I would like to see a forum that focuses on cancer research.
Thats a good suggestion - I'll second it! though there are some cancer/oncology topics, it only underscores the massively multidisciplinary nature of the field now.
[b]I'm from Romania and i have a well grounding in physics. I have writing an manuscript which is still writing in Romanian language. The main issue of this manuscript is about a real and formally accepted pattern for living systems. So, the main problem that I try to clear up is the fact that the all dynamic, chemical and physical phenomenons on living forms are individually reproducible by experiments or we could find them in nature. But, theirs individually developing (out of organisms) are ruled by spacial and temporal statistics laws. Or IN the organisms such phenomenons are coordinated and the statistics laws are not functioning (the result of this coordination is precisely geometrical determined in space-the stable form of the result of a holding of dynamic phenomenons-the organism). And this precise determination is not a result of a material (physical, chemical) actions (which are governed by statistic laws). So, what is the cause of this determination?
That's the question? And the answer isn't "DNA" which is a scalar information (not geometrical oriented, which means "vector"). So he can't generate a strictly determineted geometrical form of the result of an dynamic process.
In the same time the answer is not an religious one! It's a strictly scientific answer! I have this answer!
But we talk here about physics, statistics, theory of information etc.
The method I found for healing the cancer is based on this answer and is good (is verified illegally on peoples in Romania for many years)!
I have published in my country a few materials about this new theory which offer an explanation for genesis of cancer. The main idea of these explanation is that:
The tumor is an independent organism ( from his host). She is intelligent, can take decisions and can adapting at specific external stimulus (treatments or actions of immunologic system). This coordinated tip of behavior of malign cells is facilitated by well known connection of the tumor with the nerves of nervous vegetative system ( which offer a rich informational support). So, the principle of a method (for cureing the cancer) is that: the tumor mast be isolated by the influence of activity of the nerves (cutting the nerve or synapses). Main and Prehn have performed such experiments in 1947 ( they pull out the tumor and pull in the same tumor to the same animal) with promising results. But they follow a different theoretical idea (the existence of a specific tumor antigens ). The tumor mast remaining there by reintroducing here in the same site with out any connections with the nerves. But the nerves mostly fallow the sanguine vessels. That explain the success of Avastin (Folkman): no vessels, no nerves ! But this results could be improved: the tumor has no food but she mast haven't no coordination. Because the cancer is an "soft", an program for a coordinated activity of malign cells. That's why the individual sarcoma cell are identified and destroyed by the immunological system.
Gabriel Pascu, for contacting me please use personal Message system.
Thank you very much for your interesting information,
We would be more then interested to read your paper.
If you would have time to translate it and put it as an attachment we would be thankful for the effort.
I understand and agree with the majority of what you wrote until the end of it.
My main problem with your statements is that you are saying that the Tumor is an independent entity but all of us know couple of things that are not supporting that argument. First as you said the tumor needs nutrients so it is dependent upon the host, as you know Folkman use shark cartilage to cure cancer, as shark do not have any cancer as the majority of their body is made of Cartilage and this tissue dose not have any blood vessels.By that I am saying that Tumors are in need of constant nutrient supply via blood. Second thing is that Metastasis is possible due to the vast network of blood vessels. Many times you take out the primary tumor and then couple of month after words the secondary could be found elsewhere in the body.
So from what I understand the Tumor / Body connection is what allowing the tumor to grow proliferate and penetrate other parts of the body.
What would be you explanation to the above arguments?
Hope that we would be able to continue this discussion with more of our members that are more knowledgeable in cancer research then me.
Check out the new Cancer category!
Available for all you cancer/oncology discussions.
(The “MENTAL REVOLUTION”)
I developed a theory ("Gravitational Theory of Life") that tries to link the scientific formalism with the way it is generated: by the “life form" in the first place and by "intelligent life form", in the second row.
The "Body" is an "order" (exclusively geometrical, which means “non material”), in time and space, with a certain support.
His material part (which is "seen") is only the support for this "order". Evidence in
this regard is that the contact between its material base (of the "order") and the
environment (also "material"), a process that obeys the laws of the interaction, of
"transformation", the "order" ("form") in time and space of the bodies (interrelationship
"function-> relative position" of the processes that constitute them) remains
unchanged (within certain limits), despite these contacts.
"Gravitational Theory of Life" trying to solve, in the above context, and the problem of generation and preservation, in space and time, of the geometrical disposition resulting, of the parts (of the "BODY"), because:
1) In animal cell, the flows of high intensity (mass, ionic) occur before the
equilibrium areas (which means "structure"). I mean that there is a "flow", which initially, "floats" really on "nothing", but, nevertheless, it is perfectly oriented in space and time. For example, in the case of mitosis, it starts with a mother cell to get, by flows, the two daughter cells; it appears that at least one of these two new structures came from "nothing" (i.e. not from "something" structural, pre existing).
And FURTHER cellular structure is only a consequence of statistical equilibrium occurring in the contact zone of the routes of these "flows".
An attempt to solve this problem did Ilya Prigogine, Belgian scholar of Russian origin, the Nobel laureate.
In "Gravitational Theory of Life" is a critical analysis of Prigogine's approaches (as
tried and Romanian-born American scientist Adrian Bejan in the 90s in his
"CONSTRUCTAL" theory). Constructal Law, issued by Adrian Bejan says:
"For a finite-size (flow) system to persist in time (to live), its configuration must
evolve such that it provides easier access to the imposed currents that flow through
it.", pursuant to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructal_theory
Or: "For a finite-size (flow) system to persist in time (to live), its configuration must evolve such that it provides easier and easier access to its currents.", pursuant to: http://www.constructal.org/en/theory/presentation.html
The meaning of this formulation is that a fluid, in order to (self) preserving flow
(equivalent for Bejan to "life") should flowing on where is "correct" (in geometrical
Why Bejan contradicts Prigogine's theory? For ordinate this flow in space and
time, Prigogine suggests that necessary actions must comes from outside the
system. But in this case Prigogine had to "build" some poly of entropy (differences of
temperature, pressure, etc.) between that occur these "flows", in the living cell. But this poly does not exist in nature (in most cases the environment around a cell is
homogeneous and isotropic). And Bejan, sensing that "forcing" says: "No! The flows
must to orient themselves independently, based on this law, which, by his nature, is
statistic, "the constructal law".
According to the "gravitational theory of life" both are right and, paradoxically, both wrong:
a) Prigogine is right: imposing entropic polarizations and ordering the flow, in space and time, by actions which comes from the outside. But, if exist such imposition, of material nature, that kind of hypothesis contradicts the fact of independent way of motion (against any entropic polarization) of the living systems. The evidence actually "charged" by Bejan.
b) Now: if the "flow" would meet to the "constructal law", the stable flow (means
"life") should be independent.
How is that? The phrase "self" (from above) is not accidentally introduced: who "persuade" the flow to choose to "live" (and, by default, to respect the law)? Is asking this question for that the any evolution in physics (and Bejan says that "constructal" law is a physical law) has a causal nature and, in this formulation of the law, the "cause" of evolution can not be than a "choice" ("its configuration must evolve...")”! Because the "configuration”- “the cause”, “must evolve such that it provides easier…”. And this: “For a finite-size (flow) system to persist in time (to live)”- “the effect"!
But, which is “the cause” of the “configuration” evolving? Because “she” has a geometrical nature (non causal) and so, "she" can not “evolve”, but “she” can do only "choices" (also a non causal process), we have a physical problem here!
Without realizing it, Bejan it founded a Theory of General Relativity for the finite-size flows. The flows “choose" a certain mode of motion, which can be described by geometrical ways, as happens with the material corps, in the gravitational field. In the gravitational field these "choices" have a purely formal (uncaused) nature: change of the metric and/or curvature of the space.
He noticed that the manifestation of fluid with stable flows, it seems to be formal determined ("gravitational", geometrical, uncaused), but, probably, it could not made an explicit statement about that because he had no idea about the sources of these formal determinations (such as the gravitational field of large objects). So, the law (“constructal" law) it remained in a form that generates a physically incomplete model, of those phenomena, as shown above.
It results, by default that the persistent flows would occur spontaneously (randomly): so, “life" should have (according to “constructal” low) and another random sources (than "life" itself). And this is not found.
More, I can give some examples of situations where the "constructal" law is in clear violation: evolution of the biosphere on a global scale, and cancer. In these situations, the law enforcement at certain levels (local human activity or solid tumor growth) lead to destructive effects at other levels (biosphere degradation and death- by flows destabilization-of the body). What looks like the concrete choice of the scale of finite size flows, alone, can change the nature of the law.
However, the "Constructal" Theory has a great quality: ask, by the incompleteness of her appearance, for the “Gravitational Theory of Life.”
Solution of "Gravitational Theory of Life" is: "the way of imposing the flow persistence (“life”), by ”imposing” to appropriate configuration to make his “choice”, it must come from outward, and also, it must have an informational nature (non causal), and which overlaps over the scalar (fixed) information from the DNA.
That mean: the ways of imposing the flow in a cell must be, by their nature, gravitational and inertial actions, plus a "text"(the DNA).
In this theory is accepted that the gravitational influences (primarily from the solar system bodies, ordered by relative motion between them, including the Earth) do not have a material nature (until proven otherwise, the experimental discovery of the particle generating the gravitational field, "graviton” and the gravitational wave).
For this reason, the nature of imposition of the flow persistence, in the cell, is not causal!
2) In complex body, the nature of parameters which can ordering in space and time these dynamic processes implies the existence of "vectors" which DNA can not
Resulting an apparent state of structural equilibrium, also, and at this level, is circumvented the principle of causality between the dynamic processes which take place simultaneously!
So: the body (at large) is not a consequence of a causally interrelated
phenomena! – “The ‘Body’ is an ‘order’ (exclusively geometrical, which means ‘non material’), in time and space…”
The "order" (stable interrelationship "function->relative position" of the structural
parts) shall be preserved permanently (for a healthy body). It follows that, in a
sense, the action of an external stimulus, which automatically tends to "spoil" this
order, is destroyed in a timely manner.
EXAMPLE: timely variability of antibody.
A step in deciphering this phenomenon was a development, in 1965, of a model of
recombination of genes, so that many more genes, and not always the same, give rise to a protein chain according to the principle "more gene - one protein " by William Dreyer and Claude Bennett. In fact, we talk about not one but an infinite number of variations of the same protein.
This model was verified experimentally (in laboratory conditions) by Susumu
Tonegawa, which is Nobel laureate in 1987.
But there are serious reservations regarding its operation under real conditions (in
vivo). "Given the slow evolution in time (reflected by latency τ) of these processes,
how do you explain that a foreign substance is recognized almost instantaneously,
and the body may starts already making the appropriate antibodies ?" - Karen
Bulloch - University of San Diego, 1978.
Any biological causal chain involves a latency τ, as follows:
A biological system, regardless of its complexity, can be defined by a linear operator (S), which acts on some input quantities ui and generate the outputs yj, according to the expression:
yj (t + τ) = (S) ui (t)
Where “t” is time and “τ” is the latency of biosystem.
Then, by what mechanism, such kind of a processes, can give almost instant response? It is known that the complex interrelationship between the structures of "evoluated" bodies (tissue, organ, body) have a form of "CLOSED CAUSAL CHAIN": Francois Jacob - Nobel laureate for genetics said:" ... each component (of life systems) becomes for the other its own condition of existence, equally cause and effect. "
But a "closed causal chain" of the processes (process "1" generated process "2", process "2" generated process "3" and so on, and at last process "n" generated the first process "1"), if it's followed by a state of stability (we found this on organisms), involves the simultaneous development of each of these processes (which it transform in "CLOSED ORDERED CHAIN").
But, also, their chemical nature, burdened by a latency (slow evolution in time), made so that certain cell produces a certain amount of substance in a given period. It can result that some structures, which are consecutive, from a functional point of view, will do not operate simultaneously, for lack of "raw material”.
In the body, all structures must function simultaneously, so the flow of the substance which functional unites them must to be continuous and closed. It follows that some cells must begin working before receiving "raw material" from previous functional cells, based on a quantity of substance which is available for processing in his very structure. This mechanism could be the explanation of the intern synthesis process (biosynthesis) for necessary substances in metabolism, independently of the process of assimilation of food, from outside.
Handy command for the very moment when this phenomenon must take place
must have a "support" more "rapid" than a chemical process (the "latency" high). He
must be an electrical signal. Vegetative (autonomic) nervous system role is to
provide such synchronization signals of chemical processes at the contact of the
structures (sensitive and effectors) with environment. The result of synchronization
is a continuous mass flow between the different structures of the body which
provides geometric and functional stability.
If in a "links" of the "chain" that supports an external stimulus, and that flow tends to be interrupt because of this stimulus ( means "dead" ), but not "mechanically" but "informational" interrupting (repetitions with intervals shorter than "latency" of such chemical processes, which, default, is forced to consume more) then, the following functional structures may remain without "material" (even without the quantity of substance from his own structure which is for maintain simultaneity of processes).
Under the electrical impulses pressure that forces them to work on and in this kind of conditions they come to destroy their own internal functional structure (the one that gives them the "function”) turning them into malignant cells (cancer).
So the electrical signals those provide simultaneous processes in the body, under
certain conditions, forcing some structures to operate in a specific way, initially it is
useful for body (to avoid the spontaneous collapsing under the action of certain types
of stimulus, informational organized ).
So, the tumor is an independent organism (from his host). He is intelligent, he can take decisions, he can adapt at the specifics external stimulus (treatments or action of immunologic system). This coordinated tip of behavior of malign cells is facilitated by the connection of the tumor with the nerves of autonomic nervous system (which offer a rich informational support and which exist- the connection- in all situations, known or not by the medicine).
So, the principle of a method (for cure the cancer) is that: the tumor mast be
isolated by the influence of activity of the nerves (cutting the nerve or stop the
electrochemical signals circulation influence from synapses to the tumor by activity
of a neurotoxin-see American patent: Pub. No. : US 2005/0031648 A1; Pub Date:
Feb. 10, 2005).
Quote, from this patent, which shows that exist the situation (and it could happen to be more then this one) in which the medical science haven't knowledge about the connection between the cancer and the nervous autonomic system: "0193- Contrary to the general belief that the pheochromocytomas are not innervated and that the release of catecholamines from such tumors is not under nervous control, there is evidence for cholinergic innervation of such tumors."
Main and Prehn have performed such experiments in 1957 (they excised the tumor and reinocullated the same tumor to the same animal) with promising results. But they follow a different theoretical idea (the existence of a specific tumor antigen).
There exists a material: “This Week’s Citation Classic ‘a U1
Prehn R I & Main I M. Immunity to methylcholanthrene-induced sarcomas.
.1. Nat. Cancer Inst. 18:769-78, 1957.
[National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MDI]” (cc/number 15; April 15, 1985) which shows that the results of Main and Prehn experiences (the specific immune response of the organism for tumor) have not had, until now, an
accepted explanation .
I can put at disposal for anyone interested a treatment solution that complies with
the principles set forth above and which most probably has not been used nowhere
in the world.
I. “I", is the sole "soft" for “knowledge"?!
Roger Sperry (Nobel Prize for medicine - research on the brain);
Willis Harmon (Prof. Emeritus, Univ. Stanford)
"We have neglected conscience in our research on the world ".
As you know the basic science is (inexplicably) in a kind of "time out", very dangerous. While the "brains" and money, on complex experiments (CERN - Geneva), are not missing. The most likely explanation of this phenomenon is that the way, in which the science goes, in its development, is not correct.
We must go back to the origin. But the "origin" is where we have not looked hardly enough: in ourselves.
Everything revolves around the "I", the primary entity for any exponent of the species Homo sapiens. Is it a natural, spontaneous phenomenon? Obviously not! He appears only in the case of human, in very special circumstances. They are generated exclusively by an appropriate social
environment. An evidence of this phenomenon is that "I" never appeared in any other species in its natural habitat. That while the people who have evolved, from an early age, outside a social environment (example: children who have survived a longer time in the jungle) this phenomenon, self-conscious, disappeared.
With regard to the environment in which “I" is develop, we must try a definition for "social environment".
Obviously, this definition will have to express, first, that between the individual and the natural environment is "something", "an interface", which is not the case for the other animals, falling in a certain ecosystem.
And this "interface" is a purely informational one.
Definition: "The social environment is an environment where the opportunities to meet the physiological needs are restricted, in a informational (formal) way.
Overcoming these limitations is by the respect, during the actions, of an algorithm recorded on an artificial medium (created specifically for this purpose: spoken text, written, gesticulation, painted, modeled on the material support, etc.). This registered algorithm will be called the 'language".
Every action performed, on the basis, of this algorithm has a partial motivation, of a "stage", strictly formal (information). This motivation of a “stage" is obviously broken by the natural context of existence (Which always PROVIDES AN ALTERNATIVE TO DIRECT MEETING OF PHYSIOLOGICAL NEEDS and on which the animals they choose, IN THEIR NATURAL ENVIRONMENT, BUT on which HUMAN, choose not to follow them for the reasons which we shall analyze below).
This algorithm, being unnatural, it could not be imposed on the basis of the spontaneous "discoveries" made in the ecosystem, as many theories trying to prove! And this, because the partial objectives of the algorithm, needed to reach the meet of physiological needs, simply does not exist in nature.
To justify this statement, should be described, at the level of this analysis, what means "natural environment".
Definition: Thru "natural environment" will understand the plurality of external stimulus of the organism, of various natures (physical, chemical, informational, etc.) interrelated in certain order, in terms of spatial-temporal parameters, "around" the body, under the form of “chain tidy (ordered) closed".
A “chain tidy closed" which is a closed causal chain: wherein the process "one" determines the process "2", the process "2" causes the process "3", and so on, and the last process "n" determines the initial process "1".
The resulting stability of dynamic processes, yielding a structural appearance of this route closed ("causal chain" are turning into a "chain tidy –ordered- closed). Stability implies, in an automatic way, the simultaneity of the processes from "1" to "n".
It is obvious that the “CLOSED ORDERED CHAIN “structure of environment is a notion that is closer to the notions of "food chain" coupled with the "ecosystem" in which the body was found it.
But unlike these, which are, scientifically speaking, a plurality of processes interrelated in causal manner, here it is accepted, as an axiomatic truth, that the nature of environment (which must ensures stability of the conditions of existence) near of a body, must be, by itself, the nature of a " CLOSED ORDERED CHAIN". This is not a causal one!
Why is that? Because the "body" itself (in which are overlapping dynamic processes) also has a structure “CLOSED ORDERED CHAIN” (Francois Jacob - Nobel laureate for genetics said: "... each of the components (of living) becomes for the other his own condition of existence, equally cause and effect. ").
So, the “natural environment "(the context in which the body develops successful) MUST interact with the body solely that to preserve stability in space and time as “CLOSED ORDERED CHAIN ".
Resulting that the "natural environment” must have the same nature! By default, it will be a system of processes that occur simultaneously (even if "simultaneity"- means "simultaneously” contact with a body of all the processes from around it- is difficult to verify because of dimensional differences between the environment processes and the body processes).
Now: is known that the generating signals of mechanisms of the "conditioned reflex" does not find in the body's natural environment for study (that's means that they not appear- READ "are not elected" - on grounds of "SIMULTANEOUSLY" WITH OTHER PROCESSES from a “CLOSED ORDERED CHAIN”): they are taken out of context and that is precisely why the animals must be forced to absorb them. They are artificial!
It follows that the algorithm was imposed solely with the mechanisms of "conditioned reflex" (Pavlov).
More: repetitive nature of the signals leads to a negligible probability of spontaneous
occurrence (that implies, eventually, and, therefore, the emergence of an entire “CLOSED ORDERED CHAIN ", totally new, where they must fit thru the simultaneity criteria), in a certain “natural environment”.
We talk here about emergence of "civilization" or about emergence of the "social environment”?!
Question: the signals responsible for the appearance of conditioned reflex having an
informational (formal) nature, which is obvious , what intelligent entity, from outdoor of the natural environment, it could generate them in conditions in which the process involves, necessarily, and the imposition of a special status for individuals: TO FORCE THEM FOR
RECEPTION OF THOSE SIGNALS (Pavlov's dog stomach secrete hydrochloric acid -without to being hungry - but by lighting the bulb, simply because the animal was forced to sit there and to see him for many times before)? Or: who (imp) put light between "food "and the dog?
In other words: Who is "Pavlov" FOR "HUMANS"? *
Returning to the "I", it seems that the Universe evolves on principles that apparently exclude its existence, and that it was artificially generated.
Be a coincidence that science, base exponent of the objective knowledge, has remained true to this principled approach? Why no formal model of a certain phenomenon, created during its history, does not contain physical quantities or parameters to characterize and "I", together and simultaneously, with this phenomenon? It is clear that a formal model is generated, in fact, by association of “I" WITH the phenomenon which is studied.
It follows that by excluding the "I"- from any formal model does not solve the problem of objectivity of the model. Why? Precisely because "I" is a particular phenomenon at the universally level ("strait-laced" by a lot of formal links and special conditions-see above- which are not to find elsewhere in nature) and, however, the "I" is the only way of contact of man with the Universe.
What follows from here? That image of the Universe that is obtained by the humans is formed, exclusively, with the notions defined thru those special conditions and formal links (relations) that characterize the "I” (which are imposed from "other side").
Analogy: a piece of stainless steel does not "see" a jet of water which is taking contact.
The jet of water can not change the underlying structure of the pieces of steel (for which there is no running water). But another piece of stainless steel can change these structural links. So, she is "very visible" to the first piece. From this point of view, the diamond, for example, is among of
most "blind" materials. He can "observe", possibly, only other diamonds.
So, "I" is happening (by "filtering" the image of the Universe) and we (the "humans") we do not consider it. His form is inextricably linked with those conditions (and "links") imposed by social environment to the concrete phenomena (e.g.: the living organism).
