Another Hit for the Cassiopaeans - DNA

[Biomiast]

Hi bngenoh,

I am not sure how microDNA ties with the diet and what are the implications, but as for microRNA, every organism starting from C. elegans and upper has their own microRNA. These are not epigenetic modifications, they are what is called post transcriptional modification where a gene is expressed and exists in messenger RNA form, then microRNAs degrade this gene to stop formation of protein. While it is true that plants have microRNAs, their effect is not studied deeply, humans have their own microRNAs which cause more important changes in terms of gene expression.

While microRNAs and post-transcriptional modification means a control on the mRNA of expressed gene, epigenetics prevent the expression of gene from the start, they are two different mechanisms. Yet, there could be lots of interactions between these two mechanism and how they relate to the diet, but plant microRNAs may not have roles as strong as we think.

Just my two cents, fwiw.

[bngenoh]

Hi SeekinTruth, as to this:

Just a note. Plants AND animals are 2D -- at least that's my general understanding. 1D is generally "below the level of consciousness," i.e. inanimate matter where ONLY mechanical laws apply.

There is this:

A: Yes. Beings live absolutely everywhere in one realm or another.

Q: (L) Are the beings who live on the planet Venus aware of us on the planet Earth?
A: Yes.

Q: (L) Are there beings also living on Mars?
A: Yes.

Q: (L) Are they aware of us?
A: Yes.

Q: (L) Are the beings on all the other planets in our solar system aware of us here, on planet Earth?
A: Yes, because they are all of higher density.

Q: (L) Why is it that the Earth seems to be the lower density planet and we seem to be kind of left out in the cold, so to speak. They know of us, but we can't perceive them. Why is this? Why are we singled out for this? (D) Was earth created after all the others?
A: NO, no, no.

Q: (T) Are they interacting with us?
A: Okay, stop, whoa! A review session follows: Who is 1st density?

Q: (L) Rocks and minerals, right?
A: And?

Q: (L) Plants?
A:Yes. Now, what awareness do you suppose they have of you?

Q: (L) What awareness do rocks and plants have of US?! Oh, dear God! (V) That's an interesting way to put it. An excellent example. (T) When we ask why higher beings have awareness of us but we are not aware of them, we need to ask what awareness beings lower than us have of us. (J) Obviously no more than we have of 4th density. (T) But when you play music to a plant, it has some awareness because it makes it grow better. (L) But music is not a being. (T) It's an energy wave. (J) Wait a minute... what they are saying is: they have no more awareness of us than we, as 3rd density beings, have of 4th density beings. (T) Does this mean that they interact with us the way we interact with plants?
A: Who is "on" 2nd level.

Q: (L) Animals. (T) Insects, lower life forms.
A: Now, think carefully, what level of awareness, and more importantly, understanding, do they have of you?

问:(L)好吧,我猜他们都知道我们在一些way, but they don't understand us... (T) Some do at some point... (T) They understand us to a certain extent... (Frank) But their understanding is entirely different from our understanding of them. In other words, they see these big hulking beings, but they don't know what's going on. (L) Was Ouspensky's explanation of how animals perceive humans very close to the truth?
A: Close. Now, what about 1st level understanding and perception of 2nd level?

问:(L)好吧,1日密度、矿物质和植物……now rocks and minerals combine with plants through growing actions, water dissolution, erosion, and so on, they have a real limited existence. And what happens is that mostly animals come along and eat them. (Frank) Bees pollinate flowers. (L) Different kinds of animals live in trees. (T) Some animals live in the ground and in caves. (T) So, rocks and minerals and plants have a really limited understanding of the animals above them which interact with them in various ways.
A: Yes, and you have a limited understanding of the densities above you.

Q: (L) Well, that is still begging the question, my question was... (T) As an example, today we all experienced something we call thunder, but we were all aware that it was something more. Something happened in 4th density that we experienced in a certain way, and it was a limited understanding of that level.
A: Laura, unblock, do rocks and plants "see" you?

