The Great Data Experiment

The planet's geological changes have, and continue to be dictated by unwavering physical forces. Life evolves to fill in opportunities arising from these changes, in a string of adaptions dictated by biological processes and data - these form the basis of the experiment. It has run in phases, possibly peaking with us, and reverting to a less “intelligent” life form?

What's here:

1. Introduction - data turns into ideas :as 29Apr26 09-15
2. The foundation and framework of the Experiment
3. Data
4. Process
5. Where has the experiment taken the planet?
6. Stages in the journey
7. A final thought
8. View against time cube
9. World forming disc: 4.5 to 4.4 Gya = 0.1Gy
10. Early life cube: 4.4 to 3.5 Gya = 0.9 Gy
11. Progress of the Data Experiment 1
12. Single cell cube: 3.5 to 1 Gya = 2.5 Gy
13. Progress of the Data Experiment 2
14. Multi cell cube and additional spot view: 1 to 0 Gya = 1Gy
15. Progress of the Data Experiment 3
16. Additional spot view: 0.007 to 0 Gya = 0.007Gy or 7My
17. Progress of the Data Experiment 4

1. Originals
2. How did the experiment happen?
3. Gene-culture interactions
4. A summary of events from simple beginings
5. General overview
6. Major evolutionary stages from a data and process view
7. Major milestones in data & process:
8. OTHER BITS
9. Our thinking ability
10. A process view of thinking
11. Where the thinking processes happen
12. {notes}
13. Intro
14. more on heart and brain archictectre
15. Other views of proc & data
16. Our style of proc & data is just one of many and not without problems
17. Further info

Introduction - data turns into ideas

An explanation of the title might be a good starting point. Possibly it should be The Great Data and Process Controlled Experiment, obviously a bit too long but that’s what it’s about. Process has been omitted as the word is in common use and understanding, likewise control and used here in terms of many organisms needing some form of decision and movement control. Although Data is in common use, it’s usually about results needing the process of analysis. However, in examples such as: “weathering rocks” here the “rocks” are data processed by “weathering” (processes are always verbs and data nouns), and evolution’s selection process acting on organisms i.e. confirm suitability (verb phrase) of an organism, again the organism is seen as data. And lastly Experiment that’s generally a controlled set-up to check a hypothesis, although here the set-up is: a planet at a certain distance from a sun and with a particular angle of axis, life has started and let’s see where it goes without any goals or intervention – Great.

So putting it all together, the Experiment starts with initial life, possibly in the form of various chemicals combining (verb) into something (noun) that repeats reliably, but with slight change so making results self-selectable (if something works it tends to happen more often, not so workable it stops happening) and ultimately creating the first long molecules of ribonucleic acid RNA, which gives a solid data orientated starting point.

This early RNA world develops into a DNA one (DeoxyriboNucleic Acid is a modified and stable version of RNA that forms a reliable master copy of data from which a working copy of RNA can be produced) and the experiment takes off with the flexibility of data driven organism creation and the world is flooded with variety of species. The world has various and changing environments and the flexibility of data driven organism creation takes full advantage, but competition for finite resources leads to a self-selecting evolutionary process within this flexibility. And an arms race develops - to eat or be eaten – so brains arrive to process surrounding data obtained by suitable sensors, helping both sides of the “war” to survive. Brains are a huge adaptive advantage and so get bigger, better and imaginative to help survival, and take a new turn when we humans formalise language and start to record our survival and other ideas. These ideas eventually form a vast database available to the world’s human population via the Internet. And a new phase evolves as we enable processing of this vast database via our own created Artificial Intelligent brains with their style of thinking – or perhaps just: via AI’s data processing style.

The foundation and framework of the Experiment

just he diagram to explain how the flexibility of data driven organism creation happens - extract anything usful from below to here or into new whaterve thit is

how this different from A summary of events from simple beginings and Where has the experiment taken the planet? and A summary of events from simple beginings beleow?

The foundation of the experiment was established once RNA evolved from the various coalitions of chemicals and molecules and then RNA also developed into a means of processing (i.e. acting as a catalyst for chemical reactions) and utilising the data stored in the RNA; (AI) These early RNAs processed themselves and evolved by developing the ability to self-replicate, encapsulate, and eventually facilitate protein. The adjacent diagram gives a "simple" example of later and more advanced data and process working together to form a growing peptide chain (a linear, unbranched chain of amino acids linked together by covalent peptide bonds) molecule. Short peptide chains form essential signalling molecules, and regulators of physiological processes, while long ones fold into a protein to become an essential component of a cell. The size and shape of the protein is dictated by the (bit) of RNA being read. This is a key data process at the heart of all cells, and in the case of eukaryotes the messenger RNA is derived from the DNA held within the nucleus.

The framework of the experiment describes the types of data and the styles of process involved in the experiment.

Data

Although data has been highlighted as relating to organic evolution it also applies to the “just happened” geological changes. Data is defined as information without context, e.g. 40 20 20 20 40 50 which could be a set of temperatures or the location of Erseke in Albania, if you add context with ^oC or apply it to Google Earth it becomes clear; data can also be anything that a process operates upon e.g. cat - as in - stroke the cat. So the physical world’s geological features the: land, sea, mountains, volcanoes, rivers etc. (note the "the" before all the nouns, a giveaway that it's data) can be said to be the data operated upon by geological forces due to heating by core nuclear forces or the sun, or by air or water movements, gravity etc (all actions or verbs, a process giveaway). A simple example of this is an early "explanation of combustion" in the adjacent model - see ⮝The story of Phlogiston -2. And there’s also been process interaction between the organic and geological data items, for example: the oxygenation of the air by cyanobacteria and photosynthesis 2.7 billion to 2.8 billion years ago when they used sunshine, water and carbon dioxide to produce carbohydrates and oxygen, geological features have also isolated species and led to separate evolutionary paths e.g. the Congo river leading to Bonobos separate from Chimpanzees.

DNA data determines the construction of all creatures and critically their brains, although gene expression is influenced by environments too, and genes (reflecting a bit of DNA) provide potential and not destiny. However, gene expression also determines behaviour as well as bodies, while some behaviours (actions) are basic automatic housekeeping like: maintaining body temperature, operating the cardiovascular system, others are genetically created evolutionary start-up behaviours, such as a cuckoo chick pushing the competition out of the nest, or human babies rooting reflex for milk, screaming for attention, smiling, learning a language and generally interacting with evolutionarily built parental responses. This extends to many creatures where at least mothers teach their receptive offspring to survive. Here I’m calling these genetically created basic start-up and response behaviours, or set of ideas, the 👇 Bios - Greek for life - βιος and the name of basic computer startup software.

In addition to what can be called vertical idea exchange between parent and child, there's also those passed between creatures that spreads beneficial behaviour and ideas in a horizontal fashion, such as macaque sweet-potato washing it appears that the behaviour is genuine and is an example of the spread of cultural ideas, however unfortunately this example has been confused by a proposal that once a critical mass of ideas occur in one place they magically jump to other unconnected locations, known as the "hundredth monkey effect" that doesn't exits - see "macaque sweet-potato washing" Revisited. But we alone have the ability to record those ideas to form a massive library of ideas i.e. our cultural environment available to all generations, which can be taught, or found (now assisted by AI) by most of us via the Internet and media. And we humans extend the BIOS iteractions to initialising our children’s worldview ideas see ⮝Turing Hominin > Worldview -3.

The Great Data Experiment is only concerned with the 3 organic related data items:

• DNA and its forerunners
• ideas including both as Bios and within our Cultural Environment
• brains as the physical results played out under the Darwinian algorithm

The geological data experiment has, and will run for a much longer period throughout the universe in the form of forces and matter - the organic life data experiment occurring here is (will be?) very short lived in comparison, but may be running longer elsewhere in the universe.

Process



The slow evolution of life depended on a continuing string of changes orchestrated by data and process running under Darwin’s natural selection algorithm, whereby it’s only the fit for purpose within the current environment who survive to reproduce - see adjacent model and discussion of Darwin and Lamarck below. Evolution was acknowledged prior to Darwin, but on the basis of Jean-Baptiste Lamarck’s theory of the inheritance of acquired characteristics, whereby offspring inherit characteristics developed by their parents e.g. the child of giraffes able to stretch for higher food would acquire a longer neck; the son of a blacksmith would develop strong arms. Although this appealed to Victorian ideas of virtuous self-improvement it has not been borne out by the Jewish community’s long running experiment, and not one boy has acquired, or grown, a circumcised penis like his father. However, physical damage to parental DNA in sperm or ova e.g. due to nuclear radiation, does affect (and generally adversely) the offspring; but the effects of the Dutch Hunger Winter could be considered a Lamarckian inheritance from a parental characteristic {epigenetics?}.

The model represents Darwin’s natural selection algorithm starting at a “new parental gene mix” and the subsequent “development throughout life” of an “individual – ever changing” and includes 3 major milestone events. Although labelled in relation to us it applies in general to any sexually reproducing creature:

1. Surviving - to fertile and if chooses to reproduce contributes their gamete genes to a new parental gene mix and zygote cell
2. Start / End of life update - biological evolution requires the death of individuals to allow space for new ones and this event represents an update of the hominin population; the word “decreasing” indicates a decrease in population for each death, but of course the general population trend is upwards due to extra “new parental gene mix” events
3. Surviving - post fertile - such individuals no longer influence the genepool and are a waste of reproduction resources, however old parents and grandparents contribute significant social influencemm

In summary, if an individual is sufficiently fit for purpose in the current environment they get to reach sexual maturity (i.e. they haven’t died) and are able to pass on their genes and parental fitness. This is similar to Lamarck's idea of the inheritance parental fitness, to which Darwin was sympathetic, however, the mechanism involved separate the two. I’m not sure if Lamarck provided any explanation beyond that it was intuitive, whereas Darwin assumed some form of analogue mixing of the sexual contributions. But this idea suffered the challenging question of dilution over generations, and unfortunately for Darwin he was unaware of Gregor Mendel's concurrent work on sweet peas and the digital nature of what turned out to be genes, which provide a potential for inherited characteristics but are also influenced by environment - see ⮝Our Beginnings & Change Mechanisms-#

Where has the experiment taken the planet?

what the role of this bit? quick run throigh concentrate on end game and us (was inteligence an evo necessaty) - could concentrate on cultural explosion co evo braim but limited / frozen capability
my question: had the Cretaceous-Tertiary (K/T) extinction not have happened would The Palaeocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum have happened and if it did would the dianasors survived that heating

Where would the planet be without us? If evolution was re-run would it arrive at us again? There’s much debated on this and one argument points out that dinosaurs with their limited intelligence ruled the earth for approximately 165 to 180 million years, whereas the whole of our hominin line covers just 7 million years - see dinosaurs slice in Time Cube below. But if the massive asteroid had missed the earth, would they still be here now, so extending their reign by just another 80 million years to say 250 million in total. But if not a massive asteroid, possibly another geological change over last 80 million years may have limited their success?

And there was one at about 56 Mya, the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM) and the Earth’s biggest ever fart as the New Scientist describes it, being more than a trillion tonnes of methane bursting suddenly from the ocean 55 Mya Timeline: The evolution of life - "A sudden rise in greenhouse gases sending temperatures soaring and killing thousands of species in the ocean depths. But it also triggered an evolutionary bonanza among land mammals, including early primates. Without it we might not be here today.".

As the PETM was driven by earth's geological factors, this event would still have occurred even if the asteroid had avoided us, and AI's view is:

“While many paleontologists believe dinosaurs would have continued to dominate had the asteroid not hit, the 5–8°C temperature spike of the PETM (making the world much hotter than the Cretaceous) would have presented a severe, perhaps terminal, challenge
The PETM saw significant shifts in vegetation. If the food supply (particular plants for herbivores) could not adapt to the 5–8°C rise, large herbivores would have struggled, causing a chain reaction that could kill off large carnivores.
Likely Survival of Some Species: Ectothermic (cold-blooded/mesothermic) crocodilians and some smaller dinosaurs might have adapted better to the heat. However, the large, specialized dinosaurs (like T. rex or Triceratops) might not have survived the extreme heat and ecological changes, leading to a "different" kind of, but slower, extinction."

So either way it sounds like the "all brawn and little brain" was not a long-term survial stategy and one way or another the opportunity for the more adaptive small mammals would always come. But it's inteseting to note that crocodilians did survive both the asteroid and the PETM, possibly because their water based environment remained relativly constatnt and their body and hunting style including diet, has remained consistantly successful over many changes.

Stages in the journey

Brains whatever their size are a good adaptive strategy, so good that they occurred in many separate instances, known as convergent evolution. However, brains are a long way into the experiment, as shown in detail in the Time Cube below, and the next paragraphs gives summary of the experiment's early stages leading to brains.

Once earth’s formation reached a stage where water was present “life” and the experiment began, but at this stage it was confined to physical and chemical interactions with minerals, some of which happened so they were repeated and those doing so with stability and the ability to replicate faster than they degraded proliferated. Being repeatable implies some form of data retention somewhere and so the experiment started and continued to the formation of a long molecule of ribonucleic acid (RNA) that went on to form the basis of all life on the planet. If RNA had not formed possibly a you would not be reading this, or perhaps a “better or worse” molecule may have formed with a similar outcome.

An early RNA world evolved to form a simple cell that continued to evolve to form a more sophisticated version driven by, a development of RNA into, DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid). This all enabled much more data to be stored, and sophisticated processing of the DNA held data could form a variety of proteins, which are the basis of form many different types of cells. Life continued in a single celled form for a very long time, but events happened and multi-cellular life started with yet more data involved in how multiple cells combined to form bigger and better creatures. A key development was creatures that could move, albeit just across the sea bed, but they needed something to control this movement. So sensors and a brain to process the incoming data were a necessary addition to enabled to creature to move safely and appropriately as determined by the brain.

An early example of a brain is Spriggina ✤ from the late Ediacaran period roughly 550 Mya, and is considered one of the first animals to exhibit bilateral symmetry, mobility and a head so suggesting an early possibility of a rudimentary brain, but it was probably a unique and soon extinct species. An earlier unrelated “prototype of a mobility” was Kimberella, a slug-like creature possessing a muscular foot for movement and a (likely retractable) proboscis for feeding. Early types of Platyhelminthes (flat worms) probably co-existed with Spriginna although in comparison much smaller at that time, but members of the category (i.e. phylum) evolved and still exist today, and several species used for research and education. All the above have the common advantage of movement to find food, but this needs data from sensors for processing in order to take suitable action. ⪧Biology: The Science of Life 48 Lec.Behavior as an Adaptive Trait Lecture ⪦   gives a description of the simple brain process needed:



"A planarian has two light-sensing organs called eyespots located symmetrically on either side of its head. These eyespots do not resolve images, but they do detect the relative intensity of light. All a planarian has to do to orient to light is move until the intensity of light received by both eyespots is equal. Kinesis and taxis in animals, like tropism in plants, represent a simple kind of relationship between stimulus and response. The major difference is that taxis and kinesis involve movement through the action of muscles, whereas plant tropism involves movement through growth. Though their physiology enables animals to respond in intricate ways to stimuli, they often behave as though they are making simple responses to surprisingly simple cues."

This improved method of feeding caught on and demanded bigger and better sensors, brains and habits to match, but also establish an opportunity for others to now feed on the traditional vegetarians, and so starting an Arms races between predators and prey (Wiki Feb26) to eat, but also avoid being eaten, and "The pressure to adapt is stronger on the prey than on the predator in the sense that, if the predator fails to win a contest, it loses a meal; if the prey is the loser, it loses its life" and so makes a good evolutionary incentive to have better senses and associated brain power.

An “arms race” is the apt term we use based on one of our most effective habits of deliberately killing each other using bigger and better methods. But of course in evolution is just a matter of survival in the face of completion, and can be just an escalation of “what works prevails”. This moves us through the experiment, as initial brains evolve to aid survival in the face of changing physical environments and completion from other creatures, we arrive at the point when the owners of well devolved brains leave the safety of the trees, possibly due to over population and competition, and are driven out or leave voluntarily; or perhaps some curious individuals tentatively test the water over time and eventually take the plunge. But once permanently out on the open savanna brains and bodies needed to pick up the pace if they are to survive.



But trees and savannas are not the only testing ground for brains, as previously said brains are so good that there’s been convergent evolution, octopus have a distributed version, and while dolphin brain structure emphasizes auditory processing and emotional connection, human brain structure prioritizes, complex reasoning, and logical, long-term planning; and of course humans have hands and a dry world to manipulate and cause havoc. I suggest the challenges and opportunities in the open savanna, connected with our body arrangement enhanced by bipedal movement and so releasing our arms and hands to become The most useful enviro-mental tool in the world ✤ made all the difference in launching our “super brain” – a coevolution of additional sense data, processing and output control.



Moving on thought the experiment again takes us to the start of the “Cultural Explosion” of data and its processing, and at this stage things are changing so rapidly that a log scale of events has been used in the "View against time cube" section beleow and as preview . A key event was a workable language around 60 Kya - so helping idea sharing and across generations via stories etc., writing had to wait till around 5.5 Kya. It’s suggested that our adaptable hands also lead language formation, progressing and aided by tongues and a descending larynx to form speech, and language that we augment with hand movement to this day. This continued to reached to a tipping point where the sharing and availability of ideas drove our ancestor’s survival more effectively than selected biological traits, which meant our brain evolution stalled at a point about 10,000 years ago, as mentioned in the hover texts in page banners. Biological evolution is slow and meticulous and operates over generations, the sharing and proliferation of a good idea takes days or months to catch on locally, and then may soon spread to an adjacent tribe.

Thanks to our embryonic “shared database” of ideas human lifestyle started to accelerate, as brilliantly explained in Jarad Diamond’s ᚜Guns, germs and steel - a short history of everybody for the last 13,000 years 10 ᚛ click . A critical invention late in this period was Johannes Gutenberg's movable-type printing press in 1440, which enabled mass printing and the spread of ideas, and (ironically) This was the first mass distribution of ideas, albeit in Latin, but unfortunately this, and many other religious books, algin with many features of what we now call conspiracy theories. However it does go to expose our brain’s style of thinking. an AI ref HTS Theological Studies the earliest major book being The Gutenberg Bible, all leading to the "Gutenberg Revolution" and the age of printed books in the West. Although this was the first mass printing press, printing had occurred sometime earlier e.g. a 1.275 Kya (re 2026) woodblock-printed copy of the Pure Light Dharani Sutra, discovered 1966 in the Seokgatap Pagoda at Bulguksa Temple, South Korea History of printing.

The “ironically” note above refers to the biases involved in our brain's processing of data (or information as now all we perceive is with context) and the perpetuation and establishment of now debatable "alternative facts". Our brains evolved to help our real-time survival and not for extended off-line critical thought, beyond perhaps planning and organising tomorrow's hunting. Understandably over time intuitive explanations of our existence and origins occurred, and continue in all cultures across the world. But tentative challenges to some were made, one leading to Galileo Galilei’s 1633 Trial by the Roman Inquisition for "vehement suspicion of heresy" - he was forced to recant ideas on heliocentrism, and sentenced to house arrest for the rest of his life. And Darwin’s deduction of the theory of evolution (around 1838) gave him grave concerns as it conflicted with his religious upbringing and belief.

