Recovered: Tensegrity Structures in Biology

What is a human being? What is life? Can science give us reliable answers to such questions? The electricity of life. The meaning of human consciousness. Are we alone? Are the traditional contests between science and religion still relevant? Does the word "spirit" still hold meaning today?

Moderators: bboyer, MGmirkin

Locked
Grey Cloud
Posts: 2477
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:47 am
Location: NW UK

Re: Rigorous study of size limits for flying creatures

Unread post by Grey Cloud » Thu Oct 30, 2008 8:58 am

Hi Stephan,
Not seen you down here in the underworld for a while.
Interesting stuff in your post but it is all based on the premise that nothing has changed. I'm with Kevin on this one as I believe that things have changed (and will change again).
I lso subscribe to the view that the Earth (or that form of consciousness which we call, e.g. Gaia or Geb) looks fter the mind aspect of the creatures on the planet. They, the flora and fauna, can do anything that their mother allows them to and nothing which their mother prohibits. We humans have a mind of our own and free will. That said, we know no little or nothing about our mind and do not exercise our free will. It was not always the case.
The Vymaanika-Shaastra, G.R. Josyer trans
http://www.sacred-texts.com/ufo/vs/vs12.htm
In the Krita Yuga, Dharma or Righteousness was four-footed, that is, it was four-square, fully established, all paramount, and it was adhered to implicitly by men. The men were inherently noble-born and were possessed of remarkable powers. Without needing to go through yogic discipline to attain special powers, or practise mantras which secured extraordinary results, the men of that yuga, merely by their devotion to dharma, became Siddhapurushaas or gifted with superhuman powers. They were virtuous men and men of learning and wisdom. Going in the sky with the speed of wind by their own volition was natural to them. The eight super-sensory, and now superhuman, attainments, known as animaa, mahimaa, garimaa, laghimaa, praaptih, praakaamya, eeshatwa, and vashitwa, were all possessed by them. That is, animaa is assumption of infinitesimal shape; mahimaa is growing into gigantic shape; garimaa is becoming astonishingly heavy; laghimaa is becoming weightless; praaptih is securing any desired thing; praakaamyam is becoming rid of desires; eeshatwa is attaining paramountcy; and vashitwa is becoming extremely pliant.
In the next yuga, Treta, we had lost these abilities and had to build machines to fly (Vimanas). We can, and will, regain them.
If I have the least bit of knowledge
I will follow the great Way alone
and fear nothing but being sidetracked.
The great Way is simple
but people delight in complexity.
Tao Te Ching, 53.

User avatar
StefanR
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Rigorous study of size limits for flying creatures

Unread post by StefanR » Thu Oct 30, 2008 10:09 am

GreyCloud wrote:Not seen you down here in the underworld for a while.
Interesting stuff in your post but it is all based on the premise that nothing has changed. I'm with Kevin on this one as I believe that things have changed (and will change again).

I have never been away ;)
I personally think it not based on anything. It's purely looking at what can be seen in nature and what can be found in the ground. From there it seems that no evidence is present at all for the need for the premise of a different gravity in the timespan of what is percieved as live on earth. The structural principles evident in organisms can explain sufficiently the remains of extinct organisms. Of course one is free to assume gravity changed, but the biological record just shows no signs of it. Maybe gravity changed in the time of the presence of organisms but then only in such amount that it's effect has been negligable on the structuring of organisms.
Changes can take on many levels and many frequencies and degrees as well as quantative and qualitative, in my opinion, and not all changes are percieved by us or all of us in the same way. The fact that to be mentally able to fly or able to effect other consciousnesses because of different frequency or degree of mind on a quantative/qualitative level might be possible, is no proof that the material body is nessecary for that.


Ps. I had the idea after a little digging in the specific Vimana literature a while ago, that the authenticity of it is highly in doubt. But I could be mistaken. :?
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.

User avatar
junglelord
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: Rigorous study of size limits for flying creatures

Unread post by junglelord » Thu Oct 30, 2008 5:11 pm

Gravity is never a constant. It is a relationship of cyclic variations which are harmomic frequency relationships of their spin domains. The gravity of the earth will vary .7% every 6 months.
http://www.treeincarnation.com/articles ... f-Zero.htm
If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla
Casting Out the Nines from PHI into Indigs reveals the Cosmic Harmonic Code.
— Junglelord.
Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness. Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated.
— Junglelord

AndyM
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 12:48 am

Re: Rigorous study of size limits for flying creatures

Unread post by AndyM » Sun Nov 30, 2008 2:54 am

Of course all of this presumes that the Earth's gravity was the same 65 million years ago as it is now - given everything seemed to be rather massive which is what one would expect in a lower gravity enviroment I'd have thought some one might have considered the obvious - gravity was lower - which begs the question was Earth smaller!!!!

My guess inner rotating plasma core positive ions being fed in from Sun (see polar aurora's) and negative electrons being attracted to Earth's surface - lighting, sprites and ELFS.....Plasma core expands over time as does the Earth......

Lloyd
Posts: 4433
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: Rigorous study of size limits for flying creatures

Unread post by Lloyd » Tue Dec 09, 2008 2:40 pm

Yes, Earth may have expanded somewhat like that, but it didn't take 65 million years. Conventional dating methods are based on false assumptions of uniformitarianism. Lloyd Pye wrote about human remains or artifacts found by various scientists under rock strata thought to be 200 million years old. Pye thought it meant humans have been around for 200 million years, but it really means, according to EU findings, that the rock strata, and dinosaur etc fossils therein are likely only thousands of years old.

User avatar
webolife
Posts: 2539
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Rigorous study of size limits for flying creatures

Unread post by webolife » Tue Dec 09, 2008 4:00 pm

I agree with StefanR's post on animal flight, which assumes nothing but simply declares what is observed in the animal kingdom. Another possibility that could be brought up here is that the naturally and obvious counterbalance to earth's gravitation is its angular momentum. A slight increase (looking back in time) in rotational velocity, no other factors changed, could account for the ability of some creatures to reach seemingly over-the-top proportions. As the planet slows down, if that be the case, the limits of gravitation on creature growth would be greater. There are simply too many problems with the expanding earth theory to warrant it replacing standard views of continental drift. I'm in agreement with Lloyd, however, that traditional time scales need to be put on the chopping block.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.

User avatar
bboyer
Posts: 2410
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:50 pm
Location: Upland, CA, USA

Re: Recovered: Tensegrity Structures in Biology

Unread post by bboyer » Tue Dec 09, 2008 4:39 pm

MOD NOTE: the "Rigorous study of size limits for flying creatures" has been merged with this topic, "Tensegrity Structures in Biology."
There is something beyond our mind which abides in silence within our mind. It is the supreme mystery beyond thought. Let one's mind and one's subtle body rest upon that and not rest on anything else. [---][/---] Maitri Upanishad

User avatar
StefanR
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Recovered: Tensegrity Structures in Biology

Unread post by StefanR » Wed Jan 21, 2009 11:01 am

The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.

seasmith
Posts: 2815
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:59 pm

Re: Recovered: Tensegrity Structures in Biology

Unread post by seasmith » Wed Jan 21, 2009 11:46 am

StefanR,

Wow !

Note to moderators:
I would like to copy those 2 links over to the DNA Resources thead, for easy search and retrieval.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PKjF7OumYo

s

Henry Kroll
Guest

Re: Recovered: Tensegrity Structures in Biology

Unread post by Henry Kroll » Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:24 pm

When I was a kid 60 + years ago the teachers told us that winged dynosaurs couldn't fly because they were too heavy and had no feathers. They weren't thinking that the atmospheric pressure was around 100 pounds per square inch--five to ten times what it is today. During ancient times you would have had to saw 3/4 of the wings off your plane to fly 60 miles per hour. Our teachers didn't have any idea why dynosaurs grew to such gigantic size. Recent experiments in Japan with hyperbaric plant growth shed some light on the subject. We now know that Earth has lost 99% of its original atmosphere. This is the last gasp for any intelligent life on the planet.

I had several thousand people read the following two articles which explain a great deal how bilogical structures evolved.

HOW NONCYCLIC PHOTOSYNTHESIS JUMPSTARTED LIFE, HILLARY CLINTON AND EVERYTHING THAT FILLS A NICH.
True plants use carbon dioxide and water (along with nitrogen and phosphorus from the soil) to make organic compounds and produce oxygen as a waste product. When the plant needs to use any of the energy it stored, it uses oxygen to “burn” its fuel, generating water and carbon dioxide as byproducts of that process.
To take advantage of the energy stored in the plants, animals eat the plants directly or eat other animals that do. Like the plants, they use oxygen during metabolism and produce waste water and carbon dioxide. Both plants and animals need additional water for a variety of functions: For example, the transport of nutrients up from the roots is powered by the evaporation of water from the leaves and animals use water to regulate temperature through evaporative cooling and to dispose waste products. A small fraction of the earth’s living things are anaerobic or harvest inorganic chemical energy, and so do not fit into this cycle.

ENERGY CYCLE IN PLANTS
The photon energy: “sunlight” activates electrons, which are removed from the chlorophyll before they can reemit that energy. These “excited” electrons are used to charge a membrane battery, which is used to make the energy transfer compound, adenosine triphosphate (ATP). In the process the energized electrons, having been activated days or even years earlier, lose their energy and are discarded in energy poor carbon dioxide. The ATP is used as a carrier for the electron energy. Every organism faced nutrient poor conditions and so for every 99.9 percent of new life forms that evolved only one-tenth of one percent survived while all the rest are now extinct. --James L. Gould, Carol Grant Gould
It was the unique property of water with two hydrogen atoms each with a positive charge and one oxygen atom with a negative charge referred to as nonpolar molecules that allow weak electro static associations (hydrogen bonds). Their unique geometry allowed the self-repairing, bilayer membrane of the living cell. Modern cells protect themselves from the environment with bilayer membranes to which specific chemical doors and pumps have been added to help control molecular in-and-out traffic.
Hydrogen Cyanide, for example, is readily formed from ammonia and methane and then converted into the nucleotide adenine, which is also the backbone of ATP. –Chemical Evolution and the Origin of Life, By Richard E. Di ckerson; Scientific American, September, 1978
Many meteorites and comets contain abundant inorganically formed organic compounds. Natural selection must have been at work from the very onset, favoring liposomes with the most useful chemistry favoring those with the most useful building blocks and excluding those that might be toxic. At this point in time most organisms were autotrophs—that is, creatures that took energy or energy-rich materials from the nonliving world around them—as apposed to heterotrophs, which eat other organisms (you).
The next step in the evolution of living organisms was the development of cyclic photosynthesis—cyclic because the electron energized by an incoming photon from the sun is quickly returned to the chlorophyll molecule from which it came. Chlorophyll is embedded in a membrane along with the enzymes that steal the activated electron and harvest its energy; that energy is used to charge the membrane, and the electrostatic potential created is later employed to make ATP.
It takes about two photons to charge the membrane; enough to make one ATP, and since photons are free, life must suddenly have been released from dependence on inorganic nutrients synthesis: with photosynthesis! Suddenly there was enough ATP to generate nutrients from simple chemicals like carbon dioxide and ammonia!!! There are still bacteria that employ only cyclic photosynthesis.

There still wasn’t enough ATP available to store large supplies of sugars and starches to give evolution a much needed boost so nature invented the noncyclic process which created eight times more ATP than the cyclic process. In that process the electron energy is boosted in two steps, and so much extra charging and other work is wrung from its energy that eight ATP’s can be made from two activated electrons because the electron is not returned to the chlorophyll but is handed to an energy-storage molecule instead; the missing electron is obtained by splitting water, which generates oxygen as a waste product.
To put it another way, the electron end up in a multipurpose energy compound that can be used directly to power carbon fixation to charge the membrane for subsequent ATP production. The missing electron in the first chlorophyll is replaced with one obtained by splitting water, a process that liberates oxygen.
Most photoautotrophs (all true plants) use the more efficient noncyclic process with the eight-fold increase in energy production.
Because eight times more ATP was being produced by all the plants they were able to create more energy storage in the form of carbon-based, starches and sugars. The noncyclic process not only created more free oxygen it also allowed millions of other life forms to evolve to feed on the extra, eight-fold energy created by this process. This is why we have coal, oil and limestone on Earth plus myriads of other oxygen-breathing animals like Hillary Clinton.

--The Assembly of Cell Membranes by Mark S. Bretscher; Scientific American, October 1985
--The Photosynthetic Membrane by By Kenneth R. Miller Scientific American, October 1979
--Molecular Mechanisms of Photosynthesis by Douglas C Youvan and Barry L. Marrs; Scientific American, June 1984
--Cytochrome C and the Evolution of Energy Metabolism, by Richard E. Dickerson, Scientific American, March 1980 Offprint 146
Me: Captain Hank Kroll, navigator http://www.alaskapublishing.com


WHEN DID EARTH GET A 20.8% OXYGEN-RICH ATMOSPHERE?

It is generally believed that life on Earth probably wouldn’t have developed if the early atmosphere had been oxygen rich. Photosynthesis bacteria were surely not the first living organisms, but the history of life in the period that preceded their appearance is still obscure. What little information can be inferred about early earth is consistent with the idea that the environment was then largely anoxic (without oxygen). One tentative line of evidence rests on the assumption that among organisms living today those that are simplest in structure and in biochemistry are probably the most closely related to the earliest forms of life. Those simplest organisms are bacteria of the clostridal and methanogenic type, and they are all obligate anaerobes.
Somewhat later such bacteria gave rise to the first organisms capable of aerobic photosynthesis, the precursors of modern cynaobacteria. For the anaerobic photosynthetic bacteria the molecular oxygen released by this mutant strain was a toxin, and as a result the aerobic photosynthesizers were able to supplant the anaerobic one in the upper portions of the mat communities. The anerobic species became adapted to the lower parts of the mat, where there is less light but also a lower concentration of oxygen.
The anaerobic nature of bacterial photosynthesis seems to present a paradox: photosynthetic organisms thrive where light is abundant, but such environments are also generally ones having a high concentration of oxygen, which poisons bacterial photosynthesis. These contradictory needs can be explained if it is assumed that anaerobic photosynthesis evolved among primitive bacteria early in the Precambrian, when the atmosphere was essentially anoxic. The photosynthesizers could thus have lived in mat-like communities in shallow water and in full sunlight.
The several groups of photosynthetic bacteria differ from one another in their pigmentation, but they are alike in one important respect: unlike the photosynthesis of cyanobacteria and eukaryotes, all bacterial photosynthesis is a totally anaerobic process. Oxygen is not given off as a byproduct of the reaction, and the photosynthesis cannot proceed in the presence of oxygen. Whereas oxygen appears to be a requirement of green plants for the synthesis of chlorophyll, oxygen inhibits the synthesis of bacteriochlorophylls.
It is argued that oxygen must have been freely available by the time the first eukaryotic cells appeared, probably 1,400 to 1,500 million years ago. Hence, the proliferation of cyanobacteria that released the oxygen must have take place earlier in the Precambrian. How much earlier remains a question. The best available evidence bearing on this issue comes from the study of sedimentary minerals, some of which may have been influenced by the concentration of free oxygen at the time they were deposited. In recent years a number of workers have investigated this possibility, most notably Preston E. Cloud, Jr., of the University of California at Santa Barbara and the U. S. Geologic Survey.
One mineral of significance in this argument is uraninite (UO2), which is found in several deposits that were laid down in Precambrian streambeds. In the presence of oxygen, grains of uraninite are readily oxidized to U3O8 and are thereby dissolved. David E. Grandstaff of Temple University has shown that streambed deposits of the mineral probably could not have accumulated if the concentration of oxygen was greater than about 1 percent. Uraninite-bearing deposits of this type are found in deposits older than about two billion years but not in younger strata, suggesting that the transition in oxygen concentration may have come at about that time.
The most intriguing mineral evidence for the date of the oxygen transition comes from another kind of iron-rich deposit; the banded iron formation. These deposits include some tens of billions of tons of iron in the form of oxides embedded in a silica-rich matrix; they are the world’s chief economic reserves of iron. A major fraction of them was deposited within a comparatively brief period of a few hundred-million years beginning some what earlier than two billion years ago. That would have been a time when the earth was cooling after the planet building phase.
A transition in oxygen concentration could explain the major episode of iron sedimentation through the following hypothetical sequence of events. In a primitive, anoxic ocean, iron existed in the ferrous state (that is, with a valence of +2) and in that form was soluble in seawater. With the development of aerobic photosynthesis small concentrations of oxygen began diffusing into the upper portions of the ocean, where it reacted with the dissolved iron. The iron was thereby converted to the ferric form (with a valence of +3) and as a result hydrous ferric oxides were precipitated and accumulated with silica to form rusty layers on the ocean floor. As the process continued virtually al the dissolved iron in the ocean basins was precipitated: in a matter of a few hundred million years as the world’s oceans rusted. Could this have been a time when our solar system entered an area of space with a salt cloud? Does the Oort cloud and Kippier belt of the Sirius system contain salt?
In my book, Cosmological Ice Ages I propose that our solar system was captured by Sirius binary system at about that time 700-million years ago thereby imparting additional ultraviolet light to earth which would release more oxygen into the atmosphere with increased photosynthesis. It would have taken the power of a White Dwarf star to break through early earth’s thousand-pound per square inch-thick atmosphere to get oxygen producing plants to grow. During the Precambrian the sun didn’t burn nearly as hot as it does today. Any suggestion that our sun is solely responsible for all the biological-deposited layers on earth isn’t taking into consideration the higher atmospheric pressures and the fact that Earth had previously been in an Ice Age for over one billion years.
Fossil stromatolites first became abundant in sediments deposited about 2,300 million years ago, shortly before the major episode of iron-ore deposition. It is therefore possible that the first widespread appearance of stromatolites might mark the origin and the earliest diversification of oxygen-producing cyanobacteria. Even at that early date the cynaobacteria would probably have released oxygen at a high rate, but for several hundred million years the iron dissolved in the oceans would have served as a buffer for the oxygen concentration of the atmosphere, reacting with the gas and precipitating it as ferric oxides almost as quickly as it was generated.
One thing the scientist may have missed here is the fact that iron and dust from space during the Precambrian planet-building phase near our sun’s birthplace in Orion may account for some of the dissolved iron in the oceans. After our sun was captured by the Sirius trinary (multiple star-system) it passed through several oort clouds that may have imparted additional iron and salt to fertilize Earth’s oceans. The salt would have sped up the oxidation of the iron. Scientist aren’t sure where all the salt came from on earth and our capture by the Sirius and Procyon multiple star cluster would explain it.
Sirius B was a six-solar-mass star before it shrunk down into a white dwarf of 1.5 solar masses. That means there was 4.5 solar masses of iron and other material injected into the surrounding oort cloud of Sirius A. In addition Procyon B, currently 10.4 light years away also injected considerable iron into the neighborhood. Of course none of these stellar explosions could have happened while our sun was in the neighborhood otherwise we wouldn’t be here.
Only when our solar system traveled away from its birthplace in Orion and the oceans had been swept free of unoxidized iron and similar material would the concentration of oxygen in the atmosphere have begun to rise toward modern levels.
Much still remains uncertain regarding the evidence from the fossil record. Modern biochemistry from geology and mineralogy make possible a tentative outline for the history of Precambrian life.
Much is also uncertain about the fossil record of human evolution as well. After the mapping of the human genome scientists noticed large segments of human DNA that seemed totally unrelated to the development of a human—that is, until they started to compare these segments with other animals. They experienced the most astounding thing—the shock of a lifetime. Segments of the so-called “junk DNA” were identical to pig, cow, horse and even bacterial DNA. Humans obviously evolved on this planet and are related to most every other animal on the planet including bacteria. Without bacteria we couldn’t digest our food. We carry around billions of bacteria in order to live. We share a symbiotic relationship with most everything on Earth—especially the diatoms which at the major producer of free oxygen.
http://www.alaskapublishing.com & http://www.GuardDogBooks.com

User avatar
StefanR
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Recovered: Tensegrity Structures in Biology

Unread post by StefanR » Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:23 pm

A post earlier in this thread mentioned the innerworkings of the cell:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpB ... 8653#p8653
Bioinformation is written in the genome, but it does not build forms. To read a genome, the field requires mechanical strength. To endure that strength, living things build a dynamically balanced structure with proteins or sugar outside and inside the cell.
......
The cytoskeleton is a fiber structure to generate expansive or contractive elasticity and, at the same time, to resist that elasticity. ... All cells have three kinds of protein fiber, or cytoskeleton, in common: actin, tubulin and medium-diameter filament (Fig. 1-b). Contrary to the names “tensegrity” or “skeleton,” these are dynamically reproduced. In particular, the hollow nano-fibers and microtubes produced by tubulin reveal so-called dynamic instability.
......
Within this dynamic environment of mutual different directionality, cells do not move but sustain a tension-generating environment.
.....
While maintaining structure to generate functions, life systems function by circulating two aspects with different directionality in various tires. The come-and-go between both poles becomes the dynamic-maintenance factor, or stress factor, to the cells and facilitates adaptation. This dynamic is the synthesis and decomposition of the protein itself: dynamic formation retention by copolymerization and depolymerization of cytoskeleton protein; consumption and generation of energy; form retention and tension exertion; contraction and relaxation (extension); exercise and structure maintenance; and stabilization and destabilization.
.......
It is suggested that systems that cannot be realized simultaneously by non-life systems (such as form building, tension exertion, contraction/extension movement and combination with energy supply system) are dynamically constructed in cells by molecular complex synchronization.

Now to make it more clear how dynamic those processes can be, one is able to see it living cels in some
wonderful movies displayed on the links below:
A variety of microtubule binding proteins, including a family of end-binding proteins (known as EBs), have been demonstrated to associate specifically with the ends of growing microtubules in a variety of cell types. These proteins are believed to regulate microtubule dynamics and the binding of microtubules to organelles, membrane components, and other protein complexes
Image
http://learn.hamamatsu.com/galleries/di ... index.html
The digital videos presented in this section illustrate the interplay between mitochondria (labeled with DsRed fluorescent protein) and the microtubules by examining the tracking of microtubule +TIPs (plus end tracking proteins) labeled with EB3 fused to the popular tracking probe, mEGFP. The length of microtubules in the cell varies between 200 nanometers and 25 micrometers, depending upon the task of a particular microtubule and the state of the cell's life cycle. Microtubules are believed to act as a transport mechanism for mitochondria.
Image
http://learn.hamamatsu.com/galleries/di ... P-EB3.html
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.

User avatar
StefanR
Posts: 1371
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Amsterdam

Re: Recovered: Tensegrity Structures in Biology

Unread post by StefanR » Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:43 pm

Ahead by a tail

You’d think that in 100+ posts we’d be starting to exhaust the territory, but there are vast swaths of sauropod vertebral morphology that we haven’t even touched. Like fused vertebrae. Sauropods fused their vertebrae all the time. Some of those fusions are age-related, many are pathological, and some are…hard to classify.
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpB ... 031#p18031
The illusion from which we are seeking to extricate ourselves is not that constituted by the realm of space and time, but that which comes from failing to know that realm from the standpoint of a higher vision. -L.H.

User avatar
webolife
Posts: 2539
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Recovered: Tensegrity Structures in Biology

Unread post by webolife » Mon Feb 23, 2009 3:15 pm

Regarding microtubules...

animations:
http://cellimages.ascb.org/cdm4/item_vi ... OX=1&REC=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvF7VZlX3Pg&NR=1
some videos showing the action but not the structure of microtubules:
http://jcb.rupress.org/cgi/content/full ... 301088/DC1
There are videos in real time of real microtubules in action showing structure as well as function...maybe someone else can find one?

Microtubules are "self"-perpetuating vortices in which tubulin [globular protein] molecules temporarily join to the "head" end of the "tubule" while simultaneously "dropping off" the tail end... this device/process is used to transport cell parts or nutirent molecules from one part of the cytoplasm to another... when photographed you get tube-looking structures, but in action these are dynamic little tornados of activity, superlatively exemplified by the feverishly active spindle "fibers" [microtubule vortices] of mitosis, etc. Sometimes they are transient and operate in an electrically active environment moderated by polar molecules in the cytoplasm, other times generated and controlled by the amazing little "magnetic" dynamos called centromeres.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.

User avatar
junglelord
Posts: 3693
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
Location: Canada

Re: Recovered: Tensegrity Structures in Biology

Unread post by junglelord » Fri Feb 27, 2009 2:52 pm

Microtubules are "self"-perpetuating vortices

Well that made my day...thanks.
:D
If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla
Casting Out the Nines from PHI into Indigs reveals the Cosmic Harmonic Code.
— Junglelord.
Knowledge is Structured in Consciouness. Structure and Function Cannot Be Seperated.
— Junglelord

User avatar
webolife
Posts: 2539
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 2:01 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: Recovered: Tensegrity Structures in Biology

Unread post by webolife » Fri Feb 27, 2009 3:11 pm

I knew you'd like that.
Truth extends beyond the border of self-limiting science. Free discourse among opposing viewpoints draws the open-minded away from the darkness of inevitable bias and nearer to the light of universal reality.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests