Archimedes Plutonium wrote in
:


Quantum Duality would say that every molecule of life present on
Earth has an intrinsic root force of compounding. It wants to
change into a new form of more symmetry. It wants to compound the
already compound Ash leaves into a greater compounding. It wants
to compound the head and brain capacity of humans. It wants to
compound the vital organs of humans so that a new species can live
longer, smarter and better. It wants to compound viruses so that
new viral transmissions arise.


Symmetry doesn't occur much on the molecular level though, most
proteins are just amorphous-looking blobs. Fats and sugars are
generally not symmetrical either. Many sugars have their mirror
image counterparts, but those mirror images often have no biological
activity or importance. If there was some sort of root force driving
compounding, wouldn't there be more molecules that were symmetrical,
or compounded on themselves?

Sean

Sean Houtman wrote in message news:1098410858.UahHx36i/p9QIjm4VkcFxg@teranews...
Archimedes Plutonium wrote in
:


Quantum Duality would say that every molecule of life present on
Earth has an intrinsic root force of compounding. It wants to
change into a new form of more symmetry. It wants to compound the
already compound Ash leaves into a greater compounding. It wants
to compound the head and brain capacity of humans. It wants to
compound the vital organs of humans so that a new species can live
longer, smarter and better. It wants to compound viruses so that
new viral transmissions arise.


Symmetry doesn't occur much on the molecular level though, most
proteins are just amorphous-looking blobs. Fats and sugars are
generally not symmetrical either. Many sugars have their mirror
image counterparts, but those mirror images often have no biological
activity or importance. If there was some sort of root force driving
compounding, wouldn't there be more molecules that were symmetrical,
or compounded on themselves?

But, as fate would have it. Proteins are the most symmetrical
of all known molecules. Hemoglobin is one of few known
molecules that you can transfuse. An it's all because
all sugars, are in fact extracts of allergens. Not because
sugars are sweet.

It's not done with mirrors, it all done with
the universes most symmetric know objects:
logic tables, chairs, and, lasers.









Sean

(ZZBunker) wrote in
om:


But, as fate would have it. Proteins are the most symmetrical
of all known molecules. Hemoglobin is one of few known
molecules that you can transfuse. An it's all because
all sugars, are in fact extracts of allergens. Not because
sugars are sweet.

It's not done with mirrors, it all done with
the universes most symmetric know objects:
logic tables, chairs, and, lasers.



Dude, don't you know that the protein folding project is much less
important to society on earth than SETI@home?

Sean

Sean Houtman wrote in message news:1098501488.uZSIZNOh2QTOaxpX7HDxKA@teranews. ..
(ZZBunker) wrote in
om:


But, as fate would have it. Proteins are the most symmetrical
of all known molecules. Hemoglobin is one of few known
molecules that you can transfuse. An it's all because
all sugars, are in fact extracts of allergens. Not because
sugars are sweet.

It's not done with mirrors, it all done with
the universes most symmetric know objects:
logic tables, chairs, and, lasers.



Dude, don't you know that the protein folding project is much less
important to society on earth than SETI@home?

SETI@home is the most worthless science project
since science funded Carl Sagan to be a
chemo-theauphutic Ralph Nader wannabee MORON.

It is most overprced and stupid thing in
mathematics, since Bill Gates bought
the asccii symobol "@".

It is more even idiotic that isiotic astronomer on Mars.
Since Mars is already ireserved for
Nuclear Weapons testing by the Chinese-Indian-Sri Lanka
druid astrologers for the Sing Sing Dynasty
of Feynmann-psycho-tart fame.



Sean

(ZZBunker) wrote in
om:

Sean Houtman wrote in message
news:1098501488.uZSIZNOh2QTOaxpX7HDxKA@teranews. ..
(ZZBunker) wrote in
om:


But, as fate would have it. Proteins are the most symmetrical
of all known molecules. Hemoglobin is one of few known
molecules that you can transfuse. An it's all because
all sugars, are in fact extracts of allergens. Not because
sugars are sweet.

It's not done with mirrors, it all done with
the universes most symmetric know objects:
logic tables, chairs, and, lasers.



