Tailoring Thermodynamics for the Occurrence of

Macroscopic Quantum Coherence – the Origin of Memory

Koichiro Matsuno

Department of BioEngineering^?

Nagaoka University of Technology

Nagaoka 940-2188, Japan

Abstract

Explicating the evolutionary emergence of memory is grounded upon the interplay between thermodynamics and quantum mechanics. One descriptive candidate for addressing the emergent phenomena is syntactic integration over different grammatical tenses that are already latent in our ordinary language. In particular, grammatical tenses available to our language suggest that there are at least noticeable differences among the present perfect, the present progressive and the present tenses, as reminding us that any dynamic action in progress is basically in the present progressive mode. Differentiation of the present tense from the progressive tense just points up a linguistic means with the use of which one can address what will be called memory afterward. It is this differentiation of grammatical tenses in the practice of our language that comes to be responsible for addressing emergent phenomena linguistically. There are two means for implementing such a differentiation of grammatical tenses on material grounds. One is temperature that can distinguish itself between before and after the measurement, and the other is a quantum coherence that can remain invariant between before and after the measurement. Evolutionary emergence of biological processes in general and memory in particular is just a material manifestation of how thermodynamics can accommodate itself as experiencing a wide variety of mesoscopic or macroscopic coherences of quantum mechanical origin.

Keywords: Grammatical tenses, Measurement Memory, Quantum coherence, Temperature

Introduction

Addressing the origin of memory is a convoluted endeavor. If memory is always present from the very beginning, there would be no use of talking about its origin. On the other hand, if memory is an outcome from the memory-less precursor, it must be formidable task to get memory from what was not memory. Despite this intricate background, if the origin of memory is still a serious subject matter to be addressed, a likely attempt for the solution of the problem on the origin of memory must be through the process of transformation on material grounds (Brooks, 2000; Farre, 2000). A main focus in this article will be on the process of transformation underlying the origin and development of what is called memory.

One concise picture on the process of transformation can be perceived from the perspective that any material dynamics is grounded upon the tripartite relationship among experiencing, transforming and representing (Matsuno, 1999a, 2000b). In particular, transforming or the process of transformation is quite peculiar in admitting that any material substrate has the capacity of changing itself in a manner not fully controlled from the outside. Transformation implies some room of autonomy on the part of any material body. One justification for the statement on autonomy is that if there is no transformation, it would offend chemistry and chemists to the extent that no one could imagine. Of course, addressing the issue of transformation or transmutation seriously looks like speaking about the unspeakable. What will be intended in the remaining part of this article is to speak about the unspeakable, hopefully, in a passable manner.

An example of experiencing on material grounds is readily seen in electric or magnetic susceptibility of any material body. Experiencing applies to any material body measuring others in the empirical domain. That is measurement internal to material bodies. Even electrons and quarks maintain the capacity of internal measurement (Matsuno, 1985, 1989). Those material bodies experiencing others then come to transform themselves. The best-known example of such transformation is the first law of thermodynamics addressing the transformation of energy while maintaining its quantitative conservation. The outcome of such a transformation is now presented to others as a representation of what has been accomplished so far by the concerned material bodies. Above all, the representation is of supreme importance since it provides a stable reference at which any description can safely be anchored. The stable reference or representation is a sine qua non of any description. Furthermore, any representation carries with itself two roles at the same time. One is for the internalist, that is, for an arbitrary material substrate in motion, and the other is for the externalist, that is, for us human being as the outside observers. Despite that, once the process of transformation is dismissed at the expense of appraising the significance of representation, the phenomenon called memory as a material embodiment of what has been experienced and transformed would loose its proper place in the material world. The significance of transformation is clearly visible in the first law of thermodynamics.

Transformation

The first law of thermodynamics as understood as such is about the transformation of energy. The transformation requires at least two agencies. One is the supplier of the energy to be transformed, and the other is the consumer of the transformed. The transformation mechanism alone cannot do anything unless it is supplemented by both the supplier and the consumer of the substrate. More specifically, thermodynamics is about a software of interfaceology (Rössler, 1987; Matsuno, 1985). Hardware can be available from quantum mechanics, and a product thereof can be biology (Matsuno, 1989).

