The bookkeeping exactitude refers to the number and kind of logical
alternatives.
If the DNA is such-and-such, the cell cannot be outside the logical limits
that are the accounting equivalents of such-and-such.
If the cell is such-and-such, the DNA cannot be otherwise than in a form
that is the logical-accounting of such-and-such.
Accounting in the logical understanding is the application of rules of
tautology. Like in business accounting there is equivalence between the
grand totals, in genetics can neither appear anything out of thin air.
No so-called "information" can appear or disappear in the translation
between linear and multidimensional ways of putting the same
interdependence, like no gain or loss can be created by (correct)
accounting.
Am 08.09.2014 14:11 schrieb "Raquel del Moral" <rdelmoral.i...@aragon.es>:
> Dear Pedro,
>
> The concept of bookkeeping looks very interesting for biology, however, I
> can't see clearly how to apply it below the level of nervous systems.
> "Counting" maybe found in most biomolecules, but really registering in a
> book keeping manner is possible in the lower levels? e.g. unicellulars. Do
> you think that they modify their behaviour after checking their own
> bookkeeping registers?
>
> Just this brief comment!
>
> Best,
> Raquel
>
>
> El 05/09/2014 14:14, Pedro Marijuan escribió:
>
>> Dear FIS colleagues,
>>
>> A very interesting comment by Bob about "energy as a bookkeeping device"
>> in the other discussion track motivates these rough reflections.
>>
>> Actually, within the "culture of mechanics" (following Frank Wilczek)
>> energy appears as the more reliable concept, beyond its cousins force
>> and mass. Mechanics, like most scientific theories, finally is but a
>> method to "count" upon variable aspects of simplified phenomena and
>> provide inter-subjective "objectivity"(?). Numbers are due to our mental
>> "counting" operations; and concepts, formulas and theories become
>> bookkeeping devices to obtain more complex counting that dovetail with
>> more complex phenomena. That our mental counting dovetails with nature's
>> pretended "counting" is what the experimental side of science tries to
>> establish. It becomes of great merit that energy constructs such as
>> those mentioned by Bob do their bookkeeping accurately, in spite of
>> their intrinsic limitations.
>>
>> My concern with the views expressed in the other track is that
>> "informational bookkeeping" appears to be rather different from the
>> mechanical physical bookkeeping or counting. There are new aspects not
>> covered by the "extensive" and "inflexible" mechanical-dynamic counting,
>> and which are essential to the new informational organizations we are
>> discovering --and practicing around-- and to the new worldview that
>> presumably we should search and promote. Is there bookkeeping in life?
>> Do molecules count? Do bacteria or unicellulars bookkeep--and organisms?
>> And complex brains? And individuals? And social groups? And companies
>> and markets? And cities, regions and countries?
>>
>> Admittedly it is a potpourri; but yes, there are some clear instances
>> where quite explicit a bookkeeping is maintained. It may be about
>> signaling flows, about self production stuff flows, or about their
>> inextricable mixing--involving whatever aspects. But these bookkeepings
>> are made with "attentional" flexibility and different "closure"
>> procedures that allow for new forms of compositional hierarchy
>> ("informational") not found in the mechanical. They are "adaptive", they
>> "recognize", they are productively engaged in "life cycles" where the
>> "meaning" is generated, they co-create new existential realms... In our
>> own societies, the exaggerated importance of new informational devices
>> (historically: numbers, alphabets, books, calculi, computers, etc.)
>> derives from their facilitation and acceleration of all the enormous
>> bookkeeping activities that subtend the social complexity around.
>>
>> Who knows, focusing on varieties of bookkeeping might be quite productive!
>>
>> best ---Pedro
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *Pedro C. Marijuán Fernández*
>> Dirección de Investigación
>>
>> Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud (IACS)
>> Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Aragón (IIS Aragón)
>> Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA)
>> Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta 1
>> 50009 Zaragoza
>> Tfno. +34 976 71 4857
>> email. dirinvestigacion.i...@aragon.es
>> <mailto:dirinvestigacion.i...@aragon.es>
>> www.iacs.aragon.es
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fis mailing list
>> Fis@listas.unizar.es
>> http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
>> .
>>
>>
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> Raquel del Moral
> Grupo de Bioinformacion / Bioinformation Group
>
> Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud
> Avda. San Juan Bosco 13, 50009 Zaragoza
> Tfno. +34 976 71 44 76
> E-mail. rdelmoral.i...@aragon.es
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
