Physics of Autonomous Biological Information

Physics of Autonomous Biological Information

Howard H. Pattee

The general concept of information does not belong in the category of universal and inexorable physical laws but in the category of initial conditions and boundary conditions. Boundary conditions formed by local structures are often called constraints. Informational structures such as symbol vehicles area special type of constraint. It should be clear that the concepts of initial conditions and constraints in physics make no sense outside the context of the law-based physical dynamics to which they apply. This is also the case for the concept of information.

There are many different origins, functions, and hierarchical levels of informational constraints. Physicists require the type of information that begins by an observer choosing to perform a measurement. This passive information is necessary to establish the initial conditions of a chosen dynamical system at a particular time. The behavior of the system can then be derived by integration over time. Initial conditions include the positions of all the microscopic units (configuration), their masses, and rates of change of position (momenta). Constraints are macroscopic structures that require additional information for their description.

Biological information begins not by observer’s choice but by chance. Chance produces variation in the structures of potential informational constraints. Only by self-replication and natural selection do these constraints become functional information that controls the dynamics of chemical syntheses of the organism. This distinction between physical and biological information is essential because it is the undirected origin of biological information that is one of several necessary conditions for open-ended evolution.

Physics of Autonomous Biological Information

Howard H. Pattee

First, thanks as always for posting excellent links.  H. Pattee is presenting a status quo evaluation that is directed at supporting the current paradigm.  His position is well-considered.

 This distinction between physical and biological information is essential because it is the undirected origin of biological information that is one of several necessary conditions for open-ended evolution.

I strongly disagree.  He is arguing against a God directing evolution.  Not for a comprehensive model of mental evolution, such as I think Darwin envisioned.  

Paul, malf and Linda should read this paper as it contains well-formed arguments against my positions.

First, thanks as always for posting excellent links.  H. Pattee is presenting a status quo evaluation that is directed at supporting the current paradigm.  His position is well-considered.


I strongly disagree.  He is arguing against a God directing evolution.  Not for a comprehensive model of mental evolution, such as I think Darwin envisioned.  

Paul, malf and Linda should read this paper as it contains well-formed arguments against my positions.

Apologies if I've asked this before, but have you written out your positions in a singular place?

Again, apologies if I missed it, but I didn't realize you were arguing for a God directing evolution...

Apologies if I've asked this before, but have you written out your positions in a singular place?

Again, apologies if I missed it, but I didn't realize you were arguing for a God directing evolution...

I was arguing against a Philosophy of Science position that has a bias to refute god.  I would argue with the same argument against a bias for Physicalism or for a fundamentalist goddit.  There are not many formal spiritual viewpoints that are copacetic with pragmatic science.

I am arguing for a viewpoint that takes our informational environment and how we can measure it, as serious and foundational as our physical environment.

In my impending life after career, I hope to "write the proverbial book in retirement."