[puppypower]

The current version of evolution should...

You have made it clear that you don't understand the theory.

Explain why water is not included in every analysis for evolution

Because evolution is about change and the water is constant.

I understand the current traditions, but I am also aware that these fall short of the full truth. it substitutes dice, for the deeper understanding that water could bring to the table. Textbooks show DNA without its water. In that state it is not bioactive. Therefore you need to throw dice to account for the mystery of naked DNA being active. This is not needed if you include water.

What you said was correct; water is a constant, while evolution is about change. Water is very stable, due to being a terminal product of combustion. The organics, on the other hand, are very pliable and polymerizable; organic chemistry, with their change always having to be in the context of a constant water solvent and bookend. This constant and unchanging selective pressure loads the dice; natural selection at the nanoscale, via a constant set of potentials, which are the same everywhere in the cell from day one to deep into the future.

If we make a change on the DNA, via a mutation, this will get extrapolated into the cell through mRNA, protein, packing the protein, to even the exact position of the protein in any synthesis sequence. To be useful, all these steps need to integrate within a matrix already set up by the water; old ways. The water provides an integrating mechanism; capacitance, to help assess changes on the DNA, since even simple changes, can enhance or disrupt a lot of integrated things. Water, as the fixed bookend, stays interconnected and is able to transmit data and energy to maintain equilibrium balance. Alternately, the potential can be the reverse of this; input food can changes the potentials upstream, with a genetic expresses and even mutation the result of an earlier integration way up stream. 

Water is unique in that has two hydrogen bonding donors and two hydrogen bonding acceptors. This allows water to form 3-D polymerized structures; four bonds like carbon. Carbon can form four covalent bonds and thereby allowing an almost infinite variety of stable 3-D polymers. Water can do something similar, with its four hydrogen bonds. It can form semi-stable 3-D structures, that can come and go, even as the nearby 3-D carbon structures persist. This change in water carries free energy, that can help disrupt carbon bonds through its integration with enzymatic action.

Cooperative hydrogen bonding is when water forms a stable 3-D matrix. These cooperatives have the unique property of the first hydrogen bond being broken anywhere in the cooperative is the strongest bond. This experimental observation suggests something like resonance structures; hydrogen bonding and electron sharing. The first hydrogen bond broken, no matter where it is, is the strongest since the sharing is integrated among the cooperative.

In terms of the binary nature of the hydrogen bond; polar or covalent, the polar side is more compressed; less volume, defines higher entropy and higher enthalpy. The covalent, side of the switch is more expanded; more volume, and has lower entropy and lower enthalpy. Moving between the binary switch settings, water can move information of local organic states, with this information having muscle and energy. Water can expand or contract, exerting pressure or tension while shifting in amounts enthalpy and entropy. The enzymes can use this. 

Nature also figured out a way to tap into the free energy gold mines of water cooperatives, especially near enzymes. ATP serves several purposes. It attaches a phosphate group, which is electron withdrawing. This helps alter the conformation of the enzyme, to help express its activity. The ADP that forms from ATP, needs to  attach a water molecule. This water molecule is taken from the cooperative. The affect is similar to getting a run in a nylon stocking. The ATP is like a bolt cutter, pulling a water molecule from the cooperative, causing a run in the 3-D cooperative; spike of water entropy increase, as the cooperative water become more polar in terms of hydrogen bonding. The local water loses volume and gains entropy and enthalpy; vacuum that becomes endothermic. The enzymes can makes use of this free energy change. The cooperative will then reform to minimize potential. 

If you look at the affect called pH, this all has to due with the binary nature of individual hydrogen bond. Hydrogen bond are part polar and part covalent in nature. They can go either way with only a small energy hill separating them. One water molecule can hydrogen bond to another water molecule. This starts as polar; simple change attraction. This polar hydrogen can transition to the covalent side of hydrogen bonding;  which start to expand to allow better molecular orbital overlap. This can go all the way and covalently bond to the other oxygen of the other water. That change will require another covalently bonded hydrogen on that oxygen of water, to transition all the way to polar, so it can be released as an H+ acid. Water can break strong bonds using weaker bonds; pH.

