Factory and machine planning and design, and what it tells us about cell factories and molecular machines

Factory and machine planning and design, and what it tells us about cell factories and molecular machines
http://reasonandscience.heavenforum.org/t2245-factory-and-machine-planning-and-design-and-what-it-tells-us-about-cell-factories-and-molecular-machines
Some steps to consider in regard of factory planning, design and operation
All text in red requires INTELLIGENCE :
Choosing Manufacturing and Factory location
Selecting Morphology of Factory Types
Factory planning
Factory design
Information management within factory planning and design
Factory layout planning
Equipment supply
Process planning
Production Planning and Control
establishing various internal and external Communication networks
Establishing Quantity and Variant Flexibility
The planning of either a rigid or flexible volume concept depending of what is required
Establishing Networking and Cooperation
Establishing Modular organization
Size and internal factory space organization, compartmentalization and layout
Planning of recycling Economy
Waste management
Controlled factory implosion programming
All these procedures and operational steps are required and implemented in human factories, and so in biological cells which operate like factories. It takes a lot of faith to believe, human factories require intelligence, but cells, far more complex and elaborated, do not require intelligence to make them, and intelligent programming to work in a self sustaining and self replicating manner, and to self disctruct, when required.
Molecular machines:
The most complex molecular machines are proteins found within cells. 1 These include motor proteins, such as myosin, which is responsible for muscle contraction, kinesin, which moves cargo inside cells away from the nucleus along microtubules, and dynein, which produces the axonemal beating of motile cilia and flagella. These proteins and their nanoscale dynamics are far more complex than any molecular machines that have yet been artificially constructed.
Probably the most significant biological machine known is the ribosome. Other important examples include ciliary mobility. A high-level-abstraction summary is that, “n effect, the [motile cilium] is a nanomachine composed of perhaps over 600 proteins in molecular complexes, many of which also function independently as nanomachines.” Flexible linker domains allow the connecting protein domains to recruit their binding partners and induce long-range allostery via protein domain dynamics.
Engineering design process
The engineering design process is a methodical series of steps that engineers use in creating functional products and processes. 2
All text in red requires INTELLIGENCE
locating information and research
feasibility study
evaluation and analysis of the potential of a proposed project
process of decision making. Outlines and analyses alternatives or methods of achieving the desired outcome
feasibility report is generated
determine whether the engineer’s project can proceed into the design phase
the project needs to be based on an achievable idea
concept study (conceptualization, conceptual engineering
project planning
solutions must be identified
ideation, the mental process by which ideas are generated
morphological chart - independent design characteristics are listed in a chart, and different engineering solutions are proposed for each solution. Normally, a preliminary sketch and short report accompany the morphological chart.
the engineer imagines him or herself as the item and asks, “What would I do if I were the system?”
Synthesis is the process of taking the element of the concept and arranging them in the proper way.
Synthesis creative process is present in every design.
thinking of different ideas, typically as part of a small group, and adopting these ideas in some form as a solution to the problem
Establishing design requirements is one of the most important elements in the design process
feasibility analysis
Some design requirements include hardware and software parameters, maintainability, availability, and testability
the overall system configuration is defined, and schematics, diagrams, and layouts of the project will provide early project configuration.
detailed design and optimization
the preliminary design focuses on creating the general framework to build the project on.
further elaborate each aspect of the project by complete description through solid modeling,drawings as well as specifications.
Some of the said specifications include:
Operating parameters
Operating and nonoperating environmental stimuli
Test requirements
External dimensions
Maintenance and testability provisions
Materials requirements
Reliability requirements
External surface treatment
Design life
considering packaging requirements and implant them
External marking
production planning and tool design
planning how to mass-produce the project and which tools should be used in the manufacturing of the part.
selecting the material, selection of the production processes, determination of the sequence of operations, and selection of tools, such as jigs, fixtures, metal cutting and metal forming tools.
start of manufactoring
the machines must be inspected regularly to make sure that they do not break down and slow production
Someone can object and say, that human invented machines do nor replicate, and therefor the comparison is invalid. Fact is however, that replication adds further complexity , since humans have not been able to construct self replicating machines in large scale. This is imho what every living cell is able and programmed to do. In order to so so, extremely complex celluar mechanisms are required, like DNA replication.

