A thought results primarily from an adjustment of the brain hardware, and not from a computation executed by that hardware.
My comment: The adjustments of the brain hardware integrate RNA-mediated events that include gene duplication and fixation of amino acid substitutions. The nutrient-dependent gene duplications and substitutions link the epigenetic landscape to the physical landscape of DNA in the organized genomes of species from microbes to man via their physiology of reproduction. The idea that everything known about nutrient-dependent cell type differentiation in living organisms during their life history transitions could be linked to artificial intelligence seems silly given what is currently known.
the formation and development of blood cells.
My comment: A single nutrient-dependent RNA-mediated amino acid substitution in the red blood cells of 3 different primate species is linked via their pheromone-controlled physiology of reproduction to differences in their morphological and their behavioral phenotypes by the same neuronal system(s).
My comment: All the vertebrate neuronal systems that are epigenetically effected by food odors and pheromones appear to provide feedback to the gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) neuronal system.
My comment: Heterochronic parabiosis links what is known about hematopoiesis and practopoiesis to these epigenetically-effected feedback loops via the accurate representations of biologically-based cause and effects in two award-winning reviews.
The integration of neuroendocrinology and ethology no longer includes any misrepresentations that link the biological basis of human cognition to evolution. All the misrepresentations included in the context of textbooks like Mutation-Driven Evolution have been replaced by accurate representations in Medical Genetics.
The OL acting as control centre may be target organ for metabolic hormones such as leptin like and insulin like peptides, and olfactory organ could exert regulatory action on the OL via epigenetic effects of nutrients and pheromones on gene expression (Kohl, 2013; Elekonich and Robinson, 2000).
I don’t know any proponents of the “Singularity” nonsense who have attempted to address the fact that what is known about artificial intelligence has failed to include what is known about the role of viruses in RNA-mediated cell type differentiation. The role of viruses that perturb protein folding is clearly linked to the nutrient-dependent stability of organized genomes and the highly developed experience-dependent development of the human brain.
Works by Christ et al., continue to attest to the rejuvenating power of blood. For example, in the context of epigenetic pharmacology and regenerative medicine, one protein in the blood has been linked to health via nutrient-dependent amino acid substitutions that differentiate all cell types in all individuals of all species.
Many serious scientists who are Combating Evolution to Fight Disease, are able to distinguish between the definition of a mutation and the effects of nutrient-dependent RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions. See for example: RNA-Mediated Regulation of HMGA1 Function. However, even some of the scientists who should have joined other serious scientists are waiting on the sidelines with claims that [T]he entire ideology of personalized medicine should be taken with many grains of salt.
Personalized medicine links what is known about RNA-mediated cause and effect to single amino acid substitutions that differentiate all cell types in all individuals of all genera during their life history transitions that lead to successful reproduction. Personalized medicine replaces the ideology of neo-Darwinists who invented the “Modern Synthesis” based on de Vries definition of “mutation” and assumptions about how long it might take for one species to evolve into another species.
[W]hat Haldane, Fisher, Sewell Wright, Hardy, Weinberg et al. did was invent…. Evolution was defined as “changes in gene frequencies in natural populations.” The accumulation of genetic mutations was touted to be enough to change one species to another…. Assumptions, made but not verified, were taught as fact.
The assumptions did not include anything now known about the role of viruses, which makes the assumptions useless in any attempts to explain how biodiversity arose. For example, sttributing all of extant biodiversity to “constraint-breaking mutations” in the absence of any explanation of how viruses cause mutations, exemplifies pseudoscientific nonsense.
…genomic conservation and constraint-breaking mutation is the ultimate source of all biological innovations and the enormous amount of biodiversity in this world. In this view of evolution there is no need of considering teleological elements” (p. 199).
An environmental drive evolved from that of nutrient ingestion in unicellular organisms to that of pheromone-controlled socialization in insects. In mammals, food odors and pheromones cause changes in hormones such as LH, which has developmental affects on pheromone-controlled sexual behavior in nutrient-dependent reproductively fit individuals across species of vertebrates.
Mitochondria… generate most of the cell’s biochemical energy… In addition, they are responsible for producing and breaking down amino acids and fats. They also regulate cellular death, called apoptosis.
Viruses perturb thermodynamic cycles of protein biosynthesis and degradation, which is how they are linked to pathology. Nutrient-dependent RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions enable the repair of damaged DNA.
To my knowledge, no one who understands how ecological variation and ecological adaptation are linked by metabolic networks to genetic networks and biodiversity has ever attributed the biodiversity of nutrient-dependent morphological and behavioral phenotypes to mutations.