Coral Holibiont

[Beuchat Verified Sponsor]

Is God a mathematician, an engineer?

It is possible that God is a human concept. One more model that our brain builds to try to understand nature, which continues to elusive a single theory.For the moment we have to settle for different “model realities” that give partial but very effective explanations.

I think the analogy of an engineering system is consistent. The laws of physics and chemistry explain the interaction by levels of aggregation of matter, but above the molecular level, the almost infinite combinations that give rise to organic constructions seem to suggest some type of “emergent” quality of life. , whose greatest exponent is human intelligence. Matter thinking about itself?

 

[Subsea]

Is God a mathematician, an engineer? And much more: a pholosopher & a lover.

You have your faith in Science and I have my Faith. As scientist we can talk Science. My daughter and my wife of 40 years are phychologist. So we have some different scientist. I am happy to stick with the DNA CODE. Theologians, philosophers and psychologists can worry on where the DNA CODE came from. Perhaps it’s in the Cosmos with The Big Bang Theory.

Thank GOD for Christmas!

 

[coral reeftank]

Awesome thread and discussion, need more insightful and nuanced commentary in this hobby!

 

[Lasse]

Matter thinking about itself?

I suppose that you - just like me - do not speak English as a mother tongue. When I first read it - I read it as "organic matter that thinking by itself?" based on the text before this sentence. But if I run this sentence in Google translate - i get another meaning of the sentence, naimly "Is it important to think about itself?

Can you please explain what you mean with this sentence

I think the analogy of an engineering system is consistent.

I´m not so sure of that because here the laws of evolution comes in. Normally - they are explained as an organism with time get the characteristics that favor its survival. My understanding of Darwin is a little different and I think that it is gaining in popularity right now. I see it as " an organism with time get the characteristics that not disfavour its survival" Death and/or not be able to propagate is the final end for that organisms genepool - its unique genes just disappear. Let me take a simple example - a fish living over sand where light spectra is unlimited get a gene mutation that give a red tone in his/her colours. Its living in the sunlight and the red tone make this speciemet more visible for predators - this gene will be wiped out rather fast by predation. The same happens a fish living in depth below 6 meters with no or small quantities of red photons reaching this depth. The fish get more invisible because no reflection of light in the red parts of the body. The mutation in this species make it less vulnerable for predation and the environment (with no red photons) will push the colour over time to be more reddish.

For a fish living over a coral reef or a stony substrate with many hiding places that escape predation through very quickly take shelter in the substrate - mutations in colour schema does not affect the surviving rate because another ability (seeking cover fast) overrides color scheme changes.

Mutations in dna are random - therefore I´m more a "Chaos theory" than engineer designed type of guy. The environment for the organism decide the outcome with certain laws- but DNA mutations occur spontaneously and are always in a random way Even the environment can change in "chaos" type of events - like meteorite hits - and the changed environment will disfavour different types of genes.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Subsea]

Lasse,
you make me think a lot. I like it like that!

Chaos Theory

@Beuchat said
“I think the analogy of an engineering system is consistent. The laws of physics and chemistry explain the interaction by levels of aggregation of matter, but above the molecular level, the almost infinite combinations that give rise to organic constructions seem to suggest some type of “emergent” quality of life. , whose greatest exponent is human intelligence. Matter thinking about itself?”

I say,
Intelligent Design explains this for me. Todays intelligent design is artificial intelligence.

One definition of todays chaos engineering.

PRINCIPLES OF CHAOS ENGINEERING - Principles of chaos engineering

principlesofchaos.org

I like this better to Lasses point

Entropy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Entropy is a scientific concept that is most commonly associated with a state of disorder, randomness, or uncertainty. The term and the concept are used in diverse fields, from classical thermodynamics, where it was first recognized, to the microscopic description of nature in statistical physics, and to the principles of information theory. It has found far-ranging applications in chemistry and physics, in biological systems and their relation to life, in cosmology, economics, sociology, weather science, climate change, and information systems including the transmission of information in telecommunication.[1]

 

[Subsea]

Subsea said
The initial reason I disassembled this tank is because
Red Planaria have survived two treatments of 500% dosage. And one week layer, I am not confident I eliminated all as I watch developing larvae,

Lasse said
“Have you ever heard about scooter blenny (Synchiropus ocellatus) - its an excellent red planaria eater.”

Thank you my friend, I will source that.

 

[Subsea]

Scooter Dragonet | Synchiropus ocellatus | ORA | Oceans, Reefs & Aquariums

The only aquacultured alternative to wild caught Scooter Dragonets, now exclusively from ORA!

www.orafarm.com

@Lasse
What are you thoughts on this consumer?

Aiptasia Eating Filefish

The Aiptasia eating Filefish is also known as the Bristletail Filefish, Matted Leatherjacket, Tomentosus Filefish, or Matted Filefish. The body is a mottled green, brown, and tan coloration. It is a shy fish, and rarely aggressive towards other fish except those of its own genus. It is best...

www.liveaquaria.com

As you are in the winter of the “long night”, I know Christmas day has little daylight. May you sleep well under the Northern Lights. I worked in Pori, Finland during the winter of 1979. It was a blast, then I came back that summer.
When I was an Air Force crew chief, between 1967-71 O flew regularly into Oslo, Norway and Denmark. Sweden is the only Scandinavian country I have not been too.

 

[Beuchat Verified Sponsor]

I suppose that you - just like me - do not speak English as a mother tongue. When I first read it - I read it as "organic matter that thinking by itself?" based on the text before this sentence. But if I run this sentence in Google translate - i get another meaning of the sentence, naimly "Is it important to think about itself?

Can you please explain what you mean with this sentence

Hi Lasse,

Assuming that I no longer believe in Cartesian body-mind dualism. For me, human thought is an emergent quality of matter, impossible to explain exclusively by considering the coordinated activity of millions of neurons propagating action potentials through neurotransmitters. We are able to understand, with limitations, the functioning of our own thinking. And this is "matter thinking about matter", which seems somewhat paradoxical.

Mutations in dna are random - therefore I´m more a "Chaos theory" than engineer designed type of guy. The environment for the organism decide the outcome with certain laws- but DNA mutations occur spontaneously and are always in a random way Even the environment can change in "chaos" type of events - like meteorite hits - and the changed environment will disfavour different types of genes.

However, the biological level building blocks of nature (molecules and complex organic compounds) combine according to known physicochemical rules and not others (there is no random here). Those rules make the structures of DNA, proteins, etc. have the shape we know and no others. These fundamental laws constitute the "prior engineering design", understanding design as an analogy in this context.

 

[Subsea]

“However, the biological level building blocks of nature (molecules and complex organic compounds) combine according to known physicochemical rules and not others (there is no random here). Those rules make the structures of DNA, proteins, etc. have the shape we know and no others. These fundamental laws constitute the "prior engineering design", understanding design as an analogy in this context.”

Angel,
If “prior engineering design” translates to
“Intelligent Design”, then we are on the same page.

Where in Spain do you live? While stationed at Rhien/Main Air Base in Germany, we few diplomatic courier flights into Madrid & Barcelona. Beautiful cities, beautiful countryside and stunning woman.

The history of Franco & Spain fascinated me. Prior to World War 2, both Hitler & Mussolini tested their war ambitions during the Spanish Revolution. I can only imagine the devastation to your country. I served four 90 day tours of duty in Cambodia as a crew chief on the same courier C47, modified into AC47, Puff the Magic Dragon. Puff supportEd 82nd Airborne Rangers that dealt with the Khmer Rouge in the Killing Field of Cambodia. When Nixon said at the Paris Peace Talks, “”There are no boots on the ground in Cambodia“, The Rangers said, “issue us moccasins”. Most of the scouts in recon were Comanche & Apache, they ruled the night. Because of devotion to country and “esprit de corps” the mindset was to wear different foot ware, so as not to make the “commander in chief” a liar on the world stage of the Paris Peace Talks. This was joking banter amongst “elite soldiers”, Men who still remember the killing fields, in their PTSD. No One wins in war; Some Lose More.

