OK i think that is about all as a dummy i can absorb for the moment from the article...i still have my 36 year old question: HOW DID MY DAUGHTER happen to exist as an age old spiritual mother to myself? even as a fetus, playing a game of touch this bulge in my mother's abdomen, before i pull back my elbow or foot, and you win a prize :)
maybe there are some mysteries which should be simply enjoyed as mysteries :)
i should say i LOVE the article, and at last i have some hope that science as biology or by any other name, shall never perish from the earth, or wherever else we happen to land as bosons or gravitons after Smax :)
oops sorry about that quoting thingy ... i thought i was editing ... no way to delete a whole message i guess...
thank you, i guess to Vishnu S. Shukla, M. D. et al. for the article and the inspirational after effects :)
everything is true, the opposite of everything is also true
One of the most widely-studied systems that can display complex behavior is the simultaneous collision, or scattering, of three objects. For simplicity's sake, it is easy to think of the objects as hard-shelled billiard balls, as in the diagram here.
Because long-term mathematical predictions made for chaotic systems are no more accurate that random chance, the equations of motion can yield only short-term predictions with any degree of accuracy.
Because its lineage is very old and could have emerged prior to cellular organisms, mimivirus has added to the debate over the origins of life. Some genes unique to mimivirus, including those coding for the capsid, have been conserved in a variety of viruses which infect organisms from all domains - Eukaryota, Archaea and Prokaryota. This has been used to suggest that mimivirus is related to a type of DNA virus that emerged before cellular organisms and played a key role in the development of all life on Earth[6]. An alternative hypothesis is that there were three distinct types of DNA viruses that were involved in generating the three known domains of life [7].
Because its lineage is very old and could have emerged prior to cellular organisms, mimivirus has added to the debate over the origins of life. Some genes unique to mimivirus, including those coding for the capsid, have been conserved in a variety of viruses which infect organisms from all domains - Eukaryota, Archaea and Prokaryota. This has been used to suggest that mimivirus is related to a type of DNA virus that emerged before cellular organisms and played a key role in the development of all life on Earth[6]. An alternative hypothesis is that there were three distinct types of DNA viruses that were involved in generating the three known domains of life [7].
I seriously doubt of the existence of a life particle. Do not see how can be fix this in the Standard Model. Life, as we said in our article is a provisional term to explain the overall functions of organism, which are carbon based complex systems. However, life could be possible with other elements. Any system that reduces its internal entropy in relation to the enviromental entropy, using outside "energy" or matter (others systems with relatively or potentially lower entropy)can be consider that has "life". We do not think that the property of "living" (i.e. "life") can be assigned to any particular element or molecule or locus, because is a whole process. In fact, many people think life starts with DNA. Totally incorrect. Simply, because to produce nucleid acids it is necessary many metabolic pathways. Nucleic acids are some of the polymers produced by metabolism. In any case, maybe peptides or proteins were before nucleid acids. Just consider the prions, which are complex peptides that can have some proper metabolism and reproduce themselves without DNA or RNA.
never the less, the article helps me, as a dummy, to clearly understand the topic suggested and is most detailed and easy to understand even for my simple mind :) uncertainty is a key to every detailed analysis, and to any world view, and IMHO cannot be minimized nor sacrificed on the altar of any dogma, without destroying credibility, and individuality...
and so far i have only looked at the entropy description in the article :)
the first time i recall ever seeing a clear picture of the topic myself !!
OK halfway through Biological Systems and i am still very thankful for the article, as a dummy observer, it seems i have always had more of an effect by absorbing information, rather than exuding it...a wonderful feeling speaking as a biological system, and even as a somewhat transcendant nonphysical mind :)
done with Biological Systems section of the message...since i totally gave up on a bottom up approach after seeing Prigogine's UTEP three billiard ball contact illustration, representing a nearly infinite set of probable outcomes,
i seriously appreciate the universal leap into Smax...where i apparently will be going within the next few decades :) unlike Houdini i will not forget younz guys who are still working at less than Smax, and i will send back some info :)
No problem. Everybody will joint, sooner or later, the Suniverse. We do not know what would happen with the Information. Among us the most radical say the Information is been lost forever in the form of heat (for some heat means a cheap useless for of energy). Others, more optimistic, say the Information never decays (but who will read this information?). I myself in the middle, some Information may be kept in black holes, from where the initial conditions will re-appear (i.e. asymmetry. Hope so!).
Will readers like to participae in a philosophical dicussion about the above well written topic which explains all the posibility of fringe medicine and complementary medicine actions of human system, with the present system of logic available for use.
This has been debated by E.Schroedinger in his book "What is life?" (1948) which gave rise to molecular biology and, subsequently, by I.Prigogine and his school in Bruxelles. I don't think you can say much more. Both men earned a Nobel prize.
This if you think ef thermodynamic entropy. There is, however, another entropy which is related to information theory and was introduced by C.E.Shannon in his seminal article "The mathematical theory of communication", also written in 1948.
The use of the term "entropy" was suggested to him by John von Neumann. To which entropy do you refer?
Tullio
We are talking about the Universal Entropy. If you read carefully the article you will realize that all "entropies" are conected and can be transformed into each other. And can be used at different physical scales, from quantum to cosmological. In fact, black holes have entropy at the even horizon. We know those fellows are laureated, and have our highest respect. And are quoted in our job. However, we can connect Entropy/Information with Chaos Theory and Cybernetics (admitedlly we are not the first). But, to best of our knowledge, we may be the first putting Smax and Suniverse faceto face.
We are talking about the Universal Entropy. If you read carefully the article you will realize that all "entropies" are conected and can be transformed into each other. And can be used at different physical scales, from quantum to cosmological. In fact, black holes have entropy at the even horizon. We know those fellows are laureated, and have our highest respect. And are quoted in our job. However, we can connect Entropy/Information with Chaos Theory and Cybernetics (admitedlly we are not the first). But, to best of our knowledge, we may be the first putting Smax and Suniverse faceto face.
Interesting article, Dr. Vishnu. And thanks, Tullio, for your comments on Schrodinger's What is Life?... When reading both, I kept expecting to see a framework or template that would suffice for perspective on the 'cause of life', and for calculations of entropy in systems of 'competing orders' (this term I got from Dr. Nai-Chang Yeh, which she used to explain how high-temperature superconductivity arises in some materials, ref: "Superconductivity: Resistance is Futile" lecture at Caltech Today Streaming Theater)
I don't know if this is viable, or useful to you, Dr. Vishnu, but it's what I was trying to picture while reading...
I tried identifying something as either a system s()or a function f() (or process), but I think the distinction may be superfluous. Note: C[...] is defined as "some combination of" whatever is in the brackets, and s(C[...]) denotes "a system with some combination of"... The letters m, n, p, q, r can be any whole number {1, 2, 3, ...} Also note that it's possible to have C[s(...)] which is "some combination of systems of Order..." The arrow "--->" may be accompanied by an Order, principle, or physical law, to highlight a primary causal factor that leads to the higher Order.
[pre]
"Competing Orders: Disorder Order Order ..."
Disorder_LambdaCDM --------> Order_alpha, which is the Standard Model
Disorder_LambdaCDM + Order_alpha ------->
gravity
Order_beta_s(n), n=1 for galaxy, 2 for solar system, 3 for a planet with composition & location suitable for life
. . .
Disorder_LambdaCDM + Order_beta_s(3) --------->
Statistics
Order_gamma_f(n), n=1 for diffusion
Disorder_LambdaCDM + Order_beta_s(3) -------------->
Combinatorics
Order_gamma_f(n), n=2 for polymerization
Note that all higher Orders have Disorder_LambdaCDM + Order_beta_s(3), so call this s(T), for a terrestrial system.
