pioneer

Technically it is not mass but energy value that is stored, since not all chemical mass has the same energy value (compare CO2 to the lighter CH4). The cell needs to turn the mass/energy of food chemical states into energy to drive all the processes needed for the cell to divide. Fats are worth more pound for pound that say proteins. Protein synthesis represents an energy downgrade from the original energy stockpile. If it was not we would be creating energy out of the void which is in violation of energy conservation.

The cell climbs an energy hill and then falls down the other side to make two cells. This is similar to the activation energy of any chemical reaction, with the cell needing to climb its own energy curve until it begins to slide down the other side using a very repeatable conversion process. The new lower energy state of two daughter cells then climb their own energy curves.

There are exceptions where some cells, like ovum, store enough energy for many conversion cycles; step down the initial stored energy using many stages. Once this stored energy is used up the process stops dividing but may continue to it lowest energy configuration or steady state shape. For the cells to climb more energy hills, the blob will need to attach to the uterine wall so energy can be inputted. If we look at the sum of the parts, after attachment, the entire integrated growth is gaining mass/energy. The bulk curve is going up a huge energy curve, while the single cells are going up and over, with each differentiation impacting the up and over curves so the bulk curve can go up.

As far as material division, say we look at the nuclear membrane, late in cell cycle; it disperses. To overcome the attractive forces that had held the nuclear membrane together, we need to increase the energy of the nuclear membrane for it to gain entropy for dispersal. The descent down the bulk energy curve of the mother cell, is directly and indirectly supplying energy which helps the nuclear membrane material climb its own energy curve. The fact that this material divides and doesn't just reform in whole, implies it doesn't just back down the energy push, but goes up and over to a new final divided state. In the process of being of high entropy/energy the original distinction of position and place is less important. There is mixing of new and old.

Say we wished to make reparations for slavery, it would need to done in a way that does not create a new round of injustice. For example, slavery ended in the 1860's in US. What that means is anyone who was an immigrant after that time may not have had anything to do with it, unless they were part of the slave trade. For example, a poor family from eastern europe fleeing the 1st world war, had nothing to do with slavery, with many being only a notch above slavery themselves. It would be unjust to assume they need to make reparations based only on their fair skin color. This means you really can't use tax dollars, since many descendants of immigrants would being paying for something they did not do, via tax burden.

What about white slave owners who had children with black mistresses. Their children are genetically half slave owner and half slave. The owner liked is daughter or son and gave him/her extra privileges but with in the context of local protocol? Does this cancel? Say someone was a black person in Africa who was being paid to round up slaves for the slave traders?

To make sure we don't exceed an eye for an eye, there would need to be a clear exemption list. If not, all we have done is create a future need for another round of reparations, which might enhance race tensions in the short term.

If you look at just the DNA, each strand of the double helix becomes paired with a newly fabricated partner. At least for the DNA, the DNA of each next generation daughter cell is half old and half new. If those two cells then duplicates their DNA for cell division, one strand of the grandparent DNA remain as well as one strand of parent DNA, each paired with even newer strands. The cells may also work to better pair the strands adding a little new to old or new to new.

There is energy within gravitational potential. I can place a tank of water at a height H, and take out energy, as the water falls to lower potential. But say I didn't take that energy out when the water fell. According to the conservation of energy, it had to go somewhere to be conserved.

Say we have gravity acting on a cloud of stella gas, compacting the mass so the local space-time contracts. According to the conservation of energy, the lowering of gravity potential gives off energy that we can convert to alternate energy if we had the technology. One possible place to store at least some of that energy, to maintain energy conservation, is within contracting space-time. That may be why in SR we need to add energy to get similar effects in space-time. The energy potential within contracted space-time, adds potential in time. If the energy output, stemming from gravity lowering potential, goes into rotation of the cloud, it takes longer for the mass to condense into a clump, so contacting space-time gets potential slower.

Based on this logic, the expansion of space-time should do the opposite. It needs to give off energy. In SR, the proper direction is obvious since the kinetic energy lowers (energy has to be given off) for space-time to expand. Based on energy conservation, the energy output due to the expansion of space-time needs to go somewhere. One place some of it can go is within entropy.

