The Living-Cell

[NicholasMarks]

The Living-Cell

From the perspective of an All Electric Universe we can relook at all science and explore new avenues of thought that might lead to some exciting discoveries. That is what I propose doing here, using the living-cell as a model to guide us into a deeper understanding about the All-Electric Universe.

The living cell follows a number of patterns of behaviour. It can replicate itself…It can perform chemical tasks. It embraces atoms like long lost cousins. It is superabundant, being that trillions upon trillions of them are functioning in their many tasks at any one moment in time. They can go wrong…get stuck, in a circular pattern, which goes wild and uncontrollable, replicating in a fury, whilst not being controlled by any useful genetic patterning …and it can carry genetic information from one generation to the next…a tall order for one so small.

They each have science foxed, but not if we introduce an all-electric universe that obeys certain rules, and harnessing those rules for our own benefit…a must, for any who want  to improve their health.

[Shaker]

I wouldn't dare to hazard a guess at the title of the sub-forum where the preceding belongs, but it's not Science.

[Maeght]

I wouldn't dare to hazard a guess at the title of the sub-forum where the preceding belongs, but it's not Science.

Agreed.

[Sebastian Toe]

Can't decide between Sports and Hobbies or Art and Entertainment!

[Harrowby Hall]

So, this "all-electric" universe. Does that mean there is no gas?

[Shaker]

Perhaps God went with uSwitch.

[NicholasMarks]

Science is something that has logic in its reasoning. A logic which cannot be denied. Though things are often hidden in science they can be made visible by an inquisitive line of thought, using the stepping-stone technique. Such is the story behind the living-cell. There are invisible components which can only be explained by logic. No God is required in science it just helps the explorer to endure the hard to understand and complex matters that modern science leads us towards, but fails to make the correct connections with.

 

[NicholasMarks]

For no obvious reason, the living cell keeps replicating. Looking for an answer for this cannot be explained by chemistry alone but it can by electric behaviour patterning. You see, even the simplest, single cell, living structures, do this replicating pattern and if we take a closer look, it always requires the coming together of two parts. Take away all the atomic parts...the DNA and so forth, and we can see there are two invisible electric forces coming together...pause for a while before passing through each other and then separating from each other, and in their wake leaving behind two, whole, living-cells. The replicating phases of every living-cell tell us that a vigouress force-field is at work...a tiny force field, which, like all other force fields, is invisible, just as magnetic force-fields, gravitational force-fields, the higgs force-fields, black-hole force-fields, and electric force-fields, of which, the living-cell, is the result of.

The question then must be...Do these force-fields have a similar history...and can their combined stories tell us anything about the living-cell, and the answer is yes.

[Roses]

I wouldn't dare to hazard a guess at the title of the sub-forum where the preceding belongs, but it's not Science.

NM's posts are as far removed from science as they can possibly be.

Maybe there should be a board for nonsense posts!  

[Nearly Sane]

NM's posts are as far removed from science as they can possibly be.

Maybe there should be a board for nonsense posts!

There is - it's called Religion and Ethics Forum

[Roses]

There is - it's called Religion and Ethics Forum

In other words, you don't have to be crazy to post on this forum, but it certainly helps. 

[NicholasMarks]

So, this "all-electric" universe. Does that mean there is no gas?

What it means is that this electric energy...the same stuff that Einstein said was inside all atoms and equates to the mass, times the speed of light squared, made all gaseous mass as well. There is a technique used by nature that makes atoms from energy...but, so far, we only have the equation. It all unifies into one unified teaching which explains so much about what goes wrong with the living cell that it might be wise to try and absorb what is being said.   

[Sebastian Toe]

After that ^^^ I'm leaning towards entertainment.

[Nearly Sane]

What it means is that this electric energy...the same stuff that Einstein said was inside all atoms and equates to the mass, times the speed of light squared, made all gaseous mass as well. There is a technique used by nature that makes atoms from energy...but, so far, we only have the equation. It all unifies into one unified teaching which explains so much about what goes wrong with the living cell that it might be wise to try and absorb what is being said.

What is this teaching? And can you show your actual scientific working because none of your posts on here have been scientific?

[Roses]

NM should buy some books on science aimed at primary school children and go on from there. He obviously has no idea of the meaning of the term, 'science', he is confusing it with the fanciful notions produced by his overactive imagination.