Both Richard Dawkins & John Lennox as Cambridge scholars debated: Has Science Killed God


Two world-renown scientists go head to head at the Oxford Museum of Natural History, the famed site of the 1860 evolution debate between Huxley and Wilberforce, to discuss an issue the BBC calls "as fierce as ever."Holding the atheistic position is Prof. Richard Dawkins, celebrated author of "The God Delusion" and regarded by many as the spokesman for the "New Atheism." Opposing Dawkins is his fellow Oxford professor John Lennox. Lennox, like Dawkins, has dedicated his career to science, but arrives at very different conclusions. "It is the very nature of science," he says "that leads me to belief in God."In this discussion, these two great minds come together for a lively, entertaining, and thoughtful dialogue on one of the most important questions of our time.

 

[Beuchat Verified Sponsor]

Hello Patrick,

I live in Madrid, the capital of Spain. I was born in Murcia, a medium sized city located 40 minutes away from the Mediterranean coast. The Spanish civil war was a sad historical episode as always created by politicians. In fact nowadays there is a group of them who continue to resurrect the wounds of the past to divide the society and secure their share of votes.

I believe that science and religion are fully compatible, since their objects of knowledge do not overlap. "Non-overlapping magisteria” , as Stephen Jay Gould used to say. Science can neither affirm nor deny the existence of God, just as religion alone cannot give an accurate explanation of nature.

Thank you for the video and your kind words. I hope our colleagues are not getting bored with our philosophical dissertations.

 

[Subsea]

Hello Patrick,

I live in Madrid, the capital of Spain. I was born in Murcia, a medium sized city located 40 minutes away from the Mediterranean coast. The Spanish civil war was a sad historical episode as always created by politicians. In fact nowadays there is a group of them who continue to resurrect the wounds of the past to divide the society and secure their share of votes.

I believe that science and religion are fully compatible, since their objects of knowledge do not overlap. "Non-overlapping magisteria” , as Stephen Jay Gould used to say. Science can neither affirm nor deny the existence of God, just as religion alone cannot give an accurate explanation of nature.

Thank you for the video and your kind words. I hope our colleagues are not getting bored with our philosophical dissertations.

Angel,
Far from bored. Between you & Lasse, I am going back to school. It’s quite stimulating and as OP, I say to bring it on.

@Lasse may be late getting back. Them Vikings stay up late at Night.

Let the “good times” roll.
Patrick

PS: When Marx said that “Religion was the opiate of the masses”, he was correct, because 1920 Russia was in turmoil and life without hope was unbearable.

I have a Spiritual Relationship with a “transcending being”, who created me with a triune nature: Spirit, Intellect & Flesh and each has a function. The Bible is His ”love story” with His Creation. I also consider the Bible a historical account that is supported by ancient test from Mesopotamian Civilizations and more recent anthropologist discoveries.

 

[Lasse]

Assuming that I no longer believe in Cartesian body-mind dualism

Neither do I - I´m a materialist - a dialectic one. My question was about the word "matter" and its dualism. In the sentence you use "Matter thinking about itself?" matter can mean "it is important" and not material - at least Google translate use the meaning of matter in this special sentence when it translate it into Swedish. Never the less - I now understand that you meant material as I suspect before I run the sentence in Google translator

However, the biological level building blocks of nature (molecules and complex organic compounds) combine according to known physicochemical rules and not others (there is no random here).

The result is not total random - but that "build" (read evolution) was (is). There is a lot of evidences about this and that different evolutionary pathways can result in simulare results - convergent evolution is the scientific name for it.

