No, not really. But triple helix DNA IS A FACT.Originally Posted by [b
No, not really. But triple helix DNA IS A FACT.Originally Posted by [b
triple helix huh, can you site some sources? im interested and refuse to say "your nuts" unless you cant site some sources, preferably 2 or 3 different ones. i found out recently that some ppl have a VERY RARE condition where they have 2 sets of DNA, havent had the chance to research it much yet but hopefully ill have some time soon. im one of those ppl with intrests in lots of areas.
I'll try to find some sites noting this. I read about it a bit ago.
Any of those sources wouldn't happen to be peer reviewed journals would they? Probably not. But I'm sure the authors had access to the latest in scanning electron mircscopes, or maybe just an old crystal radio-graph. I mean thats all it took Watson and Crick. (note the hint of sarcasm)
The condition where organisms have multiple sets of chromosomes is called polyploidy. It is rare in animals because it causes severe developmental problems if we have even one extra chromosome. Like Downs Syndrome/Trisomy 21, where an individual has a third copy of chromosome 21. However, it is relativly common for plants to have multiple copies of their entire genome. In some species they may have as many as 32 copies. Many of our beloved hybrids fall into this catagory.
Rattler, I belive what you are reffering too are chimeras, which are organisms that develope from two zygotes. Like if two fertilized eggs were to combine before the cells started to defferintiate, the resulting individual would be comprised of two geneticly distinct cell types. They would be their own twin.
However, no where in there does an organism have a third helix in any strand of DNA. Molecules only fit together certain ways, which is why DNA looks like it does and a third helix is not possible.
You know, I try not to rule anything out as "not possible". I have been reading about this cat Newman and his machine that actually produces more energy than is put into it. Now, I know this is against the laws of physics but he has a nice explanation about how it draws energy from magnetic fields and such. It would take a much smarter man than I to prove him right or wrong, but intrieging it is non the less.
Now, saying there are humans amoung us with 3 strands of DNA that has been proven, but never spoken of in the scientific community is just hard for me to swallow. Not saying its not possible, just real tough to grasp.
jhupp, yeah thats exactly what i heard about. your description is exactly what i heard and ALL i know about it. i found it interesting and hard to understand the mechanics, hence why i was going to research it more.
Still looking for that link.Originally Posted by [b
That's what's interesting, alot of this stuff people discover is automaticly shunned and pushed away by the scientific community because of their "reputations" would be at stake. People are still trying to ignor the whole "aether of the universe" thing and it's slowly (thanks to the internet) coming back as the answer to alot of problems in quantum physics.
Yes, there's no doubt that happens, and occasionally some 'alternative explanation' will finally hit the mainstream and become accepted. *There is, however, a reason that these things take a while to be accepted, and that's because it requires more than simply a millennias worth of tradition about some remedy (for example) being useful to get it accepted by the scientific community. *Real proof takes careful, controlled, repeatable studies. *And it's for that reason that the so-called "cold fusion" thing that people are still bandying around here hasn't gone anywhere, not for anyone's fear of reputation. *It has been tried, and found lacking in repeatability or even usefulness as a power source. *Have you looked at the exotic setup necessary for the experiment?Originally Posted by [b
I'm curious what you are referring to. *I'm not aware of any quantum-physical problems that are solved by positing the existence an 'aether'. *At least not in any of the QM classes that i've taken recently.Originally Posted by [b
Back on the issue of traditional 'medicine' (because this one i have seen both sides of the coin): my father is an MD, and it can be said without exaggeration that he's very, very anti "traditional remedies". *Not only has he lost patients (no pun intended) to foolishly-taken 'harmless' herbal treatments on the side of approved treatments, but he regularly has to deal with cases where a patient has avoided professional medical care, preferring to patronize the assorted quacks that build their fortunes on the current popularity of anti-doctor philosophy, and finally end up in the ICU under his responsibility, when they could have recovered much earlier with real care.
I'm also appreciative and in awe of the amazing spectrum of chemical defenses and other enzymes that nature has arrayed for our discovery and use, and fully believe we have a long way to go before finding all the best 'herbal remedies' and making them targetted pharmaceuticals. *(May we find them before we exterminate the source.) So i can see both sides of that viewpoint. It's the people who occupy the fringe and sling mud at the established methods for not immediately accepting their own pet method just because they want to make a buck or like attention that bother me.
But anyway, rant aside, i am interested in others opinion regarding the space-based solar power problem. *Have you any equally viable solutions without the big caveat of the transmission problem?
Harrness the energy produced from methane from cows 'pumping' (its so much its causing global warming, or the methane produced from bacteria undergoing anaerobic respiration underneath the sea beds - its building up to a dangerous level, and could be released in a huge pressure explosion in a methane 'burp' which could cause climatic changes - tusnamis etc
How about going solar? Building solar panels on other planets might not be such a bad idea if we could build more energy effecient solar cells. Or nuclear fusion/fission. And I heard that tornados could provide electricity for all of america's homes for a year - if we can somehow learn to harrness the power. Tornado in a bottle... [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/new/smile_n_32.gif[/img]
Or maybe we can try saving more energy ie superconductors and more effecient machines (or machines that harrness energy ie solar cells)... [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/new/smile_l_32.gif[/img]
Right one of the basic laws of physics from my science textbook - there is no such thing as a free lunch! Energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can only be changed from one from to another. I know I'm only in IGCSE, but it is interesting how all this pro-science talk can appeal to my basic knowledgeOriginally Posted by [b
.Just remember that anything is possible in this universe - we haven't found out tuppence yet! That's just what I love about science - so so many undiscovered mysteries waiting, waiting to be uncovered. Any of the stuff have preached could be false, so I'm not making any assumptions here, ok?Originally Posted by [b
And to think ppl are going back to that feng shui and tradition crap (not to mention confuism), sorry all traditional ppl, but in my opinion, everything is based on science, although it may not be based on laws. That is my theory. Now, if only I could prove that... [img]http://www.**********.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/new/smile_l_32.gif[/img]