Caro Francesco & cari Tutti,
La ringrazio molto per i tuoi pensieri interessanti che associano il dominio soggetto - medicina - con i principi economici di organizzazione. I'll continue in English now. Thank you very much for your interesting thoughts associating the subject domain - medicine - with the economic principles of organization. Yes, indeed these principles are universal and a physicist would consider them as laws of nature – e.g. for the conservation of energy or breaking of symmetry. It is true that we deal mostly with unpredictable events in life, but we also have the phenomenon of anticipation which makes them to some extent predictable. It is again true that the creativity of the universe escapes our human domination and we can only register a small window of events awailable to our senses and technology. Thank you for the references to your 2004 "ethics" and 2014 "Higgs" articles. They will be certainly of interest to some of our listeners. I am personally impressed by the analogy of the autocatalytical capability of the Higgs boson which with the definition of life forms. Perhaps illness behaves in the same way. Imagine cancer as being some sort of "dark matter" we still cannot understand well. But these are the major depature points: symmetry breaking, criticality, autopoiesis, even point of singularity, etc. etc. as I addressed them ina previous correspondence with Pedro. We are open to define the points of departure for studying a particular disease. This means in Koichiro's words the selection of initial and boundary conditions. Please accept my reference to criticality in the my opening text just as an example linking to Hankey's theme. We couild select every other point or a set of them to define our frame of reference. I think that what makes our world unpredictable is the interaction of living forms. It is too complex to be traced with sufficient precision with a growing number of elements. Already a three-body-problem in pühysics is a tough challenge.But then we have the option to move to statistical models in physics. Is that fair enough for biology and medicine? I don't think that we are just lost in a big world of interacting elements and we can't do anything about it. Otherwise we would not be able to learn driving a bicycle, playing tennis or make a robot mimicing that. Anticipation is the clue I referred to earlier and there are also more additional fine tuning twicks we know from diverse disciplines that can be used to address tough problems in biology and medicine. Even the signalling issues between diverse kinds of cells that Pedro mentioned earlier could be made traceble. But Stan Salthe had an interesting idea to move to Peircean semiotics here. So, I am very exciting about discussing about all these options which should not be limited to the opening theme of this session. But please let us select one challenging problem: maybe tumor reenginering or progressing dementia, or the complex interaction between human systems addressed a curious but workable way by holistic medicine traditions such as TCM, Ayurveda or Hawaiian Huna. Are the latter disciplines really so esoteric to be ignored by modern alopathic medicine? I think that the goal of our discussion is not to define winners and losers, but to share information about the different phenomenologies of the participants. There is always something useful in superimposing diverse ideas and this is what I am interested in at the end of this round. All the best! Plamen ____________________________________________________________ On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 5:27 AM, Francesco Rizzo < 13francesco.ri...@gmail.com> wrote: > Caro Plamen e Cari Tutti, > sottolineo lo stile pedagogico e l'efficacia comunicativa di questo > eccellente contributo. Desidero soffermarmi sulla nota 5. della > fenomenologia. La discontinuità o il salto brusco e traumatico tra una > situazione e l'altra è frutto di una trasmutazione che caratterizza i > "momenti" decisivi e strategici di qualunque settore della esperienza > esistenziale e cognitiva. Tutto e dappertutto avviene secondo un processo > economico basato sull'asimmetria creativa che rompe ogni simmetria e > determina i cambiamenti evolutivi da cui dipende la vita. La vita, miracolo > dei miracoli, non è un e-vento ordinario, ma un insi-eme di fatti > imprevedibili, sconvolgenti, asimmetrici. Il cosmo è (o potrebbe essere) > iniziato in modo arbitrario, cioè indipendente da qualunque conoscenza > umana, e si svolge (o potrebbe svolgersi) in modo arbitrario, nel senso che > le rotture o le discontinuità provocate dalle singolarità o asimmetrie sono > ( o potrebbero essere) il risultato di una sua intrinseca creatività che > sfugge al dominio