MAGNITUDES of EUSYSTEMIC HIERARCHIES

This verb has been also named "evolution."

To some extent, it makes perfect sense to say that a synonym for this verb is another verb,... namely the verb named "to gravitationally-cohere."

Where matter can cohere into the all the patternings we humans can perceive,... gravitation is always operant. All translational motion which can can implicate any single eusystemic resolution is always also associated with a conceptual MOTION that is either into or out-from a given gravitational field. Every calcium atom of your brain and body has "moved" or been translocated many kilometers just this instant as you have read this sentence. The motion is relative with respect to a centroid of mass of which you are ignorant or else un-aware of.

Part of the axiomatic aspects that implicate structure in all our scientific thinking at all levels of the magnitude-sequence is the fact that there is One Universe as an at least first-orderd energy-event consideration and,... Energy is everwhere manifested and "contained" by the One Universe,...and all is in relative motion. Where the theologians might discuss their God(s), the scientist can often substitute a mathematics of energy. It can appear to be doing intelligent things.

Alternatively, we recognize an action of nature that is (as with entropy)...a sort of physical counter-part to what the bio-physiologists call "catabolism." There is something counter-productive with respect to the coherency principle that we associate with gravitation. A result of Life is Death. Metabolism happens both to the exsistentialist and the other.
As the biologist forms the equation:

...it seems possible to contemplate a similar biophysics equation:

This "dys-coherency" aspect as an analogue of biological catabolism is, we suppose, related to radiation and entropy. However, we find it difficult to metrify because to measure it properly we should have a knowledge of its opposite, namely something called "anti-entropy." This we do not have.

For both the categories of scientist which might be called the physical or the biological "purists,"... this Action of Nature implicates range-criteria of the eusystemic sets in constant motion all in accordance to local and non-local ambient-physical effects. This "constant change-or-motion idea" is the essence of the Thermo-dynamics and Entropy Theories. There is something called "Heat" because of this.

For the non-scientist and some lay persons this "Action of Nature" implicates unseen forces,... essences,... higher intelligence(es) or spiritual beings controlling things. In fact, this was a common way people thought in the 1600s when Isaac Newton, in order to survive and have a pay-check, would lecture to an empty class-room about his theory of the "fluxions." This later became the Differential and Integral Calculus by which virtually all technical progress of the Industrial Era was to deploy as an inherent and essential mathematical tool to comprehend concept "instantaneous change."

In essence, some eusystems are less constrained by the ambient effects and are more "free-falling" through the Universe of Space-Time. Relative with respect to the Space-Ship Earth Biosphere Ecosystem,... every single example is very electro-magnetically constrained. A few sky-divers and expulsed volcanic debris or some meteoric-asteroid stuff may only constitute marginal exceptions. These exceptions are generated simply by the fact of decreased matter density at the higher altitudes whence the electro-magnetic associativities of ambient matter is less. All eusystems are free-falling from the perspective of the Big-view....i.e., from the view of a another cluster of galaxies that is not "of the set." As we cannot assess these trajectories at such great distances to any great refinement... except as mental-models (Cosmologist to count the nucleons of the universe),... so too, we have trouble with the other extremes of size-range. However, the smallness ranges can be tooled to some extent here on Earth,... and so we have something called a "Sub-Atomic Science."

Human perception is minimally three-dimensionally biased.

It is remarkable that humans have gained an awesome control and understanding of some of this action of Nature TO ASSEMBLE higher-ordered sets via both the discoveries and the inventiveness-scenarios of chemistry and physics, or the "essential Physical Sciences in general. The biophysics of perception and the physics of independent objectivities may be united in this potential science defined here as a category of Bio-cosmography (a term first used by R.B. Fuller) and also, what may be named "Biophysical Co-relativity". The term "Bio-correlativism" may also sometimes be used.

At present, we tend to think there is no higher-ordering than the clusterics of galaxies and all that exists is a sub-set of these in toto. This is identically the "Unitary Cosmos" idea. Alternative theories implicate multiple or parallel universes, or some variation of the unitary idea whence a single universe can implicate endless-eternal cycles of ontogeny (cosmological birth-and-re-birth).

Thus all eusystems are componential with the "least" massivity notion being the atom-types. And these can and do accrue to the awesome magnitudes of the galaxies. As the nuclei of atoms are known to also have "parts", we could extend our sequencing to an even lesser range of size magnitudes. However, for our purposes here where a neuro-physiology is implicate and since we have no such thing as a "quantum-physiology" at present with any great foundations,...SBS establishes the least amplitude ranges at the level of the atoms of chemistry. There may indeed be an eventual "quantum-resolution" for neuro-biophysics and if so, then the systems resolutions can be extended by future explorers.

Points and Fields,
Fields and Points.

In using archetypal concept "quantity-magnitude" the language of Science is Mathematics. The current status of the branch of Mathematics that is deployed by the Physicists, i.e., the "Physical Mathematics", that seeks to take the human expertise from the domain of classical Newtonian-Maxwellian theoretics to the domain of post Feymanian-Einsteinian QED and the Quantum Domain is a reciprocity puzzle-works of all that the ideas about points-and-fields can accomplish.

One aspect of this very natural evolution of thought is the fact that the model-forms used to explain things are themselves experiencing a revolution...they are themselves a reciprocity between all that can be accomplished by the available tooling of 2-dimensional and/or 3-dimensional sensorially appreciable examples to study. In this regard, the visual tools of the computer and graphics software tools are revolutionary and indespensible.

Where the wealthiest power moguls of ancient history would have fought wars for access to the high-tech potentials offered by the technology of "ball-point-pen and typing-paper",... we have the PC, web and graphics that we routinely take for granted for self-expression tools.

Since the apparent link from the electro-dynamics of classical chemistry to the domain of the Quantum Mechanics is the notion of the physical "Field," Systems Biophysics does borrow the terminology of the physicists enough to speak in terms of the electro-dynamic and quantum-fields that can be associated with collections of atoms as they assemble to form molecules implicating concept "center of mass" which is intimately an evolutionary aspect of the eusystem in question.

To appreciate the difficuties of this idea, we can consider the example of extinct bio-forms that clearly have living descendents and thus implicate an inheritible lineage profile of protein and enzyme occurences data. Certain ancient reptiles, we know, did "give-way" (slowly evolved) into modern birds. There are many other examples.
Thus if we were to obtain any mathematical model of the biospherics-biophysics of this,...how best might we model this transition relative with respect to a generalized concept: the gravitationally relevant center of mass that is the archaeo-specific "set" as well as the now living example?

We speak about "molecular energy fields" and "force-fields." The DNA molecule for example is supposed, according to the theories here, to have a unique dynamics and bio-molecular field mechanics of it own. Similarly, we might suppose that the mitochondrion of the cell has its own "field." Yet, currently, I do not know of many scientist using this terminology.

As of this writing, it is interesting to note the fact that a web-search using the keywords "biomolecular field" does indeed return so many references that use this term within the context that Systems Biophysics does. Perhaps it is a fear of being lumped together with the more ephemeral and romantic thinkers who tend to implicate such notions as "morpho-genic fields" and auras that there are not more researchers using these terms in the quantum-sense or approximately so. I predict the number of such references will soon dramatically increase as the molecular dynamics of DNA in particular make use of this idea-fact,...i.e., the a distinct eusystem called "bio-molecule-X" does indeed have a unique (quantum) electro-magnetic field and we can speak about this and not be just as a category of Kirlian "aurists."

The non-in-vitro electromagnetic fields of the components of any system should be quite real,...it is just that we lack any good way to measure them as isolated phenomena. This we discuss and explore in relation the components that define the DNA molecule (or any other example) as the "atom-constituencies" of the molecule,...and not the sub-atomic or more quantum-mechanical aspects. So, to this extent, again I think the SBS model is not a quantum theory exactly. For the Biophysical relevance, we may find the molecules as a "basis" and the Quantum-Domain of sub-atomics may be far removed. In fact, a critical problem with the eusystemic omni-biophysics is the fact that an alternative model and definition of the classical electron may be required to attain certain consistencies with the theory BEFORE any quantum-level assertions even need to enter the model's utility to be bio-physically relevant. This will be discussed elsewhere.

Relative with respect to a given FIELD RESOLUTION (link to a demonstrative applet where you can try to make a tetrahedron),... constellational sets can be explored and studied and, in theory, paradigmed by the polyhedronalistic strategy (suggested here and called the "Tetranometric Strategy" or the "Holographic Centroid-Relevant Model") whence each resolution defines a gravitationally relevant centroid-idea. In this respect, the constellationisms must also correlate to the parallel notion of Quantum Physic's "energy-density" explorations however complex or sub-summing this may prove to be (we are reminded that energy and mass have an equivalency according to Relativity Theory).

The perspective here is that a Biophysics sub-sumes anything we can call "Physics," and so our views deserve the attention of the non-bioformianistic mechanics that has prevailed.

The bio-chemist and Molecular-Dynamic scientist has no problem saying "the cell manufactures proteins." This need not be mystified any more than a solution of sodium-ions and chloride-ions (all essentially invisible to us) can precipitate solid table-salt "out of solution" as if by magic. We find it a consistent fact that eusystems have sud-eusystem components, they take in energy and this is also in the form of eusystems that can be used directly or else partitioned into lesser building blocks and re-assembled to form the given "magnitude eusystems resolution." All eusystems also generate the "waste called entropy". For the cell this is heat and the metabolites of the cell that are pollutants,...also know as "toxins."

Thus, each gravitationally distinct eusystemic resolution of our The New Topology sequencing set defines,... in a manner of speaking, an analogue of the basic building block of Life,... the Cell. We just find it difficult to contemplate concept "galaxy" as such an analogue, and so some find mystical reverences more satisfying. Except for the few fast learners, it would require most humans several university semesters or years to even acquire the basic vocabulary of biochemistry and molecular biology science. The language of a "department" of science is its primary tool. There is nothing wrong with having mystical reverences for things we do not understand enough to say they are phenomenon "de-mystified." The dialect and language of the mystical view cannot answer the obvious questions our tools can discover. There was a time when for every child that would ask "what makes it rain?".... the standard answer would be a mystical reference (a multitude of such,... all in accordance to the local cultural scenario). Today, we have much more precise and elaborate explanations and ways and means to predict this phenomenon even for a few days into the unknown future and we find this somewhat more satisfying an answer. Our more scientific answers we can give the inquisitive child are relevant for everyone of all planetary cultures and of all ages. The answers are "Universal and for All-Time exacting." In fact, it is rather concise to answer "Solar energy and atmospheric pressure variation." This answer implicates energy-input to basic eusystem (identified as biosphere) and basic boolean operator antagonism (high-pressure cells and low-pressures cells). The resultant energy-exput is all that concept "weather" can do, namely rain, and a great many other atmospheric phenomena. The point is that this energetics seems operant among all our eusytemic magnitude resolutions, only it is problematic to concisely define the boolean sets to any Nth level of precision.
This does not mean that the phenomenon is any less awesome that minds cannot make the answers more satisfying and socio-economically useful.

It has, to some extent been historically heretical to even think of the bioforms as in any way as analogous to "machines." Tiny energy-events of a unique category in Cosmos are the "Life-Forms." A mechanization of this, of course, we do not do, and the physicists have been remote to the concept for there own reasons. At best we can find a common ground these days with the idea of "Artificial Intelligence" whatever that may mean exactly. And our views are not as they are just to save ourselves from being deemed the new and convenient heretics that may feed the fire and passions of some,...but, instead we just know there is a very complicated molecular dynamics going on and, if we are lucky and in the right place at the right time, it can indeed seem somewhat mechanistic enough to explain certain phenomena to satisfy our meager neurology.

A bacterial flagellum is very machine-like, so, according to some, we should not think only a molecular dynamics could generate this (probably para-mitochondrial ism) in 4.7 billion years of boolean bio-electro-magnetism.

It has, after all, required a little more than 120,000 thousand years for the species human brain to figure out that something called "Sodium"... as a malleable silvery metal... and another something called "Chlorine"... a noxious greenish gas... can combine under certain conditions to be know to almost everyone as "Table Salt." Just five-thousand years ago who would have ever guessed this could be so... (that salt is also these two things...a gas and a metal sharing something (electrons)). Salt was in use and a major element of trade-commerce long before recorded history. So, in a few more thousands of years we think we shall know somewhat more about the patternabilities of the other atoms and the many thousands of known molecules. So, the bioforms are not by us considered as machines,...they are unique and wonderful examples of a little as yet comprehended molecular dynamics,...and we should try to understand this.

