Notices
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Life's simmetry

  1. #1 Life's simmetry 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    63
    Here is a one-million dollar question: is the potential information of an organic entity superior or identical to the potential information of a non-organic entity? Can Carbon, Nitrogen, Oxygen and Hydrogen perhaps be considered as ...“monads“ which are much more evolved that other monads (elements?) Is the potential information of an element identified perhaps based on its own mass and atomic number? Let’s compare for a moment the values of these two physical sizes relating to the fundamental constituents of life as previously mentioned (C,N, O,H):

    Atomic Number Mass Number
    Carbon(C) 6 12.01
    Nitrogen(N) 7 14.008
    Oxygen(O) 8 16.002
    Hydrogen(H) 1 1.008


    We therefore have six neutrons and six protons for Carbon, seven netrons and seven protons for Nitrogen, eight neutrons and eight protons for Oxygen. Well, it appears that the symmetry game is perfect; furthermore, Hydrogen, since constituted by only one proton (obviously excluding the tritium, one of its isotope) and therefore conceivable as a sphere, even represents the emblem of the concept of symmetry.*9 Where is it therefore necessary to research the value of potential information that constitutes and characterizes the atom of a determined element, in the beauty of „symmetry“ between neutrons and protons forming nucleus?...It could be an idea. If it was so, we could expect great things from the interaction between Calcium,Helium, and Silicon elements (Ca®atomic number20, mass number 40.08; He®atomic number2, mass number 4.003;Si®atomic number 14, mass number 28.06) and Hydrogen.

    Information loves symmetries and analogisms because it is only thanks to them that it is able to acquire values that are always increasing and therefore manifest itself in all of its fullness and beauty in the physical reality in which we live. Consider for an instance the beauty constituted by symmetries of a snowflake; combined Hydrogen and Oxygen can make miracles. But would such miracles be possible without the symmetries of the neuron-proton which characterize the nucleuses of these two elements? In which reality are miracles created and take shape, in the quantum reality or the classic one subjected to Newton’s laws? Only a mind which works in an analogue way is able to extract from the environment surrounding it, constituted by the collective conscience (dynamic information) and by each type of physical entity (potential information), the highest quantity of information of syntony (potential + dynamic) bearable by a common human brain (or by a common human body, even supposing that it is not only our superior organ to capture such information. We could endlessly speculate about this point too).
    But the analogue machine can also have some disadvantages, as when it no longer puts limits to it, it acquires much more information than what it is allowed, and inevitably folly takes over. One of the best analogue machines of the beginning of last century is surely represented by the figure of Albert Einstein.
    If we were capable of building a machine (computer) with mnemonic circuits, prevalently constituted by the elements Ca,He and Si, where there would be an interaction between them according to analogue schemes (thus drawing potential information from one to the other, and information of the syntony from its surrounding environment), the same would very probably be able to simulate human intelligence even before reaching the 1000 teraflops velocity of elaboration of information. Apart from such velocity, the idea that the same could start to power itself would not be ruled out. In that case it will no longer be enough to ...“unplug it “to deactivate it; why would that be so? People, if a plant was able to feed itself by drawing all the necessary energy exclusively from the sun’s rays...it would grow legs. Anyhow, a computer, as “powerful” as it could be, since it is a closed energetic structure, will never be able to modify its physical configuration (that is to autonomously generate other parts, which have been added or substituted to its own physical model).
    If the analogues weren’t the basis of all potential information, constituting the facet we are offered in the classic Newtonian reality, we would surely not be able to diagnose any disease by observing the iris of the eye of a human being which is affected by such illness or cutaneous anomalies on one of his ears (that is the image of the human fetus as analogue base and therefore all to be deciphered and interpreted) nor to foresee a potential future by observing the casual disposition of the Tarots. Even in randomness there is an intrinsic order (as it has been discovered in the last years by studies carried out on the behaviour of chaos), this means that the same must necessarily represent a symbolic image (belonging to the Newtian reality) of a potential predefined spatio temporal continuum, in which it is possible to catch a sight of past, present and future events. The same thing applies for the chaotic aspect normally lining dreams. The only difference between dreams and synchronism is that the first is created from a quantum reality and it solely manifests itself in such reality, whilst the second, synchronism, also fundamentally arises from a quantum reality but manifesting itself at some time distance in all of its completeness as in the classic Newtonian reality. Dreams and synchronisms, therefore represent a symbolic image (which is all to be deciphered) by the events which have characterized in the past, characterize in the present and will characterize our life in the future. With the increase of degree (velocity) analogue information of human thought, would not at all be risky to believe that with the passing of thousands of years, the vast majority of humanity will finally be able to access the marvels of clairvoyance and many other marvels belonging to the reign (so far) of ...the paranormal. Perhaps in a few thousands of years, many individuals will be able to scrutinize, apart from his own future and that of a few others, even the one of the whole of humanity.