dell'uomo al quale è possibile (?) conoscere sola la > "realtà" compresa tra una singolarità e l'altra. Questo discorso potrebbe > continuare a lungo, cosa che non faccio rinviando, almeno, alle pagine > 211-231 di Rizzo F., "Etica dei valori economici o economia dei valori > etici" (FrancoAngeli, Milano, 2004). > Il meccanismo che trasforma un mondo ideale, dove tutto si muove alla > velocità della luce, nel nostro mondo reale è proprio quello di Higgs > basato sulla "rottura spontanea della simmetria" di gauge. Quindi partendo > dal mondo a massa nulla, si può rompere spontaneamente la simmetria di > gauge, originando la massa delle particelle, che interagiscono con la > particella di Higgs. Tutto ciò è possibile se la particella di Higgs > interagisce con se stessa o, come dicono i fisici, se il campo di Higgs è > auto-interagente. Questo effetto è un ingrediente cruciale della particella > di Higgs che genera le masse di tutte le particelle e auto-genera anche la > sua massa (cfr. Rizzo F., "Incontro d'amore tra il cuore della fede e > l'intelligenza della scienza. Un salto nel cielo", Aracne editrice, Roma, > 2014, pp. 598-604). > Quando il mondo fu creato o si formò la materia e l'anti-materia erano > presenti in proporzioni uguali o simmetriche, poi si verificò un ancora > sconosciuto fenomeno che ruppe questa simmetria e l'antimateria scomparve o > si ridusse o fu neutralizzata oppure non so cosa sia accaduto e non lo sa > nessuno. Ma una cosa è certa che lo scioglimento o la frattura di quella > simmetria consente la nostra vita, che altrimenti non ci sarebbe. > Noi viviamo in un mondo frattale imprevedibile, irregolare, discontinuo, > asimmetrico, caratterizzato dalle leggi esponenziali o di potenza, come > afferma anche la. Nuova economia (cfr. Rizzo F., "Nuova economia", Aracne > editrice, Roma, 2013). > In conclusione, sapendo che sono stato molto schematico e frammentario, il > pensare economico, più che il pensiero economico, fa diventare la > fenomenologia più brillante, pregnante e cognitiva. La libertà economica, > infatti, è condizione della libertà di pensiero ed illumina la vita. > Grazie e auguri, questo è un bel dibattito che non avrà mai nè vinti nè > vincitori. > Francesco > > 2016-05-14 9:49 GMT+02:00 Dr. Plamen L. Simeonov < > plamen.l.simeo...@gmail.com>: > >> Dear Colleagues, >> >> >> >> My contribution will finalize the discussion on phenomenology in the >> domains of biology, mathematics, cyber/biosemiotics and physics by the >> previous speakers (Maxine, Lou, Sœren and Alex) with a “challenging topic” >> in *3φ integrative medicine*. *You may wish to skip the small font text >> notes following each underscored phrase like the one below.* >> >> >> >> *Note 1:* Although this term is often used as synonym for holistic >> healing (s. ref. list A), its meaning in this context with the prefix 3φ >> goes much “deeper” into the disciplines’ integration leaving no room for >> speculations by mainstream scientists. The concept is a linguistic choice >> of mine for the intended merge of the complexity sciences *ph*ysics and >> *ph*ysiology with *ph*enomenology for application in modern medicine >> along the line of integral biomathics (s. ref. list B). >> >> >> >> It is rooted in the last presentation of Alex Hankey, since it naturally >> provides the link from physics to physiology and medicine, and thus to an >> anthropocentric domain implying a leading part of phenomenological studies. >> To begin, I compiled a précis of Alex’ thesis about self-organized >> criticality (s. ref. list C) from his paper “A New Approach to Biology and >> Medicine” -- the download link to it was distributed in a previous email of >> him -- and extended it with my reflections including some questions I hope >> you will resonate on. >> >> >> I am curious of your opinion about how to apply the scientific method, >> and in particular mathematics and information science, to study illness and >> recovery as complex phenomena. >> >> >> >> *Alex Hankey: self-organized criticality and regulation in living systems* >> >> >> >> *There is a continuous growth and change at the end of a phase transition >> in an organism, i.e. at its critical point, which is the end point of phase >> equilibrium.* >> >> >> >> *Both endo and exo, genetics and epigenetics are important for life.* >> >> >> >> *Self-organized criticality* is a characteristic state of a system at >> its critical point generated by self-organization during a long transient >> period at the complexity edge between order/stability/predictability and >> disorder/chaos/unpredictability. >> >> >> >> *Regulation of growth, form and function as a balance between health and >> illness.