Speaker 1: Welcome to the guys. I you podcast. I am your host, Trevor.
Speaker 1: How is everybody doing out there? It's Monday morning? Is
Speaker 1: there anything worse? Not on my Mondays? Mondays are fine.
Speaker 1: But there was a time in my life and I'd
Speaker 1: have to get up at you know, five am, to
Speaker 1: get in my Chrysler Seabring and drive two and a
Speaker 1: half hours to some office in San Diego. Or I'd
Speaker 1: have to go fly to San Francisco to literally spend
Speaker 1: my entire day figuring how to extract more dollars from
Speaker 1: Medicare benefit sis. God, corporate healthcare.
Speaker 2: What a mess. Hallelujah.
Speaker 1: I'm not doing that anymore. I'm dealing with the new,
Speaker 1: a brave, the brave new world of academia. Hanging in there,
Speaker 1: hanging in there. I hope you guys are hanging in there.
Speaker 1: And your jobs. I think every job has like some
Speaker 1: interesting political insight. You know, I'd be curious what you
Speaker 1: guys do.
Speaker 2: Shoot me an.
Speaker 1: Email, tell me the drama, tell me what's going on
Speaker 1: at your work. I'm very curious what you all do,
Speaker 1: you listeners. I suspect a lot of you probably drive
Speaker 1: a lot, or maybe work somewhere where you can have
Speaker 1: headphones in that that right there. Honestly, that's a blessing
Speaker 1: if you work somewhere where you can have headphones in.
Speaker 1: If you have my personality, some people don't like listening
Speaker 1: to stuff. Some people need social interaction. Not me. The
Speaker 1: cubicle is sort of often shown as the symbol of
Speaker 1: like loneliness and despair, but I disagree. Man, stick me
Speaker 1: in a cubicle. I got headphones. I've got a rectangle
Speaker 1: in my pocket where I can listen to anything.
Speaker 2: Oh my gosh.
Speaker 1: Now, if I need to meet a certain productivity expectation,
Speaker 1: that takes some of the fun out of it. But anyway,
Speaker 1: I hope you guys are doing good. I've got kind
Speaker 1: of a weird episode for you tonight or today. Maybe
Speaker 1: weird is the wrong word, but I just I came
Speaker 1: across something. It's an old, very old article on the
Speaker 1: centurial as the eye of the cell. Now, this came
Speaker 1: up in the conversation with Michael Weist. I feel like
Speaker 1: I maybe vaguely heard this but forgot about it. It's
Speaker 1: super old research. It's like forty year old research at
Speaker 1: this point. But I found an article in a New
Speaker 1: science tists that is let's see eight plus twenty six,
Speaker 1: what is that? Thirty four years old? And I don't
Speaker 1: know how much more work has been done with this,
Speaker 1: if any. I mean, maybe there's just really not much
Speaker 1: more we can do. But it's about how the centrial
Speaker 1: might act as the eye of the cell, which I
Speaker 1: find that fascinating given what the central is. So first
Speaker 1: let's back up and explain it a little bit. So
Speaker 1: within every cell, and I think it is literally every cell,
Speaker 1: maybe not like a red blood cell or some cell
Speaker 1: that will no longer divide, just so you know. You know,
Speaker 1: red blood cells are essentially non living. You know, they're
Speaker 1: just bags of hemoglobin. They were living at one point
Speaker 1: they differentiated from something called a hematopoiitic stem cell. They
Speaker 1: became a reticulo site. But eventually everything goes away. No nucleus,
Speaker 1: no mitochondria, I don't believe, basically, nothing, just hemoglobin, and
Speaker 1: they only because for that reason they die fairly quickly
Speaker 1: in circulation and they're replaced. But with the exception of
Speaker 1: cells like that, basically everything has what's called a centrisme,
Speaker 1: and a centrisme exists at about the middle of the
Speaker 1: cell by the nucleus. Generally and every cell has it,
Speaker 1: and it's fascinating, like how important must this structure be
Speaker 1: that all cells have it. It's highly evolutionary can conserve.
Speaker 1: So it's not just human cells, it's all animal cells,
Speaker 1: all plant cells, all protozoa, all bacteria, I believe, basically everything.
Speaker 2: But viruses.
Speaker 1: Has a centrisme, which is kind of interesting in the
Speaker 1: context of like what is life? You know, viruses are
Speaker 1: sort of considered like maybe they're alive, maybe they're not.
Speaker 1: They sort of occupy this region between living and dead,
Speaker 1: and the fact that they don't have a centrosome kind
Speaker 1: of leads me to think, like maybe that is something.
Speaker 1: There's something critical there anyway, So what do they do well?
Speaker 1: A centrisome is made up of two structures called centrials,
Speaker 1: and this is interesting because the structure of the centrial,
Speaker 1: they're like two little barrels that always lie at right
Speaker 1: angles to one another. You can just google, you know,
Speaker 1: centrosome or centrioles. They are these two barrels that lie
Speaker 1: at right angles to each other, and they're composed of
Speaker 1: a triplet of triplets. This is a term that I'm
Speaker 1: using on purpose because this is becoming like a popular
Speaker 1: sort of like Tesla esque way of describing these patterns
Speaker 1: we see in biology the brain way, all these things
Speaker 1: are like triplets of triplets. There's a lot of numerology.
Speaker 1: It's not really nume. I think numerology is ridiculous, and
Speaker 1: anytime I see numerology, I get skeptical. But I'm trying
Speaker 1: to be more open minded. So anyway, so you see
Speaker 1: these triplets of a triplet and it is it's nine.
Speaker 1: Hold on one second, it's nine. What's please just google
Speaker 1: google centurial triplets or something. And there's these little tubulent
Speaker 1: subunits and there's like three of them, and then there's
Speaker 1: nine sets of three. So it's like a triplet of
Speaker 1: a triplet triplet. And so it's this interesting little structure,
Speaker 1: and you'll find that we like don't really know what
Speaker 1: it does or why it's shaped that way. We know
Speaker 1: that the microtubule sort of radiate out from the centrisome
Speaker 1: so that has something important to do with the microtubules,
Speaker 1: which we talk a lot about here. And another interesting
Speaker 1: thing about the centrosome, which is this thing that has
Speaker 1: two centrioles in it, is that it's like the first
Speaker 1: thing to duplicate during cellular division. So you have this cell,
Speaker 1: the DNA duplicates, and then before the nucleus dissolves so
Speaker 1: that the chromosomes can be separated, you get a new centrosome.
Speaker 1: And the reason for this is an arbitrary The centrosome
Speaker 1: basically like runs the process of mitosis. So you duplicate
Speaker 1: the centrosome and then these microtubules grow out from it,
Speaker 1: called kineticore microtubules, and they connect to this little structure
Speaker 1: I believe it's what is it called the centro mirror.
Speaker 1: There's this little protein structure that binds the sister chromatids together.
