49
个编辑
更改
无编辑摘要
Rosen also questioned what he believed to be many aspects of mainstream interpretations of biochemistry and genetics. He objects to the idea that functional aspects in biological systems can be investigated via a material focus. One example: Rosen disputes that the functional capability of a biologically active protein can be investigated purely using the genetically encoded sequence of amino acids. This is because, he said, a protein must undergo a process of folding to attain its characteristic three-dimensional shape before it can become functionally active in the system. Yet, only the amino acid sequence is genetically coded. The mechanisms by which proteins fold are not completely known. He concluded, based on examples such as this, that phenotype cannot always be directly attributed to genotype and that the chemically active aspect of a biologically active protein relies on more than the sequence of amino acids, from which it was constructed: there must be some other important factors at work, that he did not however attempt to specify or pin down.
Rosen also questioned what he believed to be many aspects of mainstream interpretations of biochemistry and genetics. He objects to the idea that functional aspects in biological systems can be investigated via a material focus. One example: Rosen disputes that the functional capability of a biologically active protein can be investigated purely using the genetically encoded sequence of amino acids. This is because, he said, a protein must undergo a process of folding to attain its characteristic three-dimensional shape before it can become functionally active in the system. Yet, only the amino acid sequence is genetically coded. The mechanisms by which proteins fold are not completely known. He concluded, based on examples such as this, that phenotype cannot always be directly attributed to genotype and that the chemically active aspect of a biologically active protein relies on more than the sequence of amino acids, from which it was constructed: there must be some other important factors at work, that he did not however attempt to specify or pin down.
罗森还质疑他所认为的生物化学和遗传学的主流解释的许多方面。他反对这样一种观点，即生物系统的功能方面可以通过聚焦物质方面来调查。举个例子: 罗森质疑生物活性蛋白质的功能能力可以仅仅通过基因编码的氨基酸序列来研究。他说，这是因为蛋白质必须经过一个折叠过程才能获得其特有的三维形状，然后才能在系统中发挥功能。然而，只有氨基酸序列是基因编码的。蛋白质折叠的机制尚不完全清楚。基于这样的例子，他得出结论，表型不能总是直接归因于基因型，生物活性蛋白质的化学活性方面不仅仅依赖于构成它的氨基酸序列: 一定还有其他一些重要因素在起作用，然而他并没有试图指明或确定。
Certain questions about Rosen's mathematical arguments were raised in a paper authored by Christopher Landauer and Kirstie L. Bellman<ref>{{cite journal
Certain questions about Rosen's mathematical arguments were raised in a paper authored by Christopher Landauer and Kirstie L. Bellman<ref>{{cite journal
Certain questions about Rosen's mathematical arguments were raised in a paper authored by Christopher Landauer and Kirstie L. Bellman which claimed that some of the mathematical formulations used by Rosen are problematic from a logical viewpoint. It is perhaps worth noting, however, that such issues were also raised long time ago by Bertrand Russell and Alfred North Whitehead in their famous Principia Mathematica in relation to antinomies of set theory. As Rosen's mathematical formulation in his earlier papers was also based on set theory and the category of sets such issues have naturally re-surfaced. However, these issues have now been addressed by Robert Rosen in his recent book Essays on Life Itself, published posthumously in 2000. Furthermore, such basic problems of mathematical formulations of (M{,}R)--systems had already been resolved by other authors as early as 1973 by utilizing the Yoneda lemma in category theory, and the associated functorial construction in categories with (mathematical) structure.I.C. Baianu: 1973, Some Algebraic Properties of (M{,}R) - Systems. Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics 35, 213-217.I.C. Baianu and M. Marinescu: 1974, A Functorial Construction of (M{,}R)- Systems. Revue Roumaine de Mathematiques Pures et Appliquees 19: 388-391. Such general category-theoretic extensions of (M{,}R)-systems that avoid set theory paradoxes are based on William Lawvere's categorical approach and its extensions to higher-dimensional algebra. The mathematical and logical extension of metabolic-replication systems to generalized (M{,}R)-systems, or G-MR, also involved a series of acknowledged letters exchanged between Robert Rosen and the latter authors during 1967—1980s, as well as letters exchanged with Nicolas Rashevsky up to 1972.