. . .
s(T) + C[Order_gamma_f(2)] ---------------> Order_delta_s(n) = functional group number n
s(T) + m * s(C[Order_epsilon_s(n)]) ---------------->
Order_beta_s(3)
Order_zeta_s(p) = ecosystem or symbiotic framework or cellular function that is a precursor to cellular metabolism, e.g., photo-reactivity, diffusion
Note: "m * " is read as "some number m times..."
s(T) + m * C[Order_zeta_s(n)+ Order_epsilon_s(p)] ---------->
Order_theta_s(q) = cellular organelle type
s(T) + Order_iota_s(n) + m * C[Order_theta_s(p)] ------>
Order_chi_s(q) = level of awareness (which can pertain to anything from a cellular awareness of a pH change, to the human brain's awareness of s(T) )
and per Schrodinger,
s(T) + Sum over all [Order_chi_s(n)] --------->
Order_omega_s(q) = level of mastery (or control) over a system (or point of equilibrium between systems)
and, incidentally, the profession of a medical doctor can be stated as
s(T) + Order_chi_s[Order_iota_s(human)] ---> Order_omega_s(doctor)
[/pre]
- - -
From this perspective, it looks like the cause of life is synonymous with the cause of the Big Bang...
At any rate, hopefully this may be useful for calculating Smax and Suniv, or possibly for showing the manner in which the entropies of different orders are interconnected...
i found a link a few years ago where photons were used to
replace electrons in orbit of atomic nuclei, with some
stability in the resulting material...
i wonder how What is Life? would have addressed this idea,
since it seems to use the Why are atoms so small? idea as
a basic construct, in the book...
the photon replacement created a relatively HUGE atom,
suggesting the density of material made using photons would
be extremely low, maybe ultralight :)
sorry i lost the link and cannot locate it again, as i recall
it was very well documented, i just cannot remember many
details, or how i found it...
everything is true, the opposite of everything is also true
i found a link a few years ago where photons were used to
replace electrons in orbit of atomic nuclei, with some
stability in the resulting material...
i wonder how What is Life? would have addressed this idea,
since it seems to use the Why are atoms so small? idea as
a basic construct, in the book...
the photon replacement created a relatively HUGE atom,
suggesting the density of material made using photons would
be extremely low, maybe ultralight :)
sorry i lost the link and cannot locate it again, as i recall
it was very well documented, i just cannot remember many
details, or how i found it...
But photons carry no charge and are bosons. How can they replace electrons which are fermions and carry charge?
Tullio
this was one of my favorite sources back then http://fermat.nap.edu/books/0309063493/html/139.html
but this page is just a general discussion of electron 'holes'
as i recall it was a very credible source, acknowledging the
exotic nature of the material, which would be a huge atomic
structure with the orbit or hole containing i THINK a photon...
hi tullio,
i have searched my web pages back seven years in the old
internet archives for the link, maybe i just imagined it :)
i have several thousand bookmarks to search through, but
many of my favorites were lost when my CD player crashed...
the old hotbot search engine used to search the search results,
and iterate the search until the actual terms appear on sites...
i tried my last idea on yahoo's advanced search, so i give up :(
paid search privileges in materials science papers might work...
most likely the stuff was not practical to develop or it would
probably have been in the news, i used BBC news back then a lot...
but my BBC links were on my web pages, so it must be elsewhere;
everything is true, the opposite of everything is also true
RE: OK i think that is
)
i should say i LOVE the article, and at last i have some hope that science as biology or by any other name, shall never perish from the earth, or wherever else we happen to land as bosons or gravitons after Smax :)
oops sorry about that quoting thingy ... i thought i was editing ... no way to delete a whole message i guess...
