The Science Of Irvings, No. 1

12-6-19 15:44

Hey Dad,

Questions: Is thermodynamics considered a current? Doesn’t it have the properties of a current?

And isn’t it safe to assume currents, in general, could provide an arc, pitch and gradient for systems of organization to naturally align on?: Biochemical (embryonic cellular fractals) and chemical (covalent bonds).

Hypothesis: A cellular current tuned specifically to a particular ecosystem would make sense for the embryonic communication that takes place in examples of biomimicry, better explaining some of my Darwin questions of probability. I’m assuming exchanges take place on a special gradient where the information is arched by way of current/frequency/wave length.

Does that make any sense? It’s making sense to me: Because the cold meeting warm by my window and a picture of one galaxy crashing through another in the astronomy mag, which I changed my mind and want to keep. I was also reading Friston again.

It’s a pretty cool picture. It makes me feel like the same system of relativity happens molecularly. And if physics is just a bunch of currents, that kind of makes sense in the picture I have in my head. It fits my interpretation of several working systems, actually. And it works with Darwin by letting natural selection favor a specific cellular alignment (biomimetic fractalling) without forcing evolution to cater to wants and needs. Stress can be the current that brings it into alignment, making it not a matter of consciousness.

This sounds pretty fucking cool. Does it have any merit?

Love,
Patrick

Next: The Science Of Irvings, No. 2

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

4 + twenty =

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.