* The role of regulation and homeostasis in maintaining the >> structure and function of living systems is critical. Every deviation from >> a regulated state of being leads to imbalances, failures and subsystem >> dysfunction that is usually transitory, but could also become >> life-threatening, if the organism cannot find a way to restore quickly to a >> balanced, healthy state. Living beings are robust and fault-tolerant with >> respect to hazards; they possess multiple alternative pathways for >> supplying and maintaining their existential functions. However, some state >> transitions in response to severe harms can become practically >> irreversible, because of the deep evolutionary interlocking between the >> participating entities and processes. Sometimes the normal functioning of >> the organism cannot be easily restored by its natural repair processes, >> especially when adversities reoccur frequently, and the organism fails ill. >> >> >> >> *Synchronicity of action and information between the building blocks of a >> living system.* There is a need for every physiological function to be >> correctly coordinated with all other “peer” functions. Information flows >> within a living system interconnect all physiological functions and organs >> at multiple levels into a single mesh of regulatory interconnections. >> Multiple feedback-control loops enable the cross-functional interlocking of >> both healthy and ill state changes of the organism. >> Adjacent/peripheral/secondary homeostasis processes act as fine-tuning >> catalyzers of substrate ratios and process rates exchanged within the >> living system. Imbalances of these quantities lead to excess/blockage or >> scarcity/draining of essential nourishment and information exchange >> pathways. >> >> >> >> *Regulation at criticality* not only fine-tunes a process, it *optimizes* >> it for survival: with respect to a given generation’s available >> possibilities in the light of the past generations’ possibilities. To >> survive an organism or a species needs to develop optimal >> *response-ability* to environmental distress. >> >> >> *New ecological definition of life according to Hankey: self-regulating, >> self-reproducing systems that maximize efficiency of function to maximize >> competitiveness in their chosen environment. * >> >> >> >> *Summary: Elements of self-organized criticality* >> >> >> >> 1. Criticality >> 2. Edge of the chaos >> 3. Self-organized criticality >> 4. 1/f fractal patterns of response >> >> >> >> *… and beyond* >> >> >> >> I wish to add a 5th aspect to this definition from the perspective of >> integral biomathics: >> >> >> >> 1. *Phenomenology* >> >> >> >> The latter is a largely studied matter in contemporary medicine (s. ref. >> list D), at least at the macro, interpersonal *level*. >> >> >> >> *Note 2*: A level refers to the compositional hierarchy defining levels >> by scale. >> >> >> >> *The key question in such a “deep holistic” physically-phenomenological >> physiology (*3φ*)** is how to define or comprehend (self-organized) >> criticality operationally within the unifying framework of biomathematics >> and biocomputation*. Indeed, a single temporary imbalance within a >> living system regarded as disease involves multiple agents, perspectives >> and interpretations at all levels altogether, moreover *simultaneously*. >> >> >> >> *Note 3*: Simultaneously at different levels involves very different >> sized 'moments' at the different scales. >> >> >> >> So, how should we approach and take into account the other levels/scales >> in order to derive a reliable diagnosis and *therapy*? >> >> >> >> *Note 4*: The notion of “subject” becomes plural (“subjects”) as >> superposition of quantum states to survive the integration of the multiple >> first-person subjective descriptions and the standard third-person >> objective one. >> >> >> >> Until now criticality has been *non-phenomenological*. >> >> >> *Note 5:* In their 2012 paper “No entailing laws, but enablement in the >> evolution of the biosphere” Longo, Montévil and Kauffman claim that >> biological evolution “marks the end of a physics world view of law entailed >> dynamics” (http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.2069). They argue that the >> evolutionary phase space or space of possibilities constituted of >> interactions between organisms, biological niches and ecosystems is “ever >> changing, intrinsically indeterminate and even (mathematically) >> unprestatable”.Hence, the authors' claim that it is impossible to know >> “ahead of time the 'niches' which constitute the boundary conditions on >> selection” in order to formulate laws of motion for evolution. They call >> this effect “radical emergence”, from life to life. Yet this applies to >> abiotic dissipative structures