How two systems interact?

To understand what is life is necessary to know a little more how two systems interact, forming bonds that can grow in complexity, at various levels, metabolic, cellular, organic.

There are basically two forms of interaction between systems, the weak interaction or superficial, and the deep or strong interaction.

In the low or superficial interaction, two systems interact only through their appearance, without changing the whole essence. Thus, for a superficial interaction between systems, we have that the systems in essence remain the same before and after the interaction, changing only their appearances. In a weak interaction, the reagents are kept numerically equal with products. This type usually involve low energy.

The type of weak interaction between systems can be of two kinds;
1-Smooth or continuous, when the reagent systems alter their appearance together in a continuous way. Example, when a body such as a ball, it falls, it loses gravitational potential energy and gains kinetic energy in a continuous way. When an electron is hurled towards another electron, it loses kinetic energy in a continuous way (if it is relatively slow).
2-Discrete, when the reagent systems alter the appearance of a whole batch. Example, when the ball falling to the ground with great velocity, then it suddenly change the direction of speed and momentum. As an electron moves to the "bump up" with another electron. When two billiard balls of equal mass collide in a elastic or conservative collision, ball A on the move, another ball B stopped, after the shock, B enter in motion with the same speed of A, while A is stopped.

Already in deep or strong interaction, when two systems interact, they change their whole essence. The system reagents before the interaction are different to the systems products, after the reaction. In addition to qualitative change can also be quantitative (as well as changing its essence, can change the quantity of systems). In a strong interaction, the reagents are always qualitatively different from the products, but may or not also be different quantitatively. Usually involve large energies.

Regarding the type, the strong interaction will always be discontinuous, as it involves the change of systems. A weak interaction may or may not be discontinuous.

The strong interaction can be classified as to the quantity of reagents and products, such as three types;
1-preserved: when the quantity of systems is keeped the same, before and after the reaction. Although it retains the amount, the reagents remain qualitatively different from the products, which is the main feature of strong interaction.
Examples;
Chemical reactions of simple exchange;




Chemical reactions of double exchange;



Nuclear reaction;
14N7 + 4He2 ---> [18F9] ---> 1H1 + 17O8
An atom of helium react with nitrogen, creating a core of iron unstable, which decomposes into an oxygen atom and a hydrogen atom.

2-multiplicative or decomposition: when the quantity of systems products is greater than the amount of reactive systems.
Example;
Chemical reaction of decomposition;



Nuclear reaction;
107Ag47 + n ---> [108Ag47] ---> 108Cd48 + e-+ n *
An atom of silver is bombarded by a neutron, producing a core consisting of an additional neutron, which subsequently decomposes emitting an electron and an antineutrino, resulting in a core of cadmium.

3-reductive or synthesis: the quantity of systems products is less than the amount of reactive systems.
Example;
Chemical reaction synthesis;

Weak or Superficial Interaction	Strong or Deep Interaction
Occurs when two or more systems interact only changing their appearances, without changing their essences. Maintain the same number of reagents.	Occurs when two or more systems interact changing their essences. The reagents are qualitatively different from the products and may differ or not also quantitatively.
Involves minor energies, or diluted.	Involves high energies, or more concentrated.
Shows continuous changes and / or discrete.	Shows only slight changes or quantum.
As the quantity of product systems, it is always conservative.	As the quantity of product systems, it may be, conservative, multiplicative, or reductive.

A strong interaction may be linked to an weak interaction at a low level immediately below. A weak and discrete interaction may be associated with a strong interaction at a scale immediately above. As we have an interaction between systems, both types of interactions, weak and strong, may occur simultaneously but at different levels. A strong interaction occurs in a high-level, and a weak interaction in sublevel immediately below. Example;
2H + O = H2O

At a molecular level there was a strong interaction, since there was change of reagents and product. There was a profound interaction. In the atomic level, which is a sublevel below, there was an superficial interaction, because the atoms remained the same in essence and quantity, changing only their association.

To understand how life arises, we must understand how the systems can interact forming associations, in an increasing degree of complexity. I will try to address this theme in later posts.

What is ESSENCE? What is APPEARANCE?

To deepen our study of living systems, we need a little more depth in the concept of system itself.

Every system, regardless of their classification on the number of components, has an essence that defines and forms itself. The essence of a system is composed of a minimum set of characteristics that remain stable (they are fixed) and defines it in any situation absolutely. The minimum set is called canonical, as the elements that are part of this set are unique (can not repeat) and are independent of each other. There is no system without the essence that defines it. The essence of a system has a type (which defines a set of values), which is fixed, and a value, which is also fixed.