The driving force in natural evolution is - IMO - the interaction between spontaneous (qualitative) but regular (quantitative) mutations in DNA and the surrounding environment. IMO - as long as a spontaneous mutation in DNA is not a disadvantage for the organism in a special environment - it will stay in the organism genepool. If it more favorable compared the previous genes in this organism - this particular gene will it spread in the current population´s genepool. If the environment changes - there will be a new evaluation of which genes are a disadvantage and which are not. Or the principles of Hegel - a thesis, an antithesis and finally - a synthesis.

I react to the word "designed" because it indicate that there is a single final result for the evolution of an organism - and IMO - there is not. Evolution is not something that happens before present time - it still happens. And it is also indicate that someone had worked on the drawing board.

I believe that science and religion are fully compatible, since their objects of knowledge do not overlap.

I recommend you to do some Googling on intelligent design and creationism - not very common in Europe but elsewhere.

But - let us leave the philosophical questions - I will stop here because me and Patrick will never be on the same path here. I respect his believe but I will never share it. I hope he respect my standpoint too - even if he know that I will never agree with him. Let us stop with the classic formula - We agree to disagree in this matter and go back to the original issue - the Coral Holobiont.

I still have the opinion that it is in reality a crop farmed inside the "greenhouse" of the coral animal and that the coral animal can get its food from the surplus produced by the holobiont. It is more or less self-sufficient - the coral animal of many species does not need to eat external food even if it can (because the polyps are remaining structures from their not holobiont containing ancestors and it has not been a disadvantage to keep the underlying structure) and if the catch anything - its welcome.

What are you thoughts on this consumer?

In my experiences - they normally works well but can to be eaters of LPS. I prefer the copperband as a aiptasia eater. Lately - I have understand that the molly miller blenny-Scartella cristata - is a good aiptasia eater. I have two small ones in my aquarium. I also have a cooperband but my aquarium have grow a lot and create a plateau with a depth of around 6 cm. Around that plateau - reaching the surface is a slope that have been heavy infested by aitapisia. The aiptasia population have decrease lately but I do not know if it because the copperband has learned to approach the slope lying on his/her side (I have seen that behaviour) or if the molly miller is responsible. There has also been a very angry okinawae goby with his/her territory - chasing away the copperband from the plateau. It has moved away now and the copperband feel safe on the plateau

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Subsea]

Lasse,
I respect your thoughts and more importantly, I respect you as a person and without having meant you in the flesh, I like you. I suspect we are kindered spirits. For certain, we both like crawfish and for certain, we are straight forward in our talk.

I thank you for that quality.
Patrick

And Patrick said, “Let the good times roll”.

Charcoal Heated Dutch Ovens - Al Simon's Cajun Microwave

Al Simon's Cajun Microwaves are charcoal heated Louisiana cypress roasting boxes used for cooking whole roast pigs or other pieces of large meat outdoors.

cajunmicrowaves.com

This is how we cook whole hogs < 2 hours.

 

[Subsea]

Angel,
I have not received your book, yet. Is there a topic we can discuss from it?

Lasse,
As former municipal wastewater managers, we have common ground. I thought you could appreciate American humor from Erma Bombeck:


It’s the exposé to end all exposés—the truth about the suburbs: where they planted trees and crabgrass came up, where they planted the schools and taxes came up, where they died of old age trying to merge onto the freeway and where they finally got sex out of the schools and back into the gutters.

 

[vlangel]

I read this thread and have enjoyed the discussion. Thank you all.

I have to admit that even though I would consider myself a successful reef aquarist with 25 years experience, I am a baby reefer in terms of the science. I learned the fundamental biology in the late 90s at the lfs I worked at but most of what I know is just practical knowledge.

Although this isn't the main point of this thread, (but with all the discussion of OTS) I am feeling incredibly fortunate that I have never had a tank crash as my first real reef tank was up about 10 years, and it had a deep sand bed. It was a 90 gallon. I took it down when my husband's mom who lived with us became confined to bed and her care was so overwhelming that I sold my tank to concentrate on her. (I will say I was pleasantly surprised how fresh smelling that 10 year old deep sand bed was). My husband then bought me a 36 gallon because he wanted me to still have a reef but something more manageable. Five years later when my caregiving duties were over I upgraded to the 56 gallon reef I have now. That was Nov 2016 so this tank is over 7 years old. I have always used deep sand beds and the only maintenance that is done on the sand beds (because I have one in the sump too) is by the nassarius snails and Karl, my Atlantic cucumber, and oh yeah Rice Krispies, my pistol shrimp in the sump. I see worms and pods also at work on them.

My boss at the lfs had set up dozens of tanks with deep sand beds that I maintained. One of those tanks belongs to a friend of mine and her tank still has the original deep sand bed and rock that was set up almost 25 years ago.

However just because I have never seen it, (referring to what some call OTS) doesn't mean that it doesn't happen. I believe in entropy, so I realize that there could be things at work in my tank that I cannot see nor understand, that could be moving my tank ever closer to a steady decline, or worse a catastrophic crash. Again deep sand beds were not the only things discussed as contributing factors to the decline of a tank but it is one aspect that many reefers are afraid of.

Prior to reading this thread, I never really accepted that deep sand beds poison a tank (if it's not disturbed) because that has never been my experience. However most of you folks have more experience and definitely more scientific knowledge than me so I am feeling a little nervous now. Maybe the circumstances of my life brought on resets to my tanks just in the knick of time? Who knows, maybe the LORD GOD of the universe Who I believe in, (but I respect each of your choices to believe in what you choose) saw fit to spare me the pain of loss and allowed the circumstances of my life to circumvent that scenario? Of course that is not to say that He is obligated to not let my tank crash tomorrow! I certainly do not believe that, but I do believe that I experience mercy that I do not deserve. So since my tank is my responsibility, hence my interest in this thread to try and learn all I can to protect my creatures from any mishaps. I learn and do what I can and then I let the chips fall where they may.

 

[Subsea]

Dawn,

I read this thread and have enjoyed the discussion. Thank you all.

I have to admit that even though I would consider myself a successful reef aquarist with 25 years experience, I am a baby reefer in terms of the science. I learned the fundamental biology in the late 90s at the lfs I worked at but most of what I know is just practical knowledge.

Although this isn't the main point of this thread, (but with all the discussion of OTS) I am feeling incredibly fortunate that I have never had a tank crash as my first real reef tank was up about 10 years, and it had a deep sand bed. It was a 90 gallon. I took it down when my husband's mom who lived with us became confined to bed and her care was so overwhelming that I sold my tank to concentrate on her. (I will say I was pleasantly surprised how fresh smelling that 10 year old deep sand bed was). My husband then bought me a 36 gallon because he wanted me to still have a reef but something more manageable. Five years later when my caregiving duties were over I upgraded to the 56 gallon reef I have now. That was Nov 2016 so this tank is over 7 years old. I have always used deep sand beds and the only maintenance that is done on the sand beds (because I have one in the sump too) is by the nassarius snails and Karl, my Atlantic cucumber, and oh yeah Rice Krispies, my pistol shrimp in the sump. I see worms and pods also at work on them.

My boss at the lfs had set up dozens of tanks with deep sand beds that I maintained. One of those tanks belongs to a friend of mine and her tank still has the original deep sand bed and rock that was set up almost 25 years ago.

However just because I have never seen it, (referring to what some call OTS) doesn't mean that it doesn't happen. I believe in entropy, so I realize that there could be things at work in my tank that I cannot see nor understand, that could be moving my tank ever closer to a steady decline, or worse a catastrophic crash. Again deep sand beds were not the only things discussed as contributing factors to the decline of a tank but it is one aspect that many reefers are afraid of.

Prior to reading this thread, I never really accepted that deep sand beds poison a tank (if it's not disturbed) because that has never been my experience. However most of you folks have more experience and definitely more scientific knowledge than me so I am feeling a little nervous now. Maybe the circumstances of my life brought on resets to my tanks just in the knick of time? Who knows, maybe the LORD GOD of the universe Who I believe in, (but I respect each of your choices to believe in what you choose) saw fit to spare me the pain of loss and allowed the circumstances of my life to circumvent that scenario? Of course that is not to say that He is obligated to not let my tank crash tomorrow! I certainly do not believe that, but I do believe that I experience mercy that I do not deserve. So since my tank is my responsibility, hence my interest in this thread to try and learn all I can to protect my creatures from any mishaps. I learn and do what I can and then I let the chips fall where they may.