Speaker 1: If you've ever seen a chromosome, most likely what you're
Speaker 1: looking at is a double like a duplicated chromosome, it
Speaker 1: will look like an X. And so these are actually
Speaker 1: two identical copies of the same chromatid that are bound
Speaker 1: together by this thing called a centromere, this protein complex.
Speaker 1: And you you know, it's pretty important to keep the
Speaker 1: DNA organized right because you want each new daughter cell
Speaker 1: to have an exact copy of the genome. And so
Speaker 1: each little X is two copies bound together and a
Speaker 1: kineto coore from each chromosome.
Speaker 2: Uh chromos o. My, this gets crazy.
Speaker 1: A kinetic coore microtubule from each centrosome. You know, these
Speaker 1: twin pair of centrioles on either side of the cell,
Speaker 1: which just duplicated, you know, they just cloned themselves themselves,
Speaker 1: going into mitosis, the division of the cell. They have
Speaker 1: now grown these little kineticore microtubules and they connect, and
Speaker 1: so each chromosome, the pair of little sister chromatids, the
Speaker 1: centromere that binds them together, gets connected to buy a
Speaker 1: kineticore microtubule, one from each chromosome. And if you google
Speaker 1: google metaphase, for example, you can see that the centrosomes
Speaker 1: are pulling on the centromere. And what happens is all
Speaker 1: of the chromosomes align along the equator of the cell.
Speaker 1: It's called I think it's called like the metaphase plate.
Speaker 1: I forget. It's been a long time. I used to
Speaker 1: teach this stuff. Why don't you want to take a
Speaker 1: physiology class for me? Wouldn't it be fun? Those are
Speaker 1: the good old days. I missed that I was making
Speaker 1: good contract money on the side teaching physiology. Anyway, So
Speaker 1: all these centromeres get lined up and they're pulling on
Speaker 1: each other. Meanwhile, a new set of microtubules is growing
Speaker 1: out of the centrosomes. But these microtubules don't connect to
Speaker 1: the chromosomes. They connect to each other. So each centrosome
Speaker 1: has grown microtubules out When they run into each other,
Speaker 1: and rather than playing tug of war like the connecticore
Speaker 1: microtubules are doing to the chromosomes, they push against each other.
Speaker 1: And it's this process of pushing against each other that
Speaker 1: starts to split the cell in half. The cell starts
Speaker 1: to elongate, and so the centrisome is literally responsible not
Speaker 1: only for dividing up the genome into two identical sets
Speaker 1: of DNA, but also literally pushing the cell apart. And
Speaker 1: then there's this thing called the cleavage furrow where the
Speaker 1: you know, there's this little like spiderweb skeleton on the
Speaker 1: interface of the membrane, and you get these motor proteins
Speaker 1: that literally split the cell in half, and that's called cytokinesis.
Speaker 1: And then you get two daughter cells, two identical daughter cells.
Speaker 1: I think, what's fascinating about this? And this was always
Speaker 1: you know, sitting in the science class as a kid,
Speaker 1: It's like, okay, yeah, but what is regulating this? And
Speaker 1: then of course, and you know, as a kid, you
Speaker 1: just sort of believe that we have all the answers,
Speaker 1: you know, and so you ask a question, and really
Speaker 1: the only thing a teacher can do, and thus they're
Speaker 1: just very confident in themselves, which many aren't. Is sort
Speaker 1: of like dismiss the question to pretend like they answered
Speaker 1: your question, or to dismiss the question or make you
Speaker 1: feel dumb about the question, like there because there is
Speaker 1: no answer to this, like like what is the force?
Speaker 1: What is the instrument? What is the you know, what
Speaker 1: is the what is orchestrating this unbelievable complexity? Why is
Speaker 1: this centrism? This thing that we don't even know what
Speaker 1: it is. We can barely see it, it's so small.
Speaker 1: Where is this knowledge coming from? On how to do this?
Speaker 1: On how to align all the chromosomes, split them in half,
Speaker 1: push the pulls of the cell apart, like you know,
Speaker 1: every time we ask like a big why question, the
Speaker 1: answer is like some some like source of complexity, like
Speaker 1: like how is it that we experience consciousness and live
Speaker 1: in this world and have free will and act as agents?
Speaker 1: And you say, well, you have this unbelievably complex computer
Speaker 1: in your head called a brain, And it's like, oh, okay,
Speaker 1: that makes sense. You know, and it's like, how is
Speaker 1: it that these cells are so like autonomous and know
Speaker 1: what to do? And it's like, well, we have this
Speaker 1: crazy thing called a nucleus in the center of your
Speaker 1: cell and it's like a brain. Now, this is a
Speaker 1: totally incorrect metaphor, but that's generally like what a like
Speaker 1: a high school biology teacher might say, because there is
Speaker 1: no better answer, and so there's always something to point
Speaker 1: to you. With the centrisome, you're out of stuff because
Speaker 1: there is no unfathomably complex computer system to point to
Speaker 1: you as the conductor of this unbelievably complex mystery, which
Speaker 1: is you know, the splitting of the cell in half,
Speaker 1: and you can point to things like, oh, well, you
Speaker 1: know this chemical cascade triggers the process of mitosystem. It's like, okay, yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm not I'm not denying that there are like chemical
Speaker 1: and physical systems at play, but like, what is orchestrating this?
Speaker 1: You know, where does where does the where does this
Speaker 1: does this knowledge or ability come from? It's really difficult
Speaker 1: to believe because you look at the centrisome and it's
Speaker 1: essentially nothing.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's.
Speaker 1: Nine triplets of tubulin and tubulin is this simple little
Speaker 1: bead shaped molecule, Like so where where where is the
Speaker 1: the fire? You know, as Stephen Hawking said, like what
Speaker 1: puts the fire in the equations? Like where is the
Speaker 1: fire that goes into these equations to make them real?
Speaker 1: I think it's cool that Stephen Hawking said that because
Speaker 1: it's like such, because he's such a you know, physicalist
Speaker 1: or reductionist or whatever. But like that is like the mystery,
Speaker 1: Like Okay, yeah, this is just a math equation. It
Speaker 1: describes something, but like where does the fire come from?
Speaker 1: Like where does the what's the source? And it's a
Speaker 1: question you know, scientists generally don't like to contend with
Speaker 1: because it sort of falls outside of the domain of science.
Speaker 1: But it's it is a I think it's silly, Like
Speaker 1: I see Sean Carroll and others, I can do this.
Speaker 1: It's like to just dismiss that. It's like what, that's nothing?
Speaker 1: What are you talking about? Don't ask stupid questions?
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 1: It's like, bro, that's that's not a stupid question. That's
Speaker 1: the question.
Speaker 2: Anyway.
