Re: Crystalline ancestry: Vegetative growth
- From: John Edser <edser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 12:59:57 -0500 (EST)
Tim Tyler <seemysig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:-
I am using the term "vegetative growth" to refer to propagation via
growth without reproduction.
JE:-
Hi Tim,
One of the great conundrums of biology is how exactly reproduction
differs from growth. Organism growth is cellular reproduction where cell
growth can be represented by the reproduction of cellular organelles
which includes genes. IOW, what within evolutionary theory represents a
part and what represents a whole because if they cannot be objectively
differentiated, no theory exists.
Parts and wholes remain empirically separated by respectively,
propositions of fitness dependence and fitness independence. These in
turn are characterized by respectively, proposed non additive and
additive fitnesses. In set theory a part is just any nested subset (note
that unlike a set intersection a set nesting cannot be reversed because
of the proposed set sizes which remains significant within set nesting
but not within any set intersection). Associations of wholes only form
reversible set intersections where just reversible set intersections are
used within mathematical modeling because of the commutative law which
states that multiplication must remain 100% reversible across "="' "<"
and ">" signs. This law effectively deletes any set nesting within
mathematical models unless a constant has been defined which can act as
a frame of reference.
To be able to select a nested subset (a fitness part) you have to select
one entire Russian Doll set via the largest set element (the largest
doll which nests all the others) absolutely disallowing any nested
subparts as independent in fitness wholes. e.g. disallowing DNA/RNA or
silicon genes as selectable wholes which in turn disallows any notion of
"selfish genes" silicon or otherwise. If the fitness of any proposed
whole is just the simple addition of the fitness of each part then it is
not a whole but a population of independent wholes where only each whole
which comprises that population can be naturally selected allowing the
population evolve, i.e. wholes cannot evolve and populations cannot be
selected as a critical falsification of the theory. It seems to me that
the silicon model has yet to decide what represents a whole and what
represents only a part?
Regards,
John Edser
Independent Researcher
edser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Crystalline ancestry: Vegetative growth
- Next by Date: News: Scientists explore new window on the origins of life
- Previous by thread: Re: Crystalline ancestry: Vegetative growth
- Next by thread: Re: Crystalline ancestry: Vegetative growth
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