Paradigmation Strategies Relative with Respect to the Hierarchies:

Foci of Gravitational Relevance have Alternative Mathematically Useful Models.

Systems Biophysicists (Eusystemologists) believe a polyhedronal model will accomplish something. SBS model should not compete with a "Theory of Everything." ... It should only be a theory of eusystems proper and, at least for the short term,...the eusystems of Space-Ship Earth and generally of the bioforms. All else is "information,"... "empty-space,"... "void," "pure-energy,"...a "Fundamental Particle,"... and the exchange actions of this and these non-nouns lacking inherent inside-outsided-ness. An aspect of SBS that relates to alpha-numeric sets and linguistics is probably that aspect of the theory that is, an any manner, a reference to non-eusystemia proper.

As stars define the classic splays of constellational sets, so to, do, in a manner of thinking, any number of other eusystemizable ideas that naturally accrue in a discernible patternabilty that defines natural structure:... atoms, molecules,... and all the fish in the sea,... every water molecule in a hurricane, ...and so on.

Systems Biophysics equates the centroids of eusystemic masses with "fundamental Mensuration unit." This it purports to do while conserving conceptual mass-relevant spatial-volume-ness while, at the same time, optimizing ephemeral-field-ness aspects.

It is an effort to be less point dependent and more field relevant. It is only easier when the masses are biological organisms,... but there are many other examples of well-bounded true systems in the universe. Without a knowledge or perception of this, we would never be concerned about something called "size-ness". With eusystemic partitioning of Cosmos, brain is able to have the fundamental Geometric Principle: "Equal to, Greater-than,...or else,...less than." In some perhaps mystical and mysterious way the neural-sensory appreciative-ness of eusystemia itself may be the founding essential for an intelligent specie to even have a mathematics at all.

Perhaps the same "new-math" curve-fitting dynamics that can explain the Newtonian energy-gravitation ranges as well as the Einsteinian micro-macro-ranges can be elucidated from something as convenient for us as the biological domain. Again, I venture to claim that a majority of physicists just are not all so good at biology and, at the same time, a majority of biologist just are not all so adept at the physics. Systems Biophysics may provide a bridge.

We now recognize the human limits to sense and perceive all the patternability in Universe since more than 99.9999+% of all frequency modulated energy-event expressions of mass-density manifestations in Universe are beyond our direct neuro-sensory accessibilities. This, and the fact that most of the atom's volume is void-field, ...is all a very new realization for the theorizing mentation; this is in some respects the essence of the "Quantum Approach" to explaining Universe, namely, the fact that a non-sensorial Geometry is required for any modicum of progress.

Exploring this dynamical geometry of Nature is what Systems Biophysics is all about. Just as the early chemists sought to find a unifying principle among all the known chemical elements or atom-types (The Periodicity of the Chemical Elements), SBS postulates certain unifying description exists for all natural systems of the hierarchy-set-sequence. How does Nature deploy her binding-strategies to form unique packages of energy-events exactly and consistently? Certainly if we can comprehend this topological consistency in relation to all the known-bioforms (as a second-order example one-up from the periodic elements) so too, should a systematics of the eusystemia be elucidated. This we do not expect to mimic the periodicity of the atoms exactly, although there may be similarities. We do think the "field" relations of DNA for the N-bioforms have some potential to explain all other possibilities. There must be something that is a patternability criteria we cannot readily discern that unites all eusystems that are purely natural and not man-made. It is kind of like asking "How is a Raven like a Writing Desk".......?

• Introducing the
  Light Cone
• Space-Like Tessellations of Tetrahedrons
• Concerning the Gravitational Orthogonality of
  Hurricane-oid phenomena manifested in a:
  THE PRANDTL-GLAUERT SINGULARITY
• The Relevancy of Quantum Entaglement
  manifested in
  KNOTS.
• Scientific American's Best of the Web.



"Knowledge is the small part of ignorance that we arrange and classify."
__ Ambrose Gwinnett Bierce