Re: [Fis] Summing up: New Year Lecture

[JOHN TORDAY]

Dear FIS colleagues, Pedro has pointed out some rookie errors in my post.
You can find my paper "From cholesterol to consciousness" at
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28830682. Hopefully you have access to
the paper without having to buy it. If you don't please email me at
jtor...@ucla.edu and i will send you a copy. As for addressing
consciousness at the cellular/molecular level, I understand that the mental
health professionals have a problem with consciousness beyond the
brain/mind. But I consider that anthropocentric. Just like every other
aspect of our physiology, consciousness is the endogenization of
environmental factors. In the case of consciousness it is the vertical
integration of calcium fluxes for all of the cells of the organism. All
organisms are conscious of their surroundings to one degree or another. And
self-reference is, in my opinion, a result of the Singularity/Big Bang, so
it would apply to all organisms, unicellular and multicellular alike. I
refer to the experiments of Helmut Plattner, exposing paramecia to glucose.
When the paramecium homes in on the sugar its 'nervous system' of calcium
flux lights up just like the neurons in our brains. And as to the
extrapolation from individual consciousness to cosmology based on the
homologies between Quantum Mechanics and Evolutionary Biology, I see that
as a means of fully understanding the significance of consciousness as the
connection between the animate and inanimate as one continuous Singularity.
It is only in that way that the true nature of Nature can be fully
understood. As for smaller increments, the work of Daniel Fels on
electromagnetic communication between cells may hold the answer (
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4793142/).

Best, John

On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 5:41 AM, Pedro C. Marijuan <
pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es> wrote:

> Dear John and FIS colleagues,
>
> It was nice hearing your response. For technical reasons of the server, 
> *attachments
> are unwelcome* (and often directly rejected). Send please a web address
> where interested people can download your document. Also, it is better if
> you send directly your response to FIS list (*fis@listas.unizar.es
> *). About your content, I see a couple of problems
> introducing "consciousness" at the cellular/molecular level. For this term
> has a very definite meaning in the *ad hoc* research that is taken place
> during last decades. Conflating it with basic cellular processes may not be
> necessary, given that other terms (more realistic ones?) are available. For
> instance, I referred to self-referential cognition. In any case, I agree
> that classical autopoiesis  falls too short of what is needed... Besides,
> about the cosmological relationship with fundamental physics, is it a
> convenient step? Does it introduce a premature closure in the
> bio-informational thinking process?
>
> Best--Pedro
>
>
> El 22/01/2018 a las 16:02, JOHN TORDAY escribió:
>
> Dear FISers, I greatly appreciate Pedro's comments regarding my New Year
> Lecture. I fully agree with his comment " That life's physiology is based
> on the conjunction of a few principles: neguentropy, chemiosmosis, and
> homeostasis-homeorhesis" applies to non-living states too. I did not intend
> to make that statement exclusive, and if it sounded like that Pedro's
> clarification is important. In fact have just published a paper entitled
> "Quantum Mechanics Predicts Evolutionary Biology" which is predicated on
> the hypothesis that self-referential self-organization is the result of
> the Singularity/Big Bang, Newton's Third Law of Thermodynamics that every
> action has an equal and opposite reaction. That idea would apply to both
> evolutionary biology and to balanced chemical reactions alike. As for the
> question of the emergence of self-referential consciousness 'right at the
> beginning', I am in favor of that concept, as I have expressed it in a
> recent paper, entitled "From Cholesterol to Consciousness" (see attached)
> so I look forward to reading your comments about that idea as well, since
> it has the potential to fully integrate physics and biology in my humble
> opinion.
>
> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 4:01 AM, Pedro C. Marijuan <
> pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es> wrote:
>
>> Dear FISers,
>>
>> Going to the extreme, I think this year opening lecture can be summarized
>> in three contentious points.
>>
>> 1. That life's physiology is based on the conjunction of a few
>> principles: neguentropy, chemiosmosis, and homeostasis-homeorhesis.
>>
>> 2. That communication (cell signaling) is an essential factor in the
>> multicellular evolution towards complexity.
>>
>> 3. That epigenetic inheritance and the obligate recursion to the
>> unicellular state become the basis of a new evolutionary theory.
>>
>> I disagree with point 1, as I think some nonliving states could also be
>> characterized by those principles (eg, chemical cycles/hypercycles in
>> marine vents, and other outcomes 

