Biodiversity and Cartography
The excellent summary by Pedro of the session just past highlights several
different areas of processes, which appear to be interrelated at least in
some methodological ways. Pedro says in effect: “… systems such as
circulatory, pulmonary, renal, brain, etc. …” appear to work in a
comparable fashion, which has probably to do with fusing of two different
spaces into one common space.
Please allow me to propose a visualisation. We see a landscape with hills
and valleys. Some local biotopes have evolved, in which specific flora and
fauna are endemic, well adapted to their respective local circumstances. We
suspect that there are common traits present in the management of the
diverse habitats, with some obviously sustainable feedback loops –
otherwise the area would be barren. In this allegory, if one investigates
the functions in circulatory systems, one would be likened to someone
investigating insect life in a rainy forest in a division of our imagined
landscape. A person looking into the workings of the renal systems could be
seen as a team investigating the life of mammals in a savanna.
Among these field workers, a land surveyor tries to find someone who would
be interested in a new way to formalise the parameters of each and all of
the habitats, and tabulate every possible variety of anything that lives in
any of the habitats. This invention is way beyond the needs of any of the
field teams investigating the adaptations the fauna had to undergo due to
the properties of the flora, or partly the other way around. The teams have
heard about trigonometry and satellite positioning, but they are not
involved with the infrastructure of science. It would take a road building
engineer to see slopes and angles everywhere, and of that profession are
the biologists not. The teams could have heard about continual change,
because they understand that change is what life is all about, but they had
never thought to be possible to actually use measurable change tools like
one uses a scalable microscope.
Trigonometry would have remained a special pastime for scientists, had not
lenses, oculars and sextants been produced to the necessary degree of
mechanical precision. For the applications of trigonometry to become
ubiquitous in our everyday life, it was necessary to have achieved progress
in fine mechanics and precision measurement tools. The technology had to
keep step with the ideas. Both the ideas were present and the tools have
become available. The innovation could become integrated into the culture.
Presently, we try to understand the concept of information. In Pedro’s
words: “… two 3D projections are fused into a 4D one. The gain in
information is evident …”. The implication of Pedro’s thought is that
sequences, generally: order, are depositories of information, which gets –
in a fashion – released or actualised in the moment of the fusion of two
spaces into a common, third, space.
This state of affairs puts the problem with technology and ideas on its
head. We do have the technology to produce any kind of imaginable order and
disorder and to find such closed loops that are self-replicating. What we
lack presently is the understanding by the prospective users that they need
such a tool, and that such a tool is a) thinkable, b) designable, c)
realisable, d) working, e) useful.
To give an example:
The two spaces Pedro refers to are well defined. They can be observed by
reordering expressions of *a+b=c *on the properties *{a+b,a;b-2a,a;a-2b,b-2a
(A), a+b,b;b-2a,a-2b;a-2b,a (B)}*. Euclid spaces *(A) *and *(B)* merge
together into Newton space *(C), *of which the axes are *a+b, b-2a, a-2b.*
The axes of space *(C)* have each *two *sub-axes: this is the reason that 1
logical linear position can have 4 planar coordinate-pairs. (This was
narrated some two years ago in this FIS chatroom also, being Step Eight of
the lecture Learn to Count in Twelve Easy Steps. Otherwise see: Natural
Orders.)
May be suggestion be allowed that it would be more precise to talk of
merging (co-resonance) of planes rather than of merging of spaces. In a
logical sense, the space is generated by a continuous turn of 3 planes and
should not be assumed to have an independent, a-priori existence.
The land surveyor presents his compliments to the officials involved in
managing progress of society and may politely suggest, that some precision
tools have been fabricated, by which the results of the endoscopy of order
and information can be unwrapped, extricated and applied to manifold uses.
2018-01-30 14:06 GMT+01:00 Pedro C. Marijuan <pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>:
> Dear FISers,
>
> Apart from the very interesting critique by Sungchul, there is an
> intriguing comment I would like to make respect the new evolutionary views
> presented. I will risk to discuss on a topic, topology, too far from my
> usual fields. So I trust the benevolence of FIS readers.
>
> As far as we have been told, the germ line cells, the gametes, contain
> each one a DNA algorithmic "hemi-description" of the future multicellular
> ensemble organism. When fertilization occurs, the two different
> hemi-descriptions are put together in a unique, complete DNA algorithm.
