The Synthetic Engine

The Synthetic Engine

I came back this afternoon to post finally a new idea- otherwise the day was rather boring, that feeling of a blank page or no new directions worth posting. I supose in the back of my mind so to speak a couple of ideas clicked when I was doing artistic dooles and cutting paper objects and taking pictures of their shadows as in the accompaning illustration of the Otto Symbol.

I am sure the references are out there recently on the popular science sites. One involves the link to miRNA and the control of the expression of dopamine in the brain and that unbalanced by over production in the autistic mind. Another related one concerns the innate tendency to post partum depression, or the degree of self awareness of ones state of mind for lit up areas of the prefrontal lobe as to if a person was likely to take their medications. But the other significant one is the transfer of information between parent and offspring. These anayltic things if seen more from an informational viewpoint can be seen from a synthetic viewpoint as if the idea of consciousness were at least understood as an explicit totality on that level. The analytic in a sense is the realm of direct experimental evidence.

But I have speculated that the quadrapole like chain code of 64 codons, a model from first principles, was indeed an experiment already done by nature herself- in fact on this level of the myth or truth of speculation, the miRNA is a that chain encoding I styled the compass. This suggests to me a global picture which in theory may be programmed to undertake the biochemical machinery and pathways which obviously has some effect as if a subconscious machine on our mental experience.

Analog and digital, continuous and finite, seem to blend. I understand we can see the body systems as one system but we can also study them separately and sometimes the effects of systems are indeed separate. I would urge those interested in string theory and the like to apply it to biochemistry- there is more than quantum theory involved. As Ulla posted on her blog of the walking molecules in life yesterday we say the combination of such chemicals is a matter of chance and what is available. But clearly in the total body system some molecules "know" or from a hidden place can find or sense some other place very far from a distant place in the body. Or there can be distant effects if we say place engineered or cross species DNA in one part of the body without any apparent material link.

I do not accept on this level of mythical story telling that the physiology is the psychology without there being a unified theory of physical laws. I cannot accept the application of ideas like Hawking applying them to the idea of God without a more general level beyond crude distinction of what is mind or what is matter. Indeed if his final idea is that he has asked the what of the world and not the philosophic why it is here rather than not, he has come as a scientist to a place where we who still see the value of philosophy asking those questions all along from perhaps a higher comprehension with clear scientific outlines. Even for stories that try to match science and religion were that may be possible we can suggest from neurological evidence that some idea of God as the universe at least and similiar if not the same laws of our thoughts and anatomy- is such a God in a universe of diffuse shadows mixed with lensing of a so called origin or big bang (that is from the level of those seemingly global theories of their day) is such a God always aware of His state of introspection? Science suggests many diverse and complex models to explain as well as dismiss a God in a much more complex way than our evolved thinking has thus far imagined- all in principle perhaps less than the treatment of such a Deity as a static place, goal and end as a theory of everything.

I am not sure I have communicated the beauty of this picture or that it can be received. But as Hoyle said of the Big Bang- why would God make a universe based on a model less beautiful than his Steady State one? But with such an idea of God and of ourselves in the mechanism of consciousness as the ultimate of things- and that this is the end that we see and Hawkings once said was the end of things in the universe and learning- and these abstract algebraic and geometric mechanisms do apply to all obtainable levels- is it wrong to think that just perhaps we have described the synthetic consciousness of at least the universe itself in that we can understand what that is in ourselves?