Interface requires more than one agency, to be sure. It is consequential upon the negotiation between different agencies. What a single agency can do is to be only part of the interface, but not the whole interface. If only one agency were good enough for implementing the interface, everything else would be colonized by the very agency. The boundary of a colony is not the interface, but the deprivation of the interface. Colonization destroys the interface. At issue is how to describe the interface. This brings us back to the very basic issue of description in a dynamic situation.

We should first note the difference between description and explanation. Explanation is a meta-description requiring the first-hand description of the issue more than anything else. Explanation does give us the answer, but not the question. In order to have the latter, we have to describe the question first. Description is prior to explanation.

One of the longstanding positions adopted for describing any object is that what is describable remains in stasis. If the descriptive object is variable right in the process of its description, no one could expect complete identification of the object since those changes yet to come would constantly urge us to update the description. One direct outcome from this descriptive stance is that if movement is describable, it must be in stasis. In fact, the deductive syllogism concluding that any movement is in stasis was first discovered by Zeno of Elea almost 2500 years ago. Since then, no one has ever succeeded in refuting this simple syllogism, though everybody even including Zeno himself does recognize that movement in stasis does not apply to empirical reality. The descriptive stipulation requiring that what is a describable remains in stasis is too stifling.

One remedy relieving this stifling stipulation has come from mechanics asking the equality between a movement and its record. The record of a movement is about an inductive judgement or observation taking place in the empirical domain. Although mechanics is faithful in observing Zeno’s stipulation requiring that what is describable remains in stasis, it is further supplemented by an empirical judgement asking that what remains in stasis is in movement as exemplified in Galilean inertia. However, mechanical stipulation requiring movement in stasis while demanding stasis in movement, like Zeno’s movement in stasis, cannot cope with genuine genesis of changes and variations occurring in the empirical domain (Conrad, 2000; Gunji, 1995; Rössler & Matsuno, 1998). Mechanics can address dynamics only to the extent to which whatever stasis, once figured out, could remain in the empirical domain as it is. Despite that, mechanics cannot be completed unless it is supplemented by instrumental measurement. Noting that measurement is also part of dynamic process, one may enrich or extend what mechanics has accomplished to the extent that no one could expect previously, as incorporating the notion of measurement. Measurement can thus serve as a means of supplementing and extending what mechanics accomplished so far while incorporating the process of measurement also in the descriptive domain.

Movement Not in Stasis or Temperature Dynamics

Our subject matter of describing the interface properly is tantamount to saying the issue of movement not in stasis properly. Exactly at this point enters the issue of measurement. Mechanics does require instrumental measurement for specifying both the boundary conditions and the condition of stasis in movement. In particular, instrumental measurement employed for the sake of the decidability of mechanics is unique in distinguishing between measuring the boundary conditions on the one hand and measuring the required condition of stasis for the occurrence of mechanics on the other. These two instrumental measurements differ. Although mechanics suffers if stasis in movement is not literally confirmed on the basis of instrumental measurement, movement in stasis can definitely be salvaged in its record as far as the completed movement available from its instrumental measurement is concerned. What is unique to any movement registered in the record is that the notion of movement in stasis does certainly hold there even if the mechanistic stipulation requiring the equality between the record of the movement and the movement itself does not hold in advance. Even the movement not in stasis can be registered as a movement in stasis since the record of the movement, once registered, remains in stasis since the record does not change in itself by definition. Instrumental measurement does provide a means of gaining access to the movement not in stasis as far as the finished record is concerned.

What is more, the material body in charge of performing instrumental measurement can be any material body having the capacity of experiencing the target material body once the stipulation of registering the record in a specific manner is lifted. Any interacting material bodies can measure each other internally (Matsuno, 1985; 1989). Internal measurement upholding the movement not in stasis is certainly subject to the anthropocentric instrumental measurement, thus yielding the movement in stasis exclusively within the record.

