The two equations are unrelated.
First equation
The first equation is a simple modification of the logistic differential equation, although it is somewhat disguised. The usual logistic equation is
$$ {dx\over dt} = x(1-x) $$
or in terms of the derivative of $\log(x)$, it's the equation Peter Parker writes, with $\beta=1$. The factor of K in conjunction with g sets the scale for $\Phi$, and it is irrelevant, the qualitative behavior for different $\beta$ at long times is not modified, since the equilibrium position is at
$$\Phi_\mathrm{eq}={K\over g^{1\over\beta}}$$
Values above this go down and values below this go up. Further there is a nonzero first derivative of $\Phi^\beta$ for all reasonable idea of what $\beta$ is supposed to be, so this is describing a quantity $\Phi$ which wants to go up exponentially, but is suppressed by competitive effects.
The exponent $\beta$ describes the competitive effects. The logistic equation describes (say) bacteria (or white blood cells) replicating where two bacteria compete for the same limited resources. In this case, the competition is $\beta$-fold, the bacteria crowd each other out worse than quadraticaly (or less worse, depending on whether $\beta<1$ or $\beta>1$).
This equation is consistent with a biological interpretation that $\Phi$ is the concentration of some replicating crowding out agent, like a disease model.
Second equation
The second equation is writing down $\Phi$ in a way that depends on g but not on t. It has a K in it, but there is an unrelated expansion of $\Phi$ in terms of the $E_n$'s, so it isn't the expression for the equilibrium value or the relaxation to this equilibrium value.
Further, you can massage the form by exponentiating, expanding the denominator in a power-series, and performing the sum on j, to produce a second infinite series, but only if you assume the hidden log part does not depend on j, but only on the variable "i" which has so far not been used.
${\Phi\over K} = \exp(g (\sum_{k=1}^{\infty} \Delta^k e^{g\Delta^k})) \sum_i log(...)$$
Where $\Delta=(1-E_k)$, and from the form, I will assume $0<\Delta<1$, so that $0<E_k<1$. The $\log$ part makes no sense as a time development either, this isn't the development of the logistic equation, or any reasonable asymptotic of this, (although the symbol that is partly obscured is probably an $\alpha$ which can only appear multiplied by t on dimensional grounds, so you can assume that it's $\log(\alpha t ...)$, so one can only assume that the movie-makers chose a second equation to look impressive from an unrelated system.