archive-nl.com » NL » M » METAFYSICA.NL

Total: 972

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • wings VIII
    a clavus in the preserved part of the wing and the same is true of Prosbole however this genus turned out to have a clavus in the forewings as does Permoglyphis of the Prosbolidae we have to conclude that both these forms Dunstaniidae Prosbole had only a small or moderate sized scutellum bordered by a correspondingly short clavus or even perhaps by scarcely any claval area at all but as our knowledge today says this was the case in the triassic Dunstaniidae only while the true heteropterous configuration of scutellum and clavus was already well developed in the permian Prosbolidae As soon as the overlapping of the two distal parts of the wing or membranes has been brought about it will be clear that these two parts will in future act while the insect is at rest as one part only whereas the coria of the two wings remain separate see Figure 6 There will therefore be little tendency towards the thickening of the membrane at all and the heteroptery might be expected to advance more quickly than ever The line of evolution would then culminate in forms having a thick corium from which all traces of venation had been eliminated and a thin membrane in which the veins were arranged more or less parallel to one another and to the wing border Probably the highest point reached by this line of evolution to day is to be seen in the dominant family Pentatomidae in which the shield shaped or cut into five appearance of the insect becomes perfected and is often enhanced by bizarre sculpture and brilliant colouration Figure 6 shows the outline of such an insect with the five separate areas of the shield design named Now continuing with Rohdendorf s text but adding statements clarifications and Figures concerning the morphological features in the description of the heteropterygian type of wing apparatus There exists a sharp heteronomy in the pairs of wings Mesothorax more strongly developed than metathorax Musculature also heteronomous Forewings having quite a peculiar structure and divide into clearly separated parts of different consistency a firm leathery part lying at the proximal half of the wing and a thin membranous part making up the distal part of it The venation of the forewings plays a markedly subordinated role as supporting element It is rather variable and best developed in the distal membranous part The forewings are named half shields hemelytra The hindwings are membranous fairly broad but shorter than the forewings provided with a strong rather reduced venation The anterior margin is straight connected with the posterior margin of the forewing by way of special adaptational structures hooks Both pairs of wings peculiarly specialized mechanically Body usually short not possessing flexible parts Size of the insects small or medium except certain larger Prosbolidae Wings shorter than more rarely equal to body Functional features Both pairs of wings participate in flight movements as organs of supporting the body and of traction Wing beats of both pairs strictly synchronous hind pair connected with the front pair by means of special adaptational structures and in wing beat movements follwing it i e following those of the front pair functionally being its mere appendage Speed of flight not studied Known is only the wing beat frequency reaching in the bug Deraeocoris schach L 100 109 beats per second Governability weight load and other properties of flight not especially investigated The biological features of the representatives of the type are relatively well known Significance of flight for the biology fairly great We may see a certain parallel between beetles Coleoptera and bugs Heteroptera As the majority of the former representatives of the type of elytropterygia shield wingedness uses the wings only in certain periods of life often leading a concealed way of life also the bugs representatives of heteropterygia partitive wingedness only take flight in certain episodes in their life We must however indicate that heteropterygia is a markedly more sophisticated type aerodynamically than is elytropterygia Differentiations connections and representatives of the type Heteropterygia is a derivative of special forms of orthopterygia straight wingedness expressed in Homoptera cicadas in which originated a subdivision of the forewing into two parts by means of a transverse seam Some representatives of heteropterygia secondarily simplify the structure of the hemelytra in which the apical membranous part is reduced These forms connect heteropterygia with elytropterygia or even once again with the original type orthopterygia it is perhaps reasonable also to count neuropterygia as to represent one of the types from which heteropterygia has evolved The with respect to flight most progressive forms of heteropterygia are characterized by the improvement of the mechanical qualities of the hemelytra which become narrowed and acquire the nature of costalized wings These forms are a clear transition to dipterygia functional two wingedness The various cases of differentiation in heteropterygia naturally split up into three subtypes 1 Proheteropterygia The most simple cases closely connected with the homorthopterygia of cicadas which is one of the starting form s of the present type consist in the appearance of a clear dividing line partitioning the tegmen into two parts This subtype proheteropterygia pro hetero pterygia we already find in certain mesozoic cicadas Cicadoprosbole B M We definitely also include in this type and subtype the permian genus Prosbole and allies also Homoptera in which this dividing line can already be found In the recent fauna splendid examples may be seen in some Cicadidae for instance Tettigarcta This subtype foreshadowing the wings as they are in the next subtype euheteropterygia is very interesting because it is especially represented already in the permian Prosbolidae Homoptera not mentioned as such by Rohdendorf In that family of ancient cicadas the differentiation in the forewing tegmen by a dividing line into a leathery and a membranous part is clearly present So it will be instructive to include a number of Figures of tegmina and hindwings including reconstructions of these ancient insects Figure 7 Permocicadopsis angustata Mart Family Prosbolidae Order Homoptera

    Original URL path: http://www.metafysica.nl/wings/wings_8.html (2016-02-01)
    Open archived version from archive


  • wings VIIIa
    form in which it is presented by Hofstadter and which is expounded in the previous document Being so we can then assume that the very rules of TNT as formulated by Hofstadter are actually present in the Implicate Order as to their very content And as to what specific symbols are chosen here such as S 0 a etc is not substantial It is not known but also not important what symbols actually figure in ontological TNT So we can say that the very basic structure of the Implicate Order is ontological TNT and its logical rules as we see them in Hofstadter s presentation of them In our noëtic theory we have taken the freedom to assume that there are objectively existing structures ranging from immaterial to material that are in their overall general structure that is as to their type completely isomorphic with a typographical formal system as such systems are forged in conventional mathematics and mathematical logic That is we hypothetize that certain formal systems or certain types of formal systems as they have been created in mathematics and in mathematical logic do actually exist in rerum natura in the real world and thus appear not only in the usual cognitive fashion but also appear ontologically For many a researcher this may sound too hypothetic to swallow I can imagine that But I want to place organic evolution in precisely such a metaphysical context by assuming the Implicate and Explicate Orders in order to account for all of the sophisticated adaptations typogeneses and anageneses higher developments that are encountered in it Many if not all of such adaptations typogeneses and anageneses seem to defy any explanation in terms of the material world alone and that is in terms of random genetic mutations and natural selection I did not however seek for one or another mystical explanation by assuming some deity like higher order that allegedly had forged all this The Implicate and Explicate Orders are not supposed to be ontologically completely separate domains they are in constant interaction by the assumed processes of injection and projection that is traffic across their common boundary Indeed we had just established that the derivational rules of the formal system of noëtic strategy strings FSNSS cannot have been originated derived from the Implicate Order itself but must in some way have come from the Explicate Order that is from the material space time world And that our attempt to compare a typographical formal system with some objectively existing pattern is not some crazy idea of mine is indicated by the fact that something like that is already done by at least someone else namely by Hofstadter who is certainly an expert on the general nature of formal systems in his book Gödel Escher Bach There in Chapter XVI he describes the isomorphy between the basic genetic system in organisms and the typographical number theory TNT that is formalized number theory This ontologization of a initially man made formal system is shown in part LXc in Fifth Part of Website Qualitative delimitation of a formal system implemented or embedded in number theory If some typographically defined formal system say the MIU system has by us been embedded in number theory N by assigning arbitrary Gödel numbers to its typographical symbols and arithmetizing its typographical production rules and of which system we may then say It is and was in fact not more than just some section of number theory we then have worked our way let s say forwardly i e from typographic to arithmetic without thereby having changed the qualitative content of the system And as we had found out above in its arithmetized form its number strings i e its own number theoretic patterns do not particularly stand out as a group among all the many other number theoretic patterns This means that the system viewed from and within number theory cannot be recognized as a particular system at all i e it cannot be recognized or distinguished by number theory as in fact being the MIU system It is not qualitatively delimited by number theory although it is based on it The MIU system in its arithmetic guise has harnessed number theory When we take number theory ontologically we may say that the MIU system although residing in the Implicate Order is not qualitatively delimited there Indeed it was so delimited by Hofstadter i e delimited from outside the Implicate Order The MIU system is of course how it is in itself not important to us but as an analogy of our supposed Formal System of Noëtic Strategy Strings FSNSS it is very important indeed especially because its typographic symbols have not obtained explicit or implicit interpretation in contrast to those of FSNSS and as a result do not divert us when arguing about typographic formal systems embedded in number theory And of course if we consider FSNSS in its arithmetized form it just like the MIU system does not in any way stand out as a particular group among all the other number theoretic structures in the Implicate Order Like the MIU system it is not qualitatively delimited and not qualitatively distinguished from those other number theoretic structures But unlike the MIU system FSNSS is supposed not to be made up by someone but actually and objectively existing in the Implicate Order And now especially in the case of FSNSS we have the problem of its objective delimitation If it cannot be so delimited recognized or distinguished by and in number theory and thus by and in the Implicate Order and it indeed cannot be so distinguished by what IS it distinguished It must be delimited and recognized from outside number theory but by what features of it Well we solve this problem by still taking the MIU system as to be an analogy of FSNSS and forgetting the fact that the MIU system was in fact made up by Hofstadter made up that is in order to help us understanding the true nature of formal systems Having thus forgotten this we may ask by what precisely this system is qualitatively delimited The qualitative delimitation of the MIU system delimitation from outside number theory becomes evident if we work our way instead of forwards i e instead of from MIU to N backwards i e if we work our way from N to MIU and thus also from N to FSNSS Let s do this what comes next is in fact more or less trivial but nevertheless very important indeed The structure pattern or string to take an example already presented above 31 31 310 310 31010 31010 is a true number theoretic statement and as such i e as a string existing in the Implicate Order it represents numbers embedded in logical space therefore we have in our presentation of that string in addition to numbers also placed logical symbols of which means and and of which means implies The brackets serve to indicate the substructure of the string The statement s truth can be proved in N s formalization TNT As such there is nothing in particular with this statement i e it does not stand out as a member of a special group of statements among all the other number theoretic statements But if we assign to the number 3 the typographic symbol M and to the number 1 the typographic symbol I and finally to the number 0 the typographic symbol U i e if we backwardly Gödelize then we get MI MI MIU MIU MIUIU MIUIU And only then we recognize that the statement is also a MIU statement i e a statement of which the context is the typographic MIU system Equivalently we may say that the string is number theoretic and more particularly of the MIU sort Indeed we recognize MI as the one axiom of the MIU system Further we recognize in MI MIU its first typographical production rule and finally in MIU MIUIU its second typographical production rule So we now see the meaning of the above number theoretic statement string its meaning being MIUIU is a theorem of the MIU system because the statement demonstrates that the string MIUIU is derived produced from the axiom of the MIU system by applying two of its production rules So the above pattern or statement 31 31 310 310 31010 31010 exists in the Implicate Order alongside many other number theoretic patterns or structures And in working back upon it as we just have done the symbols M I and U not being number theoretical symbols were mentioned retrieved by us o n l y to express the fact that although 31 31 310 310 31010 31010 is just a number theoretic structure it turns out at the same time to be a derivation production of a theorem of the MIU system By this we in particular mean that the symbols M I and U do not actually exist in the Implicate Order Of them we see in the Implicate Order only their respective number theoretic counterparts the numbers 3 1 and 0 So to express the delimitation of the MIU system as we name it seen from the Explicate Order this system being a particular formal system embedded in number theory but a system not as such recognized by number theory we in still working backwards say that 3 means M 1 means I and 0 means U and that the arithmetic transformations mean the MIU system s typographical production rules whereas when working forwards we embed the MIU system in number theory by assigning arbitrary Gödel numbers to its symbols and by arithmetizing its typographical production rules All this what has been said about delimitation of the MIU system precisely holds mutatis mutandis also for our Formal System of Noëtic Strategy Strings FSNSS This system is delimited by the Explicate Order because this Order recognizes that the strings are noëtic descriptions of organic strategies or of their noëtic precursors And this recognizing is possible at all because the organic part of the Explicate Order is the domain of interpretation the domain of meaning of FSNSS Noëtic Chreodes in the Implicate Order Our noëtic theory of evolution is meant to present an alternative of conventional evolutionary theory i e it is designed to get rid of the great difficulties undeniably present in that theory Conventional theory is in fact unable to explain and describe the genesis in the material world of organic species organic types and of the many subtle adaptations nor is it able to explain many geographic distributional patterns of them patterns existing or having existed in the present or in the past Problematic distributional patterns such as that of the Archimylacridae in the coal basins of Siberia Europe and North America are on the contrary well accounted for by our noëtic theory especially by the elaborated idea of polyphyletic development But is the very genesis of organismic species strategies types and adaptations so very well accounted for by our alternative theory Well it is accounted for but sadly enough still in very general terms only namely in terms of the number theoretic structure of the Implicate Order which structure although allowing for some irrationalities is logical because we can describe it with TNT and detaching it from the human mind rational and accounted for in terms of projection into the Explicate Order of noëtically produced organic strategies It is our conviction but hoping that it turns out to be misplaced that science and even philosophy metaphysics can in explaining or describing organic evolution hardly go beyond stating mere generalities as has done so far in our noëtic theory In earlier documents mainly in Fifth Part of Website we have attempted to be more specific as to the genesis of organismic species and strategies but admittedly with only little success It may for example turn out that our earlier conceived idea of derivational branching in the Implicate Order of the noëtic trajectory following the derivation of strategies is not entirely correct and it may also turn out that the earlier idea of holistic simplification in the Implicate Order coupled with reductionistic complexification in the Explicate Order must be abandoned Further we had tried out in what way noëtic reactions just as reactions as analogues of those in chemistry i e without placing them in the context of formal systems may create strategies in the Implicate Order Also we probed the idea of noëtic interactions between immaterial forms and noëtic counterparts of ecological existential conditions allegedly resulting in adapted strategies and so on All these efforts met with only little success because they all were of rather an ad hoc nature without much explanatory value Indeed the Implicate Order cannot simply be a noëtic copy of the Explicate Order Nevertheless despite these difficulties inherent in our theory we may go a little beyond the level of generality so far developed if we take as our point of departure the above summarized Noëtic Theory of Formal Systems in the Implicate Order Above we had found out that the Formal System of Noëtic Strategy Strings FSNSS was delimited by the Explicate Order by as it were assigning typographical symbols to the elements of the number theoretic strings of this system i e recognizing the fact that these strings are noëtic biological descriptions It could do so because biological structures in the Explicate Order do in fact form the meaning i e do belong to the domain of interpretation of these noëtic strings So the Explicate Order recognizes which here means actively delimits these strings as to belong to the Formal System of Noëtic Strategy Strings and its production rules this system is from the outset hyper implicitly present in the Implicate Order but is recognized by the Explicate Order only It is of course especially these rules that determine the qualitative nature and content of the system But why and how then do descriptions of non strategies axioms turn into descriptions of true organic but still noëtic strategies In answering this question we theorize that the special nature of the production rules of FSNSS creates that is automatically implies a canalization of part of the Implicate Order i e it implies the presence of so called chreodes in that Order through which chreodes the derivations formal productions are being canalized in order to result in precisely such theorems that are noëtic descriptions of organic strategies We must imagine chreodes as to be noëtic funnels each containing at its bottom an axiom of FSNSS and at its end a fully fledged noëtic description of a particular organic strategy as the last theorem derived from such an axiom itself a non strategy string The axioms of the supposed FSNSS are in fact the earlier described original immaterial forms aspiring to become ontologically complete i e to become material And they can become material when they have developed into strategies to exist in the Explicate Order And when appropriate existential conditions in which such a strategy precisely fits do actually exist in the Explicate Order these strategies will be projected into that Order from the Implicate Order and appear there as material individuals of organismic species We theorize that the special nature of the production rules of FSNSS these rules existing in an arithmetic version in noëtic that is in arithmetic space the Implicate Order and in which version it is the very c o m b i n a t i o n of ordinary arithmetic operations that is recognized in fact delimited by the Explicate Order is such as to determine their consecutive order of application to the axioms or to the already derived theorems not yet strategies of FSNSS This is in fact the noëtic chreode in each case And this particular succession of rules to be applied in the end leads in each individual case to a theorem that as such is a noëtic description of a true organic strategy by which the original immaterial form an axiom is able to materially exist in the Explicate Order upon subsequent projection of it but now embedded in the strategy into that Order And so even in the Implicate Order the noëtic development has proceeded strictly polyphyletically parallel noëtic trajectories derivational sequences from axioms to theorems and finally to theorems that are complete descriptions of true organic strategies Determination of the consecutive order of application of the production rules of FSNSS may take place in the following way To a given axiom more than one rule may equally well be applicable but only the one that does not bring the noëtic trajectory outside the chreode is actually applied The same holds for intermediate theorems to which more than one rule may be applied So inside the chreode only one single noëtic trajectory is running leading from the particular axiom to intermediate theorems and finally to the last theorem Strictly in this proposed scenario branching of the noëtic trajectory inside the chreode if it is wide enough and so perhaps resulting in more than one strategies is possible but is less probable to occur because that would in the end lead to some groups of organisms that could be derived from each other Indeed common experience in evolutionary taxonomy has to do with at least many if not all organismic species resisting complete derivation from each other specialization crossings The production rules of FSNSS are supposed to be of such a nature that their application as being in fact noëtic reactions results in the noëtic construction of descriptions of organic strategies from bottom to top Or said differently their successive application to a given original immaterial form a number theoretic string an axiom and to