Life's Drive And Purpose, Choice Of Our Life's Purpose Is OURS

Henis,
Yah, G is right, it's just simple. It needs no complicated explanation for everyone to get the meaning right...

The Nature, Origin And Function Of Earth Life


Re Earth Life, my concepts of its nature, origin and function are amply presented in this thread:

Nature of Earth life: a construction temporarily constraining and maintaining energy.

Origin of Earth life: serendipitous energy-induced formation of the primal organisms, individual independent genes.

Nature of Earth's organisms: real virtual affairs, pop in and out of existence in life's matrix, the energy constrained in Earth's biosphere .

Function of Earth life: uphold and maintain as much constrained energy as possible by upholding and maintaining Earth's biosphere.


Dov Henis

PS: As a constrained energy phenomenon Earth's biosphere is a distant relative of black holes...
DH

The Nature, Origin And Function Of Earth Life

Re Earth Life, my concepts of its nature, origin and function are amply presented in this thread:

Nature of Earth life: a replicating construction temporarily constraining and maintaining energy.

Origin of Earth life: serendipitous energy-induced formation of the primal organisms, individual independent genes.

Nature of Earth's organisms: real virtual affairs, pop in and out of existence in life's matrix, the energy constrained in Earth's biosphere .

Function of Earth life: uphold and maintain as much constrained energy as possible by upholding and maintaining Earth's biosphere.


Dov Henis

PS: As a constrained energy phenomenon Earth's biosphere is a distant relative of black holes...
DH

Like Parents Like Progeny, Genomes To Multicelled Organisms

Researchers Find Something Very Expected:
Life Has Been Evolving Fractally

http://www.physorg.com/news129475602.html


A. Quote:

"... the researchers genetically blocked the two thermosensory neurons (known as AFDs) and their ability to sense temperature and discovered there was no response to stress in any cell in the organism without them. (C. elegans is a transparent roundworm whose genome, or complete genetic sequence, is known and is a favorite organism of biologists.)

“This shows, for the first time, that the molecular response to physiological stress is organized by specific neurons and suggests similarities to the neurohormonal response to stress,” said Morimoto, who was the first to clone a human heat shock gene in 1985. “The two neurons control how all the other cells in the animal sense and respond to physiological stress.”


B. Info: This organism type individuals contain a constant 959 cells; the position of cells is constant as is the cell number. The genome is small (100,269,912 bases), yet it encodes over 22,000 proteins, only slightly fewer than humans. About 35% of C. elegans genes are closely related to human genes.


C. Again, "This shows, for the first time, that the molecular response to physiological stress is organized by specific neurons..."

- What is this thing "molecular response"?

- Neurons are cells. Cells do not "organize" anything. It is the cell's genome, the organism within its multifunctional organ - the outer cell membrane - that does the "organizing".

- The AFD neuron reacts to warming by means of a transient increase of Calcium concentration inside the cell. "This was surprising...that two neurons control the response of the 957 other cells in C. elegans...".


D. Life has been evolving fractally

In multicelled organisms the nervous/sensory system relays electrical signals, directs movement, controls physiological processes and responses to environment, via the brain and the nervous system and the (five in human) senses.

See "Hormones in Context: Systems and Controls"
http://www.gender.org.uk/about/06encrn/61_cntrl.htm

Follow with "What does a worm want with 20,000 genes?"
http://genomebiology.com/2001/2/11/comment/2008

And finally see "How Decisions Are Made By The Genome"
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtop...80&#entry325606

"... the genome behaves not as being presided by a decider PG, by a President Gene, but by innate complete credence to each and every member of the cooperative genome commune of its genes membership, thus accepting a priori the decision of the individual member, but But BUt BUT coupling this with a very elaborate system of crisscross checklisting of this decision by other members of the genome."

It thus appears that Like Parents Like Progeny, Genomes To Multicelled Organisms, Life Has Been Evolving Fractally, and this evolution will proceed as long as Earth's biosphere maintains its "biocity", its capacity to maintain biologically usable energy.

