Welcome to my home-page

Dr.-Ing. Alfred Schurmann - computer scientist and mathematician

Belief and trust are good, but exact science and reasoning are better

goto main site


LIFE DID NOT ARISE EVOLUTIONARY

See also: 1)   Multicellular animals did not evolve from unicellular organisms (this line was added on November 12,2008)
               
2)   Adaptive immune system did not evolve by mutations and selection (this line was added January 23, 2009)
                
3)   Human did not evolve by random cell alterations and selection (added March 23, 2009)
               
4)    Idea of the anti-Darwin theory of developing of life , in German, only summary is in English (line added June 15, 2009)

Summary. Darwins evolution theory was a scientific attempt to explain the arising and development of living organisms, 145 years ago. However many formulations of this theory do not meet the requirements of the exact natural science, which led to false conclusions. In this essay is proved, by means of genetic and computer science, that the life could not arose in evolutionary way. First, the control-software implemented in bacteria is described. The complexity of this software shows that it could not arose automatically, but was designed and carried out by a high developed being. Further, the control software of the fly Drosophila is described. It is un-human complex and could be designed only by a devine being - an other exact natural science explanation is not known.

Contents:
Introduction
Bacteria, archaean and single-celled animals
First multicellular animals - super complex systems
Conclusions

Introduction. Although the evolution theory of Darwin was a great scientific contribution for explanation of life development (in comparison to the religious impressed unscientific ideas at that time), it is not up to date with genetic and computer science. The theory of Darwin is strained with not clear and/or shallow formulations, which led to some reasoning errors, e.g. the statement that such complex biological systems (in which are implemented very complex information systems) as bacteria, plants, reptiles, fishes, birds and mammals arose and developed by chance and selection is actually not a sufficient exact scientific argument - it is rather a wish to explain the development of life with no religious assertions. The evolution theory use up to now very un-precise  and ambiguous formulations as e.g. in the epistemology (s. [BRE] vol.8 (2006)) and in the meme theory of R. Dawkins (s. [BRE] Vol. 8). But also such formulations as "positive gene mutations, which cause the evolution of life" are not clear and unscientific, although probability theory was applied as argument - it is an example of wrong application of probability methods, because a bacterium should not be treated as a cluster of molecules, but as a very complex steering software system implemented in a system of molecules.
      The genetic scientists do discovered that information processing is an essential part of a cell - they underestimate however the complexity of this control software; examples:
i)  The formulation that an eukaryote gene contains an information matrix or template for synthesis of proteins is not appropriate, because there is implemented a meta-program, which is essential more complex than any non-mathematical matrix.
ii)   E. Dawidson considers (in [DAV] (2001)) the development of life as evolution of regulatory elements (control circuits)  encoded in DNA and thinks that a living being is controlled by a regulatory network of such regulatory elements. According to E. Dawidson, the evolution of life was caused by cooption of useful gene properties by genes or chromosomes. But why and how (according to which exact laws of nature) genes coopted such new properties is not clear and cannot be proved in exact scientific way. On the other hand, such regulatory elements (circuits) and regulatory network are not the appropriate models of the DNA software, because the control software in a cell is much more complex than the regulatory apparatus of functional circuits (e.g. the DNA software is enormous adaptable - a network of regulatory circuits is almost not adaptable, because if you change an element of it, the network would probably function wrong).
    For said reasons, I describe in short how living systems arose, from the information processing point of view; I consider however only the most important biological functions and features. Such description is sufficient to show how complex is the control software implemented in living organisms. I use the common notions and notations explained  in P. Snustad & M. Simmons [SMS] (2006) and (in German) F. Wrba et al. [WDM] (2007) and W. Janning& E. Knust [WJK] (2004). Besides, I used the Brockhaus Enzyklopaedie (encyclopedia), [BRE] Vol. 2, 3, 5, 8, 22 and 24, Mannheim (2006) and the book of E. Davidson [DAV] (2001).

