Standing-Wave Genetics [was: Substances triggering brain tumors (Parkinson)]

kenneth collins kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Tue Mar 15 11:25:14 EST 2005


"JF Baure" <nano_brain at yahoo.fr> wrote in message news:bic611hfn2lm6a4csv4n1le75c619u6m6h at 4ax.com...
| Le Tue, 15 Feb 2005 09:13:01 GMT, "kenneth collins"
| <kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> a écrit :
|
| >So Researchers alter one thing which
| >simultaneously breaks other functionalities
| >that're multiplexed within "the genome".
| >
| >I've not Verified it, yet, but my view is
| >that "the genome" is not like a "book of
| >instructions". It's more like a "hologram",
| >and it's activation is always unitary, across
| >the =whole= "genome". This's the only
| >way genetic material can "know" how
| >and why to "express" one set of things
|
| I am not qualified in these fields (genomics & neurology/brain
| dynamics), not even in the general field of biology, but as far as i
| can understand what you explain, i deeply agree. I am not sure "i got
| it" all along since it is quite technical and in english:

Hi JF,

First, the concepts that I discuss
arose within my own work, which
has not, yet, been acknowledged
by others. I'm a long-time poster,
here in b.n, and folks who meet
here understand this about me.

But you must not accept why I say
until others agree with it.

That said, it will stand :-]

| 1) Do you say that the neural structures can induce forms and states
| (*) given a specific environment (a set of stimulis in the general
| sense)  in the very same way that the DNA+associated molecular
| apparatus can induces proteinic forms or shapes given a specific
| environment ?

No [I've read your *]. What I was
discussing is the need for "the genome",
as it enters into neuronal function, to be
activated in accord with the neural ac-
tivation that actually occurs within nerv-
ous systems -- because neurons "en-
code" learning as a result of the neural
activation that they experience by un-
dergoing microscopic growth, and
such growth must be coupled to the
overall "plan" of the neural Topology,
which means that the growth has to
"know" how to fit-into the neural To-
pology -- which means that "the gen-
ome" must be activated in a way that's
rigorously-coupled to experience.

Can you see it?

In order to preserve the overall "plan"
of the neural Topology, the molecules
that construct the growth that encodes
learning have to be able to "shaped"
in accord with the necessary structure
that will encode learning, especially
when there's any sort of structural
"bifurcation".

"The genome" cannot just spew-out
"generic" molecular stuff that 'magically'
"falls-together" to form structure that
both encodes learning, and preserves
the overall "plan" of the nervous system.

It has to be activated in accord with
the activation that actually occurs "in"
neurons.

Folks have no problem with any of
this when the dopic is "development".
It's agreed-upon that, during develop-
ment, structurally-relevant signalling
guide activation of "the genome" in
ways that determine the structural
Topology of the developing nervous
system.

Basically, what I've asserted that an-
alogous signalling, that activates "the
genome" in particular ways occurs
as a rigorously-coupled result of the
neuronal activation that actually oc-
curs "within" a neuron, thus rigorous-
ly-coupling neuronal growth to exper-
ience, because neural activation is
coupled to experience.

| 2) In the same way that we can encode many images viewable under
| specific optical angles within a single hologram ? The information
| would be then accessed or processed through an interferential process
| in both cases ?

To a strong degree, yes, but it's
not like the homogeneously-dis-
tributed medium of an optical
hologram.

"The genome" is encoded as a
heterogeneously-distributed "med-
ium", and this requires that the "ad-
dressing" that I'm asserting has to
work with respect to that hetero-
geneous "medium".

So it's not the same as an optical
hologram.

Where it is similar, in the view I'm
asserting, is that "the genome" is
not "addressed" linearly, but in "3-D" -- 
in a way that "addresses" non-con-
tiguous portions of "the genome",
which, in my view, is necessary be-
cause the set of all possible exper-
iences is infinitely-large in scope,
which requires "the genome" to be
a "toolkit" that allows the construc-
tion of neuronal structure that is
commensurately-variable within
the overall "plan" of the nervous
system. During replication, this
3-D addressing could be transformed
into RNA via the formation of "loops"
of DNA that create new "sequences"
-- like when a Child ties a ribbon in
her hair, the regions of the ribbon
within the knot constituting the anal-
ogue of a 3-D-selected "sequence"
[there's a diagram in my Molecular
Biology text that shows such "loops",
but I've not verified my interpretation
of what it was depicting, and I've
not yet explained how such loops
are(?) selected as a result of exper-
ience, but expect that it is a result
of interference patterns that derive
in the ionic conductances that em-
power activation potentials. But
don't hold me to that. It's just
where I was when I closed my
book :-]

Other factors that point to this nec-
essity include the way that 'every-
thing' within the body "knows" how
to function with respect to 'every-
thing' else in the body. This could
be coded sequentially, being ex-
pressed during development, but
is, itself, "3-D knowledge" that
has to exist within "the genome".

There's a lot more in my position,
but that is, basically, it.

I was going to work all of this out,
in terms of the known Molecular Bio-
logy, but realized, shortly after I be-
gan to do so, that my personal re-
sources would run-out before I could
"gracefully" finish doing that [without
'guessing']. [My personal resources
have already "run-out", in that I'm
having to "economize" while trying to
find a way to stay-Alive. This greatly-
decreases the degree to which I can
devote myself to my research [which
I've funded with my personal resources
for the past 35 years. It's a Sorrow. I'd
like to be able to just do it, and had
to Close the text I was reading as if
I was closing the coffin on a dead
Friend.]

I'm Certain that the =general= position
I've taken will be Verified as being True.
The Necessity of it is Obvious.

I developed it to counterbalance what
was, formerly, the "everything is genetics"
position -- because I became "alarmed"
that folks were almost-completely dis-
regarding experience, saying that they
"could modify behavior" by just plugging-
in different snippets of DNA, and that
this or that "gene" is "completely-respons-
ible" for this or that behavior. That's
=Never= the case. If it were the case,
learning would be Impossible.

| 3) How are these ideas considered by specialists or the mainstream
| community ?

No one, other than you, has com-
mented [yet] on the position I've taken
with respect to "the genome" having
to be activated in a way that is rigor-
ously-coupled to experience.

Your English is Spledid, Jean-François.

Cheers, ken [k. p. collins]

| Jean-François Baure
|
| (*) forms & states refer (in my views) to ideas, thoughts, processes,
| memories, and more generally to (performed) mental tasks or mental
| states. i am not sure whether these things are linked to clearly
| defined neurology/cognition concepts...






More information about the Neur-sci mailing list