do something too to a molecule that is able to fit them, even if it's only a bad and/or shallow fit. Instead of thinking of the valley as being molded to the molecule, think also about what molecules happen to fit the valleys just because there are enough in a cell and enough enzymes and "valleys per enzyme" to make the possibility that such a thing can happen quite high (i.e. a "you tossed the dice so many times it explored all possibilities" thing). These molecules that happen to "fit a little" thus ensure the enzyme can have at least a _little_ catalytic effect for them and thus catalytic effect generally aside from its "principal" effect. And then, should the products be useful, that's all that's needed for evolution to "latch on" and develop/optimize that valley in subsequent generations of the enzyme to make it "actually" work like that, i.e. to make that a or the new principal active site.
Put another way, the enzymes themselves naturally have some nonzero ability to catalyze side effects because nature is so fundamentally _non categorical_ and _fractal._ And the truth of their evolution is thus veiled by excess human abstraction and boundary-drawing upon the boundaryless. By being able to pull back and see the _whole_ (i.e. boundaryfree) picture for how it _feels_ as opposed to _analyzes,_ one could intuit the correct mechanism more readily.
That’s exactly what I was thinking, well said!
"How do cells come up with their programming language?" is like asking how a chemical factory invented its own blueprint and built itself from the ground up, using raw materials - stone, metals etc.
No, it is not. Factories are inorganic, they don't have the capacity to reproduce and alter the genes between generations.
False equivalence, inability to that facts for what they are, and the constant need to twist them for the sake of a creationist argument is what drives most people away.
I don’t see why comparing them makes a difference. I mean then tell me, a factory that had no humans to build it, but then it just became?
Since humans are smaller than chemical factories, the gods must be smaller than a cell
Nano materials@@FuneFox
I think its easy for us to associate one thing with another in a direct relationship when so many things are happening. If you want to think of it as an analogy: enzymes are a society. Society is a web of interconnections and interactions, i buy food, that food had to be brought to the store through a distribution system, logistics, finance, HR, and you keep on going and somehow you seem very far from the original topic, yet everything is interconnected. Its like our cells and interactions with molecules are almost designed for each other. The same way society changes norms, trends etc over a long period of time, a societal evolution of some sort. If things dont work out, then natural selection and other environmental factors will shape it.
Great video and great to see Molecular Nodes being put to great use :)
Thanks man! Wouldn’t be possible without you.
@@Nanorooms if you ever have questions about how to do a particular animation etc, please do reach out! Would love to help out with this kind of video
TY!
This sounds a bit like economics with logistics and supply chains, but for biology. I'm sure there's probably some opportunities in cross-disciplinary research.
Is it has any subject which learn about Applying a Biology to Logistics, management or economics?
Well both are cases of integer optimisation on directed graphs aka linear programming
@@quantumsoul3495no
criminally underrated channel
This is probably the best way of teaching biology that i have seen so far!
The funny thing is language only comes from a mind, or an intelligence. This is applicable for all forms of language.
Thankyou for upload
Thank you for this video! Im A high school student taking AP biology and seeing stuff like this always amplifies my interest in this amazing subject. The visual models are very useful 💪🏾💙
Woah cool! How's it so far? Planning to take it next year. :0
-Highschool sophomore
Y’all are on the right path, I’m a senior in biochem and all this stuff just gets cooler as you go on. Don’t shy away from orgo! It’s super cool too
Your videos are amazing and its utility is all the more needed currently as our society explores (and exploits) novel computing paradigms to support the application (and alignment) of AI. Life has created an efficient medium for processing information (in a qualitative and quantitative sense) and a deeper insight onto how its computations are programmed surely holds invaluable seeds of Truth for societal progress as a whole. Thanks for providing this fresh inspiration to all of us!!!!
I hope you don't stop producing more contents! I've been binge watching and rewatching your earlier videos after watching your recent release haha got the motivation again to repursuit CADD research 🤓
I remember how the SubAnima video about promiscuous enzymes blew my mind, and now I'll be thinking about all the ways they can work with theories!
