Are Natural Systems Smart

Subsea · Jul 18, 2018

When I think of “natural systems”, three things come to mind: Minimalistic, Laissez Faire and Economical. I believe in a natural order of things as determined by a Creator. For discussions sake, I choose to call the process “Intelligent Design”. As a senior subsea engineer, I designed deepwater Blowout Preventor control systems using Multiplexing technology from the phone company integrated with Navy acoustic control as a back up system. In the case of emergency operations, we had four seperate recovery systems, including a remote operated robot in 10,000’ of water. When operations are critical, like flying an airplane or sitting on top of a 15,ooo psi BOP, back up systems are not options. Back up systems are necessities for your existence. So it is in Nature with “Intelligent Design”. I will attemp with help from the Network, to illuminate how the “Coral Holobiont” is a community that is dynamic, complex and holistic in nature. Biochemistry is complex. Dana Riddle articles at Advanced Aquaria helped me to see how carbon dioxide gas dissolves in water to contribute to carbonate & bicarbonate alkalinity which combine during photosynthesis to produce glucose which is carbon for the reef. When that process happened, inorganic nutrients were assimilated in organic biomass of glucose. Carbon dioxide gas can go both ways in the process depending on partial pressure of the gas and concentration of carbon dioxide gas in water. The process is controlled by Dynamic Equilibrium following the “laws of nature” as installed by Intelligent Design. As a control systems engineer, simplicity is paramount in design criteria. The fewest things that can fail is the motto. Nature is much more complex. Randy Holmes Farley, in an article, described how cynobacteria could dissolve calcium phosphate in substrate using a biofeedback loop to complete the process. Imagine that, smart bacteria.

Within the coral holobiont there is communication between bacteria, algae and coral. My cryptic sponge friend, Timfish, feeds me knowledge, thus I now have become a sponge. Last week he visited and made me aware of laboratory controlled experiment demonstrating how coral selected a certain species of bacteria, I assume by size. Not only did coral select specific bacteria to harvest, the coral gave off growth enzymes that increased populations of only that one strain of bacteria. Did that coral just manipulate its environment? Sounds like a Master Gardner.

I am on this journey to learn. Please join in the process. In fact let’s have a fun time with it.

Laissez les bonne temps roulee,
Patrick

Subsea · Jul 19, 2018

https://www.advancedaquarist.com/2015/2/aafeature

Dana Riddle goes into great detail to show how bacteria move food from one level to another. Considering that bacteria move 60% of reef food from one level to another, removeing bacteria from the water column with a protein skimmer does not contribute to natural food webs.

Subsea · Jul 20, 2018

http://medinalab.org/new/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Vollmer_et_al_2013_Scuba_Book_chapter.pdf

This got deep fast. I just did find it to provide some reference material. I am a Marine Engineer that uses science. The above article was written by scientist.

The role of bacteria is of primary interest in the dynamics of reef nutrition. The misconception that because inorganic nutrients are undetected in waters of the wild reef means that corals in captive tank need to be in nutrient limited environments could not be further from the complete truth. Because of the “microbial loop”, nutrients are assimilated into bacteria biomass and transported thru differrent
“food webs”.

https://microbewiki.kenyon.edu/index.php/Microbial_loop

https://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/resources/143-marine-food-webs

Subsea · Jul 24, 2018

While bacteria have a major role in health of a reef, without algae, inert gas from the atmosphere could not be converted into nutrients for the reef. Both carbon dioxide and nitrogen have a two way process with gas exchange controlled by Dynamic Equilibrium of gas partial pressure. Carbon dioxide gas dissolves readily in water to form carbonate & bicarbonate alkalinity which combines during photosynthesis to form glucose which is a carbon source to grow coral. Remember, coral zooanthelia is algae. Nitrogen gas is converted into ammonia by Cynobacteria in a process called “nitrogen fixation”. To summarize, both nitrogen and carbon are produced by algae and bacteria to grow the reef.

Are bacteria smart? It depends on your definition of smart. Read what science says about
“Quorum Sensing”.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11544353

Subsea · Aug 9, 2018

This quote summarizes my belief in Intelligent Design:

As many naturalists and environmentalists have suggested, we should set aside our arrogance,
our desire to conquer and control everything, and walk hand in hand with Mother Nature. -Walter Adey

Ghost25 · Aug 9, 2018

Your point is obscure. Are you suggesting that an organism as complex as coral could not come about without supernatural intervention? Your last quote is also unclear as some may interpret "Mother Nature" to be a literal mother or maternal being and others might interpret it to be all natural forces.

I agree that whether you call bacteria smart is a matter of definitions. I take smart to be synonymous with highly intelligent. One definition of intelligence is "able to vary its state or action in response to varying situations, varying requirements, and past experience." By that definition I would say bacteria are smart or intelligent, but most people don't use that exact definition in common parlance.

Oldreefer44 · Aug 9, 2018

Yeah, you lost me at "intelligent design". You can't prove it or disprove it. As an original participant in the "Creation Science Research Center" in Berkeley in the 70's I can tell you that almost everyone lost faith in it because almost every "belief" (or what we would call a theory) was eventually disproven. In the vastness that is nature there is plenty to support just about anything one chooses to believe in. As far as I am concerned we need to let observation and experimention lead us to the truth versus trying to prove what we want to believe is the "truth".

Benny Morosco · Aug 9, 2018

Subsea · Aug 9, 2018

OLDREEFER44 said:
Yeah, you lost me at "intelligent design". You can't prove it or disprove it. As an original participant in the "Creation Science Research Center" in Berkeley in the 70's I can tell you that almost everyone lost faith in it because almost every "belief" (or what we would call a theory) was eventually disproven. In the vastness that is nature there is plenty to support just about anything one chooses to believe in. As far as I am concerned we need to let observation and experimention lead us to the truth versus trying to prove what we want to believe is the "truth".

Thank you for the clarity of your response. It takes a scientist to think like that. Most people bring their belief system into being dogmatic, no matter what the evidence.

Subsea · Aug 9, 2018

@OLDREEFER44
Science is catching up to the physical world. It took the “LEP Collidier to prove why mass has weight.
Laissez les bonne temps roulee,
Patrick

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson

The Higgs boson is an elementary particle in the Standard Model of particle physics, produced by the quantum excitation of the Higgs field,[7][8] one of the fields in particle physics theory.[8] It is named after physicist Peter Higgs, who in 1964, along other six scientists, proposed the mechanism, which suggested the existence of such a particle. Its existence was confirmed by the ATLAS and CMScollaborations based on collisions in the LHC at CERN.

Higgs boson

Candidate Higgs boson events from collisionsbetween protons in the LHC. The top event in the CMS experiment shows a decay into two photons (dashed yellow lines and green towers). The lower event in the ATLASexperiment shows a decay into four muons (red tracks).[a]
Composition Elementary particle
Statistics Bosonic
Status A new particle with a mass of 125 GeV was discovered in 2012 and later confirmed to be the Higgs boson with more precise measurements.[1]
(See: Current status)
Symbol
H0
Theorised R. Brout, F. Englert, P. Higgs, G. S. Guralnik, C. R. Hagen, and T. W. B. Kibble (1964)
Discovered Large Hadron Collider(2011–2013)
Mass 125.09±0.21 (stat.)±0.11 (syst.) GeV/c2(CMS+ATLAS)[2]
Mean lifetime 1.56×10−22 shttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson#cite_note-meanlife-5(predicted)
Decays into

Bottom-antibottom pair (observed)[4]

Two W bosons(observed)

Two gluons(predicted)

Tau-antitau pair (observed)

Two Z bosons(observed)

Two photons(observed)

Various other decays (predicted)

Electric charge 0 e
Colour charge 0
Spin 0[5][6]
Weak isospin −1/2
Weak hypercharge +1
Parity +1[5][6]
On December 10, 2013, two of the physicists, Peter Higgs and François Englert, were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics for their theoretical predictions. Although Higgs's name has come to be associated with this theory, several researchers between about 1960 and 1972 independently developed different parts of it.

In mainstream media the Higgs boson has often been called the "God particle", from a 1993 book on the topic,[9] although the nickname is strongly disliked by many physicists, including Higgs himself, who regard it as sensationalistic.[10][11][12]

Subsea · Aug 9, 2018

Ghost25 said:
Your point is obscure. Are you suggesting that an organism as complex as coral could not come about without supernatural intervention? Your last quote is also unclear as some may interpret "Mother Nature" to be a literal mother or maternal being and others might interpret it to be all natural forces.

I agree that whether you call bacteria smart is a matter of definitions. I take smart to be synonymous with highly intelligent. One definition of intelligence is "able to vary its state or action in response to varying situations, varying requirements, and past experience." By that definition I would say bacteria are smart or intelligent, but most people don't use that exact definition in common parlance.

Are you suggesting that both coral and mankind evolved from the primeval slime of earth 5 billion years ago?

Mother Nature is an affectionate name for the Laws of Nature: chemistry, physics, biology, biochemistry....

Subsea · Aug 9, 2018

Benny Morosco said:

No worries. It’s margarita time somewhere.

Greybeard · Aug 9, 2018

Most of this doesn't even disturb my hair, on it way past... but it's interesting reading, anyway.

I don't know that I would accept response to stimuli as a test for intelligence. My glasses darken in the sun... it's nothing but a simple reaction.

Separating personal bias from fact, where there is a near total lack of demonstrable facts... well, I know I can't do so.

One thing I can say with certainty: Our little boxes of water are a far, far distance from anything that could be called 'natural'. Sure, we'd all like to emulate a natural reef to the best of our ability, but our best efforts are always going to fall short.

Subsea · Aug 9, 2018

@Grey Ghost
“I don't know that I would accept response to stimuli as a test for intelligence. My glasses darken in the sun... it's nothing but a simple reaction.”

The bacteria are not intelligent, the Designer is intelligent.

There is a big differrence in photo grey sunglasses and biochemical responses between algae, bacteria and coral.

Greybeard · Aug 9, 2018

Subsea said:
@Grey Ghost
The bacteria are not intelligent, the Designer is intelligent.

There is a big differrence in photo grey sunglasses and biochemical responses between algae, bacteria and coral.

Grey Ghost? Which one? John Mosby, or the one that played opposite Adam West

Subsea said:
Randy Holmes Farley, in an article, described how cynobacteria could dissolve calcium phosphate in substrate using a biofeedback loop to complete the process. Imagine that, smart bacteria.

If that's not a reference to intelligent bacteria... then I don't know how to read it.

If you're waiting for me to debate against an intelligent design theory, you're looking at the wrong guy

Subsea · Aug 9, 2018

No worries.

With respect to intelligence in the coral holobiont, let us use the word sentient,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentience

[Sentience is the capacity to feel, perceive or experience subjectively.[1] Eighteenth-century philosophers used the concept to distinguish the ability to think (reason) from the ability to feel (sentience). In modern Western philosophy, sentience is the ability to experience sensations (known in philosophy of mind as "qualia"). In Eastern philosophy, sentience is a metaphysical quality of all things that require respect and care. The concept is central to the philosophy of animal rights because sentience is necessary for the ability to suffer, and thus is held to confer certain rights.]

Considering the above definition, coral has one up on sentience. Coral can respond to sentience in many ways that effect other organisms outside of coral biomass.