CONTENTS:

The Concept of Symmetry in Biology

Symmetry and Asymmetry in Living Beings

Addendum: The Nature of Gravity, Space and Dark Energy

Bibliography

To quote this article, copy the next two lines:

Nahle, N. 2006. Didactic Article: The Concept of Symmetry in Biology. Biology Cabinet Organization. New Braunfels, TX. http://www.biocab.org/Symmetry_Asymmetry.html. No. 260.

Published: 29th October 2006. Last Update: 9th February 2009.

The Concept of Symmetry in Biology.
By Nasif Nahle
C1-L by Harvard University in Scientific ICAM Research.
(Additional editing of this English text by TS)

Symmetry refers to the homogeneity of a system.

All living beings and all their thermal states are asymmetric.

We say that a system is symmetric when each of its parts offers identical effects, characteristics and conditions through the rest of its parts, anywhere and every time that the system exists or produces its influences.

The transition from a state where the most minimum value in which the symmetric system resides on the point of zero toward a state of asymmetry with a value from almost zero to one -or close to one- is called “Symmetry Breaking". (Barrow; 2000). 1

The laws of Nature are symmetrical because they produce their effects in the same way, at every place and every moment in the Universe; however, the results of the symmetrical laws are asymmetrical systems (states and/or structures).

There is no special place in the Universe where the laws of Nature behave differently, that is to say, where the laws behave asymmetrically. Nature’s laws operate generating a vast range of systems and states which are complicatedly asymmetrical.

Consequently, the Universe started out from a symmetric state, that is to say, in a minimum zero value. (Randall et al; 1996) 2. Time has never been symmetric because it has always been different from zero.

In this Universe, time would always adopt a value distinct from zero. If we could go back in time, splitting it into smaller and smaller parts of time, we would always be left with a minimal fraction of time, but we would never arrive at an absolute zero of time. So, the mathematical concept of time is infinite if we implement it en route for processes presently occurring in the Universe and before it started off, as long as we understand that time is the trajectory of the entropy of the Universe. (Hivon & Kamionkowski; 2002). 3

The idea of a Universe beginning from a Big Bang or from a series of Big-Bangs is mathematically possible, but unfeasible in Nature. It is not rare to find this kind of inconsistency between the procedures created by the human mind and Nature in the real. Our observations of the Universe indicate that the Universe began an expansion of indefinite duration once it had started off from a bubble of false vacuum (false void).

That there could be a prior Universe from which our Universe emerged, and another Universe earlier than the universe that brought about our Universe, is only a hypothesis, but it has a bulk of evidence. (See figure 2)

There are no symmetric structures or states in the real Universe. To exist, a state or a system must be asymmetric in relation to the symmetry of Nature’s laws. (See figure 1)

Living beings are not systems stretched out from the field of action of those symmetrical laws. All states and structures in the Universe are subject to the laws of Nature, even when they are asymmetrical systems.

Our Universe grew out from a black hole produced in an older and bigger Universe. The history goes something like this:

1. A black hole is an asymmetric connection between two bubbles of false vacuum (false void).

2. When the temperature of the black hole increased to more than 10^34 K, the particles with mass (hadrons) comprised by the system, separated into elementary particles without mass (gluons, quarks and photons).

3. The particles formed together a symmetric gluon-quark-plasma into the horizon of the black hole and a bubble of false vacuum (false void) formed that extended “out” from the Mother Universe through a highly unstable wormhole.

4. The highly unstable wormhole disappeared after a few microseconds of existence, separating the bubble of quark gluon plasma from the ancient Universe to form another asymmetric system.

5. The temperature of the quark-gluon plasma decreased and adopted an asymmetric liquid-like phase whose enormous internal pressures drove the whole system into an accelerated expansion.

6. Then a new asymmetric structure (our Universe) began to exist. Quarks and gluons gathered to form asymmetries which are those familiar particles with mass, such as protons, neutrons, electrons, neutrinos, positrons, etc.

7. As the system speedily expanded, the temperature decreased and the formation of more asymmetric structures (galaxies) with billions of more asymmetric structures (stars) was possible.

8. The laws that generated those asymmetric structures remain symmetrical at present.

9. Perhaps many of the stellar systems inside galaxies are hospitable to living beings and, perhaps, many of the worlds forming part of those stellar systems hold living beings.

