If we re-evaluate the way we think about time, we may be able to more correctly underatand the apparent goal directed behavior of biology. It is convenient to image that time as a one-way street and matter as billiards. But there are plenty of experiments that disprove this view. My favorite are the double slit experiment and the presentment experiments. Both prove that inorfamtion moves backwards in time. I think the way to understand this is to think about higher dimensional geometry. Think of time as a spacial dimension and decisions as angles on the side of a higher dimensional object. As you navigate the choices of your life you are defining the shape of your higher dimensional self. Central here is the idea of time as a spacial dimension and consciousness as an embodied awareness of this invisible higher dimension.
Doesn't quite make sense to me (maybe I don't understand what Mike is saying) 1) How do the cells make definite shapes and sizes. A tall person's height will be tall in the DNA somehow. Its emergent? But if it knows its going to be a tall entity then its not emergent, that's planned. Maybe I am just dumb? 2) How do cells know when to stop building, say, a liver of the right shape. For that matter how do individual ants know how to build an ant hill - correct height and curved. "its emergent" does not cut the mustard for me. 3) I understand that a baby planaria or a baby tadpole has an electrical pattern to follow to build its eyes etc (seen it in a photo of Mike's) but what about starting from one cell (egg) - there is no pattern unless its in the DNA. I need educating maybe.
1. I am no expert, and this may be entirely off base, but in my understanding: this can be attributed in general to feedback loops. By internal logic functions encoded in cyclical metabolic flux in systems ; energetic homeostasis. There are also feedback loops all throughout genetics, positively and negatively regulated growth and control. 2. Communication of cells between each other via ion gradients (electrical field slope?) - ion gradients, H+ across membranes as used via the entire ETS/metabolism, ATP synthase, etc etc,. - constructs logic gates when combined, due to the voltage-gated nature of Ion channels. Therefore, you can combine logic gates (ANDs, ORs, etc.) together to create networks capable of computing or processing information in response to stimulus. Now you can run software on this network, and the software encodes morphogenetic relationships - the shape and relative orientations of neighboring cells and cell types. 3. If you were starting from JUST the self-replicating DNA machinery, transcription and translation proteins, then yes it would not make intuitive sense where the pattern comes from. But these cells are in a lineage billions of years old, a perpetual electrochemical gradient of H+, e-, ions - sequestered and separated across a membrane. The electrical component of bioelectricity has information, patterning encoded across the evolutionary discovery-space.
has anyone reproduced Prof. Michael Levin xenobots and has this been explored with other cells lines. Hard to understand the lack on interest from a synthetic biology perspective as nano machines.
There is interest, huge one, but the backbone of that technology is very disruptive. Even if just one of the benefits is true, like limb regeneration, that’s already in the tens of tens of billions annually lost for certain companies. Cancer - probably in the trillions. It could open the door for lab-grown organs for transplant or even the body could grow them itself if the mechanism is truly that upstream of the process. Even AI will be impacted as it is based on the function of neuronawhile there is seemingly a more advanced computation going on that we still don’t know much about. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg, should it be something we can exert some control over - it may be the most disruptive development of our century. History tends to repeats itself and we have great such examples as the eternal lightbulb.
They've moved from planarians, through frogs and to mice now; if you listened to what he is saying instead of crying in the comments section, you would have the updated info.
If we re-evaluate the way we think about time, we may be able to more correctly underatand the apparent goal directed behavior of biology.
It is convenient to image that time as a one-way street and matter as billiards. But there are plenty of experiments that disprove this view. My favorite are the double slit experiment and the presentment experiments. Both prove that inorfamtion moves backwards in time.
I think the way to understand this is to think about higher dimensional geometry. Think of time as a spacial dimension and decisions as angles on the side of a higher dimensional object. As you navigate the choices of your life you are defining the shape of your higher dimensional self.
Central here is the idea of time as a spacial dimension and consciousness as an embodied awareness of this invisible higher dimension.
*pre-sentiment*
If you’re addicted to donuts, you are probably a bacterium. 😂
What is the process for liberating the skin cells from their bioelectrical blocks?
Anyone have an opinion on Dr Jack kruse ?
Doesn't quite make sense to me (maybe I don't understand what Mike is saying)
1) How do the cells make definite shapes and sizes. A tall person's height will be tall in the DNA somehow.
Its emergent? But if it knows its going to be a tall entity then its not emergent, that's planned. Maybe I am just dumb?
2) How do cells know when to stop building, say, a liver of the right shape. For that matter how do
individual ants know how to build an ant hill - correct height and curved. "its emergent" does not cut the mustard for me.
3) I understand that a baby planaria or a baby tadpole has an electrical pattern to follow to build its eyes etc (seen it in a photo of Mike's) but what about starting from one cell (egg) - there is no pattern unless its in the DNA. I need educating maybe.
1. I am no expert, and this may be entirely off base, but in my understanding:
this can be attributed in general to feedback loops. By internal logic functions encoded in cyclical metabolic flux in systems ; energetic homeostasis. There are also feedback loops all throughout genetics, positively and negatively regulated growth and control.
2. Communication of cells between each other via ion gradients (electrical field slope?) - ion gradients, H+ across membranes as used via the entire ETS/metabolism, ATP synthase, etc etc,. - constructs logic gates when combined, due to the voltage-gated nature of Ion channels. Therefore, you can combine logic gates (ANDs, ORs, etc.) together to create networks capable of computing or processing information in response to stimulus. Now you can run software on this network, and the software encodes morphogenetic relationships - the shape and relative orientations of neighboring cells and cell types.
3. If you were starting from JUST the self-replicating DNA machinery, transcription and translation proteins, then yes it would not make intuitive sense where the pattern comes from. But these cells are in a lineage billions of years old, a perpetual electrochemical gradient of H+, e-, ions - sequestered and separated across a membrane. The electrical component of bioelectricity has information, patterning encoded across the evolutionary discovery-space.
has anyone reproduced Prof. Michael Levin xenobots and has this been explored with other cells lines. Hard to understand the lack on interest from a synthetic biology perspective as nano machines.
There is interest, huge one, but the backbone of that technology is very disruptive. Even if just one of the benefits is true, like limb regeneration, that’s already in the tens of tens of billions annually lost for certain companies. Cancer - probably in the trillions. It could open the door for lab-grown organs for transplant or even the body could grow them itself if the mechanism is truly that upstream of the process. Even AI will be impacted as it is based on the function of neuronawhile there is seemingly a more advanced computation going on that we still don’t know much about. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg, should it be something we can exert some control over - it may be the most disruptive development of our century. History tends to repeats itself and we have great such examples as the eternal lightbulb.
All these years and he’s still saying the same shit. When will we see some updated info on these studies?
They've moved from planarians, through frogs and to mice now; if you listened to what he is saying instead of crying in the comments section, you would have the updated info.
"the change would be very subtle… it might take ten years or so…"
"the same shit" ?? And your contributions to the field? Calling Levin's work "shit" ???