Theory of Everything - View Single Post

David Maes · **open or closed? -** 02-14-2006, 04:02 PM

Sorry about these thoughts (just interested...)... am just questioning something... every criticism is welcome (just thinking about something) (more in a philosophical way...) (haven't had much time to think about lately; some questions are just popping up... can't resist to question this)

Some earlier I did a post where I claimed "in a closed system the amount of entropy seems to increase (or remain the same)" and "in an open system the amount of entropy seems to decrease (or remain the same)".

But I guess a 100% closed system does not exist; and also a 100% open system does not exist.

But what is 'evolution'?

Cells seem to have combined by evolution to organisms which are still evolving.

How do they evolve?
It happens because there is some kind of 'anomaly' in an animal (or plant). Most of these 'anomalies' will even make dying the relevant animal faster...
But sometimes there are anomalies which are just happen to be an advantage for the animal... so it's more haven 'success' and more chance to reproduce its own genes... this we could call a favourable anomaly... I think like this, evolution happens in a long term...

So I guess this gives what we call 'evolution' an explication in which it can happen in a causal way (this is what scientists like...)

For example: first there are only aparts cells... some of them have (by the reproduction) anomalies... favourable anomalies maybe make it better that they combine themselves to 'organisms' (just like we would combine what we do in an organisation to get more efficiency (I guess sometimes '1+1 = 3')...
(creating wholes...)

In this way it could give time a direction, but then in the direction of evolution...
and it could even be just a normal causal chain.

You could say chemical reactions just happen and by evolution, some particular kind of chemical reactions keep on happening more and more frequently because the circumstances of the environnement make this happening...? Then these are finally leading to our (macroscopic) world and the reality we all perceive...

The question is... why does this happen?

Because it seems that species which stop evolving become extinct. Why?
I guess the following is the reason...

Imagen one species which does not evolve in time; and all the other species in the environnement of this one species do evolve...
Then the other ones will become stronger and stronger... and the one species which does not evolve will experience more and more difficulty to survive relative to the other ones of its environnement.

So eventually everything keeps on evolving and evolving...
(You can also experience this in trade and industry... keep on evolving, cause I guess when all the others evolve and you don't, then you might get into trouble...)

So I guess the law of evolution has as much as right to exist as the second law of thermodynamics (entropy increases in the direction of time....)

In general I would think that there are two kind of systems...

'Embedded' systems and 'not embedded' systems...

An 'embedded' system resists changes and will try to close itself from the environnement...
A 'non-embedded' system shall very easily adapt itself to its environnement; so I guess it'll be 'open'...

I don't know, but I guess systems often seem to be 'open' in the beginning and 'close' themselves after a time... maybe it's because of the changing (and evolving) environnement...

But I guess I might look at these matters a bit to much in 'black and white' (a bit exaggerated... (which is one of my characteristics...sorry)

I guess a 100% open system is probably not a system anymore;
and also I guess a 100% closed systems (which does not really exist anyway) will experience entropy and will vanish because of its evolving environnement...

So I guess the truth might be somewhere in between...

The disadvantage of a system being closed might be that it deteriorates and is probably is submitted to the second law of thermodynamics (increase of entropy); it doesn't receive new information!
The disadvantage of a system being open might be that it's too unprotected against its (evolving) environnement.
Think of catching cold... when a system is too open it might not only receive 'information' which it needs to survive, but also the information it 'doesn't need' like a virus or 'a cold' for example...

(thinking of organisms being consisted of very little nanoscopic parallel nano'computers' with many processes at the same time; kind of like 'democracies'...)

(we all know what's the disadvantage of connecting to the net and receiving something like a 'Trojan Horse' for example...)
(on the other hand by connecting to the 'net' our 'computer' has the ability to receive 'information'!)

So it is my thought that a system has to be more in some kind of equilibrium or balance to be able to survive; then I'm thinking about a balance between 'openness' and 'closeness'... ((seems a bit like the 'ying-yang'-philosophy...))

Some times one would think that everything is some kind of balance...

But then... imagen that everything I'm saying here would be true...
then what would be the part of what we call 'time' in all of this??

On the one hand we seem to have a logical direction of time in a 'closed' system (with a tendency to chaos...);
but on the other hand we seem to have a direction of time in which systems seem to evolve and seem to possess a tendency to more and more complexity??

Then we also have expansion of the universe...
You could interprete it as increase of entropy...
Or maybe you can also think it's evolution... (i.e. the creation of more and more timespace...)??

Is what we call 'the universe' open or closed?? Maybe it is just semi-open and semi-closed or interacting with other universes...?

Anyhow... the laws of time and space seem to stop at the border of the universe...
I guess 'the universe' won't exist for ever...
But... is there just one??

Could there be some kind of competition between universes ("getting the most timespace??") (Sorry this sounds a bit ridiculous even for myself...)

OK, that's it... any criticism is welcome and will be received with pleasure and interest...

((ye never know; maybe might bring someone closer here; you never know; (no matter if it's wrong...)))

Sorry for the 'intervention' (just interested in your reactions...)...

Greetings,
David.