Another critical point in the experiment occurred in 1620 when Francis Bacon proposed a framework for the modern scientific method as published in Novum Organum (New Method). This introduced a widespread discipline to augment and constrain our innate thinking style and ⮝The story of Phlogiston -2 provides a good example; and all such improved thinking led to the industrial revolution of 1750 to 1850, and to its unforeseen possible "endgame" repercussions.

Our Cultural Environment has introduced other such add-ons to our innate style of thinking in the form of best practice procedures e.g. courts, laws and justice (we no longer throw women into rivers to see if they are witches); and a value system now primarily based on money and markets (we created and operate it, but often have to “see what the markets say”) - for an alternative assessment of "value" see ᚜The Value of Everything - Making and Taking in the Global Economy 17 ᚛ click . Our thinking add-ons for justice and value, plus what you might call the truth of the scientific method relate to the three subjects of: truth, value and justice that have occupied philosophers (of which there are many styles of thought) for millennia.

However, our remaining primitive instincts of self, family and tribe survival, still shine through despite the many good cultural intensions and the better sides of religious teachings. This takes us to the current and "final?" stage of the experiment. Our computer technology has now dramatically overtaken the earlier mass printing and the spread of ideas, to now enable pushing tailored “alternative facts”, assertions of “fake news” and artificially created content to everyone, or to targeted individuals who share a particular view of events, and thereby enable the rich and powerful to mould the activities of the world for their own benefit. This has led to diverting world action and resources away from humanity's existential threat - Climate Change, and may result in the final endgame of the experiment, where the abilities of the creature that the experiment finally thew up outweighed its ability to control them adequately, and so possibly re-setting the experiment to an earlier stage.

A final thought

The culmination of the data experiment is the information that we all hold in our brains. As of 2026 there are about 8.3 billion brains in the world, all of which follow a homo sapient style physical architecture, but all subtly different in detail composition and leading to some being: musical, mathematical, clever / less so, left / right preference, neuro-typical / diverse etc. and in all combinations; and no two brains hold the same information, although their owners may have similar views in common. There're several items at play here: the genes relating to the brain, plus the physical and cultural / social environments, which contribute to the actual brain and the information it acquires.

Genes are potential not destiny and the finished brain is influenced by physical nourishment, but the social or family environment plays a part too e.g. there may be a genetic propensity towards schizophrenia but it depends on the child’s family environment as to what happens. (ref course?). However, the social and cultural environments is crucial to the information that the brain aquires, starting with the initial priming and Worldview, which includes an appropriate local language and parental ideas and possibly including local religious ideas. And, like it or not, early information and experiences set the underlying adult direction, which might go unchallenged or at best be difficult to change. For more on this see A Turing Hominin 3 and Turing Hominin > Worldview 3.

Not only are babies born into different physical environments, from a wealthy family to a war torn one, but they are subject to the ideas of parents and others close by that can have a lifetime's influence on them. Another driver for their future is how they are governed. Some of the world’s 8.3 billion (2026) brains are lucky enough to vote for leaders, while others have to accept who leads them. While democracy is held to be a symbol of freedom it does depend on an informed electorate, and unfortunately the power of modern technology makes it all too easy for malevolent rich and powerful people to play on peoples worldviews and to ill-inform the electorate and use democracy for their own ends.




View against time cube



This section relates the above description and applies it to the adjacent time cube, which is a time line wrapped into cubes e.g. instead of 10 mm line representing 1 million years ago, a 10 mm cube represents 10x10x10 = 1 billion years, or 1 Gya (giga i.e. 10⁹, years ago) and it shows that developing life forms have followed an increasingly complex relationship with data and process over evolution. Time period descriptions follow in chronological order, but by another convention, the diagram shows time flowing upwards - on bigger screens click for a stand-alone copy in new window that may help.

Various time periods are described below, but events occur over long periods and timings are uncertain, so time cube periods are only illustrative and boundaries are wide and flexible - all have an implied + / - of quite a lot.

World forming disc: 4.5 to 4.4 Gya = 0.1Gy

This is not to any scale, but includes the period between the earth’s formation or accretion Wiki: "the accumulation of particles into a massive object by gravitationally attracting more matter, typically gaseous matter, into an accretion disk" and the existance of liquid water, as follows.
(AI) "While the Earth began accreting 4.56–4.57 billion years ago, it is generally considered to have been largely completed by 4.54 billion years ago, which is the accepted age for the formation of the planet."
The existence of the earliest (Wiki) "liquid water, which is necessary for all known forms of life" was at around 4.4 billion years ago.

So the time period is 4.5 to 4.4 Gya Age of Earth and Origin of water on Earth

Early life cube: 4.4 to 3.5 Gya = 0.9 Gy

This includes the initial establishment of "life", and a long evolutionary development to eventual single celled organisms. Wikipedia has much to say on the subject as follows:

Abiogenesis is the study of the origin of life and the natural process by which the origins of life arises from non-living matter such as simple organic compounds. Life (including its origins), talks of the Last universal common ancestor and “Estimates from molecular clocks, as summarised in the TimeTree public database, place the origin of life around 4.0 billion years ago. Hypotheses on the origin of life attempt to explain the formation of a Universal common ancestor from simple organic molecules via pre-cellular life to protocells and metabolism.

“The last universal common ancestor (LUCA) is the hypothesized common ancestral cell population from which all subsequent life forms descend, including Bacteria, Archaea, and Eukarya.” And “Although the timing of the LUCA cannot be definitively constrained, most studies suggest that the LUCA existed by 3.5 billion years ago, and possibly as early as 4.3 billion years ago or earlier.”

However, whatever the timing the LUCA it's a very sophisticated form of life, and a lot must of happened long before its arrival. There are hypothesise of an RNA world in the form of simple self-replicating molecules, and a first universal common ancestor FUCA in the form of:

“a non-cellular entity that was the earliest organism with a genetic code capable of performing biological translation of RNA molecules to protein formation through peptides synthesis. Its descendants would include the last universal common ancestor (LUCA) and, therefore, all modern cells."

But even this is pretty sophisticated and probably developed from:

"a Prebiotic World - an environment that enabled chemical evolution, where inorganic molecules formed complex organic compounds in a "primordial soup".

(AI) “Life before LUCA began with abiogenesis, the process by which life arose from non-living matter. The earliest stages involved complex chemical evolution in environments such as hydrothermal vents, where substances like hydrogen and carbon dioxide were abundant. [but now takes a big jump to] This period is often conceptualised as a "pre-cellular RNA world," where RNA molecules acted as both genetic information storage and catalysts, before the specialisation into DNA and proteins seen in LUCA and all modern life.”

ORIG from clays, soups, scaffoldings - no cells yet, floating RNA? ... Dawkins / Course

Refs:
Abiogenesis
Last universal common ancestor
Origin of life
⪧Biology: The Science of Life 7 Lec.xx ⪦  
⪧Origins of Life 5 Lec.xx ⪦  

Progress of the Data Experiment 1

Here the data experiment has been confined to very early physical and chemical interaction with minerals in such a way the they could be repeated and improved for some advantage; being repeated implies some form of data retention somewhere. This embryonic situation develop into the sophistication of a long molecule of ribonucleic acid (RNA), which likely formed in a primordial soup with simple nucleotides bonding together to form longer chains to become RNA to go on to form the basis of all life on the planet. These initial sequences of RNA data retention were not "read" for information but were selected for stability and the ability to replicate faster than they degraded”, but whatever was doing selecting and replicating were processes.

ORIG So far the data experiment had been confined to very early physical and chemical interaction with minerals in such a way the they could be repeated and improved for some advantage; being repeated implies some form of data retention somewhere. This embryonic situation develop into the sophistication of a long molecule of ribonucleic acid (RNA) that was to form the basis of all life on the planet

rimordial soup, with simple nucleotides bonding together to form longer chains. These initial sequences were not "read" for information but were selected for stability and the ability to replicate faster than they degraded”, but whatever was doing selecting and replicating were processes.
“Over time, it is believed that an RNA molecule evolved to grab onto another RNA, creating an early, crude form of a ribosome [forming process to “read” RNA] that began linking amino acids together to make proteins.” This all formed the foundations for DNA, a more sophisticated way to store data in a molecular form than RNA, and better ribosomes to “act as molecular machines that read [process] the genetic code encoded in the sequence of nucleotides in an mRNA molecule [working data]” that is derived [process] from DNA [long term master data].

Single cell cube: 3.5 to 1 Gya = 2.5 Gy

This covers the start of single celled life, as taken from the earliest widely accepted physical evidence of fossilised stromatolites in Western Australia (layered structures built by colonies of single-celled microbes) dated at 3.5-3.7 Gya; although the LUCA is hypothesized as between 3.5 to 4.2 Gya. However the cube end period is a lot more ambiguous as it depends on the definition of multicellular life, as highlighted below, so for simplicity I've compromised on 1 Gya. This single cell period is the longest period (biggest cube) considered here and leads many, including Steve Jones (Professor of Genetics University College London) calling it “a long boring period of little change” ⪧The Cell # pxxx⪦ OR ⪧ The Cell 4 @xx minsx ⪦  ref in IoT The Cell . However, there were two very important changes during the period.

