Fossil find confirms Kauffman and Progogine self organization.

[Christopher]

I’m sorry this last post is just incoherent, and has little to do with any specifics of my models.

 

Do you realize what I am postulating here?

[Christopher]

makes more sense to me than your mystical hoodoo.

 

 

You need to realize something here my post are not meant for just you , they are for anyone with the capacity and inclination to understand them. You are obviously not interested in this subject, if you think the application of chaos to the mystery of the evolution of complex morphology is;

mystical hoodoo.

 

 

 

Then you can explain to me how a jellyfish evolves from a sponge, and a worm into a fish.

[Christopher]

What this fossil is showing is that each phyla was spawned from a life form that emerged directly from a substrate of single cells that merged in a geometrical assemblage point by a process of constructive collapse. This constructive collapse is also how every stage of the universe was created.

This is completely revolutionary idea of life that has never been considered before.

This also follows a pattern of development that proceeded the emergence of life this is also revolutionary, I can assure you this was never been postulated before if you think it has it is hasn’t dawned on you as yet what I am showing.

 

 

This pattern is as follows;

 

1. Big Bang….universe

 

2. Black hole……galaxy

 

3. Super Nova…….Solar system

 

4.Vesica AttractorCambrian Explosion …..Phyla

 

It appears that this repeating pattern of expansions and contractions creates a layered structure that embeds one system within the next.

This fractal embedding enables information to flow from one system, to the next, like a series of vortexes one within another.

This cyclical flow pattern allows for the emergence of self-stabilizing self-organizing dynamical systems.

 

------------------------------------------

At this point environmental dynamics at large compressed these cells into circular algorithmic networks, from pre-existing patterns of the universe at large. A sort of preexisting mold that envelops anything that has the complexity to sustain these forms.

 

 

---------------------------------------------------------

 

 

Another key in the self-making ability of the embryonic material that forms the vesica attractor is in it's ability to shape-shift around the tendency of a fluid to seek an ordered path though and around a medium. This medium having a fine balance of cohesion and plasticity.

The next key is in the mineral content of the spheres. Aragonite, this form of calcium carbonate has properties that promote microbial growth and acts as a mineral substrate for initiating an autopoetic biochemical cycle. This mineral has been discovered to be a fundamental element in maintaining an autopoetic system in coral reefs and closed artificial systems such as salt water aquariums.

Another important roll of the oolites is in their ability to act as a dynamic scaffolding. As the aragonite spheres dissolve though chemical and mechanical forces, a synergy unfolds throughout the emerging structure, As the oolites shrink they become point attractors among the eukaryote cells, that have now adopted the fluid energetic pattern left by the cyanobacteria filaments. As the oolites lose mass they induce the production of new filaments that emerge from the outer cellular membranes of the eukaryotes. Anchoring proteins extend through the plasma membrane to link to the emerging cytoskeleton structure. Simply put, as the temporary oolitic scaffolding deconstructs, it constructs it's permanent replacement. These Anchoring-type junctions not only hold cells together but provide tissues with structural cohesion. These junctions are produced more abundantly in tissues that are subject to higher mechanical stress such as the outer skin and heart. Connective tissues begin forming flexible geodesic scaffolding by drawing in and connecting to points in space where the oolites have now vacated. These connecting points form the extracellular matrix, meanwhile the vesica apertures acts as a cycle attractor spiraling inward keeping a central tension as the embryo loses mass and takes shape, simultaneously providing a flow of renewing sea water though the recursive system as it pulses in time with wave cycles. The central apertures begins to coil in slack in the form of a layered network of connected cells. This dense mass of wound together cells will form heart tissue. This tension that connects eukaryote cells in a medium of cohesion is called (tensegrity). Tensegrity results in a crystallization of connections in the architecture of the emerging organism, enabling the individual cell though it's own intracellular matrix to respond to a potential fitness space. This crystallization of the recursive dynamic structure might well result in an "algorithmic self-assembly" of genetic probabilities.

Developing layers of the body plan are connected from heart, shell, exo-skeleton or notochord, down to the strands of DNA in the cells nucleus by this network of filaments, thus tuning the cells information bank to circuits of communication though the internal structure, then out to the universe at large. A current of information begins to flow between the micro-cellular universe below to a cognitive landscape of the macro-universe above. "Cogito ergo sum

[emessay]

damocles, please your recommended urls make it working, I am interested to follow it. Thanks

[Christopher]

Errors.

 

Your model is not supported by the fossil evidence, over time?.

 

 

Animal life needs to have a morphology that has a certain threshold of complexity in order to evolve expodiently like we see life in the Cambrian.

 

These cellular arrangements formed around certain geometric principles theses complex arrangements allowed for more complexity within the systems to manifest more morphological features over time.

 

 

Read the last post on attractors this explains this.

 

The jellyfish does not contain this complexity in its fundamental form.

 

 

 

It does not contain the potential to evolve other more complex morphological features, it simply cannot get there from where it started.

 

This is the fundamental flaw in Darwinian models you can not go from sponge to jelly fish, or jelly fish to worm.

 

Once these simple forms are set they are limited to further stages of development.

 

The Cambrian metazoan however formed from a torus, a basic geometry that enabled it to form a complex matrix of cells that spawned not only all the higher taxon, but produced animals like fish that created the wide and diverse verities of animals in the vertebrates from parrots to humans. from the simple starting point of the fish. now that is complexity!

--------------------------------------------

Archetypal life forms

Curiously the fossil record shows a top down hierarchical pattern of appearance in which major structural themes of body plans or [bauplans] emerge before minor variations on those themes.

The vesica attractor enables an archetype to form around a preexisting possibility for order. Form will follow both Internal structures and environmental dynamics. These two basins of order represent the factors involved in determining the bauplan that emerges from the vesica attractor.

[ Example] archetypal forms developing in the high energy tidal zone, will manifest mobile, dynamic, heart based bauplans.

Whereas an archetype forming in the stable depths, will manifest a static configuration around a basin of internal structure.

The original archetypes would not have had time to be based on genetic adaptation but rather on geometrical patterns inherent in preexisting possibilities.

From these basic configurations, genetics could then use time, to develop variations on these “Eternal true forms” That emerged quickly and directly from the vesica attractor.

This scenario fits the fossil record as well as current genome research that suggests the phyla arose separately, simultaneously and abruptly, from a ''common primordial pond" of genetics, and this artifact shows clearly and precisely how.

The embryonic structure appears to have ruptured a developing chamber. This chamber could no longer contain pressure so the system collapsed. Fortunately for science this was well timed to preserve a window into a miracle of transformation, any further along the oolites would have completed the transformation into shell, any sooner the structure would not have developed into the complex geometrical form.

This form contains an extraordinary set of patterns when interpreted exposes a link between two worlds, Allowing a special insight into both.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Punctuated Equilibrium

Archetypal life forms were born on the cusp of two worlds. [MacrocosmMicrocosm] I believe the purpose of this is to establish an informational feed back loop anchored at a central Source. From this evolutionary still point genetic novelty can be collected and recombined so new species can be created.

This renewing cycle of information from a separate bank of selective genetics could also keep the system far from equilibrium.

This feedback loop cycles between two states, one of stability, and one of renewal.

The Archetypal life forms would inherit an carbonsilicon based information gathering and storage system,[see extracellular matrix]{oolitic core} thus acting as the central, sustainable, creative, pool for the phyla.

This is the best of both worlds, unlimited life span in their own self-replicating systems, and access to creative adaptive change from its progeny.

If this model proves to be correct, it begs an obvious and fascinating question. Where are these original archetypes now?

 

What I suggest is the phyla have central original archetypes. This hierarchal control retained as a actual classification of distinct entities.

 

 

These entities would regulate a two fold system. One at accumulating information that falls outside the parameters of a morphological mean, or stasis. Keeping the phyla’s genomic controls stable over time, And simultaneously allowing this collection of instabilities to self organize in its own separate space. Once this system reaches a threshold it emerges as an individual entity. A second level archetype, a new species reflecting the aspect of two basins of attraction, environment, and genetic probabilities.

 

http://www.id.ucsb.edu/veritas/JOURNEY/phyla.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.iscid.org/boards/ubb-get_topic-f-26-t-000007.html

Vesica Attractor; Gastropoda

 

 

 

The simple animals before the Cambrian such as a jellyfish and worms did not have the genetic diversity to form complex cellular networks and formed around differing dynamics. The jellyfish for instance relates to the environment in cycles that move up and down with the sun, and still posses a symbiosis with the photosynthetic cells.

 

 

In the more advanced vesica attractor, The eukaryotes acheived a way to bridge a gap of organization. The eukaryotes could not do this alone. They need to much energy. They needed the energetic "stepping stone" until the structure was up and running.

 

They needed a circulatory system, that could be built and sustained all at once, and crystallized into a cohesive whole.

This is what this artifact is showing. A frozen mid point in this self construction process.

 

Trilobites and crustaceans body plans are created by what I refer to as the {origami effect} these particular vesica attractors will utilize the recursive construction as sections and folds that preserve the folds into compartments that will unfold into fully articulated appendages and segments.

 

These attractors might form in deeper less dynamic wave pulses. allowing the retention and crystallization of these geometrical enfolded patterns. {visualize a toaist Mandela unfolding into an articulated appendage} ECHINODERMATA would form from a vesica attractor that ends up on its side, and would develop around a basin of internal structure.

 

Refer to below for chordate, gastropod and cephalopod. If the vesica attractor failed to become fertilized, by a colony of eukaryotes, a complex algae may result.

 

 

This photo and photo-shop rendering is all I have at the moment. What I really need is a photo shop animation of the dynamic.

 

http://www.imagestation.com/album/?id=2128032952

 

The fossil has a opening all the way though the center just as the photo-shop rendering.

 

This representation is what I think this embryo would have looked like when it was alive. The right intake aperture became dominant over the left, resulting in an asymmetrical growth of extruding mineralization around the left aperture.

 

This particular vesica attractor would have resulted in a conch, or gastropod design.

The dominant right intake would develop a gill while the left developed a spiraling shell and central axis of the [columella.]

 

This would keep spiraling until the shell enclosed the left aperture complexly. This left spiraling point then became what most would assume as the front. Myself included.

 

If both chambers keep a symmetrical flow, which would have been very rare, the result would be a symmetrical body plan and two gills.

 

If the attractor retained the shell and a symmetrical flow though the apertures, the result would be a cephalopod. This shell is not a genetic adaptation but more precisely the a receipt from paying {Schrödinger entropy debt} http://www.entropylaw.com/thermoevolution9.html

 

{The oolitic mass would shrink [dissipate] during this pulse into a higher ordered state.}

 

A fish’s body plan is the most perfect of all the possible out comes, and looks as though it only occurred once. All the myriad shell designs now appear to me as beautiful attempts at a fish’s body plan. Even natures screw up’s are geometrical marvels.

 

The fossil came from a creek bed cutting down though early Cambrian strata This strata is made up of dolomite limestone. The strata this originated from developed layers of a microbial mats in fine silty mud, that is devoid of any particles that would induce the growth of stromatalites, so instead you just find layers of cyanobacteia. When fine quartz particles our introduced, oolites are formed.

[Eclogite]

The fossil came from a creek bed cutting down though early Cambrian strata This strata is made up of dolomite limestone.

This implies you picked it up off the creek bed. i.e. the fossil was not in situ, so its provenance is questionable. Please clarify.

[Christopher]

This implies you picked it up off the creek bed. i.e. the fossil was not in situ, so its provenance is questionable. Please clarify.

This is not a fossil of animal in an environment, this is the environment at large collapsing into a point becoming an animal.

[Eclogite]

The title of the thread includes the words "Fossil Find". What is the fossil? Are you saying there is not one?

[damocles]

This is not a fossil of animal in an environment, this is the environment at large collapsing into a point becoming an animal.

 

???????????

 

That is confusing renormalization: that is, confusing a mathematical treatment used to reconcile the infinities derived in calculating the interactions of a physically observed event in particle/wave experiments at extremely short distances, with a biological process that goes from a single-cell animal planform to a multi-cell specialized cell animal planform?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renormalization

 

You also make this hypothesis without any physical evidenciary foundation? This hypothesis is not similar at all to particle/wave phenomenon that is renormalizable to mathematically remove troublesome infinite point values. You totally mis-equate the two phenomena by applying a false analogy.

