David:
The nature of evolution is such that symmetries emerge and disappear
(change).
Gyuri
http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Scie/ScieDarv.htm
http://epistemologia.zoomblog.com/archivo/2007/11/28/symmetry-breaking-in-a-philosophical-c.html
Darvas, G. (1998) Laws of symmetry breaking, /Symmetry: Culture and
Science/, 9, 2-4, 119-127
http://journal-scs.symmetry.hu/content-pages/volume-9-numbers-2-4-pages-113-464-1998/
;
Darvas, G, (2015) The unreasonable effectiveness of symmetry in the
sciences, /Symmetry: Culture and Science/, 26, 1, 39-82.
http://journal-scs.symmetry.hu/content-pages/volume-26-number-1-pages-001-128-2015/
; http://journal-scs.symmetry.hu/purchase/
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284341950_THE_UNREASONABLE_EFFECTIVENESS_OF_SYMMETRY_IN_THE_SCIENCES
On 2017.02.28. 19:01, Dave Kirkland wrote:
Dear Arturo Tozzi and FISers
Thank you for your _*very*_ interesting ideas. For me they raise more
questions:
Why did the number of cosmic symmetries ever _*start*_ diminishing?
Could the whole process be eternally cyclical?
I like your respectful use of capital letters.
My mind boggles.
Best rgds
David
On 24 Feb 2017, at 15:24, [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]> wrote:
Dear FISers,
hi!
A possible novel discussion (if you like it, of course!):
*A SYMMETRY-BASED ACCOUNT OF LIFE AND EVOLUTION*
After the Big Bang, a gradual increase in thermodynamic entropy is
occurring in our Universe (Ellwanger, 2012). Because of the
relationships between entropy and symmetries (Roldán et al., 2014),
the number of cosmic symmetries, the highest possible at the very
start, is declining as time passes. Here the evolution of living
beings comes into play. Life is a space-limited increase of energy
and complexity, and therefore of symmetries. The evolution proceeds
towards more complex systems (Chaisson, 2010), until more advanced
forms of life able to artificially increase the symmetries of the
world. Indeed, the human brains’ cognitive abilities not just think
objects and events more complex than the physical ones existing in
Nature, but build highly symmetric crafts too. For example, human
beings can watch a rough stone, imagine an amygdala and build it from
the same stone. Humankind is able, through its ability to manipulate
tools and technology, to produce objects (and ideas, i.e., equations)
with complexity levels higher than the objects and systems
encompassed in the pre-existing physical world. Therefore, human
beings are naturally built by evolution in order to increase the
number of environmental symmetries. This is in touch with recent
claims, suggesting that the brain is equipped with a number of
functional and anatomical dimensions higher than the 3D environment
(Peters et al., 2017). Intentionality, typical of the living beings
and in particular of the human mind, may be seen as a mechanism able
to increase symmetries. As Dante Alighieri stated (/Hell,/ /XXVI,
118-120/), “y/ou were not made to live as brutes, but to follow
virtue and knowledge/”.
In touch with Spencer’s (1860) and Tyler’s (1881) claims, it looks
like evolutionary mechanisms tend to achieve increases in
environmental complexity, and therefore symmetries (Tozzi and Peters,
2017). Life is produced in our Universe in order to restore the
initial lost symmetries. At the beginning of life, increases in
symmetries are just local, e.g., they are related to the
environmental niches where the living beings are placed. However, in
long timescales, they might be extended to the whole Universe. For
example, Homo sapiens, in just 250.000 years, has been able to build
the Large Hadron Collider, where artificial physical processes make
an effort to approximate the initial symmetric state of the Universe.
Therefore, life is a sort of gauge field (Sengupta et al., 2016),
e.g., a combination of forces and fields that try to counterbalance
and restore, in very long timescales, the original cosmic symmetries,
lost after the Big Bang. Due to physical issues, the “homeostatic”
cosmic gauge field must be continuous, e.g., life must stand,
proliferate and increase in complexity over very long timescales.
This is the reason why every living being has an innate tendency
towards self-preservation and proliferation. With the death,
continuity is broken. This talks in favor of intelligent life
scattered everywhere in the Universe: if a few species get extinct,
others might continue to proliferate and evolve in remote planets, in
order to pursue the goal of the final symmetric restoration. In
touch with long timescales’ requirements, it must be kept into
account that life has been set up after a long gestation: a
childbearing which encompasses the cosmic birth of fermions, then
atoms, then stars able to produce the more sophisticated matter
(metals) required for molecular life.
A symmetry-based framework gives rise to two opposite feelings, by
our standpoint of human beings. On one side, we achieve the final
answer to long-standing questions: “/why are we here?/”, “/Why does
the evolution act in such a way?/”, an answer that reliefs our most
important concerns and gives us a /sense/; on the other side,
however, this framework does not give us any hope: we are just
micro-systems programmed in order to contribute to restore a
partially “broken” macro-system. And, in case we succeed in
restoring, through our mathematical abstract thoughts and
craftsmanship, the initial symmetries, we are nevertheless doomed to
die: indeed, the environment equipped with the starting symmetries
does not allow the presence of life.
*REFERENCES*
1)Chaisson EJ. 2010. Energy Rate Density as a Complexity Metric and
Evolutionary Driver. Complexity, v 16, p 27, 2011; DOI:
10.1002/cplx.20323.
2)Ellwanger U. 2012. From the Universe to the Elementary Particles.
A First Introduction to Cosmology and the Fundamental Interactions.
Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. ISBN 978-3-642-24374-5.
3)Peters JF, Ramanna S, Tozzi A, Inan E. 2017. Frontiers Hum
Neurosci. BOLD-independent computational entropy assesses functional
donut-like structures in brain fMRI image. doi:
10.3389/fnhum.2017.00038.
4)Sengupta B, Tozzi A, Coray GK, Douglas PK, Friston KJ. 2016.
Towards a Neuronal Gauge Theory. PLOS Biology 14 (3): e1002400.
doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002400.
5)Spencer H. 1860. System of Synthetic Philosophy.
6)Roldán E, Martínez IA, Parrondo JMR, Petrov D. 2014. Universal
features in the energetics of symmetry breaking. /Nat. Phys. 10/,
457–461.
7)Tozzi A, Peters JF. 2017. Towards Topological Mechanisms
Underlying Experience Acquisition and Transmission in the Human
Brain. J.F. Integr. psych. behav. doi:10.1007/s12124-017-9380-z
8)Tyler EB. 1881. Anthropology: an Introduction to the Study of Man
and Civilization.
*Arturo Tozzi*
AA Professor Physics, University North Texas
Pediatrician ASL Na2Nord, Italy
Comput Intell Lab, University Manitoba
http://arturotozzi.webnode.it/
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
[email protected]
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
_______________________________________________
Fis mailing list
[email protected]
http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
