An interaction with Dr.Matti Pitkanen

My e-mail dated 21.10.2007Dear Mr.Pitkanen,
>
> I read with interest the paper “About strange effects
> related to rotating magnetic systems”.
>
> I hope you’d recall my earlier mails proposing that
> there are miniscule replicas of organism in the cells
> and they play the role of blue-prints for its
> morphological development. These blue-prints should be
> the base for creation of ‘holographic structure’ of
> the host organism, as suggested by Dr.Gariav of
> Russia. This holographic structural field acts as a
> ‘calibrating field’ to guide the multiplying cells in
> a coordinated way across the entire organism
> throughout every state of its development.
>
> Considered in this way, the ‘holographic field’
> should escalate gradually in a fractal manner, one
> within another, just like a Russian doll. I hope that
> this lines with your ideas of many-sheeted DNA.
>
> One thing I speculate is that miniscule replicas, or
> the particles that make up them, should be in
> continuous rotation, to create the electromagnetic
> waves. If so, they can be considered as a system in
> rotation. When such system rotates, join along
> boundaries bonds get entangled, as per your theory. As
> you stated, when one connects the corners of a cube D1
> to the corresponding corners of a larger cube D2
> containing D1 by elastic threads and rotates D1, the
> threads get entangled. Given the fact that the two
> helices comes together forming a junction lead to
> bending of DNA, can we attribute bending of DNA to the
> ‘entanglement’ the systems do get when joined along
> the boundaries?
>
> Regarding my trials to establishment the existence of
> miniscule replicas, I am still collecting wide range
> of material to support my point. These minicules
> should be in the order of Planck’s scale or 10-31 mts.
> Please suggest theoretical support for the existence
> of miniscule replicas in the organisms. This idea may
> also be linked to the ancient theory of preformation.
>
> With high regards
>
> C.Ramesh
>

Dr.Matti Pitkanen's Reply

Twisting of strands of braids might be a correlated for quantum
entanglement but it is nost easy to formulate this quantitatively.
Braid like structures appear at parton level and partons can have sizes

down to CP_2 length scale, about 10^4 Planck lengths. Braid like
structures
are analogous to DNA and replicate in particle vertices so that even
analog
of DNA replication occurs. They could be responsible for topological
quantum computation like activities, in particular at level of DNA.

What I take seriously is thus fractality in very general sense but not
in a
concrete sense stating that miniature models of living organisms would

appear in Planck scale. In any case, the claims that Planck length
scale
physics might be relevant to biology are impossible to demonstrate
since
energy scales are so hugely different. A more plausible view to me is
that
dark matter space-time sheets define kind of template for living body
around which ordinary visible matter organizes.


Best,
Matti Pitkanen

My E-mail dated 17th Feb, 2008 and Dr.Matti's replies.

One can imagine many alternatives.

a) Various biorhythms, say 10 Hz alpha rhythm and other EEG rhythms,
could define the reference waves and bioclocks at same time. The fields
associated with MEs representing sensory input could inteference with
them.In the model of topological quantum computation combined with some
basic facts about memory each half period of theta rhytm corresponds to
topological quantum computation and highly regular spike patterns
having interpretation as outcome of tqc and second half to random neural
firing.

In this case theta rhythm would be a reference wave and spike patters
would define the wave representing sensory input.

b) One could also imagine that expected percepts: standard mental
images which brain is creating correspond to references waves represented in
terms of MEs and real input represented in terms of MEs to second wave. Their
interference pattern characterizes how much they differ. More generally,
various kinds of comparison circuits could be considered.

I am skeptic about idea that MEs resemble biological system's structure
in concrete sense. I would expect that the coding of information to MEs
is rather abstract. For instance, nerve pulse patterns (sequences of
spikes) could superpose with the periodic rhythm of ME and ME could code this
pattern to some onionlike layer of magnetic body.


It seems that to some extent DNA reflects the structure of organism:
HOX genes are indeed good example of this but I would be cautious in going
too far. In "Manysheeted DNA" I was perhaps not cautious enough;).

I have been developing during last two months a model of DNA-cell
membrane based topological quantum computation (tqc). In this model magnetic
flux tubes connecting DNA nucleotides to lipid layer of cell membrane define
strands of braids and various braidings code for tqc programs. Braids would
take the role of texts. DNA itself would be like *hardware* of
topological quantum computer.

Best,
Matti



chidambaram ramesh :

Dear Dr.Pitkanen,
Thank you.

MEs, being like laser beams, when collide with light,
can create holographic interference patterns. But
again, such holographic patters should guide the
visible biological matters to organize themselves into
general morphology of the organism they constitute. In
other words, the holographic interference pattern
should mimic the biological structure of the organism.


In a hologram, both ‘object wave’ as well as
‘reference wave’ are required to constitute a
hologram. How are the ‘object’ waves created in the
bio-hologram? Do or how do the MEs possess the
information, the object waves would deliver in
ordinary holograms? Here, I believe, the MEs should
resemble the object in structure, or should be their
miniscule replicas, supplying the information on
physical structure of the organism.

I do believe that the genetic codes are somehow
getting translated into morphological structure,
creating electromagnetic filed patters of the organism
and guide the morphological development. Nevertheless,
by suggesting that the genetic code are ‘meaningful
texts’ and are able to create 3-dementional
electromagnetic field patters in the manner of
hologram, we are naively tracking back to the failed
gene-centric theory.

I am thankful for your views on this.

With best regards

C.Ramesh

--- matpitka@mappi.helsinki.fi wrote:


Interesting question. MEs are like laser beams but
separated from external world. What would happen if two light beams of this
kind collide? If they intersect interference occurs in their intersection and
hologram would form as interference pattern. I would not say that MEs are
opaque. And they are light themselves.
> > Best Regards,
Dear Dr. Pitkanen,

Please clarify,

“Whether the massless external (ME) or any
quantum-scale objects can be opaque or, can they reflect photons (lights), and
cause images/shades, as opaque objects do in classical optics?

Preformation: Grains of Truth

The problems of how genes code information about the morphology of organism and how this information is expressed belong to the great puzzles of the developmental biology. Preformationism of the 17th century proposed that all living beings existed preformed inside their forebears in the manner of a Russian doll, put there by God at the beginning of Creation with a precise moment established for each one to unfold and come to life. Preformationists believed beyond doubt that umpteen numbers of miniatures (animalcules ) were inside the body of every organism. They have given detailed and probably the exact description of these animalcules.

Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek was so firm as to speak out, “I know very well that there are Universities who do no believe that living creatures are in the male semen; but I do not mind about this, as I know I have the truth” Notwithstanding their belief on the creation of these miniatures and that they unfold to become mature organism, their observations on the existence of such miniatures could not be brushed aside as absurd. I fear modern(?) science have discarded the theory without proper inquiry and investigation.

The debate on development, that is, whether it is a process of growing in the sense of blowing-up, of an already finally structured miniature organism (basically, the doctrine of preformation), or rather a modeling process by which an initially almost unstructured germ develops step by step the complex structure of the organism (basically the doctrine of epigenesist and approximates the modern genetics) seems to have had a fresh leaf of life with the publication of the book “LIFECODE: The Theory of Biological Self-Organization” by Stuart Pivar.

Modern genetics commonly believed that morphology is a direct expression of gene activity. It was also believed that determining the exact structure of the genome of humans and other species would reveal how the body is assembled. Rather than launching biology into a new era of understanding, the complete decoding of the human genome announced in December 2000 augured a crisis in biology. Long thought to comprise over a hundred thousand genes, the human genome was found to contain merely thirty thousand. The decoding of the mouse genome in December 2002, also numbered thirty thousand,the same number as man, and of these, only three hundred differed from the human genes, a mere 1%. The 1,000 cell roundworm has 19,500 genes and the corn plant 40,000, 10,000 more than human (Ast 2005)

WHETHER THE THEORY OF ANIMALCULES WAS DISPROVED BEFORE DISCARDED?
I'd say NO. Though our present day advanced miscroscopes have helped us to go through cells, nucleous or even chromosomes and genes, these microscopic developments are too low to view the animalcules. In other words, the animalcules, as described by the animalculists of 17th century are of the order of 10-21 m.

Leeuwenhoek wrote, “I usually judge that three or four hundred of the smallest animalcules, laid out of the smallest animalcules, laid out one against another, would reach to the length of an axis of a common grain of sand; and taking only the least number, to wit 300, then,

300 x 300 x 300 = 27000000 animalcules together are as big as a sand-grain”

That is, as many as 27000000 (to the least) are contained in the size of a sand grain, as per the description of Leeuwenhoek.

Now, let us calculate the volume of a sand-grain. Usually sand grains measure from 1/400 inch (0.06 millimeter) to 1/12 inch (2.1. millimeters) in diameter.

If the diameter of sand grain is taken as 0.06 mm, then

Volume = 4π R³
= 4 x π x (0.03) x (0.03)
= 3.39 x 10-13 m3

Applying this volume of a sand grain to the description of Leeuwenhoek,

No. of animalcules in a sand grain is approximately 27000000
Then, volume of a single animalcule is appx = 3.39 x 10-13 m3
--------------------
27000000
= 1.25 x 10-20m3

Given our advancement in the sphere of microscopy, we are still struggling hard to see namostructures smaller than 0.1 nm. i.e.10-10m.

There were lots of people who proposed and advocated the heliocentric theory, but they were ridiculed and ignored. The scientific data at that time and common sense were against Galileo. Most educated people held the geocentric view of Ptolemy, not the heliocentric one of Copernicus. Today, we wonder how they discarded such important theories without proper scrutiny and verification. But, one big question remains before us. Are we committing a similar kind of contemporary blender? Had we ridiculed and discarded any such theories worth consideration and study or which were beyond the reach of our present science. It appears, WE HAD. The theory of Preformation is one of such theories the present science ridiculed and discarded without much application of mind and study.

As stated in the foregoing paragraphs, it is stated that Leeuwenhoek had claimed that as many as 27000000 animalcules together are as big as a sand grain. The experimental and mathematical prowess of Leeuwenhoek is well-known. He could hardly have made such an intricate calculation without enough study and evidence. Interestingly, the size of animalcules as calculated by Leeuwenhoek coincides precisely with that by Charles Bonnet. Though both of them advocated the theory of Preformation, Leeuwenhoek belonged to the period 1632-1723 whereas Charles Bonnet was between 1720 and 1783. Nonetheless, Charles Bonnet had described the size of the minute animalcules, as below, which approximates to the findings of Leeuwenhoek.

Charles Bonnet wrote in 1762,

“The Sun is a million times bigger than the earth and has at its edge a globule of light, of which several thousands enter the eye of the Animal twenty seven millions (27000000) times smaller than a mite”