Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||An unconquered conceptual divide related to cognitive perception exists between the physical and biological sciences. The life processes of self assembly and replication are unaccounted for in quantum theory or in the ordinary laws of physics. Lying at the very base element of this confusion is a theoretical wall outlined by statistical generalization on one border, and exact historical evolution on the other. Can inert, randomly oriented, statistically described agents (atoms/molecules), direct the reproduction of like things. If the answer to this proposition is negative, then are space and matter not as assumed (i.e. – as uniformly interpretable statistical entities), but things with a life like evolving history from a unique beginning. For example: if life processes are conceptually tree like, can (must) the processes from which they are created be defined this way also? If one reflects on this question he can liken it to a similar question: can a tree exist with one branch only (i.e. can a tree exist as a simple line verses a line with an origin and history) a conflict emerges that reveals a subtler conflict in the pursuit of an objective interpretation. A simple line always is less complex than the other and does not exist in the life processes or even in the ordinary life of an individual: it's history, in terms of life time, is infinitely smaller the closer it resembles a simple undefined line. In defining matter statistically, we are objectively claiming that it has no time dependant history, and yet is the objective source of evolution, which by definition has a subjective history. We are left with the alternative to find a new order for the definition of physical processes. In this paper, I wish to show that with very little rearrangement of current notions, a model of space can be created that details the replication, from an origin, and propagation in a tree like manner with a declining potential, of both the evolutionary processes of living things, and space, and matter.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Joel D. Velasco (2010). Species, Genes, and the Tree of Life. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 61 (3):599-619.
Olivier Rieppel (2010). The Series, the Network, and the Tree: Changing Metaphors of Order in Nature. Biology and Philosophy 25 (4):475-496.
L. R. Franklin-Hall (2010). Trashing Life's Tree. Biology and Philosophy 25 (4):689-709.
J. David Archibald (2009). Edward Hitchcock's Pre-Darwinian (1840) "Tree of Life". Journal of the History of Biology 42 (3):561 - 592.
Maureen A. O.’Malley, William Martin & John Dupré (2010). The Tree of Life: Introduction to an Evolutionary Debate. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 25 (4):441-453.
Maureen A. O.’Malley (2010). Ernst Mayr, the Tree of Life, and Philosophy of Biology. Biology and Philosophy 25 (4):529-552.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads2 ( #246,694 of 739,369 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,680 of 739,369 )
How can I increase my downloads?