Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   "Ontogeny and Phylogeny" by S.J. Gould
Ben!
Member (Idle past 1398 days)
Posts: 1161
From: Hayward, CA
Joined: 10-14-2004


Message 1 of 5 (208841)
05-16-2005 9:25 PM


Available online (free!), but I'm reading the hard-copy.
I've just started, but it looks like a really promising avenue for understanding heterochrony and to learn about Gould's hypothesis of neoteny governing development of the human brain.
I tried skipping to the neoteny section, but I needed the heterochrony sections. I tried skipping to the heterochrony sections, but I needed the history sections. So now I'm all the way back, and managed to get "forward" to page 40.
I want to have this thread to post some thoughts, especially when I finish. My question for now is, is this book still good, or is it outdated? It's approaching 30 years old now.
Any comments on the book or suggestions as a whole would be appreciated!

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Wounded King, posted 05-17-2005 4:50 AM Ben! has not replied
 Message 3 by Brad McFall, posted 07-07-2005 6:22 PM Ben! has replied

  
Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 2 of 5 (208953)
05-17-2005 4:50 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Ben!
05-16-2005 9:25 PM


If anything the early historical background is possibly the best part of 'Ontogeny and Phylogeny', especially in terms of the relevance of Haeckel and Von Baer to both modern embryology and evolutionary theory, particularly evo-devo.
The book is certainly still good, as in entertaining, informative and well written, but obviously what was then the most recent science is by now effectively historical as well.
Once you've read the book it might be good to look up some more recent work on heterochrony somewhere like PubMedCentral.
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Ben!, posted 05-16-2005 9:25 PM Ben! has not replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5032 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 3 of 5 (222416)
07-07-2005 6:22 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Ben!
05-16-2005 9:25 PM


Is biotime discontinuous?
Ok Ben,
It is time for me to make up my mind on this book!
It has been a while since I have tried this one. Gould seems to feel vindicated in his last tome with the claims of this one.
I suspect but I will check through your on-line link that Stephen must have assumed time as a continuum such that heterochrony can operate at gradually changing rates.
If that is indeed SJ's basis of historical time (ontogeny ratcheting any or all phylogeny) it seems that the truth of Gladyshev's law implies that time is basically discontinuous biologically.
In the early 90s I had reasearched what time meant in biology and I could not find *any* defintions except those that a process depenedent so it would not suprise me if one takes in considering rates of changes as time to be but time arrow etc.
What I have not thought through and I would like to see if this book assists me in doing is, if more than one monohierarichy thermostatically exists (processes changing a given hierarchy obeying Gladyshev's law) this either results in changing Gould's "stair step" into an inclined plane lest it further butress Gould's notion of puncutated equilibrium. I highly doubt the latter.
quote:
THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS AND EVOLUTION OF LIVING SYSTEMS
Georgi P. Gladyshev*
International Academy of Creative Endeavors
San Diego, USA — Moscow, Russia
N. N. Semenov Institute of Chemical Physics, Russian Academy of Sciences
ABSTRACT
The classical formulations of the second law of thermodynamics are presented. Some mistakes in the understanding the physical meaning of this general law of nature are noted.
The above formulations of the second law of thermodynamics are, in a sense, somewhat outside the realm of the chemistry of molecular and supramolecular systems. These formulations may seem to be even farther from biology, sociology, and other sciences that are mainly based on chemistry (both molecular chemistry per se and the chemistry of supramolecular structures), which we perceive as "chemistry around us." Therefore, it is not unexpected that a purely physical (rather than physicochemical) approach to the origin of life, biological evolution, and aging of living organisms has lead to numerous misunderstandingsone might say, even to tragic errorsin life science
I can not decide as of yet.
see also
http://www.endeav.org/evolut/
This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 07-08-2005 09:27 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Ben!, posted 05-16-2005 9:25 PM Ben! has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Ben!, posted 07-19-2005 10:34 AM Brad McFall has replied

  
Ben!
Member (Idle past 1398 days)
Posts: 1161
From: Hayward, CA
Joined: 10-14-2004


Message 4 of 5 (224592)
07-19-2005 10:34 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Brad McFall
07-07-2005 6:22 PM


Re: Is biotime discontinuous?
Hey Brad,
How's it going on this? Made much progress?
I haven't gone back to Gladyshev's papers yet, but I think I'm ready to do so. I've done some refreshers in electricity and magnetism, special relativity, and some good quantum. Plus the biological background stuff I was working on before.
I'd really be pleased if you could talk about the usefulness of defining a "biological time," and what it means for that time to be discontinuous. Do you mean discontinuous as compared to historical time? I assume not, but I cannot come up with anything else that makes sense to me. And I cannot escape me enough to find another possible solution.
Thanks,
Ben

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Brad McFall, posted 07-07-2005 6:22 PM Brad McFall has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Brad McFall, posted 07-22-2005 8:05 PM Ben! has not replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5032 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 5 of 5 (225595)
07-22-2005 8:05 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Ben!
07-19-2005 10:34 AM


http://herpetology.com/1phs30.html
It is going quite well. There do not seem to be many, if any "bumps" in the road map. I will discuss the "usefullness" of DEFINING a biological time but being busy I have not had the time to outline the worst case for my ideas. They really dont develop much. The time would be "discontinuous" (if true) to 4-D space/time. I would be the same "historical" time that Gould obviously attempted to address. I want to investigate a few more "facts" about the lipid content in the context of supposed transistions from amphibians to reptiles before I simply name the conditions of my possible error, the things needed to be for the time to have been seamless with any past, and the model that simulates the same in a slower speed. It seems that Kant's notion that fluids are older than solids (snowflakes etc) might be conceptually equivalent to Gladshev's postulate about the ontogeny and phylogeny of lipids changes if macrothermodynamically ousted water ages temporally with lipid metabolic linkage to particular lingeage expression differently expressed between amphibians and reptiles neotinically.
If the facts bear the weight of the analysis then it might be possible to venture a statement or two about the changes from feathers to hair but let me not state topologicallyb something that IS continuous no matter what the interval would have been that SPATIALLY seperate the relevant hierarchies should indeed there existence is and not a mere "would have been", Ben.
For instance the lipids
epidermatoglypic rasion de etre
structure above might temporally correlate organizationally with needed thermostat parameter changes when the surface is exposed and the possible function of heat generation from sun light is turned off hierarchically.
I will give chapter and verse later. I am busy frameing out a basement in Jersey just now.
This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 07-24-2005 11:44 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Ben!, posted 07-19-2005 10:34 AM Ben! has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024