  1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molecular_machine
  2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineering_design_process

Adona,
This is like trying to understand a large modern chemical plant without having any concept of the discovery of and developmental history of the various technics being employed at the upscaled production plant.
I’ve talked about Deamer’s book before, I found this video of a talk he gave.
Have at it. Try to quiet down your mind, simply listen and absorb what you can,
allow it to roll around your mind a little, see how it fits in with other things you know.
Take it slow.
I beg this because you are always so damned busy slamming doors that you never have a clue what’s behind 'em.
Take it easy, let it be.
It really is a beautiful mind expanding experience -
no chemicals needed!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SHHfnIHXQI Published on Oct 19, 2012 "Systems biology, synthetic biology and the origin of life" Dr. David Deamer - UC Santa Cruz, Biomolecular Engineering Synthetic life, defined as life that did not arise from preexisting life, spontaneously emerged when the first cell-like structures assembled from mixtures of organic molecules on the early Earth. These structures, referred to as protocells, exhibited certain properties of living systems and represented evolutionary steps toward the first forms of cellular life. Driven by the forces of natural selection, those first cells evolved into the biosphere we inhabit today. In my talk I will describe how we can learn about the origin of life by fabricating protocells in the laboratory. Recorded on 10/05/2011
Adona, This is like trying to understand a large modern chemical plant without having any concept of the discovery of and developmental history of the various technics being employed at the upscaled production plant. I've talked about Deamer's book before, I found this video of a talk he gave. Have at it. Try to quiet down your mind, simply listen and absorb what you can, allow it to roll around your mind a little, see how it fits in with other things you know. Take it slow. I beg this because you are always so damned busy slamming doors that you never have a clue what's behind 'em. Take it easy, let it be. It really is a beautiful mind expanding experience - no chemicals needed!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SHHfnIHXQI Published on Oct 19, 2012 "Systems biology, synthetic biology and the origin of life" Dr. David Deamer - UC Santa Cruz, Biomolecular Engineering Synthetic life, defined as life that did not arise from preexisting life, spontaneously emerged when the first cell-like structures assembled from mixtures of organic molecules on the early Earth. These structures, referred to as protocells, exhibited certain properties of living systems and represented evolutionary steps toward the first forms of cellular life. Driven by the forces of natural selection, those first cells evolved into the biosphere we inhabit today. In my talk I will describe how we can learn about the origin of life by fabricating protocells in the laboratory. Recorded on 10/05/2011
I cannot say it clear enough. Abiogenesis is IMPOSSIBLE. Thats a settled fact. Get over it. http://reasonandscience.heavenforum.org/t1279-abiogenesis-is-impossible only these two arguments refute naturalism entirely: http://reasonandscience.heavenforum.org/t2276-two-of-the-most-convincing-arguments-for-intelligent-design
Adona, This is like trying to understand a large modern chemical plant without having any concept of the discovery of and developmental history of the various technics being employed at the upscaled production plant. I've talked about Deamer's book before, I found this video of a talk he gave. Have at it. Try to quiet down your mind, simply listen and absorb what you can, allow it to roll around your mind a little, see how it fits in with other things you know. Take it slow. I beg this because you are always so damned busy slamming doors that you never have a clue what's behind 'em. Take it easy, let it be. It really is a beautiful mind expanding experience - no chemicals needed!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SHHfnIHXQI Published on Oct 19, 2012 "Systems biology, synthetic biology and the origin of life" Dr. David Deamer - UC Santa Cruz, Biomolecular Engineering Synthetic life, defined as life that did not arise from preexisting life, spontaneously emerged when the first cell-like structures assembled from mixtures of organic molecules on the early Earth. These structures, referred to as protocells, exhibited certain properties of living systems and represented evolutionary steps toward the first forms of cellular life. Driven by the forces of natural selection, those first cells evolved into the biosphere we inhabit today. In my talk I will describe how we can learn about the origin of life by fabricating protocells in the laboratory. Recorded on 10/05/2011
I cannot say it clear enough. Abiogenesis is IMPOSSIBLE. Thats a settled fact. Get over it. http://reasonandscience.heavenforum.org/t1279-abiogenesis-is-impossible only these two arguments refute naturalism entirely: http://reasonandscience.heavenforum.org/t2276-two-of-the-most-convincing-arguments-for-intelligent-design You haven't a clue as to whether abiogenesisis impossible. Get over it. Lois
Adona, This is like trying to understand a large modern chemical plant without having any concept of the discovery of and developmental history of the various technics being employed at the upscaled production plant. I've talked about Deamer's book before, I found this video of a talk he gave. Have at it. Try to quiet down your mind, simply listen and absorb what you can, allow it to roll around your mind a little, see how it fits in with other things you know. Take it slow. I beg this because you are always so damned busy slamming doors that you never have a clue what's behind 'em. Take it easy, let it be. It really is a beautiful mind expanding experience - no chemicals needed!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SHHfnIHXQI Published on Oct 19, 2012 "Systems biology, synthetic biology and the origin of life" Dr. David Deamer - UC Santa Cruz, Biomolecular Engineering Synthetic life, defined as life that did not arise from preexisting life, spontaneously emerged when the first cell-like structures assembled from mixtures of organic molecules on the early Earth. These structures, referred to as protocells, exhibited certain properties of living systems and represented evolutionary steps toward the first forms of cellular life. Driven by the forces of natural selection, those first cells evolved into the biosphere we inhabit today. In my talk I will describe how we can learn about the origin of life by fabricating protocells in the laboratory. Recorded on 10/05/2011
I cannot say it clear enough. Abiogenesis is IMPOSSIBLE. Thats a settled fact. Get over it. http://reasonandscience.heavenforum.org/t1279-abiogenesis-is-impossible only these two arguments refute naturalism entirely: http://reasonandscience.heavenforum.org/t2276-two-of-the-most-convincing-arguments-for-intelligent-design You haven't a clue as to whether abiogenesisis impossible. Get over it. Lois haha. Wishful thinking much ??!!
I cannot say it clear enough. Abiogenesis is IMPOSSIBLE. Thats a settled fact. Get over it.
No one is impressed with your web site. Do you have any links from reputable biologists to back your assertion?
I cannot say it clear enough. Abiogenesis is IMPOSSIBLE. Thats a settled fact. Get over it.
No one is impressed with your web site. Do you have any links from reputable biologists to back your assertion? read the quotes provided. All from reputable scientists.

Adonai, you silly, you don’t have any conception of all you are missing.
Seems you can’t handle the challenge of just shutting up for a few moments
to listen to someone explaining what science has discovered.
So sad.

I cannot say it clear enough. Abiogenesis is IMPOSSIBLE. Thats a settled fact. Get over it.
No one is impressed with your web site. Do you have any links from reputable biologists to back your assertion? read the quotes provided. All from reputable scientists. It only means that, so far, no one has produced any evidence of abiogenesis happening. Do you take the same position about god? No one has produced any evidence that a god exists, either. Does that mean you think a god is impossible? If not, why not? The situation is exactly the same. Lois
I cannot say it clear enough. Abiogenesis is IMPOSSIBLE. Thats a settled fact. Get over it.
No one is impressed with your web site. Do you have any links from reputable biologists to back your assertion? read the quotes provided. All from reputable scientists. It only means that, so far, no one has produced any evidence of abiogenesis happening. Do you take the same position about god? No one has produced any evidence that a god exists, either. Does that mean you think a god is impossible? If not, why not? The situation is exactly the same. LoisLL, I beg to different, the study into origins has uncovered startling information that wasn't available even a decades ago. Listen to that talk I link to, for a taster. It's not all blind chance. And actually sure there's even room for some sort of directed design… but to use "intelligent design" - invokes a conscious creator. The "creator" didn't even have to be conscious. But all those questions are such arrogant getting ahead of ourselves . First comes the understanding and the wonder and the allowing it sink in… Then way at the end should come all these presumptuous declarations....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SHHfnIHXQI Published on Oct 19, 2012 “Systems biology, synthetic biology and the origin of life" Dr. David Deamer - UC Santa Cruz, Biomolecular Engineering Synthetic life, defined as life that did not arise from preexisting life, spontaneously emerged when the first cell-like structures assembled from mixtures of organic molecules on the early Earth. These structures, referred to as protocells, exhibited certain properties of living systems and represented evolutionary steps toward the first forms of cellular life. Driven by the forces of natural selection, those first cells evolved into the biosphere we inhabit today. In my talk I will describe how we can learn about the origin of life by fabricating protocells in the laboratory. Recorded on 10/05/2011
I cannot say it clear enough. Abiogenesis is IMPOSSIBLE. Thats a settled fact. Get over it.
No one is impressed with your web site. Do you have any links from reputable biologists to back your assertion? read the quotes provided. All from reputable scientists. It only means that, so far, no one has produced any evidence of abiogenesis happening. Do you take the same position about god? No one has produced any evidence that a god exists, either. Does that mean you think a god is impossible? If not, why not? The situation is exactly the same. LoisLL, I beg to different, the study into origins has uncovered startling information that wasn't available even a decade ago. Listen to that talk I link for a taste. It's not all blind chance. And sure there's even room for some sort of directed design… but to use "intelligent design" invoke a conscious creator. The "creator" didn't even have to be conscious. But all those are such arrogant ways to look at it to begin with. First comes the understanding and the wonder and the allowing it sink in… Then way at the end should come all these presumptuous declarations....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SHHfnIHXQI
Published on Oct 19, 2012 “Systems biology, synthetic biology and the origin of life" Dr. David Deamer - UC Santa Cruz, Biomolecular Engineering Synthetic life, defined as life that did not arise from preexisting life, spontaneously emerged when the first cell-like structures assembled from mixtures of organic molecules on the early Earth. These structures, referred to as protocells, exhibited certain properties of living systems and represented evolutionary steps toward the first forms of cellular life. Driven by the forces of natural selection, those first cells evolved into the biosphere we inhabit today. In my talk I will describe how we can learn about the origin of life by fabricating protocells in the laboratory. Recorded on 10/05/2011
So sad.
Sad that you keep sticking to a flawed world view, that is obviously wrong. based on pseudo scientific reasoning. And that this will not permit you to experience Gods love.
So sad.
Sad that you keep sticking to a flawed world view, that is obviously wrong. based on pseudo scientific reasoning. And that this will not permit you to experience Gods love. I was going to church not that long ago. In a large denomination that accepts evolution and encourages science. If there was a scientific means to God's love, I would have heard about it. We would have had a pamphlet on that. You talk about science like it's going to the grocery store and choosing between fresh vegetables or a pre-packaged dinner. Evaluating cutting-edge science is a little more complicated. If all those quotes you provided are the bottom line, what are the scientists who are still looking for an explanation of the origin of life doing? According to every definition I know of "scientist", they qualify. Pseudo-scientists don't last too long in a university, their projects don't get funding, they don't get published. You're not just saying a few forum members are lacking in reasoning, you're claiming the entire scientific system is flawed. How do you make such a claim?
So sad.
Sad that you keep sticking to a flawed world view, {world view I don't have a world view. - I VIEW THE WORLD :coolsmirk: } that is obviously wrong. {"Obvious ?" What made you judge of the world ? You really believe you (and your sources) are all knowing? Me, I'm into absorbing as much of my experience as possible, that includes exposing myself to the works and ideas of hundreds. I do have some mighty strong ideas and attitudes. But I don't assume any of your absolute certitude. To me that absolute stance seems the height of naivety.} based on pseudo scientific reasoning. {How would you define "pseudo" scientific? Or is it just a fancy word you like tossing out?} And that this will not permit you to experience Gods love. {I experience God's… providence's Love on a deeper level that you can imagine. Matter of fact, we have a mutual admiration society going. ……. after all I am one of her children, and I dare think perhaps she likes me. She sure has given me a wonderful mix of good breading, tough love and a lot of good breaks along the way. :) Furthermore and for your information Adonai, my depth of appreciation is impossible without a deep understanding for the pageant of creation, and the physical origins of my body, that is, evolution on this here planet that created us and who we are going back to. :kiss: } My sort of certainty leaves the door wide open for all the new discovers and insights yet to come. And it is rich in detail and beauty, christ all you got to show is repeating empty mantras, NO THANK YOU just the same

Adonai, think I just figured out something important.
You are all about a tribal God of the mind.
Me, I’m into the God of Time and Creation.
I can’t tell you who she is,
but I know, in the fullness of time she trumps your god, hands down.

So sad.