@vlangel
Thank you Dawn.
kudos to your post. I would like to get your OK to post it to this thread started by the author of Reef Essentials. His hypothesis relates to maturity in a reef tank.

THE CHEMICAL INTERACTION BETWEEN SPECIES AS A HYPOTHESIS FOR A MATURE TANK

IME there is not a direct relation cause-efect between nitrate and phosphate concentration and algae quantity, as there are many other factors involved, mainly allelopathy between bacteria, phytoplankton, zooplankton, corals and other invertebrates. A mature tank implies a previous bentic...

www.reef2reef.com

 

[vlangel]

Dawn,


@vlangel
Thank you Dawn.
kudos to your post. I would like to get your OK to post it to this thread started by the author of Reef Essentials. His hypothesis relates to maturity in a reef tank.

THE CHEMICAL INTERACTION BETWEEN SPECIES AS A HYPOTHESIS FOR A MATURE TANK

IME there is not a direct relation cause-efect between nitrate and phosphate concentration and algae quantity, as there are many other factors involved, mainly allelopathy between bacteria, phytoplankton, zooplankton, corals and other invertebrates. A mature tank implies a previous bentic...

www.reef2reef.com

Yes Patrick, you may post it anywhere that you think it could further data on reefing.

 

[Kurt Roeloffs]

Is God a mathematician, an engineer?

It is possible that God is a human concept. One more model that our brain builds to try to understand nature, which continues to elusive a single theory.For the moment we have to settle for different “model realities” that give partial but very effective explanations.

I think the analogy of an engineering system is consistent. The laws of physics and chemistry explain the interaction by levels of aggregation of matter, but above the molecular level, the almost infinite combinations that give rise to organic constructions seem to suggest some type of “emergent” quality of life. , whose greatest exponent is human intelligence. Matter thinking about itself?

The problem with thinking of God as yet another human-generated model is that one needs a metatheory that would predict the vast variety of human generted models. The theory of emergence doesn't really explain or predict much at all because it doesn't rule out or predict one type of complexity from another. Even hylomorphic theories of matter beg the question in the same way. The only way to avoid infinite recursive thinking on this subject is to pre-suppose a general primordial principle that transcends all forms of human thinking and model making, including mathematics which may be real enough (if you are Plato) but but only if they are supported by a metatheory which Plato had in the Timeaus and which Aristotle offered through the unmoved mover. Everyone always needs to grab a metatheory. Most of us conclude it is just as real as, or even more real than, material reality. The ancient Hebrews refused to give the fundammental principal of reality a name. They used YHWH, an unpronounceable word that is vaguely reminiscent of one's breathing. So inbound is that principle it is the emergent source of life itself. We lesser thinkers allow ourselves to use the word God.

 

[Subsea]

kurt is my nephew with German heritage who is defending his thesis at Oxford. I asked him to overview my thoughts on Intelligent Design / Artificial Intelligence. While I did not expect him to post, yet he did.

When I messaged him, with another question the day after Christmas, his response said

Patrick,

I’m not tollway following this email and am about to head into the Costa Rica jungle. So, let’s speak on this when I get back home on Jan 8th or soon thereafter.

Best Regards

Sent from my iPhone. Maybe dictated. Enjoy my typos and Apple's quirky auto-corrections!

 

[Beuchat Verified Sponsor]

Hi Kurt, Patrick, good discussion

Difficult to address these types of misteries with the evidence currently available. Especially because, when something cannot be measured (for example consciousness), we all tend to look for an explanation that confirms our prejudices.

I once read that it is better to discuss an issue without reaching a clear conclusion than not to do so at all.