Re: [Fis] WHY WE ARE HERE? ...AN UNPLEASANT ANSWER?!
Cari Pedro e tutti, a mio modesto giudizio l'unico principio-concetto comune del mondo organico e inorganico è l'INFORMAZIONE nei suoi diversi tipi, La creatività o discontinuità o mutazione è figlia della vitale o neg-entropica asimmetria armonica o della neg-entropica o vitale armonia asimmetrica. L'equilibrio, più invenzione dell'uomo che della natura, è entropico o mortale. Un abbraccio. Francesco 2017-02-28 19:01 GMT+01:00 Dave Kirkland : > 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, tozziart...@libero.it 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
Re: [Fis] WHY WE ARE HERE? ...AN UNPLEASANT ANSWER?!
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, tozziart...@libero.it 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), “you 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 Dens
