“Biochemist publishes a paper solving the mysteries of life, but no one understands it!”
Who here understands PCT well enough to understand what to do with this paper?
life.pdf (1.88 MB)
[Martin Taylor 2015.04.27.17.11]
"Biochemist publishes a paper solving the mysteries of life, but no one understands it!"
Who here understands PCT well enough to understand what to do with this paper?
Having read only the abstract, my feeling is that even if it does everything the author claims, it's orthogonal to PCT, meaning that whatever it says, PCT would be unaffected by it, and whatever PCT determines would have no effect on it.
Having read the first paragraph, which is simply false, my feeling is that there is unlikely to be any value in reading further. It is just not true (at least since Prigogine and probably earlier) that: "How life abides by the second law of thermodynamics yet evolutionarily complexifies and maintains its intrinsic order is a fundamental mystery in physics, chemistry, and biology". It isn't.
Martin
···
On 2015/04/27 4:06 PM, PHILIP JERAIR YERANOSIAN (pyeranos@ucla.edu via csgnet Mailing List) wrote:
[Philip 2015.04.27]
MT: How life abides by the second law of thermodynamics yet evolutionarily complexifies and maintains its intrinsic order is a fundamental mystery in physics, chemistry, and biology". It isn’t.
PY: I’m not disagreeing with you. But let me ask you a question. And I’m sure you have the answer. Why aren’t the dimensions of the “action” of the systems we study the same as the “action” in physics - i.e. angular momentum?
···
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Martin Taylor csgnet@lists.illinois.edu wrote:
“Biochemist publishes a paper solving the mysteries of life, but no one understands it!”
Who here understands PCT well enough to understand what to do with this paper?
[Martin Taylor 2015.04.27.17.11]On 2015/04/27 4:06 PM, PHILIP JERAIR YERANOSIAN (pyeranos@ucla.edu via csgnet Mailing List) wrote:
Having read only the abstract, my feeling is that even if it does everything the author claims, it’s orthogonal to PCT, meaning that whatever it says, PCT would be unaffected by it, and whatever PCT determines would have no effect on it.
Having read the first paragraph, which is simply false, my feeling is that there is unlikely to be any value in reading further. It is just not true (at least since Prigogine and probably earlier) that: “How life abides by the second law of thermodynamics yet evolutionarily complexifies and maintains its intrinsic order is a fundamental mystery in physics, chemistry, and biology”. It isn’t.
Martin
[Martin Taylor 2015.04.28.00.09]
There's nothing magical about location and velocity as the variables
entering into entropy. They are the canonical ones Boltzmann talked
about for an ideal gas. I suppose angular momentum could be one
under appropriate circumstances. What matters is not the identity of
the variable in question, but the partitioning of variance among the
degrees of freedom. If the distribution favours none of the degrees
of freedom of the ensemble, entropy is high.
When we control a scalar perception, we reduce the variability of
one degree of freedom of the external environment, a local reduction
of entropy which is exportedas a side-effect of control, as an
increase in entropy to the rest of the environment, quite probably
as heat. The perceptual degree of freedom being controlled also is
reduced in variability, and that reduction, too, must be exported as
an increase in the entropy of the environment, which is done by the
energy flow through the system (food to excreta, for example).
The “action” of the system isn’t important. What is important is the
reduction in variability induced by the coupling to the larger
environment of the variable being influenced by the action. If you
go very micro, you wind up with the same thing no matter what the
variable – the states of nuclear and subnuclear interactions,
illustrated perhaps by Feynman diagrams. That’s true even if the
variable you are trying to influence is which party wins the next
election.
Martin
···
[Philip 2015.04.27]
MT: How life abides by the second law of thermodynamics yetevolutionarily complexifies and maintains its intrinsic order
is a fundamental mystery in physics, chemistry, and biology".
It isn’t.
PY: I'm not disagreeing with you. But let me ask you aquestion. And I’m sure you have the answer. Why aren’t the
dimensions of the “action” of the systems we study the same
as the “action” in physics - i.e. angular momentum?
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 2:16 PM, MartinTaylor csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
wrote:"Biochemist publishes a paper solving the mysteries oflife, but no one understands it!"
Who here understands PCT well enough to understand whatto do with this paper?
[Martin
Taylor 2015.04.27.17.11]On 2015/04/27 4:06 PM, PHILIP JERAIR YERANOSIAN (pyeranos@ucla.edu via csgnet MailingList) wrote:
Having read only the abstract, my feeling is that even if itdoes everything the author claims, it’s orthogonal to PCT,
meaning that whatever it says, PCT would be unaffected by
it, and whatever PCT determines would have no effect on it.Having read the first paragraph, which is simply false, myfeeling is that there is unlikely to be any value in reading
further. It is just not true (at least since Prigogine and
probably earlier) that: “How life abides by the second law
of thermodynamics yet evolutionarily complexifies and
maintains its intrinsic order is a fundamental mystery in
physics, chemistry, and biology”. It isn’t.Martin