Certain questions about Rosen's mathematical arguments were raised in a paper authored by Christopher Landauer and Kirstie L. Bellman which claimed that some of the mathematical formulations used by Rosen are problematic from a logical viewpoint. It is perhaps worth noting, however, that such issues were also raised long time ago by Bertrand Russell and Alfred North Whitehead in their famous Principia Mathematica in relation to antinomies of set theory. As Rosen's mathematical formulation in his earlier papers was also based on set theory and the category of sets such issues have naturally re-surfaced. However, these issues have now been addressed by Robert Rosen in his recent book Essays on Life Itself, published posthumously in 2000. Furthermore, such basic problems of mathematical formulations of (M{,}R)--systems had already been resolved by other authors as early as 1973 by utilizing the Yoneda lemma in category theory, and the associated functorial construction in categories with (mathematical) structure.I.C. Baianu: 1973, Some Algebraic Properties of (M{,}R) - Systems. Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics 35, 213-217.I.C. Baianu and M. Marinescu: 1974, A Functorial Construction of (M{,}R)- Systems. Revue Roumaine de Mathematiques Pures et Appliquees 19: 388-391. Such general category-theoretic extensions of (M{,}R)-systems that avoid set theory paradoxes are based on William Lawvere's categorical approach and its extensions to higher-dimensional algebra. The mathematical and logical extension of metabolic-replication systems to generalized (M{,}R)-systems, or G-MR, also involved a series of acknowledged letters exchanged between Robert Rosen and the latter authors during 1967—1980s, as well as letters exchanged with Nicolas Rashevsky up to 1972.
克里斯托弗 · 兰道尔和克里斯蒂 · 贝尔曼在一篇论文中提出了一些关于罗森数学论证的问题，这篇论文声称罗森使用的一些数学公式从逻辑观点来看是有问题的。然而，也许值得注意的是，这些问题很久以前也被伯特兰·罗素和阿尔弗雷德·诺思·怀特黑德在他们著名的关于集合论悖论的数学原理中提出过。正如罗森在他的早期论文中的数学公式也是基于集合论的，这类问题的集合范畴自然重新浮出水面。然而，罗伯特 · 罗森在他2000年去世后出版的新书《论生活本身》中提到了这些问题。此外，(m { ，} r) -- 系统的数学公式的这些基本问题早在1973年就已经被其他作者利用范畴论中的 Yoneda 引理和范畴中的(数学)结构中的相关函子结构解决了。Baianu: 1973，(m { ，} r)-系统的一些代数性质。数学生物物理学通讯35,213-217.I.C。Baianu 和 m. Marinescu: 1974，(m { ，} r)-系统的函子结构。Revue Roumaine de Mathematiques Pures et Appliquees 19: 388-391.这种避免集合论悖论的(m { ，} r)-系统的一般范畴论扩张是基于 William Lawvere 的范畴方法及其对高维代数的扩张。新陈代谢复制系统在数学和逻辑上扩展到广义(m { ，} r)系统，或 G-MR，也包括罗伯特 · 罗森和后者作者在1967ー1980年间的一系列公认的书信往来，以及直到1972年与尼古拉斯 · 拉舍夫斯基的书信往来。
克里斯托弗 · 兰道尔和克里斯蒂 · 贝尔曼在一篇论文中提出了一些关于罗森数学论证的问题，这篇论文声称罗森使用的一些数学公式从逻辑观点来看是有问题的。然而，也许值得注意的是，这些问题很久以前也被伯特兰·罗素和阿尔弗雷德·诺思·怀特黑德在他们著名的关于集合论悖论的数学原理中提出过。正如罗森在他的早期论文中的数学公式也是基于集合论的，这类问题的集合范畴自然重新浮出水面。然而，罗伯特 · 罗森在他2000年去世后出版的新书《论生命本身》中提到了这些问题。此外，(M{,}R)系统的数学公式的这些基本问题早在1973年就已经被其他作者利用范畴论中的 Yoneda 引理和范畴中的(数学)结构中的相关函子结构解决了。数学生物物理学通报35,213-217. c.Baianu和M. Marinescu: 1974，(M{,}R)系统的函数构造。这种避免集合论悖论的(M{,}R)系统的一般范畴论扩张是基于 William Lawvere 的范畴方法及其对高维代数的扩张。新陈代谢复制系统在数学和逻辑上扩展到广义(M{,}R)系统，或 G-MR，也包括罗伯特 · 罗森和后者在1967ー1980年间的一系列公认的书信往来，以及直到1972年与尼古拉斯 · 拉舍夫斯基的书信往来。
Rosen's ideas are becoming increasingly accepted in theoretical biology, and there are several current discussions
Rosen's ideas are becoming increasingly accepted in theoretical biology, and there are several current discussions
Rosen's ideas are becoming increasingly accepted in theoretical biology, and there are several current discussions
Rosen's ideas are becoming increasingly accepted in theoretical biology, and there are several current discussions
Erwin Schrödinger discussed issues of quantum genetics in his famous book of 1945, What Is Life? These were critically discussed by Rosen in Life Itself and in his subsequent book Essays on Life Itself.Note, by Judith Rosen, who owns the copyrights to her father's books: Some confusion about Rosen's analysis is due to errata in Life Itself. For example, the diagram that refers to (M{,}R)-Systems has more than one error; errors which do not exist in Rosen's manuscript for the book. The book Anticipatory Systems; Philosophical, Mathematical, and Methodological Foundations has the same diagram, correctly represented.
Erwin Schrödinger discussed issues of quantum genetics in his famous book of 1945, What Is Life? These were critically discussed by Rosen in Life Itself and in his subsequent book Essays on Life Itself.Note, by Judith Rosen, who owns the copyrights to her father's books: Some confusion about Rosen's analysis is due to errata in Life Itself. For example, the diagram that refers to (M{,}R)-Systems has more than one error; errors which do not exist in Rosen's manuscript for the book. The book Anticipatory Systems; Philosophical, Mathematical, and Methodological Foundations has the same diagram, correctly represented.
埃尔温·薛定谔在他1945年的著名著作《什么是生命?》中讨论了量子遗传学的问题。罗森在《生命本身》和他后来的《论生命的本质》一书中对这些问题进行了批判性的讨论。朱迪丝·罗森拥有她父亲著作的版权，她的注释是:罗森分析的一些困惑源于《生命本身》中的勘误。例如，引用(M{,}R)系统的图表有多个错误; 这些错误在罗森 的书稿中不存在。《预期系统：哲学、数学和方法论基础》一书有相同的图表，并被正确地表示出来了。
==Comparison with other theories of life==
==Comparison with other theories of life==
All of these (including (M,R) systems) found their original inspiration in Erwin Schrödinger's book What is Life? but at first they appear to have little in common with one another, largely because the authors did not communicate with one another, and none of them made any reference in their principal publications to any of the other theories. Nonetheless, there are more similarities than may be obvious at first sight, for example between Gánti and Rosen. Until recently there have been almost no attempts to compare the different theories and discuss them together.
All of these (including (M,R) systems) found their original inspiration in Erwin Schrödinger's book What is Life? but at first they appear to have little in common with one another, largely because the authors did not communicate with one another, and none of them made any reference in their principal publications to any of the other theories. Nonetheless, there are more similarities than may be obvious at first sight, for example between Gánti and Rosen. Until recently there have been almost no attempts to compare the different theories and discuss them together.
