The common extremalities in biology and physics maximum energy dissipation principle in chemistry biology physics and evolution

The Common Extremalities in Biology and Physics The Common Extremalities in Biology and Physics Maximum Energy Dissipation Principle in Chemistry, Biology, Physics and Evolution Second Edition Adam Moroz De Montfort University Leicester, UK AMSTERDAM BOSTON HEIDELBERG LONDON NEW YORK OXFORD PARIS SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO SINGAPORE SYDNEY TOKYO ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● Elsevier 32 Jamestown Road, London NW1 7BY 225 Wyman Street, Waltham, MA 02451, USA First edition by the Publishing House of the Ministry of Economy of the Belarusian Republic (Belarus) 1997 Second edition 2012 Copyright r 2012 Elsevier Inc All rights reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher Details on how to seek permission, further information about the Publisher’s permissions policies and our arrangement with organizations such as the Copyright Clearance Center and the Copyright Licensing Agency, can be found at our website: www.elsevier.com/permissions This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Publisher (other than as may be noted herein) Notices Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing As new research and experience broaden our understanding, changes in research methods, professional practices, or medical treatment may become necessary Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in evaluating and using any information, methods, compounds, or experiments described herein In using such information or methods they should be mindful of their own safety and the safety of others, including parties for whom they have a professional responsibility To the fullest extent of the law, neither the Publisher nor the authors, contributors, or editors, assume any liability for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions, or ideas contained in the material herein British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress ISBN: 978-0-12-385187-1 For information on all Elsevier publications visit our website at elsevierdirect.com This book has been manufactured using Print On Demand technology Each copy is produced to order and is limited to black ink The online version of this book will show color figures where appropriate Preface The science of living nature is known as biology Biology, in the modern sense of the word, encompasses the entire hierarchy of life from the atomic-molecular level to the global biogeocenosis Furthermore, biology also formulates all temporal laws of relationships in this complicated and, indeed, trophic hierarchy In other words, biology formulates evolution since life is not only a form of existence but also, in a sense, a triumphal progression towards perfection Nevertheless, biology does not provide a satisfactory explanation for the origin of life How we account for the emergence of biological processes in this immense universe of dust, stars, planets and vacuum? Is it merely down to random chance? Or, if life is not accidental, what does this signify? Biology does not explain the transition from inorganic objects to organic life perhaps because the reasons are too broad to be understood in purely biological terms Moreover, the concept of evolution has infiltrated and now permeates physics, that other ancient vision of mankind and nature A complex question arises: to which laws does life owe its existence? Essentially, the answer lies partially within the realm of physicsÀa science which is fundamentally concerned with non-living natureÀand partially within the realm of biology It seems that the answer to this question leads to a deep unity between physics and biology A non-evolutionary theory of the origin of life (‘the Creation’) centres on the involvement of a ‘super-essence’ (a super-individuality or a super-civilisation) responsible for kick-starting the processes on Earth into life The theory is reliant on the inevitable and necessary emergence of the ‘super-essence’, preceded by the appearance of primitive or increasingly sophisticated beings in nature at intermediate stages Therefore the question of the origin of life can be reformulated in various ways: To what extent the laws of inorganic nature and of physics derive from, produce and require the emergence of biological processes? Is it possible to deduce biological laws from physical and chemical laws? How we define the relationships between physical and biological processes? According to which law are physical processes transformed into biological processes? To what degree are biological regularities governed by physical regularities? Success in answering these questions, even at an elementary level, might well enable the development of a conceptual methodology that would generate biological laws based on physical laws Physics and biology would, then, be united by a uniform concept resulting in a scientific ideology more accurately reflecting the interconnectivity of nature Therefore, this work represents an attempt to evaluate the feasibility of such a mode of thinking that could be considered to allow some additional steps on the path to better understanding the relationship between biotic and physical processes xii Preface However, one should note that any concept about nature, whether a simple mental picture or a complex formal mathematical scheme, is only one of many models relating to matter Concepts such as these are produced within the social forms of informational mapping, cognition or information reflection Mathematical science (including the theory of models and the theory of systems) is itself merely one form of information reflection, mapping and modelling It can be characterised by a dissociation from the material world (from supporting material messengers and processes), creating an ideal, almost spiritual, models, and sometimes could be thought that nature itself moves according to these models Nevertheless, mathematics, though eloquent in its description of nature, is simply a tool It minimises the materiality of biosocial informational mapping systems, creating sophisticated matter-less models of nature to a somewhat abstract level One can say that these mathematical models are the most formalised of models and have the most information and functional capacity per least structural-energy cost This is one reason for the high efficiency of mathematical modelling And yet, it is an idealisation that could be considered to be rather two-dimensional “paper” form and recently appears to have taken on a distinctly electronic character It is well known that the formal mathematical modeling has achieved the greatest success in explanation, description, and the forecasting of physical phenomena, as well as in formal reconstruction of processes that take place within physical systems At the highest level, the description of physical systems and processes proceeds from an extreme ideology to enable the formal mapping of physical interaction or dynamics This ideology is based on the least action principle employing the variational method The methodology of this approach contains the following stages: ● ● ● ● There is a physical value called the action, which has the dimensional representation of the product of energy by time The action, set as some value on all possible motions of a system, aims at minimum value at any rather small interval of movement of a system From the principle using variational technique, one can obtain equations of movement of a physical system (the EulerÀLagrange equations) The trajectories, or the laws of movement of the system, can be obtained from the EulerÀLagrange equations As follows from the first stage above, as early as the highest level of formalism, physical modeling implies the energy sense of physical interaction and, as it turns out, physical evolution It is only at the final stage of the modeling process that the outcome