As an example. Say we had two identical factories making widgets, both with one error every 1000 seconds, on the average. One factory is in contracted space-time and the other in expanded space-time. The one that is in the expanded reference has time moving faster so will can make errors (entropy) quicker (when looked at side by side).

If you look at entropy, entropy needs energy to increase. Say you increased entropy but without energy being present. This would create negative energy. This is not suppose to happen, since it needs energy, so if it did, it would create an energy deficit or negative energy. Say instead we expanded space-time, but without energy given off. Since the expansion of space-time gives off energy, if energy was not given off, this would also create negative energy. To balance this off to retain zero energy, we would need to create energy. We can create potential energy, if we contracted space-time. If they form together they can cancel at zero energy.

What we now have is a potential that equals zero energy. The fastest way to remove that potential is not for expanded and contracted space-time to pull together, but to create mass/energy gravity to fill in the negative energy of expanded space-time so it equals zero. We also need to add entropy with negative energy at the contracted space-time to zero there. The mass/energy/gravity will cause the expanded space-time to contract, while the negative energy entropy will cause contracted space-time to expand. We can maintain zero energy while creating two effects, one which makes mass appear to contract and the other makes entropy continues to expand.

The amateur does something because they enjoy it. The professional does not enjoy it enough to do it for free. An analogy could be between the patriot and the mercenary. The mercenary might be the better soldier since that is his occupation and can do it everyday and earn a living. But since he does it for money, his loyalty is for sale. The patriot may be less skilled, since he has to devote time to earn a living doing something else, and there are only so many hours per day to practice. But he does it for the cause and is less influenced when money change sides.

For example, say the government decided to be rational and split the global warming/climate change budget down the middle, half to for and half to against. The idea is to give both sides equal, so we can come to the truth. Next, we have a lottery for the funding, where the pro's on either side may get funding, but may have to do the opposite of where they now stand. The mercenary would not care as long as the funding is there since he is a professional.. Some of those who get the wrong draw and who stick by their beliefs, might have to become amateurs, to be able to maintain their belief with a clean conscience.

From the POV of prestige, the mercenary pro would still have more clout than the new patriot amateurs, simply because they have more access and resources. They may even have the backdoor to publications. The new amateurs may have to get other jobs to support themselves and families. After putting in their shift, they can do their science. They may also seek private funding. If that does not pan out, there will be family pressure for less time for science. Unlike the pro who can go home and play with the kids or have a social life the new amateur may need this time for science.

Because of the constraints on energy and time, and the lack of access to basics like a well equipped lab or supercomputer power, they may need to modify their approach to their science to compensate for their playing field. But this may not be kosher to those who have the resources, who will call it amateur science at best. What use is a rag tag army when we have uniformed troops with the latest supplies.

Say you had a block of foam and a block of iron, both with the same mass. For any given velocity, both will have the same momentum. If we held a metal sheet in front of us, both blocks would feel about the same, when they hit with both imparting the same momentum. Say we remove the shield. If a flat side of each cube block hits you, with the same momentum, the iron would pack more punch, since the force would be concentrated on a smaller surface area.

In the next scenario, both blocks will hit you but using one of the very pointy apexes. The initial force will be the same for both, since the surface area is the same. However, since the foam is a weaker material than the iron, the sharp point of the foam will collapse absorbing energy, causing the surface area to increase. Less energy will go into you. The iron is stronger and would retain its sharp point sending almost all the energy into you.

Say we had a high enough velocity for both the iron and foam, such that the energy is not able to dissipate into the foam when it hits you. Now the foam and the iron would have a similar effect upon impact at the apex. The analogy is pressure washing with water. At high velocity even a liquid can't dissipate the collision energy and deform efficiently, making it abrasive. The foam would feel much tougher with all its momentum focused at a point longer.

How about doing it this way. The US government allowed slavery. This pivotal decision had to come from very high up in the power structure; main branches of government. Therefore, only the current representatives and senators need to pay reparations, simply because they are also senators and representatives. Rather than use a racist standard of all whites taxed to pay all blacks, the above standard is not racists since some representative and senators are also black.

The difference is like saying I broke the window, therefore everyone in the playground has to pay for damages, even the kids who can't hit the ball. Or should the biggest kid who can wield that powerful bat, be the one who has to pay.

The higher density object will impart greater momentum density. Momentum is MV. Density is M/D3, so momentum density would be M/D3 V. This would be a measure of the destructive force of the impact since it would create greater compression/shear stresses.

