IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

In the News with discussion - ADDENDUM

Kenneth Collins k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net
Wed Oct 30 14:28:42 EST 2002

"Now, Ken, how can you expect anyone in Biology to take you seriously when you use terminology like 'so-called genetics'? Don't you have any idea how disrespective that is?"

I understand. It's just that, until the current approach is ordered in accord with the stuff of my previous post [quoted in its entirety below], the current approach has more in common with alchemy than it does with Science.

You know, these days it's all the rage to develop 'alchemy-machines'. You know, machines that are designed to automatically test this stuff with that stuff to see what happens. These machines are just 'high-tech' implimentations of the alchemist's approach to 'discovery'. You know, 'mix this with that, and, if you mix the right this with the right that, you'll get gold, but the route is unknown to us, so we've got to do a lot of mixing.'

Because they've no understanding of the underpinning Energydynamics, 'modern' folks've just resorted to the alchemists' way, in the guise of 'high-tech' machines that hide the fact that the approach is just alchemy, automated.

So, when the 'halotype-mapping' article came out in the NYT today, because of the hit-one-smack-in-the-face obviousness of the hierarchical-order to which the "halotype' stuff points, I saw an opportunity to reiterate stuff that I've discussed many times in the past, apparently without anyone grasping what was being discussed, but, now, with hope of folks being able to grasp it. [BTW, I've decided it's 'time' to refer to this approach as "Energydynamics" because it involves all energy, not just "heat". The central principle is that all energy behaves in a way that's analogous to the way "heat"[-energy] behaves with respect to the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, but without Thermodynamics' 'statistical' stuff. I'll show how the stistical stuff is eliminated if anyone's interested. [I'd prefer to do it in-person.]]

What gave me hope of finally being able to communicate this stuff to others is that it's only one small 'step' from the realization of "halotype"-hierarchy stuff and the all-encompassing conceptualization that I discussed in the previous post.

Rather than being 'unaware' that some [perhaps many; all?] would 'take-offense', I accepted that obvious actuality in favor of 'laying down the gauntlet' with respect to drawing Biology up to full-stature as a 'Hard'-Science. I'm continuing doing that in this 'addendum', by exposing the alchemist's approach for what it is - =not= Science. Sure, the approach will probably have some 'success', but whatever 'success' it has will only point directly to the Energydynamics that I've been discussing all along. When the latter stuff is Seen for what it is, Biology will become a 'Hard'-Science.

What do I mean by that?

First, I mean no 'offense'.

It's 'just' that the difference between the now-widely-accepted approach and Energydynamics is like 'night' and 'day'. It the former, there's the resort to the alchemist's guesswork [trial-and-error; hunt-and-peck - even in 'clinical trials', in the latter, the unifying principle allows the prediction of what to expect.

So, I mean no 'offense'

I mean just-the-opposite stuff.

I'll be back to discuss more later - had a lot of good insights while I was out picking up the leaves [again], but just now, I've got to find soething to eat. [I'm not 'whining', but I guess it's 'time' to disclose that my 'diet' has been a non-subsistence one. It's 'funny' to watch my body 'devouring' itself. The leaf-picking-up was quite-light 'exercise', but afterward, I could not even bring my arm up to take a puff from my cigarette without its shaking violently. It was a 'sad' 'moment' - this body, once so robust, gradually working its way to 'dust' before my eyes. I'm not 'whining'. Just want folks to know that 'time' is short, and if anyone wants to understand anything in more detail, then it's best to get-right-to-it a bit. [Of course I should quit smoking, but, when I do, the solitude becomes 'unbearable', and since the solitude won't 'just-go away', I'm just trying to 'hold-on' for as long as I can, within it. I haven't been able to find employment, and it seems my spirit is 'giving-up' on that. It's 'funny', I can no longer make it through a job interview - something about the 'desperation' inherent in holding-on too-long is detected right-off, and I can see the 'switch being thrown' within the interviewer's nervous system. It's 'funny', too that although I do 'hold-my-head-up', because I know I've Lived-Well, I'm 'scorned' in all of my routine interactions. The other night when I was out saying my Rosary, a couple of girls walking up the street saw from a distance me and quick-turned-around and walked the other way. I can only imagine what the 'scuttlebut' is in the neighborhood that makes this sort of thing my routine experience. It's all so 'interesting' - these Consequences of having done the best-stuff that I could do with the Life that's been in-me.

Anyway, I'll be back later.

k. p. collins
    Kenneth Collins wrote in message ...
    "Gene-Mappers Take New Aim at Diseases", By NICHOLAS WADE
    'When the dust settles', the "HapMap" will yield a 'fuzzy' realization that the genetic material is passed-down, intergenerationally, in a way that 'emulates' the ontogeny of a tree in a forest. It will be realized that the 'haplotypes' 'correspond' to the tree's 'trunk'-stuff - =not= the stuff that determines the establishment of the tree's trunk, but the stuff that is most-crucial to a tree's being an organism that can, in fact, survive, intergenerationally [the stuff that is most-crucial to a Human's being an organism that can, in fact, survive, intergenerationally].
    The researchers will find ['fuzzily'] that there is a hierarchy in this 'trunk' stuff that reflect the single 'thermodynamic' that I discussed in the predeeding msg in this thread. In the 'trunk' stuff, the stronger this 'thermodynamic', the higher in the hierarchy the correlated 'haplotype' will be.
    When the same-stuff is approached via this 'thermodynamic', the 'fuzziness', of the two instances above, will be eliminated and replaced by environmentally-correlated variation - corresponding to 'areas' of the genetic stuff that, to continue the metaphor, corresponds to the "tree's limbs", 'branches', 'twigs', and 'leaves'. All of these will also exhibit the same 'thermodynamic', but with increasing correlation ot environmental stuff as one follows it "out to the 'leaves".
    This's all folks'll ever find, and it's quite-distinct from what it is proposed 'is' the thing to be looked-for.
    All folks'll ever find is the one 'thermodynamic'.
    That is, it's not 'the genes' that determine anything, but the 'thermodynamic' that determines 'the genes', and everything else.
    The Promis in what's here is that the 'thermodynamic' will simultaneously map all that we can do with respect to tuning environmental stuff so as to optimize the functionality of the so-called 'genetic' stuff - the further out toward the 'leave'-stuff, the more environmental stuff impacts 'genetic' functionality.
    The important thing is the 'thermodynamic' which organizes everything [even itself :-], and since the 'thermodynamic' exists 'outside of' what's been referred to as 'the genetic material', invocations of 'the genetic material' are just more instances in which artificially-delimited 'subsets' are arbitrarily, and Erroneously, defined within the one all-encompassing physical reality.
    In other words, the so-called 'genetic' approach "can't see the forrest for the trees" :-]
    Folks who understand what's here will See that, in its stuff [and the stuff of the precding msg], the so-called "Nature/Nurture Question" is Resolved in its entirety.
    So, it's the 'thermodynamic'-map that needs to be developed, not any so-called 'genetic' map.
    K. P. Collins
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://iubio.bio.indiana.edu/bionet/mm/neur-sci/attachments/20021030/5d7a8b30/attachment.html

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net