21:07:30 +1300: Brig, I saw your article about thermodynamics and evolution. However I think you are quite wrong about there being different kinds of entropy, and your proofs that "informational entropy" is different from "thermodynamic entropy" are rather weak:
* You can't find anywhere in a book by Feynmann where he discusses them as if they are the same.
* You can't find anywhere in a book by Shannon where he discusses them as if they are the same.

The whole point of Boltzmann's development of statistical mechanics is that he discovered that the two types of entropy *are* equivalent, and the only difference between the two types is that the thermodynamic entropy has been defined in units of Boltzmann's constant (except, as I understand it, at that time the word "entropy" was only used in the thermodynamic context, and Boltzmann's equation related thermodynamic entropy to probability). Boltzmann's constant only exists because temperature was defined before anyone realised that the two kinds of entropy are equivalent. If we define Boltzmann's constant to be 1, then this forces temperature to be defined in "natural units" of energy per log 2 e bits. (I presume this is what Shannon was talking about with regards to K being a "choice of units".) In a similar manner one can define velocity in "natural" units by deeming c (the speed of light en vacuo) to be 1. But that doesn't prove that there are two different kinds of velocity.

You state that /Entropy in a closed system can never decrease. /This is unfortunately incorrect, because actually it can decrease by a little bit. This slight exception is critical to explaining why evolution doesn't contradict the second law, because evolution by natural selection turns out to be a natural example of Maxwell's demon. A beneficial mutation is a decrease of entropy in a closed system. I give a detailed explanation in my article "The Second Law of Thermodynamics Does Not Prohibit a Decrease of Entropy in a Closed System" at http://www.1729.com/blog/SecondLawDoesntProhibitEntropyDecrease.html. Also, although you quote a book by Adami, you fail to quote his newer paper "The Evolution of biological complexity" at http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/97/9/4463 (which I refer to in http://www.1729.com/evolution/NoteOnEvolutionOfBiologicalComplexity.html). Yours, Philip Dorrell.

Thank You Brig! | from Sheila Sasselov | 10 Nov 2006

Dear Brig, Thank you so much for your thoughtfulness connecting me to Rob. Meeting you the other night and talking about interesting ideas was a great delight. Enclosed is a copy of a large mosaic I did four years ago on my version of astrobiology. It's nine feet high and is installed in a local school lobby. Best Wishes, Sheila

10:40 AM: Dear Brian -- I enjoyed speaking before your GreyThumb group in Cambridge about panspermia and the Evolution Prize Monday night [6 Nov]. From the discussion it seemed that everyone was more than mildly interested. I hope someone will followup with comments about some of the unresolved issues, like defining "innovation." Thanks also for your subsequent email thanking me, which I would like to post here with your permission. Best regards. Brig

23:01:42 -0000: Dear Brig, A documentary on panspermia, focusing on our work, is to be broadcast at 9pm on BBC2 on their high profile "Horizon" series. I am putting an advance copy of a DVD in the post. Best, Chandra

15:19:14 +0100: Dear Brig, Here are the details of the mediaeval red rain, ...From THE CHRONICLE OF LONDON FROM 1089 TO 1483 (published in London in 1827):

1361. Also in this yere, in the kal' of Juyn, fell a blody reyne in Burgoyn, and a blody crosse apered in the eire from the morwe unto myd day at Bologne, the whiche afterward moved hym and fel down into the see. ... And in this yere was the seconde gret pestilence, in whiche good Henry of Lancastre deyde....

Translation into modern English: Also in this year, in the kalends of June (i.e., in the beginning of June), a bloody rain fell in Burgundy, and a bloody cross appeared in the air from dawn until noon at Boulogne, which afterwards shifted position and fell down into the sea. ... And in this year was the second Great Plague, of which good Henry, Duke of Lancaster, died. (Note: Henry of Grosmont, first Duke of Lancaster and a member of the royal family, died 24 March 1361.)

...The same Chronicle (which I think astronomers have not consulted before) mentions comets appearing in 1337 (in June and July, 'in diverse parts of heaven'), and in 1367 (in March). It also mentions two novae or supernovae. The first was in 1456, and the second was in 1473: 'This year after Christmas appeared a blazing star, and it continued for more than 5 weeks.'

I hope all is going well with you. Best wishes from Robert....     Robert Temple | London

09:04 PM: "...Scientists studying a tiny primitive fish that makes up 70 percent of the biomass in Tampa Bay now say they have found the "missing link" marking the point in evolution that led to the development of the modern-day human immune system...."