For example, a 1KG sponge versus a 1kg uranium ball, with both moving at 10 m/sec, so they have the same momentum. The sponge might leave a mark and push you back. But the higher momentum density of the uranium ball will hurt much more.

Risk analysis is C-level science. A rational relationship has to be nearly perfect. One bad data point may require a rational theory be revised. This tough standard is why it is A-level science. Empirical science tries to fit the best curve through the data. However, even if some data (exceptions) fail to touch the curve, the correlation can still stand. The standard is a little more forgiven than rational science. We can use fuzzy math to place the bad data within the margin of error. This is B-level science. Risk analysis type science uses the weakest standard. For example, eating peanut butter increases the risk that some will have an allergic reaction. Even if there is only 1 good data point out of 100 bad, a risk correlation can stand. This is why it is C-level science. It sort of tells us something which needs further study, but at a weaker standard than B-level.

If we applied the standards of C-level science to rational science that would be like forming a theory based on one data point, that fails to take into account the other 99. It would be called quack science and not even given the time of day since the 100% standard is in effect. Empirical would not allow you to pick one point to draw its curve through and ignore the trend of the other 99 data points. The empiricist would think you were an idiot if you presented that graph. But with C-level science, one is a hero among peers.

The reason C-level science appears to work is because of the fear. Once one is made irrational, C-level science will appear to work just fine. But if one does not get swept up in the fear, but retains cool reason, one can see this is just C-level science.

Let me give an example. The airport security standards of 6 months ago had a perfect record. So why the change? This was not because of A-level or B-level science, since the reasoning and correlation for the past was nearly perfect. But with C-level science and fear, we can alter reality to make one feel that perfect was not good enough.

People need to be able to label science as A,B,C so C-level science will be required to migrate toward B and A, before being taken seriously. In terms of the new airport security machines and tactics, I wonder who benefits by this irrationality; job security and money trail.

With global warming, the entire process is C-level, B-level and some A-level, with a little too much C-level fear induction. I tend to give more weight to A-level science, slightly less to B-level and very little weight to C-level and then draw my conclusions. But most people are irrationally under the impression all levels carry the same weight because it has the word science attached to it. If you weigh it that way, one could get a very different picture in terms of averages.

Life sentence instead of the death penalty comes from Christian teachings. Christ taught that one is to love their enemy. The Old Testament was based on an eye for an eye. Liberals tend to embrace the philosophy of Christ, because it reflects wisdom, even though many are atheists. Christ was given the death penalty, even though he was an innocent man who had done nothing worthy of the death penalty. The fear is an innocent man/women might be killed. If we save even one, that one could be you are I being ramrodded by the system.

Humans are animals, even though some animals are cold blooded. To help create a further distinction, humans are included with the mammals to help distinguish us from the cold blooded animals. Humans are also bi-peds. This helps to distinguish humans from quadra-ped mammals. Humans also have free will, which is another subgroup. Religion created another sub-category to distinguish humans from the bi-ped, mammal, animals that lack this feature. To stop the sub-division at animal-mammal-bi-ped is completely arbitrary and lacks insights into other possible distinctions by which we can sub-divide and catalog life.

It has to do with personality firmware that have been called archetypes. Just as fear might animate the body for a fight/flight reaction, which can react in realtime to the threat, love at first site is sort of a sensory command line that will active the archetype of love. Much of the dynamics of the archetype of love is projection, where the firmware will shine onto the beloved to give him/her a subjective overlay effect; he/she is so perfect.

As an analogy, looking at a good work of art will induce subjectivity. This does not come from the art, but from within to get an overlay effect. The beloved will trigger the archetype which will induce subjectivity, but unlike art which may induce a single reaction, the archetype of love has many different colors, which can induce a wide range of reactions until the composite effect feels like he/she is everything to me.

But just as the love at first site command line can turn on the archetype, sometime a single command line can shut it off. The archetypes can also be on a timer. People who say they fell out of love, simply mean the timer ended. That is when it takes work to reanimate love. Those who are lazy may look around for the quickie command line from a stranger. But often the timer is too short to go through the entire spectrum.

