The self-assembling of molecules is just the basic requirement in order to have organized structures. As Katchalsky showed in his works, many others steps are necessary. Nevertheless, nowadays we can recognize (see attached paper) the unifying line among the four characteristics that we find in any living organism: material substrate, water, energy and organization. The organization is promoted by energy dissipation, the fluid (water) is the phase that allows the generation of order; The energy (by itself) is necessary for macroscopic movements and microscopic ones (tissue plasticity such as self-repairing, brain plasticity (information storing and even thinking)) and is necessary for the development and transformation of any " living" system.
If for an instant, we put far apart the cells of a living system and then reversibly we put them back together, the life will be suspended during this operation: hence, we can understand that the life comes from the interaction among the parts and it is not contained in any material thing.
If the energy is the foundamental element of life, while the matter is just the substrate, can we explain the perfectioning of living systems by the development of better and better synergies?
If the system that is more efficient has a higher probability of surviving, it follows that life is not only complexity of structure but also complexity of functions.
The ability of energy of generating the life is just the basic principle, but does it give directions that characterize the human dynamics?
Sorry, the attached paper
Article Far from Equilibrium Maximal Principle Leading to Matter Sel...
Dear Piero,
I agree that the matter self-assembling is the first step (i.e., having organized structures) towards the emergence of Darwinian evolution.
In my 2011 paper "Origin of Evolution versus Origin of Life: A Shift of Paradigm" I assert that there are three conditions that would permit systems to evolve:
1) Local conditions that allow the emergence of open non-equilibrium structural systems, organized on a macroscopic level, generated by a flow of matter and energy that is continuously supplied. These open far-from-equilibrium systems can maintain themselves far-from-equilibrium because they are able to use the matter and energy supplied by the favourable local environment;
2) Systems must be able to self-replicate;
3) Systems must be capable of acquiring heritable structure/function properties that are relatively independent from the local environment, i.e., the fact that they belong to a
specific lineage should not depend on the nature of the nutriments they receive from the local environment. This last condition is required for the emergence of distinct lineages allowing Darwinian natural selection.
And in the 2013 paper I co-wrote with Guy Hoelzer "On the thermodynamics of multilevel evolution" we specify our view about the notion of "evolution".
I would appreciate your comments about it.
If we look to the initial configuration leading to the life borning that is: energy generates organization in a fluid (tha is the emerging physical information) we find that it is confirmed in any living organism. If we look inside a living system we see a fluid (water), organization, energy (movements (macroscopic ones and microscopic ones such as plasticity of tissues (self-repairing, groth etc.)) chemical and thermal one). The only difference is that they are not considered in the correct hierarchy of importance.
We start by the matter and then the others. I try to clarify this: we accept easily that the thinking is generated by the mind but the inverse coupling is completely missing . Indeed, the thinking itself brings a flow of energy and matter that produces changes in our mind and this progressive change leads to evolution.
A computer is made by a matter substrate that allows energy flows but the energy flows do not produce any changes onto the computer and for this it cannot evolve it will remain what it is for ever. In living system is of paramount importance the inverse process (look to the matter movements in the tissues self-repairing) but not only. This also holds for the mind. An example: the mind has developed ideograms first, then cunueiform symbolism and finally alphabetic languages, the first improvement has lead to an increase of social activities and hence to the improvement of mind fuctionality and ability leading then to the second improvement that has led to our present sociality. The mind improves the means and complexity of of activities, such complexes means and uses improves the mind: this last effect is the direct consequence of the back effect of the energy use in our mind. All this in circle none comes first.
When we consider the interply between complex shapes-complex functions mediated be energetic flows the efficiency comes to play an important role, in the sence that going toward complexity, the improvement of efficiency (in terms of enery saving and better information storing) becomes the mileston in driving the multiple evolutive processes. On these new information the theory of evolution must be reinforced.
The argument is wide and complex, but I would like to give an hint: for instance the self-replication was firstly hermaphrodite, but why it changed to sexual? without this step we w'ont have any complex society, as we have, and without the perfect process of re-cycling of richness produced by it all we would be very poor and underdeveloped.
Dear Piero,
I don't see where your considerations about mind can lead you as the notion of mind is so a complex entity.
However it is clear you haven't read any of my two papers but I realize that I didn't tell you that you can easily find these in ResearchGate (you can have directly access to the 2011 paper on Google by writing my name).
I tried to read your paper "Far from equilibrium maximal principle leading to matter self-organization" but it is of course far too much beyond my mathematical skills.
On the contrary I am sure you will be able to read and understand my two papers If you try to and thus you should be able to comment these.
What is life? It is assumed that the life is a carbon world, the compositions which are constituted of C, H, O, N, S P.... with some minor trace metals, Fe, Zn.... in the currently biology. However, should life be limited in C world only, e.g. Si world or any other Worlds? In fact, it is not now to compare the life and the clay or minerals in the study of origin of life, espeacialy for the view of self-organizations.
On the other hand, it is still still a lot of gaps of the life evolution in the carbon world. One of the questions in modern biology is about the origin of protein and gene (DNA or RNA), which come first, the chicken or the egg? My recently work in the aged inorganic iron solution demonstrated that the nanoparticles of iron oxide in the aged inorganic iron solution can servred as the inorganic enzyme to promote the hydrolysis of phosphorus ester. This imply that the most important of life evolution is not the DNA, RNA or the protein, but the inter-structure of the materilas. In my case, the nanoparticles- iron oxide, ( a mineral ) which play the role of catalysis for the hydrolysis of organic phosphate, the sources of energy for all organic life. These inorganic nano-particles might be the first step of life evolution in earth. In fact, these imorganic enzyme are still in working, from the natural waters and soils... and play important role for geochemistry. Please read my paper: Hydrolysis of Glucose-6-phosphate in Aged, Acid- Forced Hydrolysed Nanomolar Inorganic Iron Solution — An Inorganic Biocatalyst? RSC Advance, November 2, 2011.
http://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2012/ra/c1ra00353d#!divAbstract
Any comments and discussion are welcome!
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Physiology
- Physiological Processes
- Stress