Thursday, 26 July 2012

Threats Due to Genetically Modified Organisms – A Realistic Assessment

Threats Due to Genetically Modified Organisms – A Realistic Assessment
Summary: There has been much debate about unknown bad effects of genetically modified organisms that might lead to uncontrollable and irreparable damage to environment and ecosystems. Genetically modified organisms are incapable of natural propagation. Therefore, all the fears about them are unfounded. Hence we should not unnecessarily restrict ourselves in their usage.

There has been much debate about safety of genetically modified crops but trading of charges and countercharges for and against genetically modified crops continues unabated even after three decades (since 1986) of intense debate.
Potential threats due to genetically modified crops – products of genetic engineering which generally involves introduction of distantly related genes into a genome, can be broadly classified into short term risks and long term risks.
Short term risks are generally identified early and are easily amenable to experimental verification. Therefore they are also often reported in literature. Hence short term risks are easily manageable before, during and after re easily amenable to human regulation and control can’t be the reason petual debate. All that needs to be done is to manage short term risks as and when encountered. Appropriate control measures can be easily applied at the level of seed production.
As far as long term risks are concerned, the principal threat is the threat of uncontrollable, irreparable threat to ecosystems and environment. Presently this is essentially a theoretical risk, since no such instance has actually been reported attributable to genetically modified organisms. Genetically modified crops have been most extensively used in USA during the past two decades and no untoward long term adverse effects have been noticed.  In fact 90% of food in USA is derived from genetically modified crops.
The principal reason for this is that for all biological species and varieties identity and integrity are big issues. All biological species and varieties tend to keep their identity and integrity in the midst of naturally occurring massive gene flow with in any ecosystem. In fact it can be safely assumed that all the species and varieties in any ecosystem are exposed to all the genes present in the ecosystem, all the time. It is only by virtue of this natural ability to keep identity and integrity, various species and varieties are able to do so.
Therefore, technically speaking, a foreign gene may be relatively easy to introduce within an organism belonging to a particular species or variety, as is being routinely done in the course of genetic engineering, but it is indeed very difficult to sustain and propagate over prolonged periods of time. Later or sooner the foreign gene shall be identified and weeded out with or without the use of terminator technology. This understanding has led the author from a historical definition of heredity to a rational definition of heredity which views heredity as a dynamic phenomenon. The new definition of heredity is as under:-
            “Heredity is defined as the ability of the genome to reproduce parental phenotype with high but not complete degree of fidelity”
Use of the phrase “the ability of the genome” says it all.
In the entire debate about genetically modified organisms we are concerned with ill effects of naturally sustainable genetically modified organisms which normally involves introduction of remotely related or rather unrelated genes into a genome. But what we overlook is the fact even naturally sustainable hybrids occur only as exception to the rule. In hybