Gatherers Of Data, Meaning And Experience, We Are The Knowledge Of Noeing The Infinite Truth That Existence Is Perception And Awareness Is Eternal. We Are The Intent Of Being, Moving Forward Throughout The Eons Of Time, Innerstanding That The Only Absolute Is Change....
Forget saving files to flash drives and cloud servers. Now, digital information can be stored in the DNA of living organisms, thanks to a breakthrough discovery by researchers at Stanford University in California.
A trio of scientists successfully demonstrated the ability to flip the direction of DNA molecules in sample E.coli bacteria in two directions, mimicking the “1s” and “0s” of binary code, which is at the root of all modern computer calculations.
“Essentially, if the DNA section points in one direction, it’s a zero. If it points the other way, it’s a one,” said Pakpoom Subsoontorn, a bioengineering graduate student at Stanford involved in the research, in an article on the Stanford School of Medicine website.
As a result, the researchers were able to get bacteria cells to glow either red or green under ultraviolet light, and were even able to arrange the colors to spell out specific messages in petri dishes holding the bacteria.
The maximum total “file size” of the data stored using the method is currently restricted to one bit per cell, but the researchers are confident they can get it up to 8-bits, or one byte, of rewritable storage capacity by increasing the number of recombination enzymes within the data. Their method, called recombinase addressable data (RAD), works because scientists are able to control the precise amount of enzymes that catalyze chemical reactions, within each of the single E.coli bacteria cells.
Specifically, the team used two types of enzymes, integrase and excisionase, in different amounts in each cell, to control the flipping of the DNA molecules. It took a lot of hard work, though: Some 750 separate attempts over three years to get the right proportions of the enzymes to be able to flip the DNA “switches” as planned. That’s because the enzymes each tell the cell to do different things, so they are often competing for control. However, the researchers were able to achieve the right balance and produce the light show they sought.
Ultimately, the scientists believe RAD will be “an incredibly powerful tool for studying cancer, aging, organismal development and even the natural environment,” said Drew Endy, an assistant professor in Stanford’s bioengineering department, in the Stanford article.
As Endy, Subsoontorn and Stanford postdoc Jerome Bonnet further explained in a free-to-access paper published Tuesday in theThe Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: “The DNA inversion RAD module developed here should be translatable to applications requiring stable long-term data storage (for example, replicative aging) or under challenging conditions (for example, clinical or environmental contexts…”
A Video Exploration of Language & Information as Reality
~
"The World is made of language. The ability to control language imparts another capability, the control of reality itself, language creates reality. We are enslaved by the linguistic assignments of our culture. An alteration of language can transform our apprehension of the universe. Reality is not independent from our description of it, words wield the power to shape reality. The beliefs we carry form a blade that sculpts wood as readily as it cuts throats".
"Language is the medium by which we transmit our thoughts. The language we use to communicate does fundamentally affect how we see the World, language structures thought to at least the same degree that it reflects thought. For the most part, we live in a world constructed by language. What and how we see the world is tied directly to how we describe it. Linguistic relativity was first suggested by Edward Sapir and Benamin Lee Whorf when they noticed that differences in language reflect the different views of different people".
"Many of the creation stories teach that the World was created through a word or sound. The New Testament says "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God". In the cosmology of the Hopi, the sun god and earth goddess chant life into being. The Hindu scriptures teach us that AUM is the sacred syllable from which the entire universe was created. In fact the word uni-verse means one phrase".
Any honest physicist will tell you that they only have maps & models for 4% of the known universe! That means that the other 96% is Unknown ??! And we only perceive 10% of the Electromagnetic Spectrum ( Light / Sound, Tactile.. ). So we ONLY experience 10% of the 4% that is known, the other 96% is an invisible mystery?? So it would stand to reason that the 96% is where the action really is! ?
Existing solely in the 10% of 4% is like someone having a 6 bedroom house & living in the bathroom and staying only in the shower! Also that 4% knowledge base gets upgraded or revised, so for science to claim an absolute certitude in truth is Scientism! Our science system can be just as dogmatic in it's certitude as religion & in the western world science has taken the place of religion as the high priests of reality.