Speaker 1: So as if that were not enough, this mystery the
Speaker 1: centrosome and the two centrials that comprise it, and the
Speaker 1: microtubules that radiate out from it. Apparently it does more
Speaker 1: than just mitosis. You'll also find centrials anywhere you need
Speaker 1: to move in a cell, like at the base of
Speaker 1: acilium or a flagellum, which is interesting because why would
Speaker 1: you need a centrial. You know, we have motor proteins,
Speaker 1: we have actin, we have tubulin. Why do we need
Speaker 1: a centrial at the base of each hair cell or
Speaker 1: at the base of a flagellum. It's not structurally important.
Speaker 1: I mean, people will try to like argue it is,
Speaker 1: but it doesn't seem to be. So it's just interesting
Speaker 1: because like moving with purpose, like moving in a way
Speaker 1: to seek goals, because that's what a cillium is for,
Speaker 1: that's what a flagellum is for, Like oh hey, there's
Speaker 1: over there, let me flap the tail and swim in
Speaker 1: that direction away from danger towards nutrients. Like this is
Speaker 1: a this is will. This is an expression of will. Now,
Speaker 1: don't like misunderstand me. It's a very simple expression of
Speaker 1: those things. But it is interesting that there is a
Speaker 1: central involved, Like why does there always seem to be
Speaker 1: a central involved when we get like some something that
Speaker 1: almost seems conscious, like the orchestration of cellular division or
Speaker 1: the implementation of movement. It's interesting because even like the
Speaker 1: cone cells in your eyes, like are basically modified cilium
Speaker 1: with centrials at their base. So centrils do something beyond well,
Speaker 1: we don't even really have a good explanation for what
Speaker 1: they do. But beyond whatever the most reductionist version is
Speaker 1: of what a central does, they clearly do something else.
Speaker 2: Anyway.
Speaker 1: So here's like a forty year old story I'm going
Speaker 1: to read to you guys, and hopefully I cann't get
Speaker 1: through this without falling over my words too much. As
Speaker 1: I age, I really struggle with the reading, just like
Speaker 1: long blocks of text on a bright laptop screen.
Speaker 2: But here we go.
Speaker 1: Warm blooded animals radiate heat is infrared light, so they
Speaker 1: appear to glow and viewed with an infrared camera. Now,
Speaker 1: a researcher in the US believes that mammalian cells have
Speaker 1: an eye with which they may actually be able to
Speaker 1: detect this glow. That was pretty fascinating because cells very simple,
Speaker 1: and the ability to detect like, you know, I guess
Speaker 1: what you might call like an end quote's visual stimulus.
Speaker 1: It does sort of imply like a sense of agency
Speaker 1: that we don't normally give to cells. Now, of course
Speaker 1: it could all be reflexive, right. I'm not suggesting cells
Speaker 1: are conscious necessarily, but it is just an interesting way
Speaker 1: of thinking of what a cell is. Last year, Gunter
Speaker 1: Albrecht Buehler of the Northwestern University Medical School in Chicago
Speaker 1: demonstrated that mouse cells growing in culture will stretch towards
Speaker 1: sources of infrared light. He has shown that cells may
Speaker 1: see nearby cells by detecting infra red light. Now, of course,
Speaker 1: like the instinct, I would think if you have a
Speaker 1: tendency to believe like everything is.
Speaker 2: Sort of.
Speaker 1: Lifeless or autonomous, you might say would be that like, okay, well,
Speaker 1: infrared lights of physical property, and so there could sort
Speaker 1: of be some thing that happens, you know, like maybe
Speaker 1: it affects the electro chemical gradients, or maybe it affects,
Speaker 1: you know, some process in the cell that causes them
Speaker 1: to orient this way that has nothing to do with
Speaker 1: like a quote unquote visual experience, and that that might
Speaker 1: be true, but let me just keep itating to investigate
Speaker 1: this remarkable heat seeking ability. Albrecht Bueler studied hamster cells,
Speaker 1: which are elongated in shape. He places cells on one
Speaker 1: side of a thin sheet of glass and watched them
Speaker 1: grow more or less parallel to each other in a
Speaker 1: single layer. He then put cells on the other side
Speaker 1: of the glass, spread so that most of them did
Speaker 1: not touch their neighbors. After seven hours, he found that
Speaker 1: three quarters of the new cells had oriented themselves so
Speaker 1: that they crossed the cells on the other side of
Speaker 1: the glass at angles of more than forty five degrees.
Speaker 1: So it's published in PNASS Proceedings of the National Academy
Speaker 1: of Sciences. If the new cells had oriented themselves randomly,
Speaker 1: only about half of them would be expected to lie
Speaker 1: in this position, So they kind of are moving towards
Speaker 1: a right angle orientation or at least more than forty
Speaker 1: five degrees with their neighbors. So my understanding of that
Speaker 1: is like the shadow of the cells on the other
Speaker 1: side of the glass is like maybe sort of obstructing
Speaker 1: the light source, so that the other cells on the
Speaker 1: other side of the glass are like trying to move
Speaker 1: to be perpendicular to those cells to increase or exposure
Speaker 1: to the heat or the light. Maybe the cells behavior
Speaker 1: mimics something which occurs naturally, and some tissues cells form
Speaker 1: distinct layers, with the cells in each layer oriented perpendicularly
Speaker 1: to those cells in the layers above and below. This
Speaker 1: criss cross pattern gives the tissues extra strength. Albrecht Buehler
Speaker 1: repeated this experiment, but this time with one side of
Speaker 1: the glass coated with either nickel chromium alloy or silicon.
Speaker 1: Nickel chromium absorbs a visible and infrared light, where silicon
Speaker 1: absorbs most visible light but is transparent to red and
Speaker 1: infrared wavelengths. Now, this is pretty smart because he's basically
Speaker 1: testing whether or not it is.
Speaker 2: Light.
Speaker 1: The results were striking. When the glass sheet was coated
Speaker 1: with nickel chromium, cells did not grow in a criss
Speaker 1: cross pattern, So when it's opaque, no criss cross it. However,
Speaker 1: the pattern was not disrupted by the silicon coat. An reminder,
Speaker 1: the silicon coat is transparent to red and infrared wavelengths.
Speaker 1: Taken with Aubreac Bueller's earlier resort, this implies that the
Speaker 1: cells need to detect infrared light in order to arrange
Speaker 1: themselves in a criss cross pattern. The cells in the
Speaker 1: original layer radiate infrared light, and they may also alter
Speaker 1: the pattern of infrared light from other sources. Okay, so
Speaker 1: what does this tell us? Well, it tells us that
Speaker 1: the cells have a mechanism for sensing light. Now, of course,
Speaker 1: it does not imply that they have like a subjective
Speaker 1: experience of light. Right, Just like we talk about all
Speaker 1: the time with the heart problem of consciousness, you can
Speaker 1: imagine living beings, even humans, being able to detect sensory
Speaker 1: stimulus without being consciously aware of them. You know, you
Speaker 1: can imagine we would basically be autonomatons like zombies, where
Speaker 1: we are not aware of things, but we are indiscernibly human,
Speaker 1: you know, because we react. You know, we have this
Speaker 1: data bank of word meanings in our mind and you know,
Speaker 1: nonverbal cues like we can store all the data and
Speaker 1: react accordingly.
Speaker 2: You could.
Speaker 1: You know, a zombie could come into your house is
Speaker 1: call them an NPC, and you would talk to them
Speaker 1: for hours and you'd have no way of knowing that
Speaker 1: they're not having a conscious experience. This is really the
Speaker 1: problem with consciousness is it's you can't test whether something
Speaker 1: has it. There are signs, and we can make assumptions
Speaker 1: that you know, they're just like they're acting just like me,
Speaker 1: I have a conscious experience, Therefore they must.
Speaker 2: This is sort of.
Speaker 1: Where we're at, And so you could scale that way
Speaker 1: down to a single cell and say just assume like, well,
Speaker 1: of course they're not having a conscious experience, or it's
Speaker 1: just an autonomaton, like Okay, it senses light and there's
Speaker 1: some reflex, whether it's a chemical reflex or whatever. There's
Speaker 1: no neurons in a cell that's leading them to behave
Speaker 1: a certain way. This is a living organism. But really,
Speaker 1: I mean this is you know, there's no awareness, right,
Speaker 1: this is all reflexive and I kind of tend to
Speaker 1: believe that, but it is an assumption. I mean, you
Speaker 1: kind of have to admit it is an assumption, okay.
Speaker 1: Albert Peler thinks it unlikely that the new cells have
Speaker 1: reacted simply to the heating effects of infrared light. He
Speaker 1: calculates that the infrared light he's shown on mouse cells
Speaker 1: increase your temperature by only point zero zero zero zero
Speaker 1: one degree c. Also, he found that mal cells respond
Speaker 1: most to wavelengths of eight hundred to nine hundred animeters.
Speaker 1: Cells hardly reacted to wavelengths around twelve hundred animeters, even
Speaker 1: though water and cells absorb these wavelengths efficiently. I think
Speaker 1: the implication there is that these other wavelengths may be
Speaker 1: heat the tissue just as much. I'm not really sure that.
Speaker 1: I don't know much about the electromagnetic spectrum, So how
Speaker 1: then can cells detect infrared light? This is Bueler talking.
Speaker 1: The eye of the cell, I think is the pair
Speaker 1: of centrials. Centrials are organelles which look like short, fat cylinders.
Speaker 1: No one knows their function. I love that. I love
Speaker 1: that in science, and I love just saying it with courage.
Speaker 1: You know, no one knows what they do.
Speaker 2: Period.
Speaker 1: Then some jerk who wants to look smart has to
Speaker 1: come along and say, well, actually, we do know that
Speaker 1: the tubulentce subunits grow out from the centrioles, and this
Speaker 1: gives rise to a sider skeleton, which gives a cell
Speaker 1: structure and support. And it's like, dude, shut up, that's
Speaker 1: not what we mean. That's not what we mean when
Speaker 1: we say no one knows what they do. God, people
Speaker 1: are so annoying. It's like it's you got to explain it.
Speaker 1: You can't just describe. I mean, listen, describe your observations,
Speaker 1: but don't imply that this is an explanation. Like it's
Speaker 1: so frustrating, Like okay, yeah, we get that they happen
Speaker 1: to be located at a point where all the microtubules converge,
Speaker 1: but that that doesn't have anything to do with their structure,
Speaker 1: Like you need to explain how their structure equals their function.
Speaker 1: You know, why are they nine pairs of three oriented
Speaker 1: at a right angle that don't actually make contact with
Speaker 1: the microtubules are just floating? Why you know you got
Speaker 1: to explain that. Well, you know, you get the cellamones
Speaker 1: of skeleton and these are therefore It's like, dude, shut up,
Speaker 1: shut up, like, don't be a know it all because
Speaker 1: you're wrong, you know, like you're not answering our question,
Speaker 1: like you want you want the brownie points from the
Speaker 1: teacher so bad. Well, actually I'm a genius, and it's like, dude,
Speaker 1: we know what you know. Okay, we just have the
Speaker 1: we have the like intellectual honesty to admit that that's
Speaker 1: not really an explanation, so sit down, okay.
Speaker 2: Sorry. Anyway.
Speaker 1: Centrals are organelles which look like short, fat cylinders. No
Speaker 1: one knows their function, but they almost always occur in pairs,
Speaker 1: usually near the nucleus. The reason they say almost always
Speaker 1: is because they don't occur in peer in pairs like
Speaker 1: at the base of a cilium. And that's kind of
Speaker 1: interesting because I don't think we would really expect the
Speaker 1: base of like acilium to need to sense light. Right,
Speaker 1: let me google what it looks like central at the
Speaker 1: base of a cilium. Let me just make sure I
Speaker 1: got my facts straight here.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 1: The cilium actually is basically a microtubule growing out from
Speaker 1: the centrial.
Speaker 2: That is so cool this picu.
Speaker 1: I wish you guys could see this picture. The centril
Speaker 1: is like it's kind of at a right angle to
Speaker 1: the microtubule though, very cool. Look at the cross section
Speaker 1: of a central it is so cool. Why like, why
Speaker 1: is it shaped that way? And it's just a hollow tube.
Speaker 1: It's inert. It's inert tubulent protein. Like how where where
Speaker 1: is the like orchestration coming from? God, It's such a
Speaker 1: freaking mystery. Okay, sorry, back to the paper. Usually appearing
Speaker 1: in the nucleus in a region called the center zomee.
Speaker 1: But I'll just believe that the centrism organizes it cells
Speaker 1: internal skeleton. But they do not know what roles centrils
Speaker 1: play in the centrism. The hilarious part is like this
Speaker 1: really all the centrosome is, It's two centrils and then
Speaker 1: a bunch of tubulin floating around. You know, got a
Speaker 1: lot of chemical like a chemical soup. So it's like, well,
Speaker 1: it's kind of funny to be like, well, we know
Speaker 1: what the central zome does, we just don't know what
Speaker 1: the centrals do. And it's like, bro, you don't Nothing
Speaker 1: you just said is true. Okay, centrals may be important
Speaker 1: in cellular division before cells divide, the pair of centrils
Speaker 1: duplicate themselves. And listen, let me just back up a second.
Speaker 1: I don't mean to criticize like trying to explain things,
Speaker 1: because I think it's sort of like admiral to make
Speaker 1: observations and propose theories and sort of like just just
Speaker 1: try to describe the world to.
Speaker 2: The best of your ability.