In other words, "I" as a scientist, I'm going to do analysis and synthesis of phenomena
encountered in a much greater extent than other individuals who, through force of circumstances, dealing with something else. I can tell them that I do that stuff for nothing anyway, because the universe is "filtered" by my "I”? No!
And because an important part of the "I" is obtained through education (by imposition), and by that, is relatively common to most individuals, they agree with my "discovering" (in so far as can hide that this agreement is due by common parts of the "I", ignored, for objectivity, from any formal model).
One could say that, the "I” after the nature and the way it is generated, are accepted as such if it is common to a significant number of individuals. It is, actually, the support for “communication", in a social environment, and not for "knowledge".
Hence, from this are coming the FUNDAMENTAL LIMITATIONS OF SCIENCE!
Considering globalization, widespread computerization, social and economic relations, very special (unique) in these circumstances, we find that they bring the individuals in a position in which it could not avoid, as being devoid of meaning, the phenomena that govern the evolution of society as a whole.
And its problems (of the society) require, unfortunately, immediate solutions.
If things go so wrong, which is the place of the “I” in this context??
The man has, since the dawn of history, questions about the world and life. Initial responses which are found have a nature of mysticism. That evidenced a strict determination "Universe->human". A simple analysis shows that is a common sense approach which would be, at the least, a natural one: the Universe existed before human ("I”). Is not the material universe (whose fundamental law is "moving", "interaction", "transformation") the Universe which about we talk.
"Something" material may not generate a phenomenon that remains unchanged in spite of
interactions (as happens between certain limits, with the organisms). The organisms, apparently, do not exist on the basis of known physics laws.
Where we have come on this way? If we refer only to human sacrifices on the altars of pagan gods and to the Inquisition crimes and gross errors of church (Giordano Bruno, Galileo Galilee) in the Middle Ages, we can not otherwise than, to put into question the correctness of this way of seeing the things.
What has changed lately?
Why that clear causal relationship between that Universe and the "human" ("I") can not be accepted anymore?
A possible answer to these questions must take account of a fact: knowledge is based, today, mostly on the scientific approach. And its essence is embodied by the establishment of "primacy" of the "human" ("I") over the Universe itself.
Direct consequence of each of the both ways of seeing the world is that the individuals, the "subjects", exclude themselves from the ''image'' of the Universe. We showed that, scientifically, it is considered that an object or phenomenon is better known as the subject it might influence less, through observation. These objects or phenomena, "objectively" modeled, in fact, belong to a Universe which is part, exclusively, from the outside of the "subject." So, being incomplete…
This fact may be explained by the antinomy that it "I'' is generated and manifest as a result of a causal contact with the environment of the organisms, but "exist" (despite of the contacts) in a, seemingly, perpetual stable condition, which is, obviously, uncaused (can not be generated by the thing which try to "spoil" the stable condition of the "I" in every moment-the material Universe).
Solely mystical knowledge, or exclusively scientific knowledge (either having as object to find a “final rule”, causal, spiritual or material) leads to the impossibility of modeling the "inside of the subject" ( i.e. bodies). Attempts to achieve such models of organisms, solely based on models of phenomena from outdoor of the organisms, have proved sterile.
The purpose of this analysis is precisely the foundation of the need of an accurate modeling of the internal zone of knowledge process (from "interior of " the organism), before initiating of any other process in relation with the "outside". The success of this undertaking would enable to complete process of create a model for “knowledge” (loss of differentiation between "I", "body" and "Universe").
For this, would be tested the specific modeling of “subject" himself. This new model of "I" should replace his models which made, so far, to be possible only mystical or exclusively scientific "knowledge". This should make from the "subject" an integral part of the image of the Universe, complete and correct this time, in formal terms.
The two "outer" sides of the process of knowledge, the mystical and the scientific, are considered by the two important philosophical currents: idealism and materialism (with all those known nuances, which are considered)...
Lack of de facto of the reconciliation of the conclusions implied by this two approaches stems from the fact that the "subject", as a living form, which support a stable, fixed discontinuity of the dynamic process of "knowledge", may be considered, with the same kind of arguments, the "sender" (idealism) or/and the “recipient" (materialism) of the phenomena that make up this process.
Being an “open" interrelationship (in the discontinuity) of dynamic processes, it (the
interrelationship) can exist only on the basis of causation, in one sense or in another: the "idea" is cause of the “matter" or the “physical processes" generate the "idea".
Overcoming this impasse must to be tried by accepting that a completion, by closing of the knowledge process cycle, will generate a dynamic process that will exclude causation ("idea" will determine "the material aspects" but, at the same time, the "matter” will generate the "idea"). Therefore, will no longer make a problem of a "cause" and an "effect" involved, both entities will lose their consistency, and, in the evolution of phenomena, will be satisfactory to be considered only of a given "order" (with geometrical nature), timeless, respected at all levels of existence.
II. The generation and expression of "I" s
Formal language is grosso modo, the method of communication meant to substitute, for Homo sapiens, means of communication used by the rest of animals, between individuals of the same species.
Initially, as noted above, the "formal language" it is "learned” thru the mechanisms generating conditioned reflexes.
By what differs the formal language, essentially, by the rest of the means of communication (with physical, chemical and physiological support) used by the animals?
The animals, which communicate the models that describe the real processes (i.e. for
description of a certain phenomenon, the communication is made in a quasireal while, by the relation with the evolution of the phenomenon). Hence, the communication between animals has evoluated on the basis of (quasi) non causal interrelation.
Instead, the humans send, by formal language, the description of virtual processes (practical, the processes being triggered and carried, far away, in time and space, by the moment when he made his description). Which description may be only "memory" or "prediction".
Formal elements for achieving these used models ("memory", "predictions") are accepted as "ideas" (with a nature of information). It materialized that the "IDEAS" are "images" of the partial objectives to being achieved and exceeded for meet the physiological needs (what the dog has "imagined" when the bulb is lighting, and in the stomach is secreted hydrochloric acid, without to give him food). This partial objectives are targets, artificially introduced (does not exist in nature- i.e. by the bulb) and imposed by the algorithm (mechanism of the conditioned reflexes) from the "other side".
If between observing a phenomenon (CAUSE) and the formal language model to describe it (EFFECT) there is a certain lag (based on the use of the algorithm), period with measurable duration, then the relationship between cause and effect is (how else) of "causal”! Therefore any description of a phenomenon supported by science (which work only on formal models), is accepted to be fair only if it involves "causality"!
How and why they came to this situation? The answer refers to the "emergence" (is it actually an "imposition") of a formal interface (algorithm) between stimulus and response, in case of humans (which "response", thus, it become "conditioned"), and which insert a time lag between the phenomenon (stimulus) and its description.
In the natural environment, the humans wouldn't survive if he is responding thus (after a "time lag") to the stimulus action. So they created (“inspirited", by imposition, from "other side") an artificial environment for their “life".
It may be noted that formal models, submitted by formal language, which are “virtual" entities (which occurring in a distant lapse, in space-time, by the real phenomena and / or processes that have generated it) may be appropriates, in probabilistic terms, if they are described the phenomena and processes with parameters which preserved themselves (being constant) for a long while. In other words, we talks about phenomena that have almost the same "picture" and when they are seen and in the moment of their description, in the formal language (the description which is, thus, possibly to be experimental verifiable). I refer to the structures and / or the dynamic processes with parameters (relatively) constant.
When we want to describe the human body is a unique situation in which formal support of modeling and observation processes of phenomenon is focus on him. In other words, it “talk to" him "about “he" himself. It follows that the formal language must, necessarily, change its position, which is stated in the beginning (to "support of the communication process between individuals"). Unlike other approaches (in medicine, biology, physics, biophysics, bio-cybernetics, information theory, etc.), which have the same object (the "body"), and which making a clear distinction between the "observer" (researcher) and the observed phenomenon (the "body"), below, will be generated some conventions that will remove this distinction.
Formal separation between the researcher and the body is very likely the origin of the known shortcomings (lack of a complete and correct model of the "organisms").
Therefore, it will issue the following postulate:
A body can be described as a model (whose shape does not matter right now) which, in turn, is creator of models.
At the level of this analyze it is accepted like "model" the shape of the reaction of "body", quite specific, generated at the action of an external stimulus. In other words it will accept that form of this response is strictly related to the form (and the nature) of that stimulus, thereby constituting a model of his.
How it show, formally, a pattern of a "designer of models"? Here's not a simple problem at all. A certain model (pattern) is static. And it follows from the affirmation of certain properties which must remain available for a given period. But something describable by a “static” model can not create, only by itself, models with completely random forms (depending on the form and the nature, also random, of external stimulus). If, nevertheless, this phenomenon happens, it is clear that this "structure" has, itself; a form based on parameters that change randomly over time, and thus, which can not be described by a "static" model.
Static modeling of "life" is an error in this case. The only acceptable model of "life" is one that in turn could create models, independently. You might say that computers are "creative models of models", which is not true! The “hard" and "soft" structures implemented in the computer contains, in a virtual state, a number of modeling possibilities which is practically infinite, but are always there, in the same shape. Observatory (the human) chooses some of these opportunities to create a model. Ultimately, only the beings (humans) had to create the models transposed on output devices. And information system had to remain, always, "dumb".
Coming back to "life", it seems that it can be described using a model (and thus represents an entity with stable properties in time) but at the same time, this "model" it's capable to creating other models with a completely random shapes (representing an entity with properties varying in time). It follows that life is "a dynamic model". In other words, it is part, simultaneously, of two different dimensions of a formal model of Universe. In one is a model and in the other may, possibly be, creative of models (“Corpora non agunt nisi fixata”-latin, means: “The body don't reacts without being stable”)
This dynamic model, an abstract entity, could be called “observer." Its usefulness is to relationship building "accidentally stimulus -> observer->model” which is fundamental to that must necessarily (if is properly described), to be bi-univocal (available in the both ways-"accidentally stimulus -> observer->model-> accidentally stimulus") and,
in this way becoming a closed order chain, timeless, and thus, non causal.
For Homo sapiens, the "knowledge" which is based on "I" and "formal model" has the exclusive nature of a mode of communication.
But the "image of the reality" must be generated from a process based on an individual point of view, which is unique, as are each of us.
THEN ONLY CONTACT WITH “REALITY” WILL BE COMPLETE (HIS RESULTS WILL BE ACCEPTED AS THE "Knowledge "): When will be biunivocal, and, consequently, he could take place simultaneously (means "causelessly") IN BOTH directions ("SINGLE REALITY " shaped us, IN A" SINGLE " MANNER, on each of us, but at the same time, the “REALITY” itself may be modified, in a controlled manner). Result:
The “MENTAL REVOLUTION”!
"I" is generated by a "social environment".
T.G.V. (“gravitational theory of life ") has put in relation these two phenomenons: "cancer" and "I".
