Summary: Emmy Noethe’s theorems were developed in the early 1900’s. Richard Feynman inadvertently or purposefully alluded to them as examples of human idiocy.
Discover Magazine resurrected the examples of human idiocy in a 2017 article. For comparison, Choi et al., (2017) support the claims that intercellular and interkingdom communication is energy-dependent and controlled by the metabolism of food energy to pheromones.
It is obvious that pheromones biophysically constrain the virus-driven degradation of messenger RNA. That fact links everything currently known about RNA-mediated cell type differentiation to human love in the context of established links from quantum physics to quantum souls. It may surprise some people to know that the virus-driven evolution of love is the antithetical to the food energy-dependent physiology of pheromone-controlled reproduction in all living genera. Indeed, some people may realize that the virus-driven evolution of anything is based upon ridiculous theories that were invented by Emmy Noethe.
Natural selection links odors and the food energy from what organisms eat to the de novo creation of microRNAs. The creation of microRNAs is linked to biophysically constrained energy-dependent codon optimality.
Odor and food energy-dependent changes in microRNAs link hydrogen-atom transfer in DNA base pairs in solution from the creation of amino acids to the ability to sense energy and mass in the context of the space-time continuum. The sense of smell in bacteria has been linked to our food energy-dependent visual perception of the space-time continuum.
A board game taking place inside a human cell! Players compete to build enzymes, hormones and receptors and fend off attacking Viruses!
Taken together, the facts about olfaction link the sense of smell in bacteria from quorum sensing to our visual perception of mass and energy in the context of the space-time continuum. It is no trouble for a serious scientist to consistently link quantum physics from food energy to the creation of quantum souls via changes in the microRNA/messenger RNA balance and the pheromone-controlled physiology of reproduction.
Richard Feynman inadvertently did that when he claimed that the different measures for units of energy used by other theoretical physicists were examples of human idiocy.
See for comparison: The Universe According to Emmy Noethe (Discover Magazine, 2017)
…energy may not be conserved “locally” — that is, in an arbitrarily small patch of space — but everything works out when the space is sufficiently large. That was one of two theorems she proved that year in Göttingen, Germany. The other theorem, which would ultimately have a far greater impact, uncovered an intimate link between conservation laws (such as the conservation of energy) and the symmetries of nature, a connection that physicists have exploited ever since. Today, our current grasp of the physical world, from subatomic particles to black holes, draws heavily upon this theorem, now known simply as Noether’s theorem.
Emmy Noethe’s so-called theorems, which she developed in the early 1900’s, attempted to explain how the concept of entropy might not appear to defy everything known to serious scientists about the biophysically constrained energy-dependent physiology of pheromone-controlled reproduction, which links feedback loops from odors and pheromones to the creation of all energy-dependent biodiversity on Earth.
Simply put, more than 100 years ago Emmy Noethe’s theorems suggested that all representations of energy-dependent biologically-based cause and effect are wrong. For a current representation of what is known, see: Feedback loops link odor and pheromone signaling with reproduction.
The physiology of pheromone-controlled reproduction links what organisms eat to all energy-dependent biodiversity via the de novo creation of genes and gene activation that is biophysically constrained by the metabolism of food to pheromones which control the physiology of reproduction in all living genera.
See also: AMP-enabled FLT3-ITD detection
Independent and bidirectional probes are specifically optimized to detect internal tandem duplications (ITDs) of all sizes. The reads originating from these probes are bioinformatically assembled by Archer Analysis using a de novo assembler to form longer consensus sequences that span the ITD. These longer sequences are then aligned to the reference genome to identify the presence of even very large ITDs (> 250bp).a
a Only available on Illumina® instruments
Use of a so-called “de novo assembler” eliminates any consideration of energy as information that must be used in the context of bioinformatics and the identify of reference genomes that are used to identify pathological gene variants that arise in the context of energy-dependent de novo gene creation. The link from Emmy Noethe’s theorems to the pseudoscientific nonsense about the “de novo assembler” may not be clear without examination of facts about the physiology of reproduction.
For example, see: Physiology is rocking the foundations of evolutionary biology
Perhaps the elegant mathematics and the extraordinary reputation of the scientists involved blinded us to what now seems obvious: the organism should never have been relegated to the role of mere carrier of its genes.
For information on Emmy Noethe’s reputation and her elegant mathematics, see:
She invented a theorem that united with magisterial concision two conceptual pillars of physics: symmetry in nature and the universal laws of conservation.
Noether’s brilliance was obvious to all who worked with her, and her male mentors repeatedly took up her cause…
Silk accused these theorists of “moving the goalposts” of science and blurring the line between physics and pseudoscience. “The imprimatur of science should be awarded only to a theory that is testable,” Ellis and Silk wrote, thereby disqualifying most of the leading theories of the past 40 years. “Only then can we defend science from attack.”
