More like a recipe, I'd think. Programs have if-then options and subroutines; what is the analogy for a gene?

Karl Pfeifer

Why is it more like a recipe?

It gives a set of instructions for how a "dish", namely the organism, is to be prepared. More linear than a program.

Karl Pfeifer

You're right

Karl Pfeifer

Four basic group classes compare to the computer with binary 1 and 0, others say

Duan Xian Xiang

The instructions are in code that can be recast as a binary code. And one can also write a flowchart for a recipe, but without decision points and subroutines, it’s not much of a program. Still, if you want to regard a linear (metaphor alert →) recipe as the limiting case of a program, fine. However, some people hesitate to call circuits in a chip “programs”, whereas others are okay with that. I guess which way you go depends on what issues are lurking in the background. Here’s how Simon Kinahan on Quora understands the issues:

1. Can you translate any program into a logic circuit that, when simulated, will produce the same behaviour as the program? No, you cannot. Computer programs are Turing complete and logic circuits are not, because computer programs do not have bounded state and logic circuits do. Self modification and self reference would also create problems, but its not necessary to go that far - Turing completeness is enough.

2. Can you produce a physical logic circuit whose behaviour is equivalent to a computer running the program? Yes, you can, because most of the hardware is already a logic circuit. In fact depending on just how you define “logic circuit” your computer with the program loaded and running already qualifies. If you exclude RAMs you can replace them with banks of flip-flops with appropriate memory address decoders or ROMs.

Karl Pfeifer

You said it very well. Let me clarify, by "program" I do not mean computer programs, computer programs are just one of it. It is also not a logic circuit, this "program" is similar to a computer program, both refers to an invisible, no physical entity thing, similar to computer software. Others, such as psychological programs, economic programs, historical programs, and so on. It refers to the operational behavior or action instructions in the form of a sequence, and is not necessarily required to be the same as a computer program, because it is only used to name some behavior or operation with similar characteristics. For example, "the earth revolves around the sun," which is a program closer to "behavior." Using this concept is to abstract the movement or change process of things, and then pay attention to this abstract thing. This is also why I think the "program" can be used in psychology, economics, biology, history, sociology, and political science. "Program" here is no longer a computer program, it is just some similar to the computer program, with this name just to achieve the purpose of the law of abstract things, similar to the role of mathematics.

In some complex science scholars, they use different names, called "instruction"or "process" or "calculation" or "information", etc., just by different names. Here, none of these concepts refers to a computer program. This "program" is a new concept, which is a name used to name an abstract class of sequence operations. And for this reason, I am against the use of computer running programs to simulate the evolution of organisms, those scholars of complex science use computer programs to simulate this "a" process "or" calculation," I don't think so, because computers are computers, creatures are creatures, they're not the same thing. I just use the word "program" to name their evolution or change process, the specific they run the program also need to be analyzed separately, can not be simulated by computer.

Karl Pfeifer

In a book by complex science scholars(He is a biologist), he also gives the example of "recipes", which it calls "instruction". He thought that mathematical equations were impossible to write this recipe, but to write the steps of the pastry. This "instruction" and my "program" actually mean the same thing, the food making step.

Karl Pfeifer

The "recipe" has subroutines, such as putting a subroutine in the recipe: sliced the cucumber, In the "cut cucumber" sub-program, it can also be divided into smaller procedures: cut from the middle of the cucumber? Or start cutting at one end? How to use a kitchen knife? These are all subroutines.

Duan Xian Xiang

RE: "How to use a kitchen knife? These are all subroutines."

Well, yeah, sort of. But you're not going to find those in a recipe book. Similarly using a computer program presupposes switching the power on, manipulating the mouse or fingering the trackpad, depressing keys on the keyboard, etc., all of which can be described by subroutines, but which aren't considered part of the program the computer is running.

The reason I avoid the term "program" is because of so-called computational theories of biological/evolutionary processes. Many people in evolutionary biology talk as if some sort of natural computation is taking place, as if nature itself is "following a program", whereas all that's really going on is that certain natural processes can be mapped onto algorithms (which are then used in simulations).

Karl Pfeifer

Why do we simulate it? Why not directly consider these natural processes as programs? And then find a way to analyze these programs? Change these programs? Isn't that just the science? Isn't the final purpose of science to "control"? It may not seem useful in the natural sciences, but in the social sciences, such as economics, analyzing the procedures of economic activity, such as the economist Quesaay's economic chart, He analyzes economic activity into such a chart, which then uses the government to determine whether intervention in the economy is needed.

This "program" is not a computer program, but because the concept of "computer program" appeared first, so many people think that a program is a computer program, if the "program" is originally present in the universe? What if the language of the universe includes programs? Just like mathematics, scientists now know that the language of the universe is mathematics. Is it possible that there is another language of the universe, which is the program? It is easier to understand that mathematics, which was invented or discovered by humans, but not only humans, but nature is also able to invent mathematics, For example, the fruit of sunflower presents mathematical rules. Do we say that the mathematics of sunflower is a human "simulation"? The universe knows programming, just as the universe can mathematics

The universe itself knows mathematics, like the sunflower itself, it knows mathematics, and the universe knows programming, just like humans have programmed computers.

Karl Pfeifer

I mean, the programs of the universe are not just computer programs, the other things in the universe also have programs, such as human psychology, human economic activities, etc. Before computers, the universe had invented programs, then humans invented computers, invented software, So, many people think that a program is what a computer program is like, but maybe the program is not what a computer program is like? A computer program is just one of those programs.

Karl Pfeifer

We dare to describe the universe mathematically, why dare we not describe the universe with programs?

Karl Pfeifer

Humans can understand the universe, because they understand mathematics, and the universe also knows mathematics. Humans use mathematics to build tall buildings and machines, and the universe also uses mathematics to build things. People can understand the universe, because both the universe and humans can understand mathematics.

Similarly, the universe knows a language: programs, and humans have now invented computer programs. The universe invented the program before, the human invented the computer program after. Using computer programs to simulate the universe, just like using mathematics to calculate the universe, if the universe itself is not mathematical, how can humans use mathematics to calculate the universe? In the same way, if the universe itself is not written by programs, how can humans simulate the universe with computer programs?

What a great insight on gene ? Gene seems to be an algorithm with some changes which have reasons in every individual's body. I was also thinking if the rose plant is a plant species which has a common program as well and what is it?

Also gene is like, specific to one rose plant like one human family . Although every family gene varies within the human species

Rumani Dey

I think "program" is another language of the universe besides mathematics.

Well i consider every repetitive behaviour in nature to be a mathematical formula or math as a whole. We just need to put the math amidst the correct selection of variables and mathematical operations and rules of calculus.

Rumani Dey

Indeed, "repetitive behavior" seems to be described mathematically.

Rumani Dey

However, many human "repetitive behaviors" are not exactly the same. Although these behaviors are repetitive, the "quantity" in each repeated behavior is not equal, Do its mathematical equations have to be modified frequently?

Mathematical equations can be used to describe the laws of physics, because they do not change, and the relationship between the quantities in the physical equations does not change. However, in economic activities, economic behaviors are indeed often repeated, which can be expressed in mathematical equations, but these repeated behaviors are somewhat different from the last time. For example, a financial crisis seems to be similar every time, but it's not exactly the same.

Rumani Dey

In the physical world, the repetitive behavior of inorganic matter is indeed completely repetitive, so physics can do experiments, because experiments can be repeated, and of course they can also be described in mathematical equations, and mathematical equations are always useful. But in the world of organic life, such as human economic activity, actually economic activity is actually the same as biological evolution, Its "repetitive behavior" may not be exactly the same, but only very similar. For example, there is a saying that "history is always repeated", indicating that human groups often repeat their behavior, but each repetition is not exactly the same, and in these fields, "programs" seems to be more efficient to describe laws.

Duan Xian Xiang

What is gained by calling a natural causal process a "program"? There is no language of the universe, just language we use to describe the universe, albeit partially and imperfectly. The universe knows nothing, only some parts of it, namely us, know a few things. And sure, you can describe the universe in term of programs, which at bottom are just a bunch of ordered n-tuples mirroring input-output relations (that's still mathematics). Note that I haven't objected to mapping algorithms onto natural processes, but that is not the same as agreeing that natural processes are computational or that nature is running a program. Nature isn't using those algorithms; we are.

Karl Pfeifer

You're right, this is actually a philosophical question, which depends on our "faith".