Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation

From: George Hammond (nowhere_at_nomailspam.com)
Date: 09/21/04 

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 12:49:12 -0400

"bv_schornak" <nowhere@schornak.de> wrote in message
news:cikd78$o5$05$1@news.t-online.com...
> 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. In fact the longitudinal
lay out of the HOX Genes in a DNA strand ARE isomorphic to the
longitudinal axis of the animal body. 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!
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.... 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.
   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"?
   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.
   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?

>
> Greetings from Augsburg
>
> Bernhard Schornak

====================================
   SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
        1st mirror site:
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
        2nd mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
     new site (under construction):
http://home.comcast.net/~proof-of-god
====================================

Relevant Pages

  • Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation
    ... surrounded by the RNA. ... DNA double helices). ... Here you can see that the double helix - which looks quite symmetric ... much about which gene is responsible for which cells. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation
    ... if we separate both cells after the first ... Early on I had the idea that the DNA DOUBLE HELIX was actually ... way back in Evolution somewhere with very primitive cells and animals ... the "cleavage of the double ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation
    ... Early on I had the idea that the DNA DOUBLE HELIX was actually ... Maybe in very primitive animals it was... ... and then inside the daughter cells they doubled again. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation
    ... George Hammond wrote: ... >Early on I had the idea that the DNA DOUBLE HELIX was actually ... >and then inside the daughter cells they doubled again. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Functionally optimized op-codes
    ... helix fast, the trouble was that if I used a long strip of material ... It has little to do with the genetic code. ... The only way in which DNA structure is relevant to the genetic code is ... stronger (more resistent to mutations and to extreme conditions) than ...
    (comp.ai.philosophy)