appears as a purely kinematical result—the movement trajectories The last stage also represents another sort of system behavior model—a model of states of a physical system, on which it is possible to forecast the behavior of a real system From this point of view, the formal mathematical description in biology has significant methodological difference, possibly a halfway policy Here one can initially proceed from concepts and terms of a dynamic system (also of some formal design), and in the majority of classical cases, from a system of differential Preface xiii equations and hybrid systems for more complex models The solution of such a system represents the law of movement or trajectory, providing information on the location of a real system at any moment of time in the multidimensional phase space of parameters of a biological system We shall note that in contrast to the physical way of formal modeling, the energetic sense, as the most formalized scheme of phenomena occurring in a biological system, escapes However, this sense, indeed, is well verified by the whole logic of physical formalism, and this sense in itself is not less important in the conception of the nature of biological phenomena This argument proceeds from the suggestion that it is the energy sense that can initiate the level of formalism, similar to top-level variational formalism in physical description, and consequently, it is ideology of a common and unified approach in biology and physics In connection with the above, it is important to look at the most common energy laws of biological phenomena (which, in fact, are the thermodynamic laws) in order to mathematically formalize, with the purpose of development on the basis of these laws, a universal, informative, and formal scheme generalizing the laws of biology We expect that such ideas could result in a formalism, similar to variational formalism in physics, and that it could be a basis for the ideological unification of biology and physics One may also bring to mind that the determining difference of biotic processes is that they carry out the utilization or dissipation of energy, with the qualitatively irreversible transformation of free energy to the thermal form It is this that hinders a direct introduction of the ideology of the least action principle into biology and in biological kinetics Therefore, we could initially consider the interpretation of the variational approach with reference to the processes with explicit dissipation, i.e., to relaxation processes in chemical and biological kinetics In this connection, it is expedient to reflect on the energy sense of the phenomena related to these areas, i.e., the hidden dynamic reason of one or another biological processes and the form of their representation (mapping) in the corresponding formal models In a sense, it would be similar to the solution of the reverse problem of variational calculus for biological kinetics—when the variational function of the corresponding under-integral function, the Lagrange function, needs to be found from the equations of motion, from a dynamic system or a system of differential equations The solution of such a problem would enable us to analyze in an explicit form the energy properties of the phenomena initially presented within the parameters of a dynamic system However, the reverse variational problem could be solved for a very limited range of cases, and there is little optimism about finding the successful solution as far as biokinetics is concerned Thus, it is possible to follow two different approaches in the formal mathematical and deterministic descriptions of these rather opposite groups of phenomena— biology and physics The first is related to physics, with an explicit energy sense outgoing from energy properties of the physical phenomena, from the least action principle, leading through the EulerÀLagrange equations to the laws of motion or xiv Preface trajectories And the second, more widespread in biology, likely begins with a comparison of a physical description, directly from so-called dynamic models, of the systems of differential or other kinds of equations, and it finally results in the same stage—the laws of motion, or trajectories We expected that the mutual penetration of both approaches could to a great extent promote mutual development as well as the technical and ideological enrichment of physics and biology We shall emphasize that the undertaken consideration concerns rather classical models—the models presented by systems of differential equations; however, even such a phenomenological consideration is difficult to implement consecutively within the frameworks of these two broad and opposing phenomena—the biological and the physical Extreme Energy Dissipation 1.1 Hierarchy of the Energy Transformation 1.1.1 Thermodynamics—A Science That Connects Physics and Biology The general laws connecting biology and physics are particularly related to energy transformations, since thermodynamics is the phenomenological science that describes the energetical macroscopic characteristics of systems Thermodynamics, which directly relates to biology, is known as biological thermodynamics It covers subjects connected to the interconversions of different forms of energy, ranging from those in the simplest chemical reactions and ending with energy complex trophic changes of the biomass of different species The energy and structure conversions in these complex changes eventually end and, can be saying in a different way, transfer to another quality in the large number of social processes Evolutionary and methodologically biological thermodynamics begins with the thermodynamics of chemical reactions The latter are known to have produced a huge variety of far from equilibrium (and also from steady state) phase-separated biochemical systems, which are actually biotic cells One can, therefore, imply that the thermodynamic (energetical transformation) laws of biology begin with the thermodynamic laws of chemical reactions The study of these laws is termed chemical kinetics For example, the thermodynamic fluxes are the velocities of chemical reactions, and chemical forces are no more than the affinity for chemical reactions It is, therefore, evident that the subjects of chemical thermodynamics and chemical kinetics overlap to a large extent One can also say that biotic organisms are complex, phase-separated, chemical reactions that contain very specific molecular forms of informational support processes It can be said that these reactions, in the process of evolution, have allowed organisms to acquire not only mechanical but also the development of more complex high-adaptive degrees of freedom—informational On some stages of the evolution, these complex reactions significantly enhanced the role of thermodynamic regulatory feedback loops, regulating for instance the heat balance in the process of cellular respiration or maintaining the temperature of the body and so on However, thermodynamic systems operate with some characteristics that reflect the hierarchy of the physical quantities in the process of energy transformation Biological thermodynamics, in turn, mirrors the hierarchy of the complex biological world It is, therefore, useful to remind ourselves of the construction of the The Common Extremalities in Biology and Physics DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-385187-1.00001-0 © 2012 Elsevier Inc All rights reserved The Common Extremalities in Biology and Physics hierarchal thermodynamic terms and the definition of these with respect to the crucial differences in the organizational hierarchy—a central point in the difference between pure thermodynamic and biological phenomena 1.1.2 Hierarchy of the Processes and Parameters in Thermodynamics Thermodynamics is known as a phenomenological science Thermodynamics represents a classical and historical example of a macroscopic description of the energetic transformations in various