The push toward alternate energy, such as solar and wind, began before we coined the phrase "greenhouse effect". It actually began with the energy crisis of the 1970's, when oil prices sky rocketed and there was a push toward energy efficiency and alternate energy. The market place was never able to become competitive in terms of alternate energy, especially as oil prices stabilized and began to fall. But it it was successful with energy efficiency.

It is not coincidental that global warming implies the need for alternate energy. Global warming is a good tactic to alter behavior, using fear to justify government control of behavior to push technology that can't make it in the free market. When people are afraid they can't think rationally, so they are easy to manipulate. People would be willing to pay more to appease fear to make up the difference between alternate energy and hydrocarbon costs. The global warming solution gives a two-for-one since it implies an increase in hydrocarbon costs that is called the carbon tax. It is not coincidence that those who were always most into alternate energy; democrats, but who lacked the ingenuity to make it work in the free market, are also the ones pushing for the same thing using big government to force change.

The reason this tactic works better in modern times, than in the past, is connected to the liberal push for men to get in touch with their feelings. The men of the past tended to be more cool and rational but often lacked emotional development. That meant cool reason with less irrational sway stemming from emotional sentiment. Although balancing the male personality with feelings was progressive, the feminization of the younger generations of men, sway them away from the cool reason of the golden generation. The newest generation of men lack much of the cold common sense of the golden generation, which prevented such manipulation. This tactic would not have worked 30-40 years ago even if the females could have been induced to fear. The males would have stuck by their common sense expecting reasons.

Nuclear power would have pre-empted the carbon scare, since it would have lowered the amount of greenhouse gases. But the fear manipulation of the liberal emotional mind overcame reason for short term gain, that turned out to be a bad long term call. This is history repeating itself. I have not yet figured out what new problem the irrational will create if or when they are able to win this battle and lose the war.

Crystal systems can self replicate. The crystal type of self replication is based on energy considerations and the way the atoms stack within the crystal lattice. If we start to add additional atoms to the base atoms we can get color changes and new growth habits. Life does this with molecular chunks called genes but it is also based on energy considerations.

The definition of random is: proceeding, made, or occurring without definite aim, reason, or pattern: the random selection of numbers. This definition is sort of relative, simply because if one can't see the aim, reason or pattern, the order will appear random. For example, if we took a picture of a group of people sitting in stands, all the faces may appear like a random mix of people from all ages and demographics. But if you also knew this picture was taken at a baseball game, now a definite reason and pattern appears which says this group of apparently random people have the same thing in common, which is the love of baseball. At some less obvious level there is order to even these random faces.

If a computer uses a formula to generate random numbers, the reason for the random pattern is the formula. But if we only look at the numbers and didn't know this definite aim, reason and pattern, the numbers will appear random lacking any aim or reason. To prove this we can take away the computer and its formula, now the random numbers are gone. One can see the do this many times until one can see the underlying cause and effect for these random numbers. But if we detach the formula from the numbers and look only at the numbers (faces in the crowd) now these appear random without cause or pattern.

Depending on how you train you mind and your observational skills will have an impact on random perception. If one assumes random, one will be looking at the data in a way that will lack order, since that is what you are to trained to see. If one assumes order, you will see patterns in the random. For example, when most people play cards at a casino they will see random in the shuffle. But someone who reads cards will see order appear. This ordering of the cards is taboo, since only ransom perception can play, since random allows the house to win over time.

Another explanation for random are events is that they appear to defy cause and effect (2-D) but can still make logical sense at the level of 3-D. As an analogy, say we have a clear tennis ball. Inside the ball we divide the internal ball with black planes between clear that are all parallel. Each plane is a plane of cause and effect. Next, we bounce the ball and using stop action photography we notice how the various planes have become distorted. If we extrapolate the original planes and compared them to their new distorted black plane, they no longer align in 2-D. The data is outside the original planes of cause and effect. But if we look at the entire ball in 3-D, the affect of the distortion is a logical result of the forces, elasticity and impact. But if we don't know how to explain that in the context of 3-D, but only have 2-D, we see a random event.

In 3-D we have cause-effect-cause. The bounce was the cause for the 3-D distortion effect. This distortion effect is the cause for the distortion of the 2-D planes. If we ignore the first cause and effect of 3-D, we get an effect that we define as having a random cause. But if we distort the plane to take into consideration the primary 3-D cause and effect, then the data is still on the 2-D since it now has more 3-D character.

