Re: [Fis] Five Momenta

[Steven Ericsson-Zenith]

Dear Pedro and List,

A note to add that the momenta in Pedro's question of disciplinary scope is 
very much on my mind as I undertake the final structuring of the content of my 
book on this now very broad subject. This final restructuring has taken much of 
my attention over the past week or two, along with my continuing fight with a 
variety of medication effects, and so I must add an apology for the 
high-latency in my contributions.

Obviously there will be details missing and this question of locality and its 
absence across dynamic physical structure, leading to my proposal of a new 
universal aspect of nature such that it may drive a new (bio)mechanics, is 
central.

In addition, the resolution of our instruments are not yet adequate to show the 
mechanics I speak of either in the organisms of interest to the current body of 
research or at the atomic level. I have only a limited ability to direct this 
research. I trust that I will be forgiven if I simply suggest the way ahead as 
these technologies evolve. 

When we do reach a capable resolution (hopefully in the not too distant future) 
I suggest, for example, that we will discover neither a discrete nor a smooth 
continuum but rather a dynamic knotted “disturbances and distortions of the 
continuum" in the world’s fundamental structure. And further, this inclusive 
model allows me to predict that we will place on this continuum, as the origin 
of both gravitation and sense/response, the single label “Light."

Because of this broad field of inquiry it can be considered a very active area 
of research and there are always new results to consider from a variety of 
sources - and this is where I have spent most of my time in the past ten years. 
For example, HHMI is a rich and diverse source and "Clique topology reveals 
intrinsic geometric structure in neural correlations" 
(http://arxiv.org/abs/1502.06172) has my attention today. I tend to steer away 
from detailed analysis of human neural structures, essentially because the 
degree of complexity is too high to manage without a more fundamental 
biophysical understanding first. For this reason I prefer the neural analysis 
of, say, biophysicist Dennis Bray over the attempts at explanation of 
mathematician Vladimir Itskov, although his highlight of the limits of 
conventional models of “neural” [sic] computation is very relevant. 

But the source of research study could have easily been the dynamics of blood 
flow in the human brain, the behavioral study and neural development of blinded 
kittens, a marine study of protists, jellyfish, plants or algae, the study of 
pain anomalies in genetically related families in Europe and Pakistan, the 
neural dysfunction of children in Canada, electroception by Zoologists in 
Australia, the bioengineering of digital counters in DNA strands or 
manipulation of other genetics in the labs at Stanford.  And I find the 
behavior of buffalo around a pond, or the empathetic or hunting social 
behaviors of sea mammals, as fascinating as human behavior manifest on Facebook.

It does seem relevant for me, however, to highlight just how my work on the 
allostery of biophysics and mathematical flexible closed structure, my 
particular view of the universal, informing, mathematics, sense and response, 
may be incorporated generally (appealing to the power of Wigner’s 
simplification) into the physical sciences and thus the general potential scope 
of endeavor that this may allow.  

Certainly, it seems to me, that this “as above, so below,” Eugene Wigner 
inspired, approach and the "general covariance” or “algebraic sum of physical 
laws” of Einstein and Benjamin Peirce, has allowed me to discover, as it did 
Maxwell for electrodynamics, simple mathematics of value able to get traction 
on the structure of the problem without being bogged down by the manifest 
complexities of biochemistry and metabolic thermodynamics.

Recalling always that despite my excursions into biology, social behavior, 
cosmology, and the depths of theoretical physics, that from the start I have 
labeled my work “The Foundations of Logic and Apprehension, informed by 
research in biophysics." And that my original motivating interest, apart from a 
confessed human curiosity, rests squarely in the large scale engineering 
problems and mathematics of process interaction in recognition and complex 
decision making in parallel computation. 

I understand how this endeavor may indeed seem a “crazy story” by conventional 
measures - it has certainly taken me "down the path least traveled" - but I 
trust that it will be taken in the truest spirit of scientific and mathematical 
investigation and inquiry.
 
It seems likely that I will be able to share this restructured (draft) Table Of 
Contents of my book, in which it will be seen that much of this momenta across 
discipline scope is covered, in the coming days, along with the additional 
notes I have promised. 

