TD: Autogenesis is also not a Maximum Entropy Production process because it halts dissipation before its essential self-preserving constraints are degraded and therefore does not exhaust the gradient(s) on which its persistence depends.
S: Abiotic dissipative structures will degrade their gradients as fast as possible given the bearing constraints. They are unconditional maximizers. Life that has survived has been able to apply conditions upon its entropy production, but that does not mean that it has enacted energy conservation or energy efficiency policies. Its mode is still maximizing, but within limits. GH: I think of [MEPP] as a thermodynamic version of natural selection in which some alternative states are thermodynamically favored over others, but this does not guarantee that dissipation will proceed to completion or that the particular alternative that absolutely generates the most efficient or effective dissipation will always be the manifested outcome (if there are a number of similarly optimal paths available). Contingency on idiosyncratic configurations within and in the neighborhood of a system might lead the system to follow a variety of alternative paths. S: I think that the keyword here is ‘striving’ Living things are mostly always striving, so they reach for the maximum until it ‘hurts’. GH: Would you argue that autogenesis is not an MEP process from this somewhat fuzzy perspective? TD: This offers a challenge to a theory (MEPP) that has recently been heralded as a key to explaining life. But it does not violate the basic logic of far-from-equilibrium thermodynamics. It is rather a further development, that now includes a non-linear factor: dissipative processes that collectively produce and modify their own boundary conditions. But as with the introduction of an such nonlinearity this can produce some quite unexpected emergent consequences. This is what makes the dynamic that we call life so radically different in what it can do compared to non-living dissipative dynamics. This -snip- does suggest that we may need to modify claims that life is "merely" an entropy maximizing process. S: I think no one has argued that living systems are ‘merely’ entropy production maximizers. That might be the view of the Universe, if it could have a view. But finalities can be parsed as {entropy production {free energy dissipation {work}}} on the template {physical process {chemical actions {living activity}}}. At each level we have finalities {Second Law {Maupertuis’ least energy {goal seeking}}}. The outermost class is locally the weakest impulse, but it acts continuously and ‘fills in’ immediately there is any hesitation, while the innermost subclass is the most immediately effective, but its enthusiasms come and go, and do not last. STAN
_______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis