[Fis] recognition - limits of thermodynamics

Dear Colleagues,

Considering the problem of recognition, we face following challenges. If we
talk about molecular similarities etc. we assume absolute space in the
Newtonian sense and come to key-lock paradigm. If we assume resonance
approach, we use more convenient basic philosophy, but we still unaware of
underlying appearing phenomena.

I would suggest that recognition process appears at the level of interacting
potential fields. When in the classical experiment photon passes through two
splits, it passes as a potential field and then actualises itself on the
screen. This all shows that �particle� or �wave-particle� approach is not
fully relevant. More relevant is an interpretation of a potential field and
its actualisation.

But I do not aim to develop this topic in detail in this letter. Some
initial approach was given in my paper in BioSystems in 1993 (vol. 31, pp.
65-73) and I tried to develop it in other papers. I would like to put
question about the limits of thermodynamic approach. I would not consider
the second law as a basic principle of the Universe. Really the second law
appears when we estimate actualised world, and do not consider the process
of actualisation. Non-equilibrium thermodynamics is non an exclusion. Fluxes
that it describes are not the fluxes of actualisation: they are the fluxes
of actualised particles.

In correspondence with the second law, the standard for describing a dynamic
system is an isolated equilibrium system with maximum entropy, and the
change in entropy is analysed in relation to that standard. But such a
standard is not valid, particularly for the description of living systems.
An equilibrium system per se cannot be observed according to the basic
principles of observation/recognition: for observation (which is achieved by
quantum measurement) we non-controllably disturb the system, resulting in
its disequilibration. That is why Robert Rosen mentioned once that the
notion of entropy is not valid for living systems.

The correctness of the second law is often proved by using construction like
Maxwell�s Demon. But the problem here (the construction which selects fast
and slow particles and thus decreases entropy) is also considered wrongly.
Demon should really use energy to recognize fast and slow particles,
increasing the entropy of the system. But in order to separate the
particles, the Demon must acknowledge what to do with them. Therefore, the
problem of the Demon cannot be solved only in thermodynamic terms, and the
interaction of pre-existing knowledge (potential information like the
Aristotelian entelechy as a knowledge) with thermodynamic system must be
analysed in order to solve it.

The problem of second law seems to be non-trivial and mainly based on
misunderstandings. The complexity of living systems cannot be simply derived
from external non-equilibrium. Moreover, it is not possible to prove
violations of the second law since we consider the actual world in our
analysis. The decision made by the regulating system appears in the
potential reality and then it brings itself to the actual world consisting
of particles and molecules. Living systems are not simply formed by actual
non-equilibrium. They actively search for external non-equilibrium milieu
suitable for their existence according to their internal decisions
(expressed as semiotic constraints).

I would not dismiss basic principles of physics. They work in our models of
the world and this determines their relative validity. But the basic
principles of even best working theories are wrong. Absolute space-time of
Newton is arbitrary. Einstein could overcome it, but the principle of
absolute speed of light is also arbitrary and based only on convenience.
Wave-particle dualism is arbitrary. But the principles of thermodynamics are
most arbitrary: they work in actualised non-living world. Understanding all
this will allow to move forward, and eventual achievement of challenging
goals of knowledge goes through all these arbitrary rules and models, which
are still necessary for building scientific theories.

Best regards,
Andrei Igamberdiev

http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~igamberd/

_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
http://webmail.unizar.es/mailman/listinfo/fis
Received on Sun Sep 14 21:53:05 2003