See for comparison:
This atoms to ecosystems model of ecological adaptations links nutrient-dependent epigenetic effects on base pairs and amino acid substitutions to pheromone-controlled changes in the microRNA / messenger RNA balance and chromosomal rearrangements. The nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled changes are required for the thermodynamic regulation of intracellular signaling, which enables biophysically constrained nutrient-dependent protein folding; experience-dependent receptor-mediated behaviors, and organism-level thermoregulation in ever-changing ecological niches and social niches. Nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled ecological, social, neurogenic and socio-cognitive niche construction are manifested in increasing organismal complexity in species from microbes to man. Species diversity is a biologically-based nutrient-dependent morphological fact and species-specific pheromones control the physiology of reproduction. The reciprocal relationships of species-typical nutrient-dependent morphological and behavioral diversity are enabled by pheromone-controlled reproduction. Ecological variations and biophysically constrained natural selection of nutrients cause the behaviors that enable ecological adaptations. Species diversity is ecologically validated proof-of-concept. Ideas from population genetics, which exclude ecological factors, are integrated with an experimental evidence-based approach that establishes what is currently known. This is known: Olfactory/pheromonal input links food odors and social odors from the epigenetic landscape to the physical landscape of DNA in the organized genomes of species from microbes to man during their development.
From my publications alert: What’s new for ‘microRNA’ in PubMed on July 26, 2017
MicroRNAs are small non-coding RNAs that bind to the 3′-untranslated region of target mRNAs and have transcriptional or translational inhibitory function in eukaryotes. Before microRNAs were widely known, bacterial non-coding small RNAs around 50-200 nt in length were discovered whose mechanism of action resembled that of microRNAs. Recently, RNAs that are of similar size to or smaller than microRNAs have been discovered in bacteria and indeed, this class of small RNAs have been found throughout all domains of life. Moreover, recent findings suggest that these tiny RNAs can be released via extracellular vesicles (such as exosomes in eukaryotes and outer membrane vesicles in bacteria), which in turn heralds a new field of research, interkingdom communication. This review discusses two similar classes of small RNAs in evolutionarily distinct eukaryotes and bacteria. In addition to their biogenesis and regulation, we discuss small RNA vehicles and their secretion. Impact statement The possible endogenous functions of small RNAs such as regulatory small RNAs in bacteria and microRNAs in eukaryotes have been extensively studied since they were first discovered. However, their powerful functions should not be seen as limited to their cells of origin. Recently, several papers have demonstrated that small RNAs function as signaling molecules between cells. This is possible because small RNAs can be shuttled around after being incorporated into environmentally protective extracellular vesicles. It is now clearly plausible that secreted small RNAs can regulate other types of cells through biofluids. Given their “common molecule” status, the role of small RNAs in mediating bacteria-human crosstalk is an emerging and competitive area of genetic research. This review provides insight into the function of small RNAs in intercellular and even interkingdom communication.
See also:Impact statement
The possible endogenous functions of small RNAs such as regulatory small RNAs in bacteria and microRNAs in eukaryotes have been extensively studied since they were first discovered. However, their powerful functions should not be seen as limited to their cells of origin. Recently, several papers have demonstrated that small RNAs function as signaling molecules between cells. This is possible because small RNAs can be shuttled around after being incorporated into environmentally protective extracellular vesicles. It is now clearly plausible that secreted small RNAs can regulate other types of cells through biofluids. Given their “common molecule” status, the role of small RNAs in mediating bacteria-human crosstalk is an emerging and competitive area of genetic research. This review provides insight into the function of small RNAs in intercellular and even interkingdom communication.
As indicated in my 2014 invited review of nutritional epigenetics, which was returned without review, endogenous functions of regulatory RNAs such as small RNAs in bacteria and microRNAs in eukaryotes have been extensively detailed in the context of biophysically constrained biologically-based cause and effect. These authors attest to the fact that the structure and function of bacterial small RNAs and eukaryotic microRNAs are not limited to their food energy-dependent de novo creation in their cells of origin.
The fact that small RNA and micro-RNA-mediated cell type differentiation occurs in the context of hydrogen-atom transfer in DNA base pairs in solution links the information in this review to claims that small RNAs in seawater solutions and microRNAs in blood link “common molecule” status to “… the function of small RNAs in intercellular and even interkingdom communication.” The fact that intercellular and interkingdom communication is energy-dependent and controlled by the metabolism of food energy to pheromones that biophysically constrain the virus-driven degradation of messenger RNA, links everything currently known about cell type differentiation from quantum physics to quantum souls via the food energy-dependent physiology of reproduction in all living genera.
See also: Choi JW[Author] microRNA
For comparison: @36:18 Larry Young explains the virus-driven evolution of love as if serious scientists had learned nothing about receptor-mediated behaviors.