The Universal Selection

Much before the soup,
Before the big-bang scoop,
Was there nothing,
or is there a proof?-
Of a beauty,
Out of spontaneity,
As true and firm,
as the science of quantity,
Everything needs to be fit,
To come, to stay and exit,
But does it show wit,
n has an ever evolving kit,
that makes it bloom,
by a magnifying zoom,
Since the time 0, when-
nothing it consume..?
Are we so lucky,
That within all the fluky,
It grabbed the hold of gold,
Born fit, bright and plucky?
I feel that it still inherits,
The patterns and their merits,
Takes the better edits,
Up and top it just hits,
I know this seems exceptional,
That it is teleological,
Just from nothing so special,
But it seems actual,
and so grand,
out of our hand,
Waves of life,
It’s a maximand,..

The Universal Selection.
Abstract: I frequently wonder if the concept of fitness maximization applies to everything and not just things alive. I claim that it could be so, if the system ‘inherits patterns’ through causal dependencies on past states. That seems to prove this conjecture as it is natural selectionally sufficient. Such a universal selection is still possible even without this classical inheritance mechanism. If the components of system are in some way fitness maximizing or neutral, they won’t die out while the opposite will. This leads to accumulation of such evolvers which leads to fitness maximization or neutrality at least, in the long run.

keywords- Ancient Patterns, Daughter Patterns, Pattern Inheritance and Mutation, Pattern Natural Selection, Single Evolver Selection, Zero-1 selection, competition in space-time,The Universal Selection.

A system classically, needs in general the following to be amenable to natural selection and fitness maximization by means of it-
1. Reproduction and Inheritance,
2. Mutation
3. Competition ( competition in space with others and/or in time with it’s own new re-incarnations, causal resource competition or at least interversion competition)

I assume every natural system shows causality i.e. past states determine future states in some way, – the pattern of variable values of past states design that of the next. But, the next patterns may be co-linear or opposite or intermediate inheritances. Such modulations can be called mutations. Such a system can then evolve in time where declining fitness versions, spread in space-time, of the system get extinct naturally at some or the other time point and the only with fitness as  increasing functions of time, survive(competition).So, it is not just zero-1 selection i.e. negative fitness systems die and any positive fitness system survives; rather it is maximization of system fitness for a herd of system versions spread in space-time. However, it is notable that if multiple versions in space time are unavailable, there would be zero -1 selection in operation over the system as the singular individual. The outcome here is not necessarily maximizing.
I feel that any system, deterministic, stochastic, a mix with or without causality and composed of such zero-1 evolving and classically(i.e. with inheritance and mutation) or otherwise fitness maximizing components is in fact evolving- it has a wait period until a fitness maximizing set of components originates; once obtained it survives while rest die out. But the origin of such fitness maximizing components is  required for this to be true. The out put thus could be fitness neutral or maximizing.
For a universe with all such evolving components, it is easy to prove that it itself is evolving and thus the proof is closed.
Living and some computational systems are examples such fitness maximizing component systems of the universe as they are evolvers in themselves.

Statement 1. Defining fitness broadly, fitness 0 or below it leads to extinction while positive fitness leads to survival.
Statement 2. Any system is evolving with fitness neutrality or maximization.
Proof. A. The system is composed of many partitional components (Axiom 1.1);
The Evolutionary Status of system is directly related to that of its components (Axiom 1.2).
B. Each Component is either Fitness Maximizing (P), neutral (Q) or fitness declining(R) in itself (Axiom 2.1)
C.  If P, then it shall be immortal fitness maximizer ( from Statement 1).
If Q, then it shall be immortal fitness neutral evolver ( from Statement 1);
If R, then it shall go extinct ( from Statement 1).
D. Thus, the ultimate composition of system is of P and Q components ( from C).
E. The system is fitness maximizing or neutral finally. ( from D and A 1.2)
Please note if the P and Q type components are under represented in system it shall hang on to its wait phase (may even be forever), but is fundamentally teleological.
Hence Proved.
Pattern inheritance and mutation systems are examples of fitness maximizers similar to living systems.
Thus, the Thesis:
I. Basal Teleology:Any possible universe or system is fundamentally, irreducibly and extensibly teleological with respect to the evaluative mechanisms and output ab initio, i.e. it is to some degree poised to select the fitter composition and reject the otherwise. For an immortal system, it could be additionally teleological owing to neutral or maximizing outcome as indicated in the above proof.
II. Extended Teleology: Sometimes, it is lucky to have such good components and evaluator teleology maximizing competition, teleological innovation and similar possible mechanisms thus leading to optimization.
Basal Teleology is universal and extended teleology is special.
Teleology Universal Selection

The retention of positives and/or rejection of rest (i.e. primary teleology in evaluation and outcome) also applies to the evolutionary mechanism of origin and innovation, evaluation and outcome which would select for really fit evolutionary mechanisms, this we can call secondary teleology. We can then extend this to n-ary teleology for those meta-evolutionary mechanisms (where direct and all at-x-length n-ary basal teleologies give net such of evaluation and outcome, which is a given at each level with possible extended teleology). Thus there could be an extent of purification that a system could achieve above the sum of i-ary primary basal teleology, which would be strictly irreducible and extensible. The limiting factor for all i-ary evolutionary mechanisms is the extension of teleology of the components of evolutionary mechanisms directly or indirectly by means of innovation  at some i-level.
Note that this purification of evolutionary mechanisms comes about by virtue of purification of such n-length evolution atoms composed of all i-ary sub-atoms each consisting of the basic unit of evolutionary mechanism of origin/innovation, evaluation and outcome. So, the evolutionary dynamics stems from the ever purifying n-length atom of the system as a case of immortal interversion competition in space-time.
Proposition 1.{Evolvability Condition Theorem}  A global positive innovation wave up to an i-level sub-atom percolates necessarily up to the end of the n-length atom after it.
This stems from – positivity wave in previous sub atoms percolates to next and positivity instances in those next sub atoms originates before them i.e. Pre-Positivity is iff Post-Positivity is. And, global pre-posiivity generates no compensations or reductions in the final post-positivity.
Proposition 2. {Purification Realism Theorem} The n-length atom involved in its interversion competition is ever purifying by virtue of percolation mediated raise or reject of the post-i-sub atom segment of the n-length atom.

Thus the evolutionary systems are granted basal teleology while they are born with their initial teleology equal or greater than the basal, and based on innovation resource, evolve ahead.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s