Centropy by Irving Simon

| Home | Randomness | Centropy |

PREFACE

To speak with authority on evolution not that 'authority'— is always desirable—one should be up to date on morphology, paleontology, taxonomy, ecology, genetics, cytology, biochemistry, and the biomathematics of coding. (At our present stage of understanding one may also have to become familiar with electromagnetism, biomagnetism, spectroscopy, biogenetics, bioelectromagnetics...). The past history of the forms of organisms is perhaps the most complex and obscure subject that the scientific mind has ever tackled, and it can only be approached by abstractions very distant from the actual events that it seeks to describe. This being so, constructive ideas potentially capable of providing a new and reliable approach to any aspect of the subject must be welcomed, wherever they come from. --L. L.Whyte

As an empiricist Ernst Mach was also an enthusiastic proponent of thought experiments: He developed the first detailed theory and indeed invented the term itself Gedankenexperiment. According to Mach’s theory, thought experiments are old experiences creatively arranged. Instead of conflicting with empiricism they are an extension of it. Learn-or-die evolutionary pressure on consciousness endows us with a treasure-store of accumulated experiences that are ever close at hand in clear articulate thought. Thought experimenters can make discoveries from their armchair because they can draw from a reservoir of past experiences.

As a dilettante of science my research on evolution was done either at school, in a library, in a lecture hall, reading books, listening to tapes, or sitting at my desk going over piles of research articles. From the compilation of data, and what may be called an 'insight' (not necessarily unique), I sensed a reason to look at complexity as part of a thermodynamic process. In a sense, one may consider me to be an 'armchair scientist.' As such, my Gedankenexperiment is hardly an experiment coming solely from experience. Yet it does rely on what may be a new thought; one that centers on the movement toward greater complexity as noted by such emergences as multicellular organisms, algae, plants...; the 'acquisition' of a skeletal form, a nervous system, the complexity of the brain as noted in higher animals, primates and, more recently, humans. I sensed that by looking at Evolution in terms of a hierarchy of energy systems, we may get a better understanding of the mechanisms that are involved in perpetuating complexity.

In accordance with the understanding that evolution can be seen as a result of a thermodynamic process then everything, individually and collectively, can be seen as an energy system. In other words, a single atom, a molecule, a cell, a complex organism, you and I, as well as an organized group, or a society, can be seen as energy systems. I intend to show that we can get a better perspective of the mechanisms of change if, instead of studying evolution solely at the microscopic (molecular level of the cell), we also need to include what is going on at the macroscopic level of energy systems. In this regard I intend to briefly introduce the concepts of entropy and its opposite, complexity. However, explaining either is no small matter. Therefore if one wants a more elaborate discussion of this thermodynamic process, I would suggest that they seek out the many books and articles that discuss this subject at great length.

When we look at a tree in terms of it being an ‘energy system’ we know that it must get some form of energy from its environment that will help it to continue to grow and possibly bear fruit. As a living organism it abstracts the nutrients within its environment (soil, sun, air) and converts them into useful energy for the aforementioned purpose. As long as there is a supply of energy-producing ingredients the tree will continue to grow. With the understanding that a tree is more complex than the seed from which it sprung, then we can acknowledge that it takes energy from the environment to perpetuate complexity. However, when the tree dies, its leaves turn brown, bark begins to peel, and eventually, it decomposes. This process is what is referred to as entropy — the decrease in complexity and organization of an energy system.

CENTROPY

Centropy is a term whose time has come as a replacement for such terms as 'negative entropy' 'negentropy' or '- (entropy),' terms that describes the thermodynamic principle whereby an energy system decreases in complexity. In a sense Entropy is a negative term because it refers to what is happening as an energy system decreases in complexity during the process of decaying... Erwin Schrodinger suggests that "the awkward expression 'negative entropy' can be replaced by a better one: entropy, taken with the negative sign..." Why should we continue to use the term negentropy whose root and body have a negative connotation to refer to a process that, in a sense, is actually positive? Centropy, on the other hand, is a term that one can readily associate with a direction that suggests growth.

As an added note, in the evolutionary sense the term 'growth' conveys the idea of an organism having an evolutionary advantage, or a species that had attained a stage of greater complexity than its predecessors. There is no doubt that thermodynamics plays an important role in that process for, as energy systems, each emerging species of greater complexity, appears to be more efficient at dealing with free energy. Now the term 'evolution' may be too general, for may refer to characteristic changes of a species, i.e., features such as tougher hides, bigger and stronger bodies, etc., — horizontal evolution — as well as the emergence of new phyla, as evinced in the transition from fish to amphibian — vertical evolution. Thus, what we may need is a term to imply negentropy, Toward that end the term ‘centropy’ may be appropriate.

Centropy comes from the term 'centration,' which has been introduced by J. Sam Bois to indicate what happens when there is a pooling of human energies. It is a concentration of a sort; a uniting as exemplified by a group engaged in a cooperative venture. It is at those times when humans commingle (share in a common endeavor), that the outgrowth of their interaction may result in a new innovation leading to the enhancement of human relationships. Just such events occurred when single-celled organisms joined together to form multicellular organisms, and when complex organisms joined to form larger structures such as societies. Thus, when we speak of the vertical aspect of evolution, we imply the evolution of complexity. Let us differentiate it from the horizontal aspect of evolution by referring to it by the term 'centropy.' Also, let us refer to the process that is implied when we speak of the evolution of complexity, as a 'centropic process' rather than a 'negentropic process.'

Independently, biological energy systems need energy for sustenance and growth, for perpetuating a species, and for undergoing transformations. The primary, most abundant source of that energy comes from our Sun. This energy comes to the earth in the form of photons that are systematically converted into 'nutrients' utilized by biological energy systems on earth. For example, before plant life could emerge, certain gases and chemical compounds had to be in place. Thereafter, plants were dependent on those nutrients for survival. Those nutrients were converted by plants into leaves, fruit and nuts. We know, after the fact, that those nutrients had to be in place before animals could emerge. In turn, animals utilized and converted the energy derived from those nutrients into a form suitable for their survival, growth, and evolution. As we continue up the evolutionary tree, we may note the various stages when a new nutrient, a by-product of an existing energy system, made it possible for the emergence of another energy system, one of greater complexity. I refer to those nutrients as Complexity-Promoting Nutrients (CPN).

Since I propose to discuss Evolution as it pertains to levels of complexity, it should be understood that I will be referring to species that appeared in a chronological and hierarchical order, exemplifying approximately the same degree of complexity, as members of a specific energy system. My reasons for treating evolution as a hierarchy of energy systems will become obvious as I give a detailed analysis of how an earlier system may have been 'transformed' into an energy system of greater complexity.

I intend to show that, from the simplest of organisms to humans of today, there were distinct times in the chronology of the evolution of complexity when a more highly organized and more complex energy system was responsible for the introduction of a new Complexity-Promoting Nutrient. I will also show distinct examples of Complexity-Promoting Nutrients that are a result of the evolution of the human brain.

RANDOMNESS

During my research I was struck by the number of times the term 'random event' was suggested as a fortuitous occurrence that led to adaptations, mutations and transformations. Intuitively I understood it to mean that, for the time being, we have no better answer for the explanation of a vital link in the process. Thus, since explanations of the possible ‘mechanism(s)’ that are responsible for bringing about an evolutionary event, I decided to look for some fundamental aspects of the process that may have been either overlooked or still undiscovered.

It's easy to imagine molecular mechanisms that might drive the process of directed mutation. We've already proven feedback between organisms and the environment that occurs through messenger molecules that help genes communicate with the cell and the outside world. In light of this it seems almost perverse to maintain, as a matter of principle, that evolution is driven by random mutations, and that no other phenomenon comes into play. --Omni, 1993, Natural Direction, Pamela Weintraub, p.41

While some mutations may be random, many others are generated by the organism to cope with environmental stress. Because these mutations are literally selected by the organism while it is under stress, Hall calls them "selection induced." In dozens of control studies, Hall has shown that the mutants are specific to the environment. The starving cells do not just start churning out mutants at random. If lactose is the only nutrient available, for instance, the mutants will develop the ability to digest only lactose, not some other, unrelated sugar. If the medium is missing the amino acid tryptophane, then the cells will evolve the ability to produce that animal acid only. --Ibid

I must confess that, even though my knowledge of physics and chemistry is quite limited, I do believe that the answer to 'random events' lies within the realm of thermodynamic principles. If I allowed my naivete to discourage me from presenting a novel view of the evolutionary process this book would never have been written. Therefore, though the scientific community may find my hypothesis wanting, I strongly believe that the philosophy that emerges may help us understand the role complexity plays in the human species.

I must confess that, even though my knowledge of physics and chemistry is quite limited, I do believe that the answer to 'random events' lies within the realm of thermodynamic principles. If I allowed my naivete to discourage me from presenting a novel view of the evolutionary process this book would never have been written. Therefore, though the scientific community may find my hypothes is wanting, I strongly believe that the philosophy that emerges may help us understand the role complexity plays in the human species.

I intend to briefly address the role of the Big Bang, and the formation of inorganic matter, in the evolution of complexity. Without diminishing the importance of anything that occurred prior to, during, or after that event, I will also briefly address another spectacular event. The Big Bang of life-forms that eventually led to us. The start of the latter event may have taken place when single-celled organisms combined to form more complex, multicellular structures. Since that time both have coexisted, as is evident by the fossil record and the fact of their prevalence today. I will also introduce the possibility that there were a third, fourth and fifth 'Big Bang' that may not be as obvious as the first two, but may be far more dramatic. They occurred soon after the emergence of Homo sapiens. Those events were a consequence of the evolution of the human brain and their impact on the evolution of intelligence. I will be discussing them at great length.

