Mike Levin

Atavistic Genetic Expression Dissociation (AGED) During Aging: Meta‐Phylostratigraphic Evidence of Cellular and Tissue‐Level Phylogenetic Dissociation Aging represents an atavistic over-representation of differential expression in the most ancient genes and under-representation in the evolutionary youngest genes for two multi-tissue aging databases...

Final version is out: @LPiolopez
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/...

"Atavistic Genetic Expression Dissociation (AGED) DuringAging: Meta-Phylostratigraphic Evidence of Cellular andTissue-Level Phylogenetic Dissociation"
🧪

Final version is out:

authors.elsevier.com/c/1mEoa5bD-s...

"Neural cellular automata: Applications to biology and beyond classical AI"

@bhartl.bsky.social
Léo Pio-Lopez

#naturephotography #infrared

New preprint - Thomas Pollak (substack.com/@drtompollak), Anjali Bhat, Matt Butler, @rokberlot.bsky.social, Mark J Edwards

osf.io/preprints/ps...

"Have you tried switching it off and on again Mechanisms and therapeutic prospects of resetting homeostatic set points in medicine and neuropsychiatry"

at the same time *being clear about the direction of interventions we need to develop*, I'm perfectly willing to get on board. I'm not stuck with the terminology, I just want people to have the option to relieve suffering and live to whatever potential they can envision.

One other thing. While I'm never going to buy the idea that all outcomes are equal, I have no commitment to the specific terminology and I don't think there should be any pejorative associated with the labels. So if you've got some kind of vocabulary that you think will be helpful to people while

will be told that "it's just variety, don't label it as a disease", and suffering goes unchecked. If I had more time on my hands, I'd run your alternative past the people who email us and see how it lands. I can guess though.

in whatever configuration, to be treated with the utmost compassion and care. Once we pretend outcomes don't matter, then "diseases" disappear as a target of research, and people who need solutions for cancer, limb loss, degenerative conditions, and all kinds of horrific situations

Bottom line. The vocabulary matters when it comes time to decide whether to do research, and if so, in what direction. Patients want a choice about outcomes. Whatever vocabulary helps us communicate about what direction we're trying to push things, that's what we need. And of course I want everyone,

Congenital Heart Defects What is a congenital heart defect? Learn the types of congenital heart defects in adults and children, symptoms, diagnosis and treatment of congenital heart defects.

Or, perhaps the American Heart Association agrees with you. Nope:
www.heart.org/en/health-to...

Birth defects and your baby Birth defects can cause problems in overall health, how the body develops or how the body works. Babies with birth defects may need special medical care.

And finally. It's not just scientists who "push back" on this idea that all outcomes are the same. Here's March of Dimes, the major foundation supporting fetal and maternal health: www.marchofdimes.org/find-support... ; are you boycotting their work?

vocabulary for what these treatments are trying to accomplish exactly? If all the outcomes are supposed to be equal, what are we developing interventions to do? Should scientists be developing ways to cause loss of brain as well? Why not? Seems like there's an asymmetry after all...

I suppose I could start forwarding you all the emails I get from desperate people asking my community to "hurry the f*&@ up" finding these treatments. So let's assume the answer is yes - you do support treatments to be available to patients who want them. In that case, what's your preferred

we not, do research on what causes different outcomes in development, and giving patients the ability to make use of this information for medical treatments that change outcome? If you think "no", then we're done and there's nothing more for me to say; I think that would be morally unconscionable.

I have a very basic question. Are you supportive of the development of medical treatments, to be available to parents or patients themselves, that would allow them to prevent or shift outcomes? For example, from "no brain, death soon" to "yes brain, standard lifespan range". Should we, or should

The phenotypes we study are often severe - very malformed brain, no behavior, death before maturity. Defects, in any reasonable definition of words. Nevertheless, there are interesting broader issues around departures from a species' default target morphology, which can be speciation etc.

Revisiting Burr and Northrop’s “The Electro-Dynamic Theory of Life” (1935) - Biological Theory Harold Saxton Burr was a biologist working throughout the 1930s–1950s on an important set of problems related to biological organization and the origin of complex living forms. He was a profound think...

The super prescient H. S. Burr (link.springer.com/article/10.1...) warned clearly even back in the 1930's that it was crucial to pay attention to the field aspect, not only the "particle" aspect of bioelectric interactions, both in and out of the CNS.

Field-mediated bioelectric basis of morphogenetic prepatterning The endogenous electric field of a simplified bioelectric network model of an embryo facilitates the autonomous formation of voltage patterns. Transient exogenous electric fields can leverage this pro...

We're definitely inspired by @earlkmiller.bsky.social 's work in the brain; we cite it in www.cell.com/cell-reports... for example.

🙏

#NaturePhotography

#naturephotography

#godzilla #NaturePhotography #infrared

👍

#naturephotography

We're working on this now, in the context of computational and behavioral/psychological models. I think in some ways least action may be pretty universal all the way up (and all the ways down). In the end, whether Least Action will belong to physics or to cognitive science, we'll see.

Cool!! I'll check it out. But, "thinking vs. obeying physics" - the standard paradigm says our thinking is obeying physics too, right? One question is: how much of more advanced "thinking" is also least action dynamics on more complex virtual spaces constructed by more advanced cognitive systems.

Very cool find, thank you!! super relevant to some stuff I'm working on.

"Cognition all the way down". Great to see this fine new paper from @robertchisciure.bsky.social & @drmichaellevin.bsky.social out now in Synthese - introducing a new metric to quantify biological intelligence as search efficiency in multidimensional problem spaces link.springer.com/article/10.1...

Morphological computational capacity of Physarum polycephalum While computational capacity limits of the universe and carbon-based life have been estimated, a stricter bound for aneural organisms has not been established. Physarum polycephalum, a unicellular, mu...

New preprint:

arxiv.org/abs/2510.19976

"Morphological computational capacity of Physarum polycephalum"

Suyash Bajpai, Aviva Lucas-DeMott, @msahsorin.bsky.social, Philip Kurian

Cognition all the way down 2.0: neuroscience beyond neurons in the diverse intelligence era - Synthese This paper formalizes biological intelligence as search efficiency in multi-scale problem spaces, aiming to resolve epistemic deadlocks in the basal “cognition wars” unfolding in the Diverse Intellige...

new paper with @robertchisciure.bsky.social

link.springer.com/article/10.1...

"Cognition all the way down 2.0: neuroscience beyond neurons in the diverse intelligence era"

🧪