Conversations On-Line
Ad Hoc List   open forum

21

                Subject:   metabolic cascade (+/-)                 Date: 02/08/97

'Negentropy .. an emergent artifact'

Lawrence B. Crowell wrote on 2/7/97 :

>>(JR) Thank you, LC. The subtle difference being that the material in the photomultiplier would be uniform - having similar susceptibilities to the incoming energies showering through the matrix; the different molecules in the metabolic sequence would not, and would represent specific channelizations and shunts instead. That's why specific metabolic energy looped cycles get established in the first place. There are preferred routes of the upward energy "cascade" through the soup of molecular possibilities, just as in the downward entropic distribution. It is not a random free-for-all dispersal. (Not a "cathodic" release ! :->>>> !) (gggg!) Nor a random neg-entropic build up.
>>
>>

>(LC)Metabolic cascades are entropy producing processes. The overall Gibbs free energy change is negative &G = &E - T&S. However, a system can have a positive Gibb's free energy change if it is coupled to some other process that has a negative change that is greater in absolute value. Much the same is true with the photomultiplier tube. A voltage must be applied to the cathodes in order for the cascade to occur.
>
>For an introduction to the energetics of metabolic pathways read Alberts, Brey, ... Watson or Lodish, ..., Darnell. These two books titled "The Molecular Biology of the Cell," and "Molecular Cell Biology" have reasonable discussions on the matter.
>
>If biological systems were purely negentropic then there would be no reason for eating food. .... (clip).
>
>Lawrence B. Crowell

[JNR]Yes, of course, an "upward cascade" is a "pump" - negentropic boosting and consolidation of energy. But I'm indeed talking "coupling" in all these writings, not a "system" (singular) with a specific Gibbs free energy.

And I'm not just referring to the two distinct sides of energy exchange: input series (the presence of an external energy source) vs output series (the metabolic free-fall cascade).

(pause)....as I sit here, thinking on what to write next, I'm constantly holding your imagery in my thoughts. Let me see if I can overlay my scenario on your photomultiplier one. ......

Y'know, Your photomultiplier model might be reasonable ... if modified slightly. First of all, it is exactly a model of entropic spatial re-distributing of free particles in a system! The splaying out of available electrons. So, even though the energy plateaus are locally negentropically increasing (higher levels capable of more "work"), the original energy content of the molecules is being enlarged and expanded to accomodate the added energy influx.

Secondly and concurrently, energy isn't just being randomly put into the metabolism - like flooding it with flows of electrons from a household electric wall socket. It is being accomplished by the creation of molecular bonds which locally store energy - within the capacity ranges of each successive molecule. Those successive molecules are stable plateaus. The *step-wise* re-distribution of electrons and their energies.

And now, we're back to the generalized 3-chamber scenario (which I'm still awaiting your commentary on). Only here, it includes the variable factor of externally-added-energy. In the original gedanken, I suggested that the approaching surfaces of the 2 small-chambers weakened and created an opening to allow the inner particle a "probability greater than zero" access port to move freely between both chambers.

Now, ammend this slightly. Have the newly input-ed particle provide the resident particle with just enough energy to punch that hole into existence. Energy which was not sufficiently present before.

We still end up with an increased spatial distribution of the original inner particle. We can still evaluate that local entropic distribution as being the "binding condition" that negentropically brought the 2 free floating chambers together - builing a "molecule" from two separate "atoms".

You still have your photomultiplier phenomenon, I still have my entropy/negentropy in adjacent frames of reference. In fact, the density of nested adjacent alternating-entropies becomes more obvious. And the notion that entropy changes (plus or minus) can be caused by changes in several different factors: specific energy content, spatial distribution, rates of transduction &
transmission through various systems, availability or absense of energy paths & states (abs or pres of appropriate molecules with electron energy storage statesor stressed EM stereo-configurations in the requisite ranges).

Well, you get the picture, Lawrence, don't you?

ps   Say, why didn't you laugh ... "cathodic"  for 'cathartic'     ?!?!?!?!?