SemEco 2a - structure interaction and the genuine evolution types

From: Alfred Lang (alfred.lang@psy.unibe.ch)
Date: Tue Nov 19 2002 - 08:40:13 PST


Before focussing on the genuine evolutions, I'd like to add a few
general points to my short descriptions of the basic evolutions. They
should prepare better understanding of the genuine evolutions.

In the three basic evolutions the elementary and composed formations
and structures built, changed or decomposed and rebuilt anew,
similarly or differently, often several times in various
compositions, are in the main results of both, brute and fine
interactions among elementary particles. Following the potentials of
their bonding valences atoms can build by fine interaction quite
regular structures such as molecules in the physico-chemical and
crystalline formations in the mineral evolutions. Of course, valences
and their foundation as elucidated by wave and quantum mechanics are
of dynamic character. So I would include in playing the essential
role in fine interaction on the atomic and small molecular level
everything of the internal organization and forces of these
elementary structures that can have effects on structures of the same
order in their surrounds. (Question to the experts: Am I correct in
the assumption that to present knowledge no nuclear processes
whatsoever within a stable, yet chemically active atom have been
shown to be in any way involved and of effect in any supra-atomic
process? If not, what can I read to learn more about the atom's
nucleus role?)

So the basic evolutions generate a certain variety of structural
variation by fine interaction which depend on specific qualities of
the interactants. However, it should not been neglected that, in
order for fine interaction based on (surface) qualities of the
interactants to becoming possible, they need to be brought near
enough by forces that belong to the brute type, such as pushed and
pulls by mechanical and/or electromagnetic forces that are
originating in the environment of the structures in question and are
not totally selective in their effects.

There appears to be a lesser role for fine interaction in the cosmic
evolution, which is primarily determined by unspecific attraction and
repulsion forces and conjoint motion governed by electro-magnetic and
gravity fields growing stronger by the very processes they determine
and that so enable the building of massive bodies. The elementary
(atoms) and composed (molecules) structures of the physico-chemical
evolutions can thus form composite formations including structures of
various kinds in both the cosmic and the mineral evolutions. In the
main these are the nebulae and stellar bodies and the energetic
structures governing their behavior in the cosmic and the
conglomerations and mixtures of matter and their energetics in the
mineral evolutions. In these latter formations, some subformations
have definitely structural characters such as crystals; they are
attained by fine interaction. However, in the main brute interaction
may dominate such as determined by gravity, e.-m. fields, pressure,
temperature, strokes etc. is crucial in forming mountainous ranges,
erosion, sedimentation etc.

Yet both kinds of interaction are lastly producing singularities:
these are all historical processes. They cannot be described and
predicted by eternal law, in spite of their obeying natural law. What
is formed is also dependent on the local situation and the conditions
in effect at interactions, true to the principle that whatever
arises, arises from interaction of pre-existing structures there.
These emergencies show enough regularities, particularly those of the
fine type, that the cosmologists and geologists have succeeded in
proposing typologies and classificatory systems that allow not only
to make statements about where such and such types are to be found
but in addition to make inferences about the conditions under which
the particulars of such formations have come about and to reconstruct
some of the history of these types of structures. The basis of all is
obviously the generation of the most, though not totally, stable
formations of the elementary particles and forces/affinities from
which everything more complex is composed.

In addition to this distinction between brute and fine interaction, I
would like to note three important qualifiers that will prove of
greatest important later on but that are already present in the basic
evolutions. For at least two reasons the interaction of more
elementary particles is not completely random. Otherwise we would not
get that rather systematic variety of mineral formations and
structures.

(a) In order to be capable of interacting among each other the more
elementary structures need to have a quality that can be described as
a (relatively high) degree of independence or stand-alone capability.
In other words, structures to interact must be capable of
self-sufficiently existing by themselves, at least for some time, no
matter whether they are moved by forces external to them or they move
around on their proper capabilities. I denote this quality with a
word whose pertinence will become more plausible in the genuine
evolutions: autonomy. A structure that is fully integrated in its
immediate surrounds and thus is nothing but a part of another
structures is not autonomous. Something like a common fate of
everything making a structure is an important evolutive factor. Yet
in more complex structures we shall be able to distinguish degrees of
autonomy and of integration of structures that can qualify their
interactional potential greatly.

(b) Interaction among structures is essentially dependent of
spatio-temporal contingencies. This is a much more specific notion
than the chance concepts reigning (bio)evolutionary theory. But
structures, of course, interact primarily with structures in their
neighborhood, so chances to interact are not at all equally great for
the structures around. Positively expressed, it is possible to
describe any structure as a center of a surrounding set or field of
structures with a probability of interaction gradient that is
essentially decreasing with increasing distance. In view of their
interactive potential structures are dependent upon their
environment. This applies to both brute and fine interaction (except
for the field forces operating brutely as long as you separate time
and space). In the basic evolutions this feature of is nothing but a
byproduct of the spatial distribution in time of structures. In the
genuine evolutions, however, this will develop to become a major
differential factor which I call the ecological organization of those
ranges. Therefrom the name of "semiotic ecology" which, of course,
implies "evolutive".

(c) Obviously, as to fine interaction, the likelihood of encounters
also varies with the qualities of the structures present in the
surrounding field, more precisely with the degree of affinity those
surrounding structures have to the qualities of the structure we are
considering to form the center of the field in question.

Both autonomy and affinity characterize structures in respect to
their relational potential. Degree of autonomy is pertinent to both
brute and fine interaction; degree and kind of affinity is essential
only in fine interaction. If autonomy is total, the structure will
not in any way able to interact in the fine mode. Also a totally
integrated structures will not be able to interact by itself. E.g. a
chemically inert atom or molecule will interact only brutely: it will
push or be pushed by any other particle or force. An atom fully
integrated in a molecule will obey the rules valid for the latter. In
contrast a chemically active particle will interact finely, i.e.
selectively, with suitable other structures. This will play a great
role in the genuine evolution.

The mineral evolution(s), probably on many heavenly bodies, but known
in the variant on planet Earth, of course is also a historical
process. All reasonable geologists know that well; that's the reason
they live mostly in tension with the traditional physicists in so far
the latter avoid to deal with historical systems and their
singularities. I need not describe that the formation of all sorts of
minerals depends to large extent on cooling and then the interaction
of the particles in the local distributions. The process obviously
depends at any time on the particles present in some region and their
valences and on the energetic conditions (temperature, pressure,
radiation etc.) reigning at any location there. This is essentially
triadic or analytically reducible to triadic relationship

Alfred

-- 

Alfred Lang, Psychology, Univ. Bern, Switzerland http://www.langpapers.net --- alfred.lang@psy.unibe.ch



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 01 2002 - 01:00:08 PST