Very impressive videos❤. How can a person who is mathematically oriented get closer to the biology that is presented on the channel? Where do you get your stories from? Are there any tutorials or materials?
You can read some of the papers and books I’ve linked in this and the previous videos!
@homeocelot3355 I am also interested in the mathematics and would like to know what you have discovered so far.
@Nanrooms I will check out the links, thanks.
Hi! I would suggest proteomics, if you like the small world, or ecology if you would like a bigger picture. Both are sub-subjects of biology
This is so good man!
Great video!!!
Thought provoking, thanks. Coupled with the stirring by Dr Tour, it's been a good couple of years thinking about this stuff.
I agree. Dr Tour’s detailed explications of the actual chemical steps involved in building the building blocks are truly mind blowing.
I find this intersection of biology and CS very interesting (Even though I know basically nothing about biology. I study CS btw). Any book recommendations / good material in general to learn more about this field? I also find stuff like neuromorphic computing kinda interesting
You should look into Bioinformatics, and any or all of the -Omic fields (Genomics, Transcriptomicts, Proteomics, Etc.)
There are a lot of open acces resourses and data bases online Like PDB, HMDB and MetFrag. I don't know a lot about book applied to the field, but most modern biochemistry and molecular biology books would have at least a dedicated to Bioinformatics
we are in the same boat i guess, lmk if you find something
Your channel inspires me. What is your mic setup? I have a blue snowball and computer fan is loud (hyte y60). Audacity filters out most but it could be better
This scope in on pathways makes me realize how Fibonnic #s mirror nature in so many ways
Can you do a booklist video so that we can go in depth
It tries all combinations over time to see what works. It's like a space of possibilities, where only certain combinations work (or survive) while others don't. You can configure the genetic code in a finite set of possible combinations. Some of these will turn out to be mutations that are advantageous to the organism, and some don't.
Except there isn’t close to enough time to try all the possibilities to see what will “work”. Hell, there hasn’t even been close to enough time for a single protein 150 amino acids in length to form by chance. That would take on the order of trillions of trillions of trillions of years.
You are the best of RUclips
Excellent video. Thank you
Nice work.
exceptional
Love this
Another banger video!
Nature doesn't even know it until inventing it. Now, we understand the nature
Amazing and so interesting!
Enzymes are arguably the most confusing proteins. They build and they break, preferentially. One rougue enzyme could easily destroy the metabolism of an entire cell, or clog it up with detrimental products!
I'm pretty sure it arises from the properties of the constituents itself. Each piece of space IS the calculator. The properties are inherent... Reality is its own system of Logic.
The properties of the parts which governs how they join up with other parts have too many ways to not get it right.
Information always arises from an external influence on the ordering of parts.
Ribozymes do not contain information, though their sequences do create functions.
Life on Earth replicates and stays alive because of unidirectional base 4 digitally encoded information which specifies (only!) A.a. sequence. The function of the given protein only arises from the combination of spatial orientation plus functional stereochemical proximity of all of the parts.
No spontaneously formed active site, nor whole protein, can ever be "back-coded" into information which then permits the creation of more.
The encoded information means nothing without both machine and matching correspondence between codon and a.a.
The encoding means nothing without "nano-machinery" which recognizes the stereochemistry of multiple codons and one specific amino acid.
The structure and function of every amino acid tRNA synthetase must also appear simultaneously with the code specifying it.
The "junk DNA" has both base sequences which indicate previous iterations of proteins and virus incorporations, but most comprises a vast operating system of AND, OR, and NOR logic gates which feed back through promoter and suppressor mRNA sequences, often, as in E. Coli, 32+ bases long, numbering well over 50 unique sequences. This comprises giga to terabyte quantities of ",information."
Compare the 2 utterly unique schema of DNA replication- no overlap. So, the encoding also had no overlap.
Sure, evolution works. But, only, if the spell-check system to limit errors to 1 part in a million or so, is present.
The scientific evidence proves a Superintelligence created both code and machines at the same time in a system whose complexity cannot be simplified below kilobyteto megabyte levels of information.