Maps & Models
What science does well is make workable descriptions i.e. "maps & models"of what is thought to be understood. Science is a system to describe how the universe appears to be working from the perspective of a human being. We can never fully understand reality or the universe because we have limitations due to our 5 senses, instruments of measurement & our intellect. As Alfred Korzybski stated:
"The map is not the territory, nor is the menu the meal".
We have to always remember we live in a world of appearances. The world only "appears" the way it does to us humans because of our sensory filters, our brains & cultural conditioning. Keep in mind not long ago Science fought against meteors from space, air-travel / airplanes & space travel. Yet all that is now passe' in our life & laughable. Can you imagine trying to describe an X-Box, television or virtual reality to a scientist in 1742 ?
The maps & models of science do not define an "Absolute" anything,
it simply provides us rational tools to better understand & communicate what we human beings perceive life to be. Our maps & models are not the fundamental nature of reality or the universe they are just good workable descriptions of what we think may be happening, even though they have their limitations they are all we can know.
We humans as thinking, experiential, conceptual beings have limits to our capacity to understand & comprehend our world & universe that we occupy. There is "The Known", "The Unknown" ( which can be learned & known eventually ) & "The Unknowable" ( which can NEVER be Comprehended by humans ). The Unknowable is like a fish in a lake trying to understand the surface world of humans, our sciences, cultures, technologies, languages, etc... Could a fish ever hope to understand how to build a 747, drive a car or read a book?
So in the same way we can NEVER KNOW the absolute nature of everything or reality in it's entirety.
All we can do is make maps & models that explain our current understanding of how we think things operate & function at certain levels. Because of this our maps & models are constantly being redefined, they are in state of constant flux.
The only absolute is change!
~
"The model itself may closely resemble the reality it describes or merely describes it's inputs & outputs. In either case, do not confuse the model of reality with reality itself."
~ Thomas Campbell
There is a school of thought which has gained significant credibility and momentum, largely as the result of Ray Kurzweil’s best-selling book “The Singularity is Near.” It is based on the belief that we will achieve a technological singularity in the coming decades (Kurzweil puts the date at 2045), a sort of AI-run-amok scenario. Closely related is the concept of Transhumanism, which predicts that due to the same trends and forces, we will merge with artificial intelligence (AI) and evolve into a new species of cybernetic being that will essentially be immortal. This is a logical theory of the future that is based on Moore’s Law, nanotechnology, and trends in AI. This paper will show that there is actually evidence that the accelerating trend may be slowing down, due to reaching the limitation of human’s ability to keep up with the pace of technology. Instead, this is actually strong evidence for the theory of Programmed Reality.
Programmed Reality is a different, yet somewhat overlapping theory, that takes Moore’s Law to an alternative conclusion. That is, between advances in virtual reality simulations, gaming, and Brain Computer Interfacing (BCI), we will eventually be able to create reality simulations that are of such high quality from a “sensory experience” standpoint, that they will be indistinguishable from “real” reality. I, Kurzweil, Nick Bostrom, and others put this event at about 20 years from now, or in the 2025-2030 range. Bostrom, Director of the Future of Humanity Institute at Oxford University, makes the logical argument in his “Are You Living in a Computer Simulation?” paper, that we are most likely living in a simulation now. My book “The Universe – Solved!”, explores significant additional classes of evidence that lend support to the idea that we may be living in a programmed reality, if not via a “Matrix”-like simulation, then by a program that drives the physical world. Either way, if true, it revolutionizes our concept of reality.
Rather than being a theory of the future, Programmed Reality is more a theory of everything; the past, the present, and the future. And the Singularity would therefore occur within the construct of our Programmed Reality. This has some interesting implications for the likelihood of the Singularity actually happening; in fact, it also provides a test case for the validity of the whole theory. This paper explores the differences between the two views of the future and presents evidence that already exists that not only do we live in a programmed reality, but if so, the Singularity will never occur.
