Gavin Ritz wrote:
> Don Mikulecky wrote:
>
> > I am in the process of reviewing Rosen's last book : "Essays on Life
> > Itself" for Columbia Univ. Press. First off I recommend it highly!
> > It is due out in November.
> >
> > I just had my mind blown and need some feedback. He discusses
> > Schroedinger's essay on "What is Life?" still one more time and puts
> > it into still one more new perspective. The essence is like this.
> > He claims that Schroedinger was after a new physics(implicitly). He
> > also, as always, points out that this is because biology can tell us
> > things about matter which the old physics can not. In particular,
> > he shows how the old physics leads to certain infinite regressions
> > if we seek to have a general theory of STABLE open systems. He then
> > shows how the answer can lie in the very same closed loops of
> > efficient causation he has developed in other ways using category
> > theory on his Metabolism/Repair systems. This line of reasoning
> > seems so clear and overpowering that I wonder if I am missing a
> > potential flaw. Does it make any sense? Please comment.
> > Don Mikulecky
>
> Dear DonIt is very difficult to make sense of what you are saying in
> such a short comment. But there is something that rings for me in your
> comments. Systems theory is about closed systems and not direct
> causation and how they evolve or devolve. Often cause and effect are so
> far in time (about time again) that it might seem that there is no
> relationship. It is clear to me that physics cannot tell us too much or
> has its limits because it belongs to the school of Discriminant Objects
> (mechanists) whilst I would imagine biology is really part of some
> Continuous Field school of thought. I do not know enough about biology
> to really comment too much here. But Cybernetics which is my interest is
> part of a Continuous Field theory. The most obvious Cybernetic link is
> the mind and the body. Which is a closed loop in terms of causation.
> When often think things, with intention and then act, we often don't see
> or even realise the consequences but they may hit us 12 months later.
> There is a Continuous Field or flux that brings us to the situation but
> we often only see it in isolation.
> And try explain cause and effect in a linear way (Discriminant Object).
> Hence my deep interest in Temporal Horisons because it can go a long way
> in linking causation.
> At present I am not aware of a unifying or field theory for physics and
> quantum mechanics, and my guess it will not come from the Discriminant
> Objects of thought, but from Biology or cybernetics or systems theory.
> Kindest
> Gavin Ritz
> Godzone New Zealand
>
> >