TED Conversations

Gad Baruch Hinkis

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

What is the most basic law of interaction between all elements in existence?

if there is such a thing... then what is in common between the planetary, subatomic, social, conceptual, and all types of elements in and out of existence, and their interactions with each other through all dimensions?

i invite you to disprove, improve, or approve my hypothesis, as a collaborative effort to use the scientific method to come with realizations that can help mankind develop a more stable awareness and society.

http://123.writeboard.com/iz3jgo6kyfwlautr/login
Password: open ted

change the document as you please and save it with your name at the bottom.

OR!!! post your own hypothesis!!! :D fun fun fun....

Related Talks:
Topics: complexity evolution existence human cooperation revolution
+1
Share:
progress indicator

  • John Smith

    • 0
    Jun 17 2011: There isn't one. There is four:
    Gravity
    Strong Nuclear Force
    Weak Nuclear Force
    Electricity:

  • Dustin Rodriguez 30+

    • +1
    Jun 8 2011: Increasing entropy, and with it, increasing complexity. Originally, there was a soup of subatomic particles. Gravity pulled them together, forming atoms, which pulled together, forming molecules, which pulled together, forming compounds, then came gasses, solids, liquids, into clouds, to planets, stars, to supernovae forming higher elements, eventually the trillions of trillions of trillions of combinations in space with different compounds produced molecules and their necessary environment to enable them to duplicate themselves and they did so as furiously as they could, forming life, which mutated and reproduced as rapidly as the environment allowed, forming proteins, viruses, and eventually unicellular life, then multicellular, then things with organs, fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals, primates, and humans, which went on to combine into groups, crowds, societies, races. states, nations. At every step, the things which remain across all of these instances, is the combination of diverse forms to produce new forms, always more complicated. Evolution is a natural consequence of the fact that reproducing creatures are limited by their environment, but we don't see organisms simply optimizing for survival. If that were the case, bacteria would be the only things around. They are certainly much more robust and better at survival in every conceivable way than larger organisms, but the drive to complexity is ever-present.

    In order for things to join and create new forms, they must also separate. The complexity of our society would not be possible without the fundamental fact that we are individuals, and the imperfect communication of language permits reproduction with mutation of ideas. As we differentiate from one another, we create further complexity in the landscape and this persists on all levels, filling the universe with entities which are all connected and yet pursuing the increase of complexity in very different ways. I apologize for the hand-waviness

    • Etienne Boireau

      • 0
      Jun 8 2011: I support fully your answer to gad's question. Thermodynamics drives all relationships, and entropy (or for more telling applications: order, information) seems the more significant principle, in the context of our current universe/world/humanship/society/.., explaining the direction in which physical entities associate or not, chemicals react or not (and how, at which rate). In a book, Joel de Rosnay, explains in entropic terms the direction of time, and even the felling we have about time speed. How entropy drives the stability (and evolution!) of any simple or complex system (whatever it is a living cell, a river dam, a town, an country economy, a robot, a theory... )through a flow of energy that is degraded partially, releasing work (entropy maintainance or growth) and heat (enthalpy).
      • thumb

        Gad Baruch Hinkis

        • 0
        Jun 8 2011: i thought entropy measures the constant factor of separation and the growth in chaos
        "Entropy is a thermodynamic property that can be used to determine the energy available for useful work in a thermodynamic process" wikipedia.
        if you are interested in measuring how much energy u can get out of burning coal than i agree its a very useful method.
        but to use this term to explain the formation of life sounds funny to me, figuratively its like explaining the growth in population through examining death rates...
        which is a good example of how science culture and politics are intertwined.

        i thought thats why some ppl invented the term Negentropy, to explain how elements in a system
        influence each other, and turn into a solid pattern.. does entropy explain the formation of genes for example?
        i found this talk about entropy http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/sean_carroll_on_the_arrow_of_time.html
        i will listen to it and hopefully will understand better what you mean..

        THANK YOU SO MUCH!!!!
        peace.
    • thumb

      Gad Baruch Hinkis

      • 0
      Jun 8 2011: oh thank you Dustin :D
      i think i get your point and it is a good one..
      for there to be complexity and life there has to be separation as part of the system.
      i also totally agree that total unity is of the system is impossible and dangerous to think about...
      with that in mind,
      would you say that the environment in the center of the sun, is a place that the forces of connection and repulsion are pretty much balanced? or is there a tendency towards more interconnection due to the fact that there is no place for the particles to escape, and so they have more chance to combine in different ways and create a more complex level of existence..
      another question... does the collaboration of cells and bacteria that form an animal have better chances and longer life then bacteria and viruses such as the ones that cause disease?
      in my eyes there is a difference of culture between the two.
      one is coexisting and collaborative and the other self reliable and aggressive, i am very much interested if there is a difference in stability to the system.
      i think its obvious that without collaboration on any elemental level, it is impossible to bring into existence the next level of structural complexity... THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOU TIME !!! im so happy someone is giving me his thoughts.. apology excepted :) hope you will enlighten me...
  • thumb

    Gad Baruch Hinkis

    • 0
    Jun 2 2011: found an amazing site that is along the same thoughts i am having, but written a 100 times better..
    http://fractalontology.wordpress.com/
  • thumb

    Christophe Cop 500+

    • 0
    TED AttendeeTEDx OrganizerAssociate
    May 31 2011: How about thermodynamics?
    • thumb

      Gad Baruch Hinkis

      • 0
      Jun 2 2011: can thermodynamics be applied to understanding social systems, or human thought ?
      would be amazing for me if you had some links to put here!
      thanks!
  • thumb

    Paul van Zoggel

    • 0
    May 31 2011: You speak german I guess, this is a quote I have seen on the streets of Vienna from Oscar Wilde; “Das wahre Ziel ist, die Gesellschaft auf einer Grundlage neu aufzurichten, die die Armut ausschließt.”
Showing all 9 comments