The subjective aspects of the mind associated with religion are also used by materialism. Marketing can give the pet rock a prestige effect to make it more than what it is. In religion this would be called idol worship. This golden calf effect was part of religious evolution, with religion coming to the conclusion these man-made objects were not gods since they wear out with use and not get stronger with use. Humans found a work-around this common sense by associating collector's prestige to objects. Some old artifacts become worth more as their get older, but this is only if we don't use them since they will wear out and lose their value. Materialism religion can continue on as long as we can keep generating the prestige special effect of new golden calves as the older golden calves lose their magic.

Every few months computers get upgrades. From a practical point of view, these monthly marginal upgrades should not be enough to buy. The prestige effect of the materialism religions is used to impact new magic to the new, as the old magic wear away, even without ever physically wearing away. Religions attempts to use this subjective effect in a more advanced way, since object worship is actually very ancient and was part of the oldest religions. Using an abstraction was more progressive.

Mammal is an empirical term the human mind has developed to help categorized life on earth based on physical attributes. Based on that definition humans fall within that category. Religion formed its own definition of humans to help categorize humans in relationship to other life forms on earth. This definition is more based on inward attributes of the mind.

Biology is an empirical science, which means the best fit for the data. But the best fit of data does not mean all the data touches the line. An empirical theory can still have data that does not touch the curve, but may be within a margin of error. This fuzzy data is where humans are.

Another way to look at the entire debate is if we had a graph populated with color instead of data dots. Half the data is black and the other half white. The average or best fit curve would be gray, even though there are no gray data points. Rational theory would not make this averaging mistake, but would say since the data collection has no gray, this can't be right. Rather there are two curves and not one.

Often commandments are the result of empirical observation and reasoning to form principles that are extrapolate to apply too all. Thou shall not smoke in public places is a commandment that sort of formed in a similar way. Like any commandment, we also has the self righteous and the metering of punishment. The idea is to regulate behavior to maximize the herd. We could have left this to each person to ponder.

Another thing humans have is an extra level of subjectivity. For example, the "pet rock" was just a rock at the rational level. An animal would instinctively see the pet rock for what it was, just a rock. But humans can give the pet rock the subjectivity of prestige, to give it an irrational enhancement that loses touch with cause and effect. If all agree that the pet rock is indeed a pet, like a dog or cat, we create an alternate reality. Animals don't create this alternate reality. One possible value this creates for humans are things no longer have to be only what they appear to be to the instincts. The stick is no longer just a stick but can now become a lever or weapon.

The ancients divided humans into body, soul and spirit. In ancient tradition, the soul animates the body and the spirit animates the soul. As a modern example of this symbolism, say you are afraid because of man-made global warming. This line of thinking is the spirit of the times. This spirit of the times, can make some people feel afraid. Whereas the spirit is mind, the soul has a connection to emotional valence or feelings. If we add it all together, the spirit of the times can induce the fear within the soul. Once the soul is afraid, this will animate the body. Some people can get afraid enough to make their body sick with anxiety.

The animal spirit, soul and body is different. Their spirit is symbolically called Mother nature, and their soul are their instincts , which give them the feeling valence needed act in a way that is completely natural. This animal soul effects their body to give it health and vitality.

The Divine spirit is similar to the animal spirit, except it is geared toward what is unique in humans. It is not man-made like in the first paragraph. It is natural in its own way, and animates the soul in the ways of love and peace, which then animates the body, so humans can also have the humans version of what animals have.

The problem is the human spirit, Divine spirit and animal spirit all play together in humans. The human spirit tends to dominate and tries to interpret and explain the natural and divine spirits in the context of what it knows and thinks it knows. The composite is the spirit of the times.

Are there also tides in the atmosphere, due to the moon? I am not trying to be funny. It seems reasonable to assume that since the atmosphere is even closer to the moon, than the oceans, one would expect the moon's gravity would create tidal effects within the atmosphere.

If you are walking along and someone jumps out of the dark to scare you, the unconscious reacts first, which is why this is so funny. Some people may pretend they have conscious control, but when they yelp like a child, they get embarrassed, by their lack of control and composure. Something else reacted first, which was not under their conscious control. It was able to process the data faster and achieve a reaction, before the conscious mind could step in and control it.