[Robbie]

Oh yes, Primary Science is excellent, fun learning.
This book might be of interest too, a little light relief after studying science :-
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/The-Padded-Cell/222496555867?epid=48247516&hash=item33cdd4035b:m:mcoXrpbxNbP5dz8-vCY8maA

[NicholasMarks]

What is this teaching? And can you show your actual scientific working because none of your posts on here have been scientific?

You missed a very important scientific point in the post you responded too. Albert Einstein, if you recall was a scientist. He formulated the equation I alluded to. I didn't argue against it, I gave it full credibility and built the same equation into my own scientific reasoning when I said that all the energy inside an atom was put there by some very precise laws of nature...now, you could have said...how can it possibly be that every   single atom in the universe goes through the same precise manufacturing process delivering a tight range of very precise atoms as listed on the periodic table??...and I would have told you. Science can't tell you because they start with a big-bang which common sense tells you couldn't produce atoms in the way we know them to be. If answering these questions, even if I were wrong, which I'm not, isn't science to you, I think you must have lost the meaning of science. Some of Einstein's work had to wait before proof could be found, so it isn't all text book, much of it is exploration and logic...and the desire to want to help those who are being left in the lurch by science.

[Nearly Sane]

You missed a very important scientific point in the post you responded too. Albert Einstein, if you recall was a scientist. He formulated the equation I alluded to. I didn't argue against it, I gave it full credibility and built the same equation into my own scientific reasoning when I said that all the energy inside an atom was put there by some very precise laws of nature...now, you could have said...how can it possibly be that every   single atom in the universe goes through the same precise manufacturing process delivering a tight range of very precise atoms as listed on the periodic table??...and I would have told you. Science can't tell you because they start with a big-bang which common sense tells you couldn't produce atoms in the way we know them to be. If answering these questions, even if I were wrong, which I'm not, isn't science to you, I think you must have lost the meaning of science. Some of Einstein's work had to wait before proof could be found, so it isn't all text book, much of it is exploration and logic...and the desire to want to help those who are being left in the lurch by science.

No , I didn't miss it. Me merely putting in Shakespeare this post doesn't make it a play. That you even use the term 'common sense' in relation to what is science shows you don't have any real understanding of science. I

And while science is about exploration and logic, you haven't shown any so far. What hypothesis are you proposing? What is the reasoning and evidence for it? And how will you test it?

[Sebastian Toe]

You missed a very important scientific point in the post you responded too. Albert Einstein, if you recall was a scientist. He formulated the equation I alluded to. I didn't argue against it, I gave it full credibility and built the same equation into my own scientific reasoning when I said that all the energy inside an atom was put there by some very precise laws of nature...now, you could have said...how can it possibly be that every   single atom in the universe goes through the same precise manufacturing process delivering a tight range of very precise atoms as listed on the periodic table??...and I would have told you. Science can't tell you because they start with a big-bang which common sense tells you couldn't produce atoms in the way we know them to be. If answering these questions, even if I were wrong, which I'm not, isn't science to you, I think you must have lost the meaning of science. Some of Einstein's work had to wait before proof could be found, so it isn't all text book, much of it is exploration and logic...and the desire to want to help those who are being left in the lurch by science.

At last Nick!
Something which gives us the same basis for discussion.

So;
common sense tells us that you haven't got a clue about science, common sense tells us that all you do is sprinkle your over imagination laden guff with 'sciency' words and phrases, common sense tell us that whatever you come up with in the same vein can be treated in the same manner.....
..dismissed as nonsense.
Common sense will tell us that you will come back with your usual circular replies.
Common sense tells us that those can also be dismissed.

Good thing that common sense eh?
Lets see if it works....

[Roses]

Common sense tells us that NM won't take the slightest bit of notice of the points others have made, and will carry on spouting his fanciful garbage.

[NicholasMarks]

No , I didn't miss it. Me merely putting in Shakespeare this post doesn't make it a play. That you even use the term 'common sense' in relation to what is science shows you don't have any real understanding of science. I

And while science is about exploration and logic, you haven't shown any so far. What hypothesis are you proposing? What is the reasoning and evidence for it? And how will you test it?

Of course, I could go into deep and serious debate on the point you make about me and science....but I won't.