like tornadoes as well. Living beings are >> not radically different in this respect. In their study of biological >> evolution, Longo and colleagues carried close comparisons with physics. >> They investigated the mathematical constructions of phase spaces and the >> role of symmetries as invariant preserving transformations, and introduced >> the notion of “enablement” to restrict causal analyses to Batesonian >> differential cases (1972: “the difference that makes a difference”). The >> authors have shown that mutations or other “causal differences” at the core >> of evolution enable the establishment of non-conservation principles, in >> contrast to physical dynamics, which is largely based on conservation >> principles as symmetries. Their new notion of “extended criticality” also >> helps to understand the distinctiveness of the living state of matter when >> compared to the non-animal one. However, their approach to both physics and >> biology is also *non-phenomenological*. The possibility for endo states >> that can trigger the “(genetic/epigenetic) switches of mutation” has not >> been examined in their model. This is intended to be different in 3φ* >> integrative medicine*. >> >> If we split a human body into macro (patient), mezzo (systems) and micro >> levels (cells) three distinct questions regarding phenomenology arise: i) >> *how* these levels pervade into each other with larger scale providing >> context (boundary conditions) and lowest scale providing raw materials for >> middle scale to function, monitor and control vital processes, ii) >> *who/which* are the agents taking care for this to happen spontaneously, >> and iii) *what kind and role* plays information in the context of i) and >> ii). After all what we are concerned about is modeling the agency of the >> systems in the mezzo level. >> >> >> >> Where should we go from here? >> >> >> In particular, I am interested to know *what kind of >> scientific-phenomenological methodology can be developed and applied for >> investigating *the following three major groups of ailments: >> >> >> >> 1. *oncological diseases* with a particular focus on spatial and >> temporal heterogeneity both in terms of flawed histological structures and >> biochemical reactions; >> >> >> 1. *neuro-degenerative disorders* such as vascular dementia, >> Parkinson and Alzheimer diseases: >> >> >> 1. *altered organ and physiological system failures* such as the >> Multiple Organ Dysfunction Syndrome (MODS), cardiovascular and autoimmune >> diseases. >> >> >> >> In the first group, the *extreme diversity of cancer tissue structures >> and circulating tumor cells (CTC) concentrations over both spatial and >> temporal scales* makes the reliable classification, diagnosis, >> model/hypothesis generation, forecast and treatment of individual patients >> very difficult. This is a real challenge for modern pathology. Another >> problem is that pathologists are actually dealing with random tissue and >> blood samples over irregular periods, which hinder the exact 3D >> histological reconstruction of the tumor formations and tracing their >> development over time and space. Using additional means such as diagnostic >> sonography, CT, MRT and PET images do not improve sufficiently the >> hypotheses about the individual cancer morphology and development. All this >> makes tumor classification and diagnosis, even when analyzing >> high-resolution digital images from biopsy slices by means of virtual >> microscopy, very difficult and often a guesswork also for experts. The >> recent advances in high-performance medical scanning and automation >> systems, computerized visualization and graphical modeling tools, as well >> the collection of huge amounts of anonymous patient data in specialized >> medical databases make the impression that the solution of these problems >> is only a question of more automation, performance, investment and time. >> However, many pathologists begin to realize a third problem, namely that >> *tumors >> appear to be unique in their histological structure and development*, >> related to the personal history and the overall state of health of the >> individual patients. This argument reveals the need for developing a more >> personalized and differentiated medicine that goes over scales without >> becoming purely symptomatic, causality-driven and reductionistic. >> >> >> >> Recent research in the other two fields leads to the same conclusion. >> Therefore, I think that we may be able to develop and test hypotheses about >> emergence and development of deficiency and illness that will lead to >> individual therapies in *3φ* integrative medicine. Your ideas regarding >> this assumption are very welcome. >> >> >> >> Some