n communications between M cells distributed over n possible “sites” in the
organism. Hence the length, n, of a message is directly matched with the variance
and the mean (a well-known property of the Poisson distribution).
In summary, each cell is characterized as an STEM system, i.e. a dissipative
system, which encompasses nested encodings, as programmed in the factorized
canonical vectors of the transformation B. Communication runs from the genetic to
higher order codes, e.g. the scheme for the accretion of proteins, stored in the
genetic alphabet and transformed via resonant mechanisms, depending on the cell’s
quality value, from cell to cell. Similarly the intra-cell mechanism imparts a
cumulative Poisson statistics based on the intensity parameter k ¼ 4p=n, with
information divided up into smaller spatial packages as n increases. While the intercell communication is mainly temporal the intra-cell statistics is predominantly
spatial.
Even if semantic or semiotic mappings centred on B need further analysis, it is
clear that our representational explanation exudes some common sense. The
modern state of the art, i.e. how information from sensory input, coding for perception and coupling the information via interneurons, to motor output, is to a large
part due to the Nobel Laureate Kandel [43] studying the giant marine snail Aplysia.
In general, various forms of learning give rise to different patterns of neural activity,
and long-term memory to the synthesis of new proteins. The important point is that
chemical synapses predominate in the brain. Consequently it is tempting to analyse
neuronal activities related to the nervous system of the present model. Rather than
presenting an exchange of numbers, see Brändas [12] for some possibilities, one
might combine relevant factors, like 60 for the DNA-protein synthesis or 23
reflecting the precise number of chromosome pairs in humans. The corresponding
diagrams emulate interlevel communication releasing active terminals serving as
classical communication channels for synaptic transmission with shifting Q-values.
The present communicative semiotics, based on the law of self-reference, does
produce teleodynamic encodings and permit collections of neurons to combine
external signals with internal memories. Coded semantic information, communicated
via synchronized spike trains, may accordingly be investigated in terms of Poisson
statistics as a predestined general feature of the neural cell. Consequently, this supports the function of statistical distributions, with k ¼ ðl À 1Þ for l ¼ 2; 3; . . .; n
providing a broadband channel (mean and variance equal to k) for communication.
Furthermore, irrespective of the location of the spatio-temporal site for communication, resolve and action, the only agent making the decision is the SELF. In this
sense we might say that we have been able to reduce biological accounts to chemistry
and then to physics under the reflexive law of self-referentiability, cf. Gödel’s paradox. Along with this understanding it is conceivable to explain the so-called psychological arrow of time, as rationalized from our teleonomical physical law. Hence,
as suggested already in Ref. [15], the analogy between gravitational interactions and
the self-referential law expressed in Sect. 4, therefore will unify all arrows of time
under the heading of the Gödelian arrow of time.
While modern communication, as perceived in our society, is founded on traditional broadcasting techniques, referring to the modulation of electromagnetic
A Zero Energy Universe Scenario: From Unstable Chemical …
277
organism. Hence the length, n, of a message is directly matched with the variance
and the mean (a well-known property of the Poisson distribution).
In summary, each cell is characterized as an STEM system, i.e. a dissipative
system, which encompasses nested encodings, as programmed in the factorized
canonical vectors of the transformation B. Communication runs from the genetic to
higher order codes, e.g. the scheme for the accretion of proteins, stored in the
genetic alphabet and transformed via resonant mechanisms, depending on the cell’s
quality value, from cell to cell. Similarly the intra-cell mechanism imparts a
cumulative Poisson statistics based on the intensity parameter k ¼ 4p=n, with
information divided up into smaller spatial packages as n increases. While the intercell communication is mainly temporal the intra-cell statistics is predominantly
spatial.
Even if semantic or semiotic mappings centred on B need further analysis, it is
clear that our representational explanation exudes some common sense. The
modern state of the art, i.e. how information from sensory input, coding for perception and coupling the information via interneurons, to motor output, is to a large
part due to the Nobel Laureate Kandel [43] studying the giant marine snail Aplysia.
In general, various forms of learning give rise to different patterns of neural activity,
and long-term memory to the synthesis of new proteins. The important point is that
chemical synapses predominate in the brain. Consequently it is tempting to analyse
neuronal activities related to the nervous system of the present model. Rather than
presenting an exchange of numbers, see Brändas [12] for some possibilities, one
might combine relevant factors, like 60 for the DNA-protein synthesis or 23
reflecting the precise number of chromosome pairs in humans. The corresponding
diagrams emulate interlevel communication releasing active terminals serving as
classical communication channels for synaptic transmission with shifting Q-values.
The present communicative semiotics, based on the law of self-reference, does
produce teleodynamic encodings and permit collections of neurons to combine
external signals with internal memories. Coded semantic information, communicated
via synchronized spike trains, may accordingly be investigated in terms of Poisson
statistics as a predestined general feature of the neural cell. Consequently, this supports the function of statistical distributions, with k ¼ ðl À 1Þ for l ¼ 2; 3; . . .; n
providing a broadband channel (mean and variance equal to k) for communication.
Furthermore, irrespective of the location of the spatio-temporal site for communication, resolve and action, the only agent making the decision is the SELF. In this
sense we might say that we have been able to reduce biological accounts to chemistry
and then to physics under the reflexive law of self-referentiability, cf. Gödel’s paradox. Along with this understanding it is conceivable to explain the so-called psychological arrow of time, as rationalized from our teleonomical physical law. Hence,
as suggested already in Ref. [15], the analogy between gravitational interactions and
the self-referential law expressed in Sect. 4, therefore will unify all arrows of time
under the heading of the Gödelian arrow of time.
While modern communication, as perceived in our society, is founded on traditional broadcasting techniques, referring to the modulation of electromagnetic
A Zero Energy Universe Scenario: From Unstable Chemical …
277