Re: Slow Motion Cosmological Train Wreck


"Rob" <rloldershaw@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1161490152.716886.148120@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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.



Which is a huge clue that fundamental laws for physical and living
systems share a common organizing property.




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.


Here's the problem. You're defining order and complexity
in the same way, a linear sliding scale from simple to
complex. Essentially the same way one would define
complicated. In complexity science, complex is defined
quite differently. Which leads to a different view of order.

Complex would be on a scale analogous to solid, liquid and gas.

Where the simple extreme of solids define one endpoint on the
complexity scale. A simple endpoint.
The opposite extreme of gasses define ...another...simple endpoint.

The complex realm would be the union of opposite extremes, the
dynamic attractor of fluids where both simple behaviors coexist.
Where classical and quantum mechanics are both required
at once to fully understand the system.

So, on a behavioral scale, complexity has /two/ minimums
and /one/ maximum. Order, or lack of order would be
defined in the same way. Quantum and galactic scales
would define simple opposites. The greatest order and
complexity would reside where the two endpoints
overlap, at stellar scales.

By retaining the part driven frame of reference of particles
instead of behavior, you retain the fundamental flaw
of classical reductionist methods. Which is that
the notions of order and complexity still contradict
reality and nature with a linear scale of order.

Nature comes in threes. Static, dynamic and chaotic
Just as science comes in threes.
Newtonian mechanics, thermodynamics and quantum
mechanics.
Just as the model you describe comes in threes.
Quantum, stellar and galactic.

The goal is to find what is universal among them so
that one science can deal with them all at once.
By switching to a non linear behavioral frame of
reference, the problem of understanding order
and complexity is solved. As the abstract mathematics
of Darwinian evolution and thermodynamics turns
out to be one in the same.

DYNAMICS OF COMPLEX SYSTEMS
http://necsi.org/publications/dcs/index.html



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.


I couldn't agree more. The old chicken and egg question, which
comes first, the particle or the system? Fractal self similarity
across scale requires an organized system. Organized
systems require particles. The answer...

They coevolve, just like life does.

This also solves the cosmic coincidence problem, as the
fundamental constants would coevolve over time.
And in a Darwinain way.

A Quintessential Introduction Into Dark Energy
Paul J Steinhardt
Dept of Physics, Princeton Univ
http://www.physics.princeton.edu/~steinh/steinhardt.pdf


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



I would argue these universal properties are best displayed
by living systems. As they define the highest level of order
and complexity in the universe.

Where the scales are from fluids, then life and intelligence.
Instead of scales of quantum, stellar and galactic.

In any event, the model you describe still gets us there.
Since the simple extremes in scale, quantum and
galactic, combine to form the complex life giving
realm of solar systems. Where both simple extremes
coexist, and dominate, at once.




Jonathan

s







.

Relevant Pages

  • The Axioms of Complementary Set Theory
    ... A singleton set ... are included in it and it has a finite quantity of scale levels. ... internal complexity, that can be the basis for infinitely many unique ... which gives us the ability to define their deep ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Personal rant about MMOs
    ... I'm thinking in terms of complexity, ... We're wasting client power ... But the *scale* you're talking about, coordinating 40 players personal RL ...
    (comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg)
  • Re: Book-able view of ID as speculative science
    ... >> design, since design seeks simplicity. ... > large scale. ... there is no need to consider complexity one way or another. ... What *other* kinds of change agents? ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Article: On Scale and Complexity
    ... > THEORETICAL BIOLOGY: ON SCALE AND COMPLEXITY ... > adaptive systems, has gained a prominent position in many sciences. ... > powerful aspect of emergent self-organization is that scale matters. ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: Gravity at the Molecular Level
    ... since both gravity and electrostatic ... Though one may expect that quantum theory will have something to say ... gravitational dynamics has already broached the atomic scale (at least ... a naked singularity, spacetime may be approximated by a 3+1 foliation, ...
    (sci.physics.research)