Dude, don't you know that the protein folding project is much
less important to society on earth than SETI@home?

SETI@home is the most worthless science project
since science funded Carl Sagan to be a
chemo-theauphutic Ralph Nader wannabee MORON.

It is most overprced and stupid thing in
mathematics, since Bill Gates bought
the asccii symobol "@".

If you look in the right VV@R3Z sites, you can get SETI free! Then
you can hack it to point Aresibo at your house and fine there isn't
any intelligentce there!


It is more even idiotic that isiotic astronomer on Mars.
Since Mars is already ireserved for
Nuclear Weapons testing by the Chinese-Indian-Sri Lanka
druid astrologers for the Sing Sing Dynasty
of Feynmann-psycho-tart fame.


Oh, so you want to bring politics into this, huh? You,
you...Moderate!

Sean

Sean Houtman wrote in message news:1098587319.mRoAo2XDeJdzmpxj6i41vQ@teranews. ..
(ZZBunker) wrote in
om:

Sean Houtman wrote in message
news:1098501488.uZSIZNOh2QTOaxpX7HDxKA@teranews. ..
(ZZBunker) wrote in
om:


But, as fate would have it. Proteins are the most symmetrical
of all known molecules. Hemoglobin is one of few known
molecules that you can transfuse. An it's all because
all sugars, are in fact extracts of allergens. Not because
sugars are sweet.

It's not done with mirrors, it all done with
the universes most symmetric know objects:
logic tables, chairs, and, lasers.



Dude, don't you know that the protein folding project is much
less important to society on earth than SETI@home?

SETI@home is the most worthless science project
since science funded Carl Sagan to be a
chemo-theauphutic Ralph Nader wannabee MORON.

It is most overprced and stupid thing in
mathematics, since Bill Gates bought
the asccii symobol "@".

If you look in the right VV@R3Z sites, you can get SETI free! Then
you can hack it to point Aresibo at your house and fine there isn't
any intelligentce there!


It is more even idiotic that isiotic astronomer on Mars.
Since Mars is already ireserved for
Nuclear Weapons testing by the Chinese-Indian-Sri Lanka
druid astrologers for the Sing Sing Dynasty
of Feynmann-psycho-tart fame.


Oh, so you want to bring politics into this, huh? You,
you...Moderate!

No, I want to bring botantists into it. Since biologists
are already to have intelligence less than or
equal to both idiot astronomers and chemists.





Sean

Fri, 22 Oct 2004 02:07:38 GMT Sean Houtman wrote:

Archimedes Plutonium wrote in
:

Quantum Duality would say that every molecule of life present on
Earth has an intrinsic root force of compounding. It wants to
change into a new form of more symmetry. It wants to compound the
already compound Ash leaves into a greater compounding. It wants
to compound the head and brain capacity of humans. It wants to
compound the vital organs of humans so that a new species can live
longer, smarter and better. It wants to compound viruses so that
new viral transmissions arise.


Symmetry doesn't occur much on the molecular level though, most
proteins are just amorphous-looking blobs. Fats and sugars are

Well I wonder if DNA drives proteins or proteins drive DNA and so that
would answer that DNA drives proteins and that proteins are secondary to
DNA.

But I wonder about some other facts, perhaps you could enlighten me
upon. I know animals are primarily protein bodies. So if a average
animal is 70% water
and then say 20% protein. But plants have little protein. So an average
plant is say 70% water then what is the 20% analog of protein?

Sean, if average animal is 70-20-10 and average plant is 70-20-10 but
where the 20% for animals is protein and for plants something else would
make a fine argument in favor of quantum duality.


generally not symmetrical either. Many sugars have their mirror
image counterparts, but those mirror images often have no biological
activity or importance. If there was some sort of root force driving
compounding, wouldn't there be more molecules that were symmetrical,
or compounded on themselves?

Sean

Well I would only remark on the diversity of life itself suggests that
some underlying root force is propelling the diversity and that the
tenets of Darwin Evolution are just so weak and time consuming to get
such huge biological diversity. In Darwin evolution they speak of
accelerated and explosive jumps of new forms.

