|
Hi Jerry,
I have a few comments and a couple questions:
Jerry Zhu wrote: I agree with "relational and organizational
matters
apply to all systems." My opinion on this is that this concept belongs to quantum physics not biology. Either you are defining things WAY differently than I do or we are
very far apart on these concepts, Jerry. On page 105 of Life,
Itself:
Robert Rosen wrote: "The reappraisal of causality
occasioned by the advent of quantum theory has left physicists without consensus
on what causality is or on how it should be encoded into contemporary physical
formalisms. More generally, no one is today sure what the formalism of quantum
theory encodes, or even if it encodes anything at all; in this latter view,
advocated by Bohr under the rubric of complementarity, the only thing that
matters is the decoding. I believe it fair to say that the "foundations" of
quantum theory remain a quagmire, to a far greater extent than has ever been
true in physics before.
It would therefore be idle, as well as perhaps presumptuous, to enter
into a more detailed discussion of quantum theory here. My main point is,
however, unarguable: that the concept of state plays the central role in its
formalism, just as it did in its classical predecessor..."
How does your view fit in with these statements? How does
organization and relational causality derive from quantum
physics?
J.Z. wrote: The reason it applies to all systems in the
emergent
hierarchy is because quantum physics is at the lowest level of evolution, the big bang that all things derived. Could you elaborate on what you mean by this? Specifically, a
definition of "emergent hierarchy" would be helpful. A fuller explanation of how
you view "evolution" would also be helpful. And does your comment about the "big
bang" mean that you consider that theory an accurate description of past events
in the formation of our universe? If so, why?
Thanks,
Judith
|