For some time, we have, with some hostility I might add, been advocating that biomachinery, especially that of energy usage such as by photosynthetic and respiratory systems (i.e, mitochondria) and downstream use of these flows of energy, are in fact quantumly engineered to facilitate efficient transfer of energy through available machinery and even that it has subsequently been incorporated from the get-go in the cell organisation and behavioral decision-making apparatus, allowing ultimately complex multi-cellular organisation.

For example, we've publically put ideas that mitochondria and connected machinery essentially drive the quantum-mechanical transfer of information in cells that is used to control regional metabolism and direction of metabolic products, and is employed in the brain as its prime method of information transfer. That is of course, pure speculation, but it is informed by observation, and it is based on a common theme, that in the design of living systems, you start off on a smaller scale, the technologies demonstrated there, are re-utilised and re-engineered to do 'higher' tasks on larger scales.

This minimises the ammount of design needed from scratch, speeding up evolutionary development, and it also minimises the ammount of data that needs to be stored in a system (sort of like a JPEG). Since energy utilising systems, like chloroplasts, are right in the thick of it, and because they can demonstrate remarkable properties, yet remain very organised despite their huge complexity, it has become rather obvious to me that here is where your quantum mechanical designs will be found mosrt refined and integrated. What I mean by that is, that there is a 'whole machine' concept in which all parts of the energy transfer chain are linked by entanglement and electron tunnelling together to affect a sophisticated, integrated machine. This is already rather predictable, because of the way that only integrated quantum machinery could in the first place capture light photons which are not of energy gaps that match the electron holes in the photo-capture equipment - the energy has to be caught by a movement throughout the electron tyransfer chain that allows photon energy to be captured at the front end. In more vigourous machinery, like mitochondria, it is obvious that they must operate in synchronisation to prevent internal disaster in terms of cooperation of components and cell decision making - so an extended, communicational system that can switch regional, process-specific machinery would be hugely advantageous in any living system, and there is evidence that human immune cells display far too rapid coordination of cytoplasmic components when moving, to be controlled by simple flows of ions around a cell.


Well anyway, the following finding is proof that at the small scale, energy machinery is in fact integrated and that all components work in one, obviously entangled fashion;



EXACTLY what we've been saying.




The origins of this integerated machinery are also those of the structure of prokaryotes themselves, as expected;



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photosynthesis

Since we believe that chemosynthesis in hydro-geological systems predates photosynthesis, and thermo-synthesis (heat to chemical energy) predates photosynthesis, and all these systems predfate all eukaryotes, then we've all inherited advanced, integrated quantumly sophisticated energy management equipment as the core control systems of all bio-energy systems.

EXACTLY as predicted and stated! And even using the approaches and vibration/wave-llke processes described (which we've elaborated further with regards to the function of simultaneous depolarisation in neurons as a means to integrate enzyme and protein structures transfer of electron energy).

It is now finally proven that basic photosynthetic machinery works like this.

So, it is an absolute nonsense now to see biological phenomena as some inherently 'dead' series of clumsy, random molecular events blundering about inside a miraculously self organising structure, without this structure having a more sophisticated means to make decisions and respond to internal changes. Life utuilises a hugely evolved quantum mechanical organisation, integrated into its fundamental parts.

The people who argued with me on this, never retracted, never acknowledged the reasoning, and instead made rediculous slights on my logical procedures and senses. and maligned my intellect.

All such individuals, are morons. Nice to see the first definitive proof of our conjectures. Virtually everybody who has argued in favour of this kind of organisation was obviously right, but all had to endure some kind of emotive hostility. One sees that science is slow and dogmatic. So its never, ever more satisfying to see people proven wrong. A new paradign in biophysics is beckoning.

Are you using "We" in the royal sense? Or were there other people on here who agreed with you?

Sounds reasonable-- I mean, the idea that the sense of smell is quantum-mechanically driven isn't terribly novel. (Probably predates the photosynthesis conclusion.)

And if one biological system relies on superposition and tunnelling, it seems reasonable that others may as well.

covering various points, some were those of us here, some were ideas put across that originate from established writings, but mirror earlier musing or predate them, and elaborarte on them, by reseaerchers who remained on the fringe due to the mere 'fallacy' of suggesting room temperature entanglement, such as the like of Mcfadden.

Some of it was merely my own.

Either way, what we see here is total vindication for the central ideas in our work. pretty much, all those against us to date, are wrong.

We actually are witnessing the most momentous new development in biology for generations. What we said, will quickly become the norm, as science starts to catch up.

And some people here and elsewhere, apparently against proper logical procedure, predicted a good deal of it.

They are now proven right - its game over. One tribes winning, the others losing.

This is how science really works - battles of egos, untill the losing side wanders off for ever with its tail between its legs, or reassumes an inferior status as mere minions effectively (funny, I know).

Its funny, really, really satisfying.

That last post was freakin odd, but thats because I was mad drunk and on zolpidem at the same time, following a long, long party. Its pretty amazing I could write anything actually.

Heh. Well let it never be said that you aren't a gracious winner, ATB.

In a sense, the sense of smell really is 'quantum mechanical' because protein and enzyme interactions with given molecules will utilise at least some electron tunneling, because at least some of the machinery is known to work that way. Its amazing what is known, and yet how reluctant 'scientists' are to conclude the obvious and extend it further.

It is fear, a circuit in peoples brains that stops them saying politically incorrect things, and its THIS THAT RETARDS CREATIVE THOUGHT.

The likes of Newton, didn't appear to have this incumbance. Much of what the greats thought, was really actually rather obvious, once you got into an uninhibited flow of realisation. I can just as easily get into such a flow. What I do, all I do, is then take the conclusions of this flow, and scrutinise reality for discrepencies, and repeat the process, building up a progressively superior model of whats going on. From this model, I can in as far as it is possible, know how something works. It takes years of constant rumination. What pisses me off, is that some dickhead comes along and, not liking the leaps you suddenly present, says 'Ooooh Logical Fallicacy!! How did you get from A to E? Must be wrong GIVE HIM LOGIC CLASS!'

I can't think of one instance when such a patronising moron, was subsequently found to be right regarding the contentiouys idea after making such an insult at me.

rant off





Absolutely - I added that quote showing that the very system that we see here, proven to be a highly integrated quantum computer / energy device, is the structure that is common to earlier prokaryotes, an inherited machine adapted to the task of harvesting light - it is pretty inconceivable that its quantum computational talents were first developed once it became photosynthesising equipment, rather than it inheriting the basic components, since they are needed for many other tasks, such as building the cell and would be equally desirable for other metabolic machinery. That further precludes that all that was present before the evolution of eukaryotes. This therefore should be our starting assumption for organisational mechanisms in ANY lifeform - that they use sophisticated quantum computation. This is the most plausible mechanism now for living systems and there methods of organisation, because it is the most likely and sensible explanation for particular observed phenomena.

What we built much of this all on, was the simple realisation that at the level of cell components, quantum mechanical effects are naturally present and thereby will definitely have to alter selection of component designs based on there ability to exploit it. Thats how evolving systems subject to such phenomena would have to work, because they are under evolutionary forces to exploit every quality of changing designs and retain the parts that work. Whether it 'works' is defined by quantum properties, and it has to keep improving to keep working, leading to such incorporation if it is available - which at that scale, it is. We ahve known this for a long time, and it precludes the neccesitation of the above mechani.

yes, let it never be said I'm a gracious winner

Consider me licked. I'm going to forget about reason and focus on revelation, er, tapping into THE UNINHIBITED FLOW OF REALIZATION!!! You should forward this to Spook. Maybe he'd recommend you for a job at the Stanford Research Institute. Also, I second NightOp's nomination of you for a Nobel Prize. Here's to a new paradigm -- cheers!

Absolutely true. The more pc people are, the more retarded they are.

lol

Standard BS.

-unless they advocted these findings, in fact opposed them, then they have no standing which which others could care - neither your self or spock teach anything very much, nor recognise the many real leaders in the biological field. I find your track record and judgment calls is at best mediocre and at worst wrong and malicious. I wonder presisely what reason you have to support your unearnt superiority complex now. How can you attack, who was proven right when you aggressively contestited it?

Humility is what everyone else would have here in this sad state, but not you. I just see the inflexible psychopaphoplogy of those whose ideas of reference arev such that they exclude that they can admit mistakes and look at the real reasoning of others whose views dissagree with their own, and built mental barriers against real dialogue by construtructing stereotypic straw men to act for enemies position in your minds and writings.

Standford SHOULD look at it, if they wanted to learn more about the neuropsychological processes and habbits of people who built contentious ideas which later are oroven correct. For some of us, we made just small contentious views, on small scale, but the principle is the same. tHE RUMINATORY PROBLEM SOLVING AND OBSERVATION REPEATED MANY TIMES EQUIPS SUCH 'FLOWS' and is preceisely what creates leaps of realisation such as Newtons Principia Mathematica, and underpins the mechnisms behind many other lesser realisations. In Newtons case his self description reveals this process.

Proton Soup's 'lol' is a reference to Section 8's post. This is why he quoted Section 8's post.

Um. People don't have transparent and complete access to their own cognitive functioning. Meta-cognition is selective, almost by definition. If you've actually read Newton (more than just his Principia), then you know that there was much, much more than a lack of inhibition going on in the man. The guy considered his life-long chastity to be his greatest achievement, for crying out loud. For every great thinker who was a social retard, you can point to at least one more who was not. Since you've invoked Newton, let's juxtapose him. Leibniz? Einstein? Feinman? You can't point to one idiot savant and claim it a rational basis for asserting that idiocy is the basis for genius. Yet again, you're throwing logic out the window in favor of self-aggrandizing absurdity.

You are betraying your voters.

Preach it, brother ATB, the unbelievers do not realize we are on the cusp of understanding some of the implications of the use of quantum mechanics by biology. I've long been a member of the quantum effects in memory/consciousness camp, and it does not surprise me at all it happens elsewhere and to a greater degree.

Quantum mechanics can be used to explain a myriad of things, they are pervasive. This does not necesarily mean that the conclusions drawn from a quantum mechanical ordering of a system are correct. I personally believe that this particular application is a good one. The human electro chemical system is so complex that it lends itself easily to a quantum mechanical interpretation. I do not agree with your conclusion that all genius is associated with social morons. I do not see the logic behind the argument, perhaps it needs to be spelled out more clearly.

erm, my last post was whilst on zolpidem again. Sorry about that. I hardly even realise I've written it at the time.

But anyway, the main finding reported on in this thread is still pretty bloody amazing. we can all agree on that.

Yes that argument is a different one. I would simply state that there is a 'politically correct' thinking and that factors which allow people the confidence to break free of it are essential. There is vast drive, but connected to a raw capacity to learn and explore, there helps to be a fearlessness to tackle difficult paths. I think real geniuses, the people who can actually come up with this physics in the first place, probably tend to have been raised such that they were always confident to tackle bigger problems, and actually had the learning capacity and boldness to take things further - a fearlessness is quite integral to taking things further I think. If you reduced the human model to that of a rat, you might say, that a less fearful rat explores more of a dangerous environment. I base what I said on my belief that there are a substantial fraction who could easily be geniuses based on the fact they have vibrant brains and as many neurons with as much capacity to wire and rewire as anyone else, but one can watch that as they reveal what they think in a debate, their mind sticks close to a consensus-view to avoid bringing on pain.

Thus these individuals are the sort that succeed in most settings. My experience of many creative and very intelligent people, is not that they are socially inept, but maybe that outside their area of strength, they can be very difficult and destructive or self destructive, whereas within their area of strength they typically dominate and cruise until eventually clashing with other egos. On form they may hold any social situation down, but there will tend to be a self belief and a boldness that can be bordering on the anti-social - a lack of fear-conditioning I think is consistent with what we can draw from various models, with those that I have observed. This is complicated though, because such individuals may be very self confident and fearless only in given areas, and timid in others, being that they can accurately assess their domain of strength or have developed limited but impressive avenues of development which may be a function of the control of reward pathways as they adapt to behaviours. In those domains I think there is little fear.

So you subscribe to the multiple intelligences theory?