macrosystems However, it is important to note that the understanding of macroscopic and particularly microscopic phenomena has steadily been changing with time Thermodynamics, as we know, deals with the systems containing a large number of particles (around 1010À1030) As we mentioned, such macroscopic systems can be characterized by two kinds of variables: Macroscopic parameters—characterizing the system in relation to the neighboring macroscopic world, or the system as a whole Two classic examples of these variables are volume and pressure Microscopic parameters—characterizing the properties of the particles that make up the system (mass of the particles, their velocities, momenta, and so on) Now, it seems obvious that in any study of processes and systems, it is possible to set at least two fundamentally different edge levels for these processes, i.e., macroscopic and microscopic levels The former is known as the phenomenological level, which can be heavily characterized by thermodynamics Let us note, therefore, that the concept of a thermodynamic system, as studied in thermodynamics, is more complicated than the concept of a mechanical system, due to the dynamic nature of the values at both of these levels Clearly, these two levels of variables are interrelated, although they have their own dynamism The inconvenience of describing a one level (macro), which employs the microscopic description of the states of all components of a system of microparticles that carry the microscopic parameters, leads to a statistical interpretation of these quantities, which connects them to the macroscopic parameters The fundamental relationships involved are closely related to thermodynamics—a form of statistical mechanics Thermodynamic consideration deals only with the macroscopic parameters of the systems, i.e., those of clear phenomenological character Therefore, the distinctive feature of thermodynamics (as a phenomenological, macroscopic description) relative to mechanics (microscopic description) is that for the thermodynamic systems the concept of two types of processes is considered In some sense, thermodynamics is the first hierarchical science within physics If in mechanics the reversible character of processes is the rule, and the irreversibility in some way is an exception, in thermodynamics, perhaps, reversibility of processes is the exception, and irreversibility is the rule Thermodynamics, therefore, requires specific fundamental law to take account of its macroscopic nature—the second law of thermodynamics The apparent dominance of irreversible processes in the macroworld is associated with the peculiarity of the dynamic nature of the relationship of Extreme Energy Dissipation microstates and macrostates of the thermodynamic system Reversible processes are understood as taking place in such a way that all the macroscopic parameters can be changed in the opposite direction, without any other macroscopic changes, even outside the system The irreversible processes occur so that they can run in the opposite direction, just when connected with other macroscopic changes, such as the environment Reversibility and irreversibility, which manifest themselves macroscopically, are closely linked with the microscopic characteristics of particles, i.e., their own dynamism Due to the dynamic nature of these macroparameters and the large range of energy that characterizes (changes/transformations) the system, these values have a certain hierarchy 1.1.3 Macroparameters: Energy and the Forms of Its Exchange In consideration of the physical interactions in thermodynamics, the nature of interaction is explicitly emphasized as the exchange of energy through two distinct processes—it is the result of work or heat transfer However, as we mentioned in thermodynamics, there are two levels of hierarchical processes—the microscopic and macroscopic These and, therefore, the energy exchange (or thus, the interaction) involved in thermodynamics are different and have the appropriate hierarchy Energy, traditionally, is distinguished in several forms The internal energy of a system takes all the available energy into account, without regard to the hierarchy of interactions at the macrolevel or microlevel This energy includes the energy of all microscopic particles, at all levels of the hierarchy of the system, and includes the energy of all known interactions between them, as well as the macroscopic part of energy (related to the system macroparameters, like pressure, volume) It should be emphasized that because of this broad concept of internal energy, it is impossible to establish its full value for any system, because it includes a large number of constituents that are difficult to take into account Therefore, we often deal only with the change in internal energy of the system between any of the states of the system Heat, also referred to as thermal energy, is the kinetic energy of the microparticles that make up the system This energy is transmitted through the exchange of the microscopic kinetic energy of the microparticles during their collisions Therefore, thermal energy (heat) has macroscopic properties due to the large numbers of particles involved in the kinetic motion and the large amount of transferred energy This type of energy exchange is not linked to the exchange of the energy of a system in the process of work Because nonequilibrium states are characteristic of macrosystems, the energy in thermodynamics acquires one other property The energy can also be considered as a measure that characterizes the aspiration of processes and systems to reach their equilibrium In other words, it can be considered as the measure of the relationship between the relatively nonequilibrium degrees of freedom and the equilibrium In a certain sense, the nonequilibrated degrees of freedom can be interpreted as overcrowded by motion To some extent, the energy is a measure of the overflow by the motion of degrees of freedom (a measure of the nonequilibrium 364 The Common Extremalities in Biology and Physics 12 Wilczek, F 2000 QCD in Extreme Conditions, arXiv:hep-ph/0003183 13 Dremin, I M., and Kaidalov, A B (2006) Quantum chromodynamics and the phenomenology of strong interactions Usp Fiz Nauk 176(3), 275À287 14 Gorsky, A S (2005) Gauge theories as string theories: the first results Usp Fiz Nauk 175(11), 1145À1162 15 Grojean, C (2007) New approaches to electroweak symmetry breaking Usp.Fiz Nauk 177(1), 3À42 16 Окунь, Л Б 1981 Современное состояние и перспективы физики высоких энергий, жФН, 134, Вып.1, с 3À44 17 Ross, G G (1985) Grand unified theories Westview Press, Reading, MA 18 Dimopoulos, S., Raby, S., and Wilczek, F (1981) “Supersymmetry and the Scale of Unification” Physical Review D 24, 1681À1683 19 Likhtman, E P (2001) Supersymmetry: 30 years ago Usp Fiz Nauk 171(9), 1025À1032 20 Mohapatra, R N (2003) Unification and Supersymmetry: The Frontiers of Quark-lepton Physics Springer, Berlin 21 Novikov, V A (2004) Nonperturbative QCD and supersymmetric QCD Usp.Fiz Nauk 174(2), 113À120 22 Raby, S (2009) SUSY GUT model building Eur Phys J C59, 223À247 arXiv:0807.4921 23 Vysotskii, M I., and Nevzorov, R B (2001) Selected problems in SUSY phenomenology Usp.Fiz Nauk 171(9), 939À950 24 Muller, M (1989) Consistent Classical Supergravity Theories Springer Verlag Berlin; Heidelberg; New York; London 25 Weinberg, S 1977 “The First Three Minutes.” Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA Conceptual Aspects of the Common Extrema in Biology and Physics 6.1 Self-Sufficiency of Extreme Transformations The applicability of the maximum energy dissipation principle as a special form of the least action principle, which uses the optimal control and variation methods in the conceptual and technical unification of biology and physics, mechanics and biological kinetics, and also physical and biological evolution, shows universal strength of the extreme penalty-and-energy interpretation of the laws in these quite opposite fields As a result of this interpretation and of the ideological penetration of biology into physics, an important conclusion follows through the penalty treatment of the least action principle: Instability and its intensive penalty evaluation—energy (specifically free energy) strives to equilibrium and stability in an extremely rapid way Such a general conclusion doubtlessly requires more comprehensive consideration that perhaps cannot be done separately only in physics or only in biology In this situation, physical and biological evolutions acquire obvious penaltyenergy touch: the emergence, the existence, and the destruction of material systems are only the material forms of the extreme utilization and elimination of instability, and they may be the last material consumption forms of these imperfect systems What could be the most general and common properties and laws for such rather different and opposite phenomena as biological (including biosocial) and physical ones? 6.1.1 Nonequilibrium/Instability The properties of motion may be considered to have nonequilibrium/instability at the different known structural levels of organization of matter: chemical, prebiotic, biological, biosocial, and physical This enables us to conclude that one of the principal properties inherent in each of the above material forms of motion is the nonequilibrium/instability of the majority of structural and energy states The essential features of this nonequilibrium/instability include relative nonequilibrium, which is the instability of the structural forms of matter organization, and relative equilibrium, which is the relative stability of its other forms The nonequilibrium/ instability can be characterized by the universal value of energy—generally, free energy The Common Extremalities in Biology and Physics DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-385187-1.00006-X © 2012 Elsevier Inc All rights reserved 366 6.1.2 The Common Extremalities in Biology and Physics Motion Is a Striving Toward Stability Another property, closely related to energetic nonequilibrium/instability, is the following: The interactions in any of the listed areas of motion and evolution could be characterized by a certain direction, by irreversibility or dissipative transformation of nonequilibrium/instability and its universal characteristic—energy This is classically expressed in physics in the second law of thermodynamics, which postulates the irreversibility of the transitions of energy from some energy forms to thermal degrees in macro-nature The consideration of evolution in other areas shows that all other energy transitions are accompanied by this fatal directness This can be explained by the preferable equilibrium/stability of energy in the form of thermal motion Such a division into the unstable and stable forms, and the motion as a transition from instability to stability, enables one to treat the nonequilibrium and instability as the sources of motion of matter At the same time, the source of the new forms of material nonequilibrium/instability and the new structural forms are also enclosed into this motion toward relative equilibrium/stability The material motion is, thus, displayed as the material implementation of instability transitions and the conversion of the nonequilibrium/instability into the equilibrium/stability This implementation includes the sense of material motion and the existence of forms at all structural levels of matter organization Thus, the material states strive to increase their equilibrium/stability status 6.1.3 Extremeness Moreover, such a transformation of the material forms of motion at all levels of structural organization of matter is carried out not lazily or with indifference, but in the most effective, fast, and most extreme way This extreme quality seems to be inherent in matter at all levels: intertransformation of material forms of motion from unstable to more stable forms is carried out as quickly as possible It is the result of the competitiveness of material forms 6.1.4 Ordered Way/Regularity The extremeness of transformation can be achieved only in an ordered, regular way Transformation is a fast and ordered means of dissipation The extremeness is a generalization of the least action principle for all material transformations It appears that in physics, the least action principle is only a special case of the principle of extreme transformation of more unstable forms of material motion The least action principle is a special case of the general methodological principle of the striving of nonequilibrated and unstable forms toward greater equilibrium and stability This methodological principle can be formulated as follows: the material forms of motion strive toward the maximum rate of transformation and increase in direction toward stability and the maximum reduction of instability of relatively unstable material forms Conceptual Aspects of the Common Extrema in Biology and Physics 6.1.5 367 New Instability—The Result of the Ordered, Structured Process of the Elimination of Extreme Instability It may seem that such an evolution of the forms of material motion should inevitably result in a greater and greater increase of common equilibrium, of common stability of all forms, and into the degeneration of forms of nonequilibrium—to be completely replaced by a few others and in an impasse in the variety of the material forms of motion However, the extremeness of transformations of relatively unstable forms to relatively stable forms can be carried out only through development of the regularity of this process Thus, the striving toward the maximum transformation rate of material forms to more stable forms is possible only through the development of the new unstable process of increasing relative stability and generation of the new material form of regularity But at the same time, the new material form of instability is nonequilibrium This process of separation of the interacting material forms occurs when a rather nonequilibrated, unstable state of the material forms is transformed (and as rapidly as possible) to a steadier state only by division of the previous state by steadier states and the new form of instability Such a process of splitting a steadier state up occurs by means of generation of a new material form of instability and a new energy form, as a measure of this instability, which is realized by the interaction of all forms of material motion, coexisting in the given state of matter In this sense, the production of relative stability is inalienably, inseparably connected to the production of relative instability In summary, it is possible to differentiate the following general properties of interaction of the material forms of motion: Nonequilibrium and instability of some forms of material motion, relative stability and equilibrium of other material forms It might be postulated as the existence of the common measure of instability—energy The essence of the motion as transition of this instability, of nonequilibrium into a more stable, equilibrated, steadier state It might be postulated as some selective energy/matter forms Extreme character of this transition to stability and to equilibrium This might be expressed by the least action principle Ordered way of transformation, through the organized form of production of disorder It might be expressed in postulating the existence of informational processes Materialization of an extreme process through generation of a new instability and new nonequilibrium process of interaction of material forms of motion The newly generated nonequilibrium is also a source of instability, having an energetic form, and it is a source of the next changes, when the first property can be applied This can be postulated as evolution or biology as the universal property The set of these properties/laws offers a rather peculiar picture of evolution of the material forms of motion Consequently, the sense of