1. BACTERIA, ARCHEAN AND SINGLE-CELLED ANIMALS
          According to the present knowledge, the first bacteria arose in seas approximately 3700 million years ago.
As information system, bacterium (denoted below by Bak) consists of:
a)     a chromosome, which is a circular formed sequence Chrb = DNA1,...DNAn,DNA1 of DNAs and each DNAi is a sequence of molecules in which is implemented a sequence of program segments  DPrA1,...,DPrAm, and a program segment DPrAi has the form:
                   Promoter region (denoted by POp ); sequence of coding genes kG1,...,kGg
where g<8, POp is a sequence of identification and condition elements, BP1,...,BPr, which control and determine whether the instructions implemented in the coding genes kG1,...,kGg can be executed, and a coding gene kGi is a sequence of simple
instructions of the kind "add amino acid ax" - in kGi is is a program for synthesis of a protein;
b)    protoplasm (or cytoplasm) which consists of molecules (e.g proteins) outside the chromosome; some of these molecules are ribosomes containing RNA like molecules  (called rRNA ); in rRNA is implemented a sequence of simple instructions, which are executed when the synthesis of proteins is performed; protoplasm can also contain circular formed DNA sequences called plasmids;
c)      cell-membrane consisting of molecules - it bounds the cytoplasm and the chromosome Chrb;
d)      control software (denoted below by STb) implemented in DNAs in the chromosome; the input information of STb are:
- DNAi in the chromosome Chrb,
- DNA-sequences in plasmids (s. (b)), denoted below by Pld,
- ribosomes  (s. (b)),
- Iz1,...,Izd - signals encoded in molecules in the cytoplasm outside the ribosomes,
- Ia1,...,Iap - information/signals from outside the cell;
the control system STb performs the following procedures:
p1)     Trp(DPrA,IS1,...,ISj) - it is the procedure, known in genetic, for transcription of a program segment DPrA  stored in a DNA double strand (s. e.g. P. Snustad & M. Simmons [SMS] and F. Wrba et al. [WDM] (2007)), where ISe  is a signal from said  signals Iz1,...,Izd; the result of this procedure is messenger mRNA which equals RNA, where DNA, RNA and mRNA have the same meaning as in [WDM] and [SMS]; more exactly, mRNA is the sequence of instructions stored in the program segment DPrA = POp;kG1,...,kGg, thus, mRNA is the sequence of instructions stored in the coding genes kG1,...,kGg (s. above (a)); the procedure Trp(DprA,IS1,...,ISj) is executed only if the signals ISe satisfy the conditions given in POp; the sequence of instructions stored in coding gene kGi is  a program for synthesis of a protein;
p2)     PS(mRNA,Rib) - it is the translation procedure for synthesis of a protein according to the mRNA program, where Rib denotes a ribosome; the result of this procedure is a
sequence of amino acids; thus, the results of the two procedures  Trp(DPrA,IS1,...,ISj); PS(mRNA,Rib) are g proteins made up according to the program stored in the coding genes kG1,...,kGg, if the signals IS1,...,ISj satisfy the conditions in POp;
p3)      Vmp(Bak,DNAv,Chrb,Pld,Iaj1,...,Iajr) - it is the procedure for replication of bacterium Bak; it is stored in a DNA (denoted by DNAv) and is initiated when certain signals from outside, Iaj1,...,Iajr, arrive at the cell Bak; the procedure makes-up two identical bacteria/cells Bak1 and Bak2 called daughter cells - they are equal to Bak, which does not exist now; the procedure is described e.g. in F. Wrba et al. [WDM] and P. Snustad & M. Simmons [SMS]; the procedure is done in three steps:
phase G1:   signals Iaj1,...,Iajr came through the cell-membrane to the bacterium; Vmp checks whether the division of the system Bak (the cell division) can be performed; if "yes" then:
phase S:   Vmp duplicates all DNA sequences in the chromosome Chrb (it duplicates also the chromo- some) and in plasmids Pld, and duplicates the cytoplasm (s. (b)); system Bak evolved to system Bak`;
phase G2:   Vmp prepares the process of the real cell division and controls whether all conditions hold;
phase M (mitosis):   Vmp divides the evolved system Bak` into two systems Bak1 and Bak2.
       The system bacterium Bak performs also other complicated operations, however the model given above proves that STb is a very complex information system, because:
i)     the procedures Trp, Ps and
Vmp perform complicated operations;
ii)    the software system STb is very adaptable, because through a professional thought-out elimination (cutting out) or substitution of some instructions in DNAs and/or putting
together two DNAs, one can get complete new programs for making-up new sequences of amino acids  (proteins);
iii)    the procedure Vmp reproduces the system bacterium; it is a professional thought-out software - the attempts of some computer scientists to develop self-reproducing programs or systems failed.
        The system STb and the remarks (i) - (iii) prove that:
s1)   The control system STb could not arose by itself (automatically) - there are no lows of nature which could develop such complex program systems; thus, STb was designed by a divine being (here called the Divine Life-Creator Gm) and his messengers (called also angel beings) carried out this project in molecules in seas. Thus, bacterium did not arise evolutionary (by chance) but the Divine Life-Creator commissioned his messengers (angel beings) to implement his detailed project in molecules in seas, in short time (months, a
year?).
s2)    The DPrA - programs and operations Trp, PS and Vmp were designed in such adaptable way that they were used as building-stones for new more complex systems (as is shown below). The system bacterium is also an evidence, that there exists a divine being (here denoted by Gm) who made the project for developing living systems, and bacteria were only the first step in implementing this project.