Internal measurement among material bodies whose record can be identified as appealing to instrumental measurement is nothing but a movement not in stasis. One such example of the movement not in stasis is seen in temperature dynamics. In fact, temperature is a quantitative figure about the context of material bodies moving randomly. Internal measurement associated with temperature is about the temperature of some material bodies to be detected by other material bodies at a different temperature in the neighborhood, as demonstrated in Fourier’s law of heat transfer. Temperature already detected is definite in determining the context of the detecting material bodies moving randomly, while temperature yet to be detected remains indefinite in the makeup of the material bodies moving randomly on the detecting end. Temperature dynamics certainly demonstrates the contrast between movement not in stasis beforehand and movement in stasis afterward.

Temperature dynamics has a unique characteristic because of its contextual nature. No contextual participants can belong to two different contexts at the same time because different contexts are mutually exclusive. Being contextual is being selective. Consequently, temperature dynamics is intrinsically selective in that realizing one particular context eventually comes to imply elimination of all of the other conceivable contexts. An example of the selective capacity latent in temperature dynamics is this. Any material body experiencing, that is to say, being affected by changes in its ambient temperature responds to the changes as quickly as possible. There is no equal opportunity for both the fast and the slow responses. Always, the faster response wins because no chances are left behind for the slower responses. A small hot body put in a huge cold environment decreases its temperature as quickly as possible because there is no room for further temperature decrease for the late comers. Meta-stable energy sources at the higher temperature locally come to be fed upon by another material bodies at the lower temperature locally serving as energy consumers (Matsuno, 1992, 1997a) As a matter of fact, energy consumption is a common denominator of whatever biological organisms (Matsuno, 1995).

Here enters Darwinian natural selection taking most advantage of temperature dynamics that is intrinsically selective. Darwinian natural selection within the framework of a molecular selection experiment has already been well established. Suppose that there has been available the recorded data of the experiment. One can read from the record the population of the target molecule and estimate the replication rate. One can know which molecular species wins at least on the completed record. At the same time, one can also imagine the following situation behind the scene. Suppose our laboratory colleague has completed the setup of a molecular selection experiment and put everything in order. All switches are on. Everything runs smoothly. After knowing that, our colleague has left the laboratory bench for something else. Of course, the molecules in the equipment are doing what they are doing. But, they are not counting the population nor estimating the replication rate. They are doing something else. What is evident at this point is that at the least, they are experiencing or responding to changes in the ambient temperature. The rule there is the first comes, first served. The context yielding the quickest response comes to win on the basis that the winner takes all. That is certainly selective and generative. Then, our colleague has returned to the laboratory bench. He can read both the population of the target molecule and its replication rate from what his molecules have been doing in his absence. Everything can be summarized in terms of the replication rate. No mystery is left behind. Everything is clear. Temperature dynamics mediates between movement not in stasis beforehand and movement in stasis frozen in the completed record, while the population of the target molecules and the associated replication can be read from the movement in stasis in the record.

What is unique to biology in general and biological evolution in particular as a concrete instance of temperature dynamics is that it can generate a local organization with the lower temperature on its own, that is nothing other than an energy consumer or an organism in the biological sense. Appearance of the lower temperature locally facilitates the faster temperature drop at the meta-stable energy sources. Then, the material body at the lower temperature can be stabilized as an energy consumer while feeding upon the meta-stable energy sources at the higher temperature locally. This just demonstrates an operational essence of the beginning and functioning of biology as a concrete instance of temperature dynamics that is contextual and accordingly about an interfaceology between different contexts at different temperatures.

Quantum Mechanics as a Contextual Dynamics

Temperature dynamics is certainly contextual, but the nature of the contexts available there is quite singular in admitting only those contextual constituents moving randomly with each other. Temperature addresses only those contexts comprising material bodies moving randomly. One more conspicuous instance of contextual dynamics is found in quantum mechanics. Each quantum there is taken to be an attribute of the context that is almost completely coherent internally as a polar opposite to the case of temperature dynamics. Quantum mechanics provides us with the hardware supplying each material body as a quantum, while temperature dynamics is about the software manipulating the context of those quanta which quantum mechanics has provides. At this point, it is duly noted that temperature dynamics as an attribute of thermodynamics is by no means a derivative of quantum mechanics through its statistics.