	(#30 (permalink))
David Maes I'm thinking thus I exist Status: Offline Posts: 460 Thanks Given: 58 Thanked 10x in 6 Posts Join Date: Jul 2005 Rep Power: 16	open or closed? - 02-14-2006, 04:02 PM Sorry about these thoughts (just interested...)... am just questioning something... every criticism is welcome (just thinking about something) (more in a philosophical way...) (haven't had much time to think about lately; some questions are just popping up... can't resist to question this) Some earlier I did a post where I claimed "in a closed system the amount of entropy seems to increase (or remain the same)" and "in an open system the amount of entropy seems to decrease (or remain the same)". But I guess a 100% closed system does not exist; and also a 100% open system does not exist. But what is 'evolution'? Cells seem to have combined by evolution to organisms which are still evolving. How do they evolve? It happens because there is some kind of 'anomaly' in an animal (or plant). Most of these 'anomalies' will even make dying the relevant animal faster... But sometimes there are anomalies which are just happen to be an advantage for the animal... so it's more haven 'success' and more chance to reproduce its own genes... this we could call a favourable anomaly... I think like this, evolution happens in a long term... So I guess this gives what we call 'evolution' an explication in which it can happen in a causal way (this is what scientists like...) For example: first there are only aparts cells... some of them have (by the reproduction) anomalies... favourable anomalies maybe make it better that they combine themselves to 'organisms' (just like we would combine what we do in an organisation to get more efficiency (I guess sometimes '1+1 = 3')... (creating wholes...) In this way it could give time a direction, but then in the direction of evolution... and it could even be just a normal causal chain. You could say chemical reactions just happen and by evolution, some particular kind of chemical reactions keep on happening more and more frequently because the circumstances of the environnement make this happening...? Then these are finally leading to our (macroscopic) world and the reality we all perceive... The question is... why does this happen? Because it seems that species which stop evolving become extinct. Why? I guess the following is the reason... Imagen one species which does not evolve in time; and all the other species in the environnement of this one species do evolve... Then the other ones will become stronger and stronger... and the one species which does not evolve will experience more and more difficulty to survive relative to the other ones of its environnement. So eventually everything keeps on evolving and evolving... (You can also experience this in trade and industry... keep on evolving, cause I guess when all the others evolve and you don't, then you might get into trouble...) So I guess the law of evolution has as much as right to exist as the second law of thermodynamics (entropy increases in the direction of time....) In general I would think that there are two kind of systems... 'Embedded' systems and 'not embedded' systems... An 'embedded' system resists changes and will try to close itself from the environnement... A 'non-embedded' system shall very easily adapt itself to its environnement; so I guess it'll be 'open'... I don't know, but I guess systems often seem to be 'open' in the beginning and 'close' themselves after a time... maybe it's because of the changing (and evolving) environnement... But I guess I might look at these matters a bit to much in 'black and white' (a bit exaggerated... (which is one of my characteristics...sorry) I guess a 100% open system is probably not a system anymore; and also I guess a 100% closed systems (which does not really exist anyway) will experience entropy and will vanish because of its evolving environnement... So I guess the truth might be somewhere in between... The disadvantage of a system being closed might be that it deteriorates and is probably is submitted to the second law of thermodynamics (increase of entropy); it doesn't receive new information! The disadvantage of a system being open might be that it's too unprotected against its (evolving) environnement. Think of catching cold... when a system is too open it might not only receive 'information' which it needs to survive, but also the information it 'doesn't need' like a virus or 'a cold' for example... (thinking of organisms being consisted of very little nanoscopic parallel nano'computers' with many processes at the same time; kind of like 'democracies'...) (we all know what's the disadvantage of connecting to the net and receiving something like a 'Trojan Horse' for example...) (on the other hand by connecting to the 'net' our 'computer' has the ability to receive 'information'!) So it is my thought that a system has to be more in some kind of equilibrium or balance to be able to survive; then I'm thinking about a balance between 'openness' and 'closeness'... ((seems a bit like the 'ying-yang'-philosophy...)) Some times one would think that everything is some kind of balance... But then... imagen that everything I'm saying here would be true... then what would be the part of what we call 'time' in all of this?? On the one hand we seem to have a logical direction of time in a 'closed' system (with a tendency to chaos...); but on the other hand we seem to have a direction of time in which systems seem to evolve and seem to possess a tendency to more and more complexity?? Then we also have expansion of the universe... You could interprete it as increase of entropy... Or maybe you can also think it's evolution... (i.e. the creation of more and more timespace...)?? Is what we call 'the universe' open or closed?? Maybe it is just semi-open and semi-closed or interacting with other universes...? Anyhow... the laws of time and space seem to stop at the border of the universe... I guess 'the universe' won't exist for ever... But... is there just one?? Could there be some kind of competition between universes ("getting the most timespace??") (Sorry this sounds a bit ridiculous even for myself...) OK, that's it... any criticism is welcome and will be received with pleasure and interest... ((ye never know; maybe might bring someone closer here; you never know; (no matter if it's wrong...))) Sorry for the 'intervention' (just interested in your reactions...)... Greetings, David.