I talk above about the special signals which are generating the "conditioned reflexes" (which are generating partial objectives), and which can leads to an emergence of an entire “CLOSED ORDERED CHAIN ", totally new, where they could fit thru by the simultaneity criteria, in middle of a certain "natural environment" (also, defined above). In such kind of environment it is necessary to initiate specific actions to meet the basic physiological needs (food, water, resting, reproduction). These specific actions will be “unnatural”, based on respect of an algorithm meant to achieve these partial objectives). Their consequences (interrelations of processes results, in the environment) will no longer correspond to the nature of “CLOSED ORDERED CHAIN ", in their conduct).”Unnatural" must be understood here like something "extra", which "intermediate" the relationship between "organism" and his “natural environment", and which, automatically, will breaks the "order" in the environment and in the body .
Fundamental characteristic of these intermediate stages to meet the basic physiological needs is that is referring, by default, to a special functional structure that is only a "part" of the “BODY”.
For example, repeating relationship " light the bulb-> bringing of food " in Pavlov's experiments, leads to changes of parameters of chemical interface of the synapses ("learning") that support the informational link between the consequences at the nervous level, and the reception of these kind of stimulus. Also, through the endocrine system (hormones) this structuring generates the internal mechanisms that "prepare” a distinct superior part (tissue, organ) of the body to meet a false physiological need (i.e. hydrochloric acid secretion in the stomach, without being really hungry).
But the body tends to function as a "whole" (otherwise it not works! He is "dead"!).Back with Francois Jacob's statement:" ... each component (of life systems) becomes for the other its own condition of existence, equally cause and effect."
The phrase "equally" means "at the same time" or "simultaneity". In case of chemical processes, which are encumbered by an inherent latency of such processes, the "simultaneity" can be achieved only by a non-chemical mechanism, which control some kind of signals (for starting and stopping processes), and, this signals, must to can move with much greater speed(their support must have, in these circumstances, only a nature of a purely energy).These signals should be able to start and/or stop certain chemical processes, at appropriate moments, in a way that, despite of the latency, they (chemical processes) shall be conducted simultaneously. Energy signals (electrical) generated for achieving simultaneity in the “CLOSED ORDERED CHAIN " of the body are integrated in a "temporal model" (with time parameter) of the ideal shape (in time) of the functional interrelation of processes. "Temporal model" could be equated with the score of the conductor of a big symphonic orchestra, which plays the classics.
Should be noted that the endocrine system works on the same principle of maintaining the integrity in space and time of " CLOSED ORDERED CHAIN " of the body but I must emphasize that this mechanism becomes effective when the body has to react to a kind of extended (dimensional) stimulus (in terms of space and/or time) that can affect the integrity of the body only at the level of a much broad structures than the cell, such as tissues and/or organs. But the probability of apparition of such stimuli is lower in the natural environment of the organisms (they are the exceptions in a “natural environment”). So, the timely reaction is sufficient to take place in a higher interval than for direct actions of the stimulus, at cell level.
So the support for command signals (hormones) for achieving the “simultaneity” of processes, at this level (tissues and/or organs), is the blood. In the circulatory system, the transmission speed of these signals (supported hydraulic) is significantly lower than in the nervous system (with electric conduction).
And at this level there is a kind of "temporal model" ("education"!?) but which is structured (at synaptic level) on the basis of the "ideas", "learned" in a "social environment" (based on mechanism of "conditioned reflexes"). That's possible because the speed of development of the two processes: the transmission of synchronization signals (hormones), to the tissue and/or organ level, by blood, and the application of "algorithms" based on "ideas" in initiating of actions, are comparable (it happen a kind of resonance), but which are smaller than processes based on "temporal model" (electrical processes) which are called only "reflexes".
“CLOSED ORDERED CHAIN " ensures the structural and functional stability of the "BODY". So, some action of the natural environment, at the level of the specific process "p" can put to work (necessarily and “simultaneously”, trough “temporal model” ) the entire body. And this process would evoluate without involve any risk.
But if in the body's natural environment, appears an artificial signal (which it's not simultaneously with no one of the simultaneous processes of his natural "closed ordered chain"?
If in the "BODY", before that, wouldn't be structured, trough imposed repetitions ("learning"), at the synaptic level, the specific relationships "artificial stimulus->" virtual stimulus "(the "idea" which corresponding with a "real stimulus") he would not react in any way, or, in the worst case, would seek to avoid it. That's because, a possible appropriate physiological need, which to be in relation with the real physical aspects (i.e., light of the bulb, in "Pavlov's” experiments) simply does not exist, for this specific "BODY"!
The "real stimulus”, in the paragraph above, means the "object" which it must found in the environment to meet a specific and false (unmanifested) physiological need, and which is appropriate with a specific "artificial stimulus" if , THE "IDEA" CORRESPONDING WITH THIS "OBJECT" WAS "LEARNED" BEFORE.
But if the “animal” is not in its natural environment but in one that offers no "natural" alternative and THE "IDEA" CORRESPONDING WITH THIS "OBJECT" WAS "LEARNED" BEFORE?
The answer is one: he will “pay his respects" to the relationship "artificial stimulus
-> virtual stimulus" with the actions involved by the conditioned reflex mechanism! He becomes “HUMAN”!
That would explain the anomalous phenomenon that causes a person to become aroused, exclusively sexually, only for that he (she) is look to a picture representing a person of the opposite sex (or not ...), naked, even if the picture does not mean so far, a real "person", even if that to be naked does not mean that (image) it is ready for copulation...
So, is reach the abnormal situation in which the “part“ leads the "whole"!
This is the essence of the process of "learning"; to subjecting the "body" only and repeated, to a single type of stimulus and forcing him to react, too, only with the structures imposed by the nature of that stimulus, which involves the removal of these structures from the general context of functioning of the body.