Hi Brig,... I just read the interview with Chandra Wickramasinghe on the Red Rain of Kerala. There's no mention of isotopic analysis. Wouldn't that be the gold-standard for rejecting the extraterrestrial hypothesis? I recall you were involved in attempting a similar analysis for the Indian stratospheric balloon experiment. Seems there's plenty of material to analyze, in this case. ...Jim

12:41 PM 8/17/2006: Right you are. But time on the dozen or so machines (NanoSIMS) in the world that can do isotopic analysis on a single cell is in very great demand. I have tried to get someone to do this analysis on the red rain without success. As you mention, there may be enough sample to do bulk analysis, which easier to obtain. Chandra is looking into that, I believe. Meanwhile, India has ordered a NanoSIMS. ...Brig Klyce

At the ALife X Conference in Bloomington IN, at a workshop cochaired with Mark Bedau the evening of June 4, I promoted a question, "Is Open-Ended Evolutionary Innovation in a Closed System Possible?" I also posed a followup question, "Can it be demonstrated?", and I proposed a cash prize of $100,000 sponsored by the Astrobiology Research Trust for a successful demonstration in an ALife model.

The workshop generated a high level of interest among the 50 or so workshop attendees and panelists. Some expressed important reservations about the terms of the question, prizes in general, the sponsor's affiliation with panspermia, and other issues. Most of those who spoke agreed that the issue was important, but needs more work.

Eleven interested people met over lunch on Monday to pursue the subject further. With the leadership of Jordan Pollack, we seemed to agree that the prize is too embryonic (Janet Wiles' term) to be simply announced to the world. Needed first are steps that would lead to clarification of the question behind the prize. For these steps, papers could be solicited, with lesser prizes (such as could be funded by the interest on a principal of $100,00) to be awarded for the best paper on a regular basis, such as annually, or biannually.

We discussed scheduling another meeting, but meanwhile we agreed that some kind of internet presence that would allow us to interact easily and frequently would be useful. To facilitate this I have, hopefully, secured the domain name "eprize.org". More on this as it develops. [The acquired domain name is evolutionprize.net. (Abandoned c.2014; now: panspermia.org/evolutionprize.)]

As mentioned in the June 4 workshop, the EPrize (although it may not yet be a prize) needs a Board of Directors to guide its development. I will ask Jordan Pollack and Mark Bedau to help with nominations, and hopefully there will be a Board of 5 or 7 members within a couple of months. Of course I welcome all who are interested to remain as collaborators and friends.

In summation here is what I am now proposing for further discussion and refinement:

A prize of approximately $3000 to be awarded annually to the best paper pertaining to open-ended evolutionary innovation in a closed system that either 1) advances our knowledge, or 2) further delineates and clarifies a question along that theme.

This prize will be awarded by a jury comprising a board of directors of 5-7 scientists who have credibility and standing in the ALife field. These directors will be chosen in a manner to be determined. The [Evolution Prize] and its board will have no affiliation with the topic or website "panspermia." Perhaps the first such prize could be awarded at ALife 11.

Let me know what you think. Thanks again for your interest and your support of this inquiry. I appreciate your hospitality and your willingness to provided education and insight into this challenging area.

Best regards, Brig ...(To be removed from the [Evolution Prize] mailing list, reply with "Please Remove" as the subject.)
====================
Brig Klyce | The Evolution Prize | phone [901-489-2222]

Scientists at the University of Illinois have discovered an antifreeze-protein gene in cod that has evolved from non-coding or 'junk' DNA. Since the creation of these antifreeze proteins is directly driven by polar glaciation, by studying their evolutionary history the scientists hope to pinpoint the time of onset of freezing conditions in the polar and subpolar seas. Professor Cheng will present her latest results at the Annual Main Meeting of the Society for Experimental Biology in Canterbury on Tuesday the 4th April [session A2].

Fish such as cod that live in subzero polar waters have evolved to avoid freezing to death by using special antifreeze proteins that work by binding to ice crystals to prevent the crystals growing larger and causing problems. Most of these antifreeze proteins evolve by natural selection from existing proteins when the DNA coding for them duplicates itself and changes over time to give new functions. However, Professor Christina Cheng and her group have found the gene for the cod antifreeze protein has come from a non-coding region of their DNA known as "junk DNA".

"This appears to be a new mechanism for the evolution of a gene from non-coding DNA", says Professor Cheng, "3.5 billion years of evolution of life has produced many coding genes and conventional thinking assumes that new genes must come from pre-existing ones because the probability of a random stretch of DNA somehow becoming a functional gene is very low if not nil. This cod antifreeze gene might be an exception to this because it consists of a short repetitive sequence that only needs to be duplicated four times to give a fully functioning protein". ...Full Text at ScienceDaily (original article from the Society for Experimental Biology).

Comment: Does this mean that junk DNA is the toolbox or parts store for the construction of new working genes? [from Stan's correspondent]

...I've been getting deep into classic R&B, trying to learn horn lines for Aretha, Etta, James, Motown standards, others like Eddie Floyd "Knock on Wood." Am actually playing in wierd pick-up band benefit performance (American Heart Association) this Sunday in Brockton, MA, featuring, among others, JB Jr. who claims, and I have no reason to doubt, to be cousin of James Brown. And who does pisser James covers. Sex Machine, Man's World, Super Bad, Feel Good, Please, Please, Please.

By the way, I take this music as further confirmation of CA. No way Darwinians can account for something as perfect as Sex Machine. "Get on up!" indeed....

Morrison

Hi Dr. Klyce, I was flattered to see that you put my compliment to you on the web, however, could you remove my name and place of work from your website? I would appreciate it very much. I am in the process of a job hunt and hope that prospective researchers will see links relating to my research rather than others when they "google" my name. Thanks so much for understanding, ...
Anonymous, Ph.D. | Unnamed Department | a Major Midwestern University

Sunday, c. 4PM: Given the date, I first thought you might be kidding. Anyway, OK, done. I hope some day you feel confident enough to "come out" as the open-minded person you really are. Best regards. Brig
PS: If you check "all reviews by Brig Klyce" on Amazon, at least two gush about certain X-Man games ("Fantastic!"), posted by my impersonating, then-minor son. What will people think?!

...http://www.rsc.org/Publishing/ChemScience/Volume/2006/02/water_handedness.asp... "Meir Shinitzky and colleagues at the Weizmann Institute of Science believe the humble water molecule to be responsible. ...Shinitzky dissolved polymers of left- and right-handed amino acids in water, and measured the pH at which they denatured from helices to random coils. This was 0.2 to 0.3 units higher for the right-handed molecules, which implied they were less stable. The effect disappeared when heavy water (D2O) was used."

The differences seem to arise due to the "different interactions between the weak magnetic field of ortho-H2O and the magnetic fields of left- and right-handed amino acids". If this is true, would left-handed chirality be a verifiably Earth-centric phenomenon? I don't think so; cometary bacteria could be expected to display the same preference. Of course, if any right-handed life were found, it could be immediately assumed to be from somewhere other than Earth. Controversial, but it seems more promising than anything else I have seen. ...Jerry Chancellor | President | VisionTech Training Solutions

Brig, I've been an avid reader of your website for more than three years and watch the mainstream media slowly but surely come around to the theories you subscribe. I'm not an academic scientist but find all your work easily accessible. Thanks for all your hard work! As a case in point I found this BBC article which you may be interested in linking to http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4702336.stm

What I find totally bizarre from the article is the prevailing view that comets bearing "life molecules" seeded the earth, but the prevailing view fails to consider that the earth is constructed from these comets and space material, therefore life must have been here from the very beginning of earth's formation. Still that is the obvious next conclusion which links in nicely. Again, thanks for you incredible efforts! Regards; Sean Underwood

...If so, yes, evolutionary innovations would be replicable and predictable, and life elsewhere would resemble Earthly life.

My thoughts exactly from reading your website. I have often read in astro-bilological articles, that we may not even recognize life on other planets when we see it. This doesn't fit my perspective on strong panspermia. In fact, my thought is in regards to SETI, take a look around us, because with only minor evolutionary innovations, that is what you will find 'out there'. -Best Regards, Ron ...PS Keep up the great work!

Brig, Here's an interesting look at why evolutionary change is not gradual. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/01/060126194000.htm

"Determining the mechanism that causes those delayed expressions of change is Schwartz's major contribution to the evolution of the theory of evolution. The mechanism, the authors explain, is this: Environmental upheaval causes genes to mutate, and those altered genes remain in a recessive state, spreading silently through the population until offspring appear with two copies of the new mutation and change suddenly, seemingly appearing out of thin air. Those changes may be significant and beneficial (like teeth or limbs) or, more likely, kill the organism."

It seems to me that this explanation also fits with Cosmic Ancestry. Rather than mutations, however, whole working genes are shifted between species by viruses and then are expressed when conditions are right. This explanation has the added benefit of not killing the organism since the jumping genes are good, working genes. ...Jerry Chancellor | President | VisionTech Training Solutions