Biological Information beyond Genes: Bioelectricity | Michael Levin 

Thanks for the feedback, it is really appreciated! Look forward to further extracted content like this in the future!

@@SEMF but still, keep the hour long content coming :D

@@levtrot3041 Plenty of that kind of content on the way!

Thank you for your comment!

It really is fascinating!

@@SEMF Do you think this line of research has any relevance to acupuncture and/or Scenar (which I've used very successfully for about 20 years) ?

​@@MikeKleinsteuber Acupuncture practices may realistically have some meaningful interaction with bioelectricity patterns indeed, although it is not at all obvious to what extent can you extrapolate from the simpler and developing organisms of Michael's experiments to an already developed human being, and how (if possible) to do it (maybe acupuncture methods are not the precise way).

@@SEMF Interesting. Thx

@@MikeKleinsteuber Thanks for your thoughtful comments!

It really is mind blowing research!

We thought so too! Glad you are enjoying our content.

Michael Levin is getting quite a bit of attention, it is only a matter of time that we see medical applications of this work!

Yes, after watching this video it is very clear to me that Michael Levin and his colleagues should immediately be given either the Nobel Prize in Physiology or a 15 to 30-year sentence for fraud and investment scams.

@@castonyoung7514 Why fraud? The science is being developed still...

Indeed very promising for those applications you mention!

@@SEMF Awesome to hear, seems like grounds breaking great work, hope it takes off!

@@tomkwake2503 Hopefully yes!

Starts to sound like the whole "morphogenetic fields" and stuff a la Rupert Sheldrake, considered very fringey ... but who knows? Today's kooky fringe _just might_ become tomorrow's hard science - if we could predict which ones do and don't, science wouldn't be necessary, as we'd have already done it!

We thought so too!

It really is fascinating!

That's a great reference! Thanks for pointing it out. We would value you sharing these on our online community. You can join by following this link: semf.org.es/participate/join.html

More proof the child within is as much a separate human as the child born?

@@friendlyone2706 How so?

@@friendlyone2706 correct

@@SEMF Individual life forms have separate fields.

We thought so too!

He will be coming to our Multidisciplinary School in a few weeks, so stay tuned!

It really is just the beginning! Exciting times!

twitter.com/semf_nexus for latest news!

@@SEMF yes sir I typed you in and Twitter but I couldn’t find you on Facebook either on Instagram

@@SEMF I don’t believe I’m talking to Michael Levine personally but that’s fine. Anyone from his laboratory knows more than I.

@@andreybogoslowsky For Michael Levin's website: www.drmichaellevin.org/

A good summary... ;)

What is a Kosmic Actor? What do you mean by "torroidal"?

That's an interesting direction. Any references or links on it?

Very good point. We need go review how these things affect bioelectricity, since evidently what we've been looking at this whole time wasn't everything

@SEMF no problem, I'll dig out some stuff. There were old articles in the journal IEEE in the 70s, with NASA interest owing to potential effects of RF exposure in astronauts etc.

@@stevepk5421 Indeed!

@@alveolus2854 Thanks! We encourage you to join our community and share that information with our members: semf.org.es/participate/join.html

We think so too! Glad to be able to share such fascinating research!

@@SEMF I am thinking of potential applications in hearing loss, spinal nerve damage, and as you mentioned cancer research. I have always thought that a century hence, they will look back at chemotherapy as equivalent to pouring boiling oil in wounds or blood letting. This is not to say chemotherapy has been a failure, just to note that as knowledge advances, so will therapy. Newton said he stood on the shoulders of giants because knowledge is cumulative.

@@seaknightvirchow8131 That's exactly right! Very good analogy.

What source do you mean?

@@SEMF Think about it. Your human molecule evolved by the source that is within the molecule. That source is the fusing of elements at atomic level. Ask yourself how can the fusing of elements form the intelligent species. Once elements are fused, they are the imprinted knowledge to form the biological matter for a purpose. Understand that and you will understand the missing link purpose.

Two excellent questions!

These are very relevant questions! I encourage you to join the SEMF community to discuss them with other members and have access to future events with Michael Levin. You can find all the relevant information here: semf.org.es/participate/join.html

DNA as an antennae: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-B3jf_d_TVc8.html

Very much so!

Thanks for the comment it is really mindblowing research!

More research showing biological response to electric fields: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-B3jf_d_TVc8.html

Follow the links in the description!

Unless they are applied to developing organisms, not much!

This implies, a lot: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-B3jf_d_TVc8.html

That's certainly a possibility!

That's a very relevant comment. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this!

Very very good question.

Something like this is really far off, but it does become more plausible!