• Earth's Great Oxidation Event (GOE) began around 2.4 to 2.3 Gya. From Wiki 11feb26: The Earth's atmosphere and shallow seas first experienced a rise in the concentration of free oxygen. This began approximately 2.460–2.426 Gya and ended approximately 2.060 Gya. Geological, isotopic and chemical evidence suggests that biologically produced molecular oxygen started to accumulate by microbial photosynthesis and oxygen levels being as high as 10% of modern atmospheric level by the end of the GOE. It’s also know as the Oxygen Holocaust as oxygen is toxic to the then-mostly anaerobic biosphere and may have caused the extinction/extirpation of many early organisms.
• The arival of the Eukaryote cell at around 2.2 Gya, as described by Symbiogenesis whereby (AI): a primitive anaerobic cell, likely an Asgard archaeon, engulfed a smaller, aerobic alphaproteobacterium but did not digest it, possibly 1.6 to 2.2 Gya. The oldest unambiguous Eukaryote based fossils date back to about 1.65 Gya and Francevillian biota, which are said to be a collection of macroscopic structures, are postulated by some to be evidence of the earliest form of multicellular life, and of eukaryotes at around 2.1 Gya.

These two events gave greater opportunities for evolution with the possibility of more sophisticated cells including a central nucleus that could protect and hold long strings of DNA and specialist organelles of mitochondria providing a good energy source to power a sophisticated cell "prorien production factory". And consequentially sexual reproduction occurred that (AI) "provides significant evolutionary advantages primarily by generating genetic variation through the mixing of DNA from two parents. This diversity allows species to adapt to changing environments, survive diseases, and avoid the accumulation of harmful mutations. It enables faster evolution and long-term survival compared to asexual reproduction”.

But, in true dispassionate evolution style, the new oxygen rich atmosphere caused the mass extinction of anaerobic life. (AI) "The Great Oxidation Event (GOE) was advantageous as it paved the way for complex life by creating energy-rich environments, leading to aerobic respiration and the evolution of mitochondria, enabling larger, more complex organisms, and spurring massive diversification of life forms and minerals, despite causing an initial mass extinction of anaerobic life. It fundamentally transformed Earth into the oxygen-rich, habitable planet known today." Or as we may see it: anaerobic life nobly laid down their life for the sake of multicellular life.

Wikipedia's Multicellular organism Origin hypotheses (2nd para Feb26) says:

"Because the first multicellular organisms were simple, soft organisms lacking bone, shell, or other hard body parts, they are not well preserved in the fossil record.[31] One exception may be the demosponge (AI) confirmed body fossils in the Early Cambrian (around 515-520 million years ago), but chemical biomarkers suggest their presence much earlier, potentially in the Neoproterozoic era (before 635 million years ago), which may have left a chemical signature in ancient rocks. The earliest fossils of multicellular organisms include the contested Grypania spiralis and the fossils of the black shales of the Palaeoproterozoic Francevillian Group Fossil B Formation in Gabon (Gabonionta).[32] The Doushantuo Formation has yielded 600 million year old microfossils with evidence of multicellular traits.[33]"

The article also describes various theories on the origin of multicellularity and also gives an intesting clip (opens in new window) of a primitive 4 celled organisum. And Wikipedia's Cambrian explosion includes a chart showing Multicellular Life starting at just over 1.5 Gya and the arrival of earlist fungi.

Although this period is known as the Boring Billion, some dramatic geological evens did occur, due plate tectonics, that changed land masses and significantly altered sea levels and marine environments. But these changes were slow and life at the time was relatively unsophisticated and had no need, or opportunity to evolve – if it’s not broken, no need to mend it.

Progress of the Data Experiment 2

Although dubbed the Boring Billion (AI) “Over time, it is believed that an RNA molecule evolved to grab onto another RNA, creating an early, crude form of a ribosome [forming a process to “read” RNA] that began linking amino acids together to make proteins.” And with the help of a lipid cell membrane primarily a phospholipid bilayer featuring amphipathic molecules with hydrophilic heads facing outward and hydrophobic tails inward. This fluid structure forms a stable, selectively permeable barrier formed an early cell orchestrated by data held as RNA, which got copied to additional cells as the original divided, or was divided.

ORIG (AI) “early RNA molecules likely formed in a primordial soup, with simple nucleotides bonding together to form longer chains. These initial sequences were not "read" for information but were selected for stability and the ability to replicate faster than they degraded”, but whatever was doing selecting and replicating were processes. “Over time, it is believed that an RNA molecule evolved to grab onto another RNA, creating an early, crude form of a ribosome [forming process to “read” RNA] that began linking amino acids together to make proteins.” This all formed the foundations for DNA, a more sophisticated way to store data in a molecular form than RNA, and better ribosomes to “act as molecular machines that read [process] the genetic code encoded in the sequence of nucleotides in an mRNA molecule [working data]” that is derived [process] from DNA [long term master data].

The origin of the eukaryotic cell was a major evolutionary event that led to a wide diversification of lineages displaying very different morphologies - Open questions on the origin of eukaryotes - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4640172/

mitochondrial endosymbiotic event - Symbiogenesis (endosymbiotic theory, or serial endosymbiotic theory - has diagram suggesting 1st merger at 2.2 Gya

when did 1st eukaryot cell form - (AI) The first eukaryotic cells are believed to have emerged between 1.8 and 2.7 billion years ago from archaeal ancestors. Determining the exact timing is challenging due to a sparse and sometimes controversial fossil record, with estimates varying based on whether scientists look at physical fossils, chemical biomarkers, or "molecular clock" DNA analyses.

wiki cell - DNA (long molecuie) acting as data and ribsome enzime acting as processor - cell & replication pocess inclds into both new items,copy ofand further cell production - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_(biology)#Prokaryotic_cells

• wiki origin simple cells Prokaryotic (bacteria and archaea - DNA ring and not in a nucleus yet)
• wiki origin complex cells Eukaryotic after the great symbiosys able to support longer DNA, more complex data and hence end product

WAS AT TOP OF NEXT PERIOD DESCRIPTION TO JUSTIFY DATES - ONLY NEED TO DO IT HERE ADD ANYTHIG TO ABOVE AND DELETE (This is the multi cell organism period that AI) "started to appear at different times, with early signs of coordination around 3-3.5 billion years ago {BUT Endosymbiotic HAPPEND AT 1.65 Gya}, but the earliest definitive fossils of clearly multicellular organisms date to about 2.1 billion years ago (the Francevillian biota)."




Multi cell cube and additional spot view: 1 to 0 Gya = 1Gy



This is the multi cell organism period, which had to contend with some dramatic geological events as the earth froze into suggested Snowball Earth on several occasions. But early single and multicelled life survived this and took advantage once the situation changed.

At the start of this period life was marking a move beyond simple colonial behaviour and the first multicellular organisms appeared, such as early red algae (e.g. Bangiomorpha), but a global freeze happened at around 0.72 Gya that slowed multicellular evolution. This freeze was caused by geological processes or mechanisms , for example, weathering of silicate rock that removed carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and a feedback loop of: ice reflecting heat away from the earth and thus creating more ice, that reflected more heat etc. Had spriginna occured by now when after Kimberella below?

However, it did survive and when further geological processes despite the glaciers, volcanoes continued to release carbon dioxide; however, the glaciers did prevented silicate rock weathering and removal of carbon dioxide, so CO² and temperatures started to rise, ice melted and so less heat was reflected away, and the earth thawed occurred (AI): "Post-glacial, high-oxygen conditions and nutrient surges from weathering - enabled the rise of complex, multicellular Ediacaran fauna, which paved the way for the rapid diversification of animal body plans." leading to soft-bodied creatures like Dickinsonia (a flat, oval-shaped creature that left impressions in the sediment, and likely absorbed nutrients directly through its body, lacking a mouth or gut) and Kimberella (at 0.555 to 0.558 Gya: a slug-like, bilaterally symmetrical creature and more advanced than Dickinsonia, possessing a muscular foot for movement and a, likely retractable, proboscis for feeding) and Spriginna in shallow, oxygenated oceans.
Unlike the many attached organisms of their time, both are believed to have been mobile, moving across the seafloor, Kimberella is thought to be shell-bearing mollusk-like creature that used a radula-like organ to graze on microbial mats, while Spriggina had a crescent-shaped head and was segmented, superficially resembling a trilobite, though not directly related to them. Both are considered pioneering, mobile, and bilaterally symmetrical "strangers" of the Ediacaran, representing the transition toward the modern animal body plans that appeared in the Cambrian.
But this period, often portrayed as a peaceful underwater garden, also ended (~0.539 Gya) with a mass extinction driven primarily by a rapid geological environmental change of decreased global ocean oxygen levels. The deoxygenation likely caused the extinction of specialized, immobile organisms that relied on high oxygen levels, plus more complex and mobile animals evolved (early Cambrian fauna) that ate the mat-like habitats.

Another big geological event occurred around 0.541 Gya giving biological evolution further opportunities i.e. the Cambrian Explosion. (AI): "the break-up of the supercontinent Gondwana and subsequent sea-level rises flooded continental shelves, creating vast, shallow, and nutrient-rich habitats; significant rise in oxygen levels, increased in calcium concentrations in seawater allowed for the development of shells and hard body parts; the appearance of the first predators, and [importantly for process and data] the evolution of Hox control genes that provided the genetic flexibility necessary for rapidly creating diverse animal body plans". Predators also meant prey, which started an evolutionary arms race between the two, to eat and not to be eaten. All this gave rise to the Cambrian explosion (~0.539 Gya) of new creatures and confirmed in an abundance of the fossil record (which worried Darwin as it was contrary to his theory of gradual evolution) and the subsequent post-Cambrian world characterized by a "cascading" increase in ecological complexity, setting the stage for the Paleozoic Era's diverse marine and, eventually, terrestrial ecosystems.

