Mindscape 294 | Addy Pross on Dynamics, Stability, and Life

[@goltltamas]

In the light of this conversation, - that I can not thank enough - now I am completely sure that Michael Levin is totally right in his all structure of thinking/talking/working!

[@ExsoLam]

I was in complete agreement until about 50 minutes in. The conceptual revision is not necessary. See Denis Noble vs Dennett

[@michealcline2469]

Another great, thought provoking, episode... Thank you for the continued content. 😊

[@aedrianys]

Thank you!! Always glad to learn new stuff with you.

[@cliffordbohm]

Well, damn. I've been working in the background on "peristant theory" only to hear it here fully formed. Good stuff!

[@rossw1365]

he says many of the things I've said I'm not a biologist and don't know how widely held the idea individual cells and organisms are aware selves is maybe it isn't widely held bc I never hear consciousness researchers talk about it but it was apparent to me when I thought about it, so I'm not surprised it is also apparent to at least some

[@rossw1365]

I didn't use the word "cognition" to describe the awareness of individual cells, however! "cognition" is usually applied to conscious minds and single cells are far from conscious, imo I did suggest plants exhibit behaviors that could be called "cognition", though I didn't use the term bc I don't think plants are conscious, not in the way animals are, anyway

[@helicalactual]

This paper presents a comprehensive exploration of Delta B (∆B), a quantitative measure of structural deviation from an ideal state of stasis, using the recently discovered Einstein tile as a primary model. By integrating entropy (∆S) as a fundamental descriptor of disorder, we propose a mathematical framework that characterizes deviations from perfect aperiodicity. We expand upon the concept of stasis-not merely as a physical state but as a multifaceted equilibrium encompassing mental, emotional, psychological, physiological, intellectual, and philosophical dimensions. Due to the inherent complexity of harmonizing these six aspects (the "six-body problem"), true stasis remains unattainable, yet it represents a universal pursuit in both physical systems and life forms. Through the definition of a quadratic function derived from thermodynamic principles, we analyze the behavior of ∆B in relation to entropy changes. This provides new insights into the stability and transformations of systems striving for stasis under varying conditions of order and disorder.

[@wadehines9971]

Absolutely on target. We have organic/biochemistry within life that we now recognize are rather typical of CHNOPS. The chemistry of life isn't all that special. What we need is useful energy in chemical form. The obvious choice is pairings of molecules from volcanic sources to produce reduction/oxidation reactions. Vulcanism's magic is that preferred redox states under heat and pressure are different than at the Earth's surface. That provides us water at the top of the mountain. Then, with quite a bit of luck, the right sorts of chemistry can occur on the flow down the mountain.

[@smallduck1001001]

I don't think awareness if a good term for simple life like a cell. I think it's better to say that life is synergistic with its environment,. As improved synergy, which I think is how you can characterize sensing ability and literal awareness, leads to improved stability, it rides on the increase stability train. I think self-awareness can fit in this way of thinking too.

[@htt232101]

Love this episode. So thought provoking and so well put that for the laymen like myself I could understand exactly what Addy Pross was saying. I'm now buoyed to go and buy his book and dig deeper.

[@jonathanbyrdmusic]

I’m glad Mindscape persists. (First.)

[@LearnedSome]

I like to think of life as anti-entropy: The tendency of things to become or stay ordered.

[@geertdepuydt2683]

The first 15min or so got me confused. These concepts have been core to any biology curriculum for many decades. Nothing new

[@ExsoLam]

He quotes Denis Noble so his influences are clear. Unfortunately he's very confused on some issues, consumed by historical strawmen

[@wadehines9971]

Lost me when he misrepresented Barbara McClintock's work and peppered in some other misrepresentations based on polemic around casual oversimplifications that he represented as standard biological wisdom.

[@rumraket38]

Had the same thought. He was totally overgeneralizing CRISPR, and seemed to think extremely confusedly that the concept of environmentally sensitive gene expression somehow contradicts evolution, or genetics, or the modern synthesis. He is deeply confused, and has probably been listening too much to people like James Shapiro and Denis Noble. These people are notoriously confused.

[@paxdriver]

28:05 - 30:00 he's describing different ideas, if that's what you're referring to. Is it possible you misheard or gave up before he completed his thought? Curious if you've made a mistake or if I've missed something, where did you listen to? Edit: Oooh 51:26, I see what you mean lol so you left 20mins early and liked the other 50mins of the show? Lol why would that bother you so much if the rest of the show was fine?

[@wadehines9971]

@@paxdriver There was a rapid file set of misrepresentations about how cells control DNA. The misrepresentation of the Central Dogma always bothers me as people assert something Crick never said. He claimed sequence information can't go backwards from protein to DNA or RNA and people try to claim he just said information. Then they claim their DNA methylation work has overturned the Central Dogma. There was a rapid fire set of similar misrepresentations around that time. Earlier he glossed over metabolism first then handwaved it away because that doesn't already solve all of replication, but that's not the claim. I greatly dislike the technique of putting up a strawman version of another idea then claiming that it doesn't work. If you want to knock something down, present it in its best light, not in a version you've hobbled.

[@gerardaygun2115]

noble simply describes his own interpretation. crisprtoxins represent another fallacious engineering experiment contaminating the natural dispersal of water throughout the earth. scientists, technologists, engineers and mathematicians suffer their own entrapment, foolishly ignoring the wisdom provided by fruit and vegetables. the plants themselves demonstrate perfect engineering, additionally granting a slow route to enhancement of said fruit and vegetables. the mistake of all meddlesome low grade academics is to believe that an 'accelerator' equates to success. this belief is false. scientists, technologists, engineers and mathematicians accelerate their own entrapment as they violently react to the quicksand of truth. objectivity is small and simple. subjectivity is vast. biologists are always false because they drown themselves in their own endless, non-sensical, frivolous categorizations. genes are viruses. viruses are genes. you are twenty percent virus. that means twenty percent of your biological information is physically determined by other species. therefore: biology, genetics and virology are proved false due to lack of coherent logical structure. biology is a colossal waste of scholarly potential. the answer is simple. simplify your life with fruit and vegetables. if you engineer your life you will enter the quick sand of complex doom- you will 'isolate' then look to engineer your way out of isolation (in your own terms) then> your act of engineering your way out of isolation will lead you to become more isolated....-away from nature- like a self imploding goldfish bowl - modern medicine. eat the God dam raw fruit and vegetables people. it takes practice and customisation. I am perfectly virus free for 25 straight years. I am way beyond asymptomatic. I naturally repel mesoscopic bugs too, thanks to carrots and broccoli.

[@wadehines9971]

Have to disagree that evolution has a direction. Forget the handwaving, show me otherwise with population genetics.

Evolution requires "survival of the fittest" to move things in a positive direction. For evolution, "the fittest" are the ones who deliver the most offspring who makes it to make their own. It doesn't care about strength or intelligence. If you make more copies of your genes than others, and those genes spread to make even more copies, you are the fittest. What makes something fit depends on a lot of things, but competition is required to remove the worst of the genes. We have eliminated all competition to any of us, but if thing get worse for long enough, something will be ready to take our spot eventually. Other species still compete among themselves and with other species. We also compete, but not really in a way that affects reproduction, and the most intelligent tend to have the fewest kids. If competition picks up or we start selecting who we think are fittest to breed, or start improving our genetics ourselves, things will start moving forwards again.

[@wadehines9971]

Evolution is more than just Natural Selection. Genome sequencing has shown that neutral evolution, AKA Genetic Drift, produces more changes than selection based evolution. Beyond that, you're repeating disputed truisms unsupported by evidence.