       As is known, there are more than 5000 species of bacteria. The shown system Bak describes one species, for each chromosome Chrb and ribosome Rib. According to the theory of Darwin, other species arose by means of mutations from a species, where DNA-strands are treated as molecules and/or templates (matrices). This point of view is not precise enough, because in each DNA-molecule strand are implemented (simple) programs for making-up proteins. Each bacterium species is determined by these DNA programs in chromosome and plasmids. Similar species can evolve by mutations. However, if in first bacteria an STb control software, without SOS-reppair procedures and other repair genes (programs), were implemented, then it is not possible (i.e. there exist no algorithm) that from a bacterium species, eg. aerobe bacteria (which need oxygen), could arose quite other species, e.g. anaerobe bacteria (for which oxygen is toxic), by mutations, because (s. W. Janning & E. Knust [WJK] (2004) and P. Snustad & M. Simmons [SMS] (2006)):
m1)    mutations by means of radioactive radiations damage and degenerate the genome,
m2)    mutations caused by virus can develop only similar bacteria,
m3)    mutations by means of chemical or environmental stimulus/substances or transposable genetic elements (i.e. a genetic element is inserted in an another gene) can lead only to  similar species; however it is not known how such different bacterium species as aerobe and anaerobe, with very different DNA-programs, could develop from  one bacterium species by means of such mutations.
       In most bacteria are implemented repair software (postreplication repair procedures, SOS-response and repair software, and repair software in plasmid DNAs), which cause  mutations (s. P. Snustad & M.Simmons [SMS]). However, these mutations are dtermined by said repair software and can lead only to new bacteria or bacteria species. If in first bacteria, a STb control software with said repair programs and SOS-repair procedures was implemented, then it is possible that mutations occured which evolved bacteria with new metabolism; and it is possible that in this way, in million years, may-be anaerobe bacteria could mutated to aerobe bacteria. If in first bacteria were implemented said system of repair and control software, then this fact supports the proposition that the control software of bacteria was designed by a divine being.
      From said reasons, we can exclude that archaean systems could evolve from a bacterium system by means of mutations, because archaean have a quite different metabolism and DNA-programs, and are made-up of quite different molecules. So is the following statement the most probable explanation: the Divine Life-Creature designed the adaptation of some bacterium systems to first archaean and his messengers implemented this adaptation (in a short time).
        The adaptations of bacteria to archaean were relative simple (in comparison to the complexity of this systems): the control software STa (of archean) was got from the control software STb (of bacteria) by deleting some instructions in DNA-programs of STb and by altering some instructions from "add amino acid ax" to "add molecule az", and by adding some new instructions of this kind.
        The first single-celled animals protozoan also did not evolve by means of mutations, because:
r1)    Protozoan have meta-programs, implemented in their mitochondral DNAs (denoted by mtDNA), where a meta-program is a program which alters itself when or before it is executed. The meta-programs implemented in mtDNAs of protozoan consists of so called guide RNAs and coding genes (s. P. Snustad & M. Simmons [SMS] (2006), chap. "RNA Editing... " and "The Molecular Genetics of Mitochondria"). These meta-programs (the editing transcriptions) are executed as follows: (i) mRNA-program is built from an mtDNA according to the procedure similar to Trp(mtDNA,...); the obtained mRNA is called pre-mRNA; (ii) guide RNA alters the pre-mRNA program by substituting or inserting instructions in this program - the result is a new mRNA-program, which makes-up quite different polypeptide than the pre-mRNA program would do.
r2)       Such meta-programs are essential more complex than not altering programs. In the first years of making computer programs, some programmers used one, two or three
instructions in a program, which this program substituted by other instructions during the execution. This led to wrong functioning programs, very difficult to correct. In order to get
transparent and reliable programs, self-altering programs are considered as a violation against reliable software development. This shows how mtDNA-meta-programs are complex - and they function correct and reliable in protozoan more than 500 million years.
Conclusions: (i) protozoan are essential more complex systems than bacteria; (ii) protozoan did not develop from bacteria because mutations of bacteria could not led to quite different control software in protozoan, (iii) the Divine Life-Creature with his messengers must had adapted bacterium and archaean systems to single-celled animals - the first eukaryote.
Remark. The evolution theory states that bacteria, archaean and protozoan evolved from an unknown archaic progenitor cell. As was shown, protozoan could not evolve from such archaic cell. But it is possible that bacteria and archaean were adapted from this progenitor cell, if this progenitor cell had control software similar to STb; because bacterium or archaean (with implemented complex control software) could not evolve automatically from a cluster of molecules having no control software with DNA-programs. For this reason, it is not important whether the first living being was bacterium or another archaic cell - important is that it must had been controlled by a STb like software with DNA programs. 

