Monday, May 10, 2010
Preternatural Observation & the Real Character of DNAese
Preternatural Observation & the Real Character of DNAese
Apparently, what I have proposed as a biochemical experiment has been done in nature ages ago. I read the information differently but it does seem like the role of the expression of that information may be involved in genetic system diseases and processes by perhaps methylation. That is if the miRNA and snoRNA circles are like my viral compass deduced from intuitive and foundational first principles. Again, who knows where my insights would have led if I had gone to Madison for genetics? No doubt the lack of specialized education (due to the failure of my government to fulfill its obligations) is an impediment to our faith in and progress toward a Baconian vision of nature and science and our role in designing our own environs and evolution. But I do not understand exactly why those so trained, especially in one on one dialog, cannot seem to understand my views at all even with expert training. Or maybe it is an inhereted ability that brings us to linguistics and more integrated brains that behave with visual cues as if the music was there that they understand and abstractly may compose it and enjoy it in the vacuum of virtual silence.
Then again it may be the climate of our age, an echo perhaps of the scientists and philosophers of the past; of Aristotle and Plato, of Leibniz as the greatest philosopher or Newton as the greatest physicist. Yet science began in the seventeenth century with ideas of method that still lingers with us today as the working hypotheses. Let us also recall in the English speaking world that the sister of Cromwell, Robina, was married to Wilkins who not only tried to bring to the time the reform of language and beyond that a universal designed one, but also brought the ideas of Galileo by the vehicle of science fiction in a story about the flight to the moon.
From a scientific humanist point of view, maybe after a hundred years now too reductionist and overly logical, the romance with the introduced Chinese ideograms suggested a classification or characterization of notions independent of local speech which like the Chinese writing we think would have fossilized progress in adapting to new notions of wider scientific discoveries.
Now, in our modern age where the principle of uncertainty seems one of the few breakthrough ideas- as Rowlands asserts it is the physical interpretation of things and not say the group theory that leads to it that is the desired result of such foundational enquiry, quarks not SU(3) as the result and goal. In terms of information whatever way we interpret the role of the parameters we can say that as if such a principle of uncertainty that we can know or guarantee the author of a message or guarantee the message, but not both. Is space or abstract group geometry the author of the natural world? How about the messages especially in things like genetic messengers of which in our time the view is only that these are the reductionist authors of their own activity much like light itself can be said to influence the gravitational field even if it has no mass.
Now it may be that the code of things results in this concrete and natural form of duality to be interpreted as materialism- and it is as if the primal observer of the fact of the world that is, author unknown or not, actions but maybe not the carrier angels (messengers), God's magic bullets as if he, capable of sperm from outer space (that is what in the resources and chance arrangement of the gene code we inherent and encounter along the lines of Hoyle's theories represented by "Andromeda Strain") That the messenger RNA for example is assumed to be just another chance test, double blind or not empirically the watchmaker, to which we treat the human organism in the name of the general welfare and faith, as guinea pigs.
Our attempts to categorize nature and its notions, our struggle with self duality of epistemology as the center of science and philosophy since Descartes unto the Copenhagen interpretation ideas as possibilities on the quantum level of physics despite some successful universal languages such as the notations of diagrams of organic chemistry, has not resulted in a very logical and viable, adaptable, real character in terms of our notions or symbols of which there is unambiguous control over nature and ourselves. On the preternatural level, at least the metaphysics of nothingness (nilpotency) we may begin to see nature as not characterized (as Rowlands asserts in a physics or philosophy that not only makes overwhelming sense to me but shows the narrowness of many other researchers and thinkers). Then again I feel so much in the lineage of the British thinkers, mostly Cambridge, at least spiritually, beginning with Newton on to Conway and Penrose- I have to ask myself if perhaps there is a bias in my thinking or genes about such foundations. Or maybe these thinkers are the forefront of physics.
Wilkins Real Character was praised but not instituted by the Royal Society at the time. We understand the author but not the message or vice versa. Was Leibniz who was so far ahead of his time on the issues, who make careful decisions on what his language was to shed and keep of irreducible intelligibility? Was he perhaps enamored himself of the binary of the I Ching which only did the counting of the ones and zeros and yes the salamanders between nothing and being as he said of the imaginary numbers? Nature plays these games of skipping stones and calculi of which at times I feel but a small part of it even if the captain of my soul.
The real character in the accompanying illustration under the title is Wilkins symbol for God, and with the small comma above it for male... Our Father. Of course these early pioneers in language planning knew God was a catergory not divisible further in their classification schemes- more like Spinoza the other deep and great philosopher and maybe like Einstein the other possible exception as the greatest scientist other than Newton.
* * *
Here we go again. the same old sides of the foundational debates. From my view the ability to comprehend music beyond the cultural is the integration of the physics that our minds seem to at least approximate an image of in intelligibility- especially of continuous and discontinuous mathematical nature and other secondary ideas such as symmetry. As if a pendulum we see the questioning of the goal of a unified theory and those who seek it either as the program for a rational physics or in the form of the search for some idea of a Deity as did Newton and Descartes and Pascal and others in their vague purposes and unexpected consequences of method.
After posting this article, and thank you Paul Anthony for inspiring my musings again on what is Berkely like in the idea of some Prime Observer even at a distance, a preternatural one maybe of which we can infer in the nothingness some form of music, I find these two relavant articles from New Scientist:
Universal music (wave theory?) and hardwired mathematics as the ground at stake?
* * *
"Life itself is a product of imperfections, from the spatial asymmetry of amino acids to mutations during reproduction. Asymmetries forged the long, complex and erratic path from particles to atoms to cells, from simple prokaryotic cells without nuclei to more sophisticated eukaryotic cells, and then from unicellular to multicellular organisms."
The imperfect universe: Goodbye, theory of everything
* 10 May 2010 by Marcelo Gleiser
If the Omnium or theory of everything is abandoned awhile I will wait unto it is popular again and maybe a generation does not give up due to the difficulty of the contemplations and symbolism of notions. Yet the relaxed natural philosophy of creative design will remain an ateleological part of the cosmological down to earth principles.
* * *
At midday after checking general delivery finding a check I cannot cash unless I have a post 911 ID which of course costs some money- and as a govt check no one else can cash it for me either.
* * *
I want to store the quasic grid graph paper here for printing purposes when at the public library computers, and for readers who may want to print off this graph:
* * *
Next day: an interesting article appears on the sciencechatforum new activity in which the subject was on my mind- I mean how early on we can induce an animal to say grow new limbs and how all this fits into say a quasi-local patterning involving these issues of duality, octonions and this applied to the physics of the expressed genome (thereferenceframe has an artical also discussing the possible further use of octonions and so on.) But the point of all of this is that we are in an age of ongoing surprises and there is no good reason other than natural human inertia of laziness that we think the future of a more unified biochemistry and physics is still far away. Surely, around 12 to 16 codons we have the forerunner of the viral compass structures as part of the evolving of species and organism development. Welcome to the new science. http://newsinfo.nd.edu/news/15540/