I actually think this works derivatives would supersede the need for a transplant. We could just reprogram the faulty heart

@@stevepk5421 That may be the case indeed!

That's certainly a related question. Ontogenesis is one of the main focuses of Michael's work.

We have not heard it from Michael Levin yet.

The issue with an intelligent design hypothesis is, as usual, to explain or characterize intelligence. You can boil it down to "if life is designed by an intelligent being/phenomenon, what is that entity and how does its intelligence emerge from known physical laws?", in a way intelligent design simple moves the goal post but, in doing so, one loses empirical reach.

@@SEMF nah, the evidence is overwhelmingly on the side of an uncaused creator (self existant) whose existance does not depend on this universe. The "pushing back" of problems is what the Darwinists do. Panspermia anyone? ID is the position that has a definite beginner. I would point out here the known universe has a definite beginning. An observation I've made is how "natural selection" has become the "god of the gaps" for the committed Darwinists so much so the it shows up in origin of life papers in a pre-biotic world

What is evidence for an uncaused creator? The question here is that there are mechanisms at work that we don't understand, as very beautifully illustrated by Michael Levin's work, even within the realm of causation where we have good empirical reach. It seems unnecessary to invoke entities "outside" the universe or whose existence is "independent" of our universe.

​@@SEMF "seems unnecessary"??? That statement baffles me. How can any complex machine exist by means of random chance and a selection process? Can you think of one? More fundemtally, do you know of any specified and complex information that came to be without an intelligence? Have you looked at the state of origin of life research lately? It hasn't moved since they debunked the lighting-in-a-primordial-soup hypthosesis. Their current theories are laughable (see James Tour). I wonder if the folks who discovered the Rosetta stone thought is seemed unecessary to consider an intelligence was involved or if they just chalked it up to wind and erossion. A living cell is vastly more complext than the most complext thing humans have every created. We still have no idea how to build one from scratch. But the real nail in the coffin of a godless universe has to atp synthase, you need it before you can have it and you can't make it until you've already made it. I think if you look around a bit your "seems unnecessary" will go away.

@@RipRyness There is no apparent reason why information dynamics of the known basic laws of physics wouldn't give rise to life as an emergent phenomenon. Arguably life is the most complex of all known emergent systems but analogous mechanisms have been quite successfully understood without the need of an intelligent entity who/which designs from outside the universe.

Michael Levin will be at one of our events soon. Stay tuned!

From Michael's work it seems that the bioelectricity network holds substantial information about shape and development.

Not that far off!

Thank you so much for the link, that's an amazing RU-vid channel, strongly recommended from us!

Unintended philosophy is the best kind of philosophy!

That's a common sentiment around here!

How does Michael's research make abiogenesis less plausible?

@@SEMF Did you not watch the video?

@@rl7012 We hosted the event. What makes you think this research implies abiogenesis is less likely?

@@SEMF I am sorry I have to state the obvious but the title of this video is called 'Biological Information beyond Genes: Bioelectricity' and the content is explaining the wonders of bioelectric networks. So how that makes abiogenesis even less plausible is because now there are even greater wonders to explain. Because in abiogenesis, not only is it necessary to explain how chemicals 'accidentally' bumped together on prebiotic earth and 'accidentally' formed the exact right molecules for life, in the exact right form and amount, then 'accidentally' put themselves together, millions of parts in a very sequence specific order, and thus 'accidentally' invented life. Now you have to explain even more of the wonders of a 'mindless blind' process that also includes bioelectric networks.

@@rl7012 That's a fair point. However, as far as we can see from the content of Michael's work, there is nothing too special about bioelectricity compared to other biological phenomena.

That's an interesting thought! Why not share it with our online community. You can join at no cost other than filling a quick form here: semf.org.es/participate/join.html

Quantum mechanical effects don't seem to be relevant in these systems.

You do use Light to stimulate the opening of voltage gated channels!

@@ronaldpearson2476 But the outcome does not depend on the QM effects, that's the upshot.

Cryptic but suggesting...

Why not ;)

?

How exactly would that work?

The capacity for suffering of planarians seems rather limited. What is problem with Michael's experiments?

@@SEMF How do you know that "the capacity for suffering of planarians seems rather limited". Any proof of this?

@@childoflight8982 The small and relatively underdeveloped nervous system. Not out of the realm of possibility that planarians experience something similar to suffering but it appears highly unlikely.

@@SEMF But this is really your ASSUMPTION, we don't now this for sure. Besides, we should treat ALL beings with respect, and not to cut their body parts off for the sake of some dubious experiment.

@@childoflight8982 Not an assumption but an observation based on empirical evidence.