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.

 

DNA waves and water

page: 2
29
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Kailassa
 


to be clear, all that is supported by this article is that the molecular signal is carried by the water. there is a one to one correspondence between the water's resonant structure and the DNA sequence. this is action within a single domain within a local environment.

what you are asking is if the water can carry information ACROSS domains. in other words, for the water's resonant structure from one molecule (DNA) to take action on another molecule (not DNA), or even simpler, that all molecules have interactivity at the "resonance level". and also that such action can occur at non-local distances.

i think that may be possible. this type of macro-quantum activity is not well supported in the scientific community as it is quite difficult to model at anything but the tiniest scale.


another place to look is at molecular codes.....such as the genetic code. such a hypothetical code would enable cross-domain interaction. and there is plenty of evidence to show an underlying and intuitive structure within molecular codes. but this model does not necessarily include water as a medium (although it could).

homeopathy seems to rely on a code of sorts, does it not? that there is some form of direct communication between "forces" within objects? well, i can tell you that it is very likely that such a code exists and is the holy grail of molecular biology. both disciplines (homeopathy and molecular biology) follow the motto "form equals function". although their descriptions of the mode of action for such correspondences are entirely different.

thanks for your input!






posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 05:17 AM
link   
look at this old 1989 Physica Scripta study, by some coauthors. cited by Gemm Therapy's Dr. Seckiner Gorgun, a (now dead) "modern Raymond Royal Rife".

Magnetic flux quantization and Josephson behaviour in living systems
iopscience.iop.org/1402-4896/40/6/017
with fulltext pdf uploaded here



Author

E del Giudice1, S Doglia2, M Milani2, C W Smith3 and G Vitiello4

Affiliations

1 INFN Sezione di Milano, Via Celoria 16, 20133 Milano, Italy
2 Dipartimento di Fisica dell'Università, Via Celoria 16, 20133 Milano, Italy
3 Dept. Electronic and Electrical Engineering, University of Salford, Salford M5 4WT, UK
4 Dipartimento di Fisica dell'Università, 84100 Salerno, Italy

Abstract
The proposal of coherent electromagnetic processes as the engine for biological dynamics suggests that Josephson effects could be present in living cells. Positive experimental evidence is reported and discussed.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by tgidkp and post by jjjtir
 

Thanks for your thoughful answers.

I've been puzzled by homeopahy because on the one hand it seemed so illogical, but on the other hand I know people for whom I have deep respect who swear by it. It's fascinating to see there could be a scientifically provable mechanism by which it could be working.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by jjjtir
 


heh. that is a pretty handy piece of research you have there. i bet you keep it handy for just this type of situation.

i truly believe this is the way forward. but it is going to take an overwhelming amount of evidence to get the block-heads on board.

thanks for the article, it is now in my arsenal.





posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 12:57 AM
link   
apparently this article is causing quite a storm of critisism. KURZWEIL website is running a piece on it.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 01:57 AM
link   
reply to post by tgidkp
 


Can you cite any reason for the analog waveform to be corrupted by any digital imposition whatsoever?

To me, it is just blasphemy. What's the point?



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 02:12 AM
link   
reply to post by tgidkp
 


So i just have a question for you,

Does the water have a mind to create with?

I had this idea a few weeks called, symphonic wave theory.

Think about it.




Symphonic -
1. symphonic - relating to or characteristic or suggestive of a symphony; "symphonic choir"
2. symphonic - harmonious in sound; "the symphonic hum of a million insects"
Wave -
(physics) a movement up and down or back and forth


Just a thought...



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 02:49 AM
link   
reply to post by starless and bible black
 


the language of your question is both odd and arrogant. but i will give it a shot.

information travels in discreet (or digital) packets, no matter what meta-level of reality you are describing. but information processors (such as human brains or DNA polymerases) can only process analog waveforms. how is this possible? well, analog waveforms are constantly being imposed upon.

for example, on the human perceptual level, when you are listening to your favorite rock tune and you hear a kick drum. what you are actually hearing is a complex phase cancellation/summation of all of the band instruments sound vibrations traveling through the air. in other words: the phase relationships of the audio frequencies is what allows your brain to hear "kick drum".

so, as you can see (hear) phase relationships are essential for carrying information.

but in the audio example, we are using a perceptual system which exists in a continuous spectrum. by this i mean that audio frequency goes from high to low and everywhere inbetween, indefinitely. this is why radio carriers typically use a frequency or amplitude modulation system, because both frequency and amplitude are able to represent the continuous spectra.

conversely, when you are trying to represent only a handful of discreet symbols such as in digital radio transmission, in order to ensure the highest efficiency, a phase modulation system is used. as you can see from the drawing, a phase reversal produces a very clear signal.

now, i hear you saying that no-where in nature will we find a phase modulation scheme. but, if you will study quantum mechanics you will notice that the phase relationship of sub-atomic particles is precisely what is being discussed.

so, i inferred from the information (and later found the article to back up the claim) that since there are only 4 symbols which are needed to be encoded by this system, that the encoding most probably has a phase relationship.

with this i hope you can see (and will hopefully be less arrogant about) that analog frequency is constantly being "imposed" upon by nature.....and most typically carries a discreet (digital) signal.

computer monitor = discreet
desk = discreet
can of soda = discreet
.....
method of perception of discreet packets = analog


perfectly natural.


thanks for your input!



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 03:08 AM
link   
reply to post by tgidkp
 

I'm not so sure that digital waveforms are 'natural'.

I know that at the root of your interest is the idea that 'aids' sufferers etc..., can be picked off at airport scanner terminals. What a neat idea. That is what tptb want and need. This has been predicted many times by those who saw it coming, having ears to pick the media's intent right out of thin air. Naturally I am cautious in dealing with you in any way shape or form.

I just don't buy that quantum physics uses digital waveforms. I think that man necessarily uses this because man is trying to subvert God to his liking, and 2 dimensional toys (computers) are his best subjugation device, at the present. I see digital as the mark of the beast, because our 3 dimensional existence is being squashed by 2 dimensional scribblings processed through mere toys. How I cringed when I heard the first CD's. I stopped listening to radio for the same reason. Now, I am acutely aware of waveforms being generated soley to disrupt or destroy my mind and learn what it can of my soul in doing so. I guess I hate digital anything. It cramps my concept of God, that any package of information would jerk around like some clipped waveform. Are you certain that what you say is true, about this being natural? Yes, you were right about my questioning this, and I expected you to say as much when I clicked on your post. Thanks.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 03:41 AM
link   
reply to post by starless and bible black
 


it doesnt matter to me whether or not you buy it. but, to ease you in to the idea, here are some pictures.

first, atomic electron orbitals:






and, for comparison, a digital modulation symbol set:




...i do find your angle interesting. but i am just a scientist! dont blame me for nefarious intent!





posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 03:57 AM
link   
reply to post by tgidkp
 

Scientists are all pretty much the same. Where it matters most, they all think alike, and there's zero money in it for them if they don't. I get nothing from the images. Thanks for trying.

My emphasis against 'science' is pretty straight forward. They have this very limited set of tools, and should anything, anything, even something catastrophic, or miraculous, fall outside this realm, then they are lost.

Some of the most insane comments I have heard came from scientists:

'Contrails are a mystery', not chemtrails, contrails; and 'good job on not overtly speculating what it all means', while sifting through a thread which described the multiple thousands of satellites suspended over our heads and funded by tax dollars. Later on, the thought was clarified as such: meaning=God. Fact=science.

science is to the soul what the fed is to our livelihoods. You may not know it as of yet, but due to advances in science, we have been cast in to the darkest of ages. It's not like they let us in on the latest abilities to subjugate us with each new breakthrough, you know? I'm telling you straight up that they have devices that use quantum physics to affect the mind and body from remote locations, and that God is pissed. I can't pronounce what's in it for them, but I am pretty certain there's a reward which they weren't expecting, that gets doled out, just when they're busy observing things they have no business observing.

edit on 16-1-2011 by starless and bible black because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 04:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by starless and bible black
reply to post by tgidkp
 

.....and there's zero money in it for them if they don't.....


i care not for money. no. really. i am financially independent. this is about exploring ideas.



I get nothing from the images.


errrr.....they dont even look remotely similar to you? visually speaking?


Some of the most insane comments I have heard came from scientists:


let me rephrase that for you: "Some of the most insane comments I have heard came from idiots." there are idiots everywhere. and i assure you that you are perfectly capable of being one, yourself.


....I'm telling you straight up that they have devices that use quantum physics to affect the mind and body from remote locations, and that God is pissed.


well, i dont know what god has to do with it but i will say this: i used to work for the NSA and during that time (the formative years of my conspiracy related mindset) i developed a pretty clear idea of what i think they are using these technologies for. and i think that your wild imaginings are probably pretty accurate. it used to scare the crap outta me.

 


but lets drop the symantics for a moment, okay? no more digital or analog.

what types of symbols do you use to represent your family members?

well, on the one hand, you can count them (on one hand?). they are discrete units. individual persons. quantity

but on the other hand, each discrete unit is packed with an intensely complex set of sub-symbols. feelings and weird little idiosyncrasies and such. we usually describe this as some sort of limitless potential or ineffable quality. quality.

this is information processing. information in nature, by minds, occurs by representing BOTH discrete and continuous information. they go hand in hand. in fact, they are nested inside one another like russian dolls. wholes and parts and wholes and parts and wholes and.....all the way up and all the way down.

quantity and quality. this is what is meant by "digital" and "analog". it is silly to object to it on a principled science-hating stance: it is what it is. and i assure you that it is perfectly natural.
edit on 16-1-2011 by tgidkp because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 04:52 AM
link   
reply to post by tgidkp
 


Excellent thread. I'm not sure if the link below relates directly to this thread or is just on the fringes.

www.google.co.nz...=en&xhr=t&q=water+DNA+KIRLIAN+PHOTOGRAPHY&cp=29&pf=p &sclient=psy&rlz=1T4GZHZ_enNZ226NZ227&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=water+DNA+KIRLIAN+PHOTOGRAPHY&pbx=1&fp=6ad847a65e1d0a9d

Link to google search 'water, DNA, Kirlian Photography". A few years ago I read somewhere that studies had been conducted on water, and the water was photographed by a Kirlian camera, which essentially captures the electromagnetic energy field (Aura) of the test subject on photo. Tests were conducted where water was placed in front of a speaker playing eg, Heavy Metal sounds and was photographed before and after, the 'music' test. The water was also placed in front of a speaker playing classical music and again was photographed before and after the 'music' test.

The results were that the water which had been subjected to listening to the Heavy Metal had become fractal in its fundamental structure and was in a 'scattered' state. The water which had been subjected to listening to the classical music was radiating more energy. I'm not 100% sure which country was conducting the tests but I seem to recall maybe Chinese laboratory technicians may have been doing the research testing.

Just recently here in New Zealand, KANGEN water has become the latest thing in promoting good health and well being. It is alkalised to different levels of pH alkalinity and apparently is extremely good for flushing toxins from the body.

Many years ago I had read that one day we would come upon the realisation that it is possible to heal any ailment with only a glass of water. At the time of reading that, I could not imagine how that could ever come into being. I thought maybe the author meant if water was 'prayed over' then it may become like 'healing' water, but after learning about DNA codes contained within water and hearing about this KANGEN water (or 'magic' water) I'm thinking the author must have been way ahead of their time. Am going to do some research on this whole subject.

Linkk below to google search KANGEN water.

www.google.co.nz...=en&xhr=t&q=KANGEN+water&cp=5&pf=p&sclient=psy&rlz=1 T4GZHZ_enNZ226NZ227&aq=0&aqi=&aql=&oq=KANGE&pbx=1&fp=6ad847a65e1d0a9d

Just an aside thought, we as humans are made up of 80% water, so in a way we could be described as a smaller version of the planet Earth which I believe is also made up of 80% water. In a word we could be described as microcosms of the macrocosm, since we are all connected energetically to this planet, we need to remember that what we inflict upon this planet's water and air supplies is what will inflict upon us directly both energetically and physically. ie, the BP Oil Spill - Not Good For Our Planet - Not Good For Us.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by onequestion
reply to post by tgidkp
 

Does the water have a mind to create with?


doubtful.

when we refer to "mind", we are usually talking about a system of self-aware self-reference.

do people have minds? yes.
do dogs have minds? wellll......okay, why not.
do mosquitoes have minds? probably not.
does the toilet have a mind? no.

this article supports the idea, in a loosey-goosey sorta way, that water enables a mind to exist. or rather, it suggests a mechanism for the perpetuation of bio-molecules. and this is very important! most physical objects degrade over time. but bio-molecules are able to perpetuate themselves into the future.


thanks!



