BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for researchDiscover
Workspaces
Network
Opportunities
Account
Researcher profile
Stuart Kauffman contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.
Trust snapshot
Actions
Identity and collaboration
Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.
Log in to claimDirect collaboration
Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.
Research graph
Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.
BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.
Published work
The transition from the quantum to the classical world is not yet understood. Here we take a new approach. Central to this is the understanding that measurement and actualization cannot occur except in some specific basis. But we have no established theory for the emergence of a specific basis.
Two alternative views of an economy are combined and studied. The first view is that of technological evolution as a process of combinatorial innovation. Recently a simple mathematical model (TAP) was introduced to study such a combinatorial process. The second view is that of a network of production functions forming an autocatalytic set. Autocatalytic (RAF) sets have been studied extensively in the context of chemical reaction networks. Here, we combine the two models (TAP and RAF) and show that they are compatible. In particular, it is shown that production function networks resulting from the combinatorial TAP model have a high probability of containing autocatalytic (RAF) sets. We also study the size distribution and robustness of such "economic autocatalytic sets", and compare our results with those from the chemical context. These initial results strongly support earlier claims that the economy can indeed be seen as an autocatalytic set.
We present a scenario for the origin of biological coding. In this context, coding is a semiotic relationship between chemical information stored in one location that links to chemical information stored in a separate location. Coding originated by the cooperative interaction of two, originally separate collectively autocatalytic sets, one for nucleic acids and one for peptides. When these two sets interacted, a series of RNA-folding-directed processes led to their joint cooperativity. The amino acyl adenylate, today amino acid-AMP, was the first covalent association made by these two collectively autocatalytic sets and solidified their interdependence. This molecule is a palimpsest of this era, and is a relic of the original semiotic, and thus coding, relationship between RNA and proteins. More defined coding was driven by selection pressure to eliminate waste in the collective autocatalytic sets. Eventually a 1:1 relationship between single amino acids and short RNA pieces (e.g., three nucleotides) was established, leading to what is today known as the genetic code. Transfer RNA aminoacylating enzymes, or aaRSs, arose concomitantly with the advent of specific coding. The two classes of aaRS enzymes are remnants of the duality of complementary information in two nucleic acid strands, as originally postulated by Rodin and Ohno. Every stage in the evolution of coding was driven by the downward selection on the components of a system to satisfy the Kantian whole. Coding was ultimately forced because there were at least two chemically distinct classes of polymers needed for open-ended evolution; systems with only one polymer cannot exhibit this characteristic. Coding is thus synonymous with life as we know it, and can be thought of as a phase transition in the history of the universe.
This Letter proposes a solution of the Vacuum Energy and the Cosmological Constant (CC) paradox based on the Zel'dovich's ansatz, which states that the observable contribution to the vacuum energy density is given by the gravitational energy of virtual particle-antiparticle pairs, continually generated and annihilated in the vacuum state. The novelty of this work is the use of an ultraviolet cut-off length based on the Holographic Principle, which is shown to yield current values of the CC in good agreement with experimental observations.
The Anthropic Principle has been with us since the 1970s. This Principle is advanced to account for the "fine tuning" of the 25 constants of the Standard Model of Particle Physics. Were these constants very different, life could not exist. The Anthropic Principle conditions on the existence of life and concludes that the value of the 25 constants must be within a range that allows life. The most common further step is to postulate the existence of a vast multiverse with vastly many combinations of the values of the 25 constants. By conditioning on our own life, we must be in a universe whose values allow life. The Anthropic Principle is commonly held to be untestable because we cannot be in contact with other universes. I aim here to show the Anthropic Principle is testable and that its explanatory power is weak: The Principle seems to make testably false predictions about planet Earth and the life on it. The Anthropic Principle seems unable to predict the existence of 98 stable atoms, when only 19 small atoms are needed for life.
We propose a non-substance dualism theory, following Heisenberg: The world consists of both ontologically real possibilities that do not obey Aristotle's Law of the Excluded Middle, and ontologically real Actuals that do o0bey the Law of the Excluded Middle. This quantum approach solves five issues in quantum mechanics and numerous puzzles about the mind-brain relationship. It raises the possibility that some aspects of mind are non-local, and that mind plays an active role in the physical world. We present supporting evidence.
I take non-locality to be the Michaelson Morley experiment of the 21st Century, assume its universal validity, and try to derive its consequences. Spacetime, with its locality, cannot be fundamental, but emergent from entangled coherent quantum variables and their behaviors. Two consequences: i. If we start with non-locality, we need not explain non-locality. We must explain an emergence of locality and spacetime. ii. There can be no emergence of spacetime without matter. This contradicts General Relativity, which is local, formulatable without matter and without an emergence of spacetime. Quantum gravity cannot be a minor alteration of General Relativity. This will lead to: Matter not only deforms spacetime, but creates spacetime. This quantum creation of spacetime consists in: i. Fully non-local entangled coherent quantum variables. ii. The onset of locality via decoherence. iii. A metric in Hilbert Space among entangled quantum variables. iv. Mapping from metric distances in Hilbert Space to metric distances in classical spacetime by episodic actualization events. v. Discrete spacetime is the relations among these discrete actualization events. vi. "Now" is the shared moment of actualization of one among the entangled variables. vii. The discrete, successive, episodic, irreversible actualization events constitute a quantum arrow of time. viii. The arrow of time history of these events is recorded in the very structure of the spacetime constructed. ix. Actual Time is a succession of two or more actual events. Relation to Causal Set Theory, faithful Lorentzian manifolds and light cones are discussed. The theory inevitably yields a UV cut off. The cut off is a phase transition between continuous spacetime before the transition and discontinuous spacetime beyond the phase transition. This may predict the knee and ankle of the gamma ray spectrum. Testing via the Casimir effect is proposed.