Speaker 1: I don't like sometimes and I think really a lot
Speaker 1: of times lately in science where we kind of take
Speaker 1: one more step and try to explain like like the why,
Speaker 1: like the base, like the like I'm not doing a
Speaker 1: good job explaining this. But it's like, okay, say you
Speaker 1: know it's like the centrisome, will the microtubules grow out,
Speaker 1: or that they push the cells of the park, they
Speaker 1: cause the cell to divide, they split the DNA in half.
Speaker 1: That's all great, say the observations, but then to just
Speaker 1: be like, okay, you know, mystery solves. You know, the
Speaker 1: centrisome does these things.
Speaker 2: That's what it is. It is what it does.
Speaker 1: And it's like, oh, dude, come on, are you yeah,
Speaker 1: like in curious, like non curious. I'm rambling. I'm sorry.
Speaker 1: I hope you get what I'm saying. Okay, centrals may
Speaker 1: be important in division. Before cells divide, the pair of
Speaker 1: centrials duplicate themselves, and the daughter pairs migrate to opposite
Speaker 1: ends of the cell, and chromosomes sort of do the
Speaker 1: same thing. They duplicate themselves. There they act as focal
Speaker 1: points for the array of filaments. Not really a correct
Speaker 1: way of writing that, you know, the array of microtubules.
Speaker 1: Filaments are a different structure anyway, which pull the chromosome
Speaker 1: into each of the two new cells. However, the exact
Speaker 1: role of centrils in cell division is not known, and
Speaker 1: plant cells divide successfully without them. Oh I didn't know that.
Speaker 1: That's interesting. That's very interesting, Albrect Bueler, I don't know
Speaker 1: anything about plants. Albret Bueler says the structure of centrils
Speaker 1: suggest but plants do have microtubules. Let me just confirm
Speaker 1: the plants have microtubules. Yes, plants have centrosomes. No, they
Speaker 1: use alternative structures like the pre prophase band and the
Speaker 1: nuclear envelope to organizer mitotic spindles. Centrisomes are completely absent
Speaker 1: in flowering plants and conifers. However, the flagellated sperm cells
Speaker 1: of non dude plants have sperm of some non flowering plants,
Speaker 1: like bryophytes and seedless vascular plants do contain centrals. What
Speaker 1: in the world, Well, that's interesting, okay. Albred Bueler says
Speaker 1: the structure of centrals suggests that they may be sensory organelles,
Speaker 1: perhaps detecting infrared light. Centrals are composed of fibers called microtubules,
Speaker 1: which usually occur as triplets of three microtubules joined together.
Speaker 1: Nine triplets are a rate or in the central circumference.
Speaker 1: Albrec Bueler believes the triplets act as blinds which intercept
Speaker 1: infrared light. Oh, that's interesting, which intercept infrared light? He
Speaker 1: suggests that next to each triplet there may be an
Speaker 1: infrared sensitive pigment. Not of maze and maybes, but still
Speaker 1: I like it. The nine triplets are arranged in such
Speaker 1: a way that infrared light from a point source will
Speaker 1: be intercepted by all but one of the triplets before
Speaker 1: it reaches the hypothetical pigment that may or may not exist.
Speaker 1: So a centurial could form a simple eye which assigned
Speaker 1: sources of infrared light to one of the nine regions
Speaker 1: around its circumference.
Speaker 2: That is so cool.
Speaker 1: The idea that centrils may act as eyes would explain
Speaker 1: why the centrial is in a pair almost always lie
Speaker 1: at right angles to each other. This arrangement is ideal
Speaker 1: for determining the three dimensional coordinates of an infrared light source. Also,
Speaker 1: centrials are sellular eyes. They are perfectly placed to affect
Speaker 1: the direction of a just sell crawls because this depends
Speaker 1: on the organization of the cells internal skeleton. Centrals occur
Speaker 1: in almost all eukaryotic cells, apart from the cells and
Speaker 1: higher plants, so if Albert Bueler's idea is correct, the
Speaker 1: ability to detect infrared like could be very widespread. Indeed, however,
Speaker 1: he admits that so far no infrared sensitive pigments have
Speaker 1: been found in centrals, although such pigments do occur in nature.
Speaker 1: Interesting centrals don't occur in plants. Plants don't explore their
Speaker 1: environment looking for food. They have a completely different way
Speaker 1: of navigating with their environment. And the one cell in
Speaker 1: a plant that does need to move, a sperm cell.
Speaker 1: I didn't know plants and sperm cells that can't be
Speaker 1: right does have central. So it's something about needing to
Speaker 1: like see into your environment so that you can navigate it.
Speaker 1: So you need to have a central. That is cool.
Speaker 1: That is so fricking cool.
Speaker 2: Wow.
Speaker 1: Okay, reading this in real time, I hadn't read that article,
Speaker 1: and we read it for the first time together. I
Speaker 1: saw the AI description. I knew it was gonna be interesting.
Speaker 1: But okay, so now we're going to this guy. He
Speaker 1: did a ted talk. Uh, he's done some interesting research
Speaker 1: about measuring really high frequency resonance in the brain and
Speaker 1: the it caught my eye because the name of the
Speaker 1: this is a ted X stock. The name of it
Speaker 1: was Triplets of triplets in the Universe. Triplets of triplets
Speaker 1: I'm trying to is super long, so I'm trying to
Speaker 1: find like the most particular I'm gonna jump rown. So
Speaker 1: in two thousand and seven to eight, I built a
Speaker 1: scanning tunneling microscope, not just to observe proteins, but to
Speaker 1: listen to their hidden rhythms. What I discovered was extraordinary.
Speaker 1: It does not matter how you trigger. Does not matter
Speaker 1: how you trigger. Proteins resonate at nine distinct frequencies organized
Speaker 1: into three intricate loops, a triplet of triplets. It was
Speaker 1: like stumbling upon a secret choreography embedded in nature's vortices
Speaker 1: or helical structures. I was expecting him to go immediately
Speaker 1: into microtubules. He doesn't really bring it up. I mean,
Speaker 1: he brings up microtubules. Let's jump ahead. Actually, let's just
Speaker 1: read this section. Okay, So this discovery changed my life.
Speaker 1: I realized that our current machines can't truly decode nature's language.
Speaker 1: So I begin modifying every characterization. Set up I encountered
Speaker 1: with antennas and signal generators in my pocket, I used
Speaker 1: to set up multiple computers focused on a single expression.
Speaker 1: I started uncovering time crystals everywhere. This is getting out there,
Speaker 1: I know, but this is something Stuart Hammerff says he
Speaker 1: describes microtubules as time crystals. I don't know why. I
Speaker 1: don't like the phrase, even if it's accurate. I just
Speaker 1: think it evokes like New Age stuff. But anyway, I
Speaker 1: started uncovering time crystals everywhere and thus finding primes Nature's
Speaker 1: pure bias free code, meaning prime numbers. Imagine striking a
Speaker 1: tuning fork. It vibrates steadily, perhaps two hundred and fifty
Speaker 1: six hirts, but in the biological world is far more complex.
Speaker 1: Instead of one tuning fork, there are hundreds, each ringing
Speaker 1: at different frequencies, like thousands of bells harmonizing endlessly with nature.
Speaker 1: This is the essence of life, a codex music of time, frequency,
Speaker 1: and motion orchestrated at every scale of existence. But we
Speaker 1: don't see that hidden pattern until we start counting rhythms. Um, Okay,
Speaker 1: what's absolutely thrilling is a universal present sense of triplet
Speaker 1: symmetry across all biomaterials size and structure. Notwithstanding, we uncover
Speaker 1: this pattern with the coils of alpha helices across entire
Speaker 1: proteins and stretching into the complex networks of microtubules and neurofilaments.
Speaker 1: Imagine this a counter for prime number of rhythms fundamental
Speaker 1: to processing information right in the cognitive powerhouse of our brains.
Speaker 1: Accounting device, not the rhythm itself. Really, this is a transcript,
Speaker 1: so it's kind of not written perfect. Unable to experiment
Speaker 1: with the full neural network, we took to the virtual realm.
Speaker 1: We crafted brain components in a computer, delved into Maxwell's
Speaker 1: equations to decode prime frequency groups, and even synthesized artificial
Speaker 1: organic materials mimicking brain vibrations. This led us to model
Speaker 1: the entire human brain as an autonomaton, a network of
Speaker 1: oneenty twenty three spheres, each a crystal of time. Energize them,
Speaker 1: and behold, a super automaton springs to life, A stunning
Speaker 1: testament to the complexities of biology machinery. Did I hate
Speaker 1: the thos? It's like, what are you saying? Like, what
Speaker 1: are you saying? I think that all sounds really cool,
Speaker 1: but like, what are you actually saying? Like you created
Speaker 1: a I don't know it sounds cool. I just I
Speaker 1: don't understand. So there I was finding primes across the
Speaker 1: brain's architecture, thirty one spinal nerves. I should mention there
Speaker 1: are sixty two spinal nurves, but there are thirty one
Speaker 1: pairs and thirty one is a prime number, So I'll
Speaker 1: give them that seven cortical column layers thirteen protofilaments in
Speaker 1: a microtubule. This is kind of interesting that he picked
Speaker 1: up on that and not the triplet of a triplet
Speaker 1: in a centurial. But uh and forty seven Broadman areas
Speaker 1: key to conscious thought processing primes are everywhere. Particularly striking
Speaker 1: was the recurrent prime number three, as if three interconnected
Speaker 1: rings formed a unit and multiple triplet the rings woven
Speaker 1: together into a resonating chain. In twenty fourteen, I postulated that,
Speaker 1: regardless of their appearance, when biomateials vibrate from the tiniest
Speaker 1: to the largest, they're linked by a continuous resonance chain.
Speaker 1: The universe itself, i argued, operates like an automaton made
Speaker 1: up of such time crystals, with each of us being
Speaker 1: a small part of this immense chain. I am a
Speaker 1: tiny automaton contributing to the whole automaton's function. However, I
Speaker 1: remain skeptical about this grand theory until twenty twenty, when
Speaker 1: we discovered that human cognitive functions, thoughts, emotions, anger, joy
Speaker 1: are all intricately connected by these triplet rules. This is
Speaker 1: where I got pretty excited, because it's like, maybe I'm
Speaker 1: taking the coincidence too far, But it just is interesting
Speaker 1: to me that the microtubule centrials is composed of a
Speaker 1: triplet of triplets of tubulent chains. And if you know,
Speaker 1: a lot of people think these microtubules are related to consciousness.
Speaker 1: It's just kind of interesting. We know, they resonate, you know,
Speaker 1: the tubuln sub units flip back and forth. It's like
Speaker 1: a giant vibrating abacus. You know, if you look at
Speaker 1: pictures of these microtubul networks in the brain, is really
Speaker 1: fad and you can imagine each of these little strings,
Speaker 1: usually green. The imaging techniques they use make them green,
Speaker 1: is made up of like millions of little beads that
Speaker 1: are flipping back and forth, and the rate of their
Speaker 1: flipping changes based on what you're doing. It's pretty cool, man.
Speaker 1: It's like as close to the Tesseract scene and Interstellar
Speaker 1: as you can get. You know, you can just imagine
Speaker 1: he's like drifting through a mind and there's all these
Speaker 1: vibrating strings. You know, it's pretty cool. I mean, let's
Speaker 1: be honest, it's very cool.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 1: I will admit it just kind of goes off the
Speaker 1: rails here, but I'll keep I'll keep breathing with just three.
Speaker 1: I'm kind of skipping around so uh as my philosophical
Speaker 1: inside skiin traction, I was driven to dell deeper. I
Speaker 1: knew from the start that to explore the open root
Speaker 1: beer here multiple time domain simultaneously, I need to build
Speaker 1: machines from the ground up. The eeg Our electrone cephlogram
Speaker 1: has been around since eighteen seventy five, but by twenty
Speaker 1: nineteen we had engineered a new machine at my lab
Speaker 1: in Ranchy. He's at like a university in Japan, but
Speaker 1: he's Indians. I'm not I'm not sure which lab he's
Speaker 1: referring to. After meticulous studies involving two hundred and eighty
Speaker 1: nine human subjects, our findings were astounding. The cortex region
Speaker 1: of the brain amidst electromagnetic bursts and signals across twelve
Speaker 1: distinct time domains. The symmetry is a triplet of triplets
Speaker 1: fluctuated with changes in human mental states, mirroring the vibrations
Speaker 1: found in proteins. The implications were profound and frankly shocking.
Speaker 1: With just three clocks, we can form a triangle when
Speaker 1: we experience emotions, signals from our brain surface altars, crafting
Speaker 1: shapes from these clocks. I don't know what this is,
Speaker 1: but he says, using the dough decanogram. Oh, I think
Speaker 1: this is the DDG, the do deco do decano. It's
Speaker 1: a shape, right, like a dough.
Speaker 2: Decagon or something. I don't know.
Speaker 1: I'm admitting my ignorance. In real time, we've measured time
Speaker 1: scales billions of times larger, and our experiments were subjects
Speaker 1: in dark rooms communicated wirelessly. What does that mean. It's
Speaker 1: a weird way of saying it. Why wouldn't you say
Speaker 1: like telepathic, Like you don't probably dont want to use
Speaker 1: that word. I guess communicated. I don't think he means
Speaker 1: he's calling someone on a wireless phone. That's why I
Speaker 1: brought that up. Merely by sensing each other's presence, we
Speaker 1: observed that megahertz vibrations transform into geometric shapes. A square
Speaker 1: signals happiness, a triangle sadness. These shapes, written in the
Speaker 1: language of time, revealed a profound connection between our feelings
Speaker 1: and the geometry of thought. Listen, I know I'm the
Speaker 1: last person who should say this, but I hate like
Speaker 1: the uber philosophization of this stuff, Like what did you
Speaker 1: actually observe? You know, like, explain it to me. What
Speaker 1: how did the signal form a square? Like what do
Speaker 1: you mean? Like, what do you mean? Where are you
Speaker 1: visualizing the data?
Speaker 2: Like what?
Speaker 1: I don't understand what you're saying, but you know it's
Speaker 1: a ted talk. So that's how they have to go.
Speaker 1: All right, Now he's back to an operation theater.
Speaker 2: Theater.
Speaker 1: This is just a way of describing like a surgical room.
Speaker 1: It's called an operation theater. There's usually like blue or
Speaker 1: green stuff draped over everything. It's a sterile field. You
Speaker 1: can't touch it. And uh, it's an intense place. I've
Speaker 1: been in one. I've been in some.
Speaker 2: Actually.
Speaker 1: I remember I was volunteering at a hospital and they
Speaker 1: asked me if I wanted to watch the surgery. I
Speaker 1: said sure. The orthopedic surgeon he walked in there like
Speaker 1: he was God. And you know what, from the patient's perspective,
Speaker 1: right he is. He's doing something that very few mortals
Speaker 1: can do. So like all due respect and props to
Speaker 1: the to the dawn. But he didn't look at anyone.
Speaker 1: He held his hands up. People rushed up to like
Speaker 1: put the stuff on his gloves or whatever. He was
Speaker 1: in there doing work. He didn't know anyone. He didn't
Speaker 1: know who anyone was. He didn't know anyone's name, so
Speaker 1: he just saw me standing there and assumed I worked there,
Speaker 1: and like I was trained.
Speaker 2: I wasn't.
Speaker 1: I was like a high school student. And he hands
Speaker 1: me like a scalpel, so I'm trying to be respectful,
Speaker 1: so instinctively I'm like, oh, I guess he wants me
Speaker 1: to take the scalpel away, like he's done with it,
Speaker 1: and so I reach out to grab it and he
Speaker 1: gives me the dirtiest look that I killed someone, and
Speaker 1: he hands it to someone else, and the main guy
Speaker 1: comes up to me. He's like, hey, you're never supposed
Speaker 1: to take something from a surgeon. You place your hands
Speaker 1: out flat and they set it into your hands. And
Speaker 1: it's like, hey, I'm I'm all for protocol, but like
Speaker 1: you should know who the people are in the room.
Speaker 1: If protocols taken that seriously, maybe like Okay, Tims, Steve,
Speaker 1: are you guys all work here? You're all what what's
Speaker 1: your role here? Are you a nurse? Are you a
Speaker 1: surgical tech?
Speaker 2: You know?
Speaker 1: I just thought it was funny, Like, yes, I'm all
Speaker 1: for taking protocol seriously anyway, Sorry tangent we're in an
Speaker 1: operation theater, the codes of triplets does not change. As
Speaker 1: we moved one hundred and nine orders from two nanometers
Speaker 1: to two meters with the neest sized subjects. We have
Speaker 1: studied at least twenty four to twenty five individuals at
Speaker 1: some hospital that I can't pronounce. In a gripping scene
Speaker 1: from an operating theater, we castured something extraordinary on video.
Speaker 1: A patient undergoing gallbladder surgery is deeply an esticide anesta size,
Speaker 1: yet their forehead shows bursts of megahertz activity similar to
Speaker 1: what we see in microtubules. Now, this is kind of
Speaker 1: interesting because the whole premise of like ork or are
Speaker 1: is orchestrated objective reduction is that anesthetics bind to microtubules.
Speaker 1: So it's interesting that there's still this app So it
Speaker 1: just must do something to them. I don't know what
Speaker 1: the theory actually is. As the patient awakens, something fascinating occurs.
Speaker 1: If they're right handed, the left side of their brain
Speaker 1: activates first, and the mega hurtz burst vanish triplet band
Speaker 1: the marker for an awake human, returns. You can see
Speaker 1: the left brains slowly come to life, followed by the
Speaker 1: right Okay, that's interesting. So there's some like super high
Speaker 1: frequency just kind of hum. When you're an scized, you're
Speaker 1: still alive. There's still movement, but it's incoherent. It's just
Speaker 1: everywhere at once. It's sort of there's no you know,
Speaker 1: you're not like embodied, right you're just sort of adrift
Speaker 1: and your unconscious. But then when you wake up, you
Speaker 1: get boom, you get patterning, you know, you get the
Speaker 1: triplet of a triplet, get the hemispheres activate. If you're
Speaker 1: right handed, first the left and the right can maybe
Speaker 1: comment on this quickly. Are you left brained or are
Speaker 1: you right brained? I'm asking you because this is like
Speaker 1: a very common misconception of wow, this works, like no
Speaker 1: one's left brained or right brained, like this is this
Speaker 1: is a made up thing. Okay, so here's the way
Speaker 1: it really works. If you're right handed, this is going
Speaker 1: to affect the mapping of cortical functioning. Okay, you're your
Speaker 1: language production center will be on the left if you're
Speaker 1: right handed. Okay, so it just it's it's a your
Speaker 1: brain forms around your hand dominance just because your hands
Speaker 1: in your brain are like wildly interconnected. This is you know,
Speaker 1: Leonardo da Vinci. I read about him a lot or sorry,
Speaker 1: there's all there's like a lot of studies about the
Speaker 1: masters like that. And there is this idea that using
Speaker 1: your hands to do creative things just like makes you
Speaker 1: a deeply intelligent person.
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 1: So he's a pain, sure, he's sketching things. There's like
Speaker 1: this mind eye hand connection.
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 1: These things are sort of like when you're using these
Speaker 1: things to create things that have didn't exist before, you're
Speaker 1: like pulling these ideas out of the ether into the
Speaker 1: world with those three structures your mind, your eyes, in
Speaker 1: your hand. It's just something powerful and uniquely human. Anyway,
Speaker 1: So your handedness affects the mapping of your cortical functioning.
Speaker 1: If you're left handed, whatever areas would have normally been
Speaker 1: on the left side of your brain, if you had
Speaker 1: been right handed, they'll be flipped.
Speaker 2: They'll be on the right side of the brain.
Speaker 1: So people talked about, you know, dominant hemispheres, like you
Speaker 1: could be left brain dominant or right brain dominant. This
Speaker 1: is what they're referring to. It's what is the mapping. Okay,
Speaker 1: And in a right handed person, a lot of the
Speaker 1: things we typically associate with being quote unquote left brained
Speaker 1: would be in the left hemisphere. So if you take
Speaker 1: twenty right handed people and say are you left brained
Speaker 1: or right brain, and they might say, well, you know,
Speaker 1: i'm creative, so i'm right brain, or I'm this, I'm
Speaker 1: left brained. But we know you and I know they're
Speaker 1: all left hemisphere dominant because they're all right handed. Does
Speaker 1: that make sense? So it's just kind of a misinterpretation
Speaker 1: of the findings. There was like a Reader's Digest article
Speaker 1: about it, and ever since it's been left brain right brain.
Speaker 1: Now you know, there's great books about cortical specialization, like
Speaker 1: The Master and his Emissary. I encourage you to read it.
Speaker 2: But again, like.
Speaker 1: We I think we've sort of developed this like unconscious
Speaker 1: understanding that like the left hemisphere does one thing and
Speaker 1: the right hemisphere does another. But that's only true and
Speaker 1: right handed people and left handed people will be a
Speaker 1: mirror of that, and individuals aren't like quote unquote left
Speaker 1: brain or right brain because they're more or less creative.
Speaker 1: Right the creative centers and their mind wherever they are,
Speaker 1: are just more developed. Okay, so hopefully that makes sense. Anyway,
Speaker 1: last paragraph, I should have waited to tell that story. However,
Speaker 1: the forehead remains in a dormant state. Intriguingly, a vertical
Speaker 1: strip just above the nose and around the eyebrows stays unresponsive.
Speaker 1: The patient insists that they are fully awake, and while
Speaker 1: the EEG supports this, our Megahurtz marker tells a different story.
Speaker 1: It's not until these bursts disappear from the circular area
Speaker 1: between the eyebrows that the patient is truly conscious, fully aware,
Speaker 1: and remembering everything. From that point on, again we see
Speaker 1: transformations of geometric shapes and vibration packets. Instead of an
Speaker 1: EG based marker, we can use a Megahurtz marker as
Speaker 1: a true marker of consciousness. It is interesting because you
Speaker 1: do kind of have that moment between fully waking.
Speaker 2: And sleep.
Speaker 1: What do they call that, like liminal? That's not the
Speaker 1: right word, hypnagogic, I forget there's some word for it.
Speaker 1: I mean, you kind of have that. I don't know
Speaker 1: if it's the same way you know from anesthesia. But
Speaker 1: then he talks about an asteroid. They found some material
Speaker 1: on an asteroid that never have been discovered. It has
Speaker 1: the same triplet of triplet symmetry. Then he gets into
Speaker 1: the hidden role of primes. I'm just gonna jump at
Speaker 1: I think we're done. Getting kind of tired here equals
Speaker 1: MC squared.
Speaker 2: I don't know. Maybe I can read.
Speaker 1: More of this, but I just thought it was interesting.
Speaker 1: The centurial is a mystery. It came up a few
Speaker 1: episodes ago, so I thought we'd dive into it a
Speaker 1: little bit. There are still a lot of mysteries and science.
Speaker 1: They discovered a new organelle in the eighties. They still
Speaker 1: don't know what it does. It's called a vault Google
Speaker 1: it vaults in cells. No idea what it does.
Speaker 2: No.
Speaker 1: We've known about the centrals forever, but we don't we
Speaker 1: It's like it's kind of like, I don't know. I'm
Speaker 1: trying to think of an analogy for this, because it's like, okay,
Speaker 1: what if aliens are studying me? Then one of the
Speaker 1: scientists was like, but but what's his function? What does
Speaker 1: he do? What's his what is the purpose of him?
Speaker 1: And you could craft an answer to that question that
Speaker 1: is just a description of my actions, Like, well, he
Speaker 1: wakes up, he seems it seems very important to him
Speaker 1: that he drives to this one location called the coffee
Speaker 1: shop every morning, and he drinks some fluid. It's probably
Speaker 1: critical to his to his sustenance, you know, to his
Speaker 1: operation as an organism. He does that, then he sits
Speaker 1: in front of a computer for a long length of time.
Speaker 1: Then he sort of just beats on the buttons, and
Speaker 1: then maybe he'll go on a walk. Sometimes he wrestles
Speaker 1: with these other little clones of his that are much
Speaker 1: smaller versions of himself, and then he's exhausted and goes
Speaker 1: to sleep. Not a bad day, right, not a bad day.
Speaker 1: But it's like okay, but clearly there's another way of
Speaker 1: explaining that, like what where where did he come from?
Speaker 1: Like what's what's the purpose of his existence? Like what
Speaker 1: was the first cause? You know, where did his environment
Speaker 1: come from? Where did the universe come from? Like does
Speaker 1: he is he a robot? Like is he an automaton? Well,
Speaker 1: I mean he claims no. We've been bugging his house
Speaker 1: and he claims to have this thing called an inner
Speaker 1: world and subjective experience.
Speaker 2: Oh wow, whatever, it's hogwash.
Speaker 1: He's clearly clearly his function is to consume the brown
Speaker 1: liquid from the coffee shop, bang on his keyboard, and
Speaker 1: keep his kids alive.
Speaker 2: That's his function.
Speaker 1: It's like, well, yeah, both things are kind of true, right,
Speaker 1: I mean, we're not really those are kind of two
Speaker 1: different questions, and I think the same thing for this
Speaker 1: humble little centurial. It's like, well, what does it do? Well,
Speaker 1: you know, it's in the middle of a cell and
Speaker 1: it seems to but it's like the how where does
Speaker 1: the fire? Where's the fire that animates and directs this thing?
Speaker 1: I like thinking of thinking of it as an I
Speaker 1: that's cool, so it could be like an eye. But
Speaker 1: also we know it resonates, and the question is why,
Speaker 1: and it is a triplet of triplets. Why the visual
Speaker 1: The visual explanation actually makes a lot of sense. But
Speaker 1: the fact that this triplet of triplet shows up in
Speaker 1: like a modified EG that measures megahertz resonance, is that
Speaker 1: an accident kind of doesn't seem like an accident.
Speaker 2: Anyway.
Speaker 1: Guys, thanks for thanks for listening. This was a This
Speaker 1: was a tough one. I'm tired. I hope you guys
Speaker 1: found that interesting. Please email me at God's Ie view
Speaker 1: book at gmail dot com. Really enjoy hearing from you.
Speaker 1: I've gotten lots of feedback. I think I get the
Speaker 1: sense that although you probably like the idea of continuing
Speaker 1: to do occasional interviews that you also enjoy this type
Speaker 1: of show. So since that's probably what I was going
Speaker 1: to do anyways, try to do interviews knowing I probably
Speaker 1: won't get that many because I'm just not that motivated
Speaker 1: to constantly bug people to interview them. We'll probably do
Speaker 1: something like that, but you know, feel free to encourage
Speaker 1: to give me names of people that you would like
Speaker 1: me to interview and I can try. I got an
Speaker 1: email for Rupert Sheldrake from a listener that would be
Speaker 1: That would be cool. That would be a big get.
Speaker 2: So I'll let you know.
Speaker 1: I'll let you know if we have anything cool lined up.
Speaker 1: Until then, see you tomorrow. Stay safe out there, God
Speaker 1: bless