Your mind is about to be blown

I wrote this e-mail in response to a Bible-bumper and decided I needed to share it. I hope he comes around. Merry Christmas (and Happy Hanukkah).

[Slightly modified for readability and effect]

[begin]

I (and others) have reasons to believe that many ancient books were composed sort of as "Arks of the Covenant", with the real knowledge hidden between lines of the literal text. Here is something that I have synthesized about the past based on things I have read and interpreted from a variety of different reputable sources over the years. Yes, reputable is kind of subjective -- deal with it:

Up until around fifty to one hundred years ago (at least as of recently), knowledge of things such as stars, causes of atmospheric phenomena, and the Earth rotating around the Sun, was not colloquial. The "gap" between educated and uneducated has only grown larger in the past twenty years, thanks mostly to the internet. Anyway, those that are taught "sacred" or "classified" knowledge are also able to confound the commoners by using either high technology and/or their learned pattern recognition to perform miracles and/or predict the future. Of course, many of these people were considered and worshiped as Gods in the past, when the commoners didn't know any better. Some of them used their knowledge and influence for good, but some of them got greedy, as those with power tend to do, and instead used it maliciously...

Being more "fit" to thrive and reproduce, the "Gods", their progeny, and perhaps some of their lucky disciples remained in power, many accumulating more, primarily in the form of money, land, and/or influence. Unfortunately, altruistic elites with the desire to stop the malicious were either outnumbered, outspoken, overpowered, or a combination of those, and the deception was allowed to continue. Apparently this viral cycle has repeated itself multiple times in recent history.

***

Relevant definitions:

The Alpha Mentality: Primal survival instinct associated most heavily with type-A personalities -- an aggressive tendency to be the most successful, have the most women, the most money, most power, etc. -- that is inherited from the genetic material (RNA/DNA) that encodes us, itself wanting simply to replicate and thereby spread its influence.

Inertia: An object in motion remains in motion until acted on by force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction.

Entropy: Defined mathematically as the heat differential over the temperature differential (dQ/dT), entropy can philosophically be rationalized as an effective signal to noise ratio of the universe. The signal to noise ratio is always increasing as more particles encounter one another and become entangled. As this occurs, the universe "learns", or maybe more accurately, "evolves", almost exactly as a human brain does, making new connections among existing neurons, which allow electrical signals to travel more quickly and efficiently through the neural network. A perfect crystal (i.e. a structure so stable that there is no motion whatsoever) has zero entropy because it does not evolve, no matter how much heat, pressure, or time it is subjected to. A perfect crystal has never been discovered, at least to my knowledge.

***

The modern archetype of God may in fact have been derived from a real, living human(s) with light skin and a long beard, as many ancient texts and drawings depict mysterious predecessor humans with these physical characteristics. Whether or not they had real superhuman powers is still up for debate, however I certainly wouldn't be surprised if they did given that humans in earlier times probably didn't have to deal with nearly as much ridiculous, artificial shit as we do today, thus were able to focus much more on their own personal growth and exploring the world around them.

My view of God is as a metaphor for the force of creation and being, not unlike your own, however I think that God set the universe in motion approximately 13 billion years ago and subsequently became everything within its bounds. By that logic, you and I and everyone else all have the potential to awaken that which sleeps within us and reunite with our LORD once again. All it takes is an open mind and practice -- we've been misled, but we are still the children of God. As per math, when infinity is divided by anything less than itself, the quotient is still infinite.

I hope this makes some sense, too...

[end]

Smell ya later, dweeb.

Biowave theory

Since I haven't posted in about a month, this is a message that I recently attempted to relay to Nassim Haramein -- I hope it finds him. If not, it found you:

I like your style and just want you to notice that DNA is shaped like a sine wave and its derivative when you look at it from the side. This is in support of the coherent light being hypothesis (that I just gave a name). Interestingly, one "wavelength" of DNA is approximately 3.4 nm, depending on the 'link number', which [matches that of a] deep UV [light wave]. This is consistent with at least one intuitive prediction despite being kind of hard to grasp academically (i.e. UV tends to break bonds, but maybe of low enough intensity...). Associations of Gariaev et al. say they detect and use radiowaves in their holographic DNA information experiments. I haven't done any experiments myself, but I think radiowaves could resonate with either a long overtone of the wavelength or some longitudinal acoustic mode [(i.e. as a frequency)]. Just some stuff to think about.

I admire your work. Happy Holidays!

**

In addition, I realized today that maybe, if DNA is used to send and receive EM waves, the natural base of the wavelength logarithm would be about ten (~10.4 bases per complete helical turn). Perhaps this is why humans have an affinity for that particular base in mathematics.

Happy Winter, Merry Christmas, and Happy Hannukkah (among others)!

Another reason why eggs are among the healthiest foods on the planet

Happy Week-That-We-Really-Need-To-Start-Being-More-Thankful-For-Things!

            I have now made deviled eggs a whopping twice in my life (both this Thanksgiving week) and have since convinced myself that the fluid balance in my recipe is perfect. Given that, I guess the world deserves to know my secret...

First, the recipe for some bomb deviled eggs:

1.      8 whole, hard-boiled eggs

2.      5 Tbsp Mayo

3.      1 Tsp Vinegar

4.      1 Tsp Mustard

5.      SPICE

Note that the recipe is extremely flexible and scalable. I use cage-free eggs, apple cider vinegar, poupon/horseradish mustard, mayonnaise made with olive oil, and a liberal myriad of whatever spices I’m feeling/are available (get creative). Sea salt is the [good] shit. Also note that I prefer to make food that will extend the lives of those who eat it rather than shorten them, hence the non-conventional staple ingredients. Either way, it’s hard to ruin the health benefits of eggs. Note that eggs from humanely raised, cage-free chickens are way better than those eggs you can get at Wally World for 88 cents a dozen. I’m half-Jew and even I can resist the urge to buy the cheapest thing on the shelf when it means I'm supporting something I believe in, so you can, too. Don’t encourage that.

Now for the good part – I think I figured out a new reason why eggs are among the healthiest foods on the planet and you will be among the first to read it:

Eggs contain lots of Sulfur. When anaerobes in your GI tract ferment organic sulfur compounds like the amino acid cysteine, they produce H₂S (the sulfur analogue of water), among other small sulfur-containing molecules. You also naturally produce H₂S and use it as a signaling molecule, albeit in smaller quantities. When you fart, you release a small amount of the gaseous metabolite (which exhibits a characteristic "rotten egg" aroma),¹ that may, believe it or not, actually be beneficial to inhale. Note that H₂S smells strongly because it is toxic in larger quantities and naturally abundant in places like volcanoes, therefore your nose has receptors that have evolved to detect extremely low concentrations of the gas. That being said, if you hold in too many farts, the H₂S will be directly absorbed back into your system and is much more likely to poison you from the inside, since in that case none of the gas is dissipated.

Anyway, recent research indicates that H₂S is a pretty potent anti-inflammatory chemical at low concentrations, suppressing the expression of inflammatory cytokines including IL-1β, TNF-α, IFN-γ, IL-12, and IL-23, among others, and in some cases increasing the expression of anti-inflammatory IL-10.² The molecule is also involved in mediating NF-κB and cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) activity,² the former of which is involved in recruitment of other cytokines and the latter of which is the same enzyme that traditional NSAID drugs like aspirin are thought to inhibit. H₂S is a pivotal player in tissue repair likely due to its stimulatory roles in mitochondria, its ability to modulate the growth, death, and activity of immune cells, as well as its physical reducing power. It has also been found to foster a healthy GI-tract, due both to its engagement in gastric mucosa signaling and likely also to its inherent antimicrobial activity. Experiments suggest that consumption of H₂S-precursor drugs do, indeed, reduce inflammatory symptoms in mice and rats. ²

Take-home message: Fart-gas is actually an antioxidant, so sniff up.

Since this was just kind of meant to be a fun fact, that will be all for now. For more information and an awesome related project, check out this link: 

https://courses.cit.cornell.edu/ee476/FinalProjects/s2009/rac82_mos22/rac82_mos22/

References:

1.      René E Cormier. “Chapter 90: Abdominal Gas”, Clinical Methods: The History, Physical, and Laboratory Examinations, 3^rd Edition, Boston, MA: Butterworths. Available from: <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK201/>. (1990)

2.      John Wallace, et al. “Gaseous mediators in resolution of inflammation”, Seminars in Immunology, 27(3), 227-233. (2015)

I just did a Google search for myself

Narcissism happens to the best of us. I returned to this page because I found the picture of parallel-stranded DNA in a Google Image search (along with a less-than-flattering picture of a shirtless me in high school (I was trying to impress a girl, but it ended up not working (go figure))) and I realized that I hadn't updated that post to clarify that chromosomal DNA is not parallel-stranded. I just did that. Here's the current figure in that paper (that may be finished eventually):

Figure 1.  Antiparallel-stranded DNA. The two strands are complimentary, meaning that each  attracts specifically to its partner, and are often unique.  As a consequence of the pairing, ‘genes’ are usually only encoded on one strand. In chromosomal coding DNA, in which the two strands are antiparallel, Adenine (A) pairs with Thymine (T) and Guanine (G) pairs with Cytosine (C). In RNA, T is replaced with Uracil (U). The G-C interaction holds two strands together more tightly than the A-T interaction because there is one more Hydrogen bond between the nitrogenous bases, thus organisms that must thrive in high-temperature environments like deep sea vents tend to have G/C-rich genomes that were naturally selected to keep their genetic material from unraveling. Though not so apparent in this figure, the purine (A,G) and pyrimidine (C,T,U) bases are relatively free to rotate about the bond to the sugar backbone, hence both parallel and antiparallel strand orientations are allowed.