Intelligence may be equated to complexity. The more complex a system, the more sentient it is. There is no doubt that at our present stage of evolution we have the most complex brains to date. Therefore we may consider ourselves the ultimate of complexity.

At present, evolution is seen as a progressive series of organismic transformations, one following another, in a hierarchy of emerging energy systems, each of greater complexity than preceding energy systems. If we change our perspective by analyzing 'bigger chunks' of the time-dependent process, we have a better chance of discovering the mechanisms that sustain and perpetuate evolution. Therefore, I would like to propose that we view the Evolutionary Process, not at the level of individual species, but at the broader and more encompassing level of energy systems. In this regard, the term ‘chunk’ seems appropriate because it would include the analysis of a conglomerate of species as an energy system that has attained a similar level of complexity over a specific period of time. As 'conglomerates' I have grouped these 'Energy Systems' in a relatively chronological order.

BOOK I is a detailed analysis of how atoms, have been rearranged into energy systems of greater complexity. It deals with the thermodynamics that may be involved in the transformation of energy systems. Conjecturing on how things happened, after-the-fact, may be thought provoking enough for others to study the mechanisms that are involved in the evolutionary process. Speculating that the energy from the Sun is responsible for the evolution of complexity appears to be reasonable in light of the fact that a continuous influx of energy is necessary to sustain the process. Yet one may ask, "how is it that the moon or any of the other planets that are also subjected to the Sun’s energy, show no signs of life or evolution?" There may be reasons beyond my understanding, but the lack of POTENTIAL seems to be the answer. In keeping with after-the-fact explanations, it is safe to say that OUR planet had the POTENTIAL for biogenesis and evolution.

Try as I may, I could not produce the relevant and important aspects of the evolutionary process, which are incorporated in BOOK II, without first getting fully involved with the complexity of the process itself. In this regard I have done my best to present my hypothesis in a scientifically, interesting way. For those who would prefer to skip the technical jargon supporting my notions, I believe that it would still be worthwhile to give Book I at least a cursory examination.

BOOK II is devoted to the Third, Fourth and Fifth Big Bangs, the consequence of three conceptual revolutions, each of which led to paradigm shifts in thinking that came about as a result of an increase in the complexity of the human brain. Each shift has altered our methods for determining how we grope with the many unknown aspects of our world. Each new methodology can be seen as a new level of evolutionary complexity. Also, complexity in our time may be increasing exponentially for, in every generation, there are offspring that have the POTENTIAL to initiate a conceptual revolution leading to a paradigm shift in thinking. "It is now believed that evolution is proceeding at a much more rapid rate than it has in the past. [Evolution] can happen on a time scale that’s as short as one generation from us to our kids." (Science, 28 March 1997, p. 1880). If we apply this understanding to human evolution then this means that some of today’s youth, by introducing a new method of thinking, have the potential to create a new population of living fossils.

As our Body of Knowledge evolves so does our way of thinking. Therefore it should be understood that 'forward thinkers' responsible for Conceptual Revolutions which lead to a paradigm shifts in thinking, may leave in their wake those who continue to stand firm. Since part of the human brain (more specifically the neocortex) is undergoing an evolution of its own — not necessarily physical — then whenever we sense the presence of the new 'fossil creators,' we should be prepared to ‘transform ourselves’ so that our thinking conforms with the science of the times.

At various stages in the evolution of the human brain, new Complexity Promoting Nutrients were introduced. They are associated with the thinking process as reflected by our body of knowledge. The evidence I will produce will support my notions that many Homo sapiens of today may be considered members of an energy system of greater complexity than Homo sapiens of by-gone eras..

The skeletal remains of many organisms, and the imprint of many others that are found by geologists and paleontologists, are recorded in the fossil record. Many species can be dated fairly accurately, and there is evidence that many ancient species and their successors are still among the living. This applies to the human species as well. But, as with many other terms utilized in the English language, the oxymoron, ‘living fossil,’ has a meaning of its own.

A living fossil is what all those under 30 consider all those over 30 to be. Dictionary definition: a person, who is old-fashioned or has outdated, fixed ideas. Keeping in mind that "science is not only a body of knowledge, it’s a way of thinking" (Carl Sagan), I intend to show that, since the advent of the first formal Body of Knowledge, there were three Conceptual Revolutions, each of which not only made a paradigm shift in human thinking, but was also responsible for the creation of new populations of living fossils. I will also demonstrate how to use a ‘living-fossil detector,’ that was specifically designed to spot humans whose thinking is out of date, as well as to provide a way of determining their fossilized age.