the motion changes: not to achieve equilibrium and “thermal death,” but new material forms of nonequilibrium It means that the main state of matter is basically nonequilibrium Only forms of nonequilibrium can replace, and nonequilibrium is universal and 368 The Common Extremalities in Biology and Physics natural for all of the matter The material motion looks like a shift of the nonequilibrium forms striving as fast as possible toward equilibrium Matter is nonequilibrated, and it is unstable and stable at the same time The extremely fast striving of nonequilibrium, instability to equilibrium, derives a new form of instability In the overall picture, it appears that the nature of equilibrium has an advantage of some sort None of the forms of material motion has an advantage The advantage has only a local character in time and space, structure, and material form of energy or substance The continuous and steady change of the forms of motion is the main state of matter, and the motion is a shift of the forms of material equilibrium and nonequilibrium In this way, the motion of matter is paradoxical: The maximum production of equilibrium, stability, and disorder can be carried out only in an ordered way through unstable processes and states It demonstrates that an ideal chaos (disorder) can emerge, and this can appear only due to the development of the ideal order Extreme, maximum production of stability can be developed only by means of production of instability and vice versa Matter, aiming toward a maximum production of disorder in an extreme form, aims at the same time to a maximum of order and to a maximum degree of regularity of extremely rapid disorder production Matter can simultaneously be aimed toward order and disorder and to stability and instability It can be aimed toward stability in an unstable way and toward instability in a stable way This explains that the motion of matter is a paradox, but the existence of matter is an even more fascinating paradox It should also be noted that organized material motion is internally open The material forms, being in an unstable state and aiming to reduce their instability, can shift the overall organization of motion, including the structural form of total stability Therefore, the motion could be treated as open and as indefinite in terms of the variety of forms of motion, in relation to the future states The material motion probably has an anti-impassive character Otherwise, if the material motion is restricted with regard to the number of forms, then in infinite terms, really absolute equilibrium, the absolute rest, and some variant of “thermal death” are the only explanations Only in the case of openness, as mentioned above, is the absolute rest of matter impossible It can manifest itself only as relative nonequilibrium, with attributes of instability 6.2 Intensive and Extensive Property of Displaying of Material Instability It was already mentioned above that the maximum energy dissipation principle on the basis of which we can conceptually unite natural (physical) and biological regularities formally appears as a requirement of extremeness of the functional, which has dimensions of the action Let us consider once again the formal structure of this functional Conceptual Aspects of the Common Extrema in Biology and Physics 369 In the thermodynamic, explicit dissipative area and in the field of biological dissipative processes and their evolution, the principle is formally and mathematically expressed as: ð _ GðxÞÞdt -min; ðTðxÞ ð6:1Þ _ is the penalty for kinetics, where x_ is amplitude of kinetic degrees of freedom, TðxÞ x is degrees of freedom of the deviation from a steady state, and G(x) is the penalty for this deviation In the purely physical, nondissipative area: ð _ UðxÞÞdt -min; ðTðxÞ ð6:2Þ where x is the degrees of freedom of the system deviation from the steady state; x_ _ is the kinetic is velocities, or rates of motion in these degrees of freedom; TðxÞ member describing kinetic loss and penalty for kinetic motion; and U(x) is an “anti-penalty,” which is an energetical profit-like value for deviation from some steady or equilibrium state We should recall that in the physical area, the control looks rather like selfcontrol due to the enormous speeds occurring at this regulation In the formal sense in both these cases, the variables that are included in the functional of the penalty can be divided into the following: the variables determining the “instant pressure” of payment and penalty character, and the values of the prices (rather, the intensity parameters) as well as the variable determining the duration of this “penalty pressure”—time (rather an extensive parameter) The form of the structure of these two formal expressions indicate the availability of two different generalized kinds of degrees of freedom of material motion, which are related to energy-like and time-like dissipative transformations The values, directly describing the nonequilibrium, instability of motion, and the internal “stock” of this instability, can be referred to as energy-like ones, and the values related to them, in which this realization of instability is only extensively displayed, can be referred to as time-like ones In the first degrees, the intensity or energy content is formalized, striving to greater stability, and the penalty valuation of system state, energy forms, and structures are in unstable states In the values related to the second degrees, the motion is displayed only as a result of the mutual competition of relative stability and relative instability The time-like value acts as an integrating factor, taking into account the accumulation of local penalties and instant instabilities From the expressions (6.1) and (6.2), one can write a general expression for the extreme requirement of interconversions of degrees of freedom of material motion between some states A and B: ðB J Ldt - min; A ð6:3Þ 370 The Common Extremalities in Biology and Physics where L is a generalized function formalizing the local energy and penalty for instability/nonequilibrium, and t can be considered the generalized parameter of duration The last parameter, time, can be treated as a degree of freedom of motion of the given unstable state transformations of material forms, in which the result of their transformations is manifested Let us compare these two parameters, energy and time, in a more detailed way, as they are interdependent aspects of material existence 6.2.1 Energy in the Penalty Sense In terms of energy, it was already noted that on the one hand, there is a measure of instability of the form of motion, and on the other hand, there is a measure of its stability, since it also characterizes the internal steady motion in a steady state The expression (6.3) could be treated as determining the evolutionary motion of some structural-matter form from a rather unstable state into a rather stable one It also determines the competitive relationship of these two opposite states In the terms of the Hegelian dialectic, energy can be considered a measure of struggle and a measure of unity of these competitive states This expression explains the internal duality of energy: its instability and its stability The generalized measure of cause of energy is the measure of intensity of conversion of this relative instability to relative stability This duality shows that, with respect to time-like parameters, one state of matter could be considered as equilibrated and stable, whereas others could be considered as nonequilibrated and unstable—that could be a source for emergence of other forms of motion 6.2.2 Time in the Penalty Sense If energy is a common source of the struggle of competition of forms, and its penalty evaluation has explicit dynamic sense, then time is a result of this struggle giving an opportunity for energy to materialize in a certain material way In an overstated interpretation, time is the extent and the duration In the above dissipative energy, control-and-penalty understanding of motion, time is a general extensive measure of (common) coexistence of material forms This generalized measure of the result of the struggle, displayed as duration, is the duration of coexistence and the struggle of these oppositions Time in this way is only an extensive measure of relative stability of the coexisting forms In contrast to time, energy is an intensive measure of instability, measuring the striving of material forms to stability and equilibrium It is displayed as the intensity of striving of instability to stability, and it is initially the cause of the struggle between stable and unstable tendencies We could say that the causality in evolution of instability forms goes from intensive internal degrees of freedom of material motion to extensive degrees, with more explicit external presentation of degrees of freedom of motion Evolution goes from instability and nonequilibrium to those degrees of freedom, in which this instability is displayed and competes again, for example, in conventional space-time Thus, the forms of instability derive time as an extensive display of Conceptual Aspects of the Common Extrema in Biology and Physics 371 competitiveness of this motion of the striving to stability In addition, it should be noted that the sense of time is also related to the process of measurement of time In a certain way, the measurement of time is a comparison of the duration of the process with a metric, for which the more stable, steady, periodic mechanical-like process that could be characterized by nondissipative transformation, which is comparable to the processes that are going to be measured All unstable related changes are compared to this mechanical-like process Therefore, time expresses itself as a measure of instability of the given forms of existence of matter relative to one another, in which time as well as energy reflect all generalized properties of this struggle, such as the direction of this struggle toward a greater stability As all forms of matter motion compete for stability and develop stability in themselves, time is a universal characteristic of their relative stability only Therefore, time can be understood as a self-oriented action, induced by matter, with the purpose of finding and selecting more stable material forms of existence, as an extensive measure of the competitiveness of forms of motion In this situation, the motion of matter makes sense as a mutual effect of coexisting material forms This mutual effect is induced by all forms that exist at the moment, and this action is displayed as some material form, destructively acting on the previous states, deforming and changing them, and deriving new forms of motion As this form of displaying of the material forms of motion quite differently affects various structural-energy forms, time forces them to decay or to arise appropriately Thus, a concept of the materiality of time could consist in common creation of an extensive direction, an arrow, in which the result of the mutual common interaction of all structural forms on themselves is compared (as well as in information mapping of material forms) In some sense, it is the generalized direction where the manifestation of these common actions is expressed Its general result looks like a destruction of one form of matter motion and the emergence of others This is a degree of freedom, in which the extremeness of intertransformation and its struggle displays as the rate of intertransformation into newly created material states, and it is manifested or self-scaled Time in this sense is the action, the “pressure” of the common motion of matter on its unstable forms Thus, time is a general form of displaying self-action and self-selection of material forms, and it is a generalized metric (measure) of their competitiveness In these terms, energy as an intensive measure is the reason for the self-action described above In its turn, energy is a measure of instability; it is a driving internal force of the intertransformation of the forms that are manifested as motion For this reason, energy is the property and measurement of the impelled potential of material motion, and time is the universal result of this motion, and they are the general forms of matter existence Therefore, time is also a generalized degree of freedom of motion, in which the instability and extremeness of the intertransformation of motion are displayed In this sense, material motion is a reason for unity of the energy-penalty properties, and time is the consequence both in every individual act of this motion as well as in the motion itself So one can say that matter is not only the reason but also the result 372 6.3 The Common Extremalities in Biology and Physics Natural and Biotic Things—Lethal Gap or Irrational Compromise It was already pointed out above that the biological area of processes could be characterized by an ever-increasing energy dissipation rate, corresponding to the MEP principle, which is the thermodynamic formulation of the least action principle The biotic and postbiotic evolutions are good examples of the colossal involvement of free energy in the circulation of dissipative events occurring in nature But nature abounds with quite equilibrated physical structures, from which the world was created and has existed for about 15 billion years The physical processes occurring in such systems can be interpreted from the point of view of the maximum rate of energy dissipation (production of entropy), which results in observation of an infinitely small free energy consumption The maximum nondissipation of physical structures occurs when the penalty for existence is paid in a nondissipated way by the internal potential—internal hidden and unobserved degrees of freedom—in the way that it is impossible to establish which internal degrees of freedom have such a potential How can the rather opposite branches of material evolution—natural (physical) and biological—agree from the point of view of extreme energy dissipation? There are two alternative conceptual models of the coordination of these processes that could be suggested from the point of view of the internal development and organization of processes in a system They are based on the consideration of the dissipation of the maximum rate for biological systems and the minimum dissipation for physical ones 6.3.1 “Continuous” Model—The Irrational Compromise The most consecutive consideration can be based on the assumption that the chemothermodynamic, biosocial area, on the one hand, and the physical area, on the other, are the expansion of an universal manner of total material evolution It was discussed above that the description in these fields can be based on the ideology of the least action principle The graphic interpretation suggested for the least action principle is offered in Figure 1.1 and later in Figure 4.31, and it can be summarized in the form shown in Figure 6.1 According to this figure, it is formally possible to expand a continuous transition of the global dissipation rate (curve “continuous” model, Figure 6.1), which qualitatively describes the biothermodynamic way that it decreases, and that corresponds to physical prototype, physical future, and physical continuation of the evolution of the chemo-bio-socio processes This expansion does not give a rise of dissipation or consumption of energy sources One can see that the dimension under this curve has a dimension of action, which equals energy multiplied by time units However, the following circumstance aggravates this model: In this continuous picture, it is supposed that the physical motion of material systems and its internal structural organization goes by nonmechanical stages in its evolution It, in Conceptual Aspects of the Common Extrema in Biology and Physics Dissipated energy/penalty “Alternative” model “Continous” model Proto- Biosocial area Pure physical area Time 373 Figure 