Contextual dynamics operating in nature is thus sandwiched between the two extremes. One is quantum mechanics providing an almost coherent context internally in the form of a quantum, and the other is temperature dynamics yielding an almost completely incoherent context internally in the form of those quanta moving randomly. The present perspective enables us to seek the capacity of contextual selection within temperature dynamics instead of quantum mechanics in itself. Temperature dynamics exerts the activity of contextual selection upon the context of quanta moving randomly. When the ambient temperature changes, the realizable context of quanta moving randomly that determines the temperature of the target quanta responds to the temperature changes as quickly as possible. The fastest temperature response influences the material makeup of the context of quanta moving randomly.

Only those quanta in accord with the fastest temperature response come to be contextually selected and realized. This can necessarily be accompanied by a quantum-mechanical updating of those quanta to be implemented on material grounds. Although quantum mechanics intrinsically provides material capacity of making the context of a material body almost completely coherent internally, it is temperature dynamics that is responsible for determining which context is actually applied to each quantum from its outside. Temperature dynamics has the capacity of tailoring quantum mechanics so as to constrain the realizable quanta only to those demonstrating the quickest response to changes in the ambient temperature. Temperature dynamics has the capacity of transforming the nature of a material quantum of quantum-mechanical origin, which is of course in accord with implementing the first law of thermodynamics (Matsuno, 1997b; Imai et al, 1999a, b).

One conspicuous example demonstrating thermodynamic tailoring of a material quantum of quantum-mechanical origin is seen in nucleosynthesis in supernovea explosions. Synthesis of a heavy atomic nucleus such as iron’s has been considered to proceed during supervoea explosions in the big bang cosmology. The temperature of those nucleons thermally accelerated at the core of a supernova could have reached even up to 1 billion degrees centigrade. They could have formed heavy atomic nuclei such as iron’s since the thermal energy available there could be large enough to overcome the threshold for their binding. Then, the material bodies thus synthesized would have been scattered into deep interstellar space in the latter of which the temperature would be extremely low. The thermodynamic fate of such a material body might have had at least the following two possibilities. One was to lower the temperature while maintaining the synthesized material body as it was, and the other was to lower the temperature as disintegrating it into the former constituent nucleons. Our empirical observation of iron’s nuclei in the empirical domain now comes to suggest that the synthesized material bodies scattered into deep interstellar space during supernovea explosions could have decreased their temperatures much faster when they remained as being integrated. The former thermal energy driving the random kinetic movement of individual nucleons could thus have been transformed into the energy for binding these nucleons in the synthesized atomic nuclei. Similar observations can also be expected even in experimental environments (Matsuno, 2000a).

Temperature dynamics of a contextual character makes each quantum of quantum-mechanical origin to act as an agency measuring the context under which it is placed. Temperature is about the interface between a quantum as an almost completely coherent context internally and one more larger context comprising the smaller contexts of quantum-mechanical origin moving almost completely randomly. Consequently, temperature dynamics is an interfaceology between two-tiered contexts of different scales. The outer larger context determining the temperature of the collection of the smaller inner contexts is almost completely incoherent in the movement of the inner contexts, while each inner context is almost completely coherent internally. However, the two contexts of different scales are not mutually independent. The outer context determining the temperature of the inner contexts is constantly subject to the fastest response to changes in the ambient temperature. When the outer context is affected by changes in the temperature of the surroundings, the target outer context may be able to respond to the changes faster by modifying the inner contexts of quantum-mechanical origin as seen in nucleosynthesis in supernovea explosions. If this is the case, the inner contexts thus modified can be stabilized within the perturbed outer context.