2. First multicellular animals - super complex systems
.
        The next mile-stone in developing life - the first multicellular animals - was revolutionary, because in multicellular animals are implemented super-complex information systems (as is shown below), which could not be derived by adaptation of control software implemented in single-celled organisms. However, some modules of single-celled animals  were used as bricks in software systems of all animals and plants. Below, the first multicellular animals represents the fly Drosophila - I describe its main software properties.
The  system fly Drosophila performs known functions (flying, walking, biting, e.t.c.) and is composed of subsystems U1,...,Us (visual organs, head, thorax, wings, skin (epidermal cells), neural system e.t.c.) and control software, denoted below by StSF, which has the following properties (f1), (f2) and (f3):
f1)     Each subsystem Ui is composed of eukaryote cells (below called e-cells), where an e-cell comprises:
z1)     cell-membrane consisting of molecules; it bounds the cell;
z2)     cytoplasm, which contains many proteins and organelles ;
z3)     nucleus - it contains eukaryotic chromosomes CHrE1,...,ChrEa and each chromosome contains sequences of eukaryotic DNAs, and each DNA is a sequence of nucleotides,  which contain eukaryotic genes, and in an eukaryotic gene is implemented a meta-program for synthesis of proteins, where such meta-program is a system of instructions and conditions for making-up programs which steer and control synthesis of proteins; the general form of such meta-program is:
              sequence of conditions (Prtr) and controlling instructions (SIj); sequence of exons (ISd) and introns (Int)
where Prtr denotes a promoter,
SIj  denotes an enhancer, a repressor or other regulation-controlling instruction (before a promoter)
ISd  is an exon i.e. a sequence of coding instructions, and
Int  is an intron, which may store regulation instructions SIj, operations miRNA and IntO, where miRNA is a short program for excision of coding instructions ISd in the pre-mRNA got after transcription or miRNA suppresses the translation of the got mRNA, and operation IntO determines which exons should be canceled (inactive); nucleus is surrounded by a membrane and contains also ribosomal RNAs (denoted by rRNA) and other proteins (s. F. Wrba et al. [WDM] (2007), W. Janning & E. Knust [WJK] (2004) or P. Snustad & M. Simmons [SMS] (2006));
z4)       mitochondria - they are in the cytoplasm, produce energy and contain mitochondrial DNAs (denoted by mtDNA); in mtDNA are implemented meta-programs which control the synthesis of mitochondrial RNAs and some polypeptides;
z5)      ribosomes (denoted below by Rib) - they contain proteins and ribosomal RNAs (rRNAs);
z6)      other organelles.
f2)        Besides said meta-programs, the control software StSF contains the following five procedures, which are implemented in each eukaryotic cell:
pr1)      TrE(TF,gen) - it is the known transcription operation (described e.g. in F. Wrba et al. [WDM] (2007) or P. Snustad & M. Simmons [SMS] (2006)), where TF stands for transcription factors (i.e. meta-instructions) which initialize the procedure TrE with respect to the gene gen; the result of this procedure is a pre-RNA with introns and niR, where niR equals to nil or to miRNA (micro RNA); TrE is a meta-procedure because it makes a simpler meta-program from the meta-program stored in gen, applying the meta-instruction TF ;
pr2)    Spl(pre-RNA) -  it is the known meta-operation for splicing (also alternate splicing) of pre-RNA; the result of this procedure is an mRNA (got from gen), i.e. a program for
synthesis of a protein;
pr3)     the execution of the meta-program gen proceeds as follows::
        TrE(TF,gen); Spl(pre-RNA);
        if niR = miRNA then begin meta-program miRNA degrades or inactivates the program mRNA - the result is a program mRNA`;
          if mRNA' is not inactive then PS(mRNA`,Rib) else no translation, i.e. the program mRNA` will not be executed end
         else PS(mRNA,Rib);