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by tgidkp
 


So how does the water know its suppose to create dna strains if it doesn't have a mind?

or

How do the atoms know what the shape of an atom is suppose to look like?

or mybe,

Is water only what water looks like because of my own personal self awareness in relation to the water? Which would i guess would mean, in essence i created the water. So did i create the water will simultaneously being created within the mind of the strain of the dna? It's my own understanding that quantum physics accounts for the observer in its model of physics...
edit on 16-1-2011 by onequestion because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by onequestionSo how does the water know its suppose to create dna strains if it doesn't have a mind?


this is why i used the toilet in the above example. so lets rephrase your above question in terms of the toilet.

"how does the toilet know when to shut off the water flow?"
"how does the toilet know when to turn the water flow back on?"
"how does the toaster know when to pop the cooked bread out?"


in the analysis of these questions, two things should pop out to you....

1- that there are intelligent feedback loops involved which themselves are not living or 'mind'ful.
2- that intelligent systems are used (by a user) to perpetuate life.


these feedback systems are built in at every level of the system from our macro-cosmos to the micro. and you are correct to point out that at each level it is necessary to incorporate a USER or "observer". but this in no way implies that *intelligence* equals *alive*. so if you ask, "does water contain intelligence?" answer: yes. "is water alive?" answer: no.

and only alive things have minds, at least insofar as minds are commonly defined.


it is my personal position that the user is integrated in such a way that, even though each level appears to have a seperate and distinct user, in reality all users are the same user. but that is just my personal take.

step carefully so as not to get your quantums mixed-up!



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by tgidkp
 


On the feedback systems created by the designer for the function of the toilet, while creating the feedback system i was in so many words, telling the feedback system what its job was by creating it. In a literal sense. So in essence i was giving the feedback system its mind, or my mind, to accomplish its function. So it understands its job on some basic level. The matter of how intelligent it is, according to its function is a different story. I mean we are limited in intelligence to our own personal experience. As i would imagine is water as well.

How could something without a mind create something with a mind?



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by tgidkp
.
these feedback systems are built in at every level of the system from our macro-cosmos to the micro. and you are correct to point out that at each level it is necessary to incorporate a USER or "observer". but this in no way implies that *intelligence* equals *alive*. so if you ask, "does water contain intelligence?" answer: yes. "is water alive?" answer: no.


Some would differ on the belief that water isn't alive.

current.com...

www.wellnessgoods.com...

Personally i'm of the belief that water can act as some form of 'transmitter', reacting to electrical or chemical changes...



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by onequestion
 


i think you are trying to edge me down a slippery slope.

the answer is simple: when intelligent systems develop symbol sets which are complex enough to include themselves within the set. this is a mind. it is a factor of complexity. it leads to a situation where not only are symbols fed into the system, but symbols are fed out of the system and generated spontaneously.....in fact, symbols can interact within the system, in an invisible symbol-space.

you can determine very easily whether or not such a symbol set is in use by observing the behavior of the system in question. again, the questions:

is a human self-aware?
is a dog self-aware?
is a toilet self-aware?

what is the symbol set of water? does it contain a self-symbol?

now, do not take this to mean that i am a cold-hearted reductionist. as i was saying to an earlier poster, information is necessarily processed from BOTH a quantitative AND qualitative approach. this is to say that, it is just as useful (if not more) to describe reality from a TOP -> DOWN perspective as it is from the BOTTOM -> UP.

from the top, down, it certainly does appear that the bigger symbols are pushing the smaller symbols around (free will and all that). and fortunately for both of us, there are scientific disciplines in development which are able to incorporate this point of view. so no slippery slope is needed! we are on solid ground!


i read recently that at the foundation of the question of livingness is that it has arisen spontaneously. it cannot have been created. this may be at odds with a lot of peoples' belief structures, but i think it is probably true. after all: it is my own spontaneous nature which defines my own sense of being alive.

so to answer your question directly, a mind is NEVER created.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by mr-lizardSome would differ on the belief that water isn't alive.


even though we are on the fringes of science, we are looking for more than belief.

thanks for the links.



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join