interesting questions bridging the previous discussion sessions to >> this one are: >> >> >> >> - Why does a human embryo repeat the evolutionary history of its >> species when going through its development stages? Is it because it is more >> secure to project and set up the execution of a future life plan by tracing >> and bodily memorizing a series of evolutionary encoded (successful) “locks” >> through equilibrium states at the edge of criticality? >> >> >> >> - Which is the *vital *role of recursion and repetition of life >> processes including their material and information exchange flows in the >> criticality driven self-regulation for recovery from imbalances and the >> reversibility and healing of diseases? How can we effectively model such >> processes? >> >> - Do we make difference between a physicist’s time and a >> biologist’s time in complex living systems? >> >> >> >> * I look forward to your feedback and notes on the subject.* >> >> >> >> *References:* >> >> *A. **Integrative Medicine* >> >> Integrative Medicine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrative_medicine >> <http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Integrative_medicine> >> >> What Is Integrative Medicine?: >> >> >> http://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/features/alternative-medicine-integrative-medicine >> >> >> >> Integrative Medicine Research: >> >> http://www.journals.elsevier.com/integrative-medicine-research/ >> >> >> >> Advances in Integrative Medicine >> >> http://www.journals.elsevier.com/advances-in-integrative-medicine >> >> >> >> *B. **Integral Biomathics* >> >> Integral Biomathics: >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integral_Biomathics >> <http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Integral_Biomathics> >> >> Integral Biomathics: A Post-Newtonian View into the Logos of Bios >> >> https://arxiv.org/ftp/cs/papers/0703/0703002.pdf >> >> On Some Recent Insights in Integral Biomathics: >> >> https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1306/1306.2843.pdf. >> >> Integral Biomathics Reloaded: 2015 (free access until July 19th 2016): >> >> http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0079610715001509 >> >> >> >> *C. **Self-organized criticality**:* >> >> >> >> Self-organized criticality: >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organized_criticality >> <http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Self-organized_criticality> >> >> >> >> Self-organized criticality (SOC): >> >> http://www.johnboccio.com/courses/SOC26/15-SOC.pdf >> >> >> >> Self-organized criticality: >> >> >> http://web.mit.edu/8.334/www/grades/projects/projects12/V.%20A.%20Golyk.pdf >> >> >> >> Self-organized criticality – what it is and what it isn’t >> >> >> http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.96.8017&rep=rep1&type=pdf. >> >> >> >> >> *D. **Phenomenology in Medicine* >> >> >> >> The meaning of illness: a phenomenological approach to the >> physician/patient relationship: >> https://baylor-ir.tdl.org/baylor-ir/handle/2104/8286 ; >> http://hdl.handle.net/2104/8286. >> >> >> >> Body Matters: A Phenomenology of Sickness, Disease, and Illness: >> >> http://philpapers.org/rec/AHOBMA. >> >> >> >> Suffering Transfigured: Phenomenological Personalism In the >> Doctor-Patient Relationship: >> http://elischolar.library.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1658&context=ymtdl >> . >> >> The challenge of neuroscience: Psychiatry and phenomenology today: >> https://www.klinikum.uni-heidelberg.de/fileadmin/zpm/psychatrie/fuchs/Challenge_of_Neuroscience.pdf >> . >> >> >> >> Rediscovering Psychopathology: The Epistemology and Phenomenology of the >> Psychiatric Object: >> http://cfs.ku.dk/staff/zahavi-publications/Rediscovering_Psychopathology.pdf >> . >> >> PHENOMENOLOGY IN PSYCHIATRY: >> http://www.wpanet.org/uploads/Sections/Philosopy_and_Humanities/Phenomenology-in-Psychiatry.pdf. >> >> >> *Plamen* >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 2015 JPBMB Special Issue on Integral Biomathics: Life Sciences, >> Mathematics and Phenomenological Philosophy >> <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00796107/119/3> >> (note: free access to all articles until July 19th, 2016) >> >> 2013 JPBMB Special Issue on Integral Biomathics: Can Biology Create a >> Profoundly New Mathematics and Computation? >> <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00796107/113/1> >> >> 2012 Integral Biomathics: Tracing the Road to Reality >> <http://www.springer.com/engineering/computational+intelligence+and+complexity/book/978-3-642-28110-5> >> >> 2011 INtegral BIOmathics Support Action (INBIOSA) <http://www.inbiosa.eu> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