This meta-program, implemented in gen, builds the end-program, mRNA` or mRNA, for translation (i.e. for synthesis of a protein), where mRNA` may be empty; 
pr4)     PS(mRNA,Rib) - it is the procedure for translation (the same as in the system bacterium), where Rib denotes a ribosome; this procedure executes the program mRNA and in this way produces a protein (s. F. Wrba et al. [WDM] or P. Snustad & M. Simmons (SMS));
pr5)      VmZ(e-cel,ChrE1,...,ChrEa,mtDNA,Ia1,...,Iar) - it is the known meta-procedure for reproduction of eukaryotic cell, e-cel, where ChrE1,...,ChrEa are the chromosomes in cell e-cel, mtDNA are the mitochondrial DNAs in e-cel and Ia1,...,Iar are the signals which initiate this procedure; VmZ proceeds in similar way as the procedure Vmp(Bak,...) characterized in the system bacterium; (s. F. Wrba et al. [WDM] or P. Snustad & M. Simmons [SMS]);
f3)      The control software StSF contains also an un-human (in German: unmenschlich) complex control software of meta-programs and super-meta-programs (this software is  below denoted by SMP), which steer and control the development of a multicellular animal from a fertilized egg-cell, where a super-meta-program is a meta-program which alters a meta-program. A preliminary system, pre-SMP(E), is implemented in a not fertilized egg (in a "molecular hardware") called oocyte; it contains maternal genes (i.e. super meta-programs), which produce, among others, the following mRNA proteins (i.e. programs): bicoid (bcd)-mRNAs (at the anterior end), nanos (nos)-mRNAs (at the posterior end), and caudal (cad)-mRNAs and hunchback (hb)-mRNAs (they are distributed uniformly) (s. W. Janning & E. Knust [WJK] (2004) or P. Snustad & M. Simmons [SMS] (2006)). In this way, the body axis A/P is determined - it is the first outline of the spatial plan in which programs and meta-programs are inserted in order to perform and control the development of the oocyte, in short, as follows:
d1)     When egg is fertilized, the control software pre-SMP(E) unites with the control software pre-SMP(S) of sperm - the result is the control software SMP implemented in the fertilized egg. The fertilization initiates or represses (prevents from execution) said bcd-, nos-, cad- and hb-mRNA- programs, which produce transcription factors (i.e. proteins in which meta-instructions are implemented) as follows: the bicoid- meta-instructions repress (i.e. prevent from execution) the caudal-mRNA-programs, and nano-meta- instructions prevent the execution of hunchback-mRNA-programs. The results are concentration gradients of proteins: Bcd- and Hb-proteins are concentrated at the anterior, and Nos- and Cad-proteins are concentrated at the posterior. In this way, the spatial body plan is further evolved - the first domains/regions (of head, thorax and abdomen) of the embryo are established; this plan has the essential property that in said regions are meta-instructions (implemented in said Bcd-, Hb-, Cad- and Nos-proteins) for further development of these regions.
d2)       Establishing the dorsal-ventral axis: The maternal dorsal-proteins (i.e. meta-instructions) are distributed uniformly in the cytoplasm. The spätzle-proteins (i.e. meta-instructions) and Toll receptors are stored in the periventelline space (Toll receptors on the inside surface). On the ventral side of the vitelline membrane occur pipe proteins
(i.e. meta-instructions). The short meta-program IP; IN; IS; IPT is executed several times, and it moves dorsal proteins only to the ventral blastoderm nuclei, and build there a dorsal concentration gradient along the dorsal-ventral (back - belly) axis, where the meta-instructions IP, IN, IS and IPT are implemented in proteins pipe, easter, spätzle, and Toll-receptor and Pelle and Tube, respectively (s. W. Janning & E. Knust [WJK] and P. Snustad & M. Simmon [SMS]). The dorsal protein (meta-instruction) activates the meta-programs (genes) twist and snail, and prevent the execution of the meta-programs (genes) zerknüllt and decaplentaplegic in the nuclei. So the positions of the blastoderm nuclei are settled and the embryo is formed into mesoderm, ventral and dorsal ectoderm, and epidermis. Thus, the further developed body plan is got, such that in it are inserted meta-instructions for further development of its regions.