Progress of the Data Experiment 3

Early RNA cells formed the foundations for a more sophisticated DNA based cell version, but not until the happenstance of symbiogenesis and the eukaryote cell, which could contain a nucleus to house and protect the long DNA molecule. The new cell version also developed communication and control mechanisms so combining themselves to create new multicellular organisms, which combined with the opportunities offered by an oxygen rich environment led to a world full of fauna and flora {diagram}. click or xx

A cell is an incredibly complex factory of activity run from DNA data and actioned initially by an enzyme An enzyme is a biological macromolecule, usually a protein, that acts as a biological catalyst, accelerating chemical reactions without being consumed in the process. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enzyme (RNA polymerase) to create working mRNA that a ribosome then reads to assemble amino acids into proteins, which perform structural, functional, and regulatory tasks in the cell. As in all data driven things this makes the cell incredibly flexible, but also the creature that they form and not only their morphology but also their habits {Spriggina - need some thing to refer to above}, and so giving the foundation of evolution. There’s a fine balance between too much flexibility (chaos) and too little (stasis), but an adaptive action, or habit, of sexual reproduction gave a controlled level of flexibility so enhancing evolution further.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

ORIG To this point the data experiment had been confined to very early physical and chemical interaction with minerals in such a way the they could be repeated and improved for some advantage; being repeated implies some form of data retention somewhere. This embryonic situation develop into the sophistication of a long molecule of ribonucleic acid (RNA) that: (AI) “eearly RNA molecules likely formed in a primordial soup, with simple nucleotides bonding together to form longer chains. These initial sequences were not "read" for information but were selected for stability and the ability to replicate faster than they degraded”, but whatever was doing selecting and replicating were processes. “Over time, it is believed that an RNA molecule evolved to grab onto another RNA, creating an early, crude form of a ribosome [forming process to “read” RNA] that began linking amino acids together to make proteins.” This all formed the foundations for DNA, a more sophisticated way to store data in a molecular form than RNA, and better ribosomes to “act as molecular machines that read [process] the genetic code encoded in the sequence of nucleotides in an mRNA molecule [working data]” that is derived [process] from DNA [long term master data].

ORIG But at the start of this period life was . . (AI)Before Spriggina appeared approximately 550 million years ago, [life on Earth was dominated by simple, single-celled microbes for billions of years, dominated by simple, single-celled microbes for billions of years (Gy),] followed by the emergence of the mysterious, often immobile Ediacaran biota. This period, mostly within the (0.635–0.541 Gya), [what happend 1 - 0.635 Gya - AI Rise of Complexity: Just before Spriggina, organisms like Kimberella appeared (around 565 Ma), which was a motile, bilaterian creature that likely grazed on microbial mats.] was marked by a "Garden of Ediacara" containing soft-bodied, stationary, and sometimes frond-like or quilted organisms that lived in shallow marine environments, largely feeding on microbial mats that coated the seafloor. As these were immobile they had to wait for micrscopice food to drft to them on sea currents.

This is the multi cell organism periodthat includes the Cambrian explosion, which probably resulted from the thawing of the “snow ball” earth around 0.635 Gya, that increased nutrient levels (such as phosphorus) in the oceans and subsequent increased oxygenation. This was an “explosion” of different species and a move away from the previous soft-bodied organisms to complex and diverse hard body parts like shells and exoskeletons. These hard body parts resulted from an evolutionary "arms race" caused by an increase in predator-prey relationships and feeding habits.

But at the start of this period - life was (AI) dominated by simple, single-celled microbes for billions of years (Gy), followed by the emergence of the mysterious, often immobile Ediacaran biota. This period, mostly within the (0.635–0.541 Gya), was marked by a "Garden of Ediacara" containing soft-bodied, stationary, and sometimes frond-like or quilted organisms that lived in shallow marine environments, largely feeding on microbial mats that coated the seafloor. As these were immobile they had to wait for micrscopice food to drft to them on sea currents.

Anything that self-moves must have sensor(s) and some processing ability to control the movement, which translates here to finding food, or to avoid being food. This is the basic arrangement: data from sensors is processed to achieve a suitable action. This change in feeding habits (and the advantages it brings) can only happen with an increase in data and processing capability, and both adaptive habits and capability of doing so evolve side-by-side, which effectively means some sort of brain. Andrew Parker (Wiki Feb26) has proposed that predator-prey relationships changed dramatically after eyesight evolved, which again isn’t any use without the brain power to go with it.

⪧Biology: The Science of Life 48 Lec.Behavior as an Adaptive Trait Lecture ⪦  

"A planarian has two light-sensing organs called eyespots located symmetrically on either side of its head. These eyespots do not resolve images, but they do detect the relative intensity of light. All a planarian has to do to orient to light is move until the intensity of light received by both eyespots is equal. Kinesis and taxis in animals, like tropism in plants, represent a simple kind of relationship between stimulus and response. The major difference is that taxis and kinesis involve movement through the action of muscles, whereas plant tropism involves movement through growth. Though their physiology enables animals to respond in intricate ways to stimuli, they often behave as though they are making simple responses to surprisingly simple cues."

But it took a long time for actual eyesight and associated brain to develop. Possible the earliest contender was Spriggina wiki at 0.550 to 0.540 Gya and (AI):

• “Sensory Navigation: The horseshoe-shaped head contains depressions that may have been primitive eyes or light-sensitive buds. It also likely possessed antennae on its second segment to sense its environment.
• Evidence of a Head: Spriggina is one of the first known Ediacaran animals to show a distinct "head" region, characterized by a horseshoe-shaped, unsegmented forward structure.
• Brain and Sensory Concentration: The presence of this head, which may have borne antennae or sensory pits, suggests the concentration of nerve tissue into a "rudimentary brain" to process information.

cognitive science religion interesting

Additional spot view: 0.007 to 0 Gya = 0.007Gy or 7My





This is an expansion of a relatively tiny spot of time at the end of this period, that is when our hominin line divided from our common ancestor with Chimpanzees and Bonobos at around 0.007 Gya or 7 Million years ago. Our line is shown very simplistically and implies a steady progression through an example of Hominin versions 👀, in reality there were many side branches that did not directly lead to us; the most recent being Neanderthals who lived concurrent with us {how about Divxxx now}, but although becoming extinct we did interbreed and therefore they have contributed to our current version. Homo sapiens became the only surviving species around 300 to 400 Thousand years ago and the experiment took of yet again. - area 2 General Introduction & Review of Not by Genes Alone and area 3Turing Hominin Nature of Brain – Thinking both have log scale chart

Progress of the Data Experiment 4

The mechanisms of evolution operated on the various creatures created by DNA (yet another - process of evolution acting on creatures as data) to fill the environment’s opportunities with various species of life. And again both morphology and habits, and as life forms became more sophisticated mothers teaching their offspring how to hunt was a very sensible habit that satisfied her maternal instincts towards her children, or was all this just the work of selfish genes. Primates took this further spending years teaching children and our hominin line took it to new hights. This all happened with bigger and better brains able to process the data around them but once we started to record our own data in the form of ideas we have arrived at a good simulation of our brains in the form of AI.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ orig below ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The period includs Spriggina (or Lancelet etc) and extends to present day, which (from a process and date view) is also begining to include non cellular creatures in the form of our created robots driven by centralised control and Artificial Inteligence that enters a new phase of the Great Data Experiment.

• Spriggina wiki or 530 Ma the Lancelet and 550 Ma Flatworms are the earliest known animals to have a brain, - wiki TL Hum Eva, and the simplest animals alive to have bilateral symmetry - /wiki/Timeline_of_human_evolutiondistributed as neural network in jelly fish earlier Orig Hum Mind lec 3?, distributed as neural network in jelly fish earlier Orig Hum Mind lec 3?.
• Brains constructed (under gene control of nuron / synaps production and interconection) to form functional capabilities, but construction also includes start-up behaviour algorithums for survival (also under control of nuron / synaps production and interconection) , forms a type of BIOS that can and is modified by normal gene natural selection.
  Basic behaviour algorithums for survival: sense wet / dry and back up, stand and walk immediately after birth, joey climbing into pouch, suckling, and at a more sophisticated level watch mother and adopt her behavior. Repeated -> Nuron/synaps configurations as created by genes forms BIOS data - other nuron/synaps configurations driven by genes forms processing functions.
• But BIOS is just the start-up, it provides the natural behaviour to watch mother cheater hunting and to adopt her actions and reaslise their benifit. The personal execution and mimicing of mothers action become rememered in the offsprings own episodic memory both good and bad attempts and bit-by-bit by trial and error but guided by mother's example the ofspring becomes a proficient hunter, reproduces and passes on the family hunting skills to the next generation - fortunatly an incometant hunter (due to poor teaching or content of mother skills, or ofsprings brain functional deficiency) will probably not survive to pass on its incompetance.
  Passing forward this batton of skills information is a Lamacian process, but the inspiration / ability to do so is driven by the BIOS, which is still very genetic. You can bequeath your information to the next generation, but not your muscles. Muscles have to be created and developed personally, as of course so does the information recieved also need to be developed personally but the difference is that you CAN inherit the big ideas from parents, but again NOT big muscles.

Alternative views - the top 400 ka slice can be alternatively show as cubes with the second tiny one on top representing the arrival of us homo sapiens. - life forms extened and likewise BIOSs from e.g. pack hunting wolves to highly socially interacting primates, but all the learning and updating of BIOS relied upon transitory events (mothers good hunting run is gone for ever, if not paying attention no option to re-play). Some events could however be repeated 'on request' via basic communication (not wait for next demo, if ever) by a competant adult (demo how he / she managed to make fire by chipping stones over dry grass), so skills could be taught and handed down through generations in Lamacian fashion. But once recording the idea in an extenal permanent form happend culture took of, you could become self taught (once been primed by basic cultural teaching).
bits - social we split from our primate cousins about 6 billion years ago (Orrorin tugenensis - wiki), and the main deserning difference was our ability to walk upright. Our brains continued to develop (why ours and not primat - did they also but our upright demanded more control options as initial robotics did, or more oportinities for better control). Did this brain control enhancement also begining the co-evo wrt culture, learning, teaching (not yet), slow accumlative changes (not leading to Great Leap Foward) but did seed mimetic skills (1.6–2.5 Ma Homo habilis - course / footnote) that produced our brain addon and our ability to record data and appreciate it in the word as stand alone item (not just the hunting performance of mum that was just done and gone until next time, if there was one).

• Wiki old Euro cent Great Leap fwd
• Wiki Behavioral modernity or "Shea (2011) in particular cautions that population pressure, cultural change, optimality models, like those in"
• Wiki human behavioral ecology; also see Upper Paleolithic Revolution in Behavioral modernity
• creationwiki creation wiki and ????

Originals

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ORIGS ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

WAS SIDEBAR Recent evolution - Origins of the Human Mind lec7-8 - (peacock brain) selec for cult, chang in last 150k, culture only debate eg outs brain - left af 70 k 12 k faced little sun, skin pigment reduce sun so thrived, more recent lactose tollerance since argi in 10k last yrs, normal illnece psat child hood, 10:50 brain gene evidence buildinghost of brain genes change since.

ORIG Our Cultural Environment has introduced many other add-on thinking guides, such as court and judicial systems (we no long throw women into rivers to see if they are witches), finance and market systems (we constructed it and operate it, but have to “see what the markets say”) and political systems and all run now via or computing technology. . .

ORIG The “ironically” note above highlights the cracks appearing in our brains ability to process data, or information as now all we perceive is with context. Our brains had evolved to help our real-time survival and not for extended off-line critical thought, beyond perhaps planning and organising tomorrows hunting. Understandably religious style explanations of our origins and existence became common in all cultures across the world, but challenges to some were tentatively made and lead to Galileo Galilei’s 1633 Trial by the Roman Inquisition for "vehement suspicion of heresy" and he was forced to recant ideas on heliocentrism, and sentenced to house arrest for the rest of his life. A turning point happened when Francis Bacon’s proposed a framework for a modern scientific method in 1620 in his Novum Organum (New Method). This introduced some discipline to thinking that augments and constrains our innate thinking style. Our cultures have introduced many other add-on thinking guides such as the court and judicial systems (we no throw women into rivers to see if they are witches), finance and market systems (that often appear to be running us as in “see what the markets say” and political systems that give some control by the masses that go a little way to avoid might is right . . .

OLD Moving on thought the experiment again takes us to another explosion point of data and its processing – the establishment of language - so helping sharing and recording ideas making them available across generations. It’s suggested that our adaptable hands lead language formation progressing and aided by tongues and a descending larynx to form speech that we still augment with hand movement.

ORIG Moving on thought the experiment again takes us to another explosion point of data and its processing, our language and recording of culture. Not only did we have adaptable hands but in association with our tongues and a descending larynx these were the enablers for language . . . .

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ orig below ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

A planet with life in a vast variety of organisms existing in every corner, and us with our brains capable of creating the Internet, endless wars and possibly climate disaster, but it's not all bad, our massive cultural library of ideas has got some others too. It took a long time to get from the early brains such as Spriggina / Planarian to us, including some intense competition over just the last 7 million years during the hominin line. The nature of brains kept changing together with the creature’s appropriate start-up behaviour as given by the integral Bios. These start-up behaviours obviously assumed an appropriate behavioural responses from the parent’s brain – it’s an integrated package. For example, we are born able to distinguish 800 different phonemes and we expect someone to talk to us so we may start to deduct a language, homing in on a sub-set of phonemes. Other creatures have similar abilities and expectations for being taught to become an adult, but our sophisticated language is one of our unique features, others being: our ability to mimic behaviour, our reasoning ability and our “most useful environmental tool in the world” (see side bar), all resulting in a massive cultural environment.

The creation of our brains was the result of DNA data and the process running under Darwin’s natural selection algorithm, but once we started to exchange and record data (initially just traditional stories and how to do things) to form a cultural ideas library it took-off in Lamarckian fashion. The adjacent model shows the “individual – ever changing” from the Darwinian process now in their role in the Lamarckian cultural evolution, detail below. The Lamarckian process is a lot simpler and quicker, but has drawbacks, one being there’s no test of suitability, ideas acquired by parents can be passed to, or directly inherited by offspring, and without any test as to their fitness, unlike genes. The offspring’s initial priming of ideas may come from parents, but very soon the child will pick up ideas from many sources and again there is no assurance as to their fitness or veracity. The child, or developing individual, also becomes a contributor to the mass of ideas within the cultural environment, either by re-iterating ideas and thereby making them more popular, or contributing new ones that are built on existing ones - similar to stretching necks. And again ideas are perpetuated without any natural test as to their fitness, although we do challenge some alternative truths and conspiracy theory. Another drawback is that there's no natural life span of ideas, the idea population just gets bigger and bigger. Some ideas may become unfashionable, or proven wrong, but they still exist and are available to all - they are as unforgettable as "don't think of an elephant". They remain ever present and often confuse and restrain progressive new ideas.

The adjacent “individual – ever changing” becomes aware of “information / data” that has come from their “cultural environment” in some event, possibly parental priming or read in a book, and they “think shuffle & correlate ideas” {change name} about it. The thinking activity depends on the “appeal” of the idea in relation to their “worldview”, some ideas appeal to us and gain our attention and thought, while others are disregarded, it all depends on our attitude as established in our worldview. Also the “nature of brain” plays a part (the structure & thinking process), for example some brains may be more mathematically or musically orientated and so affects the understanding of the information, likewise some of our reasoning processes are different from others. One way or another the individual arrives at an "idea - conclusion" and if significant is remembered and possibly assimilated into “worldview”, and/or possibly becomes a “realised idea” e.g. spoken, messaged etc and may end up as part of the cultural environment {change model}, which includes both important and mundane ideas in documents, tweets-Xs etc.

How did the experiment happen?

Although the above talks of our Lamarckian cultural take-off, rudimentary culture had gentle beginnings long before us as in the adjacent diagram. Many forms of life, such as bacteria and frogs don't provide support to their offspring and hence don't transfer any parental information to them. However others such as cheaters, and other hunter mothers do impart parental information to their offspring via example actions of their hunting skills - hopefully good skills, but if not they won’t perpetuate. The offspring will possibly live to put these examples into practise and become a competent hunter, which one day passes on the skills baton to their offspring. This skills baton is represented in the adjacent diagram by the small cloud that forms the species' cultural environment. The physical environment includes the challenges to be overcome to survive, here finding food, and success to sexual maturity adds the individual to the gene pool.

Genes and culture are two interacting forms of inheritance that together co-evolved brains in general to arrive at us. The co-evolution of genes and culture is the subject of the article below and also the book ᚜Not by genes alone - How culture transformed human evolution 15 ᚛ click  that is reviewed in relation to the information here and forms a good introduction - see ⮝General Introduction & Review of Not by Genes Alone -2

Gene–culture interactions

The following article describes how both the Darwinian and Lamarckian processes have influenced our evolution "Exploring gene–culture interactions: Insights from handedness, sexual selection and niche-construction case studies. Kevin N Laland, Published:17 September 2008".

Abstract - Genes and culture represent two streams of inheritance that for millions of years have flowed down the generations and interacted. Genetic propensities, expressed throughout development, influence what cultural organisms learn. Culturally transmitted information, expressed in behaviour and artefacts, spreads through populations, modifying selection acting back on populations. Drawing on three case studies, I will illustrate how this gene–culture coevolution has played a critical role in human evolution. These studies explore (i) the evolution of handedness, (ii) sexual selection with a culturally transmitted mating preference, and (iii) cultural niche construction and human evolution. These analyses shed light on how genes and culture shape each other, and on the significance of feedback mechanisms between biological and cultural processes.

... Sufficient BIOS behaviour to enable organism to recognise significance of observed actions and hence considered value and learning opportunity.
... to their offspring say hunting skills(hunting knowledge in the form - some form of ancestral real time / brain to brain teachings, extended via external recording - sub diagram?)
what is the repecusions of them - description of what they are / mean eg religious,

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ add above model ??? ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

edited bits from - The information driven world - combine any more of it here too somewhere

But of course for the last xx years of life on this planet such an information environment didn't exist, as diagram right. Many forms of life, such as bacteria and frogs provide no support to their offspring and hence don't transfer any parental information to them. However others such as cheater, and other hunter mothers do impart parental information to their offspring via example activities of their (hopefully good, but if not they wont perpetuate) hunting skills. The offspring will possibly live to put these examples into practise and become a competant hunter, which one day passes on the skills baton to their off spring. This skills batton is represented in the adjacent diagram by the small cloud.

The large diagram below The data and information driven world attempts to show how we humans have become such a dramatic influence upon the world and each other. This dramatic affect results from our abilities to process, generate and record information leading to an 'information environment'.

