1. While Life is exceptionally economical, Nature is exceedingly wasteful. Instead of the common definition, we are employing the scientific definition: Nature = Natural Law x Matter. Cells and all living systems have a distinct purpose – survival. This purpose drives Life to be economical in the use of materials and energy. Lacking purpose, Nature has no reason to economize. This difference alone suggests that Life has an immaterial component that Nature does not have. This immaterial component is associated with Life’s holistic behavior. In contrast, Nature’s behavior is atomistic, in that the parts determine the behavior of the whole. Atomistic content-based logic is appropriate for Nature, while holistic context-based logic is appropriate for Life’s holistic behavior. Life’s ID system (our model) supplies the holistic mathematics that living systems require. Unfortunately, many scientists only believe in atomistic logic.
2. Yet one of Nature’s fundamental laws is the conservation of energy. This law only applies to closed energy systems, e.g. the Universe. Cells, cars, and cell phones belong to open energy systems. They consume the energy stored in fuel entering from outside the system to produce useful work. The fuel must be replenished, else the system ceases to operate or dies. The Designer of these systems (human or Divine) considers any energy that is consumed without performing useful work to be wasted. The quest to minimize wasted energy in engines led to thermodynamics, the Science of energy and entropy. However, the inventor/engineer/scientist must have a holistic purpose to understand, design and produce an engine or system that produces energy. This holistic purpose is enabled by Life’s ID system – something that Nature doesn’t have.
3. The indisputable urge to survive differentiates Life from Nature. As the driver behind homeostasis (individual survival) and reproduction (collective species survival), the survival urge is exceptionally important. It could be defined as the urge to maintain the integrity of the organism – its organization – all the many subsystems. Indeed, this urge could be considered the root of all emotions and feelings that motivate our behavior. To be successful, this urge requires the Big 3 Talents (a temporal sense, a holistic purpose, and the ability to interact with info, which includes data stream analytics and correspondences.) Life’s ID system supplies or enables these abilities. Lacking a survival urge, Nature does not have these talents.
1. Thrifty Life ≠ Wasteful Nature
2. Minimizing Wasted Energy requires Holistic Sense of Purpose ≠ Nature
3. Life’s Indisputable Survival Urge requires ID System ≠ Nature
In contrast to Life’s economical use of materials and energy, Nature is exceedingly wasteful.
Life = Economical Use of Materials
Nature = Wasteful ≠ Economical Use of Materials
You might be thinking, “Isn’t Life a feature of Nature, e.g. trees and flowers?” In popular parlance, Nature is, of course, considered to be the flora and fauna in combination with rivers and mountains – perhaps anything that is not human-made. Yet for scientists, Nature is generally considered to be anything that is the result of natural law. Because they have faith that natural law generates everything, they believe that Nature is the product of the random reactions of Matter and the four fundamental forces of Physics (natural law) – and nothing else. For this discussion and in this Notebook generally, we are going to employ the Scientific definition of Nature (shown below in equation-like form.)
Nature = Natural Law x Random Reactions of Matter
Despite the popular connotation and conventional scientific understanding, this section (and subsequent sections) attempts to illustrate why Nature (under this definition) and Life belong in different categories (as our introductory equation indicates). While natural law certainly determines (à) the behavior of Life’s atomistic content (the material component), Nature does not dictate (≠) Life’s holistic behavior.
Nature --> Behavior of Life’s atomistic content
Nature ≠ Life’s holistic behavior
Let’s see what this seemingly paradoxical statement means. The past section indicated how the cell is incredibly economical in the use of materials. For instance, the cell reuses the same biomolecules (ATP and the transport molecules) repeatedly in its energy production system. Further, even the waste product (carbon dioxide) is recycled as the fuel of photosynthesis. Every single atom serves a useful cellular purpose – no leftovers.
In contrast to Life’s parsimony, Nature is incredibly wasteful. Witness all the unused energy of our local star (the Sun). The same holds true for flowing water, avalanches, glaciers, and lightning bolts. In each case, the reactions between energy and entropy serve no useful purpose.
The reason is straightforward. Nature’s building blocks (atoms and molecules; electrons and photons) are purposeless (≠). The random collisions of these microscopic ‘particles’ have no meaning independent of Life (e.g. cells and human observers). Again the reason is straightforward, only living systems attribute (-->) meaning and purpose.
Nature ≠ Purpose & Meaning
Life --> Purpose & Meaning
Lacking purpose, Nature has no need to conserve. Having a distinct purpose (surviving and thriving), Life has many reasons to conserve. In the case of cellular respiration, the cell must be very frugal in its use of essential ingredients and bioenergy. This frugality is necessary due to potential environmental scarcity combined with the precious bioenergy it takes to produce these exceedingly complex biomolecules.
Purposeless Nature --> No need to conserve --> Wasteful Behavior
Purposeful Life --> Urgent need to conserve Energy & Materials --> Economical Behavior
Rather than being synonyms, Nature and Life differ (≠) when it comes to both purpose and economy.
Nature ≠ Life
But if Life’s content is composed exclusively of Matter and Nature (natural law) governs material behavior, why isn’t Life ruled by Nature? Something is missing. Could it be that Life has a holistic component that is not encompassed (≠) by its atomistic, material content?
Life’s holistic component ≠ Life’s atomistic content
Atomistic, building block logic (a logic based around content) is perfect for Matter. However, understanding Life’s purposeful behavior requires holistic logic (a logic based in context). For instance, a complete understanding of a baseball’s content and dynamics reveals nothing about its holistic function in the game. Only by understanding the baseball’s context relative to the game do we truly understand its meaning and purpose. Similarly, an enzyme’s content tells us little of significance about its holistic cellular function. Only through an understanding of its holistic context (cellular function) do we really understand the enzyme’s purpose (its meaning).
Atomistic Logic --> Matter
Holistic Logic --> Life’s Purposeful Behavior
While atomistic logic has some amazing capabilities, it has some huge gaps. Most of these gaps are associated with context-based holistic systems – Life’s holistic behavior in particular. According to our model, Life’s Information Digestion system (ID system) fills this chasm. This ID process is based in a mathematical system (Data Stream Dynamics) whose sole function is establishing the contextual analytics of image (data) streams.
While Matter operates in the Molecular Realm, the ID system operates in the Realm of Attention. This different realm of existence requires another temporal dimension. While Matter’s Molecular Realm operates in horizontal timeline, the Attention Realm operates in vertical timeline. Horizontal time is measured in discrete temporal units (seconds, minutes, and hours), while vertical time connects a series of moments within an experiential context.
The temporal dimensions of each realm of existence are perpendicular (orthogonal) to each other (as their names suggest, i.e. horizontal and vertical). Because of their perpendicular relation to each other, the Attention Realm is invisible to the Molecular Realm of Matter and vice versa. Existing at the intersection of the two Realms, Life operates in both.
Unfortunately many material scientists have inferred from their limited human logic that atomistic logic is the only logic and that the Material Realm is the only Realm of Existence. To avoid cognitive dissonance, they either ignore vast swatches of holistic phenomenon or generate convoluted (hence unsatisfactory) atomistic solutions. In such a way, they hide their ignorance from others and, more insidiously, from themselves. Humility is needed when dealing with Reality.
In summary, Life (the survival urge) and Nature (as defined by Science) are quite different. In order to survive, Life is incredibly economical with both materials and energy. Because it has no purpose, Nature is very wasteful. Life’s urge to survive is holistic since it entails the entire organism. In contrast, Nature is atomistic in that the parts determine the qualities of the whole. The holistic logic surrounding Life’s urge to survive is based in context, while the atomistic logic of purposeless Nature is based in content.
Nature’s content-based atomistic logic is helpless before Life’s context-based holistic component. In contrast, our ID system specializes in the contextual nature of Life’s holistic urge to survive. We noted Life’s economy as a powerful example of this purposeful urge. We also suggested one final difference: Life’s holistic component (the survival urge) and Nature operate in different Realms of Existence and different temporal dimensions. The following table summarizes the differences between our stars.
Life (urge to survive) |
Nature |
|
Quality |
Economical |
Wasteful |
Reason behind Quality |
Purposeful |
Purposeless |
Logic & System |
Holistic |
Atomistic |
Mathematical System |
ID System (DSD) (Context) |
Calculus (Content) |
Realm of Existence |
Realm of Attention |
Material Realms |
Temporal Dimension |
Vertical |
Horizontal |
“But wait a minute,” you might object. “How about the conservation of energy? Isn’t this a law of Nature? Sounds pretty economical to me.”
The conservation of energy only applies to closed systems. For instance in the Universe as a whole, energy is neither created nor destroyed. It is just transformed from one form into another.
The conservation of energy does not apply to open energy systems. In this case, potential energy in the form of fuel enters from outside the system. The fuel (the energy) is consumed (not conserved) and must be replenished, else the system shuts down.
Ancient steam engines, cars, cell phones and living systems fall into this category (open energy system). In these cases, steam, gasoline, electricity, and food enters from outside the system (machine or life form). The system converts the potential energy in the fuel into kinetic energy to perform some kind of work (e.g. providing a product, producing movement, or maintaining homeostasis). Since the conversion process consumes the fuel (the energy), it must be replaced. If not, the engine shuts down or the living system dies.
Because of this dynamic, a significant concern of the designer of these systems (whether engineer, inventor, or Deity) is the efficiency of the system. In other words, the designer seeks to maximize the work-fuel ratio (maximizing the amount of work done, while minimizing the amount of fuel consumed.) For instance, car manufacturers aim at maximizing miles traveled (product) per gallon of gas consumed (fuel).
Any of the fuel’s potential energy that doesn’t perform useful work is considered to be wasted. For instance, a typical car engine converts 30% of the gasoline’s energy into movement; or a cell converts 40% of the glucose’s chemical energy into potential bioenergy (e.g. ATP molecules). In both cases, the remainder of the energy is dissipated into the atmosphere as heat. The designer considers this to be wasted energy.
