Category Archives: computer science

Biological, Biological matter, biological systems, citizen science, citizen science 1.0, citizen science 2.0, citizens, computer science, e=mc², earth, EARTH@WORK, Emergence, empirical theory, energy, Engineering, Future, language, Life, Life@Work, Municipal Processes, Nature 1, Nature 2, Non-biological matter, non-biological systems, oksimo software, Philosophy, Philosophy of Science, PHILOSOPHY@WORK, Roles in Life, Roles of Life, sustainable empirical theory, SW@WORK, the Biological, To Bring into Language, worldview

WHAT IS LIFE? WHAT ROLE DO WE PLAY? IST THERE A FUTURE?

Author: Gerd Doeben-Henisch

Changelog: Jan 17, 2025 – Jan 28, 2025

Email: info@uffmm.org

TRANSLATION: The following text is a translation from a German version into English. For the translation I am using the software @chatGPT4o with manual modifications.

CONTENT TREE

This text is part of the TOPIC Philosophy of Science.

CONTEXT


This is a direct continuation of the preceding dialogues since December 25, 2024 (see entries numbered 177 – 182).

INTRODUCTION


Ultimately, the path to today’s text leads from the first entries in the Philosophy Blog of the author (initially in 2007, then from 2009 onward) through all subsequent posts to the present day. The guiding theme, “Philosophy Now: In Search of a New Image of Humanity”, aptly reflects what has transpired. The posts on Philosophy blog document a search for those “images of the world and ourselves” that best illuminate the structures characterizing our existence over time on this planet, in this universe. For a long time, it was unclear whether an answer could be found. The many disparate images of humanity and the world seemed too fragmented: in art, in religious worldviews, in economics, in the natural sciences, in the humanities, and even in philosophy itself, which considers itself the “most fundamental perspective” from which to view and analyze the world.

It should not go unmentioned that among the many other blogs the author has filled with texts over the years, at least two more are worth noting:

First, there is the blog “Integrated Engineering and the Human Factor”, which began in 2003 with the publication of the author’s lectures. Over time, it became increasingly focused on specific topics closely aligned with computer science, engineering, and the philosophy of science—especially the relationship between humans and machines, including artificial intelligence.

Second, there is the blog “Citizen Science 2.0”. Launched in 2021, it explored the transition from “traditional citizen science” to “Citizen Science 2.0” in connection with an expanded concept of “empirical theory” into a “sustainable empirical theory”. The development of this theoretical concept ran parallel to the creation of an innovative software tool called oksimo, which allows users to describe complete sustainable theories in plain text (in any language) and simulate these theories at the push of a button. This new “view of things” emerged from applying the “Integrated Engineering and the Human Factor” theory to municipal processes in which citizens seek to understand and plan their world collaboratively.

While these three blogs with their different themes always seemed to be somehow interconnected, it was only in the past two years—since spring 2023—that these topics increasingly converged. This convergence revealed a single, overarching perspective in which all themes found a new “conceptual home”, where nothing seems insignificant, and a process is emerging with a force and richness that surpasses anything previously known in human history.

This expansive new perspective will be described in more detail below.

WHAT IS LIFE? First Steps.


There is a well-known saying, “A picture is worth a thousand words.” However, as the following example will show, when dealing with a highly complex subject, a single image is not enough. Still, it may provide the reader with an initial “framework” that can serve as a reference point, allowing the unimaginably complex concept of “life” to take shape in its first outlines. Have a look to the image at the beginning of this text.

The Complete Picture Consists of Four ‘Elements,’ Each Representing a ‘Logo’ and a Corresponding ‘Theme’:

  1. “Life@Work. It’s All Inclusive”
    This primarily represents biological life on planet Earth. However, as the discussion progresses will proceed, it will become clear that biological life cannot be separated from the other areas. The deeper we delve into the phenomenon of life, the more evident it becomes that everything forms a “dynamic unity” that is ultimately breathtaking.
  2. “SW@WORK. Expand Our Thinking”
    This intentionally does not refer to AI but rather to Software (SW), as all AI is, at its core, an “algorithm”—a piece of software capable of controlling “standardized machines” (computers). The fact that the “behavior of such standardized machines” can appear very human or intelligent to users (such as us humans) does not change the reality that this externally observable behavior is internally based on very simple computational operations. These operations lack almost everything that characterizes biological systems.
    Nevertheless, living beings can use such standardized machines in various ways to “extend their own capabilities.” It may even be argued that known life forms—particularly the species Homo sapiens—will likely be unable to face emerging futures without leveraging this technology. Conversely, these standardized machines alone will not survive any future, not even remotely.
  3. “EARTH@WORK. Cradle of Humankind”
    This represents planet Earth and everything we know about it. The existence of this planet was, in fact, a prerequisite for the development of biological life as we know it. Only in recent years have we begun to understand how known “biological life” (Nature 2) could “emerge” from “non-biological life” (Nature 1).
    On deeper analysis, one can recognize not only the commonality in the material used but also the “novel extensions” that distinguish the biological from the non-biological. Rather than turning this “novelty” into a dichotomy—as traditional human thought has often done (e.g., “matter” versus “mind”)—it can be understood as a “manifestation” of something more “fundamental,” an “emergence” of new properties that point to characteristics inherent in the “foundation of everything”—namely, energy. These characteristics only become apparent with the formation of increasingly complex structures.
    This new interpretation is inspired by insights from modern physics, particularly quantum physics in conjunction with astrophysics. It suggests a broader interpretation of Einstein’s classical formula e=mc² than is typically considered (summarized as Plus(e=mc²)).
  4. “PHILOSOPHY@WORK. Everything is Object”
    This represents the perspective through which the author of this text attempts to bring the complexity of the experienced world (external and internal) “into language” using the expressions of a particular language—here, the English language. The seemingly simple phrase “to bring something into language” belies the inherent complexity of this task.
    It will therefore be necessary to more precisely describe the act of “bringing something into language” to make transparent why the following content is communicated in the way that it is.

LITERATURE NOTE

(Last change: Jan 28, 2025)

Up to the above text (including its continuations), I have read many hundreds of articles and books, and of course, I continue reading all the time. 🙂

In doing so, I came across Fritjof Capra’s book again, The Web of Life: A New Scientific Understanding of Living Systems, completed in 1996 and published in 1997 by Anchor Books, a division of Random House, New York. In 2025, this book is (29)28 years old. And when you look at today’s worldview, this book still seems “revolutionary.” While “light texts” today spread like wildfire through social media, texts that require thoughtful engagement encounter an “invisible wall” that prevents these ideas from penetrating us.

This is not new in human history; on the contrary, it seems as if we, as humans, have a “built-in inertia mechanism” for the new, at least when “mental effort” is demanded of us. This has always been the great opportunity for “populists,” and it doesn’t seem to be any different today…

Continuation

For a continuation see HERE.

computer science, cultural level, everyday language, everyday MITM, Guenter Wagner, Günter Wagner, instruments, international standards, local standards, man-in-the-middle, man-in-the-middle (MITM), mass spectroscopy, measurement process, measuring instdruments, newspaper, real properties, standards, technology

Guenter Wagner : Man-in-the-Middle

eJournal: uffmm.org
ISSN 2567-6458, 27.December 2022 – 29.December 2022, 11:00h
Email: info@uffmm.org
Author: Gerd Doeben-Henisch
Email: gerd@doeben-henisch.de

CONTEXT

This text is part of the text Molecules and Atoms. Late Encounter with Günter Wagner: The ‘man-in-the-middle’.

‘Man-in-the-Middle’

In computer science the expression ‘man-in-the-middle’ is well known as a term to describe someone who is ‘in the middle’ between two parties which are communicating with each other. The ‘man-in-the-middle’ is in this setting not ‘known’ to the communicating parties. They think they are communicating directly with each other.[1] But this situation of someone ‘in the middle’ between a ‘receiver’ and a ‘sender’ is very common outside computer science too.

When you read a text in a newspaper, the letters of the text you read are not the ‘events ‘about which’ the text wants to report. Between the intended target of the text and the printed letters there is a long and complicated chain of events, which all together are generating a translation from some ‘events out there’ into the expressions of a text which is send out to you as the reader of the newspaper. This long and hidden chain of events is not visible to you as the reader.

While the ‘man-in-the-middle’ in case of a communication with connected computers is understood as a hostile action, in normal life all these different kinds of ‘man in the middle’ are necessary to enable a sufficient communication between an event and you as a ‘reader’ of the transmitted messages.

A special type of communication is the transmission of ‘real properties’ of the real world to researching people during a so-called ‘measurement process’. To understand this a bit better let us have a look to everyday situations which are known to us.

If different persons want to talk about a certain ‘property’ of the real world with the aid of ‘everyday language’ then this can quickly become difficult because the ‘meaning’ of the expressions of our everyday language is not objectively defined in a precise way. When we are sitting at the table during breakfast and you ask someone whether she can pass you ‘the butter’, then the other person usually can associate the expression ‘the butter’ with some object on the table, if there is ‘only one’. But, if there are two different objects which ‘usually are understood’ as being classified as ‘butter’, you would need some additional ‘distinguishing properties’ to be able to decide ‘which one of them’. And if you would receive a phone call while you are sitting at the table and you would — by some reason — talk with the person of the phone call about ‘butter’, then the ‘meaning’ of the expression ‘butter’ could be very broad.

At first glance one could qualify this ‘fuzziness’ of the meaning of everyday language expressions as ‘weak’ or even as ‘bad’, but in the everyday world it is a great achievement to work with only a few words to be able to talk about an almost infinite number of things, properties. This is possible if the situation referred to is sufficiently known to all participating speakers.

Human societies have grown considerably over the past thousands of years, and daily living situations have become increasingly diverse. If you want to sell a certain amount of flour in the market at a certain price, and you travel to different markets, then it would be good if in all markets the ‘quantities’ and the ‘prices’ were the same. It is therefore no surprise that such situations led to the introduction of local ‘standards’ through which the general idea of ‘standards for measuring’ became visible: You have something you want to measure (e.g. the volume of the ‘flour’) and you have a ‘volume standard’ (e.g. a ‘regional certified container’), which will be used to ‘measure’ a certain ‘amount’ of such certified container-volumes.

As we know, this trend to introduce ‘standards for measurement’ has evolved during the times until we have today a global system of such standards.[2,3] Thus, to measure today some property of the ‘real world’ encoded for communication in some kind of ‘language expressions’ you have to associate your language with such ‘measurement standards’ which are glob ally accepted as well as accepted in your country.[4]

In what follows the author of this text will look a bit more in the topic of ’empirical measurement’ realized with the aid of a ‘measurement process’ which is using instruments (= measurement machines) which are able to support ‘mass spectroscopy’. This philosophical investigation will use the experience of a man who has nearly his whole life dedicated to the theory behinds such measurement process, to the development of the technology enabling mass spectroscopy, and who also has actively promoted divers application scenarios; many years he was also a ‘net-worker’ between many research groups (including teams of Nobel-prize winners), scientific and national institutions, small and big companies, and even political missions in the realm of Nuclear Non-Proliferation treatises around the world.

Encountering this broad view of enabling processes of measurement can hopefully show that these processes are not less important than all the end users of such measurement processes. But in the ‘history of events’ these — often wonderful — ‘men-in-the-middle’ have usually no reporter. This is bad in more than one way. The most important bad effect is, that a society is in danger to forget about this dimension and will probably not ‘educate’ enough young people to be able to ‘keep the cultural level’ high enough to continue with technology and science. Cutting the legs of men (cultural education) makes them immobile …

COMMENTS

wkp := wikipedia

[1] The ‘Man-in-the-middle’ attack: wikipedia [EN]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man-in-the-middle_attack

[2] International System of Units, wikipedia [EN]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_System_of_Units. See also ‘derived units’: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SI_derived_unit. Another often used concept, which is not part of the SI-system is ‘parts-per-notation’ relating to a ‘dimensionless’ term: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parts-per_notation

[3] International Bureau of Weights and Measures (French: Bureau international des poids et mesures, BIPM), see wkp [EN]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Bureau_of_Weights_and_Measures

[4] Usually there exists besides the global institute for measurement [3] a national bureau of measurement like the NIST in the USA. See for a first overview wkp [EN]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institute_of_Standards_and_Technology