SUPPORT DOCUMENT #205 Even reproduction has evolved! This post suggests that those species that survive are those that had reproductive systems that became more and more dominant in the life of the organism. In a sense, the system of reproduction was stressed more than any other aspect of the organism. Thus 3.? billion years later , those surviving organisms seem to live to reproduce - the tail wagging the dog. Many seem to think that because replication is such an important aspect of evolution TODAY that it was the same 4 billion years ago - thus suggesting not one thing evolved in 4 billion years! Yes replication is important NOW. But to suggest that things haven't changed in 4 billion years is nutty to me. I'll concede that even in my theory, in order to make sense of the facts that I'm finding out about conditions of first life, that energy moderation and replication both happened - in a weird way as a simultanious outgrowth of chemicals (GC nucleotides) reacting to the heat cycle of their watery earth environment (heat of day, cold of night). I'll even submit to anyone who suggests that everything that led up to a GC world-that led up to an RNA world-that led up to a cell world was caused by a natural selection process. But the whole thing is energy moderation. If the sun wasn't shining nothing would be reproducing. And it's important to remember that to replicate you must first have something to replicate - ie. something came before replication. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #206 Let's look at the evolution of RNA closer. First the RNA that we have today didn't pop into existance full blown. Instead it evolved from much much simpler forms. What was that first and most simple form? I discounted rRNA because that seemed to me to be the least basic of the 3 main ones. I felt that RNA probably began as 2 strands-not one like it is today. I felt that it gave up the 2 strands when DNA took over the codebook job. I felt that the 'lock and key' type of arrangement of mRNA and tRNA looked like an evolved version where each side had evolved to better fit the other. Yet what had they begun as? It suggested to me that both were relatively the same in shape when they began and that they possibly could have been 2 strands of RNA that were virtually identical - 2 sides of a coin. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #207 Euk wall evolve from bacteria spore? "When growth conditions become unfavorable, many bacteria form structures called spores. One type of spore, called an endospore, is formed when a bacterium produces a thick internal wall that encloses its DNA and a portion of its cytoplasm." Biology - Miller, Levine This quote suggests something to me. Could it be that the wall around the nucleus of the eukaryote cell evolved from an endospore? And possibly a partial reason it shifted into the spore mode, is the invasion of our now friendly - chloroplasts, and mitochondria, etc. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #208 Tide pools as first cell. I have suggested that tide pools may have acted like a first cell in that the tides brough in the nutrients needed, and flushed out the waste. I thought the idea was my own. Then I read this quote, "Different kinds of algae, along with many kinds of small animals, live in tide pools. With each crashing wave, water brings food for the animals and plants. wastes produced by the organisms are carried away as the ocean water seeps from the tide pool." Biology - Miller, Levine Well said guys, and I believe it worked for first life too. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #209 Virus and temperature/nutrients - evidence for the theory In my theory I have suggested that all life is energy moderation. "A virus may not stay in the prophage form indefinitely. Eventually, the DNA of the prophage will become active, remove itself from the Dna of the host cell, and direct the synthesis of new virus particles... Factors such as sudden changes in temperature and availability of nutrients can turn on these genes and activate the virus." Biology - Miller, Levine. This quote supports my idea in that it suggests that when energy is high the virus becomes more active. It also support my idea that life replicates in high energy (as a way of moderating that excess energy). SUPPORT DOCUMENT #210 RNA to DNA In my theory I have suggested that RNA preceded DNA. Yet there should be some evidence of that today. There is in retroviruses. "Retroviruses contain RNA as their genetic information. When retroviruses infect a cell, they produce a DNA copy of their RNA genes....Retroviruses received their name from the fact that their genetic information is copied backward - that is, from RNA to DNA instead of from DNA to RNA." Biology - Miller , Levine What I suggest is that instead of being retro or backward, this was how life began. RNA first, then DNA evolved as a better code book, while RNA evolved to all the versions it has. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #211 Bacteria like most organisms grows slowly at low temperatures. "Bacteria, like most organisms, grow slowly at low temperatures." Biology, -Miller ,Levine This bit of text was talking about how refrigeration inhibits bacteria from growing. But in the light of my theory it suggests much much more. I have suggested that all life IS energy moderation. Therefore the temperature (an aspect of energy to be sure) is not something life REACTS to, but the reason life began. It is not something that affects the puppet from outside the puppet - it is the strings! In this case, bacteria like most organisms responds to energy by becoming more active - growing. And when the energy is not there it slows down it's activity, which inhibits growth. And like this seemingly innocuous little phrase says, this applies to most (I would say all ) organisms. It is the structure of life. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #212 Lipids "Some biologists believe that the first true cells arose in a shallow pool containing an organic soup (me included) Experiments show that when such a soup is dried, lipids spontaneously form spheres, or droplets, around small DNA molecules. Given enough time, a form of DNA capable of replicating itself could have arisen within such proto-cells". Biology, Miller and Levine. I have suggested that life formed in a GC world, which led to a RNA world. Then a cell world. This quote suggests a way, though I would contend that it would be RNA not DNA that would first replicate in a cell. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #213 Response to those who think my theory unusual or too much out of left field. In low energy the organism must take in more or it will die. In high energy the organism must take in less or it will die. Is there anything outside of that? I think what you are suggesting is that my theory sounds so 'philosophical' or like I'm treating life as a logic's question if A is _ and B is _ then C is _ (if I remember right that was a syllogism?) Yet when you begin to apply it to real life, it works, it makes sense, and it makes sense in organisms whether they are minora, protista, plants, fungi, or us animals. I would encourage you to look at it this way. When Newton and Liebnitz (sp?) invented calculus, they invented a new world so to speak to better understand the old one. I'm looking at biology in a new way, a way that you were not taught in school, a language that is new to you and completely out of left field. Yet I have taken it from the bottom up. It's a tough argument to argue against because of the steps that are spelled out. Actually I feel more of the "but geesh ... I mean like you know" feeling when others pull something out of the air and say this is the cause of this evolutionary step and here are 1 billion other unrelated reasons for other evolutionary steps. This flies in the face of Darwin's theory that one theory suggests the modification in every case. I've carried that somewhat further with my 'bio-calculus' if you'll forgive the vanity of using an analogy with such super minds and suggest the answer - Darwin says 'descent with modification" In the statement he asks - Descent from what? I answer from energy moderation SUPPORT DOCUMENT #214 Parmecium and an alimentary tract. There is a sort of alimentary tract even in paramecium. I have suggested that brain developed out of a nerve chord that developed parallel to the alimentary tract. It's purpose being to regulate the alimentary tract. I also suggested that the advance to land pushed brain development, as did evolving to warm blooded (as did social behavior, predator/prey struggles, etc.). IF this is so then the brain system should be bigger and more complex (in size compared with the size of the organism) as you move from paramecium to fish, then on to insects, land reptiles, then birds and mammals, etc. "A paramecium obtains food by using its cilia to force water into the gullet, an indentation in one side of the cell. Particles that include bits of food such as bacteria are trapped in the gullet and then forced into cavities called food vacuoles that form at the base of the gullet. The food vacuoles break off into the cytoplasm and eventually fuse with lysosomes, which are organelles that contain digestive enzymes. Thus the material in the food vacuoles is digested and the organism obtains the nourishment it requires. Waste materials are emptied into the environment when the food vacuole fuses with a region of the cell membrane called the anal pore." Biology - Miller, levine Also the above quote shows how the 4 options work even on the one celled level - food taken in or not taken in (1 and 2), food held in and used or stored, or excreted out as waste (3 and 4). SUPPORT DOCUMENT #215 Puzzle Pieces - mutation and metabolism related? Here are some puzzle pieces to life, that at first seem unrelated, but they may suggest support for certain aspects of my theory: of life as an energy moderator. 1. ...the mutation rate in sperm is more than twice what it is in eggs, as David Page of the Whitehead estimated even before the (human) genome was completely sequenced. - Newsweek 2/19/01 2 Mutation rates are higher in species with higher metabolism rates These 2 suggest that mutation and energy moderation MAY be related - specifically mutation higher in males and higher in species with high metabolism rates. (I have suggested that males = high energy, females = lower energy) But it also MAY suggest a difference between mitosis and sexual reproduction: 3."As long as (the single-celled Chlamydomonas)'s living conditions are suitable, this haploid cell reproduces asexually by mitosis.... If conditions become unfavorable, Chlamydomonas can switch to a stage that reproduces sexually." Biology - Miller, Levine. I ask why would conditions make any difference as to how the algae reproduces? Perhaps the 2 statements above have a clue. Could it be that: When living conditions are suitable - then mitosis would have the least risk of mutation and the most chance of things continuing as they are , while When living conditions are unfavorable - then sexual reproduction would allow for the most mutation for change to meet the demands of the unfavorable living conditions? All this suggests that perhaps metabolism (energy moderation) may play a much larger part in mutation and evolutionary change than most think it does. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #216 Fungi Symbionts. I have suggested that all life is energy moderation and that the 2 ends of energy moderation have evolved to numerous dichotomies. One of the main ones is low energy = symbiotic behavior high energy = competition and struggle behavior In this post some examples of fungi as symbionts then competitors: Fungi as symbionts: lichens - fungi and algae (or cyanobacteria) mycorrhizae - fungi and green plants fungi and humans (alcohol and bread, etc.) (Also note fungi as competitors: fungi - potato blight, wheat rust, and other assorted plant disease; animal diseases - fungus infects ant, human fungal diseases, etc.) An important thread in all life is that most of the "winners" of our Cenozoic era are symbionts: Social insects, social birds, social mammals, and flowering plants "Most flowering plants are pollinated by insects, birds, or mammals that carry pollen from one flower to another. In return, the plants provide the pollinators with food." Biology - Miller Levine It suggests a direction in history toward symbionts. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #217 A sci-fi quote from the novel "Andromeda" This is from "Andromeda" a sci-fi novel by Ivan Yefremov - 1959 "Really!" exclaimed Darr Veter in exaggerated astonishment, "Then you will reduce the entire evolution of all living and non-living matter to some sort of a gigantic symphony?" And I say "Yes - energy" SUPPORT DOCUMENT #218 Why are sunsets beautiful. You have something quite complex here. An appreciation of a sunset. And somehow that evolved out of first life 3.8? billion years ago. The logical question (unless you believe in evolution falling down from the sky in the middle of evolution) is that something simple that was in first life evolved over the billions of years to sunset sensibilities. What in the world could it be? What bio bit of nucleotides could evolve into anything so complex as sunset appreciation (or a poem, painting, or symphony on sunsets) - even if you have 3.8 billion years to evolve? My theory answers that with energy moderation. . All organisms move toward energy when energy is low. That evolved to move toward food/nurturing in animals ,which evolved to moving toward food nurturing (breast milk), which evolved to moving toward all kinds of nurturing (love). Thus every organism moves TOWARD what it needs to live - and that EVOLVED in humans, not only to what he/she needs to live, but to moving toward anything that pleases it - Sunsets please us. SUPPORT DOCUMNET #219 Desert Life as a microcosm. "Seeds of many desert plants can remain dormant for years, germinating only when sufficient moisture guarantees them a chance for survival. Other desert plants have bulbs, tubers, or rhizomes that can remain dormant for several years if necessary. When rain does come, the plants grow with amazing speed. They mature, flower, and set seed in a matter of weeks or even days - before the water disappears." Biology - Miller , Levine This description of desert life serves as a microcosm of my theory of health - that life is an energy moderator that a. slows down in low energy, and b. becomes active (and reproduces) in high energy - thus setting up the 4 options of energy moderation. A similar case could be made for life on the other temperature extreme - life in very cold climates. They too wait for spring warm up - abundant energy; end their dormant periods, and begin to become active and reproduce. Both extremes show clearly what is true with life not only in these extremes but in all life. It began as energy moderators and every aspect of life has evolved out of the 4 options of energy moderation. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #220 Tardigrades as example. Here is another example that supports that aspect of my theory that all life slows down, and/or goes dormant in low energy. This time with the invertebrate, tardigrade. "When conditions become adverse, tardigrades pull in their legs, lose nearly all the water in their body, and enter a dormant state, In this state_ which can last up to seven years - tardigrades are able to survive conditions that would kill almost all other living things! A few drops of water are all that is needed to revive the shriveled, apparently lifeless tardigrade once conditions again become favorable." Biology, Levine Miller SUPPORT DOCUMENT #221 Asexual vs. Sexual It seems to me that a general rule in all organisms that have the choice of asexual or sexual reproduction is that: Most seem to use asexual when times are good, energy is plentiful - no need to chance mutations But when times are difficult for the organism, then sexual reproduction allows for the most possible change - mutation. Here are 2 quotes from, "Biology", Miller, Levine: "Why is self-polination uncommon in many plant species? Recall that sexual reproduction allows the exchange of genetic material between individuals. This exchange increases variation in offspring. Usually, the more variation there is in a population, the more likely it is that at least some individuals will survive to reproduce." (This supports the idea of sexual reproduction as the mode for change) "Vegetative reproduction enables a plant that is well adapted to a particular environment to produce many offspring genetically identical to itself. ... It is not uncommon for many angiosperms to produce new plants by reproducing asexually. Strawberries, for example send out long trailing stems called stolons that produce roots when they touch the ground. Bamboo plants grow long underground stems that can send up new shoots in several places.... " (This supports the idea of asexual reproduction as the mode for least change when times are good for the organism) SUPPORT DOCUMENT #222 Asexual vs. Sexual - more This quote from Biology - Miler, Levine; is talking about asexual and sexual reproduction in animals (I believe most of the first post on this was about plants) "Asexual reproduction allows animals to produce offspring rapidly from a single individual. This enables species to quickly take advantage of new opportunities in the environment. The obvious disadvantage of asexual reproduction is that the offspring are genetically identical to the parent. And as you may recall, a lack of genetic diversity makes populations less able to deal with changes in the environment. Sexual reproduction maintains genetic diversity in a population. Although sexual reproduction does not create net genes, it does result in new combinations of genes. Such combinations may improve an individual's chances of surviving and coping with change. Most of the more complex animals reproduce sexually." This supports my idea that asexual reproduction is best used in times of abundant energy for the organism, and sexual used in stressful times. Why then would almost all complex animals reproduce sexually? I suggest that first they became complex because they had to deal with one of the, if not the, most difficult transitions of any life on earth - moving on to land. Thus the struggles of land demand sexual reproduction or at least a combination of sexual and asexual - as in plants. I've talked about this idea with plants and animals. How about bacteria? They too have 2 ways of reproducing. The asexual way is mitosis, splitting in to 2 identical cells. Yet they can also alter their genome through conjugation - thus allowing 2 modes of reproduction. If the above is true then each form of reproduction has its own advantage - the asexual is best for taking advantages of high energy and the conjugation reproduction a way of helping the bacteria survive in hard times. And if I remember correctly it is the conjugation method that helps some bacteria survive vaccines, pesticides, etc. If all this is true then we can look at life from yet another viewpoint, and tell conditions of life through history by how the organism reproduces. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #223 Asexual vs. Sexual - yet more. "Each daughter cell receives a complete set of the nuclear controls present in the parent cell... Mitosis is the term used to describe this important process. It provides a mechanism for the reproduction of single-celled organisms. It also provides a mechanism for growth in multicellular organisms." Cell Biology - Kimball I have suggested that growth and reproduction are the same thing except - their location: Growth is mitosis inside the organism Reproduction is mitosis outside the organism They are 2 sides of the same coin. And both evolved out of mitosis It is interesting to note that growth inside the organism has continued to be by mitosis while growth outside the organism has evolved to sexual reproduction as well as mitosis. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #224 Another textbook defines my theory (and doesn't know it's doing so). This quote from Cell Biology, J. Kimball c. 1968 (and my comments in parenthesis) "Metabolism is the exchange of matter and energy between the organism and its environment and the transformation of matter and energy within the organism. Each cell, to survive, must secure matter and energy from its environment, transform this matter and energy and release the waste products of these transformations back to the environment." Now with my notes: "Metabolism (the key to all life is energy moderation) is the exchange of matter and energy between the organism and its environment ( option 1 and 2 of the 4 options of energy moderation) and the transformation of matter and energy within the organism (option 3 and 4 of the 4 options of energy moderation). Each cell, to survive, must secure matter and energy from its environment (option 1 and 2) transform this matter and energy (option 3) and release the waste products of these transformations back to the environment (option 4) 4 options: 1 take in 2 not take in 3 (take in and) hold in 4 (take in and) not hold in - excrete out SUPPORT DOCUMENT #225 Brain development ( multi parts) One aspect of my Hendricks Health Theory suggests that brain evolved out of the alimentary tract. Here are some examples that seem to support that: (all quotes from Biology - Miller, Levine) "Some of the simplest animals have radial symmetry; most complex animals have bilateral symmetry. Some of the simplest animals, such as sea anemones, have body parts that repeat around an imaginary line drawn through the center of their body. These animals exhibit radial symmetry. Animals with radial symmetry never have any kind of real head... Complex invertebrates and all vertebrates have body parts (at least outside body parts such as arms and legs) that repeat on either side of an imaginary line drawn down the middle of their body. One side of the body is the mirror image of the other. These animals are said to have bilateral symmetry. Animals with bilateral symmetry have specialized front and back ends as well as upper and lower sides.... More complex animals tend to have a concentration of sense organs and nerve cells in their anterior (head) end. This gathering of sense organs and nerve cells into the head region is called mginary. Cephalization becomes more pronounced as animals become more complex. Nerve cells in the head gather into clusters that process the information gathered by the nervous system and control responses to stimuli. Small clusters of nerve cells are called ganglia. In the more complex animals, large numbers of nerve cells gather together to form larger structures called brains." The authors suggest that this process evolved because the organism is moving forward in the water, yet I don't believe that that is the primary reason. We must ask why is the organism moving forward. To get food. The eyes and the mouth appear almost simultaneously in the anterior. Now let's look at some specific species ... (see next post) SUPPORT DOCUMENT #226 More on brain evolution. (please see part one first. Thanks) All quotes from Biology - Miller, Levine Sponges: "Sponges have nothing that even vaguely resembles a mouth or gut, and they have no specialized tissues or organ systems...The evolutionary line that gave rise to sponges was a dead end that produced no other groups of animals" Phylum Cnidaria: "Cnidarians lack a centralized nervous system and anything that could be called a brain. They have simple nervous systems called nerve nets. The nerve net is concentrated around the mouth, but it does spread throughout the body" (note that the nerve net is heaviest around the mouth) Cnidarians are solf-bodied animals with stinging tentacles arranged in circles around their mouth and include Jellyfish, Hydras, etc. Flatworms: "The members of the phylum Platyhelminthes are the simplest animals with bilateral symmetry. Most members of this phylum exhibit enough cephalization, or development at the anterior end, to have what we call a head. ...Free living flatworms have nervous systems that are much more developed than those of cnidarians and sponges. They have a definite head in which a simple brain is located. This brain is the control center of a simple nervous system that stretches throughout the body. One or more long nerve cords run from the brain down the length of the body on either side. Shorter nerve cords run across the body. Many flatworms have one or more pairs of light sensitive organs called ocelli, or eye spots." Flatworms are the simplest animals with bilateral symmetry. Thus that time when the organism begins to line up from front to back, is the same time when organisms evolve to have a brain. Note that though the mouth of flatworms is not at the head (it is near the middle) it seems to quickly evolve to the head in more complex species. And it is important to note that the brain does not ONLY regulate the specific food processing aspects of an organism, yet those other aspects IMO evolved out of that process. More on that later "Parasitic flatworms often do not have much of a nervous system. As you can imagine, there is not much need for a nervous system in an organism that mainly hangs onto an intestinal wall and absorbs food! In fact in tapeworms the nervous system has completely disappeared as the worms have adapted to their parasitic lifestyle." This suggests to me that when the organism no longer needs a digestive system, he no longer needs a nervous system - thus the nervous system is there to regulate the digestive system. And if no digestive system, then no need