The collective mind knows all things
How many people here are good with biology and genetics? I was wondering something the other day, and I thought I'd ask you all. We've briefly touched on this topic matter before, but I am going a slightly different direction with it.
As we grow up, we learn things and gradually become smarter. We learn through experience and study. This information is stored up over time up until the point where we die, when it is all lost.
But yet while we live we innately *know* certain things. We have instincts that tell us certain things. For example we have a natural attraction to the opposite sex (most of the time), and for some reason we know that we're supposed to get naked and thrust around to make babies. Maybe this is just because of my lack of knowledge about biology, but could this be considered embedded knowledge in our genes?
We've talked before about uploading consciousness to computers, but I'm wondering if it's possible to embed knowledge to your DNA and carry it over to another generation. Imagine how much more efficient we could be as a species if we could access our memories and knowledge from previous generations. At the same time we could carry on much more long term projects and endeavors if we knew we'd be able to experience it.
So does anyone know anything about this? Is this remotely possible? I titled this thread this way because I'm hoping this can be a thread where we just ask each other questions about stuff someone else may know.
As we grow up, we learn things and gradually become smarter. We learn through experience and study. This information is stored up over time up until the point where we die, when it is all lost.
But yet while we live we innately *know* certain things. We have instincts that tell us certain things. For example we have a natural attraction to the opposite sex (most of the time), and for some reason we know that we're supposed to get naked and thrust around to make babies. Maybe this is just because of my lack of knowledge about biology, but could this be considered embedded knowledge in our genes?
We've talked before about uploading consciousness to computers, but I'm wondering if it's possible to embed knowledge to your DNA and carry it over to another generation. Imagine how much more efficient we could be as a species if we could access our memories and knowledge from previous generations. At the same time we could carry on much more long term projects and endeavors if we knew we'd be able to experience it.
So does anyone know anything about this? Is this remotely possible? I titled this thread this way because I'm hoping this can be a thread where we just ask each other questions about stuff someone else may know.
Comments
And since I heard that story, I wondered. Yes, Ryan, I think it is remotely possible.
From completely my OWN opinion, I believe that absolutely everyone is born with a specific personality. Depending on that personality, a baby may learn faster or slower, be easy to take care of or be hard to take care of, so on and so forth... and then the environment comes into play. Now, if you have a very stubborn personality to begin with, environmental factors won't affect you as much. If you don't have as much will power, though, you'll be easily changed by what is happening around you.
I'm also a huge believer in the idea that yes, certain personality traits are genetic. It goes along with the last paragraph though-- if you're genetically bound to have a more stubborn personality, you could just end up that way. Or it could change! It all depends on your initial reactions to things that happen to you as an infant.
There are just too many things that I know of that make me think that personality traits and certain talents and abilities are genetic. I mean, your brain is built a specific way based on genes, yes? Then you're bound to have some similar traits with your parents and grandparents. What I find really curious is certain traits that skip generations.
This whole topic was a big portion of what I studied last semester-- Biology, Biopsychology, and then a Philosophy class talking about where the mind is in relation to the body. We also talked a little bit about whether or not computers could have a personality, talking about the Turing Test and computationalism and all that fun stuff.
I think the biggest indication (for me personally) that some intelligence is inherited is for specific talents people are born with. I think of myself as someone with a pretty fine-tuned ear for music, something that my environment as a child would have never led up to. Neither of my parents have an ear for music at all, and my mom even said that when I was a toddler I would pick out disney songs on my little one octave piano she gave me and she realized I could do something at age 3 that she was never able to accomplish after years of trying.
I also found out later that my grandfather was a spectacular musician, but I never heard him play, ever. He died when I was 4 so I didn't even really know him that well.
This is sort of my secret interest in things
EDIT! Oh, and certain things like sex and hunger are drives, so I don't think they would be in the same category as knowledge. That stuff really IS hardwired into our brains, or else we would fail as a species. The basics needed for survival are what keeps the population growing. Why then, I've wondered, do babies (any species really) almost always need to be taught how to be independent? It probably all has to do with evolution, but I've never thought too hard about that one!
I'm fairly certain that the memories we store in our brain wouldn't leave an imprint on our DNA, at least not one that could be accessed by our brain.
But our DNA does mutate, right? I suppose it could start mutating to include particularly stressful memories.
I don't really thing memories themselves can be passed on genetically, but who knows.
My health teacher today tried to tell us that babies have a 75% chance of being a girl, and 25% chance of being a boy, then mumbled something about "The X and Y chromosomes..." Not only that, but this was her explanation when she told us "1 in 4 women will get herpes, but 1 in 8 men will, but the percent is actually the same because there are more women than men in the world".
And she works at the hospital. Scary.
I know you mean: Because of course genetic mutation is the cornerstone of life as we know it, and we KNOW that standing in front of that radar dish does affect our genes.
Then again, I still don't see it as a stretch of the imagination to imagine the emergence of a gene (or most likely a whole complex set thereof) that would allow for specific (or even general) experiences to be coded into genes and then have those genes present themselves (at the very least) in our gametes. Follow me here:
Suppose we can consider memories a form of data. As a form of data, we can represent it digitally. Anything we can represent digitally, we can code into DNA. DNA, of course, has 4 digits instead of 2, but I don't think it takes any explanation to show that this is fine. Suppose then that we already have the presence of some gene (or set thereof) that provides the proteins that provide the link between the way a memory is coded and the digital coding of DNA. The exact mechanism of this is unknown at least to me, because I have no idea how memories are stored in the brain. These genes are then transported to the gonads via some second unknown mechanism (blood stream? nervous system ion cascade? who knows.) and these genes are then incorporated into the gametes. During development of the fetus, especially the brain development, this DNA is called upon to create proteins that tell the nerves in the brain how to link up.
