This is really surprising, Marvin  !

"But this new footage reveals that there's no coordination at play here at all - somehow, each strand acts independently of the other, and still results in a perfect match each time."

Dear Tina,

Thanks for sharing! However, I have no feeling to comment on this project. I am more concerned about the organ failure is a must for the majority of patients who are so loyal and obedient to taking drugs. Why let them die in a very painful ways?

There are much cheaper and quicker natural ways to get patients out of the trouble. Why our tax money and the majority of grants go here and human stem cell injection to pigs? I only full or questions. It does like I learned, if the wheels are ready, you start to build up the vehicle instead of reinventing the wheel.

Frieda

@Dina

"But this new footage reveals that there's no coordination at play here at all -somehow, each strand acts independently of the other, and still results in a perfect match each time."

    I am not so surprised that a perfect match is obtained each time because a copied  template is present regardless of rates and coupling observed.

     Imagine a zipper divided in two. As it is pulled open the right side copies itself, making 5' - 3' (DNA polymerase copies in the 3' - 5' direction only) Okazaki fragments in a haphazard manner, stopping and starting as the left side proceeds in a continuous manner. Because of the direction constraint on the replicating enzyme there is obviously a contradiction, to accomodate the production of two new strands from a zippered molecule the polymerase has to produce 5' -3' Okasaki fragments in a retrograde upstream (5' - 3') fashion and join them. A physical gap, at least in range of the size of an Okazaki fragment, is implied; apparently researchers reflexively overlooked it to question its' temporal nature. The surprise is that assembly of one strand unpredictably idles periodically.

In the eyes of the philosopher this has important implications. There are always two aspects, structural/physical and temporal that cannot be assumed distinct if it is assumed that all things are in motion and have unique identities. Structurally the double stranded DNA molecule is a singularity; it is faithfully (excuse the pun) reproduced generation to generation, though individual strands, mutual templates for one another, have different information in the assembly of proteins that ensues from reading also, as DNA polymerase, exclusively in the 3' to 5' direction. Information maybe taken from either strand. The two strands are apriorily assumed different unless some unknown/undiscovered secret of syntax within the genetic code/base pairing exists.

The new discovery adds a temporal aspect. If all things are in motion and have unique identities, the discovered temporal factor of the single strand implies that it has a unique identity that is distinct, each is different whether faithfull copies or not. Not only, but cellular DNA is found only as double stranded, though single stranded DNA has been found recently in a human virus.

Entailed- the double strand, as witnessed and expected, undergoes change with time in a mechanism that involves 'structural faithfullness' (double strand to double strand) and as well 'temporal heatheness' (subjectivity?) (single strand to single strand). The single stranded template undergoes motions that are absolutely invisible in the frame of the double stranded molecule.

  I am also surprised by the finding, question does arise whether nature bears actual witness to singularity. The report, as I interpret it, discusses an absolute monism commonly known, double stranded DNA, a constant that 'speaks' in a context specific manner. Within the cell, specific parts can 'speak' specifically of specific processes within specific spaces, regulating spaces of those processes are usually found directly adjacent to the regulated processes, can involve the whole cell space or, within a broader context-e.g. surrounding cells or specific spaces of the cell-the whole organism. In the case of hormones it is possible to claim action at a distance but I think action universally depends on associated form (the whole organism in the case of hormones).

Also reported is the single strand and the potential interpretation of the possession of two contexts:

     1) a context that is the same as that of the double stranded DNA that it is part of, in the contemporary sense where actions are directly witnessible

     2) the second context is infinitely extended beyond witness; two strands come together as one after a temporal mischief in which exact meaning or effect is not accessible. Nature has made "knowing" of this possible, leaving behind questions; for instance the reseaarchers postulate the existence of "blocking proteins" that limit the size of the physical interval of the temporal mischief so that the new strand and processing proteins do not 'fall off' the growing chain and failed synthesis.

     I believe what is reported can be extrapolated to be a general reflection of nature, is observable, though in contrast to the current paradigm and what I extrapolate to be criteria sought for a new paradigm, I do not believe that what is regarded as information expressed as language, e.g. the genetic code, is ever 'read' or known to cellular contents, but behaves according to forces from within its' ('molecular') context, similarily all actions of nature might be construed to be the contextual effects of motion-posssessing (the physical) and form-possessing motion (the transcendental: form-defining familiarity/familiarity-defining form.

     The existence of the witness-bearing genetic code is of wonderous mystery. In supposition that universally entails a unity and its' context, small numbers and vast numbers that are beyond comprehension by the imagination, I think the genetic code is the consequence of five sided and six sided form and an (associated?) unwitnessible 6th projection (5 sided rings, 6 sided rings,joined 5 and 6 sided rings, phosphoric acid etc) are typical of nature.

Nature then does reveal, though what science elaborates as proof must be reflected upon cautiously.

Dear Marvin,

After reading your post, I feel your DNA research is interesting. May I ask you questions?

If a person sick, DNA can be changed. If recovered, DNA will become normal. Right? That's why DNA repair is used.

Can DNA also code a person's knowledge or thinking? If so, should AI target talent's DNA's info?

Thanks.

Best Regards,

Frieda

@ Frieda It is possible to alter genes but I am opposed to changing what comes from with-in from past to future; it involves very large time periods and acquired balances that are very complex. I think we should always care for the sufferring; drugs, etc. applied to symptoms, to alleviate suffering are OK.

Concerning intelligence genes might only have a role in having the ability to think and no role in intelligence or what is thought. People think and relate in the present according to life experiences and situations from where they gather their knowledge. 

For me god is "form in motion". If it is within everything, the states that compose the state of mind, physiology, the external, one cannot escape it. If there is life and volume, all is of form in motion. Yet, if I am pointed an atheist, it is incorrect-"form in motion, has language that, as all language, depends on context:setting-"form in motion" has no envisionable "form". If It exists one place, it exists all places. I think it is the basic element of neural function. I am not particularly a pious person or follow organized religion; I have created the idea of form in motion from discovery and imagination, yet I have not scientificized god, the meaning of god is still the same for me, I have never believed in an absolute all knowing being, mans image or otherwise, crutch or otherwise, but now a (halfway explanable = unexplanable) fact of existence-of the world, inherently speaking uniquely, diversely, but composed of (by) "form in motion" on encounter each time and place.