Evidence for the Programmed Reality: It is worthwhile to briefly review the evidence that we are living in a programmed reality. There is much more detail in the book, but to summarize:
1. OUR DISCRETE WORLD - It takes an infinite amount of resources to create a continuous reality, but a finite amount to create a quantized reality. The very nature of the computational mechanisms of a computer are essentially the same as Quantum Mechanics - a sequence of states, with nothing existing or happening between the states. The resolution of any program is analogous to the spatial resolution of our reality, just at a different level. In fact, if you carry Moore's Law forward (which has been consistent over the past 40 years), computers will reach the Planck resolution in 2192. Not too far off. However, you don't need to model reality all the way to that level for the model to be indistinguishable from our reality. Let's say you want to examine the guts of a tree. You cut it open, scrape off a few cells and put them under a microscope, maybe an electron microscope.
To simulate this computationally, one doesn't have to model every single tree down to the Planck level. Only the observed tree needs to be modeled, and then only the cells selected, and then only down to a resolution that matches the observational limitations of our measurement devices. The program can do that dynamically. And all quantum effects can be programmatically modeled without building a reality model to the Planck level. So, given Moore's law and the limitations of "observational reality", we should be able to create Virtual Realities that are indistinguishable from our current reality within 20 years or so. The very fact that our reality is quantized may be considered strong evidence that reality is programmed.
2. THE SIMULATION TIMELINE - Various modern philosophers and scientists have posited that we are likely to be living a simulation. This is because it is highly probable that we will be able to create ancestor simulations within a few years, when we achieve a posthuman stage. Due either to the number of simulations that will be run, or to the proximity that we are to that stage, it is actually more probable that we are in one than the case where we haven't yet reached that stage. Again, there is no way to tell that we aren't in a programmed reality.
3. THE FINE-TUNED UNIVERSE - The universe is unbelievably finely tuned for the physical existence of matter, let alone life. For example, universal constants cancel out all of the vacuum energy in the universe to an amazing accuracy of one part in 10 to the 115th power. Also, a deviation in the expansion rate of the early universe of 1 part in a billion in either direction would have caused the universe to immediately collapse, or fly apart so fast that stars could never have formed. And there are many more such examples. The only explanation that mainstream science can come up with is that either an uncountably huge number of universes are spawned every second (the Everett interpretation of Quantum Mechanics) or an uncountably huge number of universes are already out there, most of which are entirely benign and unable to support life or even the formation of matter. Via the magic sleight of hand of the anthropic principle, we happen to be in the only perfect one. It certainly seems that Occam's Razor heavily favors the simulation theory here.
4. THOSE PESKY ANOMALIES - The huge set of well-studied anomalies facing us in fields as varied as metaphysics, physics, philosophy, geology, anthropology, and psychology can all be explained only by the programmed reality model. The mathematics of coincidence, the perceived acceleration of society, OOPart, the truth about the paranormal, quantum entanglement, the existence of oil - they all fit neatly into this hypothesis. No other theory can make that claim.
Putting all of this together, we can actually make some predictions about our future. Specifically, and for the purpose of the argument of this paper, Programmed Reality predicts the following: Any impending civilization-ending trend will always reverse.
Here’s why: If we are indeed in a programmed reality, we can say one of two things about the course of the program.
Either:
1. We will end this reality at some point and begin another one.
or…
2. We will continue to “play the game.”
In the first case, I would argue that the civilization-ending trend merely gets erased, which is an extreme example of reversal. In the second case, there is an incentive for the “programmers” to maintain a construct that allows us to continue to play. Such a construct is inconsistent with the idea of a civilization-ending event. Another prediction is:
The Singularity will not occur.
The Singularity, while not civilization-ending, is certainly a type of event that will destroy life, reality, and civilization, as we know it. Therefore, by the argument above, it will not happen. If it does, then I would have to concede that Programmed Reality is not a likely description of our reality.
It is now 9 years since the release of the movies “The Matrix,” “eXistenZ,” and “The Thirteenth Floor,” all of which explored the idea that we might be living in a computer-generated simulation. Although the fun and speculation about the premise of these movies has largely died down, the interest around the concept has shifted from pop culture to academic. Nick Bostrom, the Director of the Future of Humanity Institute at Oxford, wrote his oft-quoted “Are You Living In a Computer Simulation?” [1] in 2001. More recently, in 2008, Brian Whitworth from Massey University in New Zealand submitted the white paper “The Physical World as a Virtual Reality” [2], which created a nice buzz in the blogosphere (the Slashdot forum collected over 1000 comments on it alone). Somewhat tangentially, there is also the whole Transhumanism/Singularity movement, which predicts our future merge with AI, but does not really address the idea that we may have already done so.
Also, at the beginning of 2008, I released the book “The Universe – Solved!” My take on the topic is a little different than the common theme of a computer-generated simulation. I consider that scenario to be but one of several possible ways in which our reality may be under programmed control. The book introduces these scenarios but really focuses on presenting all of the categories of evidence that our reality may indeed be programmed. This evidence takes us from feasibility to some level of probability.
But feasibility is where it starts, and for you skeptics out there, this article is for you. If, after reading it, you are still convinced that the idea is not at all feasible, I respectfully acknowledge your position and we can go our separate ways. Where do I stand on it? Put simply, I believe it is very feasible that we live in a programmed reality and highly probable, although as with every other idea in the world, I remain less than 100% convinced.
We shall begin our feasibility study with a nod to the 30th anniversary of the release of the arcade video game Space Invaders. Running on an Intel 8080 microprocessor at 2 MHz, it featured 64-bit characters on a 224 x 240 pixel 2-color screen. There was, of course, was no mistaking anything in that game for reality. One would never have nightmares about being abducted by a 64-bit Space Invader alien. Fast forward 30 years and take a stroll through your local electronic superstore and what do you see on the screen? Is that a football game or is it Madden NFL ’08? Is that an Extreme Games telecast or are we looking at a PS3 or Wii version of the latest skateboarding or snowboarding game. Is that movie featuring real actors or are they CG? (After watching “Beowulf”, I confess that I had to ask my son, who is much more knowledgeable about such things, which parts were CG.)
The Current State of CGI Tech Games & Environments
The source of our confusion is simply Moore’s Law, the general trend that technology doubles every two years or so. Actually, to put a finer point on it, the doubling rate depends on the aspect of technology in question. Transistor density doubles every two years, processor speed doubles every 2.8, and screen resolutions double about every four years. What still remains fascinating about Moore’s Law is that this exponential growth rate has been consistent for the past 40 years or so. As a result, “Madden NFL ‘08” utilizes a 1080x1900 screen resolution (at 16 bit color), at least 1GB of memory, and runs on a PS3 clocked at 2 TFLOPs. Compared to Space Invaders, that represents an increase in screen resolution of over 500x, an increase in processing speed of a factor of 2 million, and an increase in the resolution of gaming models of well over a thousand. And so, “Madden” looks like a real football game.
So, given this relentless technology trend, at what point will be able to generate a simulation so real that it will be indistinguishable from reality? To some extent, we are already there. From an auditory standpoint, we are already capable of generating a soundscape that matches reality. But the visual experience is the long pole in the tent. Given the average human’s visual acuity and ability to distinguish colors, it would require generating a full speed simulation at 150 MB/screen to match reality. Considering Moore’s Law on screen resolution, we should reach that point in 16 years. Then, of course, there are the other senses to fool, however, as we shall see, they should not be too difficult. So, 16 years is our timeframe to generate a virtual reality indistinguishable from “normal” reality. Of course, we also have to experience that reality in a fully immersive environment in order for it to seem authentic. This means doing away with VR goggles, gloves, and other clumsy haptic devices. Yes, we are talking about a direct interface to the brain. So what is the state of the art in that field?