How unlikely does this sound? Very. But then think how unlikely it is that we even exist at all.
For the sake of comedy, we can keep the word porn.
Then you may ask why it's necessary for the parents to be aggressive at all. Isn't it beneficial for the babies if they WANT to be independent as soon as possible? Same thing I think. If the babies get independent too fast, they'll leave ASAP and not be as fit to survive on their own as they would be if they just waited a few weeks or months or years. If they don't get independent fast enough or even at all, well then the parents would just push them out wouldn't they?
It looks to me that the parents are pushing to make them as independent as soon as they are ready so they can get it on faster. It looks to me that the babies increase their chances of survival if they milk the free board for as long as they can. It's like a wrestling match. The parents are bigger, but the babies are cute.
Not that there's any truth to it, but it sort of relates.
The problem is we really have no idea how knowledge and memories are stored in the brain. We know where they are; we know that if we zap certain parts we can take away memory, but we've no clue how experiences get boiled down and stored in neurons for later recovery. If we ever discover this, for the scenario you described to be possible, we would need to also find a way to store knowledge in a protein form.
Personally, I don't really think it's possible, at least not in any near future. It would require tons of Nobel prize-worthy breakthroughs. Who knows what the future holds
Shhhhh! I know this. But the proper reply is, "Yes, but...what if it did?"
So as I'm sure you know, male genomes contain an X and a Y chromosome while females have two X's. There aren't all that many genes on the Y chromosome and the ones that are, only affect sexual development and that sorta thing. But there are a few important genes on the X chromosome, I believe a human fetus must have an X to survive through to birth. Since women have two X chromosomes, that would mean their cells would produce twice as many X chromosome gene products (enzymes, hormones, what have you) than men, even though only one X is required for survival. Making these extra products would just be a waste of cellular resources.
To prevent this, one of the X chromosomes is inactivated in every cell in the female body. However, not every X chromosome is the same, some have mutations, others have different alleles. Which chromosome is inactivated in totally at random, but an organism with different X chromosomes will end up expressing different genes in its cells.
The best place this can be visualized is in calico cats. Some of you may know that calico cats are nearly 100% female. This is because the black and orange coloring comes from the X chromosome, and since males only have one, they're either black or orange. But females have two X's, if one expresses black coloring, and the other expresses orange, the random deactivation of one of them will produce the calico coloring.
:tmyk:
...Fascinating.
I've wondered sometimes about the nodule approach. We pass on certain small chunks, and then as the organism grows and reacts to its environment, neural connections form that allow the pieces to link up. You know, the "lightbulb" moments.
As for gender, there are examples of humans with up to FIVE gender chromosomes. They have severe problems, but it happens. Wiki's still down over MJ's death, or I'd link you more. Some of the sources for the articles there are really interesting.
FF's pointed out a belief that I agree with: that neural connections are created as you learn new information and experience life. This has been shown in many situations, based on EEGs looking at brain activity: paraplegics will start to show WAY more activity in certain areas of their brain that deal with their limbs still intact, and even more interesting: the spots of their brain that were formally designated for the missing limb will start being replaced by the brain functions around it. I started to write out an explanation, but I don't think I could it explain it very well and it's going off topic. Another example of the neural connections is control over certain parts of the brain with practice. If you do something a bunch, your brain will create more and more connections where your brain is being stimulated. Taxi drivers in London have a much more developed neural map in their brain since they have to know how to get to any place in London in several different ways. Violin players who are right handed will develop much better control in their left hand (and the right hemisphere of their brain) since that's the hand that deals with all the complicated bits of playing.
I would be absolutely fascinated to do research on what activities will develop other seemingly unrelated activities based on neural activity. It's a theory of mine that people with a strong focus in music are naturally better at math, because the neural pathways to solve math problems and to read music are similar. I only came up with this theory due to seeing so many examples of music people being exceptionally good at math, and not really knowing why. Another theory of mine: your first language you learn will give you little uppers on what you can learn. I really only wonder about the certain Chinese dialects that use a specific tone for certain meanings, if those individuals are more likely to have perfect pitch.
And now I'm waaaay off topic.
Is it safe to view a reflection of an eclipse? Someone at work suggested using a bowl of water to view a reflection of the eclipse tomorrow morning. How reflective is water for ultraviolet light? UV light is what makes eclipses dangerous; the lack of bright visible light causes the pupils to open and use the delicate areas of ther retina to focus on the eclipse while getting bombarded by UV light. The fact that retinas don't register pain makes it worse.
So. Is this safe? I would lean towards no, but I'm honestly not sure. I haven't seen it recommended on any websites, but I haven't seen it dismissed either. Any ideas?
http://www.cdc.gov/excite/skincancer/mod06.htm
Depending on the angle of reflection, it can reflect upwards of 100% of UV rays. That will most certainly fuck you up.
The current age of the universe is estimated to be around 13.7 billion years old. Thus, everything within a 13.7 billion light year radius is considered our "observable universe". However, it seems that astronomers can hopefully to distances of up to 47 billion light years. Does anyone know how they come up with 47? That confuses me.