1-Example of essence; considering an electron, its essence is made by the amount of mass and volume and signal (negative) of their electric charge. Regardless of their position and their speed, an electron will be recognized by these characteristics. Its essence or set of canonical features is formed by its mass and its cargo and its load signal.
2-Example of essence, a bicycle is made up of several parts, which can vary in size and color. However, if a vehicle is characterized by being moved by traction in the human form of foot, and has two wheels, can be defined as a bicycle. Once the simplified essence for the system bike, or its canonical ensemble, is formed by using the pedals, and two wheels.

Appearance is the combination of characteristics of the system that are intrinsic to it, and differs from other systems that have the same essence. They may or may not vary in several ways without changing the essence of it, only the identifying. The appearance is what establish a relationship between systems. For example, when two electrons collide, they change their speeds and positions, changing their appearance to each other. The state of a system is related to their appearance. The appearance of a system has a type (which defines a set of values), which is fixed, and a value, which may or may not be fixed.

Example-1, an electron may have several positions and speeds, while being an electron (while maintaining its essence, its mass, charge and sign of charge.). Their positions and speeds will depend on the positions and velocities of the observer.
Example-2, a bicycle can have various colors, sizes and models, but will always be a bike to keep its essence (traction for pedal and two wheels). The color, size and model does not define the bicycle system, only help to identify a bike in the middle of others.

Sometimes it can be extremely difficult to define whether certain characteristic of a given system is part of its essence, or its appearance.

Any system to be defined, must have an essence, but not necessarily an appearance. A system that has no appearance, only its essence, can be an absolute or Platonic system, ideal system, or idealized. Such a system may exists only theoretically.
Generally, any system has an essence and an appearance (minimum set of properties that are part of the system, identify, but not defined and can vary, as its essence does not change). Example, the bicycle system, has essentially [(pull a foot, two wheels)] defined, and look [(color, thickness of the tire, type of material, spatial position)], which may take different values. The color property of all appearance, for example, can take several values, blue, black, white, pink, red, etc.. However, the system will be the bicycle bike system, no matter the color.

Essence	Appearance
Characteristics that define the system.	Characteristics that are part of the system, but not defines it, only identifies it.
Immutable. If the essence of the system 1 switch, it becomes the system 2.	Can be fixed or vary in a certain range, limited or not, values can be continuous or not. Can be added or lost, without affecting the essence.
There may be a system with just essence and without appearance.	There can be no system that looks (appeanrance) only, without substance, essence.
Defines what is the boundary of the system.	Defines which forms the border may have, without changing its substance.

The whole appearance of a system may include features changing. However, some features are more easily changeable, and unstable or volatile, than others, which are more stable.

Example, a car has a joint appearance [(color, model, manufacturer, speed)]. The feature more volatile or easily changeable, is the speed of the car. The second most volatile is the color that can be changed but demand effort and money. The other features, although features essentially fixed, are part of the joint appearance, they did not define the system car, are not part of its essence [(traction motor, four wheels)].

As to the essence and appearance, the systems can be classified as similar, identical and different.

Similar systems are systems that have the same essence (canonical set of properties that define), but different appearances (additional features that do not define, identify only). Example, two bicycles, one black, the moutain bike, and one red, common. They are similar, therefore belong to the same general class of systems, called bike (has the same essence). Similar systems are also known as systems of same type, as they have the same essence.

Identical systems are systems that have the same essence and the same appearance. Example, two bikes of the same color, black, the same type, etc.. It should be emphasized here is the difference between identical systems and systems absolutely identical. For example, I can have two equal bicycles, yet they have a characteristic that makes them absolutely not the same: they do not occupy the same position in space simultaneously, or do not occupy the same point in space-time! Once we have that absolutely identical systems are systems that have the same essence, the same appearance and occupy the same point in space-time! An example of a system like that is a group of bosons, as two or more photons, for example, occupying the same space simultaneously. They do not lose their individuality because each remains in its package of energy, despite being in the same position. That makes the energy density in this point of space be greater, because we have more then a photon. Maybe at the beginning of the universe, in the Big-Bang, all systems were of the type absolutely identical, and occupying the same single point of space-time, and then began to differentiate.

Different systems are systems that have different essences, although they may look the same (equal appearence). Example, a bicycle and a motorcycle (do not have human traction).

Therefore, the appearance serves to identify a particular similar system from the others.

Classification of a System as the essence and appearance
Similar	(same essence, look different)
Identical	(same essence and appearance)
Different	(essentially different, although it can match the appearance)

What is energy? A Divine Element?

There is an element that is one of the most mysterious of the universe. It is indestructible. Moreover, it can not be created. Can only be processed in different ways. Is there ever. Everything that exists is made by it. Until the time and space. Even you and me. Qualities are divine, because God can not be created nor can be destroyed, and from God all things are formed. But that element of what I'm talking about is not God, but has some similarities. I'm talking about energy.