Dov Henis

Similar Genes In Different Organisms Behave differently

A. "Everyone assumes that deletion of the same gene in the mouse and in humans produces the same phenotype". "Our results show that may not always be the case."

http://www.ns.umich.edu/htdocs/releases/story.php?id=6536


B. "How Decisions Are Made Within The OCM (outer cell membrane)"

http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtop...80&#entry325606

Who decides to do cell division or, generally, to do any thing, within the OCM, the outer cell membrane.

Let's leave aside the many decision-related questions such as when and how a need for a decision is prompted, how decisions are instructed and executed. Let's apply ourselves now ONLY to the question WHO makes the decision.

My conjecture is that the genome behaves not as being presided by a decider PG, by a President Gene, but by innate complete credence to each and every member of the cooperative genome commune of its genes membership, thus accepting a priori the decision of the individual member, but But BUt BUT coupling this with a very elaborate system of crisscross checklisting of this decision by other members of the genome.

C. Thus deletion of the same gene in different organism produces different phenotypic results. And this leads further to "Culture Is Biology, It Imprints Genetics, Drives Evolution"

http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtop...65&#entry323376

http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...65&#entry316631


Dov Henis

Anthropic Vanity Of Some CWRU Physicists


A. Anthropic principle and gibberish verbiage

http://www.physorg.com/news130167074.html

Anthropic principle: either of two principles in cosmology (a) conditions that are observed in the universe must allow the observer to exist ("weak anthropic principle"), (b) the universe must have properties that make inevitable the existence of intelligent life ("strong anthropic principle").

Gibberish: unintelligible or meaningless language; technical or esoteric language; pretentious or needlessly obscure language.

Verbiage: a profusion of words usually of little or obscure content; manner of expressing oneself in words; diction.

Gibberish verbiage: unintelligible meaningless pretentious obscure profusion of words of little or obscure content.


B. Intelligence of some CWRU physicists

"For the sake of their analysis, the authors define intelligent life as any organism capable of producing scientists who can observe the universe around them".

Contrast this their definition of intelligent (life) with the wordnet-princeton's definition: (life) that has the ability to comprehend, to understand and profit from experience.

It appears that some CWRU physicists "can observe the universe around them" but do not "have the ability to comprehend, to understand" their place and function in it...


C. Anthropology is an aspect of biology

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-P81pQcU1dLB..._Q--?cq=1&p=372

"Comprehension of evolutionary biology is an essential pre-requisite to the study of cultural anthropology.

- Culture is a basic biological entity. It is a ubiquitous elaboration/extension of genome's activity beyond its outermost cell membrane and of multicelled organisms' behaviour. It has been selected for survival of the genome as means of extending its exploitation capabilities of the out-of-cell circumstances, consequent to the earlier evolution and selection of the genome's organ, its outermost cell membrane, for controlling the inside-of-cell genes'-commune environmental circumstances.

- Every cultural element is an artifact which involves biological intra-/inter-cell expression and/or process; biological and cultural domains are not ontologically distinct, but instead culture inheres in biology.

- In the case of human cultures, ethnocentrisms are phenotypic cases of anthropocentrism; biologically both are normal Darwinian biological survival phenomena. Thus ethnocultures are human phenotypic survival tools."

To the above we may now add that some cosmo-physicists display strange anthropocentrism highly loaded with anthropic vanity.


Dov Henis

This post has been edited by HenisDov on May 19 2008, 07:15 AM

Observation Of Natural Repair Of DNA molecule

A. Researchers observed natural DNA-repair by homologous recombination mechanism

http://www.physorg.com/news130682450.html


B. Beautiful technology, beautiful work and beautiful results.

However, strange insistence on clinging, in discussing the work, to ancient pre-enlightenment terms:

http://www.tudelft.nl/live/pagina.jsp?id=1...4cd6937&lang=en

"Using single-molecule imaging, manipulation, and force-spectroscopy methods we want to unravel the mechanism by which human cells repair DNA double-strand breaks. Repair of double-strand breaks (DSBs), arising during genome duplication or from exogenous DNA damaging agents, is of pivotal importance for the maintenance of genome stability and the prevention of cancer. Eukaryotic cells primarily repair DSBs by one of two distinct pathways, either the error-prone non-homologous end-joining pathway or the generally more accurate homologous recombination pathway. Both of these pathways involve complicated DNA gymnastics and long-scale interactions such as bringing together DNA segments from different chromosomes and keeping broken ends in proximity for eventual joining. Understanding the critical process of repairing DSBs now involves trying to understand the mechanistic role of individual proteins or complexes in these DNA transactions."

Human cells do not repair nor do anything. Cells are not organisms. The outer cell membrane, the OCM, is an organ, a multifunctional organ of the genome that resides within it. It is the genome that is the organism, that does things, including its own repair.

When a DSB occurs it is not simply a structural or mechanical damage in a link within the OCM, not merely a "double-strand break in a DNA or protein". A DSB is a damage to the organism, to the genome. And it is the in-OCM organism, the genome, that orchestrates all the goings-on within its OCM including its own repair.


C. Eventually

Eventually humans, including "scientists", will comprehend that Earth life are Genomes, and that all Outer Cell Membraned, cellular organisms, are elaborations formed and maintained by their genomes for the survival of the genomes...

Dov Henis

Proposed Definition Of Earth Organism And Of Gene


An Earth organism: a temporary self-replicable constrained-energy genetic system that supports and maintains Earth's biosphere by maintenance of genes.

Gene: a primal Earth's organism.


Suggesting,

Dov Henis

Proposed Definitions Of Earth Life, Organism And Gene


Earth Life: 1. a format of temporarily constrained energy, retained in temporary constrained genetic energy packages in forms of genes, genomes and organisms 2. a real virtual affair that pops in and out of existence in its matrix, which is the energy constrained in Earth's biosphere.

Earth organism: a temporary self-replicable constrained-energy genetic system that supports and maintains Earth's biosphere by maintenance of genes.

Gene: a primal Earth's organism.


Suggesting,

Dov Henis

Science Counts Negligibly In Attitudes Re ESCR

http://www.physorg.com/news131970855.html

Why is this a "Surprising finding" ?

What does an ethical-moral attitude have to do with science?

We all are products of the "energy constrained in Earth's biosphere". We all are "temporary self-replicable constrained-energy genetic systems that support and maintain Earth's biosphere by maintenance of genes". These are our origin and destiny.

Ethics-morals are human artifacts, components of human culture, which like cultures of ALL organisms is one of our biological attributes. Humans developed ethics-morals as one of their survival means, as guide and rules for inter-humans cooperation, as intra- and inter- organisms cooperation are the base survival format of life starting since and with Earth's primal genes.

Ethics-morals are human phenotypic artifacts. Each human phenotype tends to value its own survival more than that of other human phenotypes. Some of us bear in mind nature's example, the inter-coopperation in our body of 10^13 human cells with 10^14 non-human cells, and hold non-strictly phenotypic attitudes...this is partly the difference between Western and some other cultures...

Ethics-morals are human phenotypic artifacts...to each his own...


Dov Henis

NOT A New Way to Think About Earth's First Cells
Just Probing Small Molecule Transport Through Membranes

http://www.physorg.com/news131884452.html

This work report concludes with a strange deluded statement:

"By showing that this can happen, and indeed happen quite efficiently, we have come a little closer to our goal of making a functional protocell that, in the right environment, is able to grow and divide on its own"

This is another glaring case that demonstrates why science must be rescued from the guild(s) of "professional science (mostly) technicians and (very few) scientists".

Unbelievable that in the 21st century "scientists" regard a cell as an organism. This is like regarding a future space station as an organism. Unbelievable!


Dov Henis

News are catching up with us...


Bacteria Anticipate Coming Changes In Their Environment


2008
http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive...tion=topstories

2003
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlere...i?artid=1315802


Long-ago titles:

Culture Is Biology, It Imprints Genetics, Drives Evolution

Darwinism Corrected To Tomorrow's Comprehension.

Darwinians, It Is Culture That Drives Evolution Since Life's Day One!


Culture is a basic biological entity. It is a ubiquitous elaboration/extension of genome's activity beyond its outermost cell membrane and of multicelled organisms' behaviour. It has been selected for survival of the genome as means of extending its exploitation capabilities of the out-of-cell circumstances, consequent to the earlier evolution and selection of the genome's organ, its outermost cell membrane, for controlling the inside-of-cell genes'-commune environmental circumstances.


March 16 2008
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtop...65&#entry323376

"By plain common sense it is therefore culture, the ubiqitous biological entity, that drives earth life evolution."

March 1 2008
"Culture Is Biology, It Imprints Genetics"

http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtop...65&#entry316631

I. Quotes from "Chimp and human communication trace to same brain region"

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/200...p-cah022108.php

" An area of the brain involved in the planning and production of spoken and signed language in humans plays a similar role in chimpanzee communication.

This might be interpreted in one of two ways:

One interpretation of our results is that chimpanzees have, in essence, a ‘language-ready brain'. By this, we are suggesting that apes are born with and use the brain areas identified here when producing signals that are part of their communicative repertoire.

Alternatively, one might argue that, because our apes were captive-born and producing communicative signals not seen often in the wild, the specific learning and use of these signals ‘induced’ the pattern of brain activation we saw. This would suggest that there is tremendous plasticity in the chimpanzee brain, as there is in the human brain, and that the development of certain kinds of communicative signals might directly influence the structure and function of the brain."


II. Quotes from earlier postings in this thread:

Culture Is Biology, It Affects Genetics

The Common Mistake: Genetic Changes Have NOT Made Us Human; Human Culture Has Been Changing Our Genetics.

A. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-12/uou-ahe120607.php

Are humans evolving faster?
Findings suggest we are becoming more different, not alike.

B. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/200...w-gsp120507.php

Genome study places modern humans in the evolutionary fast lane.

C. http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-P81pQcU1dLB..._Q--?cq=1&p=207

From my postings way back in 2005, which cites genetic evidence/demonstration of the workings of human cultural evolution:

- From Science, 2 Sept 2005: "Page's team compared human and chimp Ys to see whether either lineage has lost functional genes since they split.

The researchers found that the chimp had indeed suffered the slings and arrows of evolutionary fortune. Of the 16 functional genes in this part of the human Y, chimps had lost the function of five due to mutations. In contrast, humans had all 11 functional genes also seen on the chimp Y. "The human Y chromosome hasn't lost a gene in 6 million years," says Page. "It seems like the demise of the hypothesis of the demise of the Y," says geneticist Andrew Clark of Cornell University in Ithaca, New York.

Chimp's genome has been continuing survival by physiologically adapting to changing environments.

- But look at this: From Science, Vol 309, 16 Sept 2005, Evolving Sequence and Expression:"An analysis of the evolution of both gene sequences and expression patterns in humans and chimpanzees...shows that...surprisingly, genes expressed in the brain have changed more on the human lineage than on the chimpanzee lineage, not only in terms of gene expression but also in terms of amino acid sequences".

Surprisingly...???

Human's genome continued survival mainly by modifying-controling its environment.

- And I suggest that detailed study of other creatures that, like humans, underwent radical change of living circumstances, for example ocean-dwelling mammals, might bring to light unique effects of culture-evolution processes and features of evolutionary implications parallel to those of humans.


D. Chapter II, Life, Tomorrow's Comprehension:

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-P81pQcU1dLB..._Q--?cq=1&p=372

Natural Selection Is A Two Level Interdependent Affair

1) Evolution ensues from genome/genes modifications ("mutations"), inherently ever more of them as new functional options arise for the organism.

2) Modifications of genome's functional capabilities can be explained by the second-stratum organism's culture-life-experience feedbacks to its genome, its prime/base organism. The route-modification selection of a replicating gene, when it is at its alternative-splicing-steps junctions, is biased by the feedback gained by the genome, the parent organism, from the culture-life-experience of its progeny big organism. THIS IS HOW EVOLUTION COMES ABOUT.

3) The challenge now is to figure out the detailed seperate steps involved in introducing and impressing the big organism's experiences (culture) feedbacks on its founding parents' genome's genes, followed by the detailed seperate steps involved in biasing-directing the genes to prefer-select the biased-favored splicing.

4) I find it astonishing that only very few persons, non-professional as well as professional biologists-evolutionists, have the clear conception that selection for survival occurs on two interdependent levels - (a) during the life of the second-stratum progeny organism in its environment, and (b) during the life of its genome, which is also an organism. Most, if not all, persons think - incorrectly - that evolution is about randomly occurring genes-genome modifications ("mutations") followed with selection by survival of the progeny organism in its environment. Whereas actually evolution is the interdependent , interactive and interenhencing selection at both the two above levels.


E. Eventually

Eventually it will be comprehended that things don't just "happen", "mutate", randomly in the base-prime organism, genome, constitution; the capability of the base-prime organisms to "happen" and "mutate" is indeed innate, but things "happen" and "mutate" not randomly but in biased directions, affected by the culture-experience feedback of the second level multi-cell organisms or the mono-cell communities.

Dov Henis

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-P81pQcU1dLBbHgtjQjxG_Q--?cq=1

"How" Life, Not "Where", Is Most Important

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/200...l-sct061308.php
http://www.physorg.com/news132577096.html

Whether nucleobases evolved on planet Earth or landed here from elsewhere, it is "how" their oligomers became replicating genes that is most important. The "how" would have probably been likewise wherever it evolved and the evolved life, that copiously produced more nucleobases, would have probably been life of similar essentiality, defined as follows:

Proposed Definitions Of Earth Life, Organism And Gene.

http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtop...25&#entry346136

Life: 1. a format of temporarily constrained energy, retained in temporary constrained genetic energy packages in forms of genes, genomes and organisms 2. a real virtual affair that pops in and out of existence in its matrix, which is the energy constrained in the plant's biosphere.

Organism: a temporary self-replicable constrained-energy genetic system that supports and maintains plant's biosphere by maintenance of genes.

Gene: a primal plant's organism.


Suggesting,

Dov Henis

A Small Big Difference:

Yes, Environments Dictates Gene's Structure-Expression
No, Gene's Structure-Expression Does Not Change Due To Change Of Environment

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/200...--dtg061608.php

Repeating ad nauseam: it is culture that drives genetic evolution; it is NOT that genetics drives cultural evolution.

In "...others have recently settled..." the crucial point is how recent?


See Life, "Tomorrow's Comprehension", Chapter II.
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-P81pQcU1dLB..._Q--?cq=1&p=372

and/or "Culture Is Biology, It Imprints Genetics"
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtop...65&#entry316631


Dov Henis

Shedding Light On Memory Mechanism

Two additional, recent works, locate again the sites in multicell organisms where memories are impressed:

http://www.bristol.ac.uk/news/2008/212017945279.html

http://www.physorg.com/news132920831.html

But the mechanism of memory impression and recall has not yet been brought to light.

Several years ago I suggested in "Memory, Sentience and Consciousness", at

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-P81pQcU1dLB..._Q--?cq=1&p=174

"Some of the challenging interesting things to learn and search about memory via and by neurons are if, like its parent immunity, it is founded only on structural tags or on/also the location of the tags in the brain, and or/also on intimate linkage between the tag and a neuron's dendron, which is a physical modification/adaptation of the OCM, the oldest and most evolved organ of Earth's prime-stratum organism, the genome."

The "memory tag" possibility is discussed at
http://topics.scirus.com/MOLECULAR_MECHANI...C_PROTEINS.html


The evolotionary tie between the immune and memory systems is so obviously a plain common-sense possibility that it must be scientifically probable...again, as common-sense is the best scientific approach...


Dov Henis

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-P81pQcU1dLBbHgtjQjxG_Q--?cq=1