Anyway, I haven't finished that yet because I've been working on two presentations that are conveniently scheduled back-to-back this coming week (Sunday and Monday). One of them is my thesis, which was "done" three months ago but, of course, not finished. While I'm riding that tangent, let me just express my dissatisfaction with academia (again) because my advisor tried to scold me when I jauntily noted that "Science is never actually done." And that's why I need a break. Maybe forever.

Anyway, I am excited to finally defend this thesis while my committee is present.

I'd say "Wish me luck", but I don't need it. Maybe I should do that anyway...

'Til next time.

Humility much?

I wrote this trying to describe entropy. Turns out I didn't need to describe entropy, but I thought it was too good to just delete:

Over time, history fills space, implying a chronological ‘arrow’. As more of space is occupied by the past, the present becomes an increasingly complex fraction of the whole, manifesting on our level like the next iteration of a Koch snowflake.



Also I defined a new word last week:

Oncolosis (n): Continuous cell division

We usually call discordant oncolosis "cancer", which is initiated when a protooncogene acquires a mutation that forces the cell into replication mode.

I defined it this way because I believe that concordant oncolosis can also exist based on some of my more recent research for this paper I'm working on.

Sure, it's only tangentially related to the actual thesis, but here is some potential published evidence anyway:

Am J Chin Med. 2000;28(1):3-8.

Seeds induced to germinate rapidly by mentally projected 'qi energy' are apparently genetically altered.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10794112


Bullshit-free link to free fulltext article:
http://zeniclinic.com/2011/04/dna/

The authors don't interpret it this way, so maybe I'm getting ahead of myself, but what else could be happening? (Please do comment if you have something meaningful to add to this)



Later, dweeb (thanks for reading).

Update

It has now been too long since I wrote that last entry. I meant to do some quick research and pump out a buffed up version of it in less than a week, but, of course, after doing some research, that lead to more, which lead to more things that I wanted to mention, which lead to more things I had to read...

Etcetera, etcetera, I think you get it. If you don't, welcome to the scientific process. Even Einstein was wrong sometimes. Even Tesla was wrong sometimes. Feynman called light a particle in some of his lectures.

Hell, Plato tried to write about chemistry in Timaeus, but the book was published and he turned out to be wrong, too (at least based on the audio translation that I listened to). Then I tried to act smart in front of my chemistry 1320 classes and I taught the story of Plato being wrong wrong.

This doesn't make these people bad -- on the contrary, it makes them a little bit better when they correct the mistake.

(For those interested, in Timaeus, Plato groups all things into one or more of the four "original" elements: Fire, Water, Earth and Air, then attempts to explain chemistry by describing the interactions among each of the 'Platonic solids', named after him, associated with each element. In Timaeus, he groups oil with the water element, which would be inaccurate as we know today. The tetrahedron was predicted to represent fire, which is coincident with the shape of white phosphorus.)

(*long breath* ...)

Anyway, the research on DNA is still ongoing, and I will post a link to the product when it's finished. So far I'm at 8 pages (including references). It turns out my original hunch was probably right, but the way that I tried to rationalize it was probably wrong.

Either way, it will be a pretty good read when it's done. The progress has slowed a bit because I'm trying to get involved in stuff to keep myself out of trouble (most of the time, at least).

And I think I'll leave you with a bane of metaphysical quacks out there because even they have been known to prey on the innocent at times...

How can you tell the difference between a real scientist and a phony sell-out? Sometimes it's not so simple...

Since most everyone that you'll ever come in contact with wants to make a little cash, most to be comfortable, but the best of which just to stay alive, you can't assume that someone is trying to cheat you just because they want to sell you something. Unfortunately, you often need to be somewhat fluent in science to tell the difference between hogwash and genuine good faith, but at the heart of it, what you're looking for is:

Less speculation, more science!

You can tell almost immediately if someone is genuine by whether or not they want to make you pay for knowledge. If they use fuzzy language and don't lay anything on you before the check-out screen, you don't even want to make it that far.

On the other hand, if they provide you with valuable personal experience, chemical names/structures, and/or referenced facts, they are almost certainly good, and you can probably feel okay about paying them for their services if you feel so inclined.

On the other other hand, though, fuck money and technology (in modern-day practice, not in theory). What we all really need is a solid chunk of life minus material distractions. When that day comes, we should evolve by ourselves.

Here's hoping it does.



Stay fresh, yo.

On the history of human genetics

I have listened to multiple accounts by people that claim humans of antiquity may have had more than two strands of DNA. While this could explain how some were embodied with massive stature and/or strength, I am pretty sure that this is actually not how DNA works, however since I haven't the experience as an empirical chemist, I haven't a good way to prove this either and thus could, of course, be wrong.

That being said, I have been learning about this stuff for a while and still feel more qualified to discuss it than many other humans.

I believe some channelers (using the term broadly) could be mistaken not in the idea itself, but in their use of untrained language while attempting to describe its substance.

Here's what I mean:

Specifically, I have heard one account suggesting that ancient Lemurians (the supposed precursor civilization to the Atlantians) had 22-stranded DNA and one account suggesting that the Nephalim (referring to giant people and/or their relatives that may have existed sometime during the age of the Old Testament) had 3-stranded DNA. Both accounts can be found on YouTube. While perhaps not utterly and completely impossible, both of these theories are highly improbable based on what we know so far about the phylogeny of organisms worldwide.

Now we'll get a little bit more technical:

DNA, as it exists in the genomes of almost if not every single living (nonviral) cell on Earth, is a dimeric polymer, meaning that it is composed of two complimentary, long nucleotide chains that are held together due to the fairly strong interstrand (from one to another) noncolvalent Hydrogen bonds that form between nitrogenous bases. It can be difficult to picture, so Figure 1 is a schematic drawing translated into two dimensions:

Figure 1.  Parallel-stranded DNA. Genes can be encoded on both strands of the double helix. Strands are complimentary, meaning that each one is unique and attracts specifically to its partner. In DNA, Adenine pairs with Thymine and Guanine pairs with Cytosine. The G-C interaction holds two strands together more tightly because there is one more Hydrogen bond between the nitrogenous bases, thus organisms that must thrive in high-temperature environments like deep sea vents tend to have G/C-rich genomes that were naturally selected to keep their genetic material from unraveling.

... Just imagine the chains in Figure 1 spiraling around in their characteristic 'double helix' shape, with just over ten nucleotides (the polymeric units labeled in Figure 1, ending in -ine) constituting one complete 'link' (turn) per strand in a biological environment. Google Images would be a useful tool if you cannot visualize this.

Sequences roughly matching the code for protein machinery that handles RNA transcription from double-stranded DNA in modern humans, among other things, were recovered from ancient Pandoraviruses found preserved in a circa 30,000 year-old permafrost sample found in modern-day Siberia. Interestingly, these viruses were successfully revived and are about 4 times larger than relatively large viruses that thrive today. Two 'species' of Pandoravirus were found in the sample, both of them containing machinery designed to infect amoeba, but not humans. Their genomes are currently the largest viral genomes discovered, containing up to 2.5 million base-pairs (1,2). For reference, the human genome contains around 3 billion base pairs, which is more than one thousand times the [unwound] size of the Pandoravirus genome.

This could mean one of two things:

1. A widespread viral pandemic infected ancient humans with genetic machinery that no longer allowed them to handle many-stranded DNA (possible, but unlikely)

OR

2. Nonviral coding DNA has always (at least for the past 30,000 years) been double-stranded on Earth.

While my gut supports option number two, that wouldn't mean that the channelers are completely wrong. They would, however, probably benefit from taking a biochemistry class.

Humans today are diploid, meaning that they have two copies of all 23 human chromosomes (with the exception of the X and Y chromosomes in males), totaling 46. Many plants and animals are polyploid, meaning that they have more than two copies of each unique chromosome, which are themselves composed of condensed double-stranded DNA and protein. The most common polyploids have three or four copies of each chromosome, but many have more. Among polyploids, many are reportedly also hermaphroditic and/or native to temperate climates and higher elevation (3).

Here's the revised theory: At some point(s) in history, humans were polyploid.

It would make sense based on the science and what channelers have said, but that's all I have to go on at the moment. Unfortunately, DNA doesn't stick around long enough to be recovered from unfrozen lithospheric fossils, so proving this could be difficult (but not impossible).


References:

(1) Nadège Philippe, et al. “Pandoraviruses: amoeba viruses with genomes up to 2.5 Mb reaching that of parasitic eukaryotes”, Science, 341(6143), 281-286. (2013)
(2) Cory Camasta. "Life and a Half: Engineering a Better Future". Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282979913_Life_and_a_Half_Engineering_a_Better_Future. (2015)
(3) Richard Smith-Unna. Referenced forum post. Available from: http://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/935/why-is-polyploidy-lethal-for-some-organisms-while-for-others-is-not. (June 8th, 2012)