Whether aliens ftom the stars (panspermia does not fit the precise match of geochemistry and element distribution found in life on Earth) or a God-like Creative Intelligence, you must decide.
What the scientific discoveries of >60 years does not permit us to do, is believe all this came about without some Intelligence manipulating matter and energy. The p value for random processes is < 10^minus 1 million, ot more, because thr likelyhood of multiple individual events working in harmony as complexes, dimers trimers, and tetramers, if each arises spontaneously from random base sequences, to produce a system, must be that vanishinly small.
The scientific deginition of, "impossible" is events less likely that 1 in 10^120.
I rest my case.
@@glenliesegang233 Do you see the soil and water that make up a pot when you see the end result? Do you see the raw metals it is made from when looking at a watch? Do you see the the rocks that have been turned into silicon when looking at your computer? No, you don't. So what do you expect to learn about how life came to be when anything that cannot survive in our current world isn't good enough for you?
All it takes for life to form is for a self replicating molecule that can mutate to arise. Not DNA, not RNA, just a molecule or a group of molecules. From there natural selection will allow the more stable molecules to survive.
Also, I would like a credible source for your definition of impossible. Because as far as I'm aware, the word impossible does not exist in science. If it is the best explanation for observes data, it will be considered the leading theory until a better one comes along. No matter how supposedly small the odds are.
Oh, and one other thing. DNA isn't a binary. It doesn't operate in true of false statements. Nor is it prevented from depending on circular dependencies or being subject to both constructive and destructive interference. So to compare DNA with logic circuits is the same as comparing apples to a chunk of iron.
Not to mention that all steps of abiogenesis have been reproduced in lab settings. The only thing that hasn't been reproduced is a full continues chain of events that result in a self-replicating molecule, which would be a completely superficial experiment to perform anyway. We can say with certainty that abiogenesis is possible. The only thing we cannot say with certainty through what process life on earth arrived. Regardless, even if we knew for absolute certain that abiogenesis were impossible, your claim that life was created by a form of intelligence is completely unsubstantiated. It is in fact so poorly substantiated that it is practically at the bottom of the pile of available theories. Interdimensional or multiversal panspermia would be far more likely. As would panspermia from a planet that had more beneficial conditions towards abiogenesis. Even pure random chance without any environmental factors that contribute towards abiogenesis would be a more likely explanation that the completely unsubstantiated dribble that you're spouting.
Proving an existing theory false does not prove yours correct. Not unless your theory can stand up to scrutiny. Intelligent design does not and never has stood up to scrutiny. The God of the Bible, Quoran, Torah and most other monotheistic gods outright fall flat in the face of scrutiny, to the point where I can say with certainty that the god in the Bible cannot possibly exist without violating the laws of logic. The one set of laws that most Christians seem to believe the Christian god cannot defy.
If we are the result of intelligent design. What created our creators? Surely eventually something was able to form spontaneously.
@@glenliesegang233 I think you need to broaden your definition of information… information is everywhere… ontologically that’s all that we can guarantee exists…
@@emilioarguello9786 yeah, I think about that all the time. That’s why I personally think there is no creator if they had to spontaneously exist in the first place… why not just matter spontaneously existing rather than complicate things to ridiculous causal complexity.
How about, likewise, also “letting” the computers (digital/analogue/q-bit-based) to evolve it’s own programming language from some kind of atomic core paradigm? For this to work, the computer will have to “know” itself, of course. The best method for getting information about one’s own nature is testing, which can be a repetitive cycle of successive approximation, guided (judged) by the measure of it’s own success. For that “success” to be measurable, there must be some kind of goal or purpose, reaching which comes with a certain pair of evolutionary advancements, firstly stability (not decaying), secondly balance (ability to form larger units), as well as the information/intelligence “stored” in the dual nature of the first two (since the purposes of not decaying AND forming structures both require different set of attributes). The decision is made by reading out the information stored in the dual purpose, and storing it in log file which is somewhat analogue with the DNA of the cells. And you, who are still reading, might already know what we should, eventually, end up with, right?
Great video as always, but the volume of your voice is still bit too low.
Ugh, I've never had such a hard time actually noticing what a video narrator was saying, before.
I am putting this in the background and listening while I do other things...which is how I absorb information, all the time.
I've listened to much more difficult biochemistry videos and managed to remember they were playing just fine.
But this one, for some reason, keeps falling from my attention. It's not hard to understand per se, it's hard to notice it's happening.
I keep suddenly realizing I wasn't paying the slightest attention, even though I'm used to multitasking in exactly this way.
i too had a hard time understanding or hearing his narrating. i think it’s because he’s not a native speaker, although he nearly sounds like one. irritating
Bro sounds kinda silly but it’s cool we all do be a bit goofy
El verdadero lenguaje de programación es el codigo genetico y su transcripción a proteinas. Cuando hice click crei que iba a ver un video acerca de eso...
El titulo eata mal, pero el contenido es bastante bueno 👍
Big O analysis of your entire DNA sequence when?
blowing me away
Yeah...but how did the atoms know to organize into those molecules in the first place?
whats the most overlapping UG in engineering to the topics that you cover?
It's computational biology and other fields mixed..
don't you think it's a little dishonest to start with the cells as a given, since we understand that cells already have specified information (code) inside them?
Man this is really cool.
thinking of DNA as a programming language for a human is like thinking pixels on a screen are the programming language of a video game.
Elaborate please
Where pixels land is programmed so I get it
@@johnhenry4024it’s impossible to understand the inner workings of how exactly genes translate to phenotypical traits. Imagine a rectangle drawn on a screen, this could have been done probably thousands of different ways using the hardware and CPU instructions.
@@eggsalad3481
That doesn't sound like a good analogy since genes themselves are supposed to be the hardware(in part) and the programming.
@@WessHilsetter genes aren’t the hardware. Genes carry instructions to create proteins which are the hardware of the body
Thais vídeo is a masterpiece
Please what kinda app you use to process that image? Were you using programming? What language and how?
It’s all about increasing entropy. The planet has organic compounds and conditions for chemical reactions to occur between those compounds as it is being bombarded with energy constantly. Organic reproductive life is inevitable given enough time cuz the environment needs to lose the energy bound up in those molecules faster.
How long would it take to create that path by trial and error?
Forever if you had only one instance. But there were multiple instances trying multiple things simultaneously. Think in terms of bandwidth where randomness is so random and you have so many things being random that eventually one of them comes up with something useful. We look at something happening in parts and wonder how can that ever happen, but we can easily forget trillions upon trillions upon trillions of possible reactions when, if the conditions are just so, one of them might arrive at something that makes a copy of itself. It call comes down to the versatility of carbon and the vast number of combinations.
A new book to be published by Austin Macauley Publishers titled From Chemistry to Life on Earth on 21 June 2024 explains in great detail how the cell, the genetic code and the ribosome could have evolved from basic chemistry and physics. To do this it employs 290references , over 50 illustrations and several information tables. It also proposes a formula for molecular natural selection using one worked example.
aslında bu videoya biyo - kuntum açısından da bakmak lazım. Çünkü o birleşimlerin temelinde kuantum fiziği yatar.
The universe is that way, complimentary
Quick! Someone rewrite it in rust!
Creative
Nice
That was a hodgepodge with a lot of missing evolutionary biology and misplaced theory of convergent evolution.
What do they want to do? Thats quite the question, really! Natural philosphy needs to make a comeback asap
The title is misleading. You need to define programming language then demonstrate application of this in living organic matter - FIRST to set your premise up correctly for inspection.
Immediately the video starts and it appears that the words used are flashy to appeal to social media. Though the graphics used are very presentable and visual which means it's missed opportunity to explore life in this perspective.
The title is directed at creationists, it's how they refer to
The title is spot on. And yes, there is only one answer.
Yes, evolution is backed my more evidence than any other field, scientific or religious. The point of the title is to grab the attention of the believers with doubt in their heart, in an attempt to explain how life works, since the Church has attributed a negative meaning to the word evolution.
@@davidaugustofc2574 Thank you for explaining the context however it seems confusing to me if programming is not defined in relation to evolution.
