I do not contradict Györgyi.
From: Gyorgy Darvas <darv...@iif.hu>
To: fis@listas.unizar.es
Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2017 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Fis] WHY WE ARE HERE? ...AN UNPLEASANT ANSWER?!
David: The nature of evolution is such that symmetries emerge and disappear
(change). Gyuri http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Scie/ScieDarv.htm
http://epistemologia.zoomblog.com/archivo/2007/11/28/symmetry-breaking-in-a-philosophical-c.html
Darvas, G. (1998) Laws of symmetry breaking, Symmetry: Culture and Science, 9,
2-4, 119-127
http://journal-scs.symmetry.hu/content-pages/volume-9-numbers-2-4-pages-113-464-1998/
;
Darvas, G, (2015) The unreasonable effectiveness of symmetry in the sciences,
Symmetry: Culture and Science, 26, 1,
39-82.http://journal-scs.symmetry.hu/content-pages/volume-26-number-1-pages-001-128-2015/
; http://journal-scs.symmetry.hu/purchase/
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284341950_THE_UNREASONABLE_EFFECTIVENESS_OF_SYMMETRY_IN_THE_SCIENCES
On 2017.02.28. 19:01, Dave Kirkland wrote:
Dear Arturo Tozzi and FISers Thank you for your very interesting ideas. For me
they raise more questions: Why did the number of cosmic symmetries ever start
diminishing? Could the whole process be eternally cyclical? I like your
respectful use of capital letters. My mind boggles. Best rgds David
On 24 Feb 2017, at 15:24, tozziart...@libero.it wrote:
Dear FISers, hi! A possible novel discussion (if you like it, of course!):
A SYMMETRY-BASED ACCOUNT OF LIFE AND EVOLUTION
After the Big Bang, a gradual increase in thermodynamic entropy is occurring
in our Universe (Ellwanger, 2012). Because of the relationships between
entropy and symmetries (Roldán et al., 2014), the number of cosmic symmetries,
the highest possible at the very start, is declining as time passes. Here the
evolution of living beings comes into play. Life is a space-limited increase
of energy and complexity, and therefore of symmetries. The evolution proceeds
towards more complex systems (Chaisson, 2010), until more advanced forms of
life able to artificially increase the symmetries of the world. Indeed, the
human brains’ cognitive abilities not just think objects and events more
complex than the physical ones existing in Nature, but build highly symmetric
crafts too. For example, human beings can watch a rough stone, imagine an
amygdala and build it from the same stone. Humankind is able, through its
ability to manipulate tools and technology, to produce objects (and ideas,
i.e., equations) with complexity levels higher than the objects and systems
encompassed in the pre-existing physical world. Therefore, human beings are
naturally built by evolution in order to increase the number of environmental
symmetries. This is in touch with recent claims, suggesting that the brain is
equipped with a number of functional and anatomical dimensions higher than the
3D environment (Peters et al., 2017). Intentionality, typical of the living
beings and in particular of the human mind, may be seen as a mechanism able to
increase symmetries. As Dante Alighieri stated (Hell, XXVI, 118-120), “you
were not made to live as brutes, but to follow virtue and knowledge”. In
touch with Spencer’s (1860) and Tyler’s (1881) claims, it looks like
evolutionary mechanisms tend to achieve increases in environmental complexity,
and therefore symmetries (Tozzi and Peters, 2017). Life is produced in our
Universe in order to restore the initial lost symmetries. At the beginning of
life, increases in symmetries are just local, e.g., they are related to the
environmental niches where the living beings are placed. However, in long
timescales, they might be extended to the whole Universe. For example, Homo
sapiens, in just 250.000 years, has been able to build the Large Hadron
Collider, where artificial physical processes make an effort to approximate the
initial symmetric state of the Universe. Therefore, life is a sort of gauge
field (Sengupta et al., 2016), e.g., a combination of forces and fields that
try to counterbalance and restore, in very long timescales, the original
cosmic symmetries, lost after the Big Bang. Due to physical issues, the
“homeostatic” cosmic gauge field must be continuous, e.g., life must stand,
proliferate and increase in complexity over very long timescales. This is the
reason why every living being has an innate tendency towards self-preservation
and proliferation. With the death, continuity is broken. This talks in favor
of intelligent life scattered everywhere in the Universe: if a few species get
extinct, others might continue to proliferate and evolve in remote planets, in
order to pursue the goal of the final symmetric restoration. In touch with
long timescales’ requirements, it must be kept into account that life has been
set up after a long gestation: a childbearing which encompasses the cosmic
birth of fermions, then atoms, then stars able to produce the more
sophisticated matter (metals) required for molecular life. A symmetry-based
framework gives rise to two opposite feelings, by our standpoint of human
beings. On one side, we achieve the final answer to long-standing questions:
“why are we here?”, “Why does the evolution act in such a way?”, an answer that
reliefs our most important concerns and gives us a sense; on the other side,
however, this framework does not give us any hope: we are just micro-systems
programmed in order to contribute to restore a partially “broken” macro-system.
And, in case we succeed in restoring, through our mathematical abstract
thoughts and craftsmanship, the initial symmetries, we are nevertheless doomed
to die: indeed, the environment equipped with the starting symmetries does not
allow the presence of life. REFERENCES 1) Chaisson EJ. 2010. Energy
Rate Density as a Complexity Metric and Evolutionary Driver. Complexity, v 16,
p 27, 2011; DOI: 10.1002/cplx.20323. 2) Ellwanger U. 2012. From the
Universe to the Elementary Particles. A First Introduction to Cosmology and
the Fundamental Interactions. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. ISBN
978-3-642-24374-5. 3) Peters JF, Ramanna S, Tozzi A, Inan E. 2017.
Frontiers Hum Neurosci. BOLD-independent computational entropy assesses
functional donut-like structures in brain fMRI image. doi:
10.3389/fnhum.2017.00038. 4) Sengupta B, Tozzi A, Coray GK, Douglas PK,
Friston KJ. 2016. Towards a Neuronal Gauge Theory. PLOS Biology 14 (3):
e1002400. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002400. 5) Spencer H. 1860. System
of Synthetic Philosophy. 6) Roldán E, Martínez IA, Parrondo JMR, Petrov
D. 2014. Universal features in the energetics of symmetry breaking. Nat. Phys.
10, 457–461. 7) Tozzi A, Peters JF. 2017. Towards Topological
Mechanisms Underlying Experience Acquisition and Transmission in the Human
Brain. J.F. Integr. psych. behav. doi:10.1007/s12124-017-9380-z 8)
Tyler EB. 1881. Anthropology: an Introduction to the Study of Man and
Civilization.
Arturo Tozzi AA Professor Physics, University North Texas Pediatrician ASL
Na2Nord, Italy Comput Intell Lab, University Manitoba
http://arturotozzi.webnode.it/
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
Fis@listas.unizar.es
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
