Monday, February 13, 2012
Flatworms, Roundworms, and Superior Sperm
Flatworms, Roundworms, and Superior Sperm
L. Edgar Otto February 13, 2012
Is prestige essential for the promotion of scientific progress or does it inhibit enquiry unfairly?
Sometimes, when I read an article, a review of some technical discovery I smell a Nobel Prize. Such prizes are somewhat hereditary in that Nobel prize laureates's have been know to beget other laureate winners. Einstein was not awarded that prize for his synthetic and heuristic theories but for his results on the photo electric effect. I have heard it said that it was awarded to him so as to add to the prestige of the prize as he was renown and popular.
Some working scientists and those in academia do not understand from their world view why when fundamental theories are questioned it seems always a challenge to Einstein even at the hint of some new physics that may change the established facts. This seems to me to be the new spring via the internet where hold up as a prize this social reward and like a trial by a jury of peers the justice of it is blind and not always the correct decision made as to the proof of actions and events.
This new spring can be the revolution against the evaluation by such a process that many times is inspired by those left outside the opportunity to have the academic freedom to do research much like when elected there is some time of immunity for the sake of stability in government by those in power or by general agreement some rules of conflict and diplomatic immunity that keeps a balance between various jurisdictions in the aggregate of world powers as armament and economic treaties that may work for the benefit of the whole.
Science, like the long time of adaptation and evolution, if it is to endure and build, has as one of its properties as a discipline that it is in a sense something exacting in its aspirations although we know there can be dead ends of logical systems that do not adapt in a non-necessary universe.
In the last few years there has been many observations, breakthroughs in discoveries, so fundamental as to suggest these will gain the prize at some future date regardless of some individual achievement or some consensus even by the whole computing power of mathematicians on the internet. Some of these relate to cell biology as to how mitosis occurs in various species of organisms. Speculations here usually suggest some utility by the discovery for disease and the processes of aging.
Lately, I see that a cell is exacting in the separation of chromosomes that can be related to certain proteins that balance the choices of what goes where and when into the daughter cells. I note also that some proteins seem to be in the organism from the start and is the ground for others that do not have such a long lifetime in their functions and coherence. I see also that for the process of mental phenomena, of memory in particular, that child abuse can lead to an individual that does not reach the most potential and is delayed in his general development and more likely to reach a certain decoherence toward in old age. These as just theories have always been questioned as controversial in matters of how psychology or evolution connects between the remote ends of lifetime as an individual evolves his understanding.
I see, and most of this comes from the science magazines it said that the main difference in man and the other primates is "superior sperm". (Now ladies, let us not raise a social issue here as it is hard to surpass the complexity of the human egg and well, vive l'difference if we really want a world of superior diversity). The superiority of sperm sets the coherence of the cells and for the brain results in a higher intelligence as well a longer life span than the lesser apes.
In the case of a controlling step in the process of mitosis by certain proteins the issue becomes one of the integration and differentiation of body cells, in particular the keeping separate those mechanisms that distinguish the stem cells from the differentiated cells. Probably, that this is presented as if an objective and materialist view of such a discovery along with the research comes a hidden agenda in effect for a world view, may tend to preserve the paradigm a little deeper than the general consensus as to what is the foundational view of the universe thus in those in the game of research are likely to have the opportunity to contribute until one day, merit aside, someone has the position to be the judge with respect to be sought for consultation by those who have not yet earned their peer status or tenure.
So in the general design of things there are fixed elements and there are adaptable elements which are like the proteins as the scaffolding for careful and creative new physics where even the few outsiders have some useful influence outside the stem cells for a little chaos can give us perspective. Even in the socialist models it was soon learned for an army not to have officers was to have an army that could not function as such.
As far as the media is concerned, perhaps seen with jealously by the state and for issues of privacy and property rights at least for the established world without a freer medium and the sharing of scientific knowledge with protections against the abuse of this not too wide a method of stealth and censorship, even the editors of newspapers with there position of op ed will take the letters to the editor as a lesser journalism so as to blacklist from the heart of publication those who chose to serve that function as if the town and not the gown in public meetings.