(m，r)系统只是当前几个生命理论中的一个，包括 Tibor Gánti 的 chemoton，Manfred Eigen 和 Peter Schuster 的超循环，Humberto Maturana 和 Francisco Varela 的自创生(或自我构建) ，以及 Stuart Kauffman 的自催化集，类似于 Dyson 早期的提议。所有这些(包括(m，r)系统)的灵感都来源于埃尔温·薛定谔的《生命是什么？但起初他们之间似乎没有什么共同点，主要是因为作者之间没有交流，他们在主要出版物中也没有提到任何其他理论。尽管如此，两者之间的相似之处比乍看之下可能显而易见的要多，例如 Gánti 和罗森大厦之间的相似之处。直到最近，几乎没有人试图比较不同的理论并一起讨论它们。
(M,R)系统只是目前几种生命理论中的一种，包括Tibor的化子Gánti, Manfred Eigen和Peter Schuster的超循环，Humberto Maturana 和 Francisco Varela 的自创生(或自我构建) ，以及 Stuart Kauffman 的自催化集，类似于 Dyson 早期的提议。
所有这些(包括(m，r)系统)的灵感都来源于埃尔温·薛定谔的《生命是什么？》但起初他们之间似乎没有什么共同点，主要是因为作者之间没有交流，他们在主要出版物中也没有提到任何其他理论。尽管如此，两者之间的相似之处，乍看之下可能要显而易见的多，例如 Gánti 和罗森大厦之间的相似之处。直到最近，几乎没有人试图比较不同的理论并一起讨论它们。
==Last Universal Common Ancestor (LUCA)==
==Last Universal Common Ancestor (LUCA)==
==最后的共同祖先(LUCA)==
==最后的共同祖先(露卡)==
Some authors equate models of the origin of life with LUCA, the '''L'''ast '''U'''niversal '''C'''ommon '''A'''ncestor of all extant life.<ref>{{cite journal | doi= 10.3390/life11090872 | title = The Way forward for the Origin of Life: Prions and Prion-Like Molecules First Hypothesis| last1 =Jheeta | first1 =S.| last2 = Chatzitheodoridis| first2 =E. | last3 = Devine| first3 =Kevin| last4 = Block| first4 = J.|journal = Life |date =2021| volume = 11|issue = 9 |pages = 872
Some authors equate models of the origin of life with LUCA, the '''L'''ast '''U'''niversal '''C'''ommon '''A'''ncestor of all extant life.<ref>{{cite journal | doi= 10.3390/life11090872 | title = The Way forward for the Origin of Life: Prions and Prion-Like Molecules First Hypothesis| last1 =Jheeta | first1 =S.| last2 = Chatzitheodoridis| first2 =E. | last3 = Devine| first3 =Kevin| last4 = Block| first4 = J.|journal = Life |date =2021| volume = 11|issue = 9 |pages = 872
}}</ref> This is a serious error resulting from failure to recognize that '''L''' refers to the ''last'' common ancestor, not to the ''first'' ancestor, which is much older: a large amount of evolution occurred before the appearance of LUCA.<ref>{{cite journal | doi= 10.1016/j.jtbi.2017.05.023 | title = Life before LUCA |last2=Cárdenas |first2 =M L|last1=Cornish-Bowden|first1 =A| journal = J. Theor. Biol. | volume = 434 | pages=68–74}}</ref>
}}</ref> This is a serious error resulting from failure to recognize that '''L''' refers to the ''last'' common ancestor, not to the ''first'' ancestor, which is much older: a large amount of evolution occurred before the appearance of LUCA.<ref>{{cite journal | doi= 10.1016/j.jtbi.2017.05.023 | title = Life before LUCA |last2=Cárdenas |first2 =M L|last1=Cornish-Bowden|first1 =A| journal = J. Theor. Biol. | volume = 434 | pages=68–74}}</ref>
Some authors equate models of the origin of life with LUCA, the Last Universal Common Ancestor of all extant life. This is a serious error resulting from failure to recognize that L refers to the last common ancestor, not to the first ancestor, which is much older: a large amount of evolution occurred before the appearance of LUCA.