Energy is defined as the ability to perform work, which it is a somewhat unsatisfactory definition, I would say. Indeed we must admit we still do not understand deeply what energy really is, but we can already list some of their characteristics. This is a basic summary of what is known about energy.

Energy is an entity that we know only some of its properties. From what we know so far, its total is constant, can not be created nor destroyed, only transformed from one type into another. Maybe the universe has already born with a constant amount of energy. From what we know so far, this quantity does not increase or diminish with time. The initial amount of energy was suffering successive divisions, forming all the elements known, and even the unknown by humanity. Thus, each atom, each particle represents a fraction of the initial fixed amount of energy of the universe.

I re-address this issue in detail later, but I can say is that time and space are intimately related to the concept of energy. The space is created for the distribution of energy, and time, the variation on this distribution. As I said, this desearves be studied further in future posts. One question that remains open is: where did the energy comes from? What or who created it? I am inclined to say that the energy comes from God, and therefore shares some of its characteristics.

Among the forms of energy, we have the heat, the gravitational, the electromagnetic, etc.. The mass of a body can be considered as a kind of concentrated energy, because of relativity of Einstein we know that mass is equivalent to energy, by the formula below;



Once the energy has a variety of types, as many as are the types of force. The concept of force is closely linked to energy. Force can be defined as of energy transfer rate between bodies.

I must stress that as far I know, from all theories about the origin of the universe, absolutely NO ONE explains the origin of the energy! Please correct me if I'm wrong! The Big Bang explains how the space and time and everything else was created from a highly concentrated energy, but does not explain the source of energy in itself!

A crucial point that stands out is that energy seems to be the link between the kinds of systems, and could not fail to be, it is also essential for life.

What are the BASIC BRICKS of matter?

UNIVERSAL ATOMIC SET

Imagine a universal system, which is divisible into subsystems. The minor subsystem in which it can be subdivided, will (be) a fundamental unit system. If there are only one fundamental system unit, the atomic set (atom comes from the Greek, which means indivisible, till we find that the atoms of chemical elements were divisible ...) of the universe will be formed only by this single element. Otherwise, we have a greater atomic set, and may even be infinite.

If the atomic set is infinite, our universe would necessarily also be infinite. If it is finite, our universe may or may not be infinite.

If the universe is infinite, but its atomic set (the elements that make up matter and energy, space and time, are in fact only one or a limited number) is finite, then there must necessarily be infinite copies of all atomic fundamental units.

Could there be a universe without any atomic set? Without any basic brick, or fundamental atomic set?


Theoretically yes. This universe would be one of two options. 1 - Or would be a unitary universal system (all universe would be an unique indivisible system, already reviewed in the system) and would be a static system whit no change (there are not time, because there are not many internal or external states that it could move to, only the unique state possible that makes the system!). Maybe our universe has been so early in the Big Bang. 2 - Or would be a system forever divisible, without any evidence base, as any internal system would be capable of division. We know that our universe is not the first option, because we are here now. A priori, this would be an option not possible for the existence of life, because life is essentially dynamic. We have then basically three models of the universe; 1-without atomic bricks (forever divisible), 2-a universe with limited atomic bricks (finite), or 3-with infinite atomic bricks. At first glance, any one of these models would be capable of generating compounds and complex systems, such as live systems are about.

Possible atomic sets for a universe
No atomic set (only one unitary universal set)	No atomic set (forever divisible)	Limited atomic set (finite)	Unlimited atomic set (infinite)

Possible Atomic Sets for a living universe
No atomic set (forever divisible)	Limited atomic set (finite)	Unlimited atomic set (infinite)

If our universe is really forever divisible, we can choose an arbitrary division limit for an atomic set, and take the systems obtained so far as the atomic set of our universe. So we can now fall or in the case of a limited atomic set (finite), or unlimited (infinite). This choice of division lie in our technological limitations, as well as theoretical. To the Greeks, the "atoms" were the chemical elements. Then came the electron, the quark, the muon, etc.. These are now our atomic set. But if we could break the quark? Another question arises. There would be a scale of measure in which it would be preferable to the existence of life? Or the intelligent life? (I remember now the movie MIB, in which men in black suits have to protect a jewel, which is inlaid in a whole galaxy of some alien civilization). I will try to analyze this question in other article, before we have to know how the systems interact with each other.

Pratical Options for the Universe regarding the existence of life
Limited Atomic Set (finite)	Unlimited Atomic Set (infinite)

The fact that an atomic set be unlimited (infinite), means that all its units components have unique properties, that can not be broken, or multiple, of any more fundamental property. I will try later to examine what that might mean. We must also examine how the various atomic systems interact to create composite systems, which is a topic of high importance for the creation of life: the connectivity between systems!

What is the difference between a living being and a non-live thing?