Pure water tends to favor the polar side of the binary switch. There is some covalent hydrogen bonding but this is at a smaller precedent. These form, but will quickly reverse. When we add organics to water, surface tension is created in water. Tension implies the water expands toward the covalent side. Pure water wants to go more polar but organic shift it the other way. There is also a sweet spot on enzymes and other protein surfaces, where water takes the covalent side to the extreme as cooperatives. The organics help to create this enhancement of the water, due the surface tension potential of the water-oil affect. Life can tap into this, helping the water return to the polar side of pure water.

The is almost like perpetual motion. We make water touch organic surface so tension appears. The surface tension is like a stretched swing. We use this stretch to do work, if we can release the tension; ATP to ADP. Then we reintroduce the organic surface to help reset the spring.

Say we shook water and oil, we would create surface tension; tiny bubbles of water and oil. If we left this to its own devices, the bubbles will combine; like with like, until we get two lawyers. The original surface tension stored an energy capacitance, that was used to do work. The energy in all the little bubbles is not easy for us to reclaim, but within cells the natural tension between organic and water is useful as a source of energy and work.

[Bored chemist]

Therefore you need to throw dice to account for the mystery of naked DNA being active.

No

What you said was correct;

Well, I guess that makes one of us.

Water is unique in that has two hydrogen bonding donors and two hydrogen bonding acceptors.

Not really; ethylene glycol has them too.

[talanum1]

None of them are a different species than their parents.

[alancalverd]

Not a good argument since "species" is undefined. It's a label we apply wherever it is convenient. Nor is it logical even if species was defined. Speciation appears to be an occasional consequence of evolution,  but causes do not depend on their effects. 

[alancalverd]

They can only possibly look like one of their parents since their parents will not look identical. That's OK, I'm sure you would accept that looking like one of the parents would be a good enough criterion.

It is clear that asexual reproduction does produce very similar offspring, as does cloning. But I am challenging humans, not potatoes, even if they have the same IQ.

From what I remember, when a mummy and a daddy love each other very much, the daddy does something that transfers some of his genetic material to a haploid gamete inside the mummy and the resultant zygotic DNA doesn't look exactly like that of either parent, let alone both. But then I'm very old and things may be different nowadays.

[talanum1]

Not a good argument since "species" is undefined.

Astonishing how far you would go to defend your beliefs.

Speciation appears to be an occasional consequence of evolution

That is not proven.

[Bored chemist]

That is not proven.

Then where do you think it comes from?

[talanum1]

Then where do you think it comes from?

From imagination.

[Bored chemist]

Then where do you think it comes from?

From imagination.

So, you say that speciation is imagniary.
OK, so you agree with Alan's point

Not a good argument since "species" is undefined. It's a label we apply wherever it is convenient.

but you are prepared to argue with yourself about it.

[Kryptid]

From imagination.

So you don't think that new species arise over time? That's not what the fossil record reveals (unless you think everything is the same species as everything else).

[alancalverd]

 

Quote from: alancalverd on 03/04/2022 20:47:23
Not a good argument since "species" is undefined.

Astonishing how far you would go to defend your beliefs.

If you are old enough to remember libraries, you will recall that they were full of books. Everything on the shelves was a book, with covers and pages and printing. Now supposing you wanted a book about gardening. If they were all on one shelf, you would have to sort through hundreds of  books about art, music, physics, and everything else that anyone had ever written about, in the hope that one might tell you when to plant roses.

Melvil Dewey suggested, in 1873, that you could segregate books by subject matter into 10 main classes and as many subcategories as required for convenience. And that is exactly what  Linnaeus suggested 100 years earlier for living things.

Problem is to decide whether planting roses is a science  (Dewey 500) technology (600) or recreation (700) - you could assign the book to any such Dewey category. But once it is so assigned and given a subcategory and number, any librarian will be able to find it for you.

Thus it is with species: they are assigned principally by common appearance or apparent physiology but the assignment is for human convenience. Is a bat a bird or a mammal? Depends whether you think its characteristic function is flying or suckling its young. But once you have assigned it to a species, everyone else knows what you are talking about.

[alancalverd]

Explain why water is not included in every analysis for evolution, and why anyone thinks the impact of water can be approximated by rolling dice?

As far as we know, evolution depends on variation of DNA.
The importance of cytoplasmic water in the replication of DNA is well understood, and certainly in my (and I guess anyone else's) lectures on radiation biology, the impact of radiogenic free H2O+ radicals on the integrity of mitosis is considered critical to understanding mutation. And that impact is indeed approximated by rolling an awful lot of rather odd-shaped dice.