Food Physical Chemistry and Biophysical Chemistry

Food Physical Chemistry is considered to be a branch of Food Chemistry^1,2^ concerned with the study of both physical and chemical interactions in foods in terms of physical and chemical principles applied to food systems, as well as the applications of physical/chemical techniques and instrumentation for the study of foods^3,4,5,6^. This field encompasses the "physiochemical principles of the reactions and conversions that occur during the manufacture, handling, and storage of foods"^7^. Two rapidly growing, related areas are Food Biotechnology and Food Biophysical Chemistry. 
&#xa

Category of Metabolic-Replication Systems\ud in Biology and Medicine

Metabolic-repair models, or (M,R)-systems were introduced in Relational Biology by Robert Rosen. Subsequently, Rosen represented such (M,R)-systems (or simply MRs) in terms of categories of sets, deliberately selected without any structure other than the discrete topology of sets. Theoreticians of life’s origins postulated that Life on Earth has begun with the simplest possible organism, called the primordial. Mathematicians interested in biology attempted to answer this important question of the minimal living organism by defining the functional relations that would have made life possible in such a minimal system- a grandad and grandma of all living organisms on Earth

Early Diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease by NIRF Spectroscopy\ud and Nuclear Medicine\ud

Novel approaches to Early Diagnosis of Alzheimer's Disease by NIRF Spectroscopy and Nuclear Medicine are presented and related cognitive, as well as molecular and cellular, models are critically evaluated.\u

Organismic Supercategories and Qualitative Dynamics of Systems

The representation of biological systems by means of organismic supercategories, developed in previous papers, is further discussed. The different approaches to relational biology, developed by Rashevsky, Rosen and by Baianu and Marinescu, are compared with Qualitative Dynamics of Systems which was initiated by Henri Poincaré (1881). On the basis of this comparison some concrete results concerning dynamics of genetic system, development, fertilization, regeneration, analogies, and oncogenesis are derived

Nonlinear Models of Neural and Genetic Network Dynamics:\ud \ud Natural Transformations of Łukasiewicz Logic LM-Algebras in a Łukasiewicz-Topos as Representations of Neural Network Development and Neoplastic Transformations \ud

A categorical and Łukasiewicz-Topos framework for Algebraic Logic models of nonlinear dynamics in complex functional systems such as Neural Networks, Cell Genome and Interactome Networks is introduced. Łukasiewicz Algebraic Logic models of both neural and genetic networks and signaling pathways in cells are formulated in terms of nonlinear dynamic systems with n-state components that allow for the generalization of previous logical models of both genetic activities and neural networks. An algebraic formulation of variable next-state/transfer functions is extended to a Łukasiewicz Topos with an N-valued Łukasiewicz Algebraic Logic subobject classifier description that represents non-random and nonlinear network activities as well as their transformations in developmental processes and carcinogenesis.\u

Łukasiewicz-Topos Models of Neural Networks, Cell Genome and Interactome Nonlinear Dynamic Models

A categorical and Łukasiewicz-Topos framework for Algebraic Logic models of nonlinear dynamics in complex functional systems such as Neural Networks, Cell Genome and Interactome Networks is introduced. Łukasiewicz Algebraic Logic models of both neural and genetic networks and signaling pathways in cells are formulated in terms of nonlinear dynamic systems with n-state components that allow for the generalization of previous logical models of both genetic activities and neural networks. An algebraic formulation of variable 'next-state functions' is extended to a Łukasiewicz Topos with an n-valued Łukasiewicz Algebraic Logic subobject classifier description that represents non-random and nonlinear network activities as well as their transformations in developmental processes and carcinogenesis

Organismic Supercategores: II. On Multistable Systems\ud \ud

The representation of biological systems in terms of organismic supercategories, introduced in previous papers by Baianu et al. (Bull. Math. Biophysics,30, 625–636;31, 59–70) is further discussed. To state more clearly this representation some new definitions are introduced. Also, some necessary changes in axiomatics are made. The conclusion is reached that any organismic supercategory has at least one superpushout, and this expresses the fact that biological systems are multistable. This way a connection between some results of Rashevsky’s theory of organismic sets and our results becomes obvious

Organismic Supercategories: III. Qualitative Dynamics of Systems

The representation of biological systems by means of organismic supercategories, developed in previous papers, is further discussed. The different approaches to relational biology, developed by Rashevsky, Rosen and by Baianu and Marinescu, are compared with Qualitative Dynamics of Systems which was initiated by Henri Poincaré (1881). On the basis of this comparison some concrete results concerning dynamics of genetic system, development, fertilization, regeneration, analogies, and oncogenesis are derived

From Simple to Complex and Ultra-complex Systems:\ud A Paradigm Shift Towards Non-Abelian Systems Dynamics

Atoms, molecules, organisms distinguish layers of reality because of the causal links that govern their behavior, both horizontally (atom-atom, molecule-molecule, organism-organism) and vertically (atom-molecule-organism). This is the first intuition of the theory of levels. Even if the further development of the theory will require imposing a number of qualifications to this initial intuition, the idea of a series of entities organized on different levels of complexity will prove correct. Living systems as well as social systems and the human mind present features remarkably different from those characterizing non-living, simple physical and chemical systems. We propose that super-complexity requires at least four different categorical frameworks, provided by the theories of levels of reality, chronotopoids, (generalized) interactions, and anticipation