its intermediates renders that original immaterial form to be able to inform Prime Matter and that is the same as rendering it now as a strategy to exist in the Explicate Order All this is an evolution of in each case a given original immaterial string toward a description of a true organic strategy including the description of the basic molecular machinery of living cells i e the DNA protein machinery and the expression of the macroscopic phenotypic morphological structure of the organism The derivation from FSNSS axiom to strategy theorem is therefore a sequence of increasingly complicated descriptions and the production rules of FSNSS are precisely geared to accomplish this And it is the particular physical structure of the Explicate Order especially certain details of it its ecological existential conditions that imposes upon the mentioned rules their particular nature despite the fact that they are in the end prescriptions of merely arithmetic transformations of given number theoretic strings but nevertheless transformations of a very special kind But the content of these rules is not only determined by Explicate Order conditions but first of all by the overall metaphysics of Being So at last we have succeeded in to be more specific as to the genesis of organic strategies But still things remain more or less general and our hypothesis of noëtic chreodes is admittedly a bit ad hoc This is unavoidable because as has been said our theory is for a large part metaphysical implying that we cannot go for observation and experiment to confirm it The only directing and restricting and thus controlling factor in our theorizing is the demand for conformity i e non contradiction with documented observed facts Our idea of the Formal System of Noëtic Strategy Strings comes from the empirical fact that the realm of organisms shows it to have some degree of derivational structure not only between features in different organisms but also between features of a same organism having led to the idea of evolution especially that of Charles Darwin And of course already before him not to mention Lamarck there were the rational morphologists such as Cuvier and his followers having already detected the derivational nature of the animal kindom as a result of the discovery of homologous morphological structures in fact isomorphisms in different and in the same animals Based on such facts they did not conclude that a material evolution had actually taken place on the Earth s surface but merely the presence of an idealistic rational relationship between structures of different fore feet wings and the same repeating body segments animals We in our theory also speak of the presence of ideal rational derivational patterns in organisms and also not take them as evidence of actual material descent of organismic species from one another We do recognize true derivational patterns to be present in the Implicate Order not derivations from one strategy to another but from one immaterial form a not yet strategy through a series of derived theorems also not yet strategies ultimately to a theorem that is a description of a true organic strategy to have upon projection this initial immaterial form materially existing in the Explicate Order in the form of a particular organismic species W ith all this we d like to urge the reader to try to see the evolution not only of insects but of all organisms in the context of the described noëtic machinery and indeed conclude that insofar as the Explicate Order is concerned all organisms developed polyphyletically because they just result from projections of ready made strategy strings i e noëtic strategies noëtic descriptions of strategies theorems of FSNSS and that the formal system producing in the Implicate Order the noëtic descriptions of organic strategies has its particular rules not from the Implicate but from the Explicate Order Further the reader should realize the importance and validity of the above finding that natural numbers and the logical rational production rules of TNT are respectively represent the very nature of the Implicate Order and the fact that finally there inevitably exists some degree of irrationality in at least the biological domain of the Explicate Order Further elaboration of the supposed noëtic generation of strategy strings and their projection into the Explicate Order The nature of an organic strategy After all the above considerations about the nature of the Implicate Order it is still necessary to again ponder about how strategies in it develop from non strategies i e what it exactly means to be a non strategy and in what way precisely they as axioms of FSNSS do manage to transform into organic strategies And of course for this to understand we must know what exactly is meant by saying that something is an organic strategy Well the construction of a noëtic organic s t r a t e g y is the step by step formation of a complex form that is upon projection able to a c t i v e l y keep itself far from thermodynamic equilibrium whereas simple forms such as crystals upon their projection can and indeed must exist while being in thermodynamic equilibrium If the complex form is not in some way able to keep itself far from thermodynamic equilibrium it will disintegrate ultimately resulting in fragments and transformed fragments that are each for themselves in thermodynamic equilibrium and stable implying that the original complex form that subsequently had been disintegrated could not as such i e as complex form stably exist in the Explicate Order So the material strategy must have its individual instances which is the way every such strategy exists in the Explicate Order to be active replacing the loss of matter and energy a loss resulting from dissipation by new matter and especially new energy in a form that can be used to fuel processes in contrast to dissipating heat to keep them away from thermodynamic equilibrium i e by actively ingesting energy rich materials either by synthesizing them from inorganic matter and solar energy that s what green plants do or by ingesting other organisms or parts or products of them done by fungi and animals This is the first main part of the strategy i e the main condition for something to be a strategy The second main part is more typically organic Although managing themselves as far from thermodynamic equilibrium structures constantly replacing matter energy losses the material organic individuals instances of the species s strategy are only moderately stable Sooner or later they will slide down into thermodynamic equilibrium i e they will disintegrate So the second part of the strategy made up to keep the very s p e c i e s going is the phenomenon of reproduction resulting in new fresh individuals of the same species these new individuals participating in the same strategy This main part of the strategy is probably the most intricate and subtle one and certainly one of the main conditions for a complex form to be a strategy A large part of the overall strategy of an organismic species is in the form of instructions stored in organic molecules the DNA It triggers at the right places in the body and at the right time the production of the right proteins wherby some of these directly serve as building material of the organism s body and others as start signals to in turn trigger many very specific biochemical reactions resulting in the organism s ability to grow and perform the necessary functions of sensing feeding excretion and reproduction Accordingly much of the species strategy is stored in the DNA which of course itself as a specific kind of molecule suited to store information is also part of that particular strategy In order for such a strategy to develop in the Implicate Order from a non strategy the noëtic chreode canalizing the production must be such as determined by the production rules of FSNSS that by only going up in it a form a string increasingly becomes more able to inform Prime Matter the ultimate ontologic content free carrier or substrate of Form content meaning that while being step by step transformed according to the production rules it eventually becomes c o m p l e t e l y able to inform Prime Matter i e it is able to exist in the Explicate Order it is a strategy And the rules themselves are such that they starting to act on some given original immaterial form an axiom of FSNSS determine their own consecutive order of application resulting in a in the chreode upgoing sequence of theorems the last one of which is a true strategy And we know that the rules the production rules of FSNSS being precisely such that they indeed accomplish such transformations results from the fact that their intrinsic content stems from the Explicate Order Projection of a noëtic strategy string into the Explicate Order in terms of simulation and computation In the practice of natural science mathematics is used to simulate observed natural processes and structures And when the result the simulation conforms with such a natural process or structure that process or structure is said to be understood So what is simulated is the material process or structure and it is simulated by a mathematical model nowadays implemented in a computer which by means of an algorithm a set of computer instructions solves the equations of the model For our theory we can use the practice of simulation to establish an analogue of the projection of a noëtic form from the Implicate Order into the Explicate Order that is the transformation of an immaterial form a mathematical string into a corresponding material form But for this we must turn the simulating simulated relation upside down That is ontologically mathematics does not simulate material processes or structures as it does in science but material processes or structures simulate existing mathematical processes or structures i e immaterial forms In this we may theorize that for a given immaterial form to be fully able to inform Prime Matter is to begin with equivalent to that form being able to materially exist in the Explicate Order and then for this materially existing form i e for the existing material configuration equivalent to actually s i m u l a t e that immaterial form Precisely that material configuration that simulates the immaterial form and is at the same time its simulacrum is necessarily i s o m o r p h i c with that immaterial form and consequently its m e a n i n g significatum So for an immaterial form being fully able to inform Prime Matter is equivalent to this form being such that it can be simulated by a material configuration which in turn is equivalent for it to be able to project into the Explicate Order and so precisely appearing as that same material configuration And if an immaterial form i e a mathematical structure sequence or function can be simulated by some material configuration which we may call the computer then that immaterial form is computable So the computability of this form is equivalent to the fact that it can be simulated by some material configuration And so in turn for an immaterial form to be computable i e to be materially produced by computing that form means that this form can materially exist in the Explicate Order And further for some immaterial form to be computable it must at least be non random it must internally be a true and definite pattern of elements To define randomness in terms of information we might say If an intrinsically r a n d o m immaterial form which form is non algorithmically defined in some way i e a form either just posed or given or described in words that is a form not expressed in computer instructions for example a so given number expressed as a series of digits has more information content than the axiomatic system with which it is associated then that form is random in case of a number as regards the consecutive order of its digits See COVENEY and HIGHFIELD Frontiers of Complexity The Search for Order in a Chaotic World 1995 p 32 34 and BARROW Pi in the Sky Counting Thinking and Being 1992 134 137 Such a random immaterial form is interesting when it is associated with the Formal System of Strategy Strings FSNSS It is then an axiom of this system and being internally not ordered or patterned it cannot be simulated by any material device meaning that it is not a strategy and cannot therefore be projected into the Explicate Order Because every definite immaterial pattern such as a description of something can be encoded by a single whole number it is interesting to ask when a given number is such that it is truly random that is whether its consecutive order of digits is in fact a random sequence A number for example written in binary digits is indeed random if the sequence of 0 s and 1 s is indistinguishable from a series of heads and tails obtained by tossing a coin Each outcome of a coin toss tells you nothing about any future outcomes or past outcomes In such a string of digits there is no Fibonacci like rule telling you how to everytime compute the next digit i e the sequence of digits or in other cases the consecutive numbers of a number sequence for that matter cannot be determined by some recursive function not even by a much more complex one than that what determines the Fibonacci numbers this is a sequence of numbers of which the first two numbers are given 1 and 2 and of which each next number can be obtained by calculating the sum of the two previous numbers This number series is one that pops up in some features of growth in plants The series accordingly is 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 What does it exactly mean that a given number is uncomputable To answer this it is perhaps instructive to give an example of a truly random that is uncomputable number i e a number that does have a non algorithmic definition but cannot be computed on the basis of that definition The number OMEGA as we might call it thought of as written in binary notation which choice is theoretically immaterial is d e f i n e d as follows Given is a so called Diophantine equation with a large number n of variables say 17000 and a whole number Q which could be 1 2 3 4 etc Thus X 1 X 2 X 3 X 4 X n Q where the X s are raised to fixed integer powers is in fact a family of Diophantine equations in which the members are distinguished by the value of Q Now take each value of Q in turn and write 0 if the corresponding Diophantine equation thus having the particular value of Q has a finite number of solutions in whole numbers and write 1 if that number is infinite The result then is a binary string of ones and zeros so if we place a point at the very beginning of the string we indeed have defined a number in this case a number between zero and one By the way this number so defined also expresses the probability that a randomly chosen computer program with a random ly chosen input will eventually stop after a finite number of steps And this probability cannot therefore be known The number just defined has infinitely many binary digits and is called OMEGA And the sequence of its digits is totally random and thus indistinguishable from a series of heads and tails obtained by tossing a coin No machine that merely follows a given rule or program possesses the ingredient of novelty that is required to create the next digit of the sequence So this was an example of uncomputability of a number That is a number that is defined but is nonetheless uncomputable It is uncomputable because its series of digits has no pattern it is fully random Even when some initional series of its digits were known the next digits cannot be computed with the same computer program acting according to the definition of OMEGA For each value of Q in the corresponding Diophantine equation a new approach must be followed to answer the question whether the equation with this particular value Q has a finite or infinite number of positive whole number solutions If we want to know the complexity of a defined sequence of numbers or a sequence of digits each one of them being itself a number of a defined number we ask what is the length in computer bits of the shortest program algorithm that can generate the sequence A particular random sequence of digits or numbers random but nevertheless definite may either be non algorithmically defined such as the sequence of digits constituting the number OMEGA or not defined but simply given such as for instance the number sequence 3 56 6 23 78 which we here indeed give as to its beginning but which is supposed to have been given here in its entirety where entirety should not point to actual infinity but to potential infinity meaning that the series can be extended indefinitely because we see no end In both cases there is no special single rule for generating any one entry from another And the shortest computer program to generate such a sequence can be nothing less than the mere listing i e not the consecutive computation of its members of the sequence itself which is of course not a generation of it If on the other hand the chosen sequence is ordered then the required program algorithm can be much briefer than the given or defined sequence Indeed to give an example the sequence 2 4 6 8 10 12 is ordered and a program can be written to just print all i e as far as we want the even

    Original URL path: http://www.metafysica.nl/wings/wings_8a.html (2016-02-01)
    Open archived version from archive

  • wings VIIIb
    evolution is in our theory nothing else than the successive appearance in the Explicate Order of organismic species and ecological types and the extinction of others as a result of changing ecological conditions This means that earlier species or types are not necessarily more primitive than later ones and this of course makes true derivational directions of forms species and structures much harder to assess Earlier species or types are only ecologically different from later ones Their time of appearance in the Explicate Order is dictated by prevailing ecological conditions only And it is clear that in all this functional characters play a decisive role The derivational direction within a sequence of character states can be read off from the degree of functional adaptation to newly prevailing ecological conditions Insofar as actual construction evolution is concerned it is a construction in each case of a strategy from non strategy stages a construction that takes place not in the mechanical Explicate Order but in the Implicate Order Further it should be realized that the Implicate Order is timeless and spaceless in spite of our dynamical description of it With such a description we only expound aspects of the structure of the Implicate Order And only in the latter Order there exists a teleologic aspect necessary to create functional structures here noëtic descriptions of such structures This teleologic element consists in the Implicate Order s aspiration ontological inclination to have its immaterial forms materialized and thus having its forms to become functional with respect to their existence and persistence in the Explicate Order In this noëtic construction of strategies the Explicate Order does play some part as described And methodically we can get some insight into the noëtic process as a result of the supposed fact that derivational relations existing between structures of different but related organismic species approximately reflect the formal process in the Implicate Order of strategy construction For this to investigate we use polydiagrams as was explained in the previous document Now in the coming conclusion of our noëtic theory of evolution we have realized that in the construction of organic survival strategies the part played in it by the Explicate Order must be greater still than initially assumed We therefore consider the assumed fact of subsequent specialization and also facts of universalization of a newly projected organismic species to be a result of its actual experience in its environment And for this to be true we must conjecture that the initial strategy of a newly projected organismic species is still not yet fully defined or determined This brings with it the problem of determinacy indeterminacy of the Explicate Order i e its modal structure And while inorganic beings such as atoms molecules and crystals seem to be fully deterministic as to their behavior organisms do not and this not being fully deterministic is only possible because they are truly holistic entities i e true substances in the metaphysical i e aristotelian sense see for this Back to Homepage i e First Part of Website But while inorganic beings are such substances as well they have already stabilized their habits i e have already transformed their behavior into true habits which now constitute these inorganic substances intrinsic and constant nature and this in contrast to organisms Indeed organisms must further determine their specific nature or strategy and do this by learning and habit formation during their existence in the Explicate Order And only when new behavior happens to be continually repeated in more and more individuals of the species it can be injected into the Implicate Order and only then as a result of noëtic reactions morphological structures can be adjusted to further sustain in the Explicate Order the new behavior This new behavior and accompanying morphological structures do not however result in a new organismic species but only further delimit its strategy And in the section Habitat and ecological niche we will find out that the initial indeterminacy of the newly projected strategy consists in the fact that in many cases at least the strategy as it is constructed in the Implicate Order is ordered not directly to the species appropriate ecological niche but to the species appropriate habitat which is the broader environment al type in which it at least can live but in which also a great many other species can live The habitat satisfies only the very minimal requirements of such species And as a result of experience and learning a given species may specialize within its habitat by selecting certain not yet exploited resources in it with the help of adapting its behavior and thus by more narrowly defining or adjusting its strategy and so finding at last its proper ecological niche which is now its ecological station within its habitat And it is the interaction in all this between the material organismic species in the Explicate Order and the noëtic strategy content in the Implicate Order that guarantees the eventual but nonetheless temporary stabilization and delimitation of the strategy Injection and projection and formative causation In the previous document we considered the construction or better formation in the Implicate Order of organic strategies and indicated the part therein played by the Explicate Order Indeed while stressing that the Explicate Order cannot create or produce true organic strategies all by itself and thus us having devoted so much attention to the generative processes in the Implicate Order where generative processes in the Implicate Order is just a dynamical way to describe the timeless structure of the Implicate Order Only as seen from the Explicate Order they are processes we realize that the part that the Explicate Order does play in it should be supposed to be a bit greater still This is evident from the nature of all functional structures and instincts present in organisms They explicitly reflect environmental structures and conditions So we may perhaps theorize that strategy contents insofar as they have been constructed in the Implicate Order where this construction was it must be admitted already ordered to explicate order existential conditions and thus this construction being already adapted to fill existing ecological niches are still more or less crude and generalized at the time seen from the Explicate Order of them being projected for the first time That is although such a noëtically constructed strategy is suitable enough to being materialized and able to exist as an organismic species in its ecological niche merely able to exist is still not good enough It must be able to p e r s i s t as well This means that the interaction of the new species i e a strategy being projected for the first time with its environment must be intensified in order to render the strategy complete and perfected and especially rendering it such that competition with other related strategies is avoided And competition can be avoided by specializing within the ecological niche or the other way around by becoming more universal i e becoming less of a fussy eater So in theorizing about evolution we must still more so than we had done before involve existing or having existed ecological conditions and the organisms dealing with them insofar as this takes part in the formation and especially in the perfection of organic strategies And for this to do so it turns out that certain ideas or elements making up the so called hypothesis of formative causation proposed by SHELDRAKE in 1981 and further elaborated in 1988 may when properly adapted to the tenets of our noëtic theory as far as this is fair to do so contribute to our insight in what way precisely the Explicate Order plays a formative role in the creation of strategies As is perhaps well known SHELDRAKE proposes the existence of organizing fields influencing organisms through morphic resonance or being themselves influenced by the organisms also through morphic resonance This looks very much like our projection and injection while the fields themselves look very much like our noëtic strategy contents or strategy strings and while finally the overall behavior of our materialized strategies i e of the individuals of a given organismic species has much in common with SHELDRAKE s stabilized habits However although SHELDRAKE s theory may well account for the features of morphogenesis individual development especially when embryonic development is involved it does not account for biological evolution at least not sufficiently so Nevertheless many ideas in it are useful to supplement our own noëtic theory of evolution And one such idea is about learning In the evolution of life or we might say already in the process of increasing the organism s match with its ecological niche or in its specialization or universalization within that niche learning according to SHELDRAKE plays an important role And also according to him all organisms all plants and animals are able to learn and in contrast to what is held by conventional genetic theory do pass on what has been learnt to the next generation Here we must take learning in the broadest sense and thus not only including behavioral responses but also morphological responses to prevailing environmental conditions What now follows is an argument explaining why it is necessary to introduce in the theory of evolution such controversial notions as learning and inheritance of acquired characteristics It is further considered what precisely the supposed process of making up and perfecting the strategy or habit of an organism means to our conception of the modality of the Explicate Order i e how the modal categories such as it is possible it is real it is coincidential and it is necessary and all their negations do actually relate to each other for instance do they imply each other or exclude each other And then the question of the indeterminacy or determinacy of the real world the Explicate Order naturally comes up SHELDRAKE argues that all laws of nature merely express more or less stabilized habits of things i e they are the result of development of habit This implies that in the Explicate Order at least there is no strict and fixed determinism Such a determinism is only in many cases approximated to However this seems to contradict the modality of the real world the latter as ontologically distinguished from the ideal world of immaterial entities In the real world the Explicate Order if something say A actually exists i e is real it must at the same time be possible But if A is truly possible then the complete set of conditions for it to be possible must be present at that time And if only even one member of this set of conditions is missing then A would be impossible So when A is indeed possible the complete set of conditions for A to be possible must be present But then A not only exists as a result but must exist meaning that A is at the same time necessary it necesarily exists So everything that exists in the Explicate Order at a certain point in time does so necessarily It cannot not exist at that point in time And this means that the real world the Explicate Order is fully deterministic This analysis can be found in much more detail in the book Möglichkeit und Wirklichkeit written by Nicolai Hartmann already in 1938 If qualitatively completely identical individual entities always without exception behave in precisely the same way in everytime identical ambient conditions if identical ambient conditions are at all possible then their behavior can be described as taking place according to a definite and constant natural l a w As such such a law is purely theoretical because the individual cases are either separated from each other spatially or temporally or both implying that ambient conditions will differ And there is good reason to believe that the overall collocation of matter and energy in the Universe as to their distribution is constantly changing from moment to moment So in actual practice the law any natural law whatsoever will not hold exactly but this not holding exactly is merely a per accidens phenomenon The law is as a strict law immanent in all the things for whose behavior it is a law This is the assumption of strict determinism at least as regards things above the quantum level That it is the actual course of things to act in merely an approximated version is extrinsic to it i e to determinism itself indeed because of the changing collocation of matter and energy it does not get the chance to fully express itself But although this assumption of determinacy cannot be tested experimentally because strictly everytime identical ambient conditions cannot be set up by any experimentor is it really just a mere assumption The above argument from existence to possible existence to necessary existence seems formally to prove such a strict determinism to be the case Moreover we may following Aristotelian metaphysics hold that natural laws are in fact descriptions of regularities that take place on the basis of i e as an effluence from the specific intrinsic nature or essence of things that is to say a thing acts and reacts necessarily according to its intrinsic nature So the assumption of strict determinacy boils down to assuming that the specific nature of any given thing is fixed and constant If it changes it is replaced by some other nature and that new nature is not the nature of that same thing anymore but of another thing But this statement is in fact a tautology i e a statement that is always true independently of the truth of its component propositions It says in effect that because the nature of a thing is always the same it doesn t change In the present context a given thing is always meant to be some given individual of a particular species of thing and here a constant nature is presupposed See First Part of Website Back to Homepage in the document on the Species Individuum Structure of things So the constancy of a nature and thus the prevailing of strict determinism is still not more than an assumption an assumption by the way that makes natural science possible at all even when this constancy would only be merely approximated instead of kept to by Mother Nature That is to say as long as a wavering or state of undefinedness of the whatness of things is indeed minimal to do natural science is possible because only then it can base its theories upon repeatable experiments and observations So in natural science the assertion of the immanent or transcendent existence of true laws of nature is based on the presupposition that all things have a species individuum structure where the species aspect is the fixed intrinsic whatness or quiddity of such a thing and where the thing is taken to be a substance in the Aristotelian Thomistic sense i e an entity that ontologically does not need a substrate to carry it and thus an entity that ontologically exists on its own This species individuum structure is quite clear in the case of inorganic things such as atoms molecules and crystals As individuals they are true substances each possessing the essential characteristics of its species And as seen already in the more complex among them for instance in crystals their intrinsic whatness is enveloped as it were by further determinations that are not per se but accidentally added to it as a result of their individual existence many crystals exist as to their shape in a deformed state as a result of the external conditions Snow crystals being just forms of crystallized H 2 O for instance all crystallize in the holohedric Class 6 m 2 m 2 m of the Hexagonal Crystal System as this Class i e the point symmetry described by it is part of their intrinsic and internal form or shape and as such expressing aspects of these crystals true i e intrinsic nature But the external shape snow crystals actually take up during formation is in most cases not that of a hexagonal dipyramid or prism as we meet them in Antarctic snow at all but their external shape is often that of irregular and asymmetric star shaped bodies As a result we here see in crystals in contrast to atoms and molecules the differentiation within a single crystal between 1 the essential qualitative and quantitative structure representing their true fixed intrinsic nature or whatness and 2 the accidental determinations enveloping as it were this intrinsic nature and being replaceable by other such features without altering thereby the snow crystal s intrinsic whatness And this state of affairs is supposed to be present in organismic individuals too Indeed that was Aristotle s very point of departure of his metaphysics So every individual organism is to be understood as a true substance having a specific essence or nature commonly possessed by all individuals of the biologically defined species to which it belongs and having a set of additional determinations that only per accidens have been taken up by the individual substance All determinations that are ontologically called accidents because their way of being is to inhere in contrast to independently exist in substance divide into two groups 1 the so called propria which are determinations that not merely happen to inhere in the substance in question but necessarily with respect to the substance s intrinsic nature do so and 2 determinations that just happen to inhere in it i e their inherence or ontologically being carried is not necessarily implied by the intrinsic nature of the substance having these accidental determinations And it is the latter that I take to be true accidents while the propria are as to their content but not as to their ontology a true part of the intrinsic nature or form of the substance in question And this true intrinsic nature is in the case of organisms in contrast to crystals the substance s strategy