(Gavin Ritz 2011.11.08.9.36NZT)
(Gavin Ritz 2011.11.07.18.14NZT)
[From Rick Marken
(2011.11.06.2110)]
Gavin Ritz (2011.07.11.11.41NZT)
I have been looking at
the propositions of a whole bunch of non-equilibrium subjects. Although it is
not stated explicitly the overriding proposition of all seems to me to be:
What we
want to know is how and the what of the self-assembly of the form and content
of matter.
All the other things seem
like properties and side-effects and results of this. (all need to be proved
and many have and some are very much in progress).
As AC Grayling says we
want to understand the nature of nature and the nature of man.
So what is PCT in all
this, I think it’s an elegant explanation (and well evidenced) of the self
-sensory and inter-sensory nature of a living organism? So it’s a piece in
the requisitely giant jigsaw of the things we want to know about the self-assembly
of nature.
I know I can hear all
sorts of counter comments, for those who only care about the self-sensory and
inter-sensory nature of man then you are probably in the most appropriate place.
And that’s fair enough.
I think to a larger
degree PCT has actually proved its propositions to be true.
It’s really now a
marketing and sales job.
Regards
Gavin