Lateralus: Number Theory and Genetics

a reply to: pthena

Not specifically like entropy, but driven by a similar underlying law. I knew that was a misleading addition.

But this is my internet prattling with things I have a semi-lucid grasp on, I'm gonna mess up..

a reply to: Degradation33

I'll have to sleep on it. I wake up sometimes mid-process of a formulating idea.
Not always, but occasionally.

The abstract representation looks like:

The dark occlusion is a slightly lighter gray.
And the light rays are less pronounced.

Yet another reason for dualism in my view.

originally posted by: quintessentone

I was reading a science study not on this subject but rather on how will humans evolve in 50,000 years and the science theorizes that we will change very little. So, I surmise in answer to your question re: increase in rate of evolution, I would say 'no'.

The problem is humans have taken over evolution so in 50,000 years we will be drastically different. If we went back 300 years and compared man to 50,000 years ago, not huge changes, go back a million years and we see big changes, but at the start of farming, we started to take over. We should be like 35 -40 years of life a cycle. At 35 stuff stops working, women run out of egg ets...

Think about us having a massive influence on what we evolve into.

originally posted by: Degradation33
Let me try one of these threads. I'm kinda a noob, but we'll see how it goes.

An article titled, "Scientists Discover 'Pure Math' Is Written Into Evolutionary Genetics" came through my Newsfeed.

www.sciencealert.com...

It seems black and white were all we saw in our infancy and the ratio may be golden, after all. They found a Fibonacci sequence in our genome.

The meaning of life the universe and everything may be a number thing afterall.

Luckily for us, a motley team of researchers has just uncovered another striking connection between math and nature; between one of the purest forms of mathematics, number theory, and the mechanisms governing the evolution of life on molecular scales, genetics.

Abstract as it may be, number theory might also be one of the more familiar forms of math to many of us. It encompasses the multiplication, subtraction, division, and addition (arithmetic functions) of integers, or whole numbers and their negative counterparts.

The famed Fibonacci sequence is but one example, where each number in the sequence is the sum of the previous two. Its patterns can be found all through nature, in pinecones, pineapples, and sunflower seeds.

"The beauty of number theory lies not only in the abstract relationships it uncovers between integers, but also in the deep mathematical structures it illuminates in our natural world," explains Oxford University mathematician Ard Louis, senior author of the new study.

Of interest to Louis and his colleagues were mutations, the genetic errors that slip into an organism's genome over time and drive evolution.

I swear I was just in thread on something almost similar...

This so-called mutational robustness generates genetic diversity, yet it varies between species, and can even be observed in the proteins inside cells.

Studied proteins can tolerate around two-thirds of random errors in their coding sequences, meaning 66 percent of mutations are neutral and have no effect on their final shape.

We have known for some time that many biological systems exhibit remarkably high phenotype robustness, without which evolution would not be possible," explains Louis.

"But we didn't know what the absolute maximal robustness possible would be, or if there even was a maximum.

They then looked into protein folding and RNA to see how genotype maps to a specific trait.

Louis and colleagues wondered how close nature could get to the upper bounds of mutational robustness, so ran numerical simulations to compute the possibilities.

They studied the abstract mathematical features of how many genetic variations map to a specific phenotype without changing it, and showed mutational robustness could indeed be maximized in naturally-occurring proteins and RNA structures.

What's more, the maximum robustness followed a self-repeating fractal pattern called a Blancmange curve, and was proportional to a basic concept of number theory, called the sum-of-digits fraction.

"We found clear evidence in the mapping from sequences to RNA secondary structures that nature in some cases achieves the exact maximum robustness bound," says Vaibhav Mohanty, of Harvard Medical School.

"It's as if biology knows about the fractal sums-of-digits function."

Now I can make commentary. Their words are better anyway.

This implications are that perhaps everything in the universe really is unified under a ratio in which to exist.

The Fibonacci sequence isn't just some solipsistic mathematical precept that only exists in observation, it existed before our planet had pawn scum and went into our very construction.

Thanks science alert, your pushed me a little further to the agnostic today... sorta

And I can't title it that without the song...

We are the universe. It’s all mental, but how & why is the mystery. I have my ideas , but that isn’t important here .

originally posted by: pthena

"Does the system operate just fine without human observation, or must humans observe so as to change reality in an order out of chaos sort of way?"

I think mind/consciousness and matter are one, just like an object and its shadow are one. The world exhibits mathematical predictability because it is intimately linked with the intelligence of the creators (humans) observing it.

I believe the primordial consciousness took bodily form as a human to interact with the vast creation it made in its mind, the matrix in which we all live to this day. I think thats whats being said by the greeks when they say Prometheus made the first human out of organic matter, or when God created Adam from his spirit and organic matter. Mind creating matter, sort of like in our dreams except it's enduring.

Prometheus means "forethinker", so this was in essence the thought that created humanity.

a reply to: Degradation33

Way off topic, but:
As I felt myself waking I frantically caught the tail end of the words floating on parchment. They didn't make sense until I looked at another thread.

