U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Nature
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-17-2012, 08:39 AM
 
Location: Israel
165 posts, read 194,227 times
Reputation: 75

Advertisements

DNA – Information - Evolution.

Carl Friedrich von Weizsacker in his book:
‘ The unity of Nature ‘ tried to understand the interaction
between information and DNA. He wrote:
‘ Organisms control their own growth by means of the genetic
information stored in the DNA molecules, . . . ‘ / page 281 /
‘ . . . the amount of information contained in the DNA . . . . is
the information corresponding to the concept ‘ genetic constitution’.
/ page 281 /
DNA is indeed the carrier of the genetic constitution.
/ page 282 /
#
My question.
How does DNA "draw" the shape of a human?
To draw the shape of a child from zygote DNA must know physics,
mathematics, chemistry, geometry . . . etc.
How is possible to understand that DNA knows all these subjects?
If the child was born intelligent then it means that DNA knows physics,
mathematics, geometry and . . . etc.
#
My question.
Where does DNA fit into the evolution debate?
DNA information is not static information.
DNA information is dealing with ‘ flow of information.’
DNA information is dealing with ‘progressive information.’
DNA information can evolve.
DNA information evolves from zygote to the intelligent child.
#
Our body is a multi-cellular organism made up
of perhaps 100 trillion different cells.
‘ The information content in the nucleus of a single human cell
is comparable to that of a library containing a thousand volumes.’
/ The unity of Nature, page 40. /
Question:
How can 100 trillion different cells (100 trillion libraries with a
thousand volumes in each) create a child ( by the chance )
during 9 months if according to the probability theory
it is impossible?
#
Today scientists think that everything begins from ‘Big Bang’.
And according to ‘big bang’ our Universe exist 13 (+) billion years.
My question :
Is it possible to create a child from cell [ zygote] only in 280 days
according to Probability theory ?
If ‘ yes ‘ then it will be take time not 280 days but it will be take
time more than our Universe exist and then before ‘ big bang’
was a pregnant woman who gave life to a child who invented the
‘ big bang’ theory.
If ‘ no’ then the process must have aim.
It means somebody /something must manage this process.
===.
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. Socratus.
========.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-18-2012, 12:14 AM
 
Location: Israel
165 posts, read 194,227 times
Reputation: 75
But still, what you propose is wrong in two completely different
respects, both showing a fundamental lack of understanding.


First,
that there are a lot of cells in the human body, perhaps 100 trillion,
is irrelevant to the information content since the DNA in all of these
is essentially the same.

So 100 trillion libraries is no different from one library if you
choose to use that very unhelpful metaphor for what DNA constitutes.
/ Richard Norman /
the DNA in all of these is essentially the same.
/ Richard Norman /

Maybe ‘the DNA in all of these is essentially the same.’
But cells come in all shapes and sizes .
Socratus
#
Second,
I already said that probability theory in no way says that the
development of a human child in nine months from a single
fertilized egg is impossible.
Therefore the existence of such a child does not at all mean
somebody/something must be managing it.
/ Richard Norman /

It is your opinion or law that probability theory doesn’t work
in biology ( cells ) and in astrophysics ( big bang ).
Socratus


Actually there is something that does manage it:
the workings out of the machinery of biochemistry and
biophysics and molecular biology and developmental biology.
/ Richard Norman /

Cells make copies of themselves,. . .
Different cells make different copies of themselves,. . .
Cells come in all shapes and sizes . . . .
Somehow these different cells are tied between themselves
and during pregnancy process of 9 months gradually ( ! )
and by chance ( ! ) they change own geometrical form
from zygote to a child.
Cells come in all shapes and sizes, and then . . . they are you ( !? )
This is modern biomechanical /chemical point of view.
Socratus
==.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2012, 10:06 PM
 
Location: Israel
165 posts, read 194,227 times
Reputation: 75
Maybe 99% agree that ‘Cells - they are you .’
But this explanation is not complete.
Cells have an energy / electrical potential.
Cells have an electromagnetic field.
Therefore we need to say:
‘ Cells and electromagnetic field - they are you.’
===.
Is this formulation correct?

==.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2012, 05:01 AM
 
Location: Israel
165 posts, read 194,227 times
Reputation: 75
Cells make copies of themselves.
Different cells make different copies of themselves.
Cells come in all shapes and sizes.
Somehow these different cells are tied between themselves
and during pregnancy process of 9 months gradually ( ! )
and by chance ( or not by chance ) they change own
geometrical form from zygote to a child.
Cells come in all shapes and sizes, and then . . . they are you.
Cells they are you ( !? )
This is modern biomechanical /chemical point of view.
#
Maybe 99% agree that ‘Cells - they are you .’
But this explanation is not complete.
Cells have an energy / electrical potential.
Cells have an electromagnetic field.
Therefore we need to say:
‘ Cells and electromagnetic field - they are you.’
===.
Is this formulation correct?
Of course it is correct.
Why?
Because:
Bioelectromagnetism (sometimes equated with bioelectricity)
refers to the electrical, magnetic or electromagnetic fields
produced by living cells, tissues or organisms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioelectromagnetism

What does it mean?
It means there isn’t biological cell without electromagnetic fields.
It means that in the cell we have two ( 2 ) substances:
matter and electromagnetic fields.
And in 1985 Richard P. Feynman wrote book:
QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter

The idea of book - the interaction between light
( electromagnetic fields ) and matter is strange.