@@rafaelgonzalez4175 That's not an especially helpful comment is all I can conclude from the information provided within it: Perhaps a simple explanation is not too much effort?
The simplex units of this invisible intelligence telling atoms to form diamonds ! wow ! Magical creation story! Now where did the smart units come from?
bro if u have black background. dont use white ad
Wow..❤
How do computers come up with their programming language? Do you think they evolved over millions of years?
Yes. Their predecessors weren't primarily silicon and resins, but fatty acids and proteins. Nonetheless, the programming did evolve over epochs. Elements to hydrocarbons to rocks and proteins to refined versions of each to etched silicon and baked resin boards. All to bring life to us. The creator's tools did and do their work well. Even now, as we manipulate them with words and algorithms. And eventually, we will manipulate the tools and universe with our tools, instead of indirectly.
It is incredible we humans can almost know exactly the HOW
But even more interesting and mysterious is the WHY
Congrats on your work!
Blessings from Mexico City!
😊
Time, and a lot of it
I think you have to decide if entropy is a thing or not.
NAMASTE
Are you a fan of Michael Levin? The guy studying morphogenetics, morphogenesis.. the Picasso frog and all that...
Edit, he describes an animal's physical form as a chaotic attractor in morphospace
Intelligence scaling to molecular morphospace ;)
Hope this lead to smth revolutionary in biology
as far as "happens" met, everything goes weirdo
Enzymes be hustlin n' bustlin yo
Great videos....excellent work...I am an engineer too, whole life, I was trying to link the two...nature and maths...
Finally, I am eager to know (don't feel offended pls..) WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT ALMIGHTY GOD...HOPING YOUR ANSWER PLS?
No back coding into RNA allowed from random enzyme form random a.a's.
No coding, no copying, no hrredity, no evolution.
How many a.a's in those wiggilg chains?
Because the consciousness,
of Father Mother Life
is behind it.
I think it is intriguing idea of comparing biological evolution to training neural networks. Our universe might well be a simulation of neural network being trained to get an objective function. Maybe that is why we have so much randomness in quantum level, as input parameters are fed in random, affecting evolution direction of the universe.
All laws in the universe are replicative and fravtal to the core... But their is 2 fundamental relationships that governs all
This ads up for currently in existence. Now how was life itself programmed into existence? How did a bunch of sub mass particles, then into sub atomic particles, into atomic particles, to then organize into useful elements, knowing all that would evolve into a protein and so on.
Google it.
@@pangeaproxima3681 Google says' "The universe in existence is the symphony orchestrated and conducted by the intelligent design of the creator, God."
There are so many things i understand but never able to explain it and sometimes thr are no words to describe it
These pathways was destined to be formed,
I've seen alotta enzymes in this video, I haven't heard a single hormone yet.
Iean, it took a long, long, long, long, long, long time for this to evolve.
Background music is not useful, can’t listen and understand w that music layer, that’s why there’s not music in a classroom , cause human brain can’t process to many things at the same time,
The underlying matrix is consciousness.
Interesting concept: "Its own programming language"...
Actually, Perry Marshall wrote about this while ago already
What’s the plan? I am a guest. 0:01
📝 Summary of Key Points:
📌 The retrograde hypothesis suggests that pathways are built backwards, depleting intermediate substances and requiring more enzymes upstream for production.
🧐 The forward hypothesis proposes that pathways are built forwards, with additional steps being added to optimize the end product.
🚀 Promiscuous enzymes can have more than one function, allowing for versatility and optimization in different reactions.
🚀 The C1 module hypothesis suggests that enzymes with the same reaction type originate from a promiscuous ancestor and can evolve into separate pathways.
🚀 The patchwork hypothesis suggests that promiscuous enzymes create hidden connections between pre-existing pathways, leading to the evolution of new pathways.
🚀 The final hypothesis combines elements from previous hypotheses, suggesting that pathways evolve through the simultaneous evolution of enzymes and metabolites, optimizing the speed of the pathway and creating new pathways.