Re: [Fis] Summing up: New Year Lecture

[Pedro C. Marijuan]

Dear John and FIS colleagues,

It was nice hearing your response. For technical reasons of the server, 
_attachments are unwelcome_ (and often directly rejected). Send please a 
web address where interested people can download your document. Also, it 
is better if you send directly your response to FIS list 
(_*fis@listas.unizar.es*_). About your content, I see a couple of 
problems introducing "consciousness" at the cellular/molecular level. 
For this term has a very definite meaning in the /ad hoc/ research that 
is taken place during last decades. Conflating it with basic cellular 
processes may not be necessary, given that other terms (more realistic 
ones?) are available. For instance, I referred to self-referential 
cognition. In any case, I agree that classical autopoiesis  falls too 
short of what is needed... Besides, about the cosmological relationship 
with fundamental physics, is it a convenient step? Does it introduce a 
premature closure in the bio-informational thinking process?


Best--Pedro

El 22/01/2018 a las 16:02, JOHN TORDAY escribió:
Dear FISers, I greatly appreciate Pedro's comments regarding my New 
Year Lecture. I fully agree with his comment " That life's physiology 
is based on the conjunction of a few principles: neguentropy, 
chemiosmosis, and homeostasis-homeorhesis" applies to non-living 
states too. I did not intend to make that statement exclusive, and if 
it sounded like that Pedro's clarification is important. In fact have 
just published a paper entitled "Quantum Mechanics Predicts 
Evolutionary Biology" which is predicated on the hypothesis that 
self-referential self-organization is the result of 
the Singularity/Big Bang, Newton's Third Law of Thermodynamics that 
every action has an equal and opposite reaction. That idea would apply 
to both evolutionary biology and to balanced chemical reactions alike. 
As for the question of the emergence of self-referential consciousness 
'right at the beginning', I am in favor of that concept, as I have 
expressed it in a recent paper, entitled "From Cholesterol to 
Consciousness" (see attached) so I look forward to reading your 
comments about that idea as well, since it has the potential to fully 
integrate physics and biology in my humble opinion.


On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 4:01 AM, Pedro C. Marijuan 
> wrote:


Dear FISers,

Going to the extreme, I think this year opening lecture can be
summarized in three contentious points.

1. That life's physiology is based on the conjunction of a few
principles: neguentropy, chemiosmosis, and homeostasis-homeorhesis.

2. That communication (cell signaling) is an essential factor in
the multicellular evolution towards complexity.

3. That epigenetic inheritance and the obligate recursion to the
unicellular state become the basis of a new evolutionary theory.

I disagree with point 1, as I think some nonliving states could
also be characterized by those principles (eg, chemical
cycles/hypercycles in marine vents, and other outcomes derived
from "energy flows"); besides, some previous "info stuff" has to
be in place. Then I completely agree with point 2, for signaling
is not just another characteristic of the cell, it is "the"
eukaryotic trait par excellence.  And I am curious on how point 3
could be further substantiated... In this respect I recommend the
two papers that Bill sent to the list a few weeks ago. Do we need
to postulate the emergence of a form of "self-referential
cognition" right at the beginning?
Perhaps!

All the best--Pedro



El 09/01/2018 a las 19:05, Bill escribió:

Dear Pedro and Colleagues,

I have been following the thread of comments with great interest,
all of  which have all been occasioned by John Torday's profound
insights about the nature of evolutionary development in light of
the importance of cell-cell signaling and molecular biology. 
From the comments, it is clear that there is a strong impulse to

seek a means of integrating the role of symbiogenesis, viruses
and mobile elements, multilevel selection, niche construction,
genomic plasticity into a common narrative with an informational
perspective at its foundation.
In the spirit of that line of discussion, I am offering two
links that discuss evolution as an biologic information
management system. Some of this work shares direct commonality
with John's, since he and I are frequent collaborators.

http://www.mdpi.com/2079-7737/5/2/21/htm


https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S007961071730233X


Both of these articles can be considered as complementary to
Pedro's very fine article, 'How prokaryotes ‘encode’ their
environment: Systemic tools for