Communication?
It is also claimed that proteinoid microspheres communicate by exchanging information-containing molecules.
Although this claim of microsphere communication may be technically true, it easily could be considered an exaggerated use of the term (a charge levied against Fox on many of his other proteinoid claims).
First of all, Foxs statement and the proteinoid has been shown to be informational (page 174) is troublesome. The term information does not even appear on page 174. The most pertinent statement on that page is The proteinoids are seen to have the properties of enzymes, hormones, and food. Is this the support Fox alludes to in his troublesome statement? If he is trying to establish proteinoids as information-bearing molecules because they have the properties of enzymes, then he is supporting one exaggerated claim with another. Proteinoids have very weak and limited catalytic abilities. Saying that they posses the properties of enzymes is disingenuous.
Second, of the numerous pertinent definitions of the term information, Fox chooses the broadest.
Note that this is a perfectly legitimate definition. Still, it is about as inclusive a definition as one can use.
Third, and most importantly, the transfer of the information-bearing molecules is not controlled by any biological mechanisms: it is driven, as are almost all of microspheres cell-like processes, by simple physical forces. In concentrated pools of proteinoid microspheres, some of the protocells make contact and a hollow, tube-like junction made from proteinoid forms between them. Since proteinoid particles may be contained within microspheres, random molecular movements (Brownian motion) can cause some of these endomicroparticles to eventually find and pass through the connecting junction into the neighboring microsphere.
This is haphazard communication driven purely by chance. Furthermore, the transferred particle gains no new function in the second microsphere, nor does it trigger any chemical reactions upon its arrival. This process is merely the simple, random movement of a minute solid suspended in a liquid. If a dead leaf falls into a lake at the east bank, and is eventually transported to the west bank by the random motions of waves, have the two banks really communicated?
It is also claimed that proteinoid microspheres communicate by exchanging information-containing molecules.
Although this claim of microsphere communication may be technically true, it easily could be considered an exaggerated use of the term (a charge levied against Fox on many of his other proteinoid claims).
First of all, Foxs statement and the proteinoid has been shown to be informational (page 174) is troublesome. The term information does not even appear on page 174. The most pertinent statement on that page is The proteinoids are seen to have the properties of enzymes, hormones, and food. Is this the support Fox alludes to in his troublesome statement? If he is trying to establish proteinoids as information-bearing molecules because they have the properties of enzymes, then he is supporting one exaggerated claim with another. Proteinoids have very weak and limited catalytic abilities. Saying that they posses the properties of enzymes is disingenuous.
Second, of the numerous pertinent definitions of the term information, Fox chooses the broadest.
Note that this is a perfectly legitimate definition. Still, it is about as inclusive a definition as one can use.
Third, and most importantly, the transfer of the information-bearing molecules is not controlled by any biological mechanisms: it is driven, as are almost all of microspheres cell-like processes, by simple physical forces. In concentrated pools of proteinoid microspheres, some of the protocells make contact and a hollow, tube-like junction made from proteinoid forms between them. Since proteinoid particles may be contained within microspheres, random molecular movements (Brownian motion) can cause some of these endomicroparticles to eventually find and pass through the connecting junction into the neighboring microsphere.
This is haphazard communication driven purely by chance. Furthermore, the transferred particle gains no new function in the second microsphere, nor does it trigger any chemical reactions upon its arrival. This process is merely the simple, random movement of a minute solid suspended in a liquid. If a dead leaf falls into a lake at the east bank, and is eventually transported to the west bank by the random motions of waves, have the two banks really communicated?
Upvote
0