He wrote: ‘ The theory of quantum electrodynamics
describes Nature as absurd from the point of view
of common sense. And it agrees fully with experiment.
So I hope you accept Nature as She is — absurd.
/ page 10. /
#
Once again:
1.
Cells and electromagnetic field - they are you.
2.
We cannot understand their interaction and therefore
we don’t know the answer to the question: ‘ who am I ?’
===.
Socratus.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2012, 11:25 AM
 
5,473 posts, read 9,165,675 times
Reputation: 3553
Quote:
Originally Posted by s0cratus View Post
2.
We cannot understand their interaction and therefore
we don’t know the answer to the question: ‘ who am I ?’
===.
Socratus.
It's not so much a question of "Who am I?" That's a question of what we describe as self-awareness. We know who we are. It's really more a question of "What exactly am I?" and "Why do we exist at all?" It's not so difficult when considering such questions relative to our own scale within the universe. Where things get a bit hazy is lacking a clear understanding of the nature of our existence in relation to the macro cosmic scales and quantum scales of the universe. That starts getting into comparing what we generally perceive as a physical reality with the wide range of other realities contained within the universe (maybe beyond as well).
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2012, 10:22 AM
 
Location: Israel
165 posts, read 194,227 times
Reputation: 75
Quantum electrodynamics: Who am I ?
==.
Can QED give the answer to the question: ‘ Who am I ?’
To answer to this question allow me to take one biological cell.
The cell has two ( 2 ) substances: matter and electromagnetic
fields. Then we need to understand :
Where did the matter and electromagnetic fields come from?
Question:
Do we need to search for two sources or enough one source ?
#
Matter and electromagnetic fields are some kind of energy.
But matter and energy were tied in one formula: E=Mc^2.
Therefore I will unite matter, energy and electromagnetic
fields in one simple question:
Where does E=Mc^2 come from ?
We have many sources of E=Mc^2:
F. Hasenohrl, A. Einstein, P. Dirac.
====.
Socratus.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-22-2012, 10:16 AM
 
13,136 posts, read 39,251,848 times
Reputation: 12283
It's common knowledge that cells are electromagnetic as they are awashed inside and out of electrolyte solution consisting of sodium, potassium, calcium, chloride which are ions to which are conductors of electricity.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-24-2012, 10:42 PM
 
Location: Israel
165 posts, read 194,227 times
Reputation: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6 Foot 3 View Post
It's common knowledge that cells are electromagnetic
as they are awashed inside and out of electrolyte solution consisting
of sodium, potassium, calcium, chloride which are ions to which
are conductors of electricity.
Quantum electrodynamics: Who am I ?
=.
In 1904 Lorentz proved: there isn’t em waves without Electron
It means the source of these em waves must be an Electron

The electron and the em waves they are physical reality
Can evolution of consciousness of life begin on electron’s level?
==.
Origin of life is a result of physical laws that govern Universe
Electron takes important part in this work.
#
1900, 1905
Planck and Einstein found the energy of electron: E=h*f.
1916
Sommerfeld found the formula of electron : e^2=ah*c,
it means: e = +ah*c and e = -ah*c.
1928
Dirac found two more formulas of electron’s energy:
+E=Mc^2 and -E=Mc^2.

According to QED in interaction with vacuum electron’s
energy is infinite: E= ∞
Questions.
Why does the simplest particle - electron have six ( 6 ) formulas ?
Why does electron obey five ( 5) Laws ?
a) Law of conservation and transformation energy/ mass
b) Maxwell’s equations

c) Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle / Law
d) Pauli Exclusion Principle/ Law

e) Fermi-Dirac statistics.

Nobody knows.

====.
What is an electron ?
Now nobody knows
In the internet we can read hundreds theories about electron
All of them are problematical.
We can read hundreds books about philosophy of physics.

But how can we trust them if we don’t know what is an electron ?
====.
Quote by Heinrich Hertz on Maxwell's equations:

"One cannot escape the feeling that these mathematical formulae
have an independent existence and an intelligence of their own,
that they are wiser than we are, wiser even than their discoverers,
that we get more out of them than was originally put into them."
====.
Ladies and Gentlemen !

Friends !
The banal Electron is not as simple as we think and, maybe,
he is wiser than we are.
=====.
Once again: Brain and Electron.
Human brain works on two levels:
consciousness and subconsciousness. The neurons of brain
create these two levels. So, that it means consciousness and
subconsciousness from physical point of view ( interaction
between billions and billions neurons and electron).

It can only mean that the state of neurons in these two
situations is different.
How can we understand these different states of neurons?
How does the brain generate consciousness?
We can understand this situation only on the quantum level,
only using Quantum theory. But there isn’t QT without
Quantum of Light and Electron. So, what is interaction between
Quantum of Light, Electron and brain ? Nobody knows.
Therefore I say:

we must understand not only the brain but electron too.
And when we understand the Electron
we will know the Ultimate Nature of Reality.

=================.
Socratus

==.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2012, 08:40 AM
 
13,136 posts, read 39,251,848 times
Reputation: 12283
Quote:
Originally Posted by s0cratus View Post
====.
What is an electron ?
Now nobody knows
[/color]
Hmm ... i wonder if that applies to JJ Thomson and/or Nicola Tesla?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2012, 04:38 AM
 
Location: Israel
165 posts, read 194,227 times
Reputation: 75
Book ‘ The Holographic Universe’ page 160.
by Michael Talbot .
‘ Contrary to what everyone knows it is so, it may
not be the brain that produce consciousness, but rather
consciousness that creates the appearance of the brain - . . . .’
=========.
Isn’t strange confirmation ?
Doesn’t it mean what our brail has two ( 2 ) possibilities ?
=.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Nature
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2022, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top