6.1 The autocatalytic nature of the processes of free energy dissipation in chemo-prebiotic, biological, and biosocial areas of evolution leads to close exponential growth of energy dissipation, which has been illustrated previously The dissipative processes in the area of purely physical processes have a character of relaxation and a decrease of rate of energy dissipation to zero To show the unity of all natural processes, the continuation of these curves and the resulting curve comprises some bell-shaped form One can note that the area under this curve has the dimension of the product of energy on time—the action This indicates that this area also strives to a minimum turn, assumes nonmechanical organization of physical systems: Physical matter at the levels of intensive evolution could be represented by organized, nonmechanically similar living matter ways of organization This suggests that physical motion in its evolution passes the stages that are similar to those observable in the chemo-prebiotic area in its development of dissipative interaction with the environment But the result of this is an almost nondissipative relationship to the external world that physical systems demonstrate Such a consideration into biological processes and their evolution may show final, idealized results as a quasi-physical form of the organization of the dissipative relation to the environment that is characterized by an absolute or nearly absolute denying of dissipation—energy consumption of biosocial and technological processes on the next stages of evolution Such a denying of the evolutionary impasse for living nature assumes the evolution of living forms up to a physical-like, similar mechanic level, and it assumes further instability of this quasi-mechanical motion by new levels of organization Such mutual assumptions indicate certain recognition of evolutionary unity of biotic and physical things Moreover, it seems to be the only possible denial of evolutionary impasse of the biosocial area in an energy-dissipative sense It proceeds from the assumption that there is a reduction of energy costs (energy expenditure) in time in the evolution of a biosocial system The consumption of energy in such a system would tend toward zero, which (allowing for the internal organization of dissipative systems) corresponds to the level of organization of physical systems when energy for their existence is not consumed at all The above point of view also assumes the existence in living matter of post-socio-biotic forms of organization, when the rate of energy dissipation (consumption) for these stages continually decreases On the other hand, it assumes the presence in the physical forms of motion of the internal nonmechanical degrees of freedom, during which the evolution of the physical forms of matter motion passed 374 The Common Extremalities in Biology and Physics Therefore, the above model of energy evolution of the interaction of motion in material forms can formally be represented as a continuous curve on the diagram, as evolution of biosocial processes of energy dissipation up to physical levels (Figure 6.1) Such a model can be referred to as a “continuous” model 6.3.2 “Alternative” Model The framework of the above consideration of energy dissipation seems to offer a natural “alternative” model of possible intercoordination of the evolution of living and nonliving branches of the material world Effectively, this model rejects the extreme approach of the least action principle or the principle of rapid dissipation of energetic instability This “alternative” model is based on the denying of the path suggested above for the continuous synchronization of the “live” and “nonlive” branches of development of energy dissipation The diagram of development of rate of dissipation in time, Figure 6.1, formally shows a certain gap, a curve “alternative” model This model suggests the evolutionary impasse of living matter, which is a recognition of the accidence of the biotic forms, their temporality in a completely physically and mechanically stable nature We should emphasize that it is the apotheosis of an exclusively mechanistic matter and exclusive stability of mechanical forms of its motion This seems to be a model of thermal death, when some earlier predetermined forms of motion have greatest primary favor, and their stability is absolute It emphasizes the evolutionary accident of the emergence of the live branch of evolution, the living forms of motion in nature The “alternative” model of coevolution of the biosocial and physical forms of dissipation is based on the complete independence of the evolution of living and nonliving forms of motion It is also based on the basic impossibility of the evolutionary shift of biological systems into a physical level, when their life-supporting energy consumption can be compared to the interaction of physical systems within the environment It, therefore, also assumes the standard evidence: the nonexistence of dissipative and evolving internal organization for the physical forms, which is similar to the biosocial forms Such a model seems to be natural enough from the rational point of view; however, it also fatally breaks off the living and the nonliving branches of nature But on the other hand, to what extent is rationality rational enough? Thus, of the two above opposite models of coevolution of dissipative processes, or models of global realization of the least action principle, the first model is preferable in terms of harmony Though it is irrational, it does not break with the theories of biological and physical evolution There are a number of rather strong assumptions in this model, such as the assumption about the existence of nonmechanical, biological-like stages in physical evolution, through which the physical systems evolve in the process of interaction—although only for very short times in terms of the Plank extent This assumption, however, can make the model lethal due to its extreme irrationality At the same time, there is no logical and aesthetic perfection for this “alternative” model, which is also rarely combined with the truth Conceptual Aspects of the Common Extrema in Biology and Physics 375 In summary, the above consideration of the realization of the least action principle within the framework of continuous or “alternative” models in the infrastructure may seem either reliable or irrational However, if we limit ourselves only to phenomenology, the following regularities seem to be justified: Instability of material motion: relative stability of certain material forms and relative instability of others The fundamental nature of motion as transition, transformation, and evolution of instability and nonequilibrium into a more equilibrated, stable state The extremely fast character of this transition to stability and to equilibrium (expressed in the least action principle) The ordered character of this transition, providing extremely fast increase of equilibrium, stability, order, and information The emergence and form of extreme process by rejection of its stability, through a generation of a new nonequilibrated process of interaction of material forms of motion, via the ordered form of the disorder production New nonequilibrium is also the source of new changes, and it creates an open-end evolution of the matter forms with an unforeseen diversity These five theses can probably complete the present models that deal with the unpredictable evolutionary changes in nature Main Conclusions and Remaining Questions Thus, the ideology of the maximum energy dissipation principle, which can be considered as a particular case of the least action principle, and the corresponding optimal variational technique turned out to be very constructive—both phenomenologically and formally, in terms of mathematic unification of physics and biology On the ideological basis of these principles, it is possible to conceptually formalize the reasons and character