Outline of a unified approach to physics,biology and sociology

The theory of organismic sets, introduced by N. Rashevsky (Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics,29, 139–152, 1967;30, 163–174, 1968), is developed further. As has been pointed out, a society is a set of individuals plus the products of their activities, which result in their interactions. A multicellular organism is a set of cells plus the products of their activities, while a unicellular organism is a set of genes plus the products of their activities. It is now pointed out that a physical system is a set of elementary particles plus the product of their activities, such as transitions from one energy level to another. Therefore physical, biological and sociological phenomena can be considered from a unified set-theoretical point of view. The notion of a “world set” is introduced. It consists of the union of physical and of organismic sets. In physical sets the formation of different structure is governed preponderantly by analytical functions, which are special type of relations. In organismic sets, which represent biological organisms and societies, the formation of various structures is governed preponderantly by requirements that some relations, which are not functions, be satisfied. This is called the postulate of relational forces. Inasmuch as every function is a relation (F-relation) but not every relation is a function (Q-relation), it has been shown previously (Rashevsky,Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics,29, 643–648, 1967) that the physical forces are only a special kind of relational force and that, therefore, the postulate of relational forces applies equally to physics, biology and sociology. By developing the earlier theory of organismic sets, we deduce the following conclusions: 1) A cell in which the genes are completely specialized, as is implied by the “one gene—one enzyme” principle, cannot be formed spontaneously. 2) By introducing the notion of organismic sets of different orders so that the elements of an organismic set of ordern are themselves organismic sets of order (n−1), we prove that in multicellular organisms no cell can be specialized completely; it performs, in addition to its special functions, also a number of others performed by other cells. 3) A differentiated multicellular organism cannot form spontaneously. It can only develop from simpler, less differentiated organisms. The same holds about societies. Highly specialized contemporary societies cannot appear spontaneously; they gradually develop from primitive, non-specialized societies. 4) In a multicellular organism a specialization of a cell is practically irreversible. 5) Every organismic set of ordern>1, that is, a multicellular organism as well as a society, is mortal. Civilizations die, and others may come in their place. 6) Barring special inhibitory conditions, all organisms multiply. 7) In cells there must exist specially-regulatory genes besides the so-called structural genes. 8) In basically identically-built organisms, but which are built from different material (proteins), a substitution of a part of one organism for the homologous part of another impairs the normal functioning (protein specificity of different species). 9) Even unicellular organisms show sexual differentiation and polarization. 10) Symbiotic and parasitic phenomena are included in the theory of organismic sets. Finally some general speculations are made in regard to the possibility of discovering laws of physics by pure mathematical reasoning, something in which Einstein has expressed explicit faith. From the above theory, such a thing appears to be possible. Also the idea of Poincaré, that the laws of physics as we perceive them are largely due to our psychobiological structure, is discussed.     

A note on the development of organismic sets

It is suggested that the development of organismic sets is governed not by the maximalization of the integral survival value, as suggested previously (Bull. Math. Biophysics,28, 283–308, 1966;29, 139–152, 1967;30, 163–174, 1968), but by maximizing the number of new relations which appear as an organismic set develops.     

Organismic sets and biological epimorphism

It is shown that the principle of biological epimorphism (Rashevsky,Mathematical Principles in Biology and Their Applications, Springfield, Ill.: Charles Thomas, 1960) is contained in the theory of organismic sets (Bull. Math. Biophysics,29, 139–152, 1967) if an additional postulate not directly connected to mappings is made.     

Relational forces and structures produced by them

After giving a brief review of the theory of organismic sets (Bull. Math. Biophysics,29, 139–152, 1967;31, 159–198, 1969), in which the concept of relational forces, introduced earlier (Bull. Math. Biophysics,28, 283–308, 1966a) plays a fundamental role, the author discusses examples of possible different structures produced by relational forces. For biological organisms the different structures found theoretically are in general agreement with observation. For societies, which are also organismic sets as discussed in the above references, the structures can be described only in an abstract space, the nature of which is discussed. Different isomorphisms between anatomical structures, as described in ordinary Euclidean space, and the sociological structures described in an abstract space are noted, as should be expected from the theory of organismic sets.     

Organismic sets: Outline of a general theory of biological and social organisms

The discussion as to whether societies are organisms andvice versa has been going on for a long time. The question is meaningless unless a clear definition of the term “organism” is made. Once such a definition is made, the question may be answered by studying whether there exists any relational isomorphism between what the biologist calls an organism and what the sociologist calls society. Such a study should also include animal societies studied by ecologists. Both human and animal societies are sets of individuals together with certain other objects which are the products of their activities. A multicellular organism is a set of cells together with some products of their activities. A cell itself may be regarded as a set of genes together with the products of their activities because every component of the cell is either directly or indirectly the result of the activities of the genes. Thus it is natural to define both biological and social organisms as special kinds of sets. A number of definitions are given in this paper which define what we call here organismic sets. Postulates are introduced which characterize such sets, and a number of conclusions are drawn. It is shown that an organismic set, as defined here, does represent some basic relational aspects of both biological organisms and societies. In particular a clarification and a sharpening of the Postulate of Relational Forces given previously (Bull. Math. Biophysics,28, 283–308, 1966) is presented. It is shown that from the basic definitions and postulates of the theory of organismic sets, it folows that only such elements of those sets will aggregate spontaneously, which are not completely “specialized” in the performance of only one activity. It is further shown that such “non-specialized” elements undergo a process of specialization, and as a result of it their spontaneous aggregation into organismic sets becomes impossible. This throws light on the problem of the origin of life on Earth and the present absence of the appearance of life by spontaneous generation. Some applications to problems of ontogenesis and philogenesis are made. Finally the relation between physics, biology, and sociology is discussed in the light of the theory of organismic sets.     

A remark on sensory deprivation from the point of view of organismic sets

It is shown that from the definition of organismic sets (Rashevsky,Organismic Sets. Some Reflections on the Nature of Life and Society, Holland, Michigan, Mathematical Biology, Inc. and Grosse Pointe, Michigan, J. M. Richards Laboratory) a complete sensory deprivation of an organismic set of ordern=2 should result in malfunctioning of the set. A generalization to higher order sets is suggested.     

Sporadic sustained nonperiodic oscillations in the activities of organismic sets

In combining the author's theories of organismic sets (Rashevsky,Bull. Math. Biophysics,31, 159–198, 1969a) and Robert Rosen's theory of (M, R)-systems (Bull. Math. Biophysics,20, 245–265, 1958), a conclusion is reached that the number of either normal or pathological phenomena in organismic sets may occur. Those phenomena are characterized by occurring spontaneously once in a while but are not exactly periodic. Some epilepsies are an example of such pathological phenomena in the brain.     

Organismic sets: II. Some general considerations

The theory of organismic sets, developed in previous papers (Bull. Math. Biophysics,29, 139–152; 389–393; 643–647) is further generalized. To conform better with some biological and sociological facts the basic definitions are made more general. The conclusion is reached that every organismic setS _o is in general the union of three disjoined subsetsS _o1 ,S _o2 andS _o3 . Of these the subsetS _o1 , called the “core” is equivalent to an organismic set defined in previous publications. Its functioning is essential for the functioning ofS _o . The subsetsS _o2 andS _o3 , taken alone, are not organismic sets. The first of them is responsible for such biological or sociological functions which are not necessary for the “immediate” survival ofS _o but which are important for adaptation to changing environment and are therefore essential for a “long range survival.” The second one,S _o3 , is responsible for biological or social functions which are irrelevant for the survival ofS _o . Biological and sociological examples ofS _o2 andS _o3 are given. In addition to the fundamental theorem established in the first of the above mentioned papers, three new conclusions are derived. One is that in organismic sets of order higher than zero not all elements are specialized. The second is that every organismic set of order higher than zero is mortal. The third is that with increasing specialization the intensities of some activities in some elements ofS _o are reduced. Again the biological and sociological examples are given. At the end some very general speculations are made on the possible relation between biology and physics and on the possibility of “relationalizing” physics.     

Organismic supercategores: II. On multistable systems

The representation of biological systems in terms of organismic supercategories, introduced in previous papers (Bull. Math. Biophysics,30, 625–636;31, 59–70) is further discussed. To state more clearly this representation some new definitions are introduced. Also, some necessary changes in axiomatics are made. The conclusion is reached that any organismic supercategory has at least one superpushout, and this expresses the fact that biological systems are multistable. This way a connection between some results of Rashevsky’s theory of organismic sets and our results becomes obvious.     

Contribution to the theory of organismic sets,III

In line with previous studies on organismic sets, the division of all organismic sets intogeneral autotrophic and heterotrophic is introduced. The first produce their food themselves from some external source of energy, which in general may be an energy of any kind. The others use other organismic sets as the source of their food and energy. On earth we know only one kind of generalgeneral autotrophic organismic sets, namely, the autotrophic plants which use solar radiation as their source of energy and for production of their own food. It is shown why autotrophic animals do not exist on earth except as microorganisms like, e.g.,Euglena. A rigorous proof of the previously derived theorem that in an organismic set of ordern>1 no element can be completely specialized is given. It requires the introduction of new postulates. Finally, in considering the organic world as a whole, the notion of organismic sets ofmixed order is introduced.     

Contributions to the theory of organismic sets: Leadership

The theory of organismic sets (Bull. Math. Biophysics,31, 159–189, 1969) is applied to the theory of leadership in human society. The ability of making decisions, required for leadership, is a product of the activities of the cells of the cerebral cortex, which are elements of the subsetS ₀₂ of the organismic set “man” (loc. cit.). Products of the activities of the elements of an organismic set do not need to be of a material nature. Such things as thoughts, feelings, attitudes, etc., are also products of the activitiesa ₁ of the elements. An individual can makeall necessary decisions for adaptation in a changing environment, when his subsetS ₀₂ contains as a proper subset a set {a ₁₂ ^′ ∼ ⊂S ₀₂ of activities. It is shown that such individuals are rare. If none exist, then the one who possesses a subset {a ₁₂ ^* ∼ ⊂ {a ₁₂ ^′ ∼ of higher cardinalityc _m than any other individual, will be the leader. The possibility is discussed that fromN individualsN′ 〈N possess subsets {a ₁₂ ^* ∼ ⊂ {a ₁₂ ^′ ∼ all of the same cardinalityc _m but differing in the type of their elements, thus resulting in several leaders. It is then discussed what determines which of theN −N′ individuals will choose a particular oneN′ individuals as leader. Cooperation and competition between leaders is discussed.     

Some considerations on relational equilibria

A previous study (Bull. Math. Biophysics,31, 417–427, 1969) on the definitions of stability of equilibria in organismic sets determined byQ relations is continued. An attempt is made to bring this definition into a form as similar as possible to that used in physical systems determined byF-relations. With examples taken from physics, biology and sociology, it is shown that a definition of equilibria forQ-relational systems similar to the definitions used in physics can be obtained, provided the concept of stable or unstable structures of a system determined byQ-relations is considered in a probabilistic manner. This offers an illustration of “fuzzy categories,” a notion introduced by I. Bąianu and M. Marinescu (Bull. Math. Biophysics,30, 625–635, 1968), in their paper on organismic supercategories, which is designed to provide a mathematical formalism for Rashevsky's theory of Organismic Sets (Bull. Math. Biophysics,29, 389–393, 1967;30, 163–174, 1968;31, 159–198, 1969). A suggestion is made for a method of mapping the abstract discrete space ofQ-relations on a continuum of variables ofF-relations. Problems of polymorphism and metamorphosis, both in biological and social organisms, are discussed in the light of the theory.     

Two definitions of stability of equilibria

In classical physics the stability of an equilibrium requires that any, even infinitesimal, displacement from the configuration of equilibrium results in forces which tend to restore the original equilibrium configuration. In case of several stable equilibrium configurations, the height of the threshold, which must be exceeded by the deviarion from the stable equilibrium in order to bring the configuration into another stable equilibrium is taken as a measure of stability of the first configuration. In quantum mechanics, and in the recent work of I. Baianu, S. Comorosan and M. Marinescu (Bull. Math. Biophysics,30, 625–635, 1968;31, 59–70, 1969;32, 539–561, 1970) on organismic supercategories, preference is given to take, as ameasure of the degree of stability of a configuration, or of a “state”, the length of time during which the system remains in that configuration. It is shown that under rather general conditions the two criteria are equivalent.     

Organismic supercategories and qualitative dynamics of systems

The representation of biological systems by means of organismic supercategories, developed in previous papers (Bull. Math. Biophysics,30, 625–636;31, 59–71;32, 539–561), is further discussed. The different approaches to relational biology, developed by Rashevsky, Rosen and by Băianu and Marinescu, are compared with Qualitative Dynamics of Systems which was initiated by Henri Poincaré (1881). On the basis of this comparison some concrete result concerning dynamics of genetic system, development, fertilization, regeneration, analogies, and oncogenesis are derived.     

Some consequences of Henri Poincaré's hypothesis about the biological nature of the three-dimensionality of our space

Henri Poincaré (Derniere Pansées, Paris, Flamerion, 1920) makes the interesting suggestion that our space is three-dimensional because ourvoluntary movements are those of quasi-rigid bodies in three dimensional space. Inasmuch as according to the theory of organismic sets (Rashevsky,Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics,31, 159–198, 1969) organisms are conceivable, perhaps in some remote parts of the universe, for which the primary voluntary changes may be not spatial movements but changes of other physical qualities, it is pointed out that the acceptance of Poincaré's hypothesis will require an invariance of the physical laws in an abstractn-hyperspace with respect to the choice ofm<n coordinates as the basic frame of reference.     

Contributions to relational biology

The principle of biotopological mapping (Rashevsky, 1954,Bull. Math. Biophysics,16, 317–48) is given a generalized formulation, as the principle of relational epimorphism in biology. The connection between this principle and Robert Rosen’s representation of organisms by means of categories (1958,Bull. Math. Biophysics,20, 317–41) is studied. Rosen’s theory of (M,R)-systems, (1958,Bull. Math. Biophysics,20, 245–60) is generalized by dropping the assumption that only terminalM _i components are sending inputs into theR _i components. It is shown that, if the primordial organism is an (M,R)-system, then the higher organisms, obtained by a construction well discussed previously (1958,Bull. Math. Biophysics,20, 71–93), are also (M,R)-systems. Several theorems about such derived (M,R)-systems are demonstrated. It is shown that Rosen’s concept of an organism as a set of mappings throws light on phenomena of synesthesia and also leads to the conclusion that Gestalt phenomena must occur not only in the fields of visual and auditory perception but in perceptions of any modality.     

Molecular set theory: II. An aspect of the biomathematical theory of sets

In an earlier paper (Molecular Set Theory: I.Bull. Math. Biophysics,22, 285–307, 1960) the author proposed a “Molecular Set Theory” as a formal mathematical meta-theoretic system for representing complex reactions not only of biological interest, but also of general chemical interest. The present paper is a refinement and extension of the earlier work along more formal algebraic lines. For example the beginnings of an algebra of molecular transformations is presented. It also emphasizes that this development, together with the genetical set theory of Woodger's and Rashevsky's set-theoretic contributions to Relational Biology, points to the existence of a biomathematical theory of sets which is not deducible from the general mathematical, abstract theory of sets.     

Demographic evidence for adaptive theories of aging

Pleiotropic theories for the evolutionary origins of senescence have been ascendant for forty years (see, for example, G. Williams (1957) Evolution, 11, 398–411; T. Kirkwood (1977) Nature, 270, 301–304), and it is not surprising that interpreters of demographic data seek to frame their results in this context. But some of that evidence finds a much more natural explanation in terms of adaptive aging. Here we re-interpret the 1997 results of the Centenarian Study in Boston, which found in their sample of centenarian women an excess of late childbearing. The finding was originally interpreted as a selection effect: a metabolic link between late menopause and longevity. But we demonstrate that this interpretation is statistically strained, and that the data in fact indicate a causal link: bearing a child late in life induces a metabolic response that promotes longevity. This conclusion directly contradicts some pleiotropic theories of aging that postulate a “cost of reproduction”, and it supports theories of aging as an adaptive genetic program.     

挖掘与调控乙酸胁迫响应基因提高重组酿酒酵母合成番茄红素水平

【背景】乙酰辅酶A是酿酒酵母异源合成番茄红素的重要中间产物,胞质中乙酰辅酶A主要来自乙酰辅酶A合成酶催化乙酸合成。【目的】通过外源添加乙酸盐结合调控乙酸胁迫应答基因增加胞内乙酰辅酶A含量,改善细胞生长,促进番茄红素合成。【方法】在合成番茄红素的重组酵母菌中过表达乙酰辅酶A合成酶编码基因(acs2),在发酵过程中添加10g/L乙酸盐,结合转录组学分析挖掘乙酸胁迫响应基因,进行单一和组合调控。【结果】添加乙酸盐后,重组菌Y02中番茄红素含量增加了19.14%,但细胞生长受到抑制,转录组学结果表明adk2、fap7、hem13、elo3、pdc5、set5、pmt5、hst4、clb2和swe1表达水平增加,因此构建了单基因和双基因过表达菌株,其中Y02-set5-hst4菌在添加乙酸盐后细胞生长得到了显著改善,同时胞内乙酰辅酶A浓度提高了78.21%,番茄红素含量和产量达到12.62 mg/g-DCW和108.67 mg/L,与对照菌Y02相比分别提高了42.76%和67.13%。同时该菌中甲羟戊酸途径中关键基因erg12、erg20和hmg1的表达量与对照菌相比分别上调了1.70、1.4...     

A contribution to Rashevsky’s mathematical theory of development

The application of Rashevsky’s transformationT to a primordial graph yields a set of graphs corresponding to different stages in the development of the organism. However, sinceT is multiple-valued the graphs obtained are not ordered. To obtain an ordering, it is first shown that the set of graphs under consideration is equivalent to a well defined setO (for “organism”) ofn-tuples. A metric is then introduced which is based on a biological consideration discussed by Rashevsky (Bull. Math. Biophysics,16, 317–348, 1954). Since a metric implies an ordering of the setO, with a knowledge of the structure of the primordial, one can obtain the developmental sequence. Unfortunately, at present, the structure of the primordial graph is unknown which makes the direct application of the above principle impossible. Consequently, an indirect approach which makes use of more accessible biological phenomena is discussed as well. The hypothesis thatrate of development decreases exponentially and the implications this has with regard to the metric onO are discussed. It is shown that if the hypothesis is accepted the search for the developmental sequence is narrowed.