 

Animals going from single-cell clumping to mutli-cell specialization do not collapse into some wave function.

 

I suggest that you carefully read about "punctuated equilibrium"- a lot more.

 

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/punc-eq.html

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium

 

http://www.skeptic.com/01.3.prothero-punc-eq.html

 

http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~theobal/PE.html

 

http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/creation/punk_eek.html

 

are beginners.

 

I'm not trying to teach anyone to suck eggs. But if you are going to argue eggs, first you must know that the processes that shape the egg are far more derivative than the ones that shaped a fist sized pebble that looks like an egg.....

 

http://www.answers.com/topic/derivative

 

I'm done here.

[Christopher]

The title of the thread includes the words "Fossil Find". What is the fossil? Are you saying there is not one?

read the thread and go here to see the fossil embyo;gaia egg,

 

http://www.imagestation.com/album/?id=2128032952

[Christopher]

You also make this hypothesis without any physical evidenciary foundation? This hypothesis is not similar at all to particle/wave phenomenon that is renormalizable to mathematically remove troublesome infinite point values. You totally mis-equate the two phenomena by applying a false analogy.

 

Animals going from single -cell clumping to mutli-cell specialization do not collapse into some wave function.

 

I suggest that you carefully read about "punctuated equilibrium"- a lot more.

 

 

are beginners.

 

I'm not trying to teach anyone to suck eggs. But if you are going to argue eggs, first you must know that the processes that shape the egg are far more derivative than the ones that shaped a fist sized pebble that looks like an egg

 

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

You seem to confuse the map with the actual territory, since the advent of the internet every one is now an expert. It is easy to post someone elses work.

 

But that is not what i am doing here, i am presenting my work of the last 11 years that was derived from the rock, which you seem to dismiss as unimportant compared to what you can cut and past from others work.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What is known about evolution is that life changes over time.

 

What is not thoroughly understood is how life accumulates this information.

 

We can see by the fossil record that their is not only a pattern of change but also a morphological mean or stasis over long periods.

 

We have stated that the controlling factor in this pattern can be traced to random mutation and natural selection.

 

However current models do not reflect the fossil record.

 

If natural selection and mutation has such an effect on morphology, why then does in remain so perfectly stable then suddenly take such leaps. {punctuated equilibrium }

 

Some in the scientific community have acknowledged this gradual process of natural selection and mutation, may not account for the stability and sudden change in morphology,

 

Also there exist a major disparity in the appearance of these original phyla level body plans.

 

According to the fossil record, they have no record to the past, and intermediary’s between each other.

 

Simply put we understand evolution about as well as gravity, electromagnetism or quantum mechanics.

 

No matter what anyone says, their still exist in science today a major disparity between our map of the evolution and the actual territory of the fossil record.

 

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

 

In order to create new paths of knowledge, we must first have within ourselves a sense of awe and humility in the face of a vastly unexplored universe.

Learn the paths that others have made using this same predilection, while being unaffected by the arrogance of the men that stand on the work of others and declare themselves experts.

Remember, information is not only to be constructed to contain a single idea, but more importantly to be left open to capture additional ones.

[Christopher]

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quantum phenomena in biology

Already the eminent quantum physicists Fritz London and Niels Bohr suggested that quantum phenomena might be essential for life processes. During the last decade especially, increasing evidence is accumulating that indicate that this is indeed the case. Especially the experimental work of Garajev et al (see point 1 below) indicates that a radical reinterpretation of the regulatory mechanisms of DNA is required.

 

Below you find brief summaries of some interesting texts along with links to their sources.

http://www.psrast.org/defknquant.htm

 

 

Excerpt: "Quantum physics and molecular biology are two disciplines that have evolved relatively independently. However, recently a wealth of evidence has demonstrated the importance of quantum mechanics for biological systems and thus a new field of quantum biology is emerging...Matsuno argues that actomyosin functions as a heat engine (a device that converts heat energy into mechanical energy) that is able to maintain a constant velocity due to quantum mechanical coherence and entanglement."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Eclogite]

read the thread and go here to see the fossil embyo;gaia egg,

 

http://www.imagestation.com/album/?id=2128032952

There is no scale. There is no detail visible. The rounded contours of the specimen indicate very clearly that this is a pebble that has been eroded. Although you found it in a creek bed passing through Lower Cambrian strata this pebble could have come from anywhere.