In 2006, a team at MIT did an experiment where they placed electrodes in the brains of macaque monkeys and showed them a variety of pictures. By reading the signals from the electrodes, the team was able to determine to an accuracy of 80% which picture a particular monkey was looking at. [3] Although certainly a nascent technology, this experiment and others like it have demonstrated that it is possible to determine someone’s sensory stimuli by simply monitoring the electrical signals in their brains. We can leave it to Moore’s Law for the perfection of this technology. What about the other direction - writing information into the brain? Dozens of people in the US and Germany have already received retinal implants whereby miniature cameras generate signals that stimulate nerves in the visual cortex in order to provide rudimentary vision of grids of light. Whereas it took 16 years to develop a 16-pixel version, is has taken only 4 years to develop a 60-pixel one. [4] That rate of advance is even higher than Moore’s Law because it is at the early part of a technological innovation. Further advances are being made in this field by stimulating regions deeper into the brain. For example, at Harvard Medical School researchers have shown that visual signals can be generated by stimulating the lateral geniculate nucleus (LGN), an area in the brain that relays signals from the optic nerve to the visual cortex. Perhaps stimulating the visual cortex directly will allow further acceleration of advances in generating simulated realities. Other senses, like taste, smell, and touch, seem to not require the same level of data simulation as the visual simulation and can also be accomplished via the same deep-brain stimulation methods. Given the state of these technologies today and the fact that there are about one million axons that carry visual signals in parallel through the optic nerve, Moore’s Law might say that we could achieve the electrical-implant-based simulation in a little over 30 years. However, nanotech may actually speed up the process.
Instead of implanting a device into the brain that stimulates millions of cells, or axons, why not generate millions of nanobots and give them the instructions to each find an available cell and stimulate it according to direction from a central computer. In early 2008, researchers from Northwestern and Brookhaven National Laboratory equipped gold nano-particles with DNA tentacles, and demonstrated their ability to link with neighbors to create ordered structures. [5] Crystals containing as many as a million particles were built using this technology. In addition, scientists from the International Center for Young Scientists have developed a rudimentary nano-scale molecular machine that is capable of generating the logical state machine necessary to direct and control other nano-machines. [6] These experiments demonstrate a nascent ability to manipulate, build, and control nano-devices, which are the fundamental premises for nanobot technology. Many well-respected technologists and futurists put the likely time frames for molecular assembly and nanobots somewhere in the 2020s. It is hard to say exactly when directed nanobot activities such as those necessary to create the reality experience mentioned above may be possible because there isn’t yet a starting point from which to extrapolate Moore’s Law. However, the current state of the art and common projections put the time frame 20 to 30 years out.
Of course, this would not be enough to fool us because we would still have our memory prior to the instantiation of the simulation, plus our collective set of life memories. Or can our memories be erased and replaced? Researchers at Harvard and McGill Universities used the drug propranolol in a study to dampen traumatic memories, while an amnesia drug was used in studies on rats at New York University to delete specific memories, while leaving all others intact. [7] To the best of our knowledge, memories in the brain are due to strengths in synaptic connections, which in turn are due to the generation of neurochemicals, such as glutamates. In principle, it would appear that properly-programmed nanobots should have the ability to weaken or strengthen these synaptic connections, hence removing or adding memories. The likelihood that memories are distributed throughout the brain only make the programming or deprogramming more difficult, but not impossible in theory.
From these directions, it should be clear that the generation of a full-immersion simulation is not only feasible, but also likely some time in the next 20-30 years. So who is to say that we aren’t already in one? In fact, Nick Bostrom’s Simulation Argument makes a compelling case that we probably are.
The argument goes like this…
Someday, we will have the ability to generate and experience these simulations (the time at which this occurs is called the posthuman phase). And when we do, we would generate millions of them. From a logical standpoint, he says that one of three scenarios must be true:
1. We never get to the posthuman phase because we destroy ourselves.
2. We never get to the posthuman phase because we make a conscious decision not to pursue this technology. Personally, I throw out this scenario as unrealistic. When faces with any technology that has inherent dangers (nuclear energy, nanotech, cloning, generating energies in particle accelerators that are sufficient to create a black hole), when have we ever made a decision not to pursue it?
3. We do achieve posthumanism. And, since the odds that we are living in one of the millions of generated simulations is much higher than the odds that we just happen to be in a reality musing about the possibilities 20 years hence, we are most probably living in a simulation.
Therefore, if you subscribe to his logic and have an optimistic view of where we are going as a species, you have to conclude that we are probably living in a simulation.
However, this only addresses the scenario whereby the reality that we are living in is generated by us in the future. What if our reality is programmed, but by someone else? Other nanotech-based technologies may also be deployed this century that will create physical realities rather than simulated ones. These ideas is explored further in my article "Nanotech and the Physical Manifestation of Reality."
References:
Are You Living In a Computer Simulation? Nick Bostrom. Philosophical Quarterly, 2003, Vol. 53, No. 211, pp. 243-255.
“Fast Readout of Object Identity from Macaque Inferior Temporal Cortex”, Chou P. Hung, Gabriel Kreiman, Tomaso Poggio, James J. DiCarlo, Science 4 November 2005: Vol. 310. no. 5749, pp. 863 – 866.
The Guardian, February 17 2007, p11 of the UK news and analysis section.
Farley, Peter, “Programming Advanced Materials,” Technology Review, January 31, 2008.
Fildes, Jonathan, “Chemical brain controls nanobots,” 11 March 2008, news.bbc.co.uk.
Christensen, Bill, “New Drug Deletes Bad Memories,” 2 July 2007 post on livescience.com.
Do we all exist as energetic informational frequency expressions (Enformation)
in a Cosmic Internet of communication, awareness & perception? Is the Universe a giant cosmic "Enternet"? The latest data seems to be indicating this may be the case. It's obvious that our electronic communication technologies & tools are just crude artificial replicas of what we all are doing naturally as conscious energy beings.
Energy Perceiving Energy
Are we beings of perpetual awareness having a relationship with our images of internal self reflection? Fundamentally we are "energy perceiving energy" in a complex mathematical relationship that produces self awareness, structure, separation & identity. Are some of us becoming conscious of this process & learning to understand the coded or encoded language of this energetic system of self reflecting intelligence, information and organization? I think so....
As shown before DNA can be programmed via specific light & sound frequencies. This would mean that all life, matter & energy can be controlled via a light & sound programing language. This would mean that fundamentally the universe is somehow informationally & energetically constructed via a language similar to how we can create software displaying audio & visual worlds via a computer screen yet in some ways far more advanced than our simulations & VR worlds using tools like Java Script, C++ & Python, but the principle is the same.
" In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. " ~ John 1:1.
Is it possible that "The Word" is a language to control light or energy.
We are 20 or 30 years away from creating 3D simulations & worlds that replicate our own down to the last microscopic & atomic detail. We will be able to interact in these worlds via an interface & when this occurs we will not be able to tell the difference between what's Real or Virtual.
~
If we can do it now, how do we know for certain it hasn't already been done? Energy appears to be solid but it's not, this is the illusion of matter all physicist's understand. Are we as real as we think we are? What is "REAL" if everything is made of organized electrons that really have no density? Is it possible that Us & our Sims are just degrees away in the electromagnetic engineering spectrum. Are we all existing in another civilizations simulation as holographic energy & information? Do we exist in a programed Reality Matrix that is for the most part undetectable & exists on a Nano Scale? Is this part of the Game? Eventually the Sims figure out they are sort of programed Sims & begin the creation simulation game anew?
The above videos & new science data are giving rise to some profound questions...
~ Are We Just a Program
If we exist in a programed reality who or what wrote this language? Who or what are the programers? Given the evidence & data it is probable we all may be existing in a programed simulated environment created by an advanced civilization from our past, the future or some other far out scenario. For if we have discovered or invented computer simulations who's to say it hasn't already been done?
If existence is just a hyper cosmic sentient MIND a Universal OS acting in a self organizing way then are we all just electromagnetic expressions in an energetic sea of self reflecting information? The current data seems to be expressing such a phenomenon.
What is "Out There" is a seemingly enormous flux of energy signals, translatable as sensory information via our sense & experience. Every cell in our body, our electro-chemical perceptions, all of it is fundamentally made of energetic layers existing as something else on each perceptual level. These interrelationships of energy produce the solid images & impressions we all seem to interact with & perceive.
The data is demonstrating The Universe is a complex system of energetic signal transceivers interacting on various frequencies which in turn produce a manifestation of "Images" that appear to have space, time, dimension, density, power, forces & motion. When in fact it is is all just information having a relationship with itself. The Universe is a energetic informational construct.
The Universe
The "I" Signal
Are we self aware, self reflecting mathematical movements of energetic information in a logarithimic loop of harmonic resonance & relationships via various Hz waves of energy? Is "I" just a self aware mathematical algorithmic function of energy in phase conjugation with itself having an illusory sense of identity, separation & difference regarding densities, structure & being?