The phenomenon of preadaptation, or exaptation (wherein a trait that originally evolved to solve one problem is co-opted to solve a new problem) presents a formidable challenge to efforts to describe biological phenomena using a classical (Kolmogorovian) mathematical framework. We develop a quantum framework for exaptation with examples from both biological and cultural evolution. The state of a trait is written as a linear superposition of a set of basis states, or possible forms the trait could evolve into, in a complex Hilbert space. These basis states are represented by mutually orthogonal unit vectors, each weighted by an amplitude term. The choice of possible forms (basis states) depends on the adaptive function of interest (e.g., ability to metabolize lactose or thermoregulate), which plays the role of the observable. Observables are represented by self-adjoint operators on the Hilbert space. The possible forms (basis states) corresponding to this adaptive function (observable) are called eigenstates. The framework incorporates key features of exaptation: potentiality, contextuality, nonseparability, and emergence of new features. However, since it requires that one enumerate all possible contexts, its predictive value is limited, consistent with the assertion that there exists no biological equivalent to "laws of motion" by which we can predict the evolution of the biosphere.
Newton set the stage for our view of how science should be done. We remain in what I will call the `Newtonian Paradigm' in all of physics, including Newton, Einstein, and Schrodinger. As I will show shortly, Newton invented and bequeathed to us `efficient cause entailing laws' for the entire becoming of the universe. With Laplace this became the foundation of contemporary reductionism in which all that can happen in the world is due to efficient cause entailing laws. More this framework stands as our dominant way to do science. The Newtonian Paradigm has done enormous work in science, and helped lead to the Industrial Revolution, and even our entry into Modernity. In this paper I propose to challenge the adequacy of the Newtonian Paradigm on two ground: 1) For the evolution of the biosphere beyond the watershed of life, we can formulate no efficient cause entailing laws that allow us to deduce the evolution of the biosphere. A fortiori, the same holds for the evolution of the economy, legal systems, social systems, and culture. Because I have discussed this before with my colleagues Longo and Montevil (1,2) and elsewhere, (3,4), my discussion of this first point will be rather brief. 2) What I shall choose to call, after Aristotle's four causes, noted below, Formal Cause Laws derived from specific `ensemble theories' tell us about the world. But Formal Cause Laws are not reducible to efficient cause entailing laws of the Newtonian Paradigm and, critically, have already, unnoticed, crept into biology concerning the origin of life, and economics concerning economic growth. Formal cause laws appear to be a new way to do science, independent of efficient cause entailing laws. Thus Formal Cause laws can be independent of any specific material substrate. This may bear on the sufficiency of Materialism in our account of the world.
Biological evolution is a complex blend of ever changing structural stability, variability and emergence of new phenotypes, niches, ecosystems. We wish to argue that the evolution of life marks the end of a physics world view of law entailed dynamics. Our considerations depend upon discussing the variability of the very "contexts of life": the interactions between organisms, biological niches and ecosystems. These are ever changing, intrinsically indeterminate and even unprestatable: we do not know ahead of time the "niches" which constitute the boundary conditions on selection. More generally, by the mathematical unprestatability of the "phase space" (space of possibilities), no laws of motion can be formulated for evolution. We call this radical emergence, from life to life. The purpose of this paper is the integration of variation and diversity in a sound conceptual frame and situate unpredictability at a novel theoretical level, that of the very phase space. Our argument will be carried on in close comparisons with physics and the mathematical constructions of phase spaces in that discipline. The role of (theoretical) symmetries as invariant preserving transformations will allow us to understand the nature of physical phase spaces and to stress the differences required for a sound biological theoretizing. In this frame, we discuss the novel notion of "enablement". This will restrict causal analyses to differential cases (a difference that causes a difference). Mutations or other causal differences will allow us to stress that "non conservation principles" are at the core of evolution, in contrast to physical dynamics, largely based on conservation principles as symmetries. Critical transitions, the main locus of symmetry changes in physics, will be discussed, and lead to "extended criticality" as a conceptual frame for a better understanding of the living state of matter.
This paper presents new results from a detailed study of the structure of autocatalytic sets. We show how autocatalytic sets can be decomposed into smaller autocatalytic subsets, and how these subsets can be identified and classified. We then argue how this has important consequences for the evolvability, enablement, and emergence of autocatalytic sets. We end with some speculation on how all this might lead to a generalized theory of autocatalytic sets, which could possibly be applied to entire ecologies or even economies.