Some authors equate models of the origin of life with LUCA, the Last Universal Common Ancestor of all extant life. This is a serious error resulting from failure to recognize that L refers to the last common ancestor, not to the first ancestor, which is much older: a large amount of evolution occurred before the appearance of LUCA.
一些作者将生命起源的模型与露卡相提并论，露卡是所有现存生命的最后一个共同祖先。这是一个严重的错误，因为没有认识到 l 指的是最后的共同祖先，而不是更古老的第一个祖先: 大量的进化发生在露卡出现之前。
一些作者将生命起源的模型与露卡相提并论，露卡是所有现存生命的最后一个共同祖先。这是一个严重的错误，因为没有认识到 L指的是最后的共同祖先，而不是更古老的第一个祖先: 大量的进化发生在露卡出现之前。
Gill and Forterre expressed the essential point as follows:<ref>{{cite journal | doi= 10.1017/S1473550415000282 |title = Origin of life: LUCA and extracellular membrane vesicles (EMVs)|journal= Int. J. Astrobiol.|last1 = Gill| first1 =S. |last2 = Forterre| first2 =P. |volume =15|
Gill and Forterre expressed the essential point as follows:<ref>{{cite journal | doi= 10.1017/S1473550415000282 |title = Origin of life: LUCA and extracellular membrane vesicles (EMVs)|journal= Int. J. Astrobiol.|last1 = Gill| first1 =S. |last2 = Forterre| first2 =P. |volume =15|
LUCA should not be confused with the first cell, but was the product of a long period of evolution. Being the "last" means that LUCA was preceded by a long succession of older "ancestors."
LUCA should not be confused with the first cell, but was the product of a long period of evolution. Being the "last" means that LUCA was preceded by a long succession of older "ancestors."
吉尔和福特尔表达的基本观点如下: 露卡不应与第一个细胞混淆，而是长期进化的产物。作为“最后一个”意味着 LUCA 之前有一系列更古老的“祖先”
吉尔和福特尔表达的基本观点如下:
露卡不应与第一个细胞混淆，而是长期进化的产物。作为“最后一个”意味着露卡之前有一系列更古老的“祖先”。
== Publications ==
== Publications ==
* 1991, Life Itself: A Comprehensive Inquiry into the Nature, Origin, and Fabrication of Life, Columbia University Press
* 1991, Life Itself: A Comprehensive Inquiry into the Nature, Origin, and Fabrication of Life, Columbia University Press
Rosen 写了几本书和许多文章。他出版的书籍精选如下:
* 1970，纽约生物学动态系统理论: Wiley Interscience。1970，optimal Principles，republished in 2013
* 1970，纽约生物学动态系统理论: Wiley Interscience。1970，optimal Principles，republished in 2013
* 1978，Fundamentals of Measurement and Representation of Natural Systems，Elsevier Science Ltd，
* 1978，Fundamentals of Measurement and Representation of Natural Systems，Elsevier Science Ltd，
* Robert Rosen: June 27, 1934 — December 30, 1998 by Aloisius Louie.
* Robert Rosen: June 27, 1934 — December 30, 1998 by Aloisius Louie.
* 罗森尼复杂性网站上的 Panmere 网站: “朱迪思 · 罗森的网站提供了免费的个人简历、关于她父亲作品的讨论，以及罗伯特 · 罗森作品的免费再版。”。罗伯特 · 罗森: 这个问题及其答案是: 为什么有机体不同于机器？作者: Donald c. Mikulecky。
* 罗森尼复杂性Panmere网站: “朱迪思 · 罗森的网站提供了免费的个人简历、关于她父亲作品的讨论，以及罗伯特 · 罗森作品的免费再版。”
* 罗伯特 · 罗森: 这个问题及其答案是: 为什么有机体不同于机器？作者: Donald c. Mikulecky。
* 罗伯特 · 罗森: 1934年6月27日ー1998年12月30日。
* 罗伯特 · 罗森: 1934年6月27日ー1998年12月30日。