> Then, paying attention to the BUT (Borsuk Ulam Theorem) insights presented
> in this list by Tozzi and Peters, we might interpret that two 3D
> projections are fused into a 4D one. The gain in information is evident,
> and it is this gain what makes possible the construction of the
> multicellular ensemble. That 4D structures and dynamics are present in the
> multicellular may be evidenced by the fractality of most of that
> construction (systems such as circulatory, pulmonary, renal, brain, etc.).
> Actually the presence of 4D dynamics in cerebral information processing has
> been repeatedly highlighted by different authors. Now, what John Torday
> argues, is that an essential mission of the multicellular construct becomes
> the gathering of adaptive epigenetic marks editing the 3D
> hemi-descriptions, so that the future ensemble may be better adapted to its
> environment...
>
> In the extent to which the above has any cogency, there emerges a new
> disciplinary front to check the enigmatic continuation of the
> gamete/zigote/organism along the eons of life.
>
> Best--Pedro
>
>
> El 24/01/2018 a las 15:33, JOHN TORDAY escribió:
>
> Dear FIS colleagues, Pedro has pointed out some rookie errors in my post.
> You can find my paper "From cholesterol to consciousness" at
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28830682. Hopefully you have access
> to the paper without having to buy it. If you don't please email me at
> jtor...@ucla.edu and i will send you a copy. As for addressing
> consciousness at the cellular/molecular level, I understand that the mental
> health professionals have a problem with consciousness beyond the
> brain/mind. But I consider that anthropocentric. Just like every other
> aspect of our physiology, consciousness is the endogenization of
> environmental factors. In the case of consciousness it is the vertical
> integration of calcium fluxes for all of the cells of the organism. All
> organisms are conscious of their surroundings to one degree or another. And
> self-reference is, in my opinion, a result of the Singularity/Big Bang, so
> it would apply to all organisms, unicellular and multicellular alike. I
> refer to the experiments of Helmut Plattner, exposing paramecia to glucose.
> When the paramecium homes in on the sugar its 'nervous system' of calcium
> flux lights up just like the neurons in our brains. And as to the
> extrapolation from individual consciousness to cosmology based on the
> homologies between Quantum Mechanics and Evolutionary Biology, I see that
> as a means of fully understanding the significance of consciousness as the
> connection between the animate and inanimate as one continuous Singularity.
> It is only in that way that the true nature of Nature can be fully
> understood. As for smaller increments, the work of Daniel Fels on
> electromagnetic communication between cells may hold the answer (
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4793142/).
>
> Best, John
>
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 5:41 AM, Pedro C. Marijuan <
> pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es> wrote:
>
>> Dear John and FIS colleagues,
>>
>> It was nice hearing your response. For technical reasons of the server,
>> *attachments
>> are unwelcome* (and often directly rejected). Send please a web address
>> where interested people can download your document. Also, it is better if
>> you send directly your response to FIS list (*fis@listas.unizar.es
>> <fis@listas.unizar.es>*). About your content, I see a couple of problems
>> introducing "consciousness" at the cellular/molecular level. For this term
>> has a very definite meaning in the *ad hoc* research that is taken place
>> during last decades. Conflating it with basic cellular processes may not be
>> necessary, given that other terms (more realistic ones?) are available. For
>> instance, I referred to self-referential cognition. In any case, I agree
>> that classical autopoiesis falls too short of what is needed... Besides,
>> about the cosmological relationship with fundamental physics, is it a
>> convenient step? Does it introduce a premature closure in the
>> bio-informational thinking process?
>>
>> Best--Pedro
>>
>>
>> El 22/01/2018 a las 16:02, JOHN TORDAY escribió:
>>
>> Dear FISers, I greatly appreciate Pedro's comments regarding my New Year
>> Lecture. I fully agree with his comment " That life's physiology is
>> based on the conjunction of a few principles: neguentropy, chemiosmosis,
>> and homeostasis-homeorhesis" applies to non-living states too. I did not
>> intend to make that statement exclusive, and if it sounded like that
>> Pedro's clarification is important. In fact have just published a paper
>> entitled "Quantum Mechanics Predicts Evolutionary Biology" which is
>> predicated on the hypothesis that self-referential self-organization is the
>> result of the Singularity/Big Bang, Newton's Third Law of Thermodynamics
>> that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. That idea would apply
>> to both evolutionary biology and to balanced chemical reactions alike. As
>> for the question of the emergence of self-referential consciousness 'right
>> at the beginning', I am in favor of that concept, as I have expressed it in
>> a recent paper, entitled "From Cholesterol to Consciousness" (see attached)
>> so I look forward to reading your comments about that idea as well, since
>> it has the potential to fully integrate physics and biology in my humble
>> opinion.