10. At least, one planet in one stellar system has living beings, the Earth.

11. Many universes will breed from our Universe; perhaps many young universes have already arisen from our Universe in the past. Who knows?

That “who knows?” refers to our inability to see or detect universes beyond the horizon of our own Universe, or the universe that engendered our Universe, as the bend of the horizon of our Universe renders it unobservable from our place in the cosmos.

TOP OF PAGE ^^




SYMMETRY ASYMMETRY IN LIVING BEINGS

When we talk about thermodynamics, which is the branch of physics that examines the correlations and transformations between heat and other forms of energy, we think that we are asymmetric Biosystems (living beings). In biology, the symmetric term may refer to three different States:

1. Anatomical Symmetry which refers to the arrangement of organs or organelles in an individual that is isotropic from any angle of the observed biosystem.

2. Dynamical symmetry, which refers to the absence of rotational variance. This means that there are no observable differences at the molecular level even if the biosystem is in motion.

3. Energetic symmetry, which says that the flow and the density of the internal energy of a biosystem is indistinguishable from the flow and the density of the energy of the environment.

On the first state or the state of anatomical symmetry, we could assure that there are not absolutely spatially symmetrical biosystems. Differences of the dimensions and arrangement of organs and organelles of a Biosystems always exist. For example, human beings have a liver at the upper right side of the abdomen which is not at the left side; in addition, when we look at bilateral organs, a body is different in size and functionality with the homologous organ; e.g. a kidney will work with greater capacity than the other, or will be smaller than the other, etc.

Regarding the state of dynamic symmetry, we find that this kind of symmetry does not exist in living beings since the differences between the angles and between the dimensions of the structures allow the display of any rotational movement of the biosystem.

Focusing on the third type of symmetry, or energetic symmetry, we also notice a rotating variance of the flow and internal energy densities of any living being. The rotating variance is anisotropic because it always occurs on a preferred directionality of flux of energy and a specific density of energy that permits us to maintain our internal energy in a quasi-stable state, i.e. with minimal variations.

Scientists believe that life is the result of a rupture of the symmetry of molecular conglomerates with peculiar characteristics; for example, the acquisition, storage, and autonomous manipulation of the energy taken from the environment. By means of the rupture of the thermal symmetry, the living beings were not more abiotic particles squeezed together inside small globules that we call microspheres, which lacked rotational variance and were indistinguishable one from the other.

At some point of the cooling process of the environment, the biomolecules met into asymmetric sets. Some of those sets could resist returning to the symmetry through the control of the energy obtained from their environment for maintaining their internal energy density in a quasi-stable and asymmetrical state relative to the universe.

If we gradually increase the temperature of a biosystem, we could reach the point at which the biosystem would lose its functionality and it would die. This is because we altered the state produced by the rupture of the symmetry. If we continue increasing the temperature yet after the biosystem had died, it will disintegrate and will constitute spatially-symmetric portions. If we continue increasing the temperature until reaching a point at which ionization happens, the original symmetry of the system will be reacquired. Thus, increasing the temperature of any system causes the recovery of its symmetry, while the cooling of a system causes the symmetry rupture, i.e. the system becomes asymmetric with respect to the universe.


REFERENCES


1. Barrow, John D. The Book of Nothing. Pantheon Books; 2000, New York, New York.


2. Randall Lisa, Soljacic, Marin, and Guth, Alan H. (MIT). Supernatural Inflation: Inflation from Supersymmetry with No (Very) Small Parameters. 1996, Nuclear Physics B472, 377-408.


3. Hivon, E. and Kamionkowski, M. A New Window to the Early Universe. Science; 15 November 2002: Vol. 298. No. 5597, pp. 1349 - 1350.

TOP OF PAGE ^^

The Concept of Symmetry in Biology
Google
 
Web biocab.org
This Website created and kept up by Nasif Nahle.
Copyright© 2006 by Biology Cabinet Organization.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
HOMEABOUT USE-MAIL USESPAÑOL
HOMEABOUT USE-MAIL USESPAÑOL
®
®
®
TOP OF PAGE ^^


To quote this article, copy the next two lines:

Nahle, N. 2006. Didactic Article: The Nature of Gravity, Space, Dark Matter and Dark Energy. Biology Cabinet Organization. New Braunfels, TX. http://www.biocab.org/Symmetry_Asymmetry.html. No. 261.

