How did Evolution produce Symmetry?

So then you would presume "to know" if then that plants ARE NOT going to the same places as animals? If so, would you be kind enough to try your sense at this question, "When a seed falls does it fall to the Earth or the Sun or some other Inertial System?" For thinking this way it is impossible to tell which way the psychology went and I see not reason to think that leaves didnt some how cut them self out of this arrow called the stem invert their "tail" end in your sense and provide the animals a convertable front and back at will of the higher clade seperation level. At least the variation in amphipods is not depauperated on this thought. The problem is that bilateral symeetry was used by Kant to show God's hand in his time and I see no reason this should not be found in plants if so well as well. Instead you have descended to vulgar or common language in your linkage of filiation.I do not think it occurs by a formula Weyl tried to use of lattice points + metric but I also do not think like Wolfram that Gould's selection on different levels can not be found. I have often wondered if Pasteur's grand asymmetry undelay biological symmetry much as an arrow could but Maxwell used the figure as well for nonorganic matter so I am matterially torn but not unthinking on the matter. Some people try to find chiralty as cause but the effect of Wolfram's program could indeed see Gould's biology trump any universality common in this to both plants and animals as well as the others.[This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 10-22-2003]

I know, but gravity seems to be a barrier to locomotion in animals while I have suggested it may be a facilitator in plants and yet by the current scholarship on symmetry bilateral or otherwise, there would be no way to make this difference unless say the photons do something polar and inverted differently in chlrophyll say vs retinas AND is generalized to all forms on both "sides". I would expect that whatever REPLICATION is insofar as it is a unified notion must move BOTH plants and animals focefully in THE SAME DIRECTUM. Now it could be that indeed replication functions differently such thta plants can THUS take different advantge of g-forces that animals by dint of getting around this simply cant but my first thought was that plants actually cut cell shape around places crystal lattices form in to which serve as "return points" for animals. I do not know which is correct therefore I am necessarily torn. Part of the problem here seems to be due to not enought focus molecular biologically on the horizontal force of base pairs perpendicular to the DNA twist coming BACK from the place the parts fore and aft are at but this I doubt in ration proporations any arse which is why I included the "others" (protozoans, bacteria, viruses).

My guess this is THE SAME reasoning WITHIN AGGASSIZ's MIND to Produce a study on Jelly Fish OR Turtles AFTER his FOSSIL FISH PRINTING BUSINESS failed. There is a function in the complex plane that can visually responds to desires subjectively to find non radial symmetry in star fish and other related echinoderms. I have suggested on WoLFRAM SCIENCE that even Wolfram nodes might be tried but time is not yet to show how the professional response to my writing can be wrong when the "radial" notion of Matchette's "metaphysical" map is involuted in. Certainly Faradic INDUCTION could imply the physics and wolfram's new kind of science Could test whether or not "electrical fluid thus generated was the same as galvanic fluid."p85(The Ambiguous Frog The Galvani-Volta Controversy on Animal Electricity by J. Mandelbaum1992Princeton) This however remands some issues in valance/affinity chemistry no matter how the water is assorted across generations which being but an historical approach may have been missed by the professionals who have commented on my own"" ideas.If one is thinking of "physics" only in the sense of some post-Enstein generation (Feynamn, Figenbaum etc) then the word "fluid" IS a problem no matter the electrotonics as it would be impossible to lexically differentiate "aetheral fluid"p57 even if the grammer does not remand the same legologo for Wolfram.[This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 12-22-2003]