Material transformation due to the occurrence of temperature differences can of course be perceived within the operation of the first law of thermodynamics in terms of thermodynamic entropy if the entropy is definable. When a material body contacts with two heat sources at different temperatures under its stationary condition, the heat flow entering from the source at the higher temperature comes to equilibrate with the heat flow leaving the body into the heat source at the lower temperature. Since the heat flow is equal to the temperature multiplied by the entropy difference at the contact between the two bodies, the stationary condition yields that the material body contacting with two heat sources at different temperatures can decrease its entropy. This decrease of entropy being in accord with the operation of the first law of thermodynamics is certainly legitimate, but limited in that entropy is no more than an extensive quantity derived from a given context. Entropy, once defined legitimately, cannot affect the context that has been responsible for defining itself. Entropy, though legitimate, is not competent enough to assume the role of influencing the two-tiered contexts. This is exactly the place where temperature dynamics enters as claiming its own legitimacy upon the ground that temperature can be definable at least operationally insofar as it is measurable.

Temperature dynamics as an interfaceology having the capacity of connecting between quantum mechanics and biology is unique in appreciating the construction of whatever contexts in a bottom up manner. What is intrinsic to the interfaceology is the observation that any contextual constituent of material origin has the capacity of measuring or observing its outside from within. That is internal measurement (Matsuno, 1985, 1989).

Interplay between Different Contextual Dynamics

The relationship between temperature dynamics and quantum mechanics is quite subtle. Although temperature dynamics is inclined to destroy whatever coherence upheld by quantum mechanics through random movement of the then available various quanta, there is at least one exception in which the dynamics can be supportive to the emergence and maintenance of a quantum. When there happens to be the quantum-mechanical process of releasing the binding energy stored in a certain chemical such as ATP (adenosine triphosphate) extremely slowly, it may provide a means for effectively lowering the temperature locally to the extremely enhanced extent.

For instance, actin-activated myosin ATPase activity underlying muscle contraction (Huxley, 1969; Huxley & Simmons, 1971) is characterized by the time interval over which one ATP molecule is hydrolyzed per myosin molecule while releasing the stored energy , with those typical values of and (or) (Harada et al, 1990; Uyeda et al, 1991). What is unique to actomyosin ATPase activity is its extreme slowness of releasing the energy stored in an ATP molecule. The energy release is punctuated by measurements internal to the actomyosin system as expressed in the energy-time uncertainty principle (Matsuno, 1989). If the energy release by the amount of happens to occur in the form of emitting a single quantum, the uncertainty principle would give an uncertainty in the timing of the emission only as much as . This value is far less than the actual time interval required for releasing energy from an ATP molecule.

The actual energy release from an ATP molecule with the aid of an actomyosin complex is to proceed through emitting a sequence of quanta, each of which carries energy , at every time interval of while satisfying the constraints

For the energy flow associated with measuring each quantum carrying energy over the time interval is eventually imputed to the energy release from a single ATP molecule (Matsuno, 1993). The corresponding values and would come to imply that the number of energy quanta, each of which carries energy , emitted coherently during the one cycle of energy release from an ATP molecule at an actomyosin complex would roughly be . Actomyosin ATPase activity is thus associated with emission of quanta, whose typical energy is or in temperature. The effective temperature of an actomyosin complex in the presence of ATP molecules comes to decrease down to as low as (Matsuno, 1997a, 1999b).

The effective realization of such an extremely low temperature as low as 1.6´ 10-3K could be conceivable only when there is the energy flow released from an ATP molecule. The energy release from an ATP molecule at room temperature is then taken to be the heat flow from the heat reservoir at room temperature thermodynamically. The first law of thermodynamics now comes to imply that the heat flow from the reservoir at room temperature equilibrates with the heat flow from the actomyosin complex into another heat reservoir whose effective temperature is as low as 1.6´ 10-3K. Since the heat flow is just equal to the temperature multiplied by the change in the entropy at each interface with the reservoir, the first law is found to induce a significant reduction of the entropy of the concerned actomyosin complex. Such a reduction of the entropy may seem at first sight simply opposite to the randomization intrinsic to temperature dynamics. Rather, temperature dynamics when supplemented with an extremely slow release of the binding energy, that is certainly of quantum-mechanical origin, comes to uphold a quantum-mechanical coherence (Hatori et al, 1996a, b, 1998).