of the occurring phenomena in these two opposite areas by several notions The constructivism of these principles is determined by the energy and penalty interpretation The maximum energy dissipation/least action principle can be considered as a combinational principle that determines the process proceeding from previously given harmony, which Norbert Wiener described as creation of the structural variety of material forms that is by no means impossible to predict beforehand From the different examples and generalizations discussed above, one may present the key characteristics of this process, which has infrastructure and infra-organization going into infinity: ● ● ● ● ● Matter can be treated as being in a nonequilibrium, and it is in some sense unstable With the quantitative measure of nonequilibrium/instability, one can say the penalty for staying in an unstable state can be characterized energetically Motion is the aspiration of matter to equilibrium, to stability Matter’s aspiration to stability is carried out extremely rapidly according to the least action/maximum energy dissipation principle The extremely fast striving is possible in an ordered way only, in a synergetic and cooperative manner, with informational support and informational cognition of these ways The extremely fast striving creates new forms of instability that can be treated as new forms of matter: It is also accompanied by the transformation of the material forms of previous stability In this way, the physical and biological worlds are closely united by energetic extremeness It is the extremeness of the interconversion processes of free energy that can be treated in a generalized sense, and the inequilibrity/instability is characterized by its dissipation In this sense, free energy can be treated as a penalty for being in nonequilibrated, unstable states However, at the same time, a number of questions remain They are related to the limit of the mixed up known states of substance, forms of energy, and space and time They can be referred to, to some extent, as “beyond the limit.” Once the four-dimensional space-time form was discovered, the superhot bunch of supermatter has evolved through a large variety of states, very quickly leaving its initial The Common Extremalities in Biology and Physics DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-385187-1.00007-1 © 2012 Elsevier Inc All rights reserved 378 The Common Extremalities in Biology and Physics nonequilibrium according to the least action/maximum energy dissipation principle The early material stages of evolution of this bunch may be considered as the stages that spread on the lowest formed stable three-dimensional space One of the latter known organizational stages of matter became a biosocial state Thus, within the framework of human social information cognition and informational mapping, which arises for “life support” at these latter stages, it is possible to raise a number of rather “beyond the limit” questions, related to the origin of the Big Bang and to the character of laws occurring prior to its “splashing out”: ● ● ● ● ● Why did the “beyond the limit” world (which could be considered as a physical vacuum) or its part turn out to be in nonequilibrium, or to be unstable? Did the character of its phenomena obey the least action/maximum energy dissipation principle in the above widely formulated sense? What nature did the forms of prior existence (before Big Bang) of physical world space, substance, time, and energy have before their conversion to conventional low-dimensional space-time? Was the world expediently converted on the existing space-time hypersurface, and is it a certain experiment carried out by a higher-dimensional (not only in the sense of dimension) Creator? Is the Creator physically located beyond the border of the physical vacuum and beyond the above-mentioned space-time limit? What sort of evolutionary mega-trends could exist beyond the biosocial form of organization? It is probably impossible to give the answers to these questions without considering the detailed operating mechanisms of the least action/maximum energy dissipation principle, i.e., to be limited only by phenomenology, in the framework of phenomenological consideration Within the biological and physical perspective, is the phenomenological relationship between physical and biological worlds limited only by the extreme character of energy transformation? It was mentioned that the extreme utilization of nonequilibrium/instability means the regularity of this process; and moreover, it means the informational support (informational cognition) of it In this sense, a question is: Does there exist, along with energy and penalty unity of the world, any similar informational unity that supports/provides ordered dissipation? At the same time, it is known that any transfer or transcription of the information from various information codes and languages always results in some losses So the information at one level of organization of processes does not always bear target opportunity and does not always have significance for another level of organization Therefore, perhaps in a sense, in which the energetic unity of the world exists, there is no information unity, even if matter is actually overfilled with information It seems that information divides the world while energy unites it And the vital informational question: Up to what level and up to what limiting information code can information be reduced, compressed in its transcription for transfer from one level of organization to another, without functional and valuable losses? Main Conclusions and Remaining Questions 379 The questions related to the regulative infrastructure of the extreme realization of the least action principle are interesting and need to be clarified: ● ● ● ● ● ● What are the common regularities of information contribution in the materialization of the extreme strategy of biological and physical systems, and they have a general character? What are the limitation regularities of different kinds of information mapping and informational cognition accompanying the extreme strategy? Is the information mapping in a general sense carried out by the social system of Homo sapiens limited? If yes, how? Does information participate in organization of known physical interactions? What is the role of information mapping in the realization/triggering of initial instability of the physical vacuum? And one more question: Are these questions out of the scope of some limiting restrictions on the biosocial way of information mapping? These restrictions are determined by energetic opportunities, i.e., the limits of short and long periods and distances and scales of energy consumption in a general sense Are we approaching from the perspective of the above-stated informational limitations a systemic understanding of a possible absolute border, both in the scope of energy consumption potential of Homo sapiens and in its information mapping/cognition? Eastern wisdom states that the truth lies between the words and the lines The problem is to find suitable words and lines However, the author believes that this space between the lines does not contain the above-mentioned limitations regarding informational mapping and cognition Moreover, this space has the capacity to correct the lines themselves—lines that not ever describe the truth precisely enough ... least action principle In this respect, the Ziegler principle of achieving the maximum energy dissipation rate (maximum energy dissipation principle) can be interpreted as coinciding with the least... above in terms of the pure variational approach and the 40 The Common Extremalities in Biology and Physics Pontryagin maximum principle in optimal control The minimization functional was chosen in. . .The Common Extremalities in Biology and Physics Maximum Energy Dissipation Principle in Chemistry, Biology, Physics and Evolution Second Edition Adam Moroz