The body will act, anyway, as a "whole" with one condition: the action, which must represent the means of achieving the finality of relation "artificial stimulus" -> "virtual stimulus" (means the evolution of "virtual stimulus" -> "real stimulus" relation- the "eating", in "Pavlov" experiments), will can be completed it in an appropriate interval of time, once with finding of the "real stimulus" (the "food", in "Pavlov" experiments)!
What does "an appropriate interval of time” between the initiation of action (due to "artificial stimulus") and the "finding" of "real stimulus"? Reaction "as a whole" (exclusively relative to the "real stimulus") occurs only at the level of chemical processes. These processes involve a specific rate of development (the “latency"). If the time interval between action and finding the "real stimulus" is too long (what can happen in "Pavlov" processes, if the food does not appear within a "decent" interval of time after lighting the lamp) speed and intensity of the response of the target distinct structure, to the "artificial stimulus" increases, based on positive feedback process which will "remove" from the context the way in which is functioning the specific structure of "CLOSED ORDERED CHAIN (acidity in the stomach will grow geometrically, involving adaptation and, finally, pathological-for humans means, also, the “deviation of behavior” and/or determined genetic changes- processes).
In this particular situation (a large time interval between the appearance of "artificial stimulus" and the moment in which are find the "real stimulus") the effects can be described as “disordered"(random), based on positive feedback processes.
When the interval between the appearance of “artificial stimulus” and finding the "real stimulus" is within certain limits, with values directly related to the speed of chemical processes in the "ordered closed chain” of the "BODY" on which the mechanism which are generate the simultaneity of processes (based on "temporal model") can control it, by the negative feedback processes of self adjustment, then the "BODY" can act as a "whole", and maintaining form and functional balance .
When the interval between the appearance of "artificial stimulus" and finding "real stimulus" at the level of a certain process of the "closed ordered chain" of the "BODY" falls below certain limits by repetitions with intervals much shorter than "latency" of such chemical processes, (which, by default, is forced to consume more) then, the following functional structures may remain without "material" (even without the quantity of substance from his own structure which is for maintain simultaneity of processes) as I have mentioned above, because, these cells (of following functional structures - i.e. the cells OF STRUCTURES dealing with digestion, LIVER ETC, in case of Pavlov's dog) will be forced to "work" ( for maintaining the integrity of the chain) at the command of electrical signals (which can move with a much greater speed, at the interest area). As shown, these signals are sent by the nervous system exactly where the flow of useful substances, from a previous functional structure, no longer has time to arrive, in the necessary quantities, to achieve the simultaneity. Without this mechanism the body would not adapt to the stimulus flows which are "learned" and which repeat without purpose (i.e. without finding "food" after many ignitions of the lamp, at short intervals).
So, initially, he has a positive role!
But those cells that will only work on electrical control, without any support of external mass of necessary substances, risk some "simplifications" (by controlled genetic changes) of their structure (which gave them the phenotype, meaning "function). It will be transformed into embryonic cells without function (malignant), with an accelerated metabolism. The electrical signals appear like a "soft". That provides independence and coordination of the malignant mass entity and controls the actions of the immune system.
Very important: the tumor grows by the uncontrolled multiplication of cells already genetically modified (malignant). But this process would become "visible ", sooner or later, and therefore, will inducing the body's reactions. Why do they happen? Because the "invasion" of neighboring tissues (a process strictly different) not occurs on the basis of this mechanism! Stromal cells are, in fact, former healthy cells of host tissue, genetically modified, in a controlled manner (“those cells that will only work on electrical control, without any support of external mass of necessary substances”), by electrochemical signals, received from the nervous autonomic system nerves.
1) Quote (see American patent: Pub. No. : US 2005/0031648 A1; Pub Date:
Feb. 10, 2005):
Dorosevich A E, et al., Autonomic nerve endings and their cell microenvironment as one of the integral parts of the stromal component in breast dysplasia and cancer. Arkh. Rafal. 1994 (November-December; 56(6); 49-53)
2) [CANCER RESEARCH 34, 2109-2113, August 1974]
Tumor Angiogenesis Factor1
The Department of Surgery, Children's Hospital Medical Center, and the Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115
Quote (Folkman is the creator of the “Avastin"):
"There is increasing evidence that tumor cells communi
cate with normal host cells. NGF2 is an example (14).
Certain mouse sarcomas secrete a factor that stimulates
growth in neighboring sensory and sympathetic nerve cells."
“By contrast, the ability of malignant solid tumors to
stimulate proliferation of new capillaries is common to a
wide variety of neoplasms and appears to be an essential
requirement for progressive tumor growth (1,4). No doubt
it will be found that other forms of communication between
tumor and host may be important for tumor survival.”
By "coupling” this two ideas it result one conclusion:
This would explain a "friendly" attitude of the immune system, which does not know how to treat some cells, hostile to the organism, but which, previously, were "friends”...
And so we come to the principle of "denervation" of the solid tumor...
"I" is imposed by mechanisms which come from the "exterior" of the “natural" environment ("natural" means the environment with which a "body" is “on balance", at informational level, on the Earth).
By its unnatural reactions, too often repeated, "I" may not enabling the body, by which is supported it, to react, also, "as a whole" to the certain artificial stimulus.
The reactions to "artificial stimulus", being unnatural, must be "learned"!
That means: it must impose the reception of the "artificial stimulus" and impose, also, certain actions, repeatedly. How?
1) through "absolute" education, which fails to mention that any information "learned" is something related, ultimately, also, to something unnatural, an another "I" of a person, even spiritual, not to the "TRUTH"!
2) Through the excessive advertising,
3) Through political manipulation,
4) Through the energo-informational manipulations.
Immediate solution for cure the cancer: denervation of the solid tumor - breaking any contact with the nerves of autonomic nervous system (vegetative).