    Fausto Intilla
    (Inventor-scientific divulgator)
    www.oloscience.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Freshman César's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Spain, Europe
    Posts
    61
    Can Carbon, Nitrogen, Oxygen and Hydrogen perhaps be considered as ...“monads“ which are much more evolved that other monads (elements?)
    According to today´s knowledge heavier elements were formed in the last steps of the evolution of stars and in supernovae. If the concept of evolution has room here, I believe not (it is an abuse of the word), then the heavier the more "evolved".

    Is the potential information of an element identified perhaps based on its own mass and atomic number?
    Would you mind defining what "potential information" is and how it relates with mass and atomic number and not to other properties of the atom?



    Let’s compare for a moment the values of these two physical sizes relating to the fundamental constituents of life as previously mentioned (C,N, O,H):

    Atomic Number Mass Number
    Carbon(C) 6 12.01
    Nitrogen(N) 7 14.008
    Oxygen(O) 8 16.002
    Hydrogen(H) 1 1.008


    We therefore have six neutrons and six protons for Carbon, seven netrons and seven protons for Nitrogen, eight neutrons and eight protons for Oxygen. Well, it appears that the symmetry game is perfect; furthermore, Hydrogen, since constituted by only one proton (obviously excluding the tritium, one of its isotope) and therefore conceivable as a sphere, even represents the emblem of the concept of symmetry
    1.Why do you not consider phosphorus and sulfur?
    2. You are excluding tritium and deuterium
    3. If the hydrogen is not incorporated in a molecule then it is hydrated and it is not an sphere; if it is incorporated in a molecule it is not an sphere.

    The rest of the post can be analyzed the same way.

    Spinoza once wrote: "[...] and inasmuch as those who do not understand the nature of things do not verify phenomena in any way, but merely imagine them after a fashion, and mistake their imagination for understanding, such persons firmly believe that there is an order in things, being really ignorant both of things and their own nature" (Ethics, Book I Appendix). I think this applies here.

    Best regards,

    César


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by César
    Spinoza once wrote: "[...] and inasmuch as those who do not understand the nature of things do not verify phenomena in any way, but merely imagine them after a fashion, and mistake their imagination for understanding, such persons firmly believe that there is an order in things, being really ignorant both of things and their own nature" (Ethics, Book I Appendix). I think this applies here.
    A delightful quotation. It echoed my thoughts with much more eloquence than I could deliver. Very clever selection by you.

    Fausto, your post is certainly imaginative, but I can't see any evidence to support your speculation. Do you feel you have any?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    Quote Originally Posted by César
    Spinoza once wrote: "[...] and inasmuch as those who do not understand the nature of things do not verify phenomena in any way, but merely imagine them after a fashion, and mistake their imagination for understanding, such persons firmly believe that there is an order in things, being really ignorant both of things and their own nature" (Ethics, Book I Appendix). I think this applies here.
    A delightful quotation. It echoed my thoughts with much more eloquence than I could deliver. Very clever selection by you.

    Fausto, your post is certainly imaginative, but I can't see any evidence to support your speculation. Do you feel you have any?
    Ol' fausti just cut's and paste's great chunks of his own web-site all over this one, So apart from those who have been asleep for the last week, no-one seems to answer him - look

    "Hey, Fausti - how long ago did the last person leave your village?"

    .......... No reply there!.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Junior Powerdoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    270
    I did not loved much, the learning of organic chemistry, but I learn one thing : most of our molecules are levogyr in nature. At the contrary chemistry both create levogyr and dextrogyr molecules.

    So we biological entity are not very symetric :P . We are mostly levogyre
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •