Registered: Sep 2006
My main contention is that complex system arise from a succession of attractors that spontaneously emerge from the interaction between the flow of quantum energy and particles. These energies coming in pulses or cycles whether they be a light wave of the sub-atomic micro-universe or the cycle of day and night of the macro-universe.
The information for complexity manifest as the physical components arrange themselves according to these mathematical patterns underlying this flow of energy.
Attractors emerge when information(in the form of an agglomeration of partial relationships that spontaneously bind around inherent mathematical principles ) collapses to a point, these points then absorb quantum information from its parent matrix thus stabilizing both attractor and field.
These new points then emit a new complex quanta pulse preparing the environment for the next stage of attractors and complexity.
In this view the pulses and cycles of the underlying quantum universe then must be the DNA for all the order around us, certainly this is not a revolutionary view unless it can be applied to the evolutionary stages of life, not just in theoretical models but actual fossil evidence that these attractors can form physically.
This is what I believe I’ve discovered.
The vesica attractor appears to emerges after the evolutionary line of simpler precursor attractors. The (point attractor/oolitic mineral spheres) (cycle attractor/photosynthetic cells) (torus attractor/Eukaryote cells)
The vesica attractor recapitulates, encapsulates all these founding attractors though its own developmental stages emerging as a nonlinear assemblage point of quantum information in the form of a biologic system. The higher taxon of the Cambrian explosion.
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries,
is not 'Eureka!' ('I found it!')
but rather 'hmm....that's funny...'"
- Isaac Asimov
The way this model came about was by deciphering the information contained within a fossil artifact, then placing it within the context of the fossil record. I had no prior intention of proving or disproving anything. It just occurred as a natural confluence of elements that ties together information that then produces new information.
In hindsight the best way I’ve found to test a new model is the "bootstrap approach".
If your newly discovered model begins to provide solutions to problems not yet solved by present models its probably a good model.
When these solutions provide information that you never expected or could not have predicted its probably going in the right direction.
If this new information can then shed light on problems you formerly never knew existed, and further still those solutions show practical applications to help our species survive in changing times you are no longer objectively observing the evolutionary process you are now participating in the evolutionary process.
Evolution and the study of evolution can never be solely objective activities.
Both are the acquisition and utilization of information from the world around us, whether it is a plant cell utilizing light waves via the photosynthetic process or a scientist receiving information on skin cancer cells via fiber optics.
We gain our ends only with the laws of nature; we control her only by understanding her laws.
Last edited by Chris Humphrey on 09-27-2006 at 07:53 PM
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
09-05-2006 07:33 PM
wolframscience.com | wolfram atlas | NKS online | Wolfram|Alpha | Wolfram Science Summer School | web resources | contact us
Forum Sponsored by Wolfram Research
© 2004-16 Wolfram Research, Inc. | Powered by vBulletin 2.3.0 © 2000-2002 Jelsoft Enterprises, Ltd. |
Disclaimer | Archives