Abstract
This chapter is devoted to the concept of relational space and analyzes the differences between physics and biology on the use of probability in random phenomena.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In Chance and necessity, Monod states that microscopic processes are explained by quantum mechanics, however he never specifies that it is an intrinsically probabilistic physics and that it is in contradiction with classical physics.
- 2.
- 3.
It is very interesting to quote an excerpt by Leibniz about the concept of space. He wrote to Clarke on February 25th 1716: “For my part, I have said several times that I hold space to be something merely relative […] taking space to be an order of coexistence” (Leibniz and Clarke 2007). See De Risi (2007) and Mugnai (1976).
- 4.
It is important to remind that it is not about removing reduction, rather radically limiting reductionism.
- 5.
“A diffeomorphism is a deformation of space-time that moves all points arbitrarily. […]. The original space-time is thus transformed into another space-time, different from the first, ma which is ‘diffeomorphic’ to it. The covariance of general relativity is expressed as the indifference of its laws to such deformations” (Lachièze-Rey 2008, p. 125). See also Rovelli (2010, p. 62).
- 6.
“A place is the part of space occupied by the body and, depending on the space, can be absolute or relative” (Newton 2008).
- 7.
The fact that the interaction of biological elements is radically different from the one of physical objects will be shown.
- 8.
This concept will be analyzed in the last chapter of this book, see the section The myth of “origin”.
- 9.
Leibniz used this expression to define the concept of space conceived starting from objects.
- 10.
In the last chapter of this part, the crucial epistemological relevance of context and biological contingency will be underlined.
- 11.
Indeed, the second principle (“selection”) presupposes a fundamental variation based on which selection is possible (Darwin 2011).
- 12.
Actually, Kupiec specifies that he does not make “in no way reference to a randomness analogous to the randomness of quantum theory, which would be constitutive of matter. The randomness I’m talking about remains linked to thermal agitation” (Kupiec 2012, p. 51). From the perspective of relational biology, this type of chance is only combinatorial and, therefore, it implies theoretically that it is possible to know a priori all the possibilities. This indeterminacy can only be epistemic.
- 13.
This is a statement posing several mathematical problems, but which owns a strong biological meaning.
- 14.
The fact that space of events must be a subset of space of possibilities implies that, upon rolling a dice, it is impossible to get, for example, 11.
- 15.
It is actually possible to draw examples from classical physics or quantum mechanics because in both of them the complete list of possibilities is known a priori.
- 16.
Based on what it was be just said, Kupiec’s idea of a probabilistic biology, like thermodynamics, becomes at least problematic (Kupiec 2012).
- 17.
In physics linearization can indeed be used, but only if (Lyapunov exponent) \(\lambda \leq 0\) and considering Lyapunov’s time.
- 18.
For different reasons, quantum mechanics calculations prevent from referring directly to objects.
- 19.
A section of next chapter will be devoted to this concept, introduced here just intuitively. Thickness of possibilities will be defined as the measurement of influence of contingency over the sets of biological possibilities (predictable and non predictable) such that the latter ones become liable to enter into domain of reality.
- 20.
Regarding the difference between the notions of enablement and causality, see Longo and Montévil (2013): “In short, a niche enables the survival of an otherwise incompatible/impossible form of life, it does not cause it. More generally, niches enable what evolves, while evolving with it. At most, a cause may be found in the “difference” (a mutation, say) that induced the phenotypic variation at stake, as spelled out next”.
- 21.
Concerning the relation between possibility and reality in biology, see next chapter.
- 22.
It is very important to emphasize the notion of possibility. The next chapter shows that biology is immersed in the realm of the possibility and the concept of “thickness” allow to shift from the realm of possibility to the reality one.
- 23.
Moreover, it is possible to increase the stability of a relational space in order to increase the thickness of introducing certain phenotypes. In this sense, it is possible to talk about processes canalizing the stability of biological space. The fact is that, with respect to biology, this issue develops in the only direction that leads from elements to space…from cells to tissue etc.
- 24.
It is necessary to underline that this approach is very far from Monod’s dichotomy between chance and necessity, according to which order can only come from order.
- 25.
In the next part, these concepts will be deeply developed.
- 26.
It is important to remind that, generally speaking, equilibria and constraints are structured by networks of changeable relations.
- 27.
One part of next chapter will be devoted to the dual role of biological contingency.