It was the line that starts with "everything else must seem as offensive ..."
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Nutso

a reply to: cooperton

I believe the primordial consciousness

But we have not yet determined whether the primordial is conscious or not.

Prometheus made the first human out of organic matter

Pretty sure it was Pandora(every blessing) the sister in law of Promethius who made man by throwing pieces of Gaia (stones).

My bad, Pandora's daughter Pyrrha (Fire), first naturally born human female who threw the stones with her husband Deukalion.

I'm so rusty on the scriptures!!!

originally posted by: pthena
a reply to: cooperton

I believe the primordial consciousness

But we have not yet determined whether the primordial is conscious or not.

Prometheus made the first human out of organic matter

Pretty sure it was Pandora(every blessing) the sister in law of Promethius who made man by throwing pieces of Gaia (stones).

Just jumping in here because I happened upon another inter-dip math and computer science where supposedly there is synchronicity in movement or vibration (could this be along the lines of the 'spark' or how the spark may have formed?)

Computer scientists and mathematicians working in complex systems at the University of Sydney and the Max Planck Institute for Mathematics in the Sciences in Germany have developed new methods to describe what many of us take for granted – how easy, or hard, it can be to fall in and out of sync.

Synchronised phenomena are all around us, whether it is human clapping and dancing, or the way fireflies flash, or how our neurons and heart cells interact. However, it is something not fully understood in engineering and science.

neurosciencenews.com...

Maybe I am just grasping at straws, but who knows?

a reply to: quintessentone

Maybe I am just grasping at straws, but who knows?

I just checked what the topic is. The phrase "life the universe and everything" is thrown into the OP.
Straws gotta be included.

(could this be along the lines of the 'spark' or how the spark may have formed?)

Maybe not how it is formed, but the "walk" term coined may be like the sudden change mutation of nucleotides after buildup of nonchanging mutations.

To understand how these systems work, the researchers studied what are known as “walks” through a network in a complex system. Walks are sequences of connected hops between individual elements or nodes in the network.

They were studying existing complex networks, not formation of complex networks.

On the other hand. If we assume an existing complex ethereal network giving rise to physically manifested complexity. Hmm.


Full disclosure: I'm just using rhetoric as if it can enhance credibility. I'm not really smart about physics or biochemistry or even metaphysics.

a reply to: pthena

On the other hand. If we assume an existing complex ethereal network giving rise to physically manifested complexity. Hmm.

Uh huh, hmm.

a reply to: cooperton

I will try this again, making it quite personal to myself.

You have a dualistic Worldview, and so do I.
Therefore we reach into the Platonic "idea".

What Prometheus and Hephaestus made was not true flesh and blood human, just the idea; an abstract concept.

An abstract concept is impervious to the ravages of time and decay, therefore immortal. Those men had no reality in physical terms.

All that ideal idea abstract immortality got swept away by the deluge. Only afterward did flesh and blood humanity come to be, with the daughter of Pandora.
" Her other name—inscribed against her figure on a white-ground kylix in the British Museum[4]—is Anesidora (Ancient Greek: Ἀνησιδώρα), "she who sends up gifts"[5] (up implying "from below" within the earth)." -Wikipedia

I forgot where I was going with this.

Maybe immortality is an idea only, not physical reality. Or something I forgot.
------------
I suddenly remembered. I was going to get all hyperbolic:
Non-dualism is assailing me from every side, causing untold torment and suffering, like the punishment of Prometheus.

But I've seen the abstract representation of reality, the very idea, with my own eyes. It is dual.

a reply to: cooperton

And yet another stab at this:

The world exhibits mathematical predictability because it is intimately linked with the intelligence of the creators (humans) observing it.
...
I believe the primordial consciousness took bodily form as a human to interact with the vast creation it made in its mind, the matrix in which we all live to this day.

Lest someone mistakenly assumes that my stance on duality necessitates The Man in the Sky concept, I will say no. It doesn't.

The first part of your quote above is actually the human projection of human intent upon the Ground of Being(Tillich), the Organizing Principle(Degredation33), which she equates with Spirit.

The primordial consciousness(Cooperton) may be a human mythological construct. The Organizing Principle (perhaps Mathematically understood) may not be conscious as humans define consciousness. Moreover, the Myth of Man in the Sky taking human form may be human invention also, a myth of mythological proportions.

--------
I thought that I could explain it in words but maybe not.

a reply to: Degradation33

I have a semi-lucid grasp on,

I thought it said "grasp on p"

originally posted by: pthena

Lest someone mistakenly assumes that my stance on duality necessitates The Man in the Sky concept, I will say no. It doesn't.

I think it would be "Mind in the ether", not "man in the sky".

The first part of your quote above is actually the human projection of human intent upon the Ground of Being(Tillich), the Organizing Principle(Degredation33), which she equates with Spirit.

Yeah I would equate that to "Logos", which is the 'reason'/'logic' that the cosmos perpetuates according to. To define this "Being" and the methods that were used to create is quite difficult and mysterious

The primordial consciousness(Cooperton) may be a human mythological construct. The Organizing Principle (perhaps Mathematically understood) may not be conscious as humans define consciousness.