I also thought that I made it perfectly clear in my opening post that I wanted  to show how the living cell responds to electric laws rather than any other laws, and that this was a stepping stone proof of a universe that followed electric laws as its priority. The reason I do this is to show that illness, the living cell, our attitudes, and the behaviour of our neighbours, all combine to control our health. As an exaggerated proof of this we can safely say that if a person is abused daily their health will be much worse than someone who is loved and encouraged. Now...my lab was a factory full of women who were driven hysterically on a daily basis until I arrived on the scene and introduced text-book supervision much to the dismay of those who thought they were entitled to drive mothers, and daughters, wives and young ladies, to the depths of despair but I viewed it very differently...but it makes a good science.

[Nearly Sane]

Of course, I could go into deep and serious debate on the point you make about me and science....but I won't.

I also thought that I made it perfectly clear in my opening post that I wanted  to show how the living cell responds to electric laws rather than any other laws, and that this was a stepping stone proof of a universe that followed electric laws as its priority. The reason I do this is to show that illness, the living cell, our attitudes, and the behaviour of our neighbours, all combine to control our health. As an exaggerated proof of this we can safely say that if a person is abused daily their health will be much worse than someone who is loved and encouraged. Now...my lab was a factory full of women who were driven hysterically on a daily basis until I arrived on the scene and introduced text-book supervision much to the dismay of those who thought they were entitled to drive mothers, and daughters, wives and young ladies, to the depths of despair but I viewed it very differently...but it makes a good science.

No,none of this is science, Nicholas. What hypotheses did you form at your 'lab'? How did you test them? How would they be falsifiable?

[NicholasMarks]

No,none of this is science, Nicholas. What hypotheses did you form at your 'lab'? How did you test them? How would they be falsifiable?

I would suggest that it is the scientist that decides whether or not it is a science or not. You may not understand the science or you may have bias reasons for condemning the science but the truth is that a science is a science and cannot be shaken.

It is all logical and self explanatory...and it is recognised by many as a way to manipulate the masses but it is also very harmful and can leave people distraught and very ill, so it is wise to listen to the expert...the scientist...and, here, that's me...and I have a supporter whom I have made sure you all know about...though I prefer at the moment to rely on my own initiative. If you don't have any interest in why the living-cell goes haywire, that is your concern...but it is analogous with the behaviour of bullies...a bullying cell, no less, and this is why the instructions have to be firmly adhered to, just as any responsible person would expect. But the bully is irresponsible and prefers to argue round and round in circles because they know no better and many people who have been bullied will know the trauma it creates and this too is part of my science.



 

[Nearly Sane]

I would suggest that it is the scientist that decides whether or not it is a science or not. You may not understand the science or you may have bias reasons for condemning the science but the truth is that a science is a science and cannot be shaken.

It is all logical and self explanatory...and it is recognised by many as a way to manipulate the masses but it is also very harmful and can leave people distraught and very ill, so it is wise to listen to the expert...the scientist...and, here, that's me...and I have a supporter whom I have made sure you all know about...though I prefer at the moment to rely on my own initiative. If you don't have any interest in why the living-cell goes haywire, that is your concern...but it is analogous with the behaviour of bullies...a bullying cell, no less, and this is why the instructions have to be firmly adhered to, just as any responsible person would expect. But the bully is irresponsible and prefers to argue round and round in circles because they know no better and many people who have been bullied will know the trauma it creates and this too is part of my science.

The above just shows you nothing about science and you avoided answering the fairly basic scientific questions I asked. It's because I am interested in what you think that I asked you present your ideas in a simple scientific fashion.


Again simply announcing you are a scientist in no way makes it trye, just as saying Einstein in a post doesn't make it scirnce. Your use of common sense earlier indicates a misunderstanding of science.

In order to have any valid discussion here you need to a) actually respond to the points made, and b) actually put some science in your posts rather than mention words talismanically.

[Sebastian Toe]

I would suggest that it is the scientist that decides whether or not it is a science or not. You may not understand the science or you may have bias reasons for condemning the science but the truth is that a science is a science and cannot be shaken.

It is all logical and self explanatory...and it is recognised by many as a way to manipulate the masses but it is also very harmful and can leave people distraught and very ill, so it is wise to listen to the expert...the scientist...and, here, that's me...and I have a supporter whom I have made sure you all know about...though I prefer at the moment to rely on my own initiative. If you don't have any interest in why the living-cell goes haywire, that is your concern...but it is analogous with the behaviour of bullies...a bullying cell, no less, and this is why the instructions have to be firmly adhered to, just as any responsible person would expect. But the bully is irresponsible and prefers to argue round and round in circles because they know no better and many people who have been bullied will know the trauma it creates and this too is part of my science.

Nick,
Common sense tell us that you are talking utter rubbish.