Register | Sign In

Understanding through Discussion

EvC Forum active members: 57 (9175 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: sirs
Post Volume: Total: 917,649 Year: 4,906/9,624 Month: 254/427 Week: 0/64 Day: 0/8 Hour: 0/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   yEC IT is.
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5119 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001

Message 1 of 1 (10467)
05-28-2002 11:04 AM

Biodiversity may in fact be larger than genetic diversity such that the width of the genetic continuum is wider than the ability to concentrate the bioinformatics of biodiversity. This would mean that biogeographic workarounds ought be possible even if orientation with respect to Eath's inertial frame is not possible. Any resultant vector must however have topological properties that singularities would belie even if collected as easily as stamps.
Selection against the extremes, no matter the domain thus orthoganalized, may be a perverted way the laws of growth exert an affect despite any effectual artificial selection naturalistically appostioning the trigeer or intusception inertially governing the mass sort in gravity falling a straight line.
For instance if remote electronic control of Darwin's circumnutation exists it ought to be possible to use statistical physics to assist selecting molecular adaptations that have coactions on larger levels of organization even if behavior does not come before morphology before genes serially etc. in the heirarchy of actual materialistic selection (no simple axiom of choice on presumed Mendel A prioriness, aposterior dominant claim).
Of course MNT may make knoweldge of d^2 on the same platform as currently discussed h^2 and space esploration will capitulate a better science of e^2 thus the rotation of w into *w or the other way around in mind will bring this static procedure into a dynamic awoke to Hume experimental philosophy by direct application of Newton's System of the World literraly the whirl with figurative congruence of Maxwell's vortex default to nerve energies in Galileo's submerged lever one Darwin ellipse at a wedge time. The visualization of Marx's economics is not abroad enough for this.
Experimental Design to Test Darwin's idea of Common Descent : without reversing any Modification Gained by natural selection (... A THREE STEP PROTOCOL MODELLING LANGUAGE)
Select Fundamental Series in e-Fish waveform traits
1)- calculate h^2.
2)- set conditions for common developing environment
3)- associate statistical categories to morphological variance establishing database structure.
From analysis above, design MolecularNanoTechnology(MNT) specification for implementation to alter either way small variances at regimen(will) (as inbreeding sense attained or retained by selective capability gain said (take home) in A) asymetrically in groups transitive (irreversible with postive respect to the program) that if (funding holds out to B) economy (no mind the ecology for the behavior) have different compilations of {w and *w} for classes classified done by A) timely.
4)- Select over Same F1,2,3,...generations sequence(S), measure MNT change on common development environment and apportion data into pre-synthesized (high fidelity) classes d^2, e^2 and h^2 - computer datawarehousing optimizations for actual acquired hardware to some A PRIORI (transient policy) assumption ("bottom" (not base)'line') retained by whatever means of Haldanes' ---- or Fisher's--> or Wright's %% architecture on the affordance refinements during software life-cycling.
5)- Create SQL (or other parrallell extendable programming language (compilable) support for the tabled relational database combining inFORmation from A) + B) by logic of digitization (computer science) and purchase database exloratory visualzation tools' machine (the trend towards re-usable objects manifesting in bioinformactic biodiveristy informatics(not mere genomics)).
Synthesize Results depending on correlations that with some addition tests based on controls for electrotonic functions (open vs closed curves) the external variable of which may show that what in A) went into h^2(heritability) was misapportioned(depreciated) based on allocation of meaning of place(reference(tangent)form)[location semantics in population genetics (not simply Mayr's "genetic revolution"), isolation by distance, attractors of multi-peak equilibrium figures numerical techniques ordered etc]) without potential for actual "microscopic" control doing by communicating thoughout B) that not reduction (no constraint on the absolute magnitude (dimensional arrest transition)) would have been thought descent no matter the affirmed modification taken advantage (not luxury) by the next viewable generation (of consults) prior to MNT or thereafter is ascent of science out a former phenomenological horizon of steady mutation rate genetics into a mroe dynamic science that can assert a certain kinematic point due to invariance (constant)e^2(environment) that much morphology generally thought taxogenic is neophenogenesis(Gottleib) etc. and that embryology as it attains more binding corrected Driesh'es prospective value OR prospective potency for Pasteur's grand asymmetry ultimately not proximate by approximating the output of final areally co-extensive set data type networked may not (or may) be used as Darwin hoped \"the structure of the embryo is even more important for classification than that of the adult. For the embryo is the animal in the less modified state; and in so far it reveals the structure of its progenitor. In two groups of animal, however much they may a present differ from each other in structure and habits,..."(1859pp.448-9)/.(bold added to italics)
