New Scientist Wrote:A Nobel prizewinner is reporting that DNA can be generated from its teleported "quantum imprint"
A STORM of scepticism has greeted experimental results emerging from the lab of a Nobel laureate which, if confirmed, would shake the foundations of several fields of science. "If the results are correct," says theoretical chemist Jeff Reimers of the University of Sydney, Australia, "these would be the most significant experiments performed in the past 90 years, demanding re-evaluation of the whole conceptual framework of modern chemistry."
Article
here (requires registration)
Paper "DNA waves and water" on Arxiv
here
Abstract: DNA waves and water Wrote:Some bacterial and viral DNA sequences have been found to induce low frequency electromagnetic waves in high aqueous dilutions. This phenomenon appears to be triggered by the ambient electromagnetic background of very low frequency. We discuss this phenomenon in the framework of quantum field theory. A scheme able to account for the observations is proposed. The reported phenomenon could allow to develop highly sensitive detection systems for chronic bacterial and viral infections.
Reminds me of the DNA tests done with both frog and salamanders, and duck and hens. Both are cases of transmitting DNA.
Thanks.
Groundbreaking if the effect is not due to contamination and others are able to duplicate.
There have been many groundbreaking discoveries about DNA (and 'quantum' transference of information/structure) in the last two decades, and yet the mainstream scientific community continues to ignore them.
New paradigms such as this take years before they are accepted.
I have my doubts as to the proper documentation of those ignored DNA discoveries. I've read hundreds of science papers, and some, often those with the most incredible claims, are complete garbage.
Don't get me wrong, I 'believe' in homeopathy, for example. My intuition says there is something to it, and I've seen it work - even if it's placebo. But that's not science. The current science behind it is awful. And it's not horrible due to some inherent flaw in the scientific method, or even epistemological foundations. It's bad simply because of inadequate understanding of the phenomena, or poor experimental controls used, by the researchers themselves. Pioneers can actually 'ruin' great discoveries for everyone by improperly presenting their findings. Do not always assume that these people are society's 'unsung heros' or that there is a conspiracy involved.
Sure there will always be researchers that stick their heads in the sand - either because it's not compelling enough or it doesn't serve their interests. But believe me, there are plenty of scientists out there with open minds that will look into claims and are seeking the truth, even if it involves a paradigm shift.
Interesting to note though....Kryon has been claiming, for decades, that DNA has quantum attributes. I can't say whether this particular study is provable or not.
But everytime I hear someone saying something is impossible or useless, it makes me remember the IBM development guy dangling a wired mouse from 2 fingers and saying...." we're gonna do what with this?" (paraphrased)
I suspect the Wright Brothers ran into the same mindset.
Richard
I wonder how the wave or non-local (I don't understand the terms here) nature of DNA relates to the formation of social memory complexes.
I know Ra often said that humans were really seen as one organism, might this be more than a spiritual truth? Does our DNA actually have a form that integrates with others? Can someone aid my thinking on this?
I think that we are all connected at a basic level. I believe that there is an invisible background that forms the physical manifestation. This may be what is meant by Love/Light and Light/Love.
Light may mean the physical structure of DNA, while Love may mean the imprint that creates that physical form. The two are connected together in the form of Creator/Creation.
(01-15-2011, 03:05 PM)Jerome Wrote: [ -> ]I wonder how the wave or non-local (I don't understand the terms here) nature of DNA relates to the formation of social memory complexes.
I know Ra often said that humans were really seen as one organism, might this be more than a spiritual truth? Does our DNA actually have a form that integrates with others? Can someone aid my thinking on this?
(01-14-2011, 12:14 PM)Richard Wrote: [ -> ]But everytime I hear someone saying something is impossible or useless, it makes me remember the IBM development guy dangling a wired mouse from 2 fingers and saying...." we're gonna do what with this?"
?
This paper was very interesting. I can't speak to the theoretical treatment the paper attempted at, as it seems to be highly glossed over and would require a lot of study on the details of the theory. Maybe if I'm bored in the next few weeks I will have a go at understanding the theory part of it more completely (put that physics degree to good use
). The results of replicating the DNA, however, I find very intriguing (assuming no contamination, etc). Hopefully these researchers can put out a more complete paper in the future that would be ready for proper peer review. Just the DNA replication through the EM transfer of information itself is an amazing discovering, and it deserves a more rigorous treatment.
(01-13-2011, 09:17 PM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]Sure there will always be researchers that stick their heads in the sand - either because it's not compelling enough or it doesn't serve their interests. But believe me, there are plenty of scientists out there with open minds that will look into claims and are seeking the truth, even if it involves a paradigm shift.
I believe there's also a large bias in science to stick with the pack. Being renegade is risky- you could turn out to be the next Einstein if your work is accepted and reproducible, but if not then you fall by the wayside or worse- discredited and basically unable to do much work due to your inability to obtain research funding.
You are right though- I believe many scientists are extremely interested in things like this, but remain quiet about it for their own self preservation. Dean Radin has spoken about this in regards to PSI research, calling it an underground college that's growing each day.
(01-19-2011, 12:10 PM)Eric Wrote: [ -> ]I believe there's also a large bias in science to stick with the pack. Being renegade is risky- you could turn out to be the next Einstein if your work is accepted and reproducible, but if not then you fall by the wayside or worse- discredited and basically unable to do much work due to your inability to obtain research funding.
You are right though- I believe many scientists are extremely interested in things like this, but remain quiet about it for their own self preservation.
It's a good thing to keep the intuition in check through rational evaluation - either by use of feeling or thinking faculties. That is if you want to actually make practical use of what it has to offer. However, you can also keep it in some more subjectively raw, undigested form if the purpose is to relate a sense of (ambiguous) wonderment or want to reveal your psychological free associations.
(01-19-2011, 12:10 PM)Eric Wrote: [ -> ]Dean Radin has spoken about this in regards to PSI research, calling it an underground college that's growing each day.
It's an interesting area that is gaining acceptance. I like Sheldrake's insightful presentations on the subject. Christopher Bach shares his experiences with a
"shared mind".
(01-16-2011, 02:57 AM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ] (01-14-2011, 12:14 PM)Richard Wrote: [ -> ]But everytime I hear someone saying something is impossible or useless, it makes me remember the IBM development guy dangling a wired mouse from 2 fingers and saying...." we're gonna do what with this?"
?
I read that IBM was reluctant to even consider the use of a mouse early on. Thinking it was useless technology. There was a direct quote from one of the development engineers. I paraphrased it above (from memory)
Richard
Hi, quantun fans !
To see a REALLY good film about our human link with the quantum world,
get the 3 DVD kit that the link of my signature gets you to. . .
I have viewed it 6 or 7 times now ! FANTASTIC ! !
Blue skies.
(01-22-2011, 04:42 PM)C-JEAN Wrote: [ -> ]Hi, quantun fans !
To see a REALLY good film about our human link with the quantum world,
get the 3 DVD kit that the link of my signature gets you to. . .
I have viewed it 6 or 7 times now ! FANTASTIC ! !
Blue skies.
Watched it once and wasn't impressed.