to exist describing not only the organism s behavior but also its morphology and physiology insofar as these characteristics are commonly possessed by all individuals of the species In inorganic substances such as crystals this intrinsic nature seems to be as a result of their prolonged existence and thus of their continued repetition well established and well defined and thus well fixed and constant in them that is their behavior has grown into a well stabilized habit already for an immeasurably long time And so as to their behavior they follow natural laws In organisms on the other hand their intrinsic nature is not as in crystals a mere static qualitative structure or content but a dynamic strategy a strategy to materially exist and persist in the Explicate Order In contrast to crystals o r g a n i s m s actively maintain and secure their material existence And by having in the Implicate Order evolved into intricate strategies their material expressions are necessarily highly complex and therefore thermodynamically unstable They cannot afford to adopt a state of thermodynamic equilibrium such as in crystals in order to be stable because that would mean their structural disintegration and demise where then the remains are stable They must keep themselves far away from this equilibrium state and yet remain stable as well as they can And they can only accomplish that actively i e by being themselves a materialized strategy And now it is to be expected that a strategy as developed in the Implicate Order and as such ready to be projected into the Explicate Order is although of course already being ordered to certain existential conditions in that Order still not yet fully worked out As to this we might say actual experience learnt by the newly appeared organismic species in its proper environment i e in its assigned ecological niche is needed for the Implicate Order to be able to supplement and perfect the strategy content A newly i e for the first time projected strategy content results in a new species And the individuals of such a species have a not yet fully defined intrinsic nature That would mean that while crystals are what they are namely either H 2 O crystals NaCl salt crystals or whatnot according to their specific intrinsic nature organisms are apparently not what they are namely either Homo sapiens organisms chimpansee organisms Musca domestica organisms or whatnot according to their supposed specific intrinsic nature i e according to their specific strategy content But isn t it so that any given organism simply is what it is according to even its still not yet fully defined strategy That is to say doesn t any organism behave purely deterministically according to its albeit incomplete intrinsic nature while at the same time also every organism that does possess a complete i e perfected strategy content behaves deterministically according to its well defined intrinsic nature This obviously does away with the necessity to assume a degree of indeterminism in the world of material substances This may be so provided we assume an organism to be a machine like entity i e it metaphysically to be a mere aggregate of constituent true substances in the metaphysical sense These substances together making up the organism are then its constituent chemical atoms or even going still further down into the reductionistic hierarchy the sub atomic particles or wave packets for that matter making up these atoms This is a reductionistic view as regards organisms and such a view is not simply wrong because it is reductionistic or mechanistic for that matter But perhaps it is wrong as many observed facts seem to point to Indeed even already crystals do have some holistic properties as I showed in Fourth Part of Website In star shaped snow crystals for instance there must be some non local connection between the six arms And indeed organisms are held by many authors to be holistic entities par excellence as for instance their individual development embryonic development seems to suggest clearly If so we cannot reduce an organismic individual as to what it is to its constituent parts i e it is not its parts The whole is more than its parts The organism is an holistic entity or being So an organism is a fundamental entity all by itself it is not a mere aggregate of fundamental entities And as such we may then see it as a true substance with its own intrinsic nature It is it is true composed of atoms but has thereby become a true single fundamental being or substance And although its behavior depends in some way on its constituents it is not simply equivalent to the combined behaviors of its constituent atoms Its behavior is not composed but emerges as a new kind of behavior from the structural collection of the organism s atoms And these latter have thereby become virtual atoms instead of real independent atoms i e they have become mere qualities of the organism instead of its constituent particles These particles are not true particles anymore and have lost their substantiality which they still had when they were free and regain when they are freed and are ontologically integrated into the whole i e into the organism which now is the new substance And while the composing now virtual atoms have their nature long since established as being carbon atoms oxygen atoms etc the new organic substance having emerged by these atoms composing an organism and themselves turned from real to virtual has in most cases its nature or essence its strategy not yet fully defined when it has for the first time been projected into the Explicate Order It must further perfect its intrinsic nature as a result of the organismic species continued experience in the Explicate Order in order to remain able to exist in that Order And because this process of adjustment and perfection will never come to a final conclusion because existential conditions in the Explicate Order continue to change organisms will never possess such a fully defined and constant intrinsic nature or habit as for instance crystals do possess it Conventional evolutionary theory expresses this by saying that organisms either become extinct at some time or develop into other species But because the process of speciation is by no means well understood because it doesn t exist and certainly cannot result in and by the Explicate Order in a long term evolution of new species and types by the proposed mechanism of random genetic mutation and natural selection we hold that the part played by the Explicate Order is no more than getting a noëtically produced strategy content to be revised through a specialization of the corresponding same species within its proper habitat see below resulting in it finding in that habitat its proper ecological niche In this we assume that the nature or intrinsic whatness of a newly projected species is still not yet fully determined That is to say the individuals of such a species are substances with only a partly determined essence or nature For this to occur at all such substances must be holistic entities And we take all true substances in the Aristotelian sense to be holistic entities Mere aggregates of constituent substances in the Aristotelian sense i e mere aggregates of atoms and thus such aggregates being fully reductionistic entities do have a definite albeit composed nature and deterministically behave according to that nature And so because all true substances in the Aristotelian sense are not such aggregates but are holistic entities there can exist certain such substances with not yet fully defined essences or natures and these are the organisms So if indeed organisms can be taken to be truly holistic beings like independent atoms can be so taken then we may have cases of a certain degree of indeterminacy to be present in the material world If on the other hand they could legitimately be fully reduced to their atomic constituents i e if their atoms are still real instead of only virtual they would at all times deterministically behave even according to an incomplete i e not yet perfected strategy But as has been said we on this website take organisms to be truly holistic entities Certain versions of their behavior turn into habits as a result of repetition while others do not because not sufficiently often repeated And through injection the noëtic strategy strings are further perfected insofar as bringing with it a revised noëtic description of morphological structures involved in this behavior that is to say only when the strategy content is in the Implicate Order again as a result of injection the new behavioral habit as it is noëtically codified can noëtically react with other elements of the injected strategy content resulting in the morphological and or physiological structures that sustain the new habit And through projection of this revised strategy content now including new morphological details into the individuals of subsequent generations of the species in question the perfected strategy content is thus non mechanically distributed among in an increasing degree so as habituation is strengthening all the species individuals however far apart they may live i e however far apart spatially their morphogenesis may take place We have found out that projection of a noëtically constructed strategy content results in that content to be transmitted or transferred from the Implicate Order into the appropriate ecological niche in the Explicate Order and thus resulting in the transfer of this content to and into the subsequent material individuals together constituting an organismic species By this we mean of course that the strategy content as a result of its projection appears in the Explicate Order in the form of organic individuals of subsequent generations And we may further theorize that such a projection is immediately followed by an injection again of this content back into the Implicate Order And from then on a continued alternation will take place of projection and injection And each time a projection of that content has taken place the noëtic strategy content as it was present in the Implicate Order has now turned into an intentional sign with its content its meaning now being permanently present in the Explicate Order as long as the organismic species manages to exist there This constitutes part of the Implicate Order s knowing the Explicate Order while injection brings back to the Implicate Order new habits i e a revised strategy In this way as generation after generation of the organismic species appears there is a continued alternation of projection and injection between the station of the noëtic strategy content intentional sign and the station of the material individuals generations of the corresponding organismic species revising and adjusting its strategy This means that the Implicate Order is in constant contact through the acts of projection and injection with the changing ecological conditions of the respective organismic species i e it keeps a record of so to say or perhaps better it continually knows of these conditions And on the basis of this knowledge it adjusts perfects and stabilizes the strategies of each one of these species by functional specialization or universalization within its overall ecological niche see for this next section And this means that not only the species strategy becomes more and more defined and stabilized but also its ecological niche i e also the determination and delimitation of its ecological niche All this is directly evident in the case of the species specialization within its niche in fact within its habitat see further down but is indirectly also clear in the case of universalization within the species niche because universalization here does not mean the strategy to be still poorly defined but a strategy ordered in a precise way not to one but to a definite series of targets i e resources in the environment This is for instance the case in a number of calyptrate flies such as the housefly each single species being able to individually develop as larva in a wide range of different breeding substrates The Implicate Order is spaceless and timeless in spite of us having it dynamically described construction of strategies And because its entities are immaterial there are no individuals or individual cases in it In the Explicate Order on the other hand spatially and temporally existing individuals and individual cases are typical of it There strategies are genuinely active through the behavior of the individuals And because the Implicate Order is immaterial and non individual individual events in the Explicate Order cannot influence immaterial structures in the Implicate Order i e cannot be injected into that Order Only when an increasing repetition of a given behavioral change in a given organismic species is taking place i e when a more or less new habit is evolving it will influence the structure of the corresponding noëtically developed strategy in the Implicate Order together with revising or supplementing the noëtic description of the morphological structures functionally involved in the development of the behavioral habit of the species In fact injection into the Implicate Order brings with it this revision of the noëtic description And through projection of the so perfected strategy content it will in the Explicate Order be non mechanically distributed finally resulting in a state or condition of material distribution among the species subsequent individuals This is then the non mechanical inheritance of an acquired habit to subsequent generations of the species And the mechanism of transmission of such a habit as this habit was first developed in the Explicate Order to the noëtically developed strategy content through injection or said differently the mechanism of or the condition for injection of the new habit into the Implicate Order is continued repetition of the changed behavior when the latter becomes established in more and more individuals i e when the new behavior is not individual anymore but becoming specific Only through projection of the in this way further defined strategy content all subsequent individuals of the species will acquire it i e they will inherit it non mechanically Habitat and ecological niche We spoke about specialization within the ecological niche Maybe we should qualify this a bit more First of all an ecological niche is a specific part aspect or station inside an organism s overall habitat A habitat of a given organismic species is the overall environment that satisfies the general and minimal conditions for such a species and for a number of other species as well to live in In it the ecological niche is a precisely defined existential condition for a particular organismic species which condition like the habitat itself may be instantiated in more than one different geographical regions This species can deal with the biotic and abiotic elements of that niche in order to guarantee its continued existence It can do so because it has or is a strategy to get hold of and exploit special resources present in the niche resources that actually realize its prolonged existence These resources consist in means of shelter and in food Most important are the conditions that guarantee reproduction These conditions first of all imply the necessity of the organism to reach maturity and the possibility and opportunity to mate and are laid down or expressed in its morphology physiology and behavior in short in its strategy Its whole strategy as it is commonly possessed by all the species individuals must precisely match the elements of its ecological niche So in contrast to a mere habitat of a given organismic species an ecological niche is defined such that every element in it has its counterpart in the strategy of the species and all elements of that strategy have their respective counterparts in the elements of that ecological niche as it is present in the species habitat Said differently the whole morphology physiology and behavior of the individuals of a given organismic species must reflect all its niche s elements In an ecological niche so defined there are no irrelevant elements Strategy and niche match precisely So we cannot in fact speak of specialization within the ecological niche because that would mean that this niche was not yet properly defined with respect to that organismic species So we d better speak of specialization within the species habitat which comprises potential or actual niches of other species as well And it is the habitat of the species that is the not yet properly defined ecological niche and the species must find in it its own properly defined niche We might theorize then that the for the first time projected strategy content ends up as a collection of material individuals of a particular organismic species a materialized strategy as a rule not directly in its proper ecological niche but in its proper habitat And while being still a crude strategy it can live in it But for guaranteeing its prolonged existence it must however find its own place within its habitat i e it must find its ecological niche And in doing so it i e the species must explore its habitat and eventually set up its precise ecological station inside the habitat And this is precisely what we should have meant by specializing within the ecological niche This specializing consists of increasingly emphasizing a narrower defined behavior ordered to exploit certain selected resources actually present in the habitat among all the other potential resources of that species These chosen resources are precisely those that are not yet exploited in the same way by other organismic species and so by selecting precisely them competition is avoided And as soon as more and more individuals do so their behavior becomes a habit of the species and will upon injection supplement the noëtically constructed strategy content in the Implicate Order including supplementing its noëtic description of the functional morphological structures and of the physiological ones

    Original URL path: http://www.metafysica.nl/wings/wings_8b.html (2016-02-01)
    Open archived version from archive

  • wings IX
    moment is the result of the transformation of the configuration of these qualitatively differing points cells as that configuration was the case in the previous moment And these successive transformations of one configuration of cells s into another is governed by rules of projection from the Implicate Order into the Explicate Order i e CA rules These overall cellular automaton rules are the result of the integration of countless other rules including those that have to do with organismic strategies and also with the constitution and constancy of other Substances as they are being projected into the Explicate Order The concept of discrete but nevertheless gapless voidless space will be expounded by working out an argument against even the logical possibility of the actual infinite physically as well as mathematically And for the successive transformations of qualitative configurations we will refer to the part i e the document having dealt with cellular automatons already in our First Part of Website And only when all this has been done Natural Philosophy including Unimol and the Theory of qualitative Space points we will return to insects their wing types and their evolution now within a more extended philosophical setting and background That is we will turn to what comes next in the present document By now it is spring 2011 and I have finished the documents in present Part of Website on natural philosophy So within due time the reader can expect the left over documents dealing with insect wing types to be finished too Most expressed example of the type Strepsipterygia Figure 1 Stylops shannoni N America Order Strepsiptera male enlarged After PIERCE in RICHARDS and DAVIES 1977 Description of the type Morphological features Here we have to do with an extreme degree of wing heteronomy The front pair is completely reduced and transformed into small appendages totally lacking any significance as a flight organ Great differences exist as to the structure of the middle and posterior divisions of the thorax resp meso and meta thorax The skeleton external mechanical support structure and musculature of the metathorax are notably enlarged significantly exceeding the strongly contracted mesothorax Hindwings very large See Figure and broad and provided with rare longitudinal veins In the great majority of the representatives of the present type cross veins are almost absent The shape of the body usually is fairly specialized mechanically with a large head strongly enlarged thorax and an abdomen that tapers towards its end Body usually small seldom of moderate size The wings are longer than the body See also next Figures Figure 2 Elenchinus delphacophilus Ahlb Stylopidae Sweden Order Strepsiptera Length of body 1 5 mm After ALBERG in ROHDENDORF 1949 Figure 3 Hindwings of Strepsiptera Left Mengea tertiaria Grote Baltic amber Tertiary epoch After ULRICH Middle Xenos sp After MEIGSNER Right Delphacixenos sp After PIERCE All Figures in ROHDENDORF 1949 Functional features The organ of flight is only the hind pair of wings The rudiments of the forewings do not take part in

    Original URL path: http://www.metafysica.nl/wings/wings_9.html (2016-02-01)
    Open archived version from archive

  • wings X
    wings decreasing load per unit surface together with little increase of power of the muscular apparatus Differentiation connections and representatives of the type The chief source of broad wingedness was neuropterygia one of the most primitive and simple types Special forms of broad wingedness also undoubtedly were formed on the basis of orthopterygia straight wingedness of certain cicadas Today broad wingedness has reached a fairly diverse differentiation rendering possible to distinguish several subtypes See also next diagram Figure 2 Interrelationships with other types and structure of broad wingedness platypterygia I neuropterygia XI uropterygia XIII dipterygia X dactylopterygia IV orthopterygia XII ptilopterygia 1 2 3 4 subtypes of platypterygia After ROHDENDORF 1949 1 Proplatypterygia The most ancient forms transitions from neuropterygia are characterized by relatively little broadened but elongated fore and hindwings In addition to that there often are germs of heteronomy consisting of a decrease of the relative size of the hindwings This subtype original broad wingedness or proplatypterygia is the chief source of the other subtypes It is illustrated by the lepidopterans Hepialidae Zeto Phassus and others Cyclotornidae Xyloryctidae and others To the present type also should belong certain Neuroptera Berothidae Berotha Stenobiella See next Figures Figure 3 Wings of Palaeoses scholastica Turn Hepialoidea Order Lepidoptera Australia Wingspan 14 18 mm After TILLYARD in ROHDENDORF 1949 Figure 4 Wings of Berotha insolita Order Neuroptera After COMSTOCK 1918 2 Euplatypterygia Broadening of both pairs of wings transformation of them into triangular blades little disruption of their homonomy slender body with little enlarged head and thorax are the very characteristics of the chief subtype euplatypterygia This subtype is most clearly illustrated by the majority of butterflies Rhopalocera especially Nymphalidae Asciidae Plebejidae certain Papilionidae and others Geometroidea and certain other Heterocera for example Uraniidae See Figure 1 and next Figures Figure 5 Wing venation of Abraxas grossulariata Family Geometridae Order Lepidoptera After RICHARDS and DAVIES 1977 Figure 6 Euploea godarti Male India Family Nymphalidae Order Lepidoptera After BINGHAM in RICHARDS and DAVIES 1977 Figure 7 Wing venation of Tisiphone abeona Don Family Nymphalidae Order Lepidoptera Australia After TILLYARD in ROHDENDORF 1949 To this group also belong certain Neuroptera of the fossil family Kalligrammatidae Figure 8 Kalligramma haeckeli Walth Family Kalligrammatidae Order Neuroptera Jurassic of Western Europe Wing span 240 mm Reconstruction After HANDLIRSCH in ROHDENDORF 1949 3 Diplatypterygia Broad wingedness acquires special forms with the increase of size of forewings and body To this subtype progressive broad wingedness or diplatypterygia belong many diverse groups of Lepidoptera Such for example Lasiocampidae Ocneriidae Limacodidae Pyraustidae certain Noctuidae for instance Catocalinae certain Hepialidae Hepialus Charagia and Cossidae See Figures Figure 9 Wing venation of Malacosoma neustria Family Lasiocampidae Order Lepidoptera After RICHARDS and DAVIES 1977 Figure 10 Wing venation of Anisota virginiensis Order Lepidoptera After COMSTOCK 1918 Figure 11 Wing venation of Bombyx mori Family Bombycidae Order Lepidoptera After COMSTOCK 1918 Figure 12 Wing venation of Thyridopteryx sp Order Lepidoptera f frenulum f h frenulum hook After COMSTOCK 1918 Figure 13 Wing venation of Prionoxystus

    Original URL path: http://www.metafysica.nl/wings/wings_10.html (2016-02-01)
    Open archived version from archive

  • wings XI
    covered with long scales hairs especially long at the margins of the lobes Wing venation rather rare not costalized serving as skeleton of the lobes of the wing The shape of the body doesn t display special aerodynamic adaptations Body elongate with long legs Functional features Flight not yet investigated evaluation of it must be based on indirect considerations Both pairs of wings participate in wing beat thereby do move simultaneously evident from the presence of a special attaching device frenulum Speed of flight and wing beat frequency not known exactly but certainly not great Maneuverability and persistence of flight not investigated Also absent are data on wing beat frequency load and other parameters of flight features These remarkable insects possessing such an unusual wing structure forcing to erect for them a special type undoubtedly realize a flight of a special nature The main features of dactylopterygia allow them to be compared on the one hand with broad wingedness platypterygia and on the other with feather wingedness ptilopterygia In all these types the chief direction in evolution consists in maximum decrease of load per unit of wing surface This was realized in different ways Probably one of the important reasons of these differences were the absolute sizes of the insects that is their weight which is very low in the representatives of feather wingedness large in the type of broad wingedness and medium in the representatives of the present type finger wingedness See also next Figure Figure 4 Wings of Orneodes sp Family Orneodidae Order Lepidoptera After HANDLIRSCH in ROHDENDORF 1949 Differentiation connections and representatives of the type Dactylopterygia as such expressed in only a few lepidopterans namely moths of the families Orneodidae and Pterophoridae undoubtedly is a derivative of certain forms of broad wingedness specifically those that accomplished increase

    Original URL path: http://www.metafysica.nl/wings/wings_11.html (2016-02-01)
    Open archived version from archive

  • wings XII
    beats of the forewings must be considerably higher than that of the hindwings The long ribbon like hind wings of the Nemopteridae are not expected generally to be able to execute beats with the usual for wings amplitude Their motion must be very peculiar The basic physical parameters of flight speed wing beat frequency maneuverability persistence of flight are not known The values of load per unit of wing surface during flight are low and probably a little more than we have it in platypterygia The biological significance of flight is not investigated so it only remains to suppose the importance of this function in the two best known groups the moths Saturniidae and the neuropterans Nemopteridae being for a large part of their life in the air for whom this function plays an important role in the process of reproduction Differentiation connections and representatives of the type It is clear that the well known but not the only source of this type is the platypterygia of the Lepidoptera In the representatives of the chief subtype of platypterygia changes can be observed characteristic of uropterygia and consisting of the formation of narrow appendages tails on the margin of the hindwing Such appendages undoubtedly having a determined aerodynamic significance as propelling devices creating traction force are in certain forms present in up to triple quadruple fashion increase in size and finally surpass the remainder of the body as to length In spite of the relatively low distribution of this type all known representatives divide into three subtypes characterized by different degree of development of the features of this type their greater or lesser specialization 1 Proturopterygia primitive tail wingedness This is a subtype that includes forms directly connected with the primitive type still having broad fore and hindwings the latter carry developed in different degrees outgrows tails as to their size smaller than the remaining part of the hindwing To this subtype do belong a number of lepidopteran genera of the families Plebejidae Papilionidae Papilio s l Thais and Uraniidae See Figures Figure 2 Left Papilio machaon Winspan 34 45 mm Family papilionidae Order Lepidoptera Right Iphiclides podalirius Wingspan 35 45 mm Family Papilionidae Order Lepidoptera After SEVERA in Thieme s Insektengids 1977 3 Europterygia eu uropterygia true tail wingedness This subtype includes some forms of Lepidoptera and Neuroptera such as certain Saturniidae and Papilionidae Leptocircus and Nemopteridae Neuroptera characterized by a transformation of the tails of the hindwings into long narrow appendages essentially making up the whole wing The unchanged broad part of the wing is almost entirely absent being merely the base of the large tail See next Figure Figure 3 Wings of Oliverina extensa Family Nemopteridae Order Neuroptera After COMSTOCK 1918 Figure 4 Nemoptera coa Family Nemopteridae Order Neuroptera Length of hindwing about 38 mm After CHINERY in Elseviers Insektengids 1983 3 Meturopterygia ultra tail wingedness Finally in certain Nemopteridae Croce Neuroptera also the forewings show special transformations They take up a more narrow shape while the transformed

    Original URL path: http://www.metafysica.nl/wings/wings_12.html (2016-02-01)
    Open archived version from archive

  • wings XIII
    The origin of ptilopterygia from various other types let alone as to the different phylogenetic pathways results in a wide differentiation of this type 1 Protoptilopterygia Traits of feather wingedness are least expressed in small Lepidoptera moths of the superfamily Tineoidea and some others in caddis flies Trichoptera of the family Hydroptilidae in psocids Psocoptera booklice and their allies of the family Lepidopsocidae In these insects the forewings have a narrowly elliptical shape with a pointed wing tip The hindwings are even narrower Long hairs are only to be found along the posterior wing margin Venation of forewings fairly rich consisting of many branching veins not displaying costalization shift of veins towards the anterior wing margin or strenghening of the veins in the anterior region of the wing The evident source of this subtype original feather wingedness or protoptilopterygia is neuropterygia and perhaps platypterygia See Figures Figure 2 Perientomum triste Hag Family Lepidopsocidae Order Psocoptera Sri Lanka Wings Length 1 5 mm After HENDERLEIN in RODHENDORF 1949 Figure 3 Hydroptila sparsa Curtis Family Hydroptilidae Order Trichoptera Caddis flies Length of forewing about 3 2 mm After CHINERY in Elseviers Insektengids 1983 Figure 4 Wing venation of Stactobiella ulmeri Silt Family Hydroptilidae Order Trichoptera Length of body about 2 mm Hairs covering the wings not drawn Northern Europe After MARTYNOV in RODHENDORF 1949 Figure 5 Parametriotes theae Kusn Family Coleophoridae Order Lepidoptera Caucasus After KUSNETSOV in RODHENDORF 1949 2 Euptilopterygia The most expressed condition of ptilopterygia feather wingedness we find in thrips Order Thysanoptera See Figure 1 This subtype true feather wingedness or euptilopterygia is characterized by almost homonomous wings being narrow stretched blades supported by a few simple veins Along the margins of these wing blades there are combs of long bristles being longer at the posterior margin Source of this subtype probably also is neuropterygia but then from the earlier most simple of that type s forms See next Figures Figure 6 Melanothrips ficalbii Buffa Family Aeolothripidae Order Thysanoptera Italy Length of body 0 8 mm After BUFFA in RODHENDORF 1949 Figure 7 Phloeothrips coriacea Hal Family Phloeothripidae Order Thysanoptera Europe Strongly magnified After UZEL in RODHENDORF 1949 3 Diptilopterygia Other no less clear forms of feather wingedness we find in the minute parasitic Hymenoptera from the family Mymaridae fairy flies and certain other Chalcidoidea Usually the wings preserve the heteronomous condition typical of their ancestral forms which belong to as to wing type to dipterygia two wingedness The forewings are longer with rudimentary but costalized venation Hindwings narrower and shorter sometimes completely reduced Hairs are distributed in the form of very long combs at the distal half of the wing This subtype of feather wingedness in the Hymenoptera or diptilopterygia certainly is a derivative of the dipterygia of ancestral forms with still four wings having in connection with decrease of size lost active flight See next figure Figure 8 Alaptus sp Family Mymaridae Order Hymenoptera Length of body approximately 0 5 mm After SHARP in RODHENDORF 1949 4

    Original URL path: http://www.metafysica.nl/wings/wings_13.html (2016-02-01)
    Open archived version from archive



  •