Thus, when we make the claim that Nature is wasteful, we’re claiming that most of the energy in Nature’s open energy systems does no work and is rather released into the atmosphere. In general, useful energy organizes, while wasted energy is entropic (moves towards equilibrium). Further the contents of Nature’s hypothetical open energy systems are not carefully recycled for repeated use, but rather employed indiscriminately.
Let’s consider a waterfall. We define work as etching the boundaries, whether stone or soil. Almost all of waterfall’s energy is lost (wasted) flowing downstream, while only a miniscule fraction of the energy does the work of etching the stone boundaries. Further the contents of the system are not carefully recycled, but rather flow downhill.
In contrast, to Nature’s indiscriminate use of energy and materials, Life regularly attempts to conserve energy and recycle materials. Almost every molecule is recycled for repeated use in cellular respiration and the bioenergy extracted from the process is carefully parceled out for future use in discrete quantized chunks. The cell’s energy production system judiciously passes a photon’s energy (coming from outside the biological system) from electron to G3P to ATP – with relatively little dissipated into the atmosphere. For this reason, we make the claim that Life is economical.
The urge of every inventor/engineer/designer of open energy systems such as engines is to maximize the work-energy from the fuel and to minimize consumption. This urge drove the design and production of the first steam engine, and every engine since. In turn, this drive catalyzed the origin and development of thermodynamics – the Science of Energy and Entropy. However, this very significant human drive requires a holistic sense of purpose that atoms and molecules (hence Nature) lack.
Lacking a holistic sense of purpose, Nature has no such urge to maximize efficiency and output. Lacking any urges whatsoever, Nature is wasteful. Because survival depends upon maximizing efficiency and output, Life is exceptionally economical in its use of materials and energy.
Due to this fundamental difference alone, Nature (as defined by Science - the reactions between natural laws and random collisions) could not possibly have created Life. Further Life must have a component that Nature does not have – the holistic urge to survive as a Being.
If not Nature, what is the source of Life’s survival urge?
Our model suggests that a Divine Source incarnated as Life at Creation and has replicated ever since. Of course the incarnation only produced an imperfect copy in Matter – akin to the relationship between a photograph and the photographed person. Accompanying Creation was the urge to survive.
The survival urge necessitated Life’s ID system complete with a life force. The ID system is necessary as it enables talents that are essential for survival – a temporal sense, a holistic purpose, and the ability to interact with information. Further the ID system provides useful data stream analytics that are equally essential for maximizing efficiency, hence optimizing the possibility of survival.
Lacking the need or urge to survive, Nature possesses neither an ID system, nor any of the requisite talents. How could Nature possibly be the Creator?
The urge to survive is exceptionally important as it is also the root of the urge to maximize efficiency. Indeed survival is an indisputable feature of every living system.
Survival Urge = Indisputable Feature of Life
What is it? The urge to survive can’t be defined in atomistic fashion (by its parts). Rather this urge is holistic in that it only makes sense in terms of the entire organism. Hence survival requires a definition that entails holistic context, rather than atomistic content.
Survival Urge = Holistic; Not Atomistic
The urge motivates us and every life form to maintain the integrity of our organism – more specifically the organization of our particular living system. Life’s organization, from cells on up, contains many subsystems. Certain, if not all, subsystems (e.g. energy production, reproduction, and elimination) are crucial for the survival of the whole. The individual parts (e.g. the biomolecules) are not a factor, since cellular content is dynamic. Thus survival entails maintaining the integrity of the organization and operations of our subsystems.
Survival Urge = Maintaining Organism’s Integrity
Survival Urge = Maintaining Organization & Operation of Subsystems
It could be argued that the urge to survive is the root of all cellular drives (e.g. hunger and thirst). It is certainly the root of homeostasis (individual survival) and reproduction (collective survival of the species). Many biologists consider these two drives (maintenance and growth) to be the foundation of all living feelings and emotions. Further, the modern consensus is that emotions, rather than intellect (ideas), motivate, order, and organize our lives.
Survival Urge = Root of Homeostasis (maintenance) & Reproduction (Growth)
Survival Urge = Root of All Feelings & Emotions
To satisfy our central urge to survive, every living system must have the Big 3 talents - a temporal sense, a holistic purpose (survival), and the ability to interact with information. The last (info interaction) includes the ability to analyze data streams (trajectories and correspondences) with the purpose of choosing between alternatives. Lacking an urge to survive, Nature has no need for these talents. Life’s ID system enables these talents.
To Satisfy Survival Urge, Life must have Big 3 Talents
ID Systems enables Big 3 Talents; Not Nature
Nature includes everything material (natural law etc.). Yet Nature doesn’t possess the survival urge. In addition to a material component, Life must also have an immaterial component that includes the holistic urge to survive and everything that goes with it. Indeed we could easily make the claim that the indisputable urge to survive is the primary factor that differentiates Life and Nature. In this sense, Nature is a subset of Life, rather than vice-versa.
Nature = Matter x Natural Law ≠ Survival
Life = Nature x Immaterial Component (Holistic Survival Urge)