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 4:01 AM, Pedro C. Marijuan <
>> pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear FISers,
>>>
>>> Going to the extreme, I think this year opening lecture can be
>>> summarized in three contentious points.
>>>
>>> 1. That life's physiology is based on the conjunction of a few
>>> principles: neguentropy, chemiosmosis, and homeostasis-homeorhesis.
>>>
>>> 2. That communication (cell signaling) is an essential factor in the
>>> multicellular evolution towards complexity.
>>>
>>> 3. That epigenetic inheritance and the obligate recursion to the
>>> unicellular state become the basis of a new evolutionary theory.
>>>
>>> I disagree with point 1, as I think some nonliving states could also be
>>> characterized by those principles (eg, chemical cycles/hypercycles in
>>> marine vents, and other outcomes derived from "energy flows"); besides,
>>> some previous "info stuff" has to be in place. Then I completely agree with
>>> point 2, for signaling is not just another characteristic of the cell, it
>>> is "the" eukaryotic trait par excellence. And I am curious on how point 3
>>> could be further substantiated... In this respect I recommend the two
>>> papers that Bill sent to the list a few weeks ago. Do we need to postulate
>>> the emergence of a form of "self-referential cognition" right at the
>>> beginning?
>>> Perhaps!
>>>
>>> All the best--Pedro
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> El 09/01/2018 a las 19:05, Bill escribió:
>>>
>>> Dear Pedro and Colleagues,
>>>
>>> I have been following the thread of comments with great interest, all
>>> of which have all been occasioned by John Torday's profound insights about
>>> the nature of evolutionary development in light of the importance of
>>> cell-cell signaling and molecular biology. From the comments, it is clear
>>> that there is a strong impulse to seek a means of integrating the role of
>>> symbiogenesis, viruses and mobile elements, multilevel selection, niche
>>> construction, genomic plasticity into a common narrative with an
>>> informational perspective at its foundation.
>>> In the spirit of that line of discussion, I am offering two links
>>> that discuss evolution as an biologic information management system. Some
>>> of this work shares direct commonality with John's, since he and I are
>>> frequent collaborators.
>>>
>>> http://www.mdpi.com/2079-7737/5/2/21/htm
>>>
>>> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S007961071730233X
>>>
>>> Both of these articles can be considered as complementary to Pedro's
>>> very fine article, 'How prokaryotes ‘encode’ their environment: Systemic
>>> tools for organizing the information flow', which is in BioSystems.
>>>
>>> I am grateful to John for inviting me to participate in the forum and to
>>> Pedro for encouraging me to share these manuscripts.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Bill
>>>
>>> William B. Miller, Jr., M.D.
>>> 602-463-5236 <%28602%29%20463-5236>
>>> wbmill...@cox.net
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> -------------------------------------------------
>>> Pedro C. Marijuán
>>> Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
>>> Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud
>>> Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA)
>>> Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta 0
>>> 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
>>> Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 <+34%20976%2071%2035%2026> (&
>>> 6818)pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.eshttp://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
>>> -------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________ Fis mailing list
>>> Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bi
>>> n/mailman/listinfo/fis
>>
>> --
>> -------------------------------------------------
>> Pedro C. Marijuán
>> Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
>> Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud
>> Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA)
>> Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta 0
>> 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
>> Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 <+34%20976%2071%2035%2026> (&
>> 6818)pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.eshttp://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
>> -------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing
> listFis@listas.unizar.eshttp://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>
> --
> -------------------------------------------------
> Pedro C. Marijuán
> Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
> Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud
> Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA)
> Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta 0
> 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
> Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 <+34%20976%2071%2035%2026> (&
> 6818)pcmarijuan.iacs@aragon.eshttp://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
> -------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