🚀 The final hypothesis does not fully explain the evolution of core pathways, but highlights the potential of using our understanding of pathway evolution to design enzymes and invent new pathways in the future.
💡 Additional Insights and Observations:
💬 "Pathways are like programming languages in cells."
💬 "Enzymes are the workhorses of the cell."
📊 No specific data or statistics were mentioned in the video.
🌐 The video does not reference any external sources or references.
📣 Concluding Remarks:
The video explores different hypotheses on how pathways evolve in cells and the role of enzymes in this process. It discusses the retrograde and forward hypotheses, as well as the concepts of promiscuous enzymes, the C1 module, and the patchwork hypothesis. The final hypothesis combines elements from previous hypotheses and suggests that pathways evolve through the simultaneous evolution of enzymes and metabolites. While there are still unanswered questions, this understanding of pathway evolution has the potential to be applied in enzyme design and the invention of new pathways.
Generated using Talkbud (Browser Extension)
Emotion and intelligence is not considered a force of nature in modern science. Where did the code for atoms and atomic bonding come from?
Google it.
🎉🎉🎉
once more it confirms that nothing in the universe is fixed but evolving all the time, which means the future is what our imagination has in store for ourselves!
Any efficiency gain that brings on reproductive efficiency, even given the addition of a step or molecule, will be favorably selected.
This broke my brain
If God (the creator) is like a programmer, then science is reverse engineering
Truth.
Only- it's dead end..
Faith in God through Jesus is the way to the rebirth- a real supernatural event that actually happens-
For ALL will stand in front of the judgement seat of God..
Absolutely no doubt about that.
There is coming a day of night..
No light in it, thick darkness-
The "day" of the Lord.
Israel exists as perfectly prophesied, wisdom has increased- and the bickering of Government and the coming global warming will set the stage for the upheaval that is coming- which you will see in your lifetime- no doubt about it. But the end? No man may know that day or hour but God in heaven.
@@rdallas81 "for the upheaval that is coming- which you will see in your lifetime-" you narcs have been saying th same thing for thousands of years you honestly think the universe revolves around your dirt in the middle east because some pedo prophets chugged goat blood as older religions like pagan greek and norse egpytion religions were already 4x older than christianity ever was and dying
What makes you all so sure there's only a single creator?
How can you take one single look at life, and eliminate the possiblility of team work?
"Look at DNA. Only one guy did that! There was absolutely no collaboration whatsoever!"
reminds me of local minima in gradient descent
❤
❤❤❤
The googly eyes are killing me I'm so stoned
👀
This is an interesting THOUGHT experiment, but Information does not simply arise to solve a given problem, rather, there are principles that must be in place! Information IS NOT a material quantity... so it requires intelligence behind it.
And this seems to be the first attribute of a molecule that shows clear intelligence defined as the capability of simultaneously (or interchangeably?) serving/interpreting completely different logical formations by using just one single structure? Some proteins seem to be as intelligent as a molecule can currently be. Before jumping to the conclusion that we have just spotted the smallest implementation of any kind of intelligence, though, remember that even particles (as fundamental as space-time itself) are capable of showing themselves to our discoverable universe simultaneously (or interchangeably?) as “particles” and “waves” and... space-time that, less surprisingly, is capable of showing itself as space and time simultaneously. These are the 3 ACTUALLY fundamental component of our entire (physically and intellectually) discoverable reality. Any other “fundamental” thing is, actually, just a derivative of these 3 modern-day earth, wind and fire. If you still believe in “EM waves” as waves of physical properties, as well as specks of matter as the last valid things to speak of, with no further secrets to hide (as per the Copenhagen interpretation) then I really wonder why are you still reading this comment.
It could also have resulted from design by a designer.
Science only describes the what of things in more detail. It explains no why’s or how’s. It can’t.
well, its all natural selection in the end, just like AI learning mechanisms. you mutate and prepare a lot of variations of enzyme pathways and then see which one survives. this is the cause of creation and the creation of the said programming language. speaking of language, i think in a biological sense, the ability of DNA storing the commands is much more interesting than the protein enzyme side of the problem.