Re: A combination of relational thinking and reductionist capability at work?

[James N Rose <***>]

Judith Rosen wrote:
 
> Protein folding... that was one of my father's big areas
> of concentration because the shape of the protein is not
> specified by genetics, only the type of protein, and the
> protein itself is inactive until it assumes its "tertiary
> shape". He used this as an example of both anticipation
> at work in an organism and of the fact that there must be
> more modes of information storage/transmission/activity
> within an organism than just the genetic variety.


Not all excellent creative minds (ie, the majority of scientists)
are creative 'enough' to break the constrictions of habituated
models.  The homily "if it ain't broke then don't 'fix' it", is
more on the scale of "if it deoesn't -seem- inaccurate then
don't alter what you've got it - until the errors/anomalies are
unavoidably pervasive." (with apologies to Thomas Kuhn)

In functional attribution, RR was absolutely correct - every tier
of complex organization has its own (independent -yet- inter-coordinated
with other tiers) "information" that produce real events and organization
activity -not- codable directly from constituent tiers.   At least, not
-obviously- so.  But that does not preclude the existence and
functioning of viable relations between the tiers.

At my Ceptual Institute website there are at least two topics exampled
the focus on this.  One is a discussion where the proposition is made
that function is not solely derived from software, but that the
hardware (specific materiality of systems) is also a source of 
information.  The prime example cited is stereoconfiguration differences
in otherwise 'identical molecules' -- left v right twisting molecules.
The only difference beiung that they are mirror images.  Either form can
be the resultant form from a biochemical (metabolic) pathway.  BUT, one
twist is conformal with the metabolic environment and pathways and the other
is not.  Effectively, the molecule is (acts as) a software instruction node:
a boolean yes/no gate. The instruction sequencing then directs subsequent 
molecular: construction, breaking, or loop halting.

The hardware IS the software .. which is totally outside the current
science paradigm - that instructions are separate from the mechanism(s)
they are used "in".  "Code is wholly distinct from apparatus."

This is a utilitarian notion in many many situations, but importantly,
cannot be the end all be all relation: of information with substanstantiation.

In the Genre section of CI, there is a section devoted to Dean Falk.
It highlights her anthropological work re early homosapiens and in
particular how the early species segued into erect posture and walking.

It was strongly dependent on the position of veins leaving the brain
case and the speed (restriction of) blood draining from the brain.
Early hominids had foramin holes in the braincase which allowed blood
to drop stright down and flow out faster - if the body was more
vertical than horizontal in posture.  Couldn't stand for any length
of time without getting dizzy from blood loss in the brain .. which led 
to performances of life concurrent with that bodyform.

Suddenly, in the fossile records, the foramin location changed, and
the draining shunt-veins jigged around differently, with the
result being that blood flow backed-up and kept cranial blood
pressure higher if the hominid stood erect.  So it wasn't just 
limb position that mattered, this other factor did too.

Now, the point is, what 'coded' for the difference?  Did some
codon suddenly provide the "specific instructions" to the 
circulatory system: 'grow 7 centimeters then turn left 3 millimeters
then grow right in a stright line until you reach the heart' ?!?  

Ie, where is the 'gene' that instructed for the improved 
configuration relation between bone and circulation systems??

Could there be such 'specific genetic instructions for the
production of specific forms'?

In some cases, yes, in the majority of cases, no.  Some other
'information' is there.  The (elegant) answer I came up with
is in the online articles and I recommend anyone interested
read there in more detail.

Information transduces as it moves through different aspects
of systems.  In a related (but not exact) way that we
transduce chemical brain 'information' into muscle mechanical
information, into keyboard transduction into analog signals,
then into digital trnasmission data, then back into analog
'form' for visual display into optical form for reception
and transduction back into biochemical form for use and 
processing and effective interaction.

Image the Mona Lisa.  Now imagine the form it exists in in the 
data transmission line where the image is being sent from
sender to receiver.  Who could look at the data packet and
immediately say "oh wow, what a beautiful replication of Davinci's
artwork, look at the subtlety of the background shading: ..Z#a77c{
++mKK__s"*&SOOK7892wqDd..."

:-)


Jamie