Moreover, the flat worms seem to have no such mechanisms as such for such mitosis yet they get along fine. In a quasic sense although separate they are easily cloned as if more closely one organism. In a general sense the very proteins eaten by one that has learned a maze teaches the solution, probably via RNA the way to navigate through that maze to the prize.
Beneath this level, heart tissue synchronized in the petrie dish and from different hearts reaches a compromise of the heartbeats. Cancer cells seem immortal just as such tissues that is not clearly dependent on an extended aggregation into a wider organism that globally protects its coherence and tendency to survive. Many of these principles as theoretical only prove to be the fact, controversial without the explicit molecules and energies involved so as to ground it as science. The nature and nurture debate as a general dialectic comes to mind. But can we say the organization of molecules has a purpose for the emergence of an organism? The fact that it exists in a pattern, an anthropocentrism, in a wider sense proves nothing deeper than what is as it is and that can be seen to explain nothing although it seems to, that gives a sense of purpose as if a sentient force behind these mechanism of nature that is still an open question of what is real in the world views.
Is the idea of a Nobel Prize a projection of our scientific research purposes or have we become a projection of that and of other concerns or rewards like that? Such rewards are much like the dreamy world of fantasy that is inspired by the virtual world which as a dream is subject to its inner laws of facts and reasons. Some mourn the loss or breakdown with on line friends as much as one would mourn the loss of some real friend or perhaps a family pet. Most time meetings result in the cruel world of reality where those more into the ideal of such a world act in real life with ill results. In a sense the internet is an extension of our substance and state of mind but can it be said to be a mind of its own even in the thought that a collective awakening might be seen so?
In a non-necessary universe its state of existing, vanished or as a given, or as a process of coming and going out of being, is a quasi-finite default state as far as objectivity and subjectivity goes. In the process, to say the universe does not or will not exist, perhaps as anything more than illusion while we can still think about it for we cannot say anything about its nothingness not in the given even if a false ground to explain what is that it could not be otherwise, we find the paradox that some such world is not forbidden, with of course an uncertainty of the numbers of such necessary worlds where they meet the possible in physical reality and our imaginations, that being indifferent to some design or to some purpose and with nothing else to make a difference to the design we can understand that in the foundations the universe will exist if it is not forbidden and the question as to why it comes to be is not necessarily one that it is meaningful to ask on the lower levels of possible designs.
These are issues of quasicity in the sense of what is the unique original in the actions of light and sentient being in a universe of patterns, parallels and similarities. It is where the Chinese Box debate as to the nature of symbols meets on the cave walls of walls of Plato as the Ship of Theseus on the seas of chaos. It is the difference in the round and flat worms on the make in the wormholes of chance and the span of the manifolds and infinity seek mirrors for renewal and conjugation (even on the paramecium level, or better the actions of sperm like that of the grampus dolphins in a pack hunting the ladies have those that sacrifice themselves for the alpha male to take the prize where such relations are superior binary one-on-one instead of multivalued at least at one event). The ship paradox is solved somewhat by the quasic ideas as to what constitutes that distinguishing as unique an individual or collective and is the case for the more general physical processes as the state of the foundations of the universe insofar as we may now feel a little better explanation of the what if not the why it is. To imagine the events, as in a quantum world as many-world or multiverse is to go beyond the natural state of the totality, that I have styled the Omnium.
Also, the concept of some sort of scale invariance taken to logical extremes is not deep enough as physics to reach this state of explanation, in effect the idea of crystal lattices as real or abstract symmetries needs some deeper work as to how the theory relates to a third law of thermodynamics- for we have to address the level of aggregates of patterns before we can move on decisively to address what we come close to in the truth of the matters of creative physics and yes that which will stand as objective design should science prove in the future to be creative and prove it by its new technologies that is hoped, as a scientific humanism or benevolent and fair judgement of equal weight at least initially for those who desire for whatever reason a life of research- give then a special place in heaven for the sake of us all, so rare such a hopeful species and so hard the proliferation in nature to insure the design, with purpose or not, fills this universe or not, in our hope the stars. For that, if not some higher being is as much our higher judge as we are in the design of our civilization itself. But I have told you much that you already know, and for me at least much that is new in my little corner on the checky shores of the quasi-infinite universe.
* * *