Even simply to be aware of being aware. I don't see how unconsciousness could implement mind-boggling physical algorithms to allow the consistency exhibited in all matter and energy.

Moreover, the Myth of Man in the Sky taking human form may be human invention also, a myth of mythological proportions.

The human body is the ideal vessel to create and manipulate matter physically. Hands with opposable thumbs and uprightedness allow creative work to be done. It makes sense when we look at ourselves as manifestations of this spirit, or, in other words, its 'children'

originally posted by: pthena
a reply to: Degradation33

I have a semi-lucid grasp on,

I thought it said "grasp on p"

It did. It was an edit mistake or overtype or something. Sorry about that.

a reply to: cooperton

I don't see how unconsciousness could implement mind-boggling physical algorithms to allow the consistency exhibited in all matter and energy.

Ratios and equations exist before people discover them? (sounds Platonic) Kind of how gravity and atomic bonds don't rely on human intellect or discovery.

The human body is the ideal vessel to create and manipulate matter physically.

Metabolism (/məˈtæbəlɪzəm/, from Greek: μεταβολή metabolē, "change") is the set of life-sustaining chemical reactions in organisms. The three main functions of metabolism are: the conversion of the energy in food to energy available to run cellular processes; the conversion of food to building blocks for proteins, lipids, nucleic acids, and some carbohydrates; and the elimination of metabolic wastes.

Has been going on since the first cell came to be, maybe even before, probably before. Humans can build skyscrapers and telescopes and such.

It makes sense when we look at ourselves as manifestations of this spirit, or, in other words, its 'children'

And ignore all other life?

All if not most of the World's mythology is very humancentric. Is it because humans are the only one's who need these stories? One day we may learn enough animal languages to ask them about their metaphysical speculations. That might be very educational.

a reply to: Degradation33

It did. It was an edit mistake or overtype or something. Sorry about that.

I broke my mind over an edit mistake? JK
I'm OK, just a little wrung out.

The change of avatar is because of the earthquake. The Linus seemed so jarringly out of place.

originally posted by: pthena

Ratios and equations exist before people discover them? (sounds Platonic) Kind of how gravity and atomic bonds don't rely on human intellect or discovery.

I am making the argument that the creation existing with mathematical predictability and beauty is indicative of it being a mentally contrived system. The natural world is pleasing to the mind because it was created by the Primordial Mind. Ratios and equations are indicative of intelligent constructs. A house is made according to proper proportion and you know it was intelligently contrived when you see it. It is the same with biological and cosmological constructs, the only reason we don't consider it an intelligent contrivance is because we've grown to take it for granted. But biology shows that all organisms have microscopic machinery that allow them to persist on the material interface

And ignore all other life?

All if not most of the World's mythology is very humancentric. Is it because humans are the only one's who need these stories? One day we may learn enough animal languages to ask them about their metaphysical speculations. That might be very educational.

Well I don't think a dog's mind would be a good candidate for the creator of the universe, and the human has the apex creative ability, so it is sensible that we are harboring uniquely the Creator Spirit that founded the universe. With that being said, animals and other lifeforms do have analogous traits to humankind. Humans have been known to act like dogs, pigs, a workhorse, etc, etc. Perhaps Adam wasn't simply naming the animals, rather he was designing them and speaking them into existence... because when Adam does this, Him and the Primordial Creator Spirit are still one in Genesis 2:20

It is also interesting to note that the Anglo-Saxon's in their Epic of Beowulf, they describe a creature that matches a T-rex to a T... They call it a creature/contrivance of Cain...

a reply to: cooperton

We have left the science, the physics; and ventured into Metaphysics and Systematic Theology. I don't have a problem with that as long as the OP doesn't.

I am making the argument that the creation existing with mathematical predictability and beauty is indicative of it being a mentally contrived system.

And I am arguing out of both sides of my mouth. On the one hand, The Organizing Principle may be intelligent. On the other hand the Organizing Principle may not be intelligent. It doesn't matter to me one way or the other. That gives me a psychopathic advantage. It is what it is. And since I've given up on solipsism, what I think about it isn't going to change it.

From what you have stated explicitly, I would say that your Worldview, your Systematic Theology, starts with man and ends with man, Alpha and Omega, immortal and all wise. The very reason, the very goal of the universe.

My Worldview, my Systematic Theology, does not include immortality, it just doesn't. The Universe itself will end sometime. The Organizing Principle may be intelligent, but not alive, that is apart from the elements which it animates, where metabolism happens. Spirit and body together, to make a Soul. The Soul. The One.

I am no specialist in any scientific field, but I have no reason to doubt the huge amounts of Time that the Universe has existed. And the 100s of millions of years in which life (metabolism) have been.

Man is not the beginning and man is not the end. Even some time when our particular specie has ended, there will still be life and still the One will live on, maybe even a billion years still.
===========
So that's my Worldview. It promises nothing. It may suck compared to other Worldviews. But it might be factual. It might even be true. Mystery of Mysteries.