On Thu, 30 Nov 2023 14:15:19 -0800 (PST)
MarkE <
me22over7@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, November 30, 2023 at 3:01:55 PM UTC+11, Lawyer Daggett wrote:
[cost of junk DNA]
The energy cost argument does deserve testing, which you've had a go at. Is the cost of carrying junk DNA more than just energy? E.g. the cost of material? Although efficient recycling within the cell may partially offset that. Or the cost of occupied
volume, processing speed (you mention time to replicate), the requirement for proportionally more DNA management resources (error correction etc)?
If the cell as-a-factory analogy has merit, the idea of burning that proportion of time and money is highly questionable. At the same time, beware of simplistic comparisons - e.g. checking against biological realities is necessary, e.g. your selection
coefficient calculation.
Interesting to see where the science goes from here.
It's a poorly designed factory. But it seems to work, and that's all
evolution cares about.
[]
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)