Is "I" or "Reality" just a binary function of electromagnetic residual images based on a programmable thought wave?
For if existence is just a Hyper Dimensional Sentient MIND in layers of self organization, intelligence & self reflection then are we all just metaphoric expressions in an energetic sea of mirrored information having a labyrinth of experiences but actually in essence it is one infinite being or self organizing system of information experiencing it self subjectively creating false divisions of separation & objectivity?
And if the universe is programmable units of energetic informational codes able to be experienced at various levels then is it possible we exist in a some type hyper advanced enformational system of communication & self reflection with the ability to change or modify the system ?
Metaphorically, Is the universe a just a huge mirrored fun house of light & sound creating the appearance of being something more that it is? Is energy having a self reflecting narcissistic relationship with itself ?
Is energy & information having a perceptual relationship based on various mathematical sequences of Hz frequencies ? The data seems to be indicating...
From The Canadian National News / By Mary Rodwell 2007
Some recent Russian DNA discoveries documented by Grazyna Fosar and Franz Bludorf in their book Vernetzte Intelligenz have been summarized by Baerbel. ‘The human DNA is a biological Internet’ with evidence that DNA can be ‘influenced and reprogrammed by words and frequencies.’ This suggests that ‘our DNA is not only responsible for the construction of our body, but also serves as data storage and communication.’ The Russian scientists and linguists have found that the genetic code ‘follows the same rules as all our human languages.’ In effect, human language did not appear coincidentally but is a reflection of our DNA.
The Russian researchers believe that ‘Living chromosomes function just like a holographic computer using endogenous DNA laser radiation. This means that they managed to modulate certain frequency patterns (sound) onto a laser-like ray which influence DNA frequency and thus the genetic information itself. Since the basic structure of DNA-alkaline pairs and language is of the same structure, no DNA decoding is necessary. One can simply use words and sentences of the human language! This, too, was experimentally proven!’ Of course the frequency has to be correct. But for the purposes of this article, the Russian research shows how science now can demonstrate a way to reprogram DNA through language and frequencies.
The human DNA is a biological Internet and superior in many aspects to the artificial one. The latest Russian scientific research directly or indirectly explains phenomena such as clairvoyance, intuition, spontaneous and remote acts of healing, self healing, affirmation techniques, unusual light/auras around people (namely spiritual masters), the mind’s influence on weather patterns and much more.
In addition, there is evidence for a whole new type of medicine in which DNA can be influenced and reprogrammed by words and frequencies WITHOUT cutting out and replacing single genes.
Only 10% of our DNA is being used for building proteins. It is this subset of DNA that is of interest to western researchers and is being examined and categorized. The other 90% are considered "junk DNA. The Russian researchers, however, convinced that nature was not dumb, joined linguists and geneticists in a venture to explore those 90% of "junk DNA". Their results, findings and conclusions are simply revolutionary!
According to them, our DNA is not only responsible for the construction of our body but also serves as data storage and communication. The Russian linguists found that the genetic code, especially in the apparently useless 90%, follows the same rules as all our human languages. To this end they compared the rules of syntax (the way in which words are put together to form phrases and sentences), semantics (the study of meaning in language forms) and the basic rules of grammar.
They found that the alkalines of our DNA follow regular grammar and do have set rules just like our languages. So human languages did not appear coincidentally but are a reflection of our inherent DNA.
The Russian biophysicist and molecular biologist Pjotr Garjajev and his colleagues also explored the vibrational behavior of the DNA. [For the sake of brevity I will give only a summary here. For further exploration please refer to the appendix at the end of this article.]
The bottom line was: "Living chromosomes function just like solitonic/holographic computers using the endogenous DNA laser radiation."
This means that they managed, for example, to modulate certain frequency patterns onto a laser ray and with it influenced the DNA frequency and thus the genetic information itself. Since the basic structure of DNA-alkaline pairs and of language (as explained earlier) are of the same structure, no DNA decoding is necessary. One can simply use words and sentences of the human language!
As the evidence is suggesting if DNA Biology is programmable via light & sound frequencies then what are we as living beings & what we are all existing in ? Is the universe fundamentally at the core some form of language pattens and frequencies of information in a programmable matrix of energy
( Enformation )