d3)     Said in (d1) bcd-, hb- und cad-meta-instructions activate also some  Gap-genes (i.e. Gap-meta-programs), namely: hunchback(hb), Krüppel (Kr), knirps (kni) and giant (gt). The proteins produced by these meta-programs are transcription factors (i.e. meta-instructions), which repress (prevent from execution) or activate the following meta-programs (called pair-rule-genes ): even-skipped (eve), fushi-tarazu (ftz), hairy (h) and runt (run). The result is the division of the embryo into 14 distinct zones, called parasegments, along the A/P axis. The pair-rule meta- programs produce transcription factors (meta-instructions). Eve- and ftz-transcription factors establish the segmental boundaries by means of meta-instructions (in each segment), which steer and control the further development of these segments. The spatial plan of the body has been further developed and in its domains are inserted meta-instructions for further software and "molecular hardware" development. The obtained transcription factors initiate said in (f2) meta-procedure VmZ(e-cel-b,...) for cell reproduction, where e-cel-b stands for cells in the blastoderm. In this way, new cells are built in the parasegments (s. P. Snustad & M. Simmons [SMS], chap. "Zygotic Gene Activity...") or W. Janning & E. Knust [WJK], chap. 22).
d4)      Said meta-instructions ftz and eve activate also the execution of the meta-program (activation of gene) engrailed (en) (i.e. the execution of the meta-program given in (pr3),
where gen=en) in the boundary cells; in this way, the boundaries between segments are established. These "molecule hardware" boundaries are stabilized by meta-instructions as
follows:
The result of an en-meta-program in a boundary cell is the transcription factor (i.e. meta- instruction) en, which initiates the meta-program hedgehog (hh), which produces the transcription factor hh. The hh-protein moves to the neighbor cell on the other (left) side of the boundary and activates (it is a meta- instruction) there the meta-program wingles (wg) (the wg-gene). The result of the wg-meta-program is the transcription factor wg; it moves to said neighbor cell on the right side of the boundary and (as meta-instruction) activates there the meta-program en. Thus, a loop of said meta-programs and meta-instructions is executed. In this way, the boundary cells hold together and build a stabilized boundary between the parasegments (s. W. Janning & E. Knust [WJK]).
d5)     The differentiation and further development of parasegments are steered and controlled by homeotic genes( i.e. meta-programs) as follows: The  gape- and pair-rule-genes (i.e. meta-programs hunchback, Krüppel, bicoid, caudel, fushi-tarazu, even-skipped, engrailed,...) prevent from execution or activate the following homeotic genes (meta-programs) Dfd, Scr, Antp, Ubx, abd-A and Abd-B. These meta-programs take part in determination and control of further development of parasegments, e.g the meta-programs Ubx, abd-A and Abd-B control the development of parasegments 5,...,14 (s. W. Janning & E. Knust [WJK], chap. 22  or P. Snustad & M. Simmons [SMS], chap. "Vertebrate Homologues of ..."). The development of subparts of parasegments is controlled also by many other meta-programs (genes). Below are three examples:
d6)     Example d6.1. Establishing the Drosophila wings (according to W. Janning & E. Knust [WJK], chap. 26). As said in (d4), the parasegments are established; also the wing imaginal disc (the first spatial plan of the wing) was localized by the gen (meta-program) engrailed (en) in the thorax-parasegment. The result of the meta-program en (i.e. of the procedure given in (pr3), for gen=en) is the transcription factor (i.e. meta-instruction) en. En activates the meta-program (i.e. gene) hedgehog (hh) (i.e. the procedure given in (pr3), for gen = hh), which produces the protein (i.e. meta-instruction) hh. Hh is localized in the narrow stripe on the left side of the boundary of engrailed-cells and represses (i.e. prevents from execution) the metaprogram (gene) patched (ptc). This causes the activation of the meta-program (gene) decapentaplegic (dpp), which produces many dpp-proteins (meta-instructions). The dpp-proteins diffuse on left and right side of said boundary, and in this way establish dpp concentration gradients on both boundary sides. Thus, to each position in the dpp concentration field are assigned meta-instructions, which activate or prevent from execution meta-programs; this dpp field is also the spatial plan of the wing - e.g. meta-programs (genes) spalt (sal) and optomor-blind (omo) are activated, according to the concentration of dpp. This plan has inserted meta-instructions (i.e. growth factors) of the family TGF-ß/BMP, which activate or prevent from execution meta-programs in different regions; in this way, the wing plan is realized and the wing developed. The performance of these growth factors TGF-ß/BMP is complicated and these factors are effective only in interaction with other transcription factors.
Example d6.2. The execution of a meta-instruction of the family TGF-ß (according to W. Janning & E. Knust [WJK], chap. 26.4).  The meta-programs (genes) thickveins (tkv) and punt (pnt) produce protein receptors Typ-I and Typ-II, which will be localized in the cell-membrane where they interact as follows. A TGF-ß growth factor binds the Type-II receptor (from outside the cell). This is an instruction to the Type-II receptor to bind a Type-I receptor. This binding causes the Type-II receptor to establish (phosphorylation) serine and threonin in the Type-I receptor (on the inside cell-membrane). This is an instruction to the Type-I receptor to separate a protein R-Smad from the molecule Sara (anchored on the inside cell-membrane). The free R-Smad unites with a Co-Smad (e.g. Smad 4) and together they act as a transcription factor (i.e. meta-instruction). This transcription factor moves to the nucleus, where it is a low transcription factor for certain genes (meta-programs) i.e. the meta-instruction R-Smad/Smad4 is effective only together with other meta-instructions. This means that said "certain meta-programs" can be activated only when several meta-instructions acts simultaneously. This property enables the development of a cell in cooperation with other cells in the group.
Example d6.3.   Development of neural cells; it proceeds in other way than the development of wing cells (s. W. Janning & E. Knust [WJK], chap. 27). The meta-programs (i.e. genes) which controlled the segmentation established a patch of proneural cells (i.e. forerunner of neural cells) and proepidermal cells in ectoderm on the ventral (bell) side of the embryo, where the proneural cells are scattered among proepidermal cells. Said patch of cells is the first spatial plan for development of neural and epidermal cells, where in the proneural cells are genes (i.e. meta-programs) of the achaete-scute-complex (AS-C). In some of these proneural cells, this meta-program produce more AS-C proteins (AS-C meta-instructions) of the family bHLH than in other proneural cells. Each meta-instruction (AS-C) activates the meta-program (i.e. gene) Delta, which produces the signal molecule (a meta-instruction) Delta. This molecule moves to an adjacent cell and activates on its cell-membrane the Notch-receptor; this makes free the inside part of the Notch-receptor (i.e. the Notch-meta-instruction), which enters the nucleus and activates there genes (i.e. meta-programs) of the Enhancer-of-split-complex (E(spl)). The results of these meta-programs are E(spl)-meta-instructions, which prevent the execution of (AS-C)-meta-programs. Thus, in this cell are produced fewer (AS-C)-proteins (meta-instructions) and the meta-program Delta is fewer times activated. In this cell are produced fewer Delta molecules and it sends fewer meta-instructions (signal molecules) Delta to adjacent cells. In this way arise cells which send many meta-instructions Delta to adjacent cells and cells which send only few signal molecules Delta. In this way, the cells sending many Delta signals are established to be neural cells and the other proneural cells will be developed to epidermal cells.   
           