thank you, i guess to Vishnu S. Shukla, M. D. et al. for the article and the inspirational after effects :)
everything is true, the opposite of everything is also true
http://www.math.utep.edu/Facu
)
http://www.math.utep.edu/Faculty/sewell/articles/article.html
A Second Look at the Second Law
http://www.ph.utexas.edu/~gonzalo/3bgraphs.html
http://order.ph.utexas.edu/research/threebody.html
http://order.ph.utexas.edu/chaos/
http://order.ph.utexas.edu/chaos/dynamicalinstability.html#panel19
http://www.utexas.edu/opa/news/03newsreleases/nr_200305/nr_prigogine030528.html
http://order.ph.utexas.edu/research/
everything is true, the opposite of everything is also true
RE: are these questions or
)
RE: are these questions or
)
I seriously doubt of the existence of a life particle. Do not see how can be fix this in the Standard Model. Life, as we said in our article is a provisional term to explain the overall functions of organism, which are carbon based complex systems. However, life could be possible with other elements. Any system that reduces its internal entropy in relation to the enviromental entropy, using outside "energy" or matter (others systems with relatively or potentially lower entropy)can be consider that has "life". We do not think that the property of "living" (i.e. "life") can be assigned to any particular element or molecule or locus, because is a whole process. In fact, many people think life starts with DNA. Totally incorrect. Simply, because to produce nucleid acids it is necessary many metabolic pathways. Nucleic acids are some of the polymers produced by metabolism. In any case, maybe peptides or proteins were before nucleid acids. Just consider the prions, which are complex peptides that can have some proper metabolism and reproduce themselves without DNA or RNA.
RE: RE: RE: never the
)
RE: RE: RE: RE: Quote
)
We are talking about the Universal Entropy. If you read carefully the article you will realize that all "entropies" are conected and can be transformed into each other. And can be used at different physical scales, from quantum to cosmological. In fact, black holes have entropy at the even horizon. We know those fellows are laureated, and have our highest respect. And are quoted in our job. However, we can connect Entropy/Information with Chaos Theory and Cybernetics (admitedlly we are not the first). But, to best of our knowledge, we may be the first putting Smax and Suniverse faceto face.
RE: We are talking about
)
Interesting article, Dr. Vishnu. And thanks, Tullio, for your comments on Schrodinger's What is Life?... When reading both, I kept expecting to see a framework or template that would suffice for perspective on the 'cause of life', and for calculations of entropy in systems of 'competing orders' (this term I got from Dr. Nai-Chang Yeh, which she used to explain how high-temperature superconductivity arises in some materials, ref: "Superconductivity: Resistance is Futile" lecture at Caltech Today Streaming Theater)
I don't know if this is viable, or useful to you, Dr. Vishnu, but it's what I was trying to picture while reading...
I tried identifying something as either a system s()or a function f() (or process), but I think the distinction may be superfluous. Note: C[...] is defined as "some combination of" whatever is in the brackets, and s(C[...]) denotes "a system with some combination of"... The letters m, n, p, q, r can be any whole number {1, 2, 3, ...} Also note that it's possible to have C[s(...)] which is "some combination of systems of Order..." The arrow "--->" may be accompanied by an Order, principle, or physical law, to highlight a primary causal factor that leads to the higher Order.
[pre]
"Competing Orders: Disorder Order Order ..."
Disorder_LambdaCDM --------> Order_alpha, which is the Standard Model
Disorder_LambdaCDM + Order_alpha ------->
gravity
Order_beta_s(n), n=1 for galaxy, 2 for solar system, 3 for a planet with composition & location suitable for life
. . .
Disorder_LambdaCDM + Order_beta_s(3) --------->
Statistics
Order_gamma_f(n), n=1 for diffusion
Disorder_LambdaCDM + Order_beta_s(3) -------------->
Combinatorics
Order_gamma_f(n), n=2 for polymerization
Note that all higher Orders have Disorder_LambdaCDM + Order_beta_s(3), so call this s(T), for a terrestrial system.
. . .
s(T) + C[Order_gamma_f(2)] ---------------> Order_delta_s(n) = functional group number n
. . .
s(T) + C[Order_delta_s(n) + Order_gamma_f(2)] ------>
Order_epsilon_s(p) = organic compound number (e.g., amino acid, protein, enzyme, polysaccharide, etc.)
. . .
s(T) + m * s(C[Order_epsilon_s(n)]) ---------------->
Order_beta_s(3)
Order_zeta_s(p) = ecosystem or symbiotic framework or cellular function that is a precursor to cellular metabolism, e.g., photo-reactivity, diffusion
Note: "m * " is read as "some number m times..."
s(T) + m * C[Order_zeta_s(n)+ Order_epsilon_s(p)] ---------->
Order_theta_s(q) = cellular organelle type
s(T) + Order_zeta_s(n) + C[Order_theta_s(p) + Order_epsilon_s(q)] --------->
Order_eta_f(r) = cellular metabolism
s(T) + m * C[Order_eta_s(n) + s(Order_theta_s(n) + C[Order_epsilon_s(p)] )] ----->
Order_iota_s(q) = taxonomic designation
s(T) + m * C[Order_eta_s(n) + Order_iota_s(p)] --------------->
Order_beta_s(2)
Order_kappa_s(q) = taxonomic alteration/mutation
s(T) + Sum over all [C[Order_kappa_s(n) + Order_iota_s(p) + Order_zeta_s(q)]] ------>
Order_zeta_s(r) = evolved or significantly altered ecosystem
s(T) + C[Order_eta_s(n) + C[Order_iota_s(q)]] ------->
Order_iota_s(q) = taxonomic reproduction
s(T) + Order_iota_s(n) + m * C[Order_theta_s(p)] ------>
Order_chi_s(q) = level of awareness (which can pertain to anything from a cellular awareness of a pH change, to the human brain's awareness of s(T) )
and per Schrodinger,
s(T) + Sum over all [Order_chi_s(n)] --------->
Order_omega_s(q) = level of mastery (or control) over a system (or point of equilibrium between systems)
and for a shorthand way to state the above,
s(T) + Order_chi_s[s(T) + Order_eta_s(n)] --------> Order_omega_s[Order_eta_s(n)]
and, incidentally, the profession of a medical doctor can be stated as
s(T) + Order_chi_s[Order_iota_s(human)] ---> Order_omega_s(doctor)
[/pre]
- - -
From this perspective, it looks like the cause of life is synonymous with the cause of the Big Bang...
At any rate, hopefully this may be useful for calculating Smax and Suniv, or possibly for showing the manner in which the entropies of different orders are interconnected...
part way through What is
)
part way through What is Life?...
i found a link a few years ago where photons were used to
replace electrons in orbit of atomic nuclei, with some
stability in the resulting material...
i wonder how What is Life? would have addressed this idea,
since it seems to use the Why are atoms so small? idea as
a basic construct, in the book...
the photon replacement created a relatively HUGE atom,
suggesting the density of material made using photons would
be extremely low, maybe ultralight :)
sorry i lost the link and cannot locate it again, as i recall
it was very well documented, i just cannot remember many
details, or how i found it...
everything is true, the opposite of everything is also true
RE: part way through What
)
But photons carry no charge and are bosons. How can they replace electrons which are fermions and carry charge?
Tullio
this was one of my favorite
)
this was one of my favorite sources back then
http://fermat.nap.edu/books/0309063493/html/139.html
but this page is just a general discussion of electron 'holes'
as i recall it was a very credible source, acknowledging the
exotic nature of the material, which would be a huge atomic
structure with the orbit or hole containing i THINK a photon...
hi tullio,
i have searched my web pages back seven years in the old
internet archives for the link, maybe i just imagined it :)
i have several thousand bookmarks to search through, but
many of my favorites were lost when my CD player crashed...
the old hotbot search engine used to search the search results,
and iterate the search until the actual terms appear on sites...
i tried my last idea on yahoo's advanced search, so i give up :(
paid search privileges in materials science papers might work...
most likely the stuff was not practical to develop or it would
probably have been in the news, i used BBC news back then a lot...
but my BBC links were on my web pages, so it must be elsewhere;
everything is true, the opposite of everything is also true