..without an intellect to assign a value?
In the sense that a pile is sand is “Turing Complete”, and therefore capable of any computation, I’d say it came that way, or perhaps the question is meaningless?
There is so little premise here that it barely qualifies as a topic. Maybe you can elaborate more on what you really mean?
2 Likes
Define: Data processing scheme.
Sounds like CS Lewis’s “milk jug” analogy? Using updated vocabulary doesn’t make a dumb argument any less dumb.
2 Likes
So your answer is, “It could not have”?
I’d say that in an early prokaryote, as soon as a protein’s synthesis acquires a regulatory sequence that can increase its synthesis, that is a simple “data processing scheme”. Other kinds of protein interactions can start that process too. Whether one wants to have that kind of regulation is of course just a matter of what fitness results.
1 Like
Yeah but your example requires representation and a decoder. @Dan_Eastwood will argue that computation does not require these things. So he’s sorta got you beat to the punch.
Oh dear! I had not previously come across that analogy. And here was me thinking that my opinion of CS Lewis could not get any lower.
1 Like
I don’t see that my example requires “representation” and “a decoder”. If Dan Eastwood were to say that it didn’t require those, I would agree. You must mean some much more complex system, and you have not made that clear. Not just an organism having a response to an environment.
I don’t want to do anything to make it easier for biologists to come and muck things up with their crazy metaphors
He would say that, though he hasn’t actually stated yet whether or not he really believes that in a universe sans intellect, piles of sand would melt and purify into silicone and arrange into CPUs. But there are actually more simple examples one could give and then posit that they would process 1 bit of information. But if “Piles of sand are [maybe?] Turing complete” ends up being the official position of the Peaceful Science forum, then perhaps that is as it should be..
So you don’t think that evolving a response to an environmental cue qualifies as an early step in a “data processing scheme”? Or you do? A little clarification would help, though I realize that you don’t want to.
2 Likes
Sure, but this only leads to disagreements over whether or not there is representation and decoding involved in this scheme. @Dan_Eastwood seems like he’s trying to suggest we start with something more fundamental, pure computation. Something which we know exists outside of biology. But his piles of sand melting and arranging into CPUs thing is a bit weird and he doesn’t want to talk about it anymore, I guess.
But we can think of something much more simple; We can imagine a system of warm and cool air convection in the universe, existing before minds and intellect. Such a system wouldn’t actually be performing computation but it’s a good example because there is no representation involved in this scheme.
Dan would say this system processes 1 bit of data.
I would say Dan is incoherent.
Who would you agree with?
The original comment said “matter”, not matter “outside of biology”. Matter in biological systems can evolve to respond to environmental cues, by natural selection, without abstract representations. The values assigned are in the form of fitnesses, which naturally lead to evolution towards better responses. If Dan Eastwood wants to bring sand piles into it, that is a separate matter. But he was mostly confused as to what you meant. Which you have not tried to clear up, alas.
3 Likes
I would not. I’d say you asked an ill-defined question with the intent of starting an argument.
I will also say I had the intent to Silence you BEFORE you called me incoherent. Thanks for confirming my suspicions.
2 Likes
Okay. But can you define “data processing scheme” then? We can’t have a meaningful conversation if we don’t know what you mean by those words. And I don’t know.
2 Likes
(?) How did matter begin to employ data processing schemes… >> >>
This discussion is over my head, in terms of processing theory…but I like this portion you coined as a phrase: <…employ data processing schemes.">
Many have trouble believing that biological evolution is…“A real thing”, because it looks like DNA is CODED information, and that in their evaluation, that means evolution “requires a mind” to shape all functions. And that an active “Mind”, maybe a deity, programs needed changes into the genetic codes of life. A good word for God in science is that our mysterious creator may be a source of real time AGENCY.
I tend to see it more like chemistry tutor Professor Dave does, who points out that “chemical combinations self assemble all the time in Nature.” Hydrogen and Oxygen come together as water, that exists in a state of vapor, liquid, or ice, depending on temperature. And no “MIND” applied any AGENCY to make that happen in each and every instance, at the granular level.
Therefore, one might say with some coherence, that “God created all the elements of the periodic table” , and THAT is the ultimate source of God’s agency. But bacteria replicating, I believe life creates its own destiny. And all that needs is chemistry in action.
For me, there is no need to hire an outside conductor to orchestrate the music. Biology is more like JAZZ, all the skilled and sincere participants are improvising to a common theme. And our mysterious creator can really JAM. Variations on a theme…
It just seems reasonable to start with the most basic definitions. Being reasonable only triggered him. Go figure. 
1 Like
Hi Dan
At the end of the day does this end up being the fine tuning argument? The find tuning of atoms make is possible to perform computation.
No. All it means is that Mr. Destroyer was totally unprepared to discuss his own question.
“Turing Complete” is a definition, the set of operations needed for a Turing Machine to carry out any computation. The OP question is so vague that the definition of computation is really the only way to answer it.
Curious, I googled for a source. Turing did not come up with the sandpile model, it is a modern development from Set Theory. Deep Set Theory.
1 Like