In compounding there would always be increasing new forms with time.

Darwin Evolution is happenstance and circumstance.

Quantum Duality of Kingdoms with compounding as a force of change has
change built into the DNA molecule of life itself. So it is the DNA that
has a force of change built into its structure as is and is wanting to
compound some features of its A,C,T,G code. Much like the cosmic-ray
that packs 10^14 MeV in that when it stops by hitting into something it
compounds into symmetrical left and right particles.

Some may say that planet Earth in the last 1 million years due to human
actions has lost biological diversity in that many species have become
extinct. But no-one has really tabulated how many new species of
bacteria and viruses have come into existence. We maybe surprized that
in all of Earth history that diversity has steadily increased with time
and even in the past 1 million years.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

Archimedes Plutonium wrote in
:




Symmetry doesn't occur much on the molecular level though, most
proteins are just amorphous-looking blobs. Fats and sugars are

Well I wonder if DNA drives proteins or proteins drive DNA and so
that would answer that DNA drives proteins and that proteins are
secondary to DNA.

DNA holds the codes that make the proteins, if you change the code,
the proteins change. If you change the proteins that DNA uses to
make proteins, or to replicate into new copies of DNA, you either
get nothing, or the same thing, so the DNA drives the proteins.


But I wonder about some other facts, perhaps you could enlighten
me upon. I know animals are primarily protein bodies. So if a
average animal is 70% water
and then say 20% protein. But plants have little protein. So an
average plant is say 70% water then what is the 20% analog of
protein?

Your experiments with Ash, Oak, and Hickory should tell you the
answer to that question.

snips

Well I would only remark on the diversity of life itself suggests
that some underlying root force is propelling the diversity and
that the tenets of Darwin Evolution are just so weak and time
consuming to get such huge biological diversity. In Darwin
evolution they speak of accelerated and explosive jumps of new
forms.

In compounding there would always be increasing new forms with
time.

The world is huge, and the layer of life is tiny, with Evolution,
there are plenty of ways to get new forms.


Darwin Evolution is happenstance and circumstance.

With happenstance and circumstance, great beauty arises.


Sean

Sun, 24 Oct 2004 03:23:27 GMT Sean Houtman wrote:
(most snipped)



But I wonder about some other facts, perhaps you could enlighten
me upon. I know animals are primarily protein bodies. So if a
average animal is 70% water
and then say 20% protein. But plants have little protein. So an
average plant is say 70% water then what is the 20% analog of
protein?

Your experiments with Ash, Oak, and Hickory should tell you the
answer to that question.


Yes plants have cellulose which has glucose in contrast with starch.

But I need a firm data sheet as to how much proteins the average animal
consists of. Does the average animal contain 20% proteins. Then does the
average plant consist of roughly the same 20% of cellulose?

Then, can we say that cellulose is just sugar and can we thence say that
the dual of protein is sugar? I am not sure.

Can we say that photosynthesis end goal is to create sugar. And since
animals live indirectly off of photosynthesis, not directly as plants
do, that their bulk 20% is proteins whose end goal is to create food.

So in this light, can we say that sugars are the dual of proteins and
that plants consist on average 70% water, 20% cellulose and 10% other
whereas animals on average consist 70% water, 20% proteins and 10%
other.

So that the numbers match and leaves us with the undeniable insight that
plants are dual to animals where one has sugar and the other has
proteins, and both driven by DNA.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

Sun, 24 Oct 2004 02:48:22 -0500 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
(most snipped)


So in this light, can we say that sugars are the dual of proteins and
that plants consist on average 70% water, 20% cellulose and 10% other
whereas animals on average consist 70% water, 20% proteins and 10%
other.

Now this may get even more interesting, in that the relationship is not
only a dual complimentary relationship but that it is a *inverse
relationship*.

So let us say the average animal and average plant is the following
content:

Animal-- 70% water with 20% protein and 10% other

Plant-- 70% cellulose with 20% water and 10% other

The inverse is that plants inverse water for cellulose.

But I need some accurate numbers for the above is mostly my own guesswork.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies