Path: Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.supernews.com!news.supernews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 16:22:14 +0000
From: John Larkin <jjSNIPlarkin@highNONOlandtechnology.com>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Re: OT: Dynamic DNA structures and the formation of memory
Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 09:20:24 -0700
Organization: Highland Tech
Reply-To: xx@yy.com
Message-ID: <a9f44j5clq47cgj7u7jgbu5k7e4ctqc8pi@4ax.com>
References: <v175s8$1mprm$1@dont-email.me> <vsvf3jt621a4kvtj2rq4162nhcpvsubeda@4ax.com> <v1rpvh$335cp$1@dont-email.me> <77r24jloc6k59o98o9nb47j8ul3n3ngh6a@4ax.com> <f6644jhqdkgo00numinfft8mbuj89kbq5r@4ax.com> <jr744j5mjf6bhrdt5kfmepdiq4imjeomje@4ax.com> <bib44j1cv49j2ev4t9sd2d62f38q1hg7e3@4ax.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 3.1/32.783
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 89
X-Trace: sv3-fWBcYcGxt/mBpx3eGI6WHuSWwv+2lAuGgZhiW2DZjfvTmJtO/2kjPv8nG2jA/dSV5cGdDfFM/ZyB+Ka!YGdxdBTDZbhxJg+4wQx4zKWgyJiD0DzlVg6MWFOGTiZuffiYH43hnq63STsvmcEGtRPyGwqkEHkh!9O/e+g==
X-Complaints-To: www.supernews.com/docs/abuse.html
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: www.supernews.com/docs/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 5034

On Mon, 13 May 2024 11:18:13 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:

>On Mon, 13 May 2024 07:13:48 -0700, John Larkin
><jjSNIPlarkin@highNONOlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 13 May 2024 09:54:25 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 12 May 2024 18:30:32 -0700, John Larkin
>>><jjSNIPlarkin@highNONOlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 12 May 2024 21:21:56 -0400, "Tom Del Rosso"
>>>><fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>John Larkin wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 05 May 2024 05:36:06 GMT, Jan Panteltje
>>>>>> <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dynamic DNA structures and the formation of memory
>>>>>>> https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/05/240501125755.htm
>>>>>>> Summary:
>>>>>>> An international collaborative research team has discovered that
>>>>>>> G-quadraplex DNA (G4-DNA) accumulates in neurons and dynamically
>>>>>>> controls the activation and repression of genes underlying long-term
>>>>>>> memory formation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have always though that memory could be stored as DNA sequenxes...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> More likely RNA or some other protein.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The oft-mocked Lamarckian concept, of genetic learning (not just
>>>>>> natural selection) is probably real, and some reverse transcription
>>>>>> does happen, namely that DNA is edited within the life of one
>>>>>> organism. But remembering where you left your glasses is probably
>>>>>> handled at a lower level than editing your chromosones.
>>>>>
>>>>>But how can it be passed down as Lamarck thought, if the eggs in the 
>>>>>ovaries are formed early? If genetic memory could be passed down it 
>>>>>would be only from the father because sperm are formed recently. But the 
>>>>>sperm spawn from local cells. If DNA is edited to store memory then 
>>>>>would these changes be duplicated in all cells in all tissues? How else 
>>>>>would the changes get into sperm cells? How could they get into eggs?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>If it is advantageous for a woman's life experiences to be passed onto
>>>>her children, nature will find a way.
>>>
>>>Yes, but that is not the issue.  Lamark claimed that it could be done
>>>very quickly, in the lifetime of one woman, versus over generations
>>>(where DNA controls).  Actually, Lamark was focused on Wheat,
>>>specifically can one train wheat to grow in Siberia; this was very
>>>attractive to Stalin.  Turns out you cannot.
>>>
>>>But there is a twist.  There was a study of the effect of mass
>>>starvation of the Swedish population which showed that one could
>>>detect the effect of starvation of grandfathers on their
>>>grandchildren.  It is thought that this is mediated by epigenetic
>>>information carried in methyl tags on the DNA, but I don't know if
>>>that was ever sorted out.  "Överkalix study":
>>>
>>>.<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96verkalix_study>
>>>
>>>Joe Gwinn
>>
>>
>>Classic evolution, random mutation and selection, is absurdly
>>inefficient. Why wouldn't species use something better? Because the
>>scientific establishment doesn't approve?
>
>But it's good enough at the species level, or it would have been
>replaced by now.

It has been. Because species compete.

>We on SED did discuss the evolution of the eye some
>time ago - same framework, and the actual design is pretty rough in
>places.
>
>How "classic evolution" works is itself subject to evolution, and
>there are some pretty wild genetic systems in tiny critters.
>
>Joe Gwinn

Yes, the mechanisms of evolution must themselves evolve. Why wouldn't
they?