Published: March 23, 2009. Last Update: None

Didactic Article: The Nature of Gravity, Space, Dark Matter and Dark Energy
(Addendum to the article on Symmetry-Asymmetry)
By Nasif Nahle
C1-L by Harvard University in Scientific ICAM Research.

(Additional editing of this English text by TS)


The Nature of Gravity

Gravity is one of the four fundamental forces of the Universe. To date, scientists have not yet arrived at a clear understanding of the nature of gravity. The only thing that we know is that gravity acts on matter and is always positive. For the gravitational force to be evident, we have to consider bodies with high energy and/or matter density. The gravitational force is less evident at the molecular level and it is negligible at the quantum level.

There are many errors in our knowledge with respect to the effects of gravity in nature; some of those errors are plainly evident, while others are quite intricate.

An example resides in that modern astronomers insist on binding classical theories, based on observation and experimentation, to Einstein’s theory of relativity, based on mathematical reasoning. Almost all astronomers speak of distortions of space and time (some of them insist on the distortion of space-time) and how gravity is able to alter and modify the shape of space and time.

Let us here consider the “stretching of space”. To get a precise panorama of this kind of pseudoscience, let us define what space is. Space is defined as an unbounded three dimensional continuum in which the Universe occupies a defined and finite region.

From the above definition, let us now consider the most important standpoints. Space is a three dimensional continuum which can exist with or without content, i.e. energy and/or matter. Consequently, space does not have the characteristics of mass and/or energy, that is, space exists independently of the existence of matter and energy.

I have read in many articles (Ron Cowen. 2001) (1) that “space stretches”, that is to say, that space expands. This is a quite illogical conjecture because what we observe is that the Universe (matter and energy) expands beyond its physical limits, but if space does not exists beyond the physical limits of the Universe, the Universe could not expand because photons and matter would have no space to permeate. In other words, it is the collection of matter and energy that is expanding, not space. Space is here and there, it is three-dimensional, infinite and unbounded, and it cannot be affected by gravity because gravity only acts on matter and energy, not on space where matter and energy exist. A useful axiom is that space can neither be created nor destroyed, but only permeated.

The True Vacuum is filled with nothing; it is space alone. The gravity distortions that can be observed surrounding massive objects, for example a star, are distortion of the trajectories of photons, which are deviated by the pull exerted by the gravitational force of the celestial body. The space continues as before and is not distorted by any means. In other words, all that is being distorted is the shape or the trajectory, not space. The same applies to the “stretching of space”. Space cannot be stretched by any means; it is a place; a place can be occupied or filled, but it cannot be expanded or distorted.

Vacuum space is homogeneous and symmetric, i.e. it has the same aspect everywhere and extends everywhere. It begins at that point where the farthest photon traveling towards the true void is situated. Beyond that point, emptiness prevails; further than that point there is no light, no energy and no particles of matter. It is the space between our Universe and other possible universes far from our limits of observation and beyond.

The Darkness of Dark Energy

On my trek through new cosmological theories, I came across an APS NEWS article, published by the American Physical Society, of which I am a proud member,  in which the editor expounds on the evolution of the Dark Energy hypothesis to explain the accelerated expansion of our Universe, which was discovered in 1998.

The discovery of the acceleration of the expansion was made by two independent teams of astrophysicists and published in Science magazine on December 18th, 1998. (2)

The coldness of these astrophysicists when conjecturing and conceiving of the factors with which they try to explain the acceleration of the expansion of the Universe when natural and logical explanations lie within sight in Classical Physics concerns me.

They reason that 30% of the matter in the Universe exerts an attractive force sufficient to slow the expansion of the Universe and to collapse it finally into a Big Crunch (the exact opposite of the Big Bang). However, as they had already observed that the Universe accelerated its expansion, they had to resort to a nonexistent cosmological constant, which had been invented originally by Albert Einstein to reconcile his idea of a static Universe with his theory of general relativity. This time, the astrophysicists revived the old lambda constant or cosmological constant, which Einstein had rejected as inadmissible, and have attempted to apply it in the opposite manner, i.e. to explain that the Universe is not fixed and is thinning out at frightful speeds.

