🚀 go-pugleaf

  George Hammond wrote:

>bv_schornak wrote:
>  
>
>>This is _not_ a top posting - replies are at the bottom of the prime
>>report!
>>
>>Here's what I found out about all this stuff:
>>
>>First we have the fertilized egg. This egg consists of an outer mem-
>>brane, the cytosol and the nucleus. While the outer membrane separa-
>>tes the cell from the environment, the cytosol is a solution of pro-
>>teins, electrolytes and carbonhydrates - some of these "ingredients"
>>are called organelles (e.g. mitochondria, Golgi apparatus, lysosomes
>>or centrioles, etc.). Every nucleus is covered in a porous membrane,
>>surrounded by the RNA (a messenger to the DNA). The inner of the nu-
>>cleus consists of chromatin material and the chromosomes (containing
>>DNA double helices).
>>
>>Each DNA molecule consists of complementary base pairs - adenine (A)
>>and thymine (T), guanine (G) and cytosine (C). Only the both comple-
>>mentary bases can connect to each other via hydrogen bonds - two for
>>the A-T pair, three for the C-G pair.
>>
>>This far for the "assembly" of an egg (or any other cell).
>>
>><http://www.unomaha.edu/~swick/2740mitosis.html> the process of cell
>>"cleavage" (mitosis).
>>
>>How RNA works:
>>
>><http://staff.jccc.net/pdecell/proteinsynthesis/transcript.html#overview><http://staff.jccc.net/pdecell/proteinsynthesis/dnareprokary.html><http://staff.jccc.net/pdecell/proteinsynthesis/dnarepli.html><http://staff.jccc.net/pdecell/expression/control.html><http://staff.jccc.net/pdecell/cells/basiccell.html>
>>
>>How DNA replication works:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>About genes:
>>
>>
>>
>>Here you can see that the double helix - which looks quite symmetric
>>from the outside - is anything else than symmetric seen from inside.
>>
>>Some other interesting websites about the topics:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>George Hammond wrote:
>>
>>>bv_schornak wrote:
>>>
>>>>George Hammond wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>stew dean wrote:
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>>>The point is the brain is a 3-axis mirror symmetirc construct
>>>>>>>which begins at the 8 cell stage in embryology (1st 3 cleavages).
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>Let's review that again - the brain is roughly symmetrical along one
>>>>>>axis, as is  the rest of the body. You have DNA to thank for this.
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>
>>>>>[Hammond]
>>>>>Really?  I'm only claiming the Left-right symmetry of the
>>>>>body comes from the first cleavage of the Egg (a fact proved
>>>>>by Roux, Conklin and others).  You just stated that it comes
>>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>>from DNA.... what makes you think that?
>>>>
>>>>You've already forgotten that we get two complete (but half
>>>>sized) organisms, if we separate both cells after the first
>>>>cleavage? And four quarter sized organisms after the second
>>>>cleavage? George, George...
>>>>
>>>>Where else than in the DNA should the information about the
>>>>final organism sit?
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>[Hammond]
>>>Well, I happen to agree with you, but I don't see any way to prove it.
>>>Early on I had the idea that the DNA DOUBLE HELIX was actually
>>>a gometrical map of the human body.
>>>      
>>>
>>Not for real. It holds the information, but the "genetic map" is not
>>a map of the body. It provides instructions how to assemble a cell -
>>nothing else. Which kind of cell is produced depends on the RNA (and
>>the organelles).
>>    
>>
>>>In fact the longitudinal
>>>lay out of the HOX Genes in a DNA strand ARE isomorphic to the
>>>longitudinal axis of the animal body.
>>>      
>>>
>>Are you _really_ shure about that? No one knows, which of the groups
>>represent which part of an organism - DNA mapping is in its earliest
>>stage. Even if our entire DNA is mapped meanwhile, we don't know too
>>much about which gene is responsible for which cells.
>>    
>>
>>> So then I had the idea that
>>>the RH half of the DNA helix caused the RH side of the body, and
>>>LH half of the helix caused the LH side of the body.  But I've never
>>>seen any evidence for that.  Still, I suspect there is a connection!
>>>      
>>>
>>There is none. The DNA cannot work if it is "one half", it needs the
>>complementary part to work properly. And if the both halves are com-
>>pleted, they are identical copies of each other.
>>    
>>
>>>Maybe in very primitive animals it was... but just like "totipotency"
>>>in Eggs, the thing finally developed so either half of the DNA
>>>string can build a cell....
>>>      
>>>
>>Yes, they do. But not as a "half DNA" - the mechanism of replication
>>includes splitting up _and_ copying the missing half (by attaching a
>>matching base to form the new base pair - C-G or A-T).
>>    
>>
>>>fact of the matter is I don't know that much
>>>about genetics.... but I'll tell you what... if you ever nail down
>>>this principle that the "Double Helix" is a "homunculous of the body"
>>>be sure to put in for your Nobel Prize.
>>>      
>>>
>>This isn't a visual "assembly instruction". The RAM in your computer
>>represents the structure of the internal organisation of its "cells"
>>much better than the DNA represents the structure of the final orga-
>>nism. DNA has more of a complex database, where data might be stored
>>anywhere in the available storage "room".
>>    
>>
>>>  Frankly I think the guy who suggested this is actually on to      
>>>
>> > something,  
>
>>>because I've suspected it for years.... problem I think is, that it is
>>>buried
>>>way back in Evolution somewhere with very primitive cells and animals
>>>when such a thing actually DID exist... in fact there are probably still
>>>signs of it in the modern animal.  Most likely, the "cleavage of the     
>>>
>> > double  
>
>>>helix" has something to do with the "cleavage of the egg".... what
>>>do they call it..... "mitosis"?
>>>      
>>>
>>Yep - mitosis is the process from triggering the chromosomes to copy
>>themselves until the final cell division.
>>    
>>
>>>  The way I understand mitosis is that the DNA "chromosome" actually
>>>doubles into "two double helices" and then separates so one double
>>>helix goes to each daughter cell during cleavage.  I'll bet "originally"
>>>the double helix itself separated and one helix each went to each      
>>>
>> > daughter  
>
>>>cell,
>>>and then inside the daughter cells they doubled again.  This probably      
>>>
>> > proved  
>
>>>too risky, so it finally developed a method of doubling first, and then
>>>separating into the doughter cells..... or something like that.
>>>      
>>>
>><http://staff.jccc.net/pdecell/proteinsynthesis/dnarepli.html> shows
>>three possible ways to replicate a double helix - conservative, dis-
>>persive and semi-conservative. In general, the semi-conservative way
>>is used in real cells.
>>    
>>
>>>  The other thing to investigate is whether it is only ONE side of the
>>>double
>>>helix which is used to produce cells, or whether BOTH SIDES are actually
>>>read by RNA?  I don't in fact know the answer to this basic question.
>>>I posted this to bionet.biphysics, maybe someone there can tell us
>>>something?
>>>      
>>>
>>RNA is a messenger between the outside of the nucleus and the DNA in
>>the nucleus (which resides in the chromosomes).
>>
>>These are two brief description how DNA parts are copied to RNA:
>>
>><http://www.accessexcellence.org/RC/VL/GG/protein_synthesis.html><http://www.accessexcellence.org/RC/VL/GG/rna_synth.html>
>>
>>
>>I think it is sufficient for the moment. To get deeper into this, it
>>would take a lot of time. My "special interests" are programming and
>>electronics, not biology. Would be interesting, but I don't have the
>>time to learn all this stuff...    
>>
>
>[Hammond]
>Hey Bernie.... all this encyclopediac stuff is enough to give us a headache.
>

