• 2 Posts
  • 150 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 11th, 2023

help-circle
  • But it may be something to work towards to, isn’t it? Or at least get rid of these societal taboos?

    Where I live and grew up (Germany), there isn’t that much of a taboo on nudity. I liked showering in my gym for example where there is only a shared (gendered) shower. Since starting my transition I wouldn’t feel welcome in any gendered shared public shower however. I would really like to stop hiding my body but instead feel more included among cis people. One day I hope…

    I still prefer going swimming naked (if there are not too many people around) because it avoids gendered swim wear. At most lakes in Germany you can find people going swimming naked or with swim wear. Just coexisting :)



  • Haha yes, recursion is always fun!

    Although I’m still confused on what the clock would show in an hour. Because if the subclocks mirror the parent clock at the given time, then they would all be stuck to the hour they are positioned on? Or if they can move then the sublcocks are coupled to 3 o’clock of the main clock. But well, it is all hypothetical anyways :D


  • What a fun idea!

    Is it on purpose that all clocks in this are coupled at the 3 o’clock position? I assume all the clocks go the same speed. Then the large clock and all the smaller clocks at the 3 o’clock position (there are 13 of them) would show the same time. E.g. in one hour, the 12 o’clock position would show 1 o’clock, but the large clock and all the clocks on the 3 o’clock position would show 4 o’clock.

    Oh and why is it a clock squared if you have three layers of clocks? Isn’t it cubed then?







  • flora_explora@beehaw.orgtoScience Memes@mander.xyzThe circle of life
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Haha yes, it is sometimes sad when other people around cannot really appreciate certain thoughts or concepts of one’s own.

    One book that really got me excited about studying biology well over a decade ago was Evolution in four dimensions, which touches on some similar topics as in our conversation. Or maybe even in reverse, how language is actually some dimension of evolution in itself. Since then my knowledge on evolution and genetics got a bit rusty because I specialized in ecology. But I find it deeply fascinating how evolution works and what mind-boggling stuff it came up with.


  • Hm, I think I start to see your point. I guess the thought of language as something like human language is biasing a lot what we consider language. It feels kinda weird, but if I shake off this narrow view on what a language is, all sorts of alternative ways to look at it come to mind.

    I think it helped that you mentioned a technical manual that is a form of language but that doesn’t count as a conversation. And having a conversation in itself is very much biased by our human form of language.

    And now that you mention the proteome and metabolome, it really seems like a much richer form of information and that much more back-and-forth is happening. I guess epigenetics have shown that the DNA/RNAs are much more plastic than we thought, too.

    Thanks for this conversation, it did actually help me get to explore this much more and change my mind :)


  • But thinking of DNA as code is pretty different than thinking of it as a language, isn’t it? That’s why I brought up the example of binary code in the first place. And sure, I completely agree that DNA is very much like binary code (just more complex). But code written in a human readable form is again different to that because we need language to understand machine readable code. There needs to be some kind of translation for us. Because language is a form of abstraction that is not present in neither code nor DNA.


  • flora_explora@beehaw.orgtoScience Memes@mander.xyzThe circle of life
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I do understand how DNA works, I’m actually a biologist. And I don’t doubt that it is complex. What I doubt is that it is a complex system of communication. But sure, I see your point that is some form of complex transferral of information and that yes, if I stretch my understanding of language a bit, it probably is one as well. Maybe the next question would be: what is this useful for? What can we learn from that? Like I said (not sure if in this or in another comment), maybe we then need to have various categories for language?

    E: and we could explore the new fringe cases a bit more, too. If DNA/RNA is a form of language, then even non-living entities can have language like in form of viruses. If abiotic things get complex enough, would we also call it language at some point? Like chemical reactions?


  • flora_explora@beehaw.orgtoScience Memes@mander.xyzThe circle of life
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Hm, interesting point regarding not limiting the definition of language to individuals only. Maybe I should have said entities? And my point is still valid, just because everyone of us carries DNA with us, we still cannot “talk” DNA. I meant this mismatch in various levels of the complex multicellular entities we are.

    Does DNA/RNA really pose an example of complex communication? It certainly is some highly specialized form of storing and transferring information. Calling it dialects sounds more like anthropomorphizing it to make it sound more like a language. Not sure if it is my human bias accustomed to human-style languages, but it somehow doesn’t feel like a language to me when the information is just past further down the line and there is no real back-and-forth?

    But even if I’d agree that DNA was a language, it would be something fundamentally different to what we commonly understand as language. So what is it worth? We probably need different categories of language then. And on the level of individuals, DNA would be an unintelligible form of language while humanlike language would be unintelligible on cellular level.

    And don’t get me wrong, I’m not set on rejecting DNA as a language. I just try to explore the opposite position to yours ;)


  • I think it rather depends on how you define language. For example, Wikipedia says the following:

    Depending on philosophical perspectives regarding the definition of language and meaning, when used as a general concept, “language” may refer to the cognitive ability to learn and use systems of complex communication, or to describe the set of rules that makes up these systems, or the set of utterances that can be produced from those rules.

    What kind system of complex communication do we have in DNA/RNA? It sure is a mode of storing and transferring information. But does this make it a language? And if yes, who is speaking the language of DNA/RNA? Can cells talk then? Because I would argue that this (hypothetical) language of DNA is then always “spoken” by individual cells and isn’t transferrable to a multicellular entity? (I mean, sure all your cells are “speaking” DNA in this way, but you yourself aren’t.) But back to the question of the “complex systems of communication”. I would argue that while DNA is a mode of transferring information, it isn’t a language in itself. Because you don’t have a back-and-forth. It is a pretty simple progression of reusing information again and again. But it isn’t a mode of communication and especially not complex communication.