< < <
Date Index
> > >
Is Evolution "Quantum Chaotic" or is Quantum Chaos "Evolutionary?"
by Luke Rondinaro
16 August 2002 20:21 UTC
< < <
Thread Index
> > >
I ended my last piece on Systems and Systematic Processes talking about gmaps inside of maps.h  But how? c Is this phenomenon merely (a matter of an overall systemic phenomena and its intrinsic relationship being viewed from a variety of angles and analyses) or (is there, in fact, a super-framework of systematic structure-processes) inherent in human evolutionary development, world history, and the universe as whole?

Itfs as if we had a sequence of  terms gA, B, C, D, E c X, Y,Zh and we also had evidence of a process where we see A as a matter of potentiality headed toward Z but also a cosmic superstructure/function where even the process of going from A to Z is itself a subset of the grander scheme.

But within this framework we also have a number of simple formulas [(A+B), (A-B), (A and B), (A or B), and (A->B) c] that can be formulated and reformulated to any infinite variety of either structural forms (such as: A+B -> C) or operations (->) = A,X, Y and (+) = (C, D, F) and so on

Even of itself, this material is not all that problematic.  But when processes and structures start substituting and interchanging [which they seem to do], becoming simultaneous, and even at times equivocal or univocal thatfs when things get shady for us.  Seeing  A= (B/C) is no problem for us as we see it but when it comes to (->) = (A) = (B and (+/A-D) we immediately are sent through the roof)

This canft be! (we say)  There canft be the scenario that (g‡h = X/0) or more plainly, it canft be that: (4 = 2+4, 4=5, or g+h = 3/2.  This is all meaningless (and I would have to agree) on such a point.

However, what happens when hypothesized gwormholesh seem closer to becoming a conceivable reality to us, when the idea of gteleportationh becomes more plausible in our scientific models? c





(Caution: some of this material is a heavy dose of theory, science fiction related content, science, and even some pseudo-science.  I use it only to illustrate my point that the conceptual framework to this stuff is becoming more amenable to us in terms of mathematical projections and models.  For the most part, a lot of this content is probably still too far gout thereh without any concrete substantiation or verifiable data to it.  I wouldnft bet the bank on any of it; however what it does show and can show, in the way it plays off our verifiable empirical methods, is that the universe seems to be a stranger kind of place than we would have expected given the assumptions of Pre-Twenty First, and pre-Twentieth century scientific understanding. Itfs almost as if the same kind of thing going on with the Eonic Effect with human affairs is happening on the cosmic level also in terms of Relativity Theory and Quantum Theory.)

To bring it back down to our discussion of evolution and human events in world history, what happens when our evolution and gbig historyh seems to loosely exhibit such properties as those I described above?  What happens when nature doesnft always seem to follow gnaturefs rulesh (as science has discovered them & even proven them time and time again)?  While itfs too sketchy to apply a notion of gspiritualh direction to such phenomena (as ID theorists like to)(although animistic philosophies are even better at expressing the idea that gspiritsh occupy and direct the motions of material things) it genuinely seems like nature and evolution both are more than just being gindeterminateh; it seems like theyfre acting eaversivelyf to our attempts to pin them down perceptually and conceptually, as a matter of intrinsic self-organized programming.

As Ifve said before, this canft be.  Or if it seems to be, then how?  My guess is that natural laws (and evolution also) are in fact driven at their roots by dynamics related to my gmaps inside of mapsh discussion (involving substitutions, interchangeable terms, etc.)  William McNeill in his essay  gIncreasing Complexity Breeds Surprising Behaviorg ( http://www.braudel.org.br/paping17.htm)  speaks of the following dynamic. 

What I conclude from this scenario is that laws of physics familiar on earth and in the nearby fringes of our galaxy are a special case ...They may be stable, or apparently stable, for long periods of time, but do not endure forever. Instead, extreme conditions of concentration and/or dispersal at the beginning and at the end of time establish regimes in which matter and energy, as physicists know them, simply do not exist and when space and time also lose their meaning. Moreover, amidst our expanding universe, the ultimate limits of our familiar matter, energy, space and time, are sporadically approached, or perhaps even crossed, in the neighborhood of Black Holes, quasars and the like.  Such a cosmos is strikingly at variance with the regular, fixed and eternal laws of physical science that prevailed in the classrooms of my youth. Changes of physical-chemical regimes that are sometimes radical, often sudden, and always unpredictable in detail, have displaced the eternal uniformity and mathematical predictability that astronomers and physicists imputed to the natural world between the 17th and 19th centuries.

Well, what if the principles of that greater universe work in terms of what occurs regarding gwhat we knowh (or think we know) of black holes, singularities, and hypothesized gwormholes?h  What then? c

What if (X/0) is the norm for the rest of the cosmos expect our tiny section?  What would happen if the effects of an (gundefinedh), ever-expanding/replicating, substitutable, and interchangeable expression of (X/0) were to filter down to where we are in the universe, encountering the kinds of pattern interference that it would in our little chunk of the universe and skewed as it might be by gthe way things work hereh?   Would we interpret it as gRelativity works differently than what goes for the normal run of naturefs lawsh or say the same thing about human history/evolution and quantum mechanics?  This kind of a scenario has me puzzling about such problems. 

It might seem plausible that these three phenomena exhibited such properties (to us and in terms of our tests) if the cosmos-at-large functioned from a set of principles that are found inherent-in and at-the-heart-of gsingularitiesh (and indeed from the primordial universe itself right at the gBig Bangh when it would have been a Singularity).  (I should warn you all, this is no more than conjecture on my part; Ifm not a quantum physicist nor am I an evolutionary scientist of either the biological or natural sciences)(I am merely a world historian and social scientist whofs interested in some of these larger issues that come into play when Science, Social Science, and the Humanities/Letters (esp. Philosophy and Scientiaefic reasoning - and sometimes various avenues literary thought & linguistics - cross paths)  With that caveat having been made, take it or leave it as to whether my points here are acceptable or are merely hogwash.

So to conclude and to summarize, I would ask this question -> is evolution quantum chaotic or is quantum chaos evolutionary? c (Perhaps both Eduard Prugovecki and John Landon would like to chime in on this one)(and anyone else is welcome to also)


Luke R.


Do You Yahoo!?
HotJobs, a Yahoo! service - Search Thousands of New Jobs
< < <
Date Index
> > >
World Systems Network List Archives
at CSF
Subscribe to World Systems Network < < <
Thread Index
> > >