Someone who is a professional card player will look for tells. These are unconscious body language that many people are not aware off, which tells the value of their hand. Even for the pro, these still continue to exist, so one has to be vigilant to control them. But as time goes on, these can be conditioned away, but it that only means the output is regulated, not the input. This is only the tip of the iceberg. Unconscious tells (faster data processing) impact behavior right down to the bias of traditions. Just because the entire herd has the same tell, does not mean it is conscious to it.

To see this data one needs to experience it. This type of data means less from the outside. The pro card player can control their tells on the surface, but they still are aware, but only from the inside, where they can hide it from others. The next time, someone jumps out of the dark to scare you, you may be prepared and can avoid the yelp. But the startle will still be there, but can be hidden from surface data collection. That is why second hand data is not the best source of data. An unconscious tell can also control other unconscious tells.

The animal would react to you scaring it in an unconscious way, but it doesn't try to hide this. Human instincts are also unconscious tells. But like the pro-card player these can be controlled until they start to become unconscious. Then we will use fads to play them out in a conscious way. But if you go inside to the source of these tells, what had become unconscious starts to become conscious. The term mammal is only for the surface of things and does not reflect the unique relationship that humans have between conscious and unconscious.

This idea came to me the other day. If you look at the cell, the energy economy of the cell is based on the stored energy within reduced carbon and nitrogen compounds. This is one side of the energy equation. On the other side of the energy equation is oxidation, with O2 being the most potent terminal electron acceptor. From the oxidation, ATP energy is created, which can then be used to help enzymes drive both reduction and oxidation reactions on both sides of the energy balance.

As an example of where I am heading, there is a normal middle aged spread where the body gains weight. Although the DNA has not changed relative to its genetic content, the energy balance resulting from the bulk DNA shifts slightly toward the reduction side of the energy balance. One possible extrapolation of this is obesity reflects the DNA shifting the energy balance more toward the reduction side, but at an earlier age.

The DNA shift in the energy balance is not one gene, but would reflect the summation of effects.

For example, the instinct of hunger pushes the energy balance toward reduction. The premium taste, attached to sugars and fats favors reduction almost instinctively. While the urge to be in motion, using the muscles of the body, turns ATP into mechanical energy and waste heat, thereby favoring the oxidation side. Deep breathing will favor oxidation more than shallow breathing since it adds O2 potential. Genes that store body fat tend to favor the reduction side of the energy balance, while genes that favor muscle tend to favor less reduction since muscle has less energy value than fat, etc. The sum of the many connected and competing genetic effects defines the energy balance set point.

If you look at male mating olympics in animals, this is energy intensive, reflecting the oxidation side of the potential. Females tend to store extra body fat, such that their genetics tends to slightly favor the reduction side of the equation. Culturally one may diet and exercise to shift the balance to oxidation. But for some people the DNA can still be slanted more toward the reduction side of the energy balance, making these have less impact. There can also be an induction toward constant fatigue, lowering the oxidation potential associated with activity. Generating body heat favors the oxidation side of the energy equation, while being cool favors the reduction side. When we run a fever, the extra heat generated favors oxidation, which is sort of what you want since this also means the metabolism of bacteria; lower their reduction value.

The place I was hoping to head, as a group project, was to list the oxidation and reduction sides of the equation. The next thing would be to have some of the experts map the DNA relative to both sides of the energy equation to see if bulk structural changes in the DNA shape-activity can move the entire energy balance. The question is can 3-D DNA can click between bulk states of integrated activities on either side of the equation? The middle age spread is more that just added body fat but also reflects a wider range of integrated changes.

Part of the problem we face has to do with particle accelerator-collider data. These experiments do not occur at extreme gravity, and therefore do not reflect the idea that charge becomes close to zero at extreme gravity. The result is we might be creating sub-particle states that would not exist at extreme gravity. This will bias theory, with synthetic states of matter that would be more appropriate to a compression at low gravity, rather than an expansion at extreme gravity.

For example, the electron is considered an elementary particle, yet at extreme gravity if charge is zero, doesn't that mean this particle is no longer fundamental, since the charge of the electron is not there? One will not see that in particle accelerator data at low gravity. However, since the low gravity compression data shows the electron is fundamental, so we tend to fixate on matter-antimatter, which is a moot point at extreme gravity.