In particular, the relationship between temperature dynamics or thermodynamics and quantum mechanics is bilateral. There is no such likelihood that one party comes to be subordinated to the other as practiced in the effort of deriving thermodynamics from statistical quantum mechanics. Once an ATPase activity due to an actomyosin complex becomes available on the ground of quantum mechanics, it can also have the capacity of accommodating temperature dynamics so as to keep the activity alive. Realization of the effective temperature as low as 1.6´ 10-3K at the actomyosin complex now lets the first law of thermodynamics be implemented through the process of making available the heat flow entering into the complex from the ambient at room temperature. The first law demonstrates that the quantum mechanical process of the ATPase activity at the actomyosin complex is robust enough against thermal agitations available in the neighborhood. At the same time, temperature dynamics accommodates the quantum mechanical process so as to meet the stipulation imputed to the first law of thermodynamics. The sliding movement of an actin filament on myosin molecules in the presence of ATP molecules just points up how the quantum mechanical process of the ATPase activity could be implemented in accordance with the fulfillment of the first law (Matsuno, 1999b).

As evidenced in the example of the ATPase activity in an actomyosin complex, there are two contexts at different scales. The larger outer context housing the smaller inner ones is for temperature dynamics, and the smaller one is for quantum mechanics. Both are mutually supportive. The outer context intrinsic to temperature dynamics is almost completely incoherent with regard to the movement of each inner context of quantum-mechanical origin, while the inner context of the latter is almost completely coherent internally.

What is focused at this point is the contrast between quantum nonlocality intrinsic to the inner context and quantum locality imputed to the outer context. The significance of quantum mechanical nonlocality can be seen from the occurrence of what we call memory. Memory is about something in the past progressive tense that still survives in the present progressive tense. Quantum nonlocality just fulfills such a requirement for serving as the carrier of a memory. Since it is a spatio-temporal whole at an arbitrary spatio-temporal scale, quantum nonlocality naturally has the capacity of bridging the chasm between the present progressive and the past progressive tense via the present perfect tense. Quantum nonlocality is in fact a material means substantiating the linguistic crossover between the present progressive and the present perfect tense. In contrast, the agency responsible for updating what is registered as a memory is temperature dynamics addressing quantum locality through accommodating quantum mechanics into the dynamics itself.

Concluding Remarks

The relationship between thermodynamics and quantum mechanics within the traditional framework of thermodynamics has been unique in maintaining their mutual consistency. Thermodynamics has set the boundary conditions on how the quantum mechanical development would proceed, while the quantum mechanical specification has not been taken to influence the underlying thermodynamics. Occurrence of a macroscopic quantum coherence met in the extremely low temperature physics has been a well-known example demonstrating such a mutual consistency between thermodynamics and quantum mechanics.

However, there is another class of the mutual consistency. If there is available a quantum mechanical process releasing the energy stored in the chemical bonds extremely slowly, thermodynamics or temperature dynamics can come to accommodate such a process into the dynamics as referring to the first law of thermodynamics internally in a bottom-up manner. Quantum mechanics now has the capacity of influencing temperature dynamics so as to prepare the heat source that is indispensable for implementing and financing the first law. A mesoscopic or macroscopic quantum-mechanical process of energy release at an extremely slow rate does require the heat source enabling the energy release. Macroscopic quantum coherence observed in the biological realm serving as a carrier of a memory in the biological domain demonstrates the necessity of heat sources for the sake of actualizing an extremely low temperature locally. Biology is just a material manifestation of how thermodynamics can maintain itself as experiencing a wide variety of mesoscopic or macroscopic coherences of quantum mechanical origin.

References

Brooks, D. R., 2000. The nature of the organism: Life has a life of its own. Ann. New

York Acad. Sci. 901, 257-265.

Conrad, M., 2000. Closure and anticlosure in the realm of quantum gravity: why

evolution needs no origin. Ann. New York Acad. Sci. 901, 244-256.

Farre, G. L., 2000. Fundamental and modal procecesses in the evolution of natural

systems. Ann. New York Acad. Sci. 901, 237-243.

Gunji, Y.-P., 1995. Global logic resulting from disequilibration process. BioSystems 35,

33-62.

Harada, Y., Sakurada, K., Aoki, T., Thomas, D. D. & Yanagida, T., 1990.

Mechanochemical coupling in actomyosin energy transduction studied by in vitro

movement assay. J. Mol. Biol. 216, 49-68.

Hatori, K., Honda, H. & Matsuno, K., 1996a. ATP-dependent fluctuations of single

actin filaments in vitro. Biophys. Chem. 58, 267-272.

Hatori, K., Honda, H. & Matsuno, K., 1996b. Communicative interaction of myosins

along an actin filament in the presence of ATP. Biophys. Chem. 60, 149-152.

Hatori, K., Honda, H., Shimada, K. & Matsuno, K., 1998. Staggered movement of an

actin filament sliding on myosin molecules in the presence of ATP. Biophys. Chem.

70, 241-245.

Huxley, A. and Simmons, R.J., 1971. Proposed mechanism of force generation in

striated muscle. Nature 233, 533-538.

Huxley, H.E., 1969. The mechanism of muscular contraction. Science 164, 1356-1366.

Imai, E., Honda, H., Hatori, K., and Matsuno, K., 1999a. Autocatalytic synthesis of

oligoglycine in a simulated submarine hydrothermal system. Origins Life Evol.

Biosphere 29, 249-259.

Imai, E., Honda, H., Hatori, K., Brack, A., and Matsuno, K., 1999b. Elongation of

oligopeptides in a simulated submarine hydrothermal system. Science 283, 831-833.

Matsuno, K., 1985. How can quantum mechanic of material evolution be possible?:

symmetry and symmetry-breaking in protobiological evolution. BioSystems 17, 179-

192.

Matsuno, K., 1989. Protobiology: Physical Basis of Biology (CRC Press, Boca Raton

Florida).

Matsuno, K., 1992. Cohesive interaction for the emergence of eukaryotic cells. In: The

Origin and Evolution of the Cell, H. Hartman and K. Matsuno (Eds.) (World

Scientific, Singapore), pp. 231-240.

Matsuno, K., 1993. Being free from ceteris paribus: a vehicle of founding physics

upon biology rather than the other way around. Appl. Math. Comp. 56, 261-279.

Matsuno, K., 1995. Consumer power as the major evolutionary force. J. Theor. Biol.

173, 137-145.

Matsuno, K., 1997a. Biodynamics for the emergence of energy consumers. BioSystems

42, 119-127.

Matsuno, K., 1997b. A design principle of a flow reactor simulating prebiotic evolution.

Viva Origino 25, 191-204.

Matsuno, K., 1999a. The clock and its triadic relationship. Semiotica 127, 433-452.

Matsuno, K., 1999b. Cell motility as an entangled quantum coherence. BioSystems 51,

15-19.

Matsuno, K., 2000a. Contribution of cosmic rays, radiation, Lightning and geological

heat to prebiotic synthesis on the primitive Earth, In: The Role of Radiation in the

Origin and Evolution of Life, M. Akaboshi, N. Fujii & R. Navaro-Gonzalez (Eds.)

(Kyoto University Press, Kyoto), pp. 9-24.

Matsuno, K., 2000b. The internalist stance: A linguistic practice enclosing dynamics.

Ann. New York Acad. Sci. 901, 332-349.

Rössler, O. E., 1987. Endophysics, In: Real Brains, Artificial Minds, J. L. Casti & A.

Karlqvist (Eds.) (North Holland, New York), pp. 25-46.

Rössler, O. E. & Matsuno, K., 1998. “The relativist stance” BioSystems 46, 213-216.

Uyeda, T. Q. P., Warrick, H. M., Kron, S. J. & Spudich, J. A., 1991. Quantized

velocities at low myosin densities in an in vitro motility assay, Nature 352,307-311.

-- MishtuBanerjee - 01 Feb 2005
to top