Sad that you keep sticking to a flawed world view, that is obviously wrong. based on pseudo scientific reasoning. And that this will not permit you to experience Gods love. I was going to church not that long ago. In a large denomination that accepts evolution and encourages science. If there was a scientific means to God's love, I would have heard about it. We would have had a pamphlet on that. You talk about science like it's going to the grocery store and choosing between fresh vegetables or a pre-packaged dinner. Evaluating cutting-edge science is a little more complicated. If all those quotes you provided are the bottom line, what are the scientists who are still looking for an explanation of the origin of life doing? According to every definition I know of "scientist", they qualify. Pseudo-scientists don't last too long in a university, their projects don't get funding, they don't get published. You're not just saying a few forum members are lacking in reasoning, you're claiming the entire scientific system is flawed. How do you make such a claim? i make that claim because the scientific establishment has determined that a priori, one of the two possible explanations of origins shall not be permitted , not even be considered, based on flawed assumptions, namely , because the supernatual cannot be tested, its not science. Thats just plain bollocks. First of all, because there is a demarcation problem till today to define what science is. And secondly, it testability is a requirement, all historical sciences cannot be included, and are not science either. Is the mind natural, or supernatural ? and what does it tell us about ID theory ? http://reasonandscience.heavenforum.org/t2265-is-the-mind-natural-or-supernatural-and-what-does-it-tell-us-about-id-theory
My sort of certainty leaves the door wide open for all the new discovers and insights yet to come
yep. as long as God is kept at the outside, everything is fine. isnt it ?? https://www.facebook.com/philip.cunningham.73/videos/1121720701174195/?hc_location=ufi
because the supernatual cannot be tested, its not science.
Yup, science is dedicated to studying the natural world. Supernatural is a thing of the imagination, thus outside the purview of science. Pretty straight-forward
My sort of certainty leaves the door wide open for all the new discovers and insights yet to come
yep. as long as God is kept at the outside, everything is fine. isnt it ?? https://www.facebook.com/philip.cunningham.73/videos/1121720701174195/?hc_location=ufi Obviously you haven't grasped a word I've tried to share. Time and Creation goes well beyond ancient tribal texts and our minds. Your sentiment is ironic considering it is you who are afraid of allowing evolution and an appreciate for our physical planet into your heart. As for your video, I find it most amazing when people with no advanced physics understanding go on and on interpreting Einstein laws and their various implications and failing, as though they understand what they are talking about. It's sick joke of self-illusion. The video is a fail, because it doesn't actually say a thing. Oh and you neatly avoided my questions, let me try again
Sad that you keep sticking to a flawed world view
{world view I don't have a world view. - I VIEW THE WORLD :coolsmirk: } that is obviously wrong. {"Obvious ?" What made you judge of the world ? You really believe you (and your sources) are all knowing? Me, I'm into absorbing as much of my experience as possible, that includes exposing myself to the works and ideas of hundreds. I do have some mighty strong ideas and attitudes. But I don't assume any of your absolute certitude. To me that absolute stance seems the height of naivety.} based on pseudo scientific reasoning. {How would you define "pseudo" scientific? Or is it just a fancy word you like tossing out?} And that this will not permit you to experience Gods love. {I experience God's… providence's Love on a deeper level that you can imagine. Matter of fact, we have a mutual admiration society going. ……. after all I am one of her children, and I dare think perhaps she likes me. She sure has given me a wonderful mix of good breading, tough love and a lot of good breaks along the way. :) Furthermore and for your information Adonai, my depth of appreciation is impossible without a deep understanding for the pageant of creation, and the physical origins of my body, that is, evolution on this here planet that created us and who we are going back to. :kiss: } My sort of certainty leaves the door wide open for all the new discovers and insights yet to come. And it is rich in detail and beauty, christ all you got to show is repeating empty mantras, NO THANK YOU just the same
Yup, science is dedicated to studying the natural world.
Is the mind natural, or supernatural ? and what does it tell us about ID theory ? http://reasonandscience.heavenforum.org/t2265-is-the-mind-natural-or-supernatural-and-what-does-it-tell-us-about-id-theory
Yup, science is dedicated to studying the natural world.
Is the mind natural, or supernatural ? and what does it tell us about ID theory ? http://reasonandscience.heavenforum.org/t2265-is-the-mind-natural-or-supernatural-and-what-does-it-tell-us-about-id-theory It is way beyond time to stop feeding the troll.