6)- Convert relationally coordinating organized lists to an object oriented database management system.
7)- Summerize any advantage the cross generational discetion accomplishes to give and in giving Gladyshev's "macrothermodynamics" the Darwinin involvement it requested by futhering the teaching and transmission of Maxwell-- Shrodinger (negative) entropy for any energy accounted in the process which is possible by searching for sorts of gravity,mass and inertia sumerged or not not by not doing catastrophe theory but by finding the mould that turns this knoted inside, out.
It seems uncontroversial that any adaptive oversight of Fisher would first be thought in the differing perversions of de Vries' strech by Haldane or Wright rather and that any less modified embryo of thought on topic whether the information was first found and classified in genotype or phenotype changes in gene frequeny(ies) may not be the suspect especially if genetic rotation (same projective geometry (different incidence embodied enstantiation in the modelling language)) gives biologic (not biogeny) change whether transmitted or merely physiological (bioentropism notion towards any biogeny) even if/as if being the prospect for approximations of/to applied torque.
The fit of biometery to any continuity being ipso facto (discovery during fact finding) (genetic diversity) able to track the space common to parent and offspring no matter how it came that Darwin was influenced by Agassiz if ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny Browinain motion is not mutually (reciprocally) independent of gravity fall then the confusion of adaptive modification and Waddington's empirical cross veinless fly change across generations when not other (work left unspecified) parts of neophenogensis (Gottleib) idea etc etc can be explained without committing to an idea of history (not idea of idea, please understand) Will Provine has propagated to the deficiency of this idea to be willfully disseminated, else it appears (short of this work ordered) it appears to me biologists have indeed seen but not properly described something physicists have not (two temperature values in the same materiality).
Statisitcally one can address this underappreciated thread in evolution talk (Lamark thought we would always have ears to hear and I think Croizat read this) without the molecular attachement. The issue of infinite vs constrained (retained) variablity is not being (the subject Provine claims to have mastered but he did so by trasing the biology my grandfather passed on to me that can be read for the likes of a Provine in Wright's earliest papers-- there simply is a disconnect over causation and correlation and then the philsophy of the Gottleib is disconsidered but M. Greene agreed with me not Provine in general (heirarchy idea before Green published on it)) addressed here but depends on the physico-chemcial (not singular "phase" transition as Provine had depauperated the depth of former Cornell colloid physco-chemsitry probably by higher allegience to Univ. of Chicago (memory (of Eisntein not Wright))) assocations (dense in themeselves or not axiom of choice) that result from a more mechanical (vortex implementable) (use of Newton vs Galelio vs Laplace vs Maxwell vs Figenbaum etc) (Driesh like) development we have not yet at present, but which would result if Galdyshev's Macrothermodynamics was supplied its' requested Darwininzation which is increasingly possible (no matter how one interprets Provine use or disuse of contiuing diffusive effects possible to supply with the emergence of Molecular Nano Technology.
This is specifically the equal and oppositie cosultation on the force of the code (post- Watson/Crick??) not the difference of phenotype and genotype. Thus, this is not similarly necessarily preadaptive characterizations to the conditions of development. The equivalent (final data type unit) of gentic drift for h^2 may be here for d^2 due to FOR ANY GIVEN TIME PERIOD (of and other former "period of developement" (species by species)) the chance difference of molecular velocity (Gottleib behavior?) distributions [hether calculated bu virials or not etc] (i.e. not in analogy to the difference of artifical and natural selection) (series exemplar of extreme selection then inbreending then adaptive modification by E^2 differentiable not the other way around the French Curve example ordniation coordinatable by Quine's classes etc) but random (probabilstic) nonetless (NOT BIOLOGICAL DETERMINISM or predicatble from physics (nonlinear vs stochastic) measureable. I use nothing over denumerability currently fluid or condensable. Impenatribility (limits to variation) is not incompresibility bound of analysis in synthesis. Planck's oven may not be the same in biology.

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024