SYSTEM

To learn more and differences in categorical system of a live and a non-live system, we must first understand the system by saying that, what its various possible types, and interact with each other, and classifies them and ordering them. Reasoned about it, I came to the following conclusions;

General definition of system; is formed by a boundary that separates down the middle internal (object of study) of the external environment.




Example of a general system.

A system can be classified into several basic types based in the number of components and states; universal, unitary, composite.

Universal system, is the system that covers everything. Its boundary is infinite. In this system there is no way "outside". It can be decomposed into other compounds or systems units, but can not itself be part of any system composed, since by definition, there is nothing outside it. The system is the universe itself.

Simple unitary system, is the system that can not be decomposed into any other system smaller. It consists of a single and indivisible, even if that element has several characteristics that differ from the external environment. To be simple, not wanting to consider is that the system is easy to understand, but merely that it is formed by a single element. A unitary system has no simple variation of internal states, only external change in status, since by definition it is indivisible, and not have different internal configurations. If we consider that an electron is an indivisible particle, it would be a simple unitary system. However, if it is divisible, it would be a compound system, which is defined below.

System composed, is formed by at least a combination of two or more simple systems unit. Systems can also be formed consisting of two or more systems compounds. Among the elements that compose unit, there is necessarily a kind of interaction. An atom consists of electrons, protons and neutrons is an example.

System´s Classification
Universal	Unit	Composite

You can have a universal unit system (when the entire universe is composed of one element and that element is indivisible). This system would be essentially static, as a unit is indivisible and has no internal states (different internal configurations), it just could have outside states, and yet a universal system has no external states by definition, because there is nothing outside it. You can also have a universal compound system (when the whole universe consists of finite or infinite, components or systems unit and / or compounds). In this system, there are only internal states. I think that is the case of our universe.

How could we classifie the living systems?. We then further discussion on our systems issue. Some questions arise, there would be a simple single unitary system, which would form all other systems of the universe? (The old question of the Greek atom). Or there would not be only one, but a set of simple systems units, which can not be decomposed or transformed in each other? If there is more than one, forming a set of bricks of matter and energy, this set is finite or infinite? I will try to examine some of these issues in future articles, as well as some of the consequences of possible answers.

What is Life?

My intention in this paper is to discuss and understand what life is, how it is, what are its basic elements, its essence. How can we know whether a process or thing is alive, or is merely a physical normal process? What differentiates a common physical system, a physical system that they say alive? We can recognize and list these characteristics? Whereas a living being as a system of study, it is of particular in relation to a physical non-living? A machine can often behave in ways similar to a living being, and yet it is known that a machine is not alive. There are real assembly lines in which their own machines or robots are used to build other robots. If you build a machine capable of reproducing itself, we could say that it became alive? If not, it would not be alive? What exactly distinguishes a living being? Of biology, it is a huge variety of living beings in the earth. We humans, mammals in general, birds, reptiles, fish, plants, the worms, bacteria, the plankton, fungi, the lichens, etc.. All are living. The largest to smallest, the simplest to the most complex, all exhibit characteristics that make them are classified as living beings. What are the characteristics of life that are shared by us, by worms, and even by plants by bacteria? Life is based on some kind of physical process and / or mathematical subject knowledge and study of the man? Or life is a metaphysical essence, and out any range of physical and mathematical laws, and beyond the reach of human understanding? The man will one day create artificial life? There may be other ways of life using other elements, different elements used by life on Earth? There may be life without water, oxygen? Could there be life in much higher temperatures (400 degrees, 1500 degrees), or much lower (-200 degrees), if the forms of life were based on different elements? What characteristics of life prevents it from there if it were not based on carbon, water and oxygen? Will could not have different ways of life, using different elements, living in different ways, of which we are familiar?

For these questions can be answered categorically, we need greater understanding of what life is. Until today no one ever proved that life could only be using the chemical elements known on Earth, the physico-chemical conditions known on Earth. I would not, a priori, to defend the existence of different forms of life. I am just saying that the universe is immense, with several planets and stars with the most diverse elements, with the most varied physico-chemical conditions of temperature, pressure, pH, etc.. Extremists. Even on Earth, many scientists are surprised by the discovery of bacteria that live at high depths, without light, feeding chemically of volcanoes in the depths of the ocean, others living in environments of high salinity, even in other environments with high pH, and others who live in extremely high temperatures, almost to the boiling point of water. How can we be sure that life can not exist under different conditions of the Earth? We may one day have that certainty? It is in search of answers that employ this day. I ask you, friend reader, to contribute with your comments and ideas about the pursuit of understanding, which in my opinion, is the most important problem throughout the history of mankind.

My definition of life is:

A dynamic process that manipulates matter, energy and information, to keep itself in time and space.

One of the implications of this definition is that to really understand what is life, one must have an accurate understanding of what is matter, energy, information, time and space. A difficult task, which however should be very rewarding.