Conclusions. The above described control-software StSF, implemented in a "molecular hardware" of the fly Drosophila, is un-human complex, because:
i)      Building stones of this software are meta-programs, i.e. program systems which produce reliable programs. A high qualified software designer is not able to develop such reliable and complex programs.
ii)     A meta-program contains many conditions, rules and even short programs for producing a program. The obtained program makes a protein, in which can be implemented a meta-instruction, which activates and determines the execution of a next meta-program. The result of it can be again a meta-instruction, which activates or prevents from execution an other meta-program etc. The StSF software consists of about 14000 of meta-programs and they function reliable more than 200 million years!
iii)     The software StSF develops it-self from an initial software (initial state) implemented in a fertilized egg. When this egg is in a suitable surrounding, the software system StSF directs and controls its development and the development of the "molecular hardware", and implements itself in this hardware as described in (d1),...,(d6). It is a planed super-complex development process, which a human is not able to design.
        As described above, the control software StSF is very essential more complex than the control software of protozoan (which is essential more complex than the control software of bacteria and archaean). Therefore, the proposition that the software system StSF could develop automatically, by means of chance, cooption and mutation of genes is unscientifically - it is only a belief - because it is impossible to get in this way the very sophisticated and super-complex system StSF (which works reliable more than 200 million years) from the very simpler software system of protozoan.
         Actually, the control software implemented in the "molecular hardware" is more sophisticated and complex than presented above, because:
The control software of a sea urchin like multicellular animal is similar to the software system StSF of Drosophila (s. E. Davidson [DAV], 2001). Thus, the StSF like control software of first multicellular animals was developed/designed in such a way that it could be adapted for development and control of more sophisticated "molecular hardware systems" as reptiles, insects, fishes, birds and mammals. Such complex control software like StSF is not needed for a sea urchin, because, if it genes would contain only programs (as in bacteria) or simple meta-programs (as in protozoan), controlled by a supervisor program, then they could guide and control the development of sea urchin - StSF like meta-programs are not needed. But such supervisor system of programs is not adaptable, because for each new animal system (reptiles, insects etc.) a new supervisory program system had to be developed.
          The only scientific explanation of said facts is: StSF like control software was designed by a divine being (here called the Divine Life -Creator Gm) and implemented by his messengers in a revolutionary way, first in sea urchin like animals, and then they adapted this project in other animal systems: reptiles, insects, fishes, etc. The presented facts prove also that there exists divine being who can create such sophisticated super-complex software systems implemented in "moleculare hardware".
          However, the Divine Life-Creator Gm is neither the God from the Bible nor the Allah from the Koran, because these Gods are only the results of non scientific imaginations of ancient people living in the Middle East Asia, and these gods have the properties of a narrow minded, obstinate and powerful ruler living 2500 years ago.
         But also the assumptions, that human is the highest developed being in the world or that out of our material system (world) nothing more exists, are unscientific ways of thinking. We ought to apply a similar reasoning schema as astronomers do with respect to the not identified dark matter: they concluded that there must exist dark matter/energy, because otherwise the functioning of the system of galaxices cannot be explained scientifically. I applied the same reasoning schema: one cannot explain exactly and scientifically the arising and development of the very sophisticated and complex control software implemented in unicellular and simple multicellular organisms without the existence of a not-human, high developed being who created said contrlol software.

References
[BRE]    Brockhaus Enzyklopedie; Baende 2, 3, 5, 8, 22, 24; Mannheim, Germany (2006).
[DAV]   E. H. Davidson: Genomic Regulatory Systems - Development and Evolution; Academic Press; San Diego,..., USA (2001).
[SMS]    D. P. Snustad & M. J. Simmons; Principles of Genetics; John Wiley & Sons, Inc., USA (2006).
[WDM]   F. Wrba, H. Dolznig, C. Mannhalter: Genetik verstehen - Grundlagen der molekularen Biologie; Facultas Verlags- und Buchhandlungs AG, Wien, Austria (2007).
[WJK]   W. Janning, E. Knust: Genitik - Allgemeine Genetik, Molekulare Genetik, Entwicklungsgenetik; Georg Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart * New York, Germany (2004).

 goto  Life

Copyright; Sept. 01, 2008;   last correction Sept. 18, 2008.