The longer a parent spends with their offspring the greater the transfer of parental information, this culminats in primates whose batton is possibly the bigest, other than ours - our batton is so large that we can'n carry it so in The data and information driven worlds diagram below it's represented by clouds. As the generations pass, the batton of accumulated ancestral knowledge may expand, but it will change in light of changing conditions both by location and time - if you can not change with the environment you die, and no more offspring to carry the batton.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~lamark para del - incorpoarted above ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Although parental acquired characteristics can't be passed on physically they can be taught to offspring; here the acquired characteristics are in the form of ideas that are transfered between established brains. This teaching will have an imediate affect on the offspring's behavior, but there is another mechanisum that operates on behaviour at a slower and more basic level. This mech is based on parental acquired characteristics but are subject to evolutionary gene pool selection. {somewhere ref /set-1/think-straight.html - Our out of the box brain}. All creatures born with abilities nec to survive, wilder beast get up and walk, duck inprint on mother or any moving object, we suckly, smile, respond and attend to world tuned to 800 sounds, language ability - we all equiped with basic start up brain config that in our case can mimick and learn this parental acquired characteristics have taken millions of years to aquire via the slow selection .

A summary of events from simple beginings

Need a simple text summary of below detail but nothing more - adapt below to give it

THIS PARA ORIG IN intro THE peamble After a relatively short time of 7.5 million years life started to existed on this planet after its formation 4.55 billion years ago, see bottom of image in A very long data experiment ✤. Life evolved slowly, not with any intention or goal in mind, but just filling in opportunities as they arose within the planet's slowly changing geology, but as it grew within these opportunities it also had to compete with itself. While geology is driven by the physical forces at its core, surface and atmosphere and things just just happen, life's evolution is built on organic molecular processes orchestrated by data. This union of data and process has moved through several phases: initial life, the cell and now us with brains, again as in A very long data experiment, but is this the end of the evolutionary experiment, is the last development just too "clever" for its own good?

Our brain with its capability to think about itself, the universe and how they may have both come into existence and work is very impressive. Explanations of its simple origins and its gradual development over vast (and not so vast) amounts of time is both plausible and fascinating to me and possibly you? But, because we can understand ourselves and the universe, does something special have to exists? - as suggested by the Anthropic Principle (Weak and Strong versions) The Anthropic Principle – Are We Meant to Be Here, or Just Lucky? and BBC Horizon 1987. Possibly this also relates to our common phycological need that there is a purpose to our existence, and that we are not just a temporary object subject to random events, and that we are not alone with no benevolent control.

General overview

Life started on this planet in a very basic form about 3.5 billion (3.5x10⁹ or 3,500,000,000) years ago, it became more organised and formed cells after around 0.5 billion yrs and stayed as single celled life for aqnother 3 billion yrs; then multi celled organisum formed and have been around for just 0.6 billion years (that relativley short period includes all the initial basic faunan and flora that resulted in reptiles, mamals and us) - as shown in the adjacent diagram and explained futher in xx.

Once multi cellular organisums existed the variety of forms took off and the subsequent introduction of sexual reproduction drove the possibilities faster and further. All organisums need nutrision, flora types (including bacteria and fungi) general obtain it from sun light and local chemicals, whereas the fauna obtain it from consuming the flora or other fauna. The ability to find food of any sort was possibly the principle driving force for organisum change, if you're good at exploiting the current resourses you proliferate, if not, you and your type die and possibly become extinct like the vast majority of species - (the more culinary adventurous organisums possibly died, but others prospered from a new food source).

As organisums became more sophisticated so the need, or opportunity, for data processing was born; an organisum with movement options needs something to control and co-ordinate them. Plants don't have many behavioural abilities, but they still need to move themselves (by growth patern) to obtain 'food' from sun light. This simple behaviour is in built into the cell arangements (mimosa even utalises electrical signaling in a primative type of neuron) {ref BSoL lec 47},

Once organisums became mobolised to find food, they also had to avoid being food to their fellow marauders. Mobility gave the new animal creatures a great advantage, but greater abilities require greater control and co-ordination. Travelling may be advantagious, but also potenially very dangerous, so sensors that determined the local environment together with a means of corelating and responding to incoming data was esential for survival. bit-by-bit the response to this control need was the formation a nervous sytem and brain (shown on adjacent diagram as Spriggina / Planarian in the multi cell cube), which however all still followed a basic process algorithum of: input, do, output, but in ever growing complexity.

Other data processing - Ancient moveing creatures, and even us if touching a hot object, need a robotic style data processing and control. However other types of data processing going on - eg RNA - xx and DNA - Ribsom o/p protines, early clay scaffolding, and at the other end our comprehension of our communicated information. All from scaffolding / DNA, robotic control to our coms and thought all follow the same basic basic process algorithum of: input / do / output - explaind further below.

BIOS - evo mecm subject to selection and evo itself - origins human mind lec 4

{below incorporated above now??} We - with our brains, minds and thinking ability - are merely the current situation on this long timeline of evolutionary changes.
IoT Change ..? is inteligence inevatble, if re-run eveo (S J Gould?) would we get here again?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Major evolutionary stages from a data and process view

RE WORD / INCORPORATE INTO BELOW This article considers a number of major evolutionary stages from a data and process view (see xx for more on data / process) and proposes that life forms have followed an increasingly complex relationship between data and process, from the earliest beginnings of life to us at present day.
Four major milestone periods on this journey are outline below. Although shown as mile stone points it should be rememberd that they too are long periods of slow and gradual change covering thousands, if not millions of years; there is however one notable exception to the usual gradual bit-by-bit change - the occurance of the more complex eukaryote cell was possibly a single event one cell engulfed another etc - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1826735/how-do-i-prevent-div-tag-starting-a-new-line (that occured on a Tuesday at 14:30) for more info. see or hear BBC In Our Time - The Cell single event discussed at around 18 minutes.
The progress from stage 3 to 4 is propossed upon an ever increasing body sophistication and I speculate that hands (primate / ours) have formed a key role in this change.

Major milestones in data & process:

1. initial establishment of "life", but not life as we think of it now, the bottom cube below, (wiki 3.8 and 4.1 bil ya https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life and 'life descended from an RNA world' - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RNA_world) from clays, soups, scafoldings, pre-cellular world of chemical replicators {BBC Earth amoeba}. - no cells yet, floating RNA? ... Dawkins / Course


2. DNA - (long molecule) acting as data and ribsome enzime acting as processor - gave rise to single celled organisums, this was the situation for a very long time (2.6 billion years - biggest time cube) wiki cell. Although the Eukarayot cell formed in this period, which enabled more complex single celled organisums to develop (e.g. ancestors of modern amoebaa predatory single cell that does not have a fixed shape. It can project parts of its cell to create jellylike tentacles called pseudopodia. The amoeba uses these to move, touch, and grab prey. Amoebae live in water, where they creep along rotting vegetation. They hunt smaller single cells, such as bacteria ref http://www.factmonster.com/dk/science/encyclopedia/single-celled-organisms.html#ESCI285SINORG001,
   but this control was acheived by molecular means in a similar maner to DNA processing by ribosom that can hunt down bactirial prey via molecular control), a brain based robotic control didn't happen until the occurance of multi celled organisums.
   - how does this work from day-to-day and replication - cell & replication pocess inclds into both new items,copy of and further cell production - wiki ref
• wiki origin simple cells Prokaryotic (bacteria and archaea - DNA ring and not in a nucleus yet)
• wiki origin complex cells Eukaryotic after the great symbiosys able to support longer DNA, more complex data and hence end product


3. Spriggina (or Lancelet etc) - the formation of early brainsa body organ capable of processing data i.e. receiving signals from sense organs and responding by directing muscle organs provided a simple centralised robotic control of a creature's movement capabilities. But brain response capabilities and options had to become more complex as bodies became more complex (or could more complex bodies evolve because of better control options - either way, bit-by-bit body and brain coevolved). Another way of describing these ever more complex brain response options is: 'behaviours'.
   Again as life forms became more complex and mammals evolved that nurtured their young appropriate behaviours coevolveda bit-by-bit development of simple reptilian nurturing of e.g. crocodiles helping hatchlings into water. The instinctive behaviour for offspring nurture is 'hard wired' (a totally inappropriate expression: very little in modern computers is 'hard wired' and nothing in our brains - both are configurable, meaning that it may start one way, but can easily be changed) in the parents brain as a result of genetics. And as life forms in general became more sophisticated, nurturing behaviours became more and more sophisticated e.g. rodent care for a few weeks, to cheater mother care for years in order to teach hunting skills. Skill teaching and learning require another set of behaviours, but it also introduces a new kind of information that is not initiated by genes. The mother cheater will have developed her own initial hunting skills by coping her mother, with some trial and error, in young adulthood; if they are effective she will survive to have her own offspring and will teach them her hunting techniques (if not her incompetence will fortunately die with her). This life acquired skill information is passed from generation to generation, but not via genes, they just set the scene, or provide the start-up BIOS (more latter) to enable teaching and learning, what is actually taught and learnt is driven by events. The life acquired skill is passed on in a Lamarckian culture style (more latter). So from simple brains with just robotic control evolution has introduced basic start-up behaviours that enabled bequeathing information to future generations - like many things we have picked up the baton and run with it, but hopefully not into disaster.