You cannot base a paradigm shift on fossil with no discernible provenance. This is just silly.

Sorry Christopher, but while there are soem intriguing philosophical niceties in your speculation it does not hang together, and copy and pasting diverse qotations without providing adequate connections between them does not help.

[Christopher]

The rounded contours of the specimen indicate very clearly that this is a pebble that has been eroded

 

 

 

Did you expect to extrapolate more information from the photo than I could from first hand examination? Did you read this thread entirely and carefully, I think not, if you had you would know the size shape dimension and construction of the artifact. There is also a photo shop reconstruction of what the fossil would have looked like when alive.

 

Please read the thread before calling my work silly, I’ve worked hard to bring this information to light and if you cannot provide more than thoughtless remarks and misrepresentation than I think you should move along.

 

 

AS for scale it is setting on a 8 1/2" + 11" typing paper.

[Eclogite]

Did you expect to extrapolate more information from the photo than I could from first hand examination?

No, but I know a water worn pebble when I see one.

Did you read this thread entirely and carefully, I think not, if you had you would know the size shape dimension and construction of the artifact.

Your thinking on this point is wholly accurate. I have not read the entire thread carefully. I have suggested why in my last post.

Your thesis may be completely valid and reflect the most important discovery in palaeontology in one hundred years, or in evolutionary biology since Darwin, but you have not, in my view, presented your arguments in a cogent, coherent manner. I am stating this not to give offence, but to make you aware of how your ideas are perceived. They are confusing and genuinely difficult to follow. Five people have responded to your ideas so far: Tormod, prgmdave, Damocles, emmesay and myself. Three of them seem to echo this confusion.

Tormod said this:

Can you please clean up your post - this appears to be cut-and-pasted from somewhere else an I am not sure what are your actual statements and what are quotes from others.

prgmdave said this:

Christopher, what of the first post is actually your words? It seems like you posted something extremely similar here and here. If you could, please go through and surround the parts of the post which are not your own words with [*quote] and [*/quote] tags (without the stars).

Damocles said (amongst many other things) this:

While that blizzard of quotes was entertaining, where has your appeal to authority, negated your errors in thought or presentation that I cited?

and this:

By the way, you do know that most of your quotations are out of context?

and this:

I'm not trying to teach anyone to suck eggs. But if you are going to argue eggs, first you must know that the processes that shape the egg are far more derivative than the ones that shaped a fist sized pebble that looks like an egg.....

I'm done here.

 

Please read the thread before calling my work silly,

Please make it easier for us to read your ideas by presenting them in more coherent manner.

The fossil that lies at the heart of your thesis is a contained within a worn pebble without provenance. It is difficult not to describe such flaunting of basic scientific practices as silly.

I’ve worked hard to bring this information to light.

And I have given freely of my time to offer you a brief critique and more importantly to ask some pertinent questions, which you have chosen largely to ignore.

 

if you cannot provide more than thoughtless remarks and misrepresentation than I think you should move along.

I have thought carefully about the formulation of my questions. If I am misrepresenting anything it is because it has been badly presented by yourself in the first place. I am still prepared to invest time in discussing your concept, but please help by offering a better presentation and by directly addressing the questions I have posed, not responding with another string of quotes.

[nkt]

Wow 50 posts for Christopher? Somehow it seemed like a lot more in this thread alone.

 

Christopher, I did try to read your posts, but they were a bit over-long and tedious to trawl through. Please be a little more brief. I hate to use the page down button that often in a single post, only to find further posts from the same person at the end!

 

Let me see if I get the essence of your idea:-

 

Signals from other cells drive local cells to form the correct cell. These signals are in both the DNA and the chemical and electrical signals sent by local cells. From this, which seems quite logical, there is a progression to using this same arguement to see if evolution comes up with the same result, which doesn't seem so logical.

 

Could you sum up for me if this is wrong?

[damocles]

damocles, please your recommended urls make it working, I am interested to follow it. Thanks

 

by Emmassay

 

 

Thanks for pointing out my hotlinking fault. Corrected.