Re: Slow Motion Cosmological Train Wreck

jonathan wrote:
"Rob" <rloldershaw@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1161407687.482438.254730@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Isn't it true that self similarity across scale applies to biological
systems also?

Yes, biological systems are rich in examples of self-similarity and
fractal organization. There are quite a few books and papers devoted
to this topic.

Concerning the heirarchy of order in the universe, isn't it true
that life and intelligence define the higher levels of order?

That depends on how you define levels of order.

Why do we assume the fundamental properties of the universe
are best displayed by the physical (non-living) properties
the universe has to offer? Why do we assume fundamental
law is best derived from the lowest levels of order in
the universe?

Nature seems to be built up from simple fundamental particles, which
can combine in ever-more complicated systems like a human. The
Discrete Fractal paradigm introduces the new idea that equally
fundamental particles dominate the Stellar and Galactic Scales, as well
as the Atomic Scale. So within the general fractal paradigm,
reductionism is a fool's errand. Each Scale has fundamental particles
at the "bottom" and ever-more complicated structures as you go "up"
through that Scale. Then the pattern repeats when you go "up" to the
next Scale.

You seem to describe the heirarchy of order in the universe
in terms of scale from smallest to largest. But shouldn't
it be from the physical universe to the living?

Simple to more and more complex on each Scale.

I submit that the chaos and complexity sciences, which first
defined self similarity, tell us that fundamental law is to
be derived from the highest levels of order in the universe.


Strict reductionism is a mistake. Strict holism is a mistake. The
unbounded, discrete fractal paradigm finally shows us that a symmetric,
unbounded hierarchy divided into discrete Scales is the correct
approach to nature.


If the definitive DM prediction of the unbounded fractal paradigm is
vindicated, then it will have demonstrated that it alone is the right
path towards a bold and incredibly beautiful new understanding of
nature.
Actually, for those who are a bit impatient to see how this plays out,
nature has given us some hints of what the solution to the dark matter
enigma is likely to look like. If you go to the arxiv.org preprint
site and print out copies of astro-ph/0002363 by Oldershaw and
astro-ph/0607358 by Calchi Novati et al, you will get an overview of
results to date. They are very exciting.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Is Scale Absolute?
    ... but it said something very profound about nature. ... where current physics does a lot of arm-waving and assuming. ... scales, but not on the Stellar Scale. ... how can you experiment with the entire universe? ...
    (sci.fractals)
  • Re: IS TIME REAL?
    ... >>| place to place in the universe. ... >>physics is very much concerned with such things, ... Because it's not a true spacial dimension. ... > arbitrary scale that we have universally accepted. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Darwinism causes people to stop loving each other
    ... leads on to future effects rippling out from that point through time ... down to a smaller scale to explore the atomic, ... can become predicatble at higher scales. ... rules of the universe have remain unchanged. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Hogg says "fractal universe is untenable"
    ... of manifolds could be reduced by transform to a simple sphere ... quantum masses or the groupings of matter in the observed universe ... are you happy with the conventional Planck scale? ... Reminds me of somebody up Mass. ...
    (sci.fractals)
  • Re: Our Expanding Universe
    ... and no expansion is observed on local scales. ... and with useful assumptions for e.g. the Universe as a whole ... This is not a quantitative prediction of a scale. ... infinite percent-wise increase in distances per unit of time. ...
    (sci.astro)