It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Can a Virus move at Light Speed?

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by GreatTech
An average virus moves (x,y,z coordinate motion) most like which macroorganism? An average virus moves at a speed most like which macroorganism?


Viruses don't move actively; they are subject to random ambient forces only. Viruses move only as a function of brownian motion in liquids. There is no comparable motion in 'macroorganisms,' except for maybe sitting in your pool on a raft and floating.

Viruses do nothing in the absence of a host cell. They're not living per se... they're called obligate intracellular parasites for a reason.

Even those viruses with abnormally large genomes are not 'living.' They still rely on the biochemical activities of host cells to 'do' anything.




posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow

Well, okay. Is it possible that viruses access quantum wormholes? Or create them?



No... they don't have the energy to create any kind of wormhole and they can't move so they can't access them.



posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by GreatTech
An average virus moves (x,y,z coordinate motion) most like which macroorganism? An average virus moves at a speed most like which macroorganism?

It moves at the speed of whatever fluid it's in. So on a macroorganism level, it moves most like a rock.

Yes, I know that rocks aren't organisms. The only way a virus can be moved is to be carried by something else.



posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by soficrow

Well, okay. Is it possible that viruses access quantum wormholes? Or create them?



No... they don't have the energy to create any kind of wormhole and they can't move so they can't access them.



I agree that your take is the most obviously sensible - but...

By the same terms that viruses are not alive, DNA is not alive. Yet this physicist says "Wormholes could ...perhaps provide even DNA with a rudimentary nervous system."

Can you explain how this is hypothetically possible, given that DNA is not alive and cannot move?



www.helsinki.fi...

Wormhole super conductivity leads to a quantum model of EEG and nerve pulse. In the model the lipid layers of the cell membrane are identified as coupled wormhole super conductors. Join along boundaries bonds connecting the lipid layers serve as Josephson junctions [Josephson]. The model [eeg] is described in more detail in a separate abstract.

b) Wormholes could be important also in DNA and molecular length scales and perhaps provide even DNA with a rudimentary nervous system. This idea gets support from the successful model of the so called Comorosan effect [Comorosan1,Comorosan2,worm].







posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by GreatTech
MidnightDStroyer, do you work with viruses? Where do you get your information?

I read a lot...Even before computers first hit the market for public use, I'd spend lots of time in the local library.



Originally posted by soficrow
By the same terms that viruses are not alive, DNA is not alive. Yet this physicist says "Wormholes could ...perhaps provide even DNA with a rudimentary nervous system."

I didn't really find any actual names at your link that were willing to be connected with this theory...Who's baby is it, really?
From what I understand, the existence of wormholes is still only theoretical...It's only been about a decade or so since astrologists have found definitive proof that black holes exist! I forget which sector of space was under observation & don't even remember the name of the star involved (I originally saw it on Discovery Channel a long time ago). However, they observed a star orbiting around...nothing...And the star was having its stellar mass sucked out of it, heading right to the point where the gravity-well would exist for the "nothing" that the star was orbiting. From their observations, it's apparent that the star in question will eventually get sucked into the black hole.
Even so, the astrophysicists have yet to completely hammer out their theories about how such intensive gravity wells affect the flow of time.

At any rate, the link you provided...They seem to ignore the fact that micro-organisms are, in themselves, a macrosystem based upon molecular & atomic physics. If you really want to see the how the universe itself is merely a "macro" of the "micro", learn a bit more about Physics.

[edit on 4-11-2006 by MidnightDStroyer]



posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by soficrow

Well, okay. Is it possible that viruses access quantum wormholes? Or create them?



No... they don't have the energy to create any kind of wormhole and they can't move so they can't access them.



I agree that your take is the most obviously sensible - but...

By the same terms that viruses are not alive, DNA is not alive. Yet this physicist says "Wormholes could ...perhaps provide even DNA with a rudimentary nervous system."

Can you explain how this is hypothetically possible, given that DNA is not alive and cannot move?


Eeek! Physics! Okay (gulp) let me go see what he's really saying...
www.helsinki.fi...

Firstly, it's a speculative paper... he's using his concept of TGD and applying it to string theory and he's treating several speculative (and possibly disproven) theories as being real and true (Comorosan effect is one of them.)

So his physics is of the "quantum mind" theory; a theory that has had some holes shot in it.

Now... a nervous system is a system whereby stimuli is accepted and transferred to a separate area where a decision that results in a change in the organism is made and the information is transmitted back to the rest of the organism as a result. So (I don't think he understands the biology, here) his proposal is that DNA or other chemicals will suddenly become aware of things in their environment and will react and change NOT in chemical ways (glomming onto ions, etc) but in ways that are processed.

I don't believe that, personally.

Here's where I think it goes seriously wrong:

Wormhole super conductivity leads to a quantum model of EEG and nerve pulse. In the model the lipid layers of the cell membrane are identified as coupled wormhole super conductors. Join along boundaries bonds connecting the lipid layers serve as Josephson junctions [Josephson]. The model [eeg] is described in more detail in a separate abstract.


I really can't see that. I'm teaching the nervous system for the next two weeks, and we're examining nerve tissue under the microscope. There are (literally) billions of lipid Schwann cells all over the body. Wormholes (according to physics) take a lot of energy; more than would be accounted for by chemical reactions. They aren't isolated from each other, but in many cases they're packed together right next to each other. You couldn't stack 100 or 1,000 wormholes packed tightly together in a fat round ring. The Schwann cells are no more than half a millimeter in length, so we're talking wormholes of 1/2mm enfolding a nerve that's 3 feet long (from my spinal cord to my toes) and it's packed into a nerve fiber that's composed of a hundred or more nerve cells just like it.

I think he's way off base here.

I can't address the physics much, only the anatomy and physiology.



posted on Nov, 4 2006 @ 08:59 PM
link   
Thanks Byrd.

...I am NOT ready to argue that viruses travel at the speed of light or jump through wormholes.

But - these concepts do intrigue me, and I suspect life, loosely defined to include things like prions
, somehow bypasses the high energy needed by more pedestrian matter to create wormholes.

Of course I could be way wrong about that. But I do think the jury's still out.



.



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
Thanks Byrd.

....I suspect life, loosely defined to include things like prions
, somehow bypasses the high energy needed by more pedestrian matter to create wormholes.




Eeew. That is SUCH a stupid comment. I really do know better than to post late at night.


Revised: Some molecules(?) apparently contain a phenomenal amount of energy in their nucleus - maybe enough to enable the creation of wormholes, especially when tweaked with electro-magnetic pulses, radiation, or ???


.



posted on Nov, 9 2006 @ 09:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow

Originally posted by soficrow
Thanks Byrd.

....I suspect life, loosely defined to include things like prions
, somehow bypasses the high energy needed by more pedestrian matter to create wormholes.




Eeew. That is SUCH a stupid comment. I really do know better than to post late at night.


Revised: Some molecules(?) apparently contain a phenomenal amount of energy in their nucleus - maybe enough to enable the creation of wormholes, especially when tweaked with electro-magnetic pulses, radiation, or ???


.



heehee! I do stuff like that... write when I'm otherwise sleepy or distracted and then come back and go AARRRRRRRRRGH!!! WHAT AN IDIOTIC THING TO SAY!!!

Makes me feel like a REAL nitwit!



posted on Nov, 10 2006 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd
...WHAT AN IDIOTIC THING TO SAY!!!

No reason for both of you to get so hard on yourselves for it...I'd bet everybody has their moments too.


After all, even Einstein failed in Mathematics...So don't feel so bad when you encounter a "brain fart" moment.


[edit on 10-11-2006 by MidnightDStroyer]



posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 07:53 PM
link   
Now I have heard that you can accually speed light up past the Standardized measurement of the speed of light.



posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 02:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Brand403
Now I have heard that you can accually speed light up past the Standardized measurement of the speed of light.

I fail to understand how, even if it's true, this has any connection to the topic of this thread? Maybe another thread to explore the idea further?

IMO, I think it would be more worthwhile to slow down light...So that I can turn off the switch & get into bed before the room gets dark.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join