**BIOPHYSICS**

How does the
discovery of the third form (gimmel) affect our understanding of life, and more
specifically, the area of scientific study called biophysics? Recall that there
could be no stable physical forms without the existence of the third form of
reality, not measurable as either mass or energy. (If you don’t remember how
the application of the principles of relativity and quantum mechanics to
normalized Large Hadron Collider data using the mass of the electron as the
basic TRUE quantum unit with the application of Fermat’s Last Theorem revealed
the third form, please review the series of posts under “Putting Consciousness
into the Equations” and posts about Fermat’s Last Theorem, gimmel and TRUE unit
analysis. These concepts and derivations have also been published elsewhere, in
technical journals and in “Reality Begins with Consciousness”, available at www.BrainVoyage.com.) The way the
discovery of the third form affects biophysics is most obvious in the
replacement of much of the statistical and probability analyses currently assumed
as the basis of biophysics with new mathematical processes involving gimmel in the
processes of biological change such as mitosis and mutation. This of course
affects how we must think of the evolution of species, since it removes the
randomness assumed to exist in natural selection.

I want to
establish the logical basis for this presentation of new concepts in biophysics
without bringing in the mathematical details here, by discussing the probabilistic
and deterministic approaches to science, as they are used and misused in the
current paradigm. I think I can best do this by relating some of my experiences
and discussions with other scientists when I was one of the seven charter
members of the Department of Interior USGS Systems Analysis Group. Over a period
of three years, I had many discussions about probabilistic vs deterministic
analysis with Dr. Nicholas C. Matalas, Director of the Systems Group, as well
as other members of the Group, and Dr. Benoit Mandelbrot, an IBM mathematician
who worked with us on some environmental modeling projects. Dr. Matalas,
received his PhD in probability theory from Harvard University, and Dr.
Mandelbrot was the creator of fractals. We found fractal functions useful in the
mathematical modeling of environmental systems.

Dr. Matalas,
who preferred to be called Nick, and I became good friends and we both very
much enjoyed discussing probabilism vs determinism. He took the position that reality
is basically probabilistic, that the laws of physics are statistical in nature,
and thus only approximate; while I argued that statistics and probability
analyses are estimation tools appropriate for use when the exact mathematical
nature of a relationship is unknown. Neither of us could ever totally convince the
other.

And I remember discussing fractals with Dr. Mandelbrot, a somewhat shy,
but warm and friendly, large man of European origin. We agreed that the success
of the use of fractal functions to model coastline morphology, cloud and storm-cell
formations and other environmental features was probably due to the similarity
of the iterative nature of fractals to the structure of cells, molecules, atoms,
and quanta that made fractals and physical reality essentially holographic. Now,
many years after those interesting discussions with Nick Matalas, Ben
Mandelbrot and others, I now see how the inclusion of the third form of reality,
and application of the calculus of distinctions clarifies those concepts.

In this
series of posts I will attempt to bring that clarity to the subject of
biophysics. In general, Max Planck’s discovery of the quantum nature of the
mass and energy of physical reality, and Albert Einstein’s discovery of the relativistic
nature of space and time, combined with the discovery of gimmel and TRUE analysis,
radically changes what is known and knowable about biophysics, life and
consciousness. Starting with the utter simplicity of the distinction of an
object of observation from everything else, we have the binary logic of Bayesian
algebra and computer science. Then by including the consciousness of the
observer, the logic becomes triadic, and the whole universe begins to be revealed
in a completely new and exciting way.

G. Spencer
Brown’s statements that “A universe comes into being when a space is severed or
taken apart” and that “Although all forms, and thus all universes, are
possible, and any particular form is mutable, it becomes evident that the laws
relating such forms are the same in any universe” are replaced by: A

*living*universe comes into being when space and content are made distinct by the action of the conscious drawing of a distinction, and this triadic relationship is articulated in the conveyance equations of the Triadic Dimensional distinction Vortical Paradigm (TDVP), expressing the laws governing all of reality, not just the 5% of the universe available to the physical senses.
In posts to
come, I will describe the difference between the materialistic statistical
randomness basis of current biophysics and the conscious symmetrical stability basis
of the new biophysics of TDVP. This will allow us to see subjects like creation
and evolution in a new light, and answer questions like ‘Why are elementary
particles so small? (Or, conversely, why are conscious living organisms so
large?) Why is more than 95% of reality
hidden? And what is the purpose of intelligent life? Stay tuned!

## No comments:

## Post a Comment