• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

Erik Andrulis paper "Theory of the Origin, Evolution, and Nature of Life"

catsmate

No longer the 1
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Messages
31,920
I've just been perusing this document, which seems to have been getting some attention on the web, after I was sent a link to it. [2MB PDF]
Here's the abstract:
Abstract: Life is an inordinately complex unsolved puzzle. Despite significant theoretical progress, experimental anomalies, paradoxes, and enigmas have revealed paradigmatic limitations. Thus, the advancement of scientific understanding requires new models that resolve fundamental problems. Here, I present a theoretical framework that economically fits evidence accumulated from examinations of life. This theory is based upon a
straightforward and non-mathematical core model and proposes unique yet empirically consistent explanations for major phenomena including, but not limited to, quantum gravity, phase transitions of water, why living systems are predominantly CHNOPS (carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus, and sulfur), homochirality of sugars and amino acids, homeoviscous adaptation, triplet code, and DNA mutations. The theoretical framework unifies the macrocosmic and microcosmic realms, validates predicted laws of nature, and solves the puzzle of the origin and evolution of cellular life in the universe.
It continues in this vein for 105 pages, includes a lexicon of dozens of new terms coined for this theory. Plus some nice gyroscopic diagrams and equations but no maths.

Has anyone else read this document? Any theories? Poe? Incipient insanity? Sokal?
 
39 of those pages are references. I'm not sure I even agree with his opening point, which appears to be the reason for the paper : "How life abides by the second law of thermodynamics yet evolutionarily complexifies and maintains its intrinsic order is a fundamental mystery in physics, chemistry, and biology". The 2nd law refers to isolated macroscopic systems. The Earth, for example, isn't isolated energetically or entropically, and it's fairly easy to see how the energy gradients present allow for life and evolution. Complexity arises inevitably if you start with the simplest possible organism and evolution can occur.
 
39 of those pages are references. I'm not sure I even agree with his opening point, which appears to be the reason for the paper : "How life abides by the second law of thermodynamics yet evolutionarily complexifies and maintains its intrinsic order is a fundamental mystery in physics, chemistry, and biology". The 2nd law refers to isolated macroscopic systems. The Earth, for example, isn't isolated energetically or entropically, and it's fairly easy to see how the energy gradients present allow for life and evolution. Complexity arises inevitably if you start with the simplest possible organism and evolution can occur.
Aww, you mean life doesn't abuse entropy after all?
 
I wonder if the "gyres" could have any connection with Goethean science (see the references to "spirality" in the PS, and footnote 16, to this letter, although they seem to relate to plants).
 
Well then. My favorite comment on pz's blog was the one about hit forgetting the lamb and chicken gyro.

If I had to bet money it would be mental illness, but it's possible he's taking us for a ride I guess.
 
I'm voting for "taking us for a ride."

The first entry in Table 1 defines an "Alternagyre" as "A gyrosystem whose gyrapex is not triquantal," as contrasted to a "Majorgyre," which is "gyrosystem whose gyrapex is triquantal"

As Figure 1 shows, "The levorafocagyre, in turn, is antichiral to the dextrasupragyre. Ⓧ and Ⓨ are thus both antichiral Matrioshkagyres."

I can't even spoof those.

He also redefines "Quantum" as "A capacious, potentially infinite, uncertain unit of IEM; a gyre"

Now, consider the line "Restated, the versatile gyre does not avail itself to the predictive power of mathematics." (section 2.1.2) . . . one of the features fo the gyre is that it's inherently untestable!

ETA: now I've skimmed the Pharyngula post, and the first reponse was
Well PZ, this is either an elaborate joke or the onset of schizophrenia

umm, yeah, I can't rule out the 'onset of schizophrenia' thing; certainly parts of it would fit. In that context, I'd say that my remarks above were not terribly helpful, and pending further data, it's probably best if I, too, just drop the subject.
 
Last edited:
I hear the Science magazine and the university both removed the paper today .. and act as if nothing ever happened. I guess it's pretty good reaction. I too will speak of this no more. The ignorance density is just too high. Who know what it can do in environments like internet.
 
I hear the Science magazine and the university both removed the paper today .. and act as if nothing ever happened. I guess it's pretty good reaction. I too will speak of this no more. The ignorance density is just too high. Who know what it can do in environments like internet.
If it's unavailable I have the PDF saved.
Personally I'm torn between the "he's been refused tenure and has done a Poe/Sokal" and "he's been suppressing his wooster/nuttery and it's erupted since he was refused tenure" theories.
 
Do a search on google for "MXW0bx_Ooq4" and watch the video in the first link. (I can't post links yet)

ETA: Also google "turboencabulator data sheet" and read the pdf on the first link.
 
Last edited:
Do a search on google for "MXW0bx_Ooq4" and watch the video in the first link. (I can't post links yet)

ETA: Also google "turboencabulator data sheet" and read the pdf on the first link.
I wonder can he supply the parts for an interocitor.:D
So perhaps a Sokal.
 
The work of a genius! A scientific Finnegans Wake. He knows exactly what he is doing... why is another matter.
 
Check out the last full paragraph on page 65. A Sokal indeed.

~~ Paul

I agree. Also, you will note that in the acknowledgements he does not thank anyone in particular and makes sure to mention no one funded the research. Everything is just too over the top. His grant wasn't renewed and he is presumably not being tenured, so he is making a big joke (when he should be trying to get a new grant). I am not exactly sure what the joke is, but maybe he is poking fun at Robert Lanza's Biocentrism.
 
Reading in detail..

'But, and I repeat but, this is a big assumption. As a theoretician, I cannot accept any assumption'

This is so funny!
 
I wonder if the "gyres" could have any connection with Goethean science (see the references to "spirality" in the PS, and footnote 16, to this letter, although they seem to relate to plants).

Or "...did gyre and gimble in the wabe,"
Lewis Carrol
ETA: Scooped again, didn't read all the posts.
 
Last edited:
I think that this guy was anticipated by Lewis Carol:

Err... no. That wasn't the quote. I could quote the line from memory, but I figured that I'd add a link to confirm, so I'm just copying and pasting.

Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
 

Back
Top Bottom