To explain the accelerated expansion of the Universe, the astrophysicists gave in to the cosmological constant (lambda); nevertheless, to be able to explain the existence of lambda, they had to find sufficient energy in vacuum space to exert the lambda force acting on “normal” matter and energy. Thus, they invented two new physical factors, dark energy and dark matter. Now we have three ubiquitous factors (i.e. that fill the whole Universe and beyond) although these factors cannot be observed or detected by our human senses and techniques: dark matter, dark energy, and true vacuum energy (the energy of nothingness).

Dark energy is thought of as an elusive kind of energy with an eccentric quality — it can reverse gravitational attraction by producing repulsive (negative) gravity. It is futile to point out that repulsive gravity has never been observed in this Universe. Here, we stumble upon the first problem, we theoretically assume that the four fundamental forces of the Universe were once but a single unified force composed of the four fundamental forces indistinguishable from one another; explicitly, that the four forces did not exist, only a single primordial force.

When the exponential expansion of the Universe from a bubble of false vacuum happened, the single primordial force was divided into the four fundamental forces that we observe today. If we were to break the subject down, we would find that the only existing force is the electromagnetic force, but in four different forms acting on the different hierarchic states and levels of matter.

For instance, gravity acts and relies on mass, without any adjunction to electromagnetic charges. No mass, no gravity; no energy, no gravity. The reasoning of the creators of dark energy, dark matter and vacuum energy goes something like this: No mass, antigravity; no energy, antigravity. Nevertheless, we need energy to generate a rejecting force that acts on every point of the Universe. In which case, the density of that form of energy would have to be thousands of times greater than the density of well-known detectable energy. If this kind of energy was indeed everywhere present at densities which overcome the force of gravity, it would be easily detected. But it is not. And what is more, it is not visible or measurable either. In other words, it does not exist.

The idea is an invention of a kind of energy that changes erratically and cannot be affected by ordinary matter and energy, but that can act on ordinary matter and energy. The whole idea is darker than the darkest metaphysical hypothesis. These three factors, dark matter, dark energy and energy from nothingness, are plainly paranormal or mystical issues.

Gravity is generated by the flux of currents, their intensity, frequency, etc., which is clear evidence of the influence of electromagnetism on gravity. We could apply the same criterion to the weak and strong forces. (3)

We are able to find that the source of the weak and strong force is the Electromagnetic Force. Actually, we have theoretically split the Unified Force into four forces according to our current perception. However, the Unified Force has always been the same and there is no need to break it down. Let us assume that the unified force passed from one Universe to another Universe through a quantum tunnel and produces its effect on four different levels with four discrete attributes — the four forces constituting a continuum from the macrophysical cosmos to the microphysical cosmos.

TOP OF PAGE ^^



RESOURCES

1. Cowen, R. A Dark Force in the Universe-Scientists try to Determine what’s Revving up the Cosmos. Science News. April 7, 2001: Vol. 159. No. 14, pp. 218-220.

2. Glanz, James. BREAKTHROUGH OF THE YEAR: ASTRONOMY: Cosmic Motion Revealed. Science 18 December 1998: Vol. 282. No. 5397, pp. 2156-2157.

3. http://wwwghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/gffc.html

4. G. Hinshaw, et al. Five-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Data Processing, Sky Maps, and Basic Results. 2009, ApJS, 180, 225-245. NASA-WMAP. Last reading on 21 October 2009.

TOP OF PAGE ^^

No. 260 and 261
Figure 1. Galaxy Cluster 1E 0657-556 (Credit: NASA/Hubble). A bunch of asymmetries in the Universe. We and the whole Universe exist thanks to a Symmetry Breaking that produced the Inflation and the ulterior expansion.

(CLICK ON THE THUMBNAIL TO SEE A LARGER IMAGE)
Figure 2. Illustration on the origin of the Universe. The number of universes created from a "mother-universe" is unknown. The "black hole", a huge zone of extremely low temperature, recently observed by WMAP on the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) 4is evidence on the formation of a black hole through which the bubble of false void slipped out from the metastable wormhole during the starting of our Universe.

(CLICK ON THE THUMBNAIL TO SEE A LARGER IMAGE)