Free Energy
Free Energy
Wikipedia Definition
The amount of work that a thermodynamic system can perform.
Author’s Definition
The energy available in a system to do work that is not controlled by intelligence.
© 2016 Mike Van Schoiack
Science
Science
Collins American Dictionary Definition
- the state of fact of knowledge; knowledge;
- a. the systematized knowledge of nature and physical world
Author’s Definition
- the systematic knowledge of the natural world gained through observation and experiment.
Note: This definition of physics and chemistry excludes matter/energy with embedded intelligence because conflating science with philosophy causes confusion.
Merriam-Webster’s first definition is “the state of knowing.” This definition applies to any field, e.g., art and philosophy. It implies that something that is not understood is not science, e.g., entanglement, dark matter and energy. I am sure that scientists would disagree. And the phrase “the science of (fill in the blank)” is commonly used even as titles of classes and curriculum in universities.
I learned that science is about the physical sciences (physics and chemistry) and philosophy was about the mind (logic, math) by the department they were taught. However, engineering was in the school of science. But this was over 50 years ago. I see that today, the sciences are typically divided into two divisions, natural sciences and formal or applied sciences. Natural sciences are what I thought of as “science” and engineering as applied science. Applied science implies adding intelligence to science and fits the idea that engineering merges the realms of science and philosophy.
However, mathematics, now called a formal1 or applied science should stay as in the realm of philosophy as it is a mental abstraction, in my opinion.
For the purposes of this site, the term science, without an adjective, means physics and chemistry, geology, weather, etc. or natural science.
Part of the purpose of this site is to make a clear distinction between outcomes that result from natural causes (laws of physics sans intelligence) and matter/energy with embedded intelligence resulting from engineered manipulation, and that science and intelligence are two separate things.. This is impossible to do if terminology used is not clearly defined and understood.
The proponents of ID have argued life is only possible because of a mind, and the probability that something with the coherence and complexity exceed the limits of reason. These arguments are absolutely true and it would seem that the debate should be settled. But it isn’t. The concepts put forward offer alternative ways to think about the issues involved, amplify the ID argument, and provide means to falsify materialist claims.
Since writing the paper “On the Limits of Natural Causes”, I’ve found that many scientists think of science being a process unrelated to any particular topic. I’ve always associated it with the natural world only, thinking that is the proper interpretation, but maybe it is not. If the definition of science is agreed to be a method of pursuing knowledge of any topic, then I would need to change the word science to physics or biology when referring to the field of endevour, or scientific method when referring to process of gaining knowledge in my writing.
© 2016 Mike Van Schoiack
Aging Theory
Aging Theory
Describe telemores, how aging could be the result of cells not reproducing after a time. Could account for kness cartlidge wearing out, brain functioning to degrade, skin wrinkling, etc.
An Engineer’s Perspective
An Engineer’s Perspective
“An Engineer’s Perspective” means that this is the thoughts of this author and may not reflect view of most engineer’s, however, my guess that it hits close to home for most engineers who have designed complex systems.
Realism
Engineering is about designing and creating things that work. This means that there is an objective that is normally put into writing in the form of goals and specifications.
The goals are typically organized into two groups, “must” goals and “want” goals. The must goals are “not negotiable”, they must be met or is not worth the effort of starting the project. The “wants” are goals that will enhance the product in some way and these are normally ordered by value. This exercise is necessary due to the realization that it is seldom that trade-offs are required, enhancing one objective typically degrades another. Specifications follow objectives, putting subjective goals into specified, objective engineering terms.
There is no such thing as perfection, always trade-offs. The specifications will normally included “life” requirements. This is a recognition that “in the real world” things degrade over time. The 2nd law of thermodynamics always takes it toll. Products have to be designed in order to have a useful “lifetime.”
One cannot get around the laws of physics. Likewise, one cannot get around logical limitations. Logical limitations include the fact that parts are not perfect. Inductors also have resistance. Resistors also have inductance. Conductors have resistance and inductance. Semiconductor switches have risetimes, and they have resitive, electrostatic and magnetic coupling between the input and output. These are all logical limitations that constrain results.
The success of an engineer is reflected by his/her abiltiy to design the best possible product with the technology available, or to develop new technology that broaden posssibilities. And the success of a product is measured by its suceess in the marketplace.
This brings us to life. Life is not a product in the sense that life is not an entity for sale. But life, including we humans, were designed for some reason. The complexity and skill involved in our design is beyond human comprehension. I believe I speak for most thoughtful, experienced engineers that have taken a serious look “under the hood of life.”
I poist that mankind may never be able to fully reverse engineer life due to its microscopic scale coupled with its insane complexity. But I also poist that there is no higher calling as this is the connection between science, philosophy and theology.
A Macro World Emzyne Analogy
A Macro World Emzyne Analogy
It was pointed out in the “Fake Biology” post that the world of biology defines an enzyme to be a protein catalyst, and a catalyst to be a molecule that “speeds up a chemical reaction.
This post is being written while spending time with family and friends at a celebration in Santorini, Greece. Santorini is the remains of a volcano that exploded 3,700 years ago, destroying an advanced city thought by many to be the lost city of Atlantis. Yesterday, we visited the archeological dig site of an ancient city on the volcano island and the tour guide pointed out what she called the rock “bombs” that flew out of the mouth of the exploding volcano and destroyed buildings. There were a number of them on display there.
This picture, taken from the villa we are staying in, is one of these “bombs” on the hillside opposite the villa. The rock is precariously situated on the hillside, and will eventually roll down the hill due to erosion and/or an earthquake.
Someone in our group mentioned that a person with a shovel and a pry bar could do the same thing in 10 minutes. Such an action by a human (intelligent machine) would speed up the natural process of erosion that reduces the activation energy required to dislodge the bomb. This is analogous to the intelligent work an enzyme does to “build” a molecule compared to the molecule being formed by a natural chemical reaction. This analogy works from a specificity point of view as well as a thermodynamics point of view because the human could control the timing of the event and the direction that the “bomb” would roll down the hill.
A close-up view shows that someone has stuffed stones to, in effect, increase the activation energy. This is an example of intelligent work expended to offset the effects of natural causes.
© 2016 Mike Van Schoiack