4. Human culture - 400 ka (or some such time - on Bit at the Top Expanded) - The bit-by-bit body and brain coevolution continued and reached another level of complexity at the haplorrhines (includes the three living groups of: prosimian tarsiers, simian monkeys, and apes) that now had complex 'hands' to control, this hand complexity extended yet again when we became fully bi-pedal and enabled them to become the most usful enviromental tool in the world. Our aquired bigger and better brains, together with our expending behaviour reportire encouraged another usful feature that many creature poses, but another we excell at - communication. Starting with another bit-by-bit body and brain coevolution of our voice / throat {tech bit in a course somewhere} gradual changed. The eventual ability to communicate and use hands to permanently insribe this on the world for all to see for thousands of years (no more constraints of personal hand me down info) has resulted in the info and cultural explosion, that our poor old brain's feeble basic servival functions can no longer sensibly cope with.
   
   life forms extened and likewise BIOSs from e.g. pack hunting wolves to highly socially interacting primates, but all the learning and updating of BIOS relied upon transitory events (mothers good hunting run is gone for ever, if not paying attention no option to re-play). Some events could however be repeated 'on request' via basic communication (not wait for next demo, if ever) by a competant adult (demo how he / she managed to make fire by chipping stones over dry grass), so skills could be taught and handed down through generations in Lamacian fashion. But once recording the idea in an extenal permanent form happend culture took of, you could become self taught (once been primed by basic cultural teaching).
   bits - social we split from our primate cousins about 6 billion years ago (Orrorin tugenensis - wiki), and the main deserning difference was our ability to walk upright. Our brains continued to develop (why ours and not primat - did they also but our upright demanded more control options as initial robotics did, or more oportinities for better control). Did this brain control enhancement also begining the co-evo wrt culture, learning, teaching (not yet), slow accumlative changes (not leading to Great Leap Foward) but did seed mimetic skills (1.6–2.5 Ma Homo habilis - course / footnote) that produced our brain addon and our ability to record data and appreciate it in the word as stand alone item (not just the hunting performance of mum that was just done and gone until next time, if there was one).
• Wiki old Euro cent Great Leap fwd
• Wiki Behavioral modernity or "Shea (2011) in particular cautions that population pressure, cultural change, optimality models, like those in"
• Wiki human behavioral ecology; also see Upper Paleolithic Revolution in Behavioral modernity
• creationwiki creation wiki and ????

OTHER BITS

Our thinking ability

A process view of thinking

Although our thinking ability is relativly sophisticated, it is still achieved by processing information (or more appropriatly [data] here) in the same way as done by simple organisums and follows the basic process algorithum: input, do, output - as introduced above.

A process always consists of two objects and an action; a starting object, an action, and resulting object. A process could be called for example 'throw the stone', which describes a starting stone, muscle action and then a moving stone. This can be broken down further, how did the stone into a hand in the first place (assuming it's thrown by a human hand). So there's a preliminary process 'pick up stone', but of coure we must first 'look for stone' and then 'select stone'. Such a process involving a human soon gets very complex and especially 'select stone' .... there lies philosopy.

But for less troubled organisums proceses are simpler. If you are a worm that needs a damp environment a very simple set of processes will work for you: move forward, sense new environment, if dry move backwards (for a short time and not in a straight line), move forwards, sense new environment, if damp keep going and feed, otherwise go back again etc; this simple process strategy will get there in the end - diag. / video

Processes are of course just a convienient way of representing what is actually physically happening e.g. real muscle movements in response to combinations of real nurons firing (or not), which in turn are responding to sensor neurons detecting current real environmental events {not so good and the followin} . But they can also be used to represent what is still happening in a real physical world, but has moved up a level in representation (may be like letters to words, to sentances to paragraphs etc) in a conceptual, symbolic, way - what we good at; we think and in ideas that are the result of groups of neurons firing, we don't think in terms of neurons themselves, we think are aware of just the wood and not the individual trees. So we can regard an idea as an object that is acted upon by a process to produce another idea object. The process action is often compare ideas, but this needs considerable decomp to describe. So we can extend the summary of the worm movements in process terms to include all organisums:
- sense something (which in jargon is data about say: light, heat, wet etc) and then do something in response i.e. make a body movement and / or, for those with memories, do a data manipulation.

Doing something with the data is what we call inteligence and is a great aid to survival. If all the data assosiated with the sensed data event (not a lot in the worm example) such as sounds, smells, light conditions etc can be stored (remembered), together with the action taken (again the worm here has only one) and the outcome, then organisum with more sophistication than the worm here can avoid previous bad response actions. If the past response action was fatal obviously such a response could not be individually remebered, but it is noted in a collective form. Organisums that repetedly make such life thrtening responses don't tend to survive long enough to reproduce and pass on that response strategy (see xx re BIOS).

Where the thinking processes happen

{notes}

{- evo and development of brain architecture and specific moduals to enable on board control for survival plus a bit of non real time review and planning capability, but constrained by basic architecture and not good for true objective thinking, we try addon control apps but they still corrupted / constrained by basic arch - any hope for us basic self preservation machines
- arch wrt on board cntrl., some self contemplation & joint discussion, but influenced by biases (confirmation, xx); no new modules, taxi driver knowldge may produce larger thal / hypo ? but not a gps modual (would say not need as using hunter gather spacual aware modue), but other animals have nav module (migrating birds re stars and wales re magnetit lines?), but we not need so not got (but we do have addon app that needs a clock and sextant), we left with what neccs 50k yrs ago possible the last was an enhanced language modual, also in the area of descisions and emotions, and biasis (List of cognitive biases https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases) to allow move on to next real incounter and not committe discusion or referendum votes}

Intro

As mentioned above sensing your environment and responding to it is an essential feature of survival. The building blocks of such an ability are cells that can relay electrical signals in a controlled manner, known as nerve cells or neurons. Each neuron has many inputs, each of which is connect to the output of other neurons, if there is a sufficient level of electrical activity at the inputs of an idndividual neuron it will 'fire' and send an electrical pluse to its outputs, which in turn contributes to the electrical activity at the inputs of other neurons. Together with other chemically based control mechanisums, networks of neurons can work together to provide a particular data processing function e.g. a group of neurons within our [Primary Visual Cortex] detect the dividing line between black and white, or edge detection.

.. .. .. see footnote: Visual cortex v Occipital lobe ...

How all these individual neuron cells grow in numbers (by cell division) and interconnect to form data processing functional clumps is truly amusing, but of course this is no different to building say a heart, which too forms from self controlled cell division to create a blood pumping organ, instead of an information pumping one - for an explanation of how cells grow and form specific organs see {current SelfRef will be TA, but cell joining in area Fact & Figs}. But not only does this evolutionary 'product build plan' produce a brain of particular functional components, it also provides its startup behavior - its BIOS, the same for any creature with a brain, .....

more on heart and brain archictectre

Our hearts have various functional components that have been determinted by many generations of our ancestors (human, primate, reptilian and others). Our hearts have eveolved to have functional components that provide a double pumping action; one action pumps the de-oxyginated blood returning from muscles and organs to the lungs for removal of Carbon Dioxide and take up of Oxygen, this blood now returns to the heart where the second pump action delivers it round the body again - http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/pe/appliedanatomy/0_anatomy_circulatorysys_rev1.shtml.

This double action is more sophisticated than say a central heating system where the the cold water returning from the radiators (muscles & organs) is pumped through the boiler (lungs) and straight back to the radiators in a single pump action (though for technical reasons the pump is often on the hot side of the boiler). A similar comparison can be used for our brain architectur. We are all familiar with computors in one form or another, but posibbly not the underlying architecture of them.

This laptop and most computors we use conform to the principles propossed by Alan Turin back in 1936 {http://www.rutherfordjournal.org/article040101.html}. The driving force for this type of computing was calculation, earlier computing machines such as Charles Babbage's (1791-1871) Difference Engines, and Analytical Engines
{http://www.computerhistory.org/babbage/engines/ https://www.britannica.com/technology/Difference-Engine} were to construction mathematical tables, specifically, logarithm tables for use in navigation - and somewhere cannon ball tragetaries etc.

Turin arch especially universal can be applied to all info procc machines, even humans, but via sub procedure moduels that on early comps ran is series, litte i/p & o/p lots of calcs in middle, nowerdays, specific h/w modules handling i/p & o/p (screen of mega pixs and colours not 5 hoes in a tape etc), also maths moduals, similatr to brain moduals, - principly binary but can implemet weighted option created by various module (eg referendum: 1) imigration balance and figure 2) finance figure 3)risks figure and then make a final binary in / out cross; if only we had followed such an analysis, but we floored), Dick and Dumbledoor missed oportunity to tell him nurons are only binary as is computor gate - our desktop need to respond accuratly - on board control less determinable eg wash machine check clothes weight and give end estiate, could improve wrt previous loads / date / water temp, cloth mix via chip and manufacturers info, learn and improve estm, down to programer but data out of his/her control, - our brain purpose to keep us alive need suitable h/w moduals, good at resolving visual confusion (CAPTCHA - Completely Automated Public Turing test to tell Computers and Humans Apart)prob so can detect camoflaged animals food of preditor.

Other views of proc & data

There are other instances of data processing that occure on this planet in addition to simple or complex life forms responding to theier environment:

1. as mention above cell inbuilt working re sun liight detect and move
2. ribsom v rna
3. weather physical responses to laws of nature?
4. our electronic proc v data, e.g. to model weather re laws of nature - proc / algorithums & data / measurements.

Our style of proc & data is just one of many and not without problems

- our style of proc & data is just one of many i.e. based on our brain arch / proc. style, its more sophisticated than the worm, or the rigid 'predictable' weather, but not necessarily accurate / good enough / desirable for just society (we make many mistakes and the societies we create and run could be better, there are some mechs in society to make it better, e.g. democrasy but only to a point, but these are flawed / poluted / have trap doors introduced by our inherant proc deficiencies). A just society is a modern value idea, brain style good for world domination by Homo Sap, but not for loving Christian etc society, add-on s/w moduels help but still operating on a dominating platform and often struggle.

Further info

- nature of ideas in Ideas
- more about the proc limitations and why, are in: Can we ever think straight
- more about the addon cntls, are in: Socialising