Steven


> On Oct 20, 2015, at 8:31 AM, 

Re: [Fis] Fw: Five Momenta. Five Itineraries

[Francesco Rizzo]

Cari Pedro e Joseph, Cari Tutti,
ho scritto sempre le stesse cose. La conoscenza dell'armonia o l'armonia
della conoscenza è basta sulla super-legge dell'informazione (energia della
cultura) o dell'energia (informazione della natura). L'informazione
naturale o termodinamica, genetica, matematica e semantica sono
specificazioni della stessa unica legge. Il sapere è unico ed è servito
dalla scienza economica, mediatrice di tutte le scienze e fondamentale per
l'esistenza. Le leggi della natura o dell'arte o della poesia, etc. sono
leggi economiche nel senso che perseguono il massimo risultato con il
minimo delle risorse. Le "strutture dissipative" di Ilya Prigogine che
creano ordine dal disordine mediante fluttuazioni sono unità di carattere
generale. La mia "Nuova economia" si in-centra su questi pilastri. I miei
numerosi libri lo testimoniano. Purtroppo, essendo scritti in lingua
italiana, non sono tanto conosciuti, nemmeno da Voi. Pazienza. Comunque
Cari Tutti questa è la strada che bisogna perseguire non per una forma di
conoscenza generalista, bensì per creare una nuova alleanza tra le scienze
dell'uomo e le scienze della natura di cui non si può fare a meno. I
dettagli e le specificazioni specialistici vengono dopo e meglio se si
sceglie questa visione paradigmatica ed epistemologica.
Un abbraccio per tutti.
Francesco Rizzo.

2015-10-20 22:20 GMT+02:00 Joseph Brenner :

> Dear Pedro, Dear FISers,
>
> Pedro's note conveys very well the intellectual /Angst/ I and probably
> also many of you feel confronted by the complexity of the 'crazy story'
> which we are both tellers of and listeners to. Pedro's division into five
> domains of knowledge (and knowing) is a very useful first step. The second,
> I suggest, just to continue the thinking process, is to look for what
> underlies or might be common to the domains, as a possible part of what
> Pedro calls a multidisciplinary Itinerary. I can think of five candidates,
> some of which have been touched on recently. All of them address change and
> process in some way. None of them is fully adequate by itself, but perhaps
> a combination, with the addition of some others, might be. "Theories of
> Everything" need not apply. Please note that 1) no necessary meaning or
> hierarchical priority should be ascribed to the order used and 2) I have
> written exactly two sentences for each entry.
>
> 1. The Tao
> This universally valid attempt to conceive of and refer to an underlying
> unity of phenomena seems very relevant to today's problems. A key concept,
> among many others, is that the ambiguity and self-contradiction in language
> is not only accepted as inevitable but considered a necessary way of
> pointing to that unity.
>
> 2. Wu Kun's Philosophy of Information
> The first step here would be to accept that all of the momenta are
> constituted by information and hence constrained by the dynamics of
> information. In other words, I see the Philosophy of Information also as an
> /Itinerary/ rather than only as part of Momentum 1, part of the solution
> rather than of the problem, joining with Momentum 5.
>
> 3. Lupasco's Logic of Energy and Principle of Dynamic Opposition
> Action in all the domains listed by Pedro involves the expenditure of
> energy by an agent to effect change against a resistance of some kind,
> especially at the higher cognitive levels of human sociality (Momentum 4).
> Such interactions and antagonisms are the locus of change and the emergence
> of new entities at all the levels of reality of the momenta.
>
> 4. Transdisciplinarity (I)
> There is a growing general understanding that the boundaries of classical
> disciplines block the development of knowledge, and any methods which
> transcend their limitations will be constructive. This is certainly
> happening in Momentum 2, and Information Science has been clearly
> recognized as transdisciplinary.
>
> 5. Transdisciplinarity (II)
> The Nicolescu acceptation of Transdisciplinarity as that which lies
> within, between and beyond individual disciplines is even stronger. There
> is a unique tension between the ontological and epistemological aspects of
> this form of Transdisciplinarity that itself points toward a unity of
> knowledge.
>
> Pedro's call, in his last paragraph, is an instance of application of
> Itinerary 3 above, a proper maintainance of interaction with an excess of
> neither identity nor diversity. My note itself is an instance of Itinerary
> 5 (which includes 3 and 4) and suggests that a degree of self-reference is
> an indication of the possible utility of an approach. Self-reference is a
> key principle in art and humor and it may also be a key component of the
> structured coherence in science Pedro and we are seeking.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Joseph
>
> - Original Message - From: "Pedro C. Marijuan" <
> pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es>
> To: "'fis'" 
> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 5:31 PM
> Subject: [Fis] Five Momenta
>
>