Mark 03-02-07: [snip] What i think i should be reaching for is the suggestion that biological life rides on the tide of thermal entropy to do things thermal entropy at the inorganic level cannot do? (non-carbon based chemistry). Perhaps a good way of looking at this would be to suggest that biological life seizes entropy and directs it for it's own ends? The result of those ends is an ever more precise utilisation of entropy itself? This seems to accord with the moq's suggestion that biological patterns use the patterns of the lower level. But you have already pointed this out Case. I should have listened to you. Having said this, i don't feel you fully appreciate the significance of the way in which thermal entropy is being utilised? The very forms of utilisation demarcate a dividing line between the biological and the inorganic. Maybe the laws of thermodynamics will change to accommodate new ideas?
[Case] I think you should think about this a while. I have not been very accurate in describing entropy. I was working around the points you were making and taking liberties in the process. But I would say you are getting close. I have always thought your stuff with the sweet spot and coherence and all are close they just need to shift up a notch. What you just said here about boundaries. Boundaries are where things get interesting. For example what is the boundary between the inorganic and biological. I would like to call it carbon chemistry but not all organic chemistry is living. Viruses are seen as the most primitive life forms but they are little more than DNA and protein. Any time you draw a distinction the edges are fuzzy. Mark 03-02-07: [snip] Other forms of entropy have been advocated - with varying degrees of tility - and it's a contentious area. Those who won't entertain it simply deny any use at all - no argument necessary. I think there is something in new perspectives on entropy but i've been sloppy while accusing you of sloppy thinking. Sorry about that mate. Not sure if i'm short sighted or seeing over the horizon? [Case] No problem at all. Believe me I understand. Many years ago I read Jeremy Rifkin's book Entropy. I remember thinking, "this is Wrong!" Wrong in a moral as well as actual sense. This is called denial; then came anger. Then I tried to figure a way out of it. Then I was depressed. It took years but I followed Kubler-Ross to the letter and you know, it's not so bad. What's bad is that, all this original source... where did it all come from... seeking after a unity... Perfect order is a single point where all is one and before that point? ...Nothing. From perfect order to perfect disorder; ashes to ashes. But these things are really only troublesome if you insist on thinking in "ultimate" terms. Ultimately, schmultimately! It has been at least 13 billion years since the point of perfect order. The estimated time until perfect disorder is something like 10 with 150 zeros after it. Life as we know it took 4 billion years to get here. That is a lot of time. All we really need to know is that it has been this way a really long time and it is not going anywhere soon. As long as the inorganic level remains static the biological level has something to play with. moq_discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