Hi Biomast:

Hi bngenoh,

I am not sure how microDNA ties with the diet and what are the implications, but as for microRNA, every organism starting from C. elegans and upper has their own microRNA. These are not epigenetic modifications, they are what is called post transcriptional modification where a gene is expressed and exists in messenger RNA form, then microRNAs degrade this gene to stop formation of protein. While it is true that plants have microRNAs, their effect is not studied deeply, humans have their own microRNAs whichcause more important changes in terms of gene expression.

While microRNAs and post-transcriptional modification means a control on the mRNA of expressed gene, epigenetics prevent the expression of gene from the start,they are two different mechanisms. Yet, there could be lots of interactions between these two mechanism and how they relate to the diet, but plant microRNAs may not have roles as strong as we think.

Just my two cents, fwiw.

Agreed, Biomast, you have a deeper understanding of genetics than i at the moment, what you have said expands upon my knowledge, thanks.

[SeekinTruth]

Yes, I'm aware of that session transcript, bngenoh. But there was a discussion of this very issue not so long ago, I believe the thread was mainly about 5th density. I thought that some life forms were 1D/2D -- like single cell organisms, etc. It was stated that the cell is probably the first "entity" that's 2D, etc.

I'm pretty sure that there are other references in several places by the C's about 1D being below any consciousness / awareness that can be recognized by us -- non-biological entities, i.e. inanimate matter. At least as far as I remember, there's more than one session where that's stated. Also you can search for it in the transcripts and look it up in the Cass Glossary.

[bngenoh]

Yes, I'm aware of that session transcript, bngenoh. But there was a discussion of this very issue not so long ago, I believe the thread was mainly about 5th density. I thought that some life forms were 1D/2D -- like single cell organisms, etc. It was stated that the cell is probably the first "entity" that's 2D, etc.

I'm pretty sure that there are other references in several places by the C's about 1D being below any consciousness / awareness that can be recognized by us -- non-biological entities, i.e. inanimate matter. At least as far as I remember, there's more than one session where that's stated. Also you can search for it in the transcripts and look it up in the Cass Glossary.

You are right SeekinTruth,

The cass glossary has 1st density as the level of inanimate matter, but perhaps plants are the most advanced manifestation that is sill at 1st density, as they do not have the moving center.

[anart]

The cass glossary has 1st density as the level of inanimate matter, but perhaps plants are the most advanced manifestation that is sill at 1st density, as they do not have the moving center.

How do you know they do not have some sort of 'moving center'? Most plants move their leaves toward the nearest light source, after all. Just a question since you seem so sure - (I don't have a definitive answer...)

[SeekinTruth]

It may be that genetics / DNA is the interface for soul / consciousness and the physical body. There's intelligence / consciousness / information that organizes and animates living things. We and all living things are made from the same matter as inanimate matter in this physical realm. So it would seem that some matter comes to life because of this interface with consciousness.

Inanimate matter has the most order of laws it's subject to and is the most mechanical. It only has some interaction with beings that have / can access higher consciousness than non-living things -- can have some quantum effects, etc. In Fourth Way terms, everything is alive and part of a whole living organism -- The Macro Cosmos containing all cosmoses. So it's hard to really get these things very precisely defined, but it's still easier than defining (and describing / understanding) densities above our own.

All this is also related to what Gurdjieff referred to as "vivifyingness." Living things defy some laws of physics -- they generate a sort of "negative entropy." Energy is transferred whether in an STO way or STS (eating other living things / consciousnesses). So access to greater and greater consciousness leading to more and more awareness and thus free will is what separates densities, right?

Add: just saw anart's reply. Yeah and there are plants that move very visibly and some are even carnivorous, e.g. Venus Flytrap, etc.

[mkrnhr]

Maybe from a rather simplistic intellectual viewpoint, it can be seen that both plants and animals live in a dualistic world (good/bad, useful/useless, friend/enemy, etc.), which corresponds to the lessons of the material world. On the other hand, third density beings have the capacity (at least in potential) to consider the law of three, transcend determinism, developping somehow freewill (soul) through self-awareness (being outside the dualistic realm of the reactive machine). OSIT

[SeekinTruth]

Maybe from a rather simplistic intellectual viewpoint, it can be seen that both plants and animals live in a dualistic world (good/bad, useful/useless, friend/enemy, etc.), which corresponds to the lessons of the material world. On the other hand, third density beings have the capacity (at least in potential) to consider the law of three, transcend determinism, developping somehow freewill (soul) through self-awareness (being outside the dualistic realm of the reactive machine). OSIT

Yeah, that's a good way to think of it. The Law of Three is a higher Law, but we are struggling with it here on 3D STS. I guess that's a major part of our lessons and growth: to be able to apply the Law of Three in all circumstances.

[bngenoh]

How do you know they do not have some sort of 'moving center'? Most plants move their leaves toward the nearest light source, after all.Just a question since you seem so sure- (I don't have a definitive answer...)

Well, i don't for certain, gotta watch that damned haughtiness, :D but the growth and development of plants is determined largely by the mechanical laws as i understand them atm. Plants moving their leaves towards the nearest light source is also purely mechanical, since the dominant factor is the direction of greatest photon concentration osit.

Inanimate matter has the most order of laws it's subject to and is the most mechanical. It only has some interaction with beings that have / can access higher consciousness than non-living things -- can have some quantum effects, etc. In Fourth Way terms, everything is alive and part of a whole living organism -- The Macro Cosmos containing all cosmoses.So it's hard to really get these things very precisely defined, but it's still easier than defining (and describing / understanding) densities above our own.

Yeah way easier.

Add: just saw anart's reply.Yeah and there are plants that move very visibly and some are even carnivorous, e.g. Venus Flytrap, etc.

The movement of the Venus fly trap in your example is a purely mechanical:

The Venus Flytrap (also Venus's Flytrap or Venus' Flytrap), Dionaea muscipula, is a carnivorous plant that catches and digests animal prey—mostly insects and arachnids. Its trapping structure is formed by the terminal portion of each of the plant's leaves and is triggered by tiny hairs on their inner surfaces. When an insect or spider crawling along the leaves contacts a hair, the trap closes if a different hair is contacted within twenty seconds of the first strike. The requirement of redundant triggering in this mechanism serves as a safeguard against a waste of energy in trapping objects with no nutritional value.

A moving center at least in so far as i understand it is a property which gives the creatures who posses it, the ability for more complex movement, than the growth cycle of plants, and the bear like mechanism of the Venus fly trap. But, i really don't know for certain, thanks guys and gals for pointing out my ignorance, i definitely needed it.

Maybe from a rather simplistic intellectual viewpoint, it can be seen that both plants and animals live in a dualistic world (good/bad, useful/useless, friend/enemy, etc.), which corresponds to the lessons of the material world.On the other hand, third density beings have the capacity (at least in potential) to consider the law of three, transcend determinism, developing somehow freewill (soul) through self-awareness (being outside the dualistic realm of the reactive machine).OSIT

Yes, makes sense

[anart]

Plants moving their leaves towards the nearest light source is also purely mechanical

The movement of the Venus fly trap in your example is a purely mechanical

bhgenoh, why do you think a motor center isn't completely mechanical? You keep saying that as if all motor centers aren't completely mechanical...

But, i really don't know for certain, thanks guys and gals for pointing out my ignorance, i definitely needed it.

这部分似乎与你其他的地方post where you're explaining that a motor center can only be for what you define as 'complex' movement. Sometimes it really is okay to just say, "I don't know".

[bngenoh]

Plants moving their leaves towards the nearest light source is also purely mechanical

The movement of the Venus fly trap in your example is a purely mechanical

bhgenoh,why do you think a motor center isn't completely mechanical? You keep saying that as if all motor centers aren't completely mechanical...

But, i really don't know for certain, thanks guys and gals for pointing out my ignorance, i definitely needed it.

这部分似乎与你其他的地方post where you're explaining that a motor center can only be for what you define as 'complex' movement. Sometimes it really is okay to just say, "I don't know".

oops anart, there were a lot of associations going on when i was putting them into words, i realize that the complex movement bit was taken from Daniel Wolpert's theory that the brain evolved to control complex movement. "I" was about to edit it, but you responded before i had the chance, i usually sit in front of the screen and prun the associations before posting. So yes the moving center is likely to be also completely mechanical, osit.