for a nervous system. "Members of the phylum Nematoda, which are known as roundworms, are among the simplest animals to have a digestive system with two openings - a mouth and an anus. Food enters through the mouth, and undigested food leaves through the anus. Roundworms ... may be the most numerous of all multicellular animals" (This suggests how important an evolutionary move it was to develop an alimentary tract from mouth to anus) " Round worms have simple nervous systems. They have several ganglia, or groups of nerve cells, in the head region, but they lack anything that can really be called a brain... Several nerves extend from the ganglia in the head and run the length of the body. " "Many annelids are active animals with well developed nervous systems. The brain sits on top of the gut at the front end of the body (Note how the brain and gut are close together) Two large nerves pass around the gut and connect the brain with a pair of ganglia below. from these ganglia, a ventral nerve cord runs the entire length of the worm. Nerves from each segment of the worm enter and leave the nerve cord at a pair of small ganglia." Annelids are round wormlike animals that have a long segmented body. From these examples one can see how the brain may well have developed out of the digestive system. More to come, SUPPORT DOCUMENT #227 More on brain development. I have shown in parts 1 and 2 how brain may have developed to better regulate the metabolism of organisms (regulate energy). Yet brains do more, they help the animal see both prey and predators, move about, etc. How is that connected to energy moderation (the key to my theory)? Let's take muscle. It is regulated by the brain and helps the organism move. But move where? If you look closely it is the same 4 options of energy moderation that controls metabolism and all life: 4 options #1 take in #2 block out #3 take in and hold in #4 take in and not hold in (excrete out) Now look at the connection between muscle and the 4 options #1 Muscle allows the organism to move toward its food and take it in #2 Muscle allows the organism to move against competitors, protect themselves and block predators out. Also block out anything unwanted from getting into the organism (evolved to cough, spit out etc. Also it is important to note that one of the earliest parts of the brain the hypothalumus has just that job: to regulate both of these: take in food - swallow, and to block out bad food - cought , spit up etc. #3 Muscle helps move food through the digestive system inside the organism and nurture every part of the organism #4 Muscle helps excrete out waste that is not wanted in the body. Also evolved to flee from predators (excrete out of there) So though the brain does indeed regulate muscle movement, it is still just an outgrowth of the organisms evolved ability to regulate food = regulate energy the key to first life. The same process can be done for seeing and all the other senses. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #228 More on brain development I'm continuing talking about how IMO thinking evolved out of energy moderation - specifically the development of brain evolved from a nerve chord, from a nerve net, that evolved along the alimentary tract. (Please read my other posts on this first ) All quotes from Biology - Miller, Levine "Mollusks vary greatly in the complexities of their nervous systems... Clams and other 2 shelled mollusks, many of which lead basically inactive lives burrowing in mud or sand, have simple nervous systems. they have several small ganglia near the mouth (note the first nerves and ganglia of many species are often by the mouth), a few nerve cords, and simple sense organs. Octopi and other tentacled mollusks , on the other hand are active and intelligent predators that have the most highly developed nervous systems of all members of their phylum. because of their well developed brain, these animals can remember things for long periods of time, and they may even be more intelligent than some vertebrates (I will talk about Octopi later. I feel they are the one exception to the rule, yet may indeed be a dead end of evolution in brain development. As for clams etc. they fit the pattern that brain needs bilateral symmetry and an alimentary tract to build/evolve brains.) "Most arthropods have well developed nervous systems All have a brain that consists of a pair of ganglia in the head. These ganglia serve as central switchboards for incoming information and outgoing instructions to muscles. From the brain, a pair of nerves runs around the esophagus and connects the brain to a nerve cord that runs along the central part of the body. Along this nerve cord are several more ganglia, usually one for each original body segment. These ganglia serve as local command centers to coordinate the movement of legs and wings" Here we have a high development of brains in insects etc. One key point to add to the other brain builders is this. I believe that when any organism leaves the water it deals with many many problems, some of the most severe in life's history. It forces the brain to develop to match that struggle. Therefore the biggest brain development will probably be in land organisms. "Adult echinoderms have a body plan with five pairs organized symmetrically around a center. As a result of this body plan, adult echinoderms typically have neither an anterior nor a posterior end and no brian." This includes starfish, etc. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #229 More on brain development I'm continuing talking about my ideas on brain development. Please see the many posts before this. All quotes from Biology - Miller, Levine "As you might expect in animals that have no head, echinoderms have primitive nervous systems. Most echinoderms, have a nerve ring that surrounds the mouth and radial nerves that connect the ring with the body sections." (Starfish, etc.) Invertebrate Chordates. "The first chordate characteristic, the notochord, is a long flexible supporting rod that runs through at least part of the body, usually along the dorsal surface just beneath the nerve cord. Most chordates have a notochord only during the early part of embryonic life. In most vertebrates, the notochord is quickly replaced by the backbone The second chordate characteristic, the hollow dorsal nerve cord, runs along the dorsal surface just above the notochord. ...In most chordates, the front end of this nerve cord develops into a large brain. Nerves leave this cord at regular intervals along the length of the animal and connect to internal organs, muscles, and sense organs." This quote shows the next step in brain development : nerve net- nerve chord, nerve chord with ganglia, nerve chord with notochord that develops into a back bone, hollow dorsal nerve cord with ganglia at the front evolving into a brain. "...invertebrates show three obvious trends in the evolution of the nervous system: centralization, cephalization, and specialization.... The cells that make up a hydra's nerve net are quite spread out, although they are concentrated in the tentacles and around the mouth. In animals such as jellyfish and flatworms, the nerve cells are more concentrated, or centralized. they form nerve cords or nerve rings in certain areas. These structures transmit signals more quickly and efficiently than nerve nets and help coordinate responses.... Most animals that have bilateral symmetry also have a concentration of nerve tissue in the anterior end of the body (cephalization). Cephalization tends to increase as animals become more complex. In simler animals, such as flatworms, there are a few small clumps of nerve tissue, or ganglia, in the head. In more advanced animals - cephalopod mollusks and arthropods, for example - the ganglia are organized into a brain that controls and coordinates the nervous system." This is a good sum up of brain development. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #230 Consciousness, evolution of. I have suggested that consciousness evolved this way: Repetition - Memory - Consciousness Repetition (the way we learn almost all things) led to memory (we remember what we repeat most often - and organisms with memory would then be aware of the difference between 'now' - what it does , and 'before' - what it did before) ... led to consciousness. Organisms also learn by pain. Example - touch a hot stove and you learn that it burns - yet repetition is the basic process. Learning, memory, and consciousness all are ruled by the cerebrum. The cerebrum is the largest in humans: "Note that the size and complexity of the cerebrum and cerebellum increase as you move through the vertebrate classes from fishes to mammals. The cerebrum can be thought of as the 'thinking' region of the brain. It receives, interprets, and determines the response to sensory information. It is also involved in LEARNING, MEMORY, and CONSCIOUS THOUGHT. In fishes, amphibians, and reptiles, the cerebrum is relatively small. In birds and mammals - especially primates - the cerebrum is enormously enlarged and may contain many folds that increase its area." Biology - Miller, Levine. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #231 Octopi brain development - an exception? Octopi seem to break the rules when it comes to brain development. I think they are an exception, and a sort of dead end, and they do not disprove the main rule. The nerve net and brain of the octopi are very strange indeed. They seem to circle the mouth, congregate behind the eyes, and diverge in fan like streams through the tentacles below the mouth, and the other way - above the eyes and through the bulb like head. I think this was in many ways a fluke of brain development with most nervous systems working this way: nerve net - mostly around the mouth, leads to nerve chord that follows the digestive system to nerve chord lines up with mouth and anus nerve chord lines up with bilateral symmetry nerve chord lines up with head/mouth to anus alimentary tract nerve chord develops ganglia at the head - later the brain nervous system is pushed to greater development by the struggles of surviving on land (plus some we haven't yet talked about: prey vs. predator builds brains for both to survive social behavior builds brains to develop specific skills repetition leads to memory, leads to consciousness. etc. Octopi fit a few but not most of these requirements. I think what intelligence they have is somewhat hampered by their lack of bilateral symmetry. That alone was the turning point for almost all nervous system development. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #232 Theory analogy - 1 door leads to thousands. Yes there are many subjects discussed in my theory. This is perhaps due to the fact that unlike most science, I'm going from the general to the specific. Also this is a very big theory that covers all life - the proof must cover all life. Then too once I had the key to life (in my opinion anyway) that life was energy moderation - then that opened the main door and inside were 1,000 more doors - each with an answer that now seemed clear. It is a big sprawling mess - yes, but one that is zeroing in on the truth much like focusing a camera lens in on a subject. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #233 Temperature and energy moderation. Those familiar with my theory may be confused by the almost interchangeable use of temperature - high or low, and energy moderation - high or low. It is difficult for me to sort out as well. I tend to think that energy moderation is an outgrowth of temperature moderation (see my theory for more) One main aspect of my theory is that all organisms slow down in low energy and become active in high - up to a point - then it becomes excessive and dangerous. This quote supports that idea with temperature too: "...many chemical reactions, including those important to living things, work better at certain temperatures. And essential life functions can be carried out smoothly and efficiently when an animal's internal body temperature is within its preferred 'operating range.' When the body temperature is too low, animals slow down or become immobile (This is why ectotherms such as snakes and frogs are easier to catch in the early morning , before they have had a chance to warm up. It is also the reason that such animals necessarily enter a dormant state during cold winters) When the body temperature is too high, body systems are stressed and fail to function properly. Thus it is not surprising that many techniques of temperature control have appeared in vertebrates" Biology - Miller, Levine Here's a specific ex. "A horned lizard is an ectotherm that regulates its body temperature in an unusual way. When its body temperature is low, it changes color to a heat absorbing dark brown. When its body temperature is high, it changes to a heat reflecting light brown." (ibid.) SUPPORT DOCUMENT #234 Chemical reactions and temperature. "Temperature affects the rate of chemical reaction. ... As a general rule the speed at which chemical reactions take place doubles with every 10 C rise in temperature. This is true not only for reactions in the test tube but also, within limits, for reactions in living things." Cell Biology - Kimball These few sentences pack a mouthful of meaning. If an organism can evolve to a higher body temperature (birds, mammals) then all its chemical reactions can speed up. Think of all the advantages: nerves could respond faster, muscles could build faster, wounds could heal faster, food could be processed into fuel and utilized faster, faster growth, more production of eggs, or sperm, faster response to adverse conditions, etc. etc. AND With an organism that can sustain a specific body temperature , then it can sustain the temperature at which its chemical reactions function at their optimum level. (A minor side note - fever raises the body temperature to fight infection. Yet it is also probable that the fever raises the body temperature to speed up chemical reactions - at least for that emergency, then its back to the normal temperature.) So now when we suggest that birds and mammals have, an advantage in keeping their bodies in moderate temperature in all kinds of (usually) land climates , and that the mother is a constant temp. incubating machine, we may also add another perhaps equally important reason - that birds and mammals have a warm body temperature to speed up chemical reactions. Yet finally we should note the obvious constraints - that at some point the temperature is too high and becomes a liability not an asset. Again, IMO, we see energy/heat as the key to all life. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #335 Water and temperature. "(An) important property of water is the slowness with which it changes temperature or changes from solid to liquid to gas, as heat is added. It takes more heat to accomplish these changes with water than with almost any other substance known...this property of water is extremely important to life. It means that the temperature of living organisms changes relatively slowly despite sudden temperature changes in the environment." Cell Biology - Kimball It also suggests to me that this slow changing environment was a key element in first life. Had the environment been such that first life chemicals had been subjected to cycles of extreme heat, then extreme cold; I doubt that life could have begun. The water acted like a first incubator in allowing the primordial soup to build up complexity in a reasonably constant environmental temperature. ALSO I have suggested, in my theory, that when life moved on to land it faced some of its greatest challenges - "Freshwater and marine organisms are subject to a far smaller range of temperatures than land-living animals of the same region. Even land-living animals benefit from the temperature-moderating effect of nearby bodies of water. The ocean's slow absorption of heat in the summer and slow release of heat in the winter tend to reduce violent extremes of temperature in coastal regions." Cell Biology - Kimball This also suggests that life probably did NOT start at thermal vents due to the fact that the water near the vent would be too hot, and the water farther away from the vent too cold- we could call it the 'Goldilocks problem'. The water needed to be more temperature similar, throughout to produce life. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #236 Land ho. Plants adopt to land I have suggested as a thread in my theory that adapting to land was perhaps the most difficult transistion that any organism made (excluding cataclysmic meterorites) Here are some of the struggles plants faced: All cells need a constant supply of water. For this reason land plants must obtain water and deliver it to all of their cells; even those cells that grow above ground in dry air... they must protect that water against loss by evaporation to the atmosphere. The parts of the plant that make food for the plant mus be exposed to as much sunlight as possible. ..Land plants need rigid supports to hold their leaves up to the sun in ways that expose the leaves to sunlight. Land plants take up water and nutrients in roots but make food in leaves. To supply all cells with the necessities of life land plants must transport water and nutrients upward and the products of photosynthesis downward. Land plants must exchange water and carbon dioxide with the environment without losing too much water in the process. Fully terrestrial plants must be able to reproduce in environments that lack standing water in which the sperm can swim. In many terrestrial situations, the zygotes and young embryos of land plants are in danger of drying out. (All the above from Biology - Miller, Levine) All these struggles for both plants and animals have generally led to more complexity in land organisms than in water organisms. It also suggests to me that a trial and error period of first organisms to attempt land (much like the trial and error of the Cambrian) may possibly have led to some aspects of the C Value Paradox - which is generally higher in amphibians and flowering plants. Though I take into account that this may be caused by numerous other factors too, and that many species prove and many disprove the rule. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #237 Response to my 'brain rule' idea (see #196) lenny wrote: > > The question arises is the brain in whales > > proportionally bigger and more complex than it is in humans. That would > > be better to compare. > > In *the Mammalian Radiations* (1981, University of Chicago Press), J.F. > Eisenberg presents a table of encephalization quotients for selected mammals > (in Appendix 6), where encephalization quotient is calculated with Jerison's > definition (the ratio between the observed brain weight and the expected > brain weight for a defined body weight). The quotient for humans is > 7.33-7.69; harbor porpoise is 4.9; the quotient for baleen whales is quite > low (0.137-0.233 for B. musculus, the blue whale), probably due to seasonal > fattening phenomenon. Eisenberg makes some interestin connections between > encephalization quotient and both life-history and the number of modalities > of sensory input. Thanks for that information. I thought that that was the case. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #238 On 5-strikes-of-a-chemical-wand theories of first life. Yet all this, to me, is the "5 strikes of a chemical wand' type theory of first life. What I mean is when a theory suggests that this chemical reaction magically led to the next chemical reaction, and so forth 4 or 5 or ? many times and poof... life popped out of that single string of events - then continued to endless complexity from that single 'poof' moment.... Even without any of the endless support for energy as the key to life (see my txt files and more new postings) it would make no sense. The world is energy and matter. If it ain't matter then its energy. For life to start and evolve it must have had a strong force behind it - not a magical wand of assorted 1 time chemical reactions. Common sense says that, and every fact in nature confirms it. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #239 Chlamydomonas compared with humans The 4 options of energy moderation (Hendricks Health Theory) are most clearly developed in mammals. This passage compares an unicellular Chlamydomonas with humans. It is from Cell Biology, J. Kimball. Notes in ( ..) from me. "Chlamydomonas is almost entirely at the mercy of its environment. About its only means for coping with any adverse change in its environment is to swim away from it (option 4 - excrete out or separate from) or form a resting stage until such time as conditions improve, (option 1 and 3 - slow down in low energy. Yet also the chlamydomonas has some other ways to protect itself - its cell membrane , option 2 ; and its ability to reproduce - divide its volume in half, and/or excrete out half as waste, option 4) Many changes in its environmental conditions e.g., temperature or chemical changes in the water, can cause its death. Thus the habitat of Chlamydomonas is a very narrow one and it is at the mercy of it (yet remember it lives in the more hospitable water environment than land living organisms) Man on the other hand, can live successfully in a great variety of habitats. When conditions change, he is usually able to cope successfully with them. Changes in temperature, diet, etc., have remarkably little effect upon the individual cells of which his body is composed. It is important to understand that the ability to moderate energy has evolved. And as life faces more struggles (example the move on to land that led to so many evolutionary strategies to survive) it becomes more complex as an energy moderator. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #240 The cell environment Just as 4 options of energy moderation effect a single celled organism, or a multi-cell organism, it also effects the environment of interior cells in a multi cell organism. "In considering the cellular environment of more complex plants and animals, one must consider also the environment of the cells that are not close to the exterior of the organism. These deep lying inner cells are also in contact with liquid. Sap in plants, the blood of insects, and lymph in man are examples of fluids that bathe the inner cells of higher organisms.... Because these fluids are outside the cells, we will refer to them as the extracellular fluid or ECF. For the living cells of our body, the ECF IS the environment. To distinguish between the external environment of our bodies , air, and the actual environment of our cells, the French physiologist Claude Bernard a century ago referred to the latter as the internal environment. He studied its properties carefully and found them to be remarkably stable. This is particularly true of the most complex of the multicellular organisms, the birds and mammals. Whether placed in warm locations or cold, whether recently fed or starved, no matter what kind of food taken in the diet, he found that the composition of the ECF remains relatively unchanged. In a real sense, the most adaptable of our higher animals actually are made of cells whose environment, the ECF, remains unchanged despite wide fluctuations in the eternal environment. Bernard was able to discover several mechanisms by which the mammalian body is able to maintain this constancy of its internal environment. He was so struck by these findings that he wrote: "The constancy of the internal environment is the condition of a free and independent life.' Today we use the term homeostasis to describe this constancy of the ECF. In the years since Bernard's discoveries, physiologists have studied the internal environment of other kinds of animals and found that they, too, have mechanisms for maintaining a stable ECF. The less complex animals are, however, less capable in this respect, and this may well account for the more restricted lives that they live" Cell Biology - J. Kimball This passage shows yet another example of energy moderation - this time in the environment of the cell. SUPPORT DOCUMENT #241 Environment Cellular Fluid - ECP "Another important characteristic of the ECF (environment cellular fluid) is its temperature. Microorganisms have no control over the temperature of their ECF. It is simply a function of the climate conditions around them. This is generally true of plants, invertebrate animals, and the so-called cold-blooded vertebrates: the fishes, amphibians, and reptiles. In some of these cases, however, the organisms have a certain degree of control over the temperature of their ECF..." (The quote goes on to list bees fanning their wings to cool off a too hot beehive, goldfish swimming to water at a more suitable temperature, lizards basking in the sun or panting. I would suggest that any movement of any organism is a type of energy moderation, as is replication, as is the most basic of all - slowing down in low energy, and becoming more active in high. Yet the quote makes it clear that energy moderation of the cellular environment is something that evolved to its highest complexity in birds and mammals) "It is among the birds and mammals, however, that we find the strictest control over the temperature of the ECF. Birds and mammals are able to maintain the temperature of their ECF within very narrow limits despite wide fluctuations in the temperature of the surrounding air. For this reason, they are often called 'warm-blooded', or better, homeothermic. A healthy human is capable of maintaining the temperature of his ECF within a degree or so of 37.5 C at rest or during violent exercise, in warm surroundings or cold." both quotes from Cell Biology, Kimball *** Salmons fly ducks swim things change