カテゴリー: English

When I was an elementary school student, I learned it on science encyclopedia. Mr. Robert Brown, a botanist, born 1773, found the phenomena.
He observed through microscope a strange movement of pollen on the surface of water. He, then, verified that it is not driven by something of biological.

Several scientists or academics have attempted to build a theory and mathematical model of this strange phenomena, namely Thorvald N. Thiele, Louis Bachelier, Albert Einstein and Marian Smoluchowski.

For something looks like random, a theory and mathematical model, is it possible?
Yes! Possible!

One of our teachers (I call him so on my own selfishly) Mr. Einstein, applied “probability density function”. Probability! Once I had an impression of ambiguous with it but actually having grown through a life of an engineer, I can somewhat share a degree of rationality in applying probability.

To my surprise, by Mr. Einstein’s theory determined are the size of atoms, and how many atoms there are in a mole, or the molecular weight in grams, of a gas. Mr. Einstein once stated that God doesn’t play dice. But then what about Brownian Motion?

If such process as calculation of the size of atoms etc. works properly even with probability, then there is nothing like “dice” in the process. Hereunder being put is the reference to an equation on Brownian motion from the famous Wikipedia

That famous discussion on quantum theory was won by Copenhagen. Then the concept of probability in quantum physics has been “temporally” accepted though many academics are still thinking of it as an issue, saying that maybe another further sophisticated way rather than relying on probability can never be ruled out.

In the above reference equation, you see symbol Φ as probability density function, which was also the main focal point in that discussion on quantum theory. In Schrödinger equation, Φ symbolizes wave functions of the electron and it does not say exactly the location of an electron rather describes what can be observed. In this regard, introducing probability gives us a degree of rationality.

So, let’s return to the topic “Brownian Motion”. In the phenomena, atoms intermittently hit the pollen. So many patterns of hit and run. At that time, when I found it on scientific encyclopedia I thought that it might be possible of air flow rather than movement of atom.
Also I was wondering that how Mr. Robert Brown was getting aware of it as something worth enough to consider. Anybody may even not notice it!

Indeed, I have forgotten about “Brownian Motion” until I have recently surfed websites about Fractal for my blog. https://rinotaka84.com/2022/06/17/fractal-geometry-everywhere-nowhere-whenever-but-obscured/
Now, knowing it as rational problem-solving-process and his marvelous sense of exploration, I will add Mr. Brown as one of my teachers selfishly.

Yes, I have just found it wonderful the science is. In Japanese “Omoroy-yan”.

I know that there are some people who attempt to apply the theory of Brownian Motion to economy. Do they want to make a lot of money? In physics, it is utilized of course with other law of physics as basic conditions, such as conservation law. Do they put such condition on theory of economy? If an individual gains tremendous amount of money, then others cannot even get an amount sufficient for daily life. That is conservation law in economy, don’t you think? If Brownian Motion is applied to economy, then the system of economy should be equipped with conservation law. I am not communist rather supporting capitalism as driving force for human development, but at the same time, putting importance on equality and healthy wealth concentration and distribution.

Because of its nature, “random”, it would not allow any extreme wealth disparity, if it were a part of mechanism of economy, I just imagine.
Brownian Motion in this regard gives us an idea of how human should behave. Kind of , you know, “Freedom”, I suppose. Now getting drunk, my statement is getting like Brownian Motion, it seems.

Lactose, a substance that is contained in milk. It provides nourishment with human and it is easy to obtain through domesticating mammals like cows or horses. However, it is not always a perfect thing for human.

Some people is tolerant to it, some are not. So called lactose intolerant is a typical issue for human eating habits. This lactose intolerance shows certain characteristic with geographical or human race distribution. In some areas, lactose intolerance is rare, in others it is frequent.

This focus on nutrition winds around to what is the most nutritious food that would have been available to modern humans over the past five or ten thousand years. We finally come to the conclusion that milk is a well-balanced food that provides all three critical macromolecules—protein,

https://blog.education.nationalgeographic.org/2017/11/07/talking-evolution-are-we-still-evolving/comment-page-1/

Typical state of lactose intolerance is stomach pain, diarrhea etc. A person who is intolerant to lactose experiences problem with digestion when the person takes milk.
The mechanism; the person does not have enzyme lactase that plays a role of breaking down it into glucose and galactose.

Anyway, there are certain people who is tolerant to lactose indeed. Why they can be ?Yes, on a whole, human became tolerant to lactose out of necessity throughout its evolution. Human attained the capability from their eating habit. For instance, some nomadic tribes take milk from their livestock. So, they naturally were able to adapt to lactose because milk was one of rare source of vital nutrition due to its relatively stable availability. If the tribes people cannot adapt it, they will lose a chance of survival.

How human body got aware that it is necessary to be tolerant? This function is basically programmed in human DNA, it seems. However, this DNA function have not always existed rather sometime in a past DNA mutated into such form somehow. Maybe some kind of signal was being transmitted to DNA so that DNA could sense the necessity of mutate it self, academics are still seeking the answer though.

In the footsteps of my lactose-intolerant ancestors

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/in-the-footsteps-of-my-lactose-intolerant-ancestors

So, for modern humans, that mechanism of “let DNA learn” is still working?

What if present food becomes not available anymore? Can we be adapted to another food which are not considered as food presently?

This kind of function might be of lessons-learned System of Lifeforms. This could be one of the key element of “Survival of Fittest”.
Is it involved by brain? How human brain can work with DNA in such a stabilized and rigorous manner?

Now a days, environment is rapidly changing. So, in a future, human might face a situation in which daily normal food is no more available and then a new type of food is sought nevertheless though DNA mutation for human to adapt to it is necessary.
Then new chemical substance will be developed, a kind of vaccination that can mutate DNA in a way that it can attain new function; “tolerant to a new type of food”.
Assuming that, in such a terrible era of food crisis, only available source of food is human droppings! Oh my god! Then special vaccination is developed ————-.
Can you eat it? Or else you choose the destiny of extinction?

Ok, let’s flee from such an extreme. DNA is learning it, means everyone is learning it. Therefore, By only evaluating an individual on the academic score or amount of income or family roots etc. can surely be of loss of possibility of the very survival of human being because nobody knows whose DNA can have it. Oh therefore, me myself maybe a special VIP for all human being like the fox in “The Little Prince” by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry. Or else, if DNA eventually becomes driving force for human discriminations,
I will stand against it. I think lactose tells us that being individual is human freedom. It has given a person what has been necessary respectively for a long period of time.

Fractal, mysterious but theorized as one of geometrics though many unknowns.
By far the most unique feature of all is so called Self-Similarity.
Its whole appearance or shape emerges when a part of the whole magnified again and if in the emerged shape a part is further magnified, then a similar shape is found again.

Self-Similarity

https://users.math.yale.edu/public_html/People/frame/Fractals/

More Examples of Self-Similarity

https://users.math.yale.edu/public_html/People/frame/Fractals/

Once being fascinated by it, inspiration may come to you, such as;
—– What if the universe is one of Fractal Geometries? Maybe then the issue of the conflict between Theory of Relativity and Quantum Theory could be settled by applying the concept of Fractal, perhaps?
—– Or, as often emerges in Fractal Geometry is shapes of something that gives impression of lifeform especially of a sort of plants, lifeforms are also ruled by self-similarity, isn’t it?

Space and Time, if it is properly quantized, maybe Fractal emerges or not?
In an instant of a past, the information of the space at that instant remains in a form of photons etc. If so then the infinite chain of those instants may possibly form a kind of self-similarity.

Turning to the idea of a relation between lifeform and fractal and attempting to find Fractal in the shape of lifeform, nevertheless the attempt will surely be of failure.
You see, if a part of lifeform is visually magnified by microscope, surely cells can be observed that is not self-similar to the lifeform at all.

Furthermore, by further magnifying it with such technique of bio-chemical can also be viewed is the famous Double Helix of DNA.

DNA contains design and fabrication drawings and specification data of lifeform, to put it another, it is information.

Information! Yes, Yes, Yes! Appearance or “how the lifeform looks”, is also information. Therefore, if the same (or better expressed as “Similar”) information is reserved in DNA, this kind of relation can be considered as self-similarity and therefore as fractal, to some extent.

Oh No! Don’t take such a crazy leap! Calm down otherwise I will be scolded by specialist or academics in this field.

No, I continue stubbornly. let it go! (humming the phrase of that song)

So, how further can it be magnified? In fractal, self-similarity appears again and again.
Therefore, it should be so!

Yes! It is being hidden in a dimension or domain of “Spirit”.
There the essence of human spirit takes shape. The essence of course is also information.

Then what will be the next level?
Sorry, I don’t know. I am not specialist then. I am just being drunk.

Fractal Geometry does not convey exactly of physical appearance of something physical existence rather it might express some sort of fundamental, basic or essence such as law of physics, characteristics of life form etc. Theory of Relativity states that every single coordinate axis keeps the law of physics the same (similar?) as it is in any others, regardless of its motion. If the law of physics is considered as a kind of Geometry then it can be of self-similarity, I think.

Geometry in general can be considered as information, therefore even if direct appearance of things are different completely from each other, the information it contains could be similar to others and then if the integrated whole of the things forms a unit, the unit may be considered as Fractal.

Also, like DNA, each individual has its own DNA separately and independently. However if you see DNA as information then one DNA will never be independent of others, rather one surly be linked to others throughout or along with time, space or evolution process. That could be linked to concept of fractal, I feel it, if not having any proof though.

I’m having concern about development of Fractal Geometry. It caused once a sensation or impact on science and technology, however it has been somewhat gradually vanishing nowadays, it seems to me.
Perhaps to be accused is economy.

——– Just my illusion all the above statement is.

To my surprise, they say the sand in Sahara desert is being transported to Amazon rainforest by wind.

NASA Satellite Reveals How Much Saharan Dust Feeds Amazon’s Plants

https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/nasa-satellite-reveals-how-much-saharan-dust-feeds-amazon-s-plants

Sahara desert is considered as once was a dense forest millions years ago.
There are some theories for the reason why it turned into desert.
One of them is a theory of “Earth experienced a dangerous tilt in axis about 84 million years ago”. Because of that dynamic and huge scale of the impact, Sahara could not keep its forest.

The Sahara swings between ‘lush’ and ‘desert’ every 20,000 years, in sync with the Earth’s tilt

https://www.zmescience.com/science/news-science/sahara-desert-swings-earth-tilt-0423/

So, substances that were essential to vegetation became sand.

In a cave around Florida, stalactites and stalagmites are found, that contain a layer of ash content. By chemically analyzing the layer, something detected is specific chemical components that is likely originated from vegetation in Sahara.

Then the layer can represent when the layer was formed.
From this finding, they guessed that there might have been large scale forest fire in Sahara. The timing then is found to be consistent with the start of desertification.

I forgot the exact article from which I learned it but here put the similar one as reference.

Stalagmites Help Scientists Trace Ancient Wildfires

https://www.iflscience.com/physics/stalagmites-help-scientists-trace-ancient-wildfires/

African savanna was once a natural pasture field dense with grass for herbivores.
But the grass were almost lost, turning the field into savanna. Herbivores consumed the grass field into savanna.

So, what has recently been done by Human can also be the same as those done by nature. Therefore its only the matter of short term or long term, anyway eventually something would be lost after all. Then, why we have to preserve eco-system? It’s not necessary!

Oh ——– I am such an extremist!

Let’s see the difference between “By Human” and “By Nature”.

The example of Sahara, you see, its resource for sustaining bio-flourishing eco-system is now being transferred to Amazon rainforest. Maybe this flow of vitality is part of dynamic servo or feedback loop that is keeping any such shift within reversible balance..

Nature knows the precise balance for reversible.

In case of savanna, though an extent of grass field have disappeared, animals are surviving there. Maybe now balance between supply and demand have well been settled.
Probably, Nature knows here again “how”.

OK then, what about mass-extinction, our mother Earth have experienced so far?
Are they all being that balance state of reversible, or say sustainability?
After such mass-extinction, lifeform always were able to show its resilience. That’s why we are here on the earth right now.

All right, so if natural mass-extinction is permitted, then can another mass-extinction be allowed even if it is caused by human?

No matter how rapid the change is, everything destined to change and lost. Therefore, is there any point in keeping things as it is? Even if things get irreversible, being complete opposite of reversible state after natural mass-extinction, nevertheless there is nothing being forever. So, we do not need to care about anything like balance or reversible or sustainable.

I disagree with myself!

What matters most is our bond with nature. If we do not care about it then we will lose the meaning of ourselves. Nnnnnnn, I can’t have clear idea of justifying the superiority of “By Nature” against “By Human”. It’s like justifying the meaning of life like something conveyed by Albert Camus. Maybe the bond are the rock of Sisyphe.

Sorry Mr. Albert Camus, I just refer to your great work in this kind of idle talk.

Today, the theme of this article is now getting quite a bothering but I am able to insist that I love nature as presently is so I do not want to lose it, in my life at least, the beauty of nature found in Amazon Rainforest, Sahara Desert, Savanna field etc.

Oh another sip of sake can be the only salvation to me.
(Don’t drink too much of it anyway L.O.L)

It was around 40 years ago, when I read that legendary book (to me though) “Entropy”.
The author is Jeremy Rifkin.

In the book being argued is, I slightly remember, that if solar power is to be the fundamental basis of our energy system, the system of social and economy should be changed to something of decentralized because solar power, as it is toward natural flora and fauna, is a type of decentralized system.

Sunlight over the mother earth is not the sort of laser beam nor burning fire in furnace.
It is always providing sufficient amount but not being in a manner of concentrated for any life forms, well equally distributed to anything that need to thrive.

Plants need it, for photosynthesis in order to gain starch that is the energy reserve.
Then animals can collect it by eating plants.
Plants, there are a lot of types in a woods or forest well dispersed through extended area, where sunlight is falling over like drizzling rain.

By contrast, some kinds of power system like thermal power plant or nuclear are the system of centralization and therefore it can well fit capitalism and inclination of population to concentrate in urban area.

Everything has its own limit is quantity and therefore that way of concentration has almost reached to the limit in an accelerating manner causing issues of environment and sustainability, say, issues of Carbone-Free, SDG, etc.

One of the solution, some specialists are suggesting, is solar power but then those contexts in the above implicates that as well as energy source the economical and social system should also be “adapted” to the nature of solar energy.

So, does anyone know such approach of changing economy and social formation into something that could well fit renewable energy like solar? Or if the present solutions being offered are just an extension to the present “rudimentary” one, maybe we will be easy prey to entropy.

Thinking of modern network technology, integration or concentration of people’s knowledge, consciousness, communication whatsoever can be established without a sort of physical system while each single value can also be respected like plants in forest. If the identification of what is to be concentrated and what is to be decentralized is done in a sophisticated manner, then solar power can well be fit into our life.

Honestly saying, the direction of SDG etc. currently being observed looks not toward that way.

War in Ukraine alike was caused by, to some extent, the negative effect of entropy. After the WWII, the world, it looked so at that time, established well organized minimum entropy state in the world order. Then it has recently been found that the world have not kept the entropy low so far, allowing Russians to start such devastating and stupide war.

So, energy and environment system could also plunge into such increase of entropy because, as we see in that war, human still placing the priority on conserving the rudimentary system rather than leaping toward minimizing entropy.

Anyway, this is just an opinion of ignorance who is pretending to be a scientist.