Ouch! ;)

>The SPoG only depends on simple clear cut primary robust simple
>facts.  It's the simple stuff that's hard to understand you know.... not the
>complex stuff.
>

Yep - things which look quite trivial sometimes are more
difficult than they seem to be. See the discussion about
mirror images or the observer standing on the surface of
a rotating object...

>Simple stuff like:
>
>1.  Real space is cubic  (has a cubic metric)
>

This "cubic metric" doesn't tell us _anything_ about the
real shape of an object.

>2.  This causes the first 3 cleavages of the egg to be orthogonal.
>

You should read the documents from the linked locations?
The chosen form only depends on the surface area of each
cell and the best possible connection between the cells.
All cells have to handle the input of material to "feed"
each cell with energy and it has to handle the output of
"waste". The orthogonal arrangement provides the maximum
surface area to perform the exchange of food and waste &
the fastest possible exchange of "messengers".

That's the only reason why it looks like it looks, there
is no magic involved.

>2.  The first 3-cleavages of the egg cause the 3-symmetry
>     axes of the adult body (in both plants and animals)
>

How should I interprete this repetition of (2.)? Is your
previous (2.) invalid? Or is this second (2.) a (2.1.)?

However, this only is true in a very far fetched thought
that each cell includes an identical set of chromosomes.
What these cells form later on could be observed under a
microscope, of course. It's up to you to prove your idea
by making a series of experiments with cells after their
3rd cleavage.

>3.  Real space causes Psychometry space via the "cubic" cleavage of the
>brain.
>

Yep. After the tooth fairy brushed the teeth of Mr. Psy-
chometry and Ms. Hindbrain.

>4.  Psychometry space is "curved" by brain growth. (children have
>     very large curvature, adults less curvature)
>

You're still misinterpreting your own diagram?

>5.  This "curvature" explains the historical phenomena called "God"
>

All Gods will be slain in the final battle called Ragna-
r�ck...

>6.  Since real space causes Psychometry space, and the curvature of
>     real space is called Gravity, and the curvature of Psychometry
>     space is called God, we have the result that Gravity causes God,
>     or  "God=G_uv".
>

You should update your formula:

if(!Ragnar�ck)
{
God = G_uv;
}
else
{
God = dead;
}


Greetings from Augsburg

Bernhard Schornak