Standing-Wave Genetics [was: Substances triggering brain tumors (Parkinson)]
kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Wed Mar 16 06:46:49 EST 2005
"kenneth collins" <kenneth.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:ysEZd.393125$w62.291931 at bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| The "standing waves", here, could be as
| simple as ionic conductances [anything
| that communicates relative-position
| would do]. Ionic conductances can
| encode position because they alter,
| in ways that are rigorously-coupled
| to topological boundaries, which is
| what "standing wave" connotes in this
| particular stuff.
While flipping-through my Mol-Bio
text, just now, looking for the dia-
gram of the "loop-sequence" stuff
that I mentioned a couple of posts
ago, I came across a discussion of
"dynamic instability" within micro-
tubule growth [p. 522 of the text
that I've [twice] cited in earlier posts.
This so-called "dynamic instability"
is correlated with GTP hydrolyzation
to GDP [ibid].
On p. 533, this "dynamic instability"
is attributed to "the randomness of
chemical processes" :-]
Please get it straight -- there exists
no "randomness"! [Harrumph!]
What's actually happening is(?) that
the GDPs act as "receivers" with
respect to ionic-conductance-
"Coulomb forces", and interference
conjunctions within these forces are
what triggers the so-called "unexpected"
lengthenings and shortenings of the
It's not "random" at all, but is part of
the ionic-conductance-governed stuff
that couples "the genome" to experience.
I can't open the book without seeing
stuff like this that's been "overlooked"
by Molecular Biologists be-cause
Tapered Harmony has been actively-
withheld from them.
That's why I stopped reading the test.
It's 'two'-"Painful" to read in-it -- 'fairly'
rips-my-'jeart' to pieces be-cause every
page is filled with the =Tragedy= that
results from the work I've done having
been acctively-suppressed [Censored].
I'm still wanting to find the "loop-sequenc-
ing" diagram -- so I can read the correlated
text, and Correct my earlier discussion, if
it's necessary for me to do so.
But, Lord! Just flipping through the book
is as if I've descended into Hell. So much
is "missing" from this 'standard' stuff that
so-directs choices being made in Science
that it takes my breath away to just skim
I'll post a msg, one way or the other, on
the "loop" stuff when [if] I find the diagram.
Meanwhile, shame-on-everything that has
folks still 'believing' in 'randomness'.
K. P. Collins
More information about the Neur-sci