Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Asexual to sexual reproduction? How?
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 68 of 78 (396050)
04-18-2007 7:02 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by miosim
04-18-2007 4:58 PM


Re: WHY DO TWO SEXES EXIST?
I began to think that a new statistically testable division of sexuality was possible on reading:
and thinking:
.
I have diagrammed the thought with this:
If true that would involve untangling the lines I drew with a computer program here:
untwisting according to some simulation like:
It seems to me that the medieval imagination that permited humans to draw plants like:
and
necessitate via the statistical extension within a form constrained in part by the work I overlayed here:
into inverting Gould’s diagram
into its real on(so says Brad):
Unfortunately, I do not get the time to really work on this idea much.
In this way the vertical delinations above would become transformed by the idea of sex into the horizontal ones here during gene expression.
Alternatively
http://aexion.org/sectorseven.aspx
(assuming I am not simply just plain wrong), the reason that I am slow on working it out may be that haptic touch sense is macrothermodyanmically required to "sense" this notion, i.e. pictures just wont work but differences of feel between right and left do...?)
On this view sex is not from asexual to bisexual but our confusion about it comes from wrong ways of thinking about the parent-offspring relation within the anscestor-descendent one. So, where Goldschmidt, for genetic exemplar, was wont to speak of systemic mutation and chemicallly induced phenocopies, we need a new symmetric representation but one that is not sexually visualized once the rod of the image is 'erected' and yet is always topologically unquie for each diploid-polyploid shape differences and thus within different "patterns" of chromosomes and their parts TO the expression thus expereinced a different but not asexual notion of the origin of bisexuality may arise.
Unfortunately, the difference of the shapes of letter signs continue to refuse a simple image of this, provisonaly symbol.

Click for full size image
I find that sex may become from the difference of crystal forms of viruses rather than the behavior of microbes. But that is just me.
Edited by Brad McFall, : link

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by miosim, posted 04-18-2007 4:58 PM miosim has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by miosim, posted 04-19-2007 10:50 AM Brad McFall has not replied
 Message 71 by miosim, posted 04-19-2007 10:51 AM Brad McFall has not replied
 Message 72 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2007 2:50 PM Brad McFall has not replied
 Message 73 by fallacycop, posted 04-19-2007 4:30 PM Brad McFall has replied
 Message 75 by Damouse, posted 10-11-2007 9:50 PM Brad McFall has replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 74 of 78 (396378)
04-19-2007 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by fallacycop
04-19-2007 4:30 PM


INSANITY? please clarifiy
quote:
from asexual reproduction
Eledhan OP
quote:
Asexual reproduction only takes one parent
Asexual reproduction - Wikipedia
TO
quote:
Bisexuality - Wikipedia(disambiguation)
quote:
Bisexual species, in biology, one that has members of two different distinct sexes (e.g. humans), opposed to unisexual (only one sex present, always females).
as in the OP
quote:
into bisexual reproduction if evolution is true? Can any evolutionist explain this to me? Heck, I'll even take a Creationists theory on how it could have happened
Dear Fallacycop
You will have to be more specific.
What really do you mean by "insanity". Did you assume that only via phatoms rather than images nor propositions was it "birthed" in me??
If it does not relate to this thread please address it here
EvC Forum: All about Brad McFall II.
(I am more than happy to air any concern about me you may have)
When I spoke of "erection of an image", I was not letting my imagination 'run' wild. I think Crashfrog said it. There is a Jeckel-Hyde aspect.
I had in mind rather specifically the use of the colored rods on the sides of voynich
http://www.voynich.nu/
papers
as a scheme for what Gould wrote as De Vries' "fluctuating variation"
only on my handling of the color scheme there would be explantory room missed by Stephen between 'mutational' and 'fluctuating' variation precisely where Gould was interested in the different views of Bateson and Goldschmidt. I took the higher level on the rod as being a "symbol" or "mnemonic" for the serially dipicted "plants" across the page. This permits me to ideationally visualize quite algebraically the "rotation" of Gould's image as I did(in the dispute over neutral evolution and phenotypes). I will explain more of this as I address the specifics of viruses non-fluid forms and the topic of this thread in response to others.
The crucial image comparison that I have left off of the internet so far is this:
and
This curvature is in PRINCIPIA TAXANOMICA (in Spanish) which I depicted here:
http://axiompanbiog.com/panbioglnks.aspx
Which is where logically my mind goes while (it) indicates a possible statistical division not noticed apparently available for observation. Reducing this comparison of images to the propositions of the "origin" of sex is however not one of mediate occurrance as there is some aspect of empricial geometry in the former that is lacking in the latter.
If being able to think within infinity makes you say I am insane then there will be nothing I can do to change your mind. I am fuctionin in society, working and paying for my survival and not crossing the law, so I do not know what else would be required. It would be unwise however for you not to change if you really didnt understand what I was trying to communicate.
I finally can read Bertrand Russell in my own voice. He never really tried to read Cantor for what in Kant Cantor was trying to apply. Of course no one after Russell even came that close. Biological descent with modification remands this attention insofar as geodesics do not inscribe the tracks of life. This will be obvious if any life is every discovered off Earth. Till then we confuse the difference of geometry and algebra where psychology was the experience as Russell was able to say but we can do differently today. If pressured by EvCers I may even be lead to bring the ideas round to the speciation of Amblystoma but it would be unwise for me to second guess this , where I have not written.
Edited by Brad McFall, : image placement

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by fallacycop, posted 04-19-2007 4:30 PM fallacycop has not replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 76 of 78 (427759)
10-12-2007 6:52 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Damouse
10-11-2007 9:50 PM


Re:WHY DO TWO SEXES EXIST?
It is hard to reply to all of the changes that have occurred in my thinking within a span of half a year or so.
The parent-offspring relation is generational while the ancestor-descendent one is equally temporal but can be spatially circumscribed somewhat more on account of being larger.
The symmetric diagram I presented above came to anticpate (for me) some statements made by Wright (showing (me) that some scholarship that relies on Provine'86 (words "dimension" and "direction" with respect 'peak shifts')) in his Volume II THEORY OF GENE FREQUENCIES, thus (for me again) geometrically dividing the space of quaternions of my own thinking since then... where Gould wrote of "vector of progress" instead, consequently my mind has not rotated back to this specific thought as of yet.
I have been keeping some kind of Cladoceran (if like Daphnia shows two kinds of reproduction (sexual and parthenogenic)) and made the identical observation reported in 1925 by Robertson that if light and electromotive force are applied large but not small water fleas flee to the light. By following up on this I may indeed be led to reconsider the subject of this thread. If, in the mean time you have a specific dimension to discuss, simply direct my attention to it.
best, Brad.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Damouse, posted 10-11-2007 9:50 PM Damouse has not replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 78 of 78 (428530)
10-16-2007 5:23 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by Equinox
10-16-2007 12:34 PM


Re:back to the topic, with diagram
You are flatering yourself to think that you "went" around something here. If you want to address me rather than the topic please take that to
EvC Forum: All about Brad McFall II.
I'll address ANYTHING you want there...(I you and I stoped rather than went around, and this seems to me to be because YOU did not answer MY questions, not because of me not posting. I will resume that topic with you if you like but you really need to address me directly as per above or else say only nice things etc (ethics and justice are two different things, creationists need justice but humanity needs some ethical norms first)
As for this topic I DID find a page that spelled out this "sex" for me in relation to other topics, I had keept it aside to scan for this thread. I will do that. It is here:
There is no reason why I may not be correct about sex here. This is a different issue than kinds(the link, again, would be with crosses or hybrids). If anyone really cares to know how I think I will explain this. (You had precluded me from addressing "kinds" at the margin of this diagram, which was where your thread was, this one is inside of that, to me.)
I am contemplating trying to define a Gladyshev thermostat via electrical paramaters that may induce the Cladocerans to switch TO sex (crossing)(DC currents cause electrode postivation while AC currents correlate with photopositivism, a combination programmed might work to facilliate the demonstration of the population divisions implicit in my sexual view).
Edited by Brad McFall, : added picture

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Equinox, posted 10-16-2007 12:34 PM Equinox has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024