Bibliography
Bailly, Francis, and Giuseppe Longo. 2006. Mathématiques et Sciences de la Nature. Paris: Hermann.
Buiatti, Marcello, and Giuseppe Longo. 2013. Randomness and multi-level interactions in biology. In Theory in Biosciences, vol. 132, pp. 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12064-013-0179-2.
Darwin, Charles. 2011. L’origine delle Specie. Torino: Bollati Boringhieri.
De Risi, Vincenzo. 2007. Geometry and Monadology. Basel/Boston/Berlin: Birkhäuser.
Del Giudice, Emilio, and Giuliano Preparata. 1998. A new QED picture of water: understanding a few fascinating phenomena. In Macroscopic Quantum Coherence, ed. E. Sassaroli et al. London: World Scientific.
Del Giudice, Emilio, and Giuseppe Vitiello. 2006. Role of the electromagnetic field in the formation of domains in the processof symmetries-breaking phase transitions. In Physical Review A 74 (2).
Del Giudice, Emilio, Silvia Doglia, et al. 1986. Electromagnetic fiel and spontaneous symmetry breaking in biological matter. Nuclear Physics B 275.
Kupiec, Jean-Jacques, and Pierre Sonigo. 2000. Ni Dieu ni Gène. Paris: Seuil.
Kupiec, Jean-Jaques. 2012. L’ontophylogenèse. Versailles: Quæ.
Lachièze-Rey, Marc. 2008. Au-delà de l’espace et du Temps. Paris: Le Pommier.
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm, and Samuel Clarke. 2007. Exchange of papers between Leibniz and Clarke, ed. by Jonathan Bennet. http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/pdfs/leibniz1715_1.pdf.
Lesne, Annick. 2008. Robustness: confronting lessons from physics and biology. In Biological Review 83.
Longo, Giuseppe, and Maël Montévil. 2013. Extended criticality, phase spaces and enablement in biology. In Chaos, Solitons and Fractals. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Longo, Giuseppe, and Maël Montévil. 2014. Perspectives on Organism: Biological Time, Symmetries and Singularities. Berlin: Springer.
Longo, Giuseppe, Maël Montévil, Stuart Kauffman 2012. No entailing laws, but enablement in the evolution of biosphere. In GECCO Companion ’12. New York: AMC.
Macchia, Giovanni. 2006. L’Argomento del buco di Einstein. Il recente dibattito sull’ontologia dello spaziotempo. http://www.uniurb.it/Filosofia/isonomia/2006macchia.pdf.
Mossio, Matteo, and Alvaro Moreno. 2010. Organisational closure in biological organisms. In History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 32.
Mossio, Matteo, Leonardo Bich, and Alvaro Moreno. 2013. Emergence, closure and inter-level causation in biological systems. In Erkenntnis, vol. 78, pp. 153–178. https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=6da8edfde86656bfJmltdHM9MTY5MzM1MzYwMCZpZ3 VpZD0yNDE1MjQ0YS1mYmViLTY1NzItMzFkNi0zNWIwZmFmZjY0MmYmaW5zaWQ9 NTU0OQ&ptn=3&hsh=3&fclid=2415244a-fbeb-6572-31d6-35b0faff642f&psq=Mossio%2c+ Matteo%2c+Leonardo+Bich%2c+and+Alvaro+Moreno.+2013.+Emergence%2c+closure+and +inter-level+causation+in+biological+systems.+In+Erkenntnis.&u=a1aHR0cDovL2R4LmRv aS5vcmcvMTAuMTAwNy9zMTA2NzAtMDEzLTk1MDctNw&ntb=1”10.1007/s10670-013- 9507-7.
Mugnai, Massimo. 1976. Astrazione e Realtà: Saggio su Leibniz. Milano: Feltrinelli.
Newton, Isaac. 2008. Principi Matematici della Filosofia Naturale. Milano: Arnoldo Mondadori.
Noble, Denis. 2006. The Music of Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rovelli, Carlo. 2010. Quantum Gravity. Cambridge: Cambridge Universit Press.
Sonnenschein, Carlos, and Ana Soto. 2007. The Society of Cells. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1986. Philosophical Investigations. Oxford: Blackwell.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Marinucci, A. (2023). Relational Biology. In: Theoretical Principles of Relational Biology. Human Perspectives in Health Sciences and Technology, vol 6. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-39374-7_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-39374-7_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-39373-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-39374-7
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)