Dear Lou, Pedro and Colleagues,

I have another somewhat provoking question about the "constructive" role of
topology in morphogenesis. What do you think about the somewhat artistic,
but scientifically VERY controversial theory about the origin and
development of life forms based on physical forces from classical mechanics
and topology only, thus ignoring all of genetics, Darwinism and Creationism:

What part of this can be regarded as science at all, and If there is
something missing what is it? Why did a person like Murray Gel-Mann support




On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Pedro C. Marijuan <> wrote:

> Louis, a very simple question: in your model of self-replication, when you
> enter the environment, could it mean something else than just providing the
> raw stuff for reproduction? It would be great if related to successive
> cycles one could include emergent topological (say geometrical-mechanical)
> properties. For instance, once you have divided three times the initial
> egg-cell, you would encounter three symmetry axes that would co-define the
> future axes of animal development--dorsal/ventral, anterior/posterior,
> lateral/medial. Another matter would be about the timing of complexity,
> whether mere repetition of cycles could generate or not sufficient
> functional diversity such as Plamen was inquiring in the case of molecular
> clocks (nope in my opinion).  best--Pedro
> --
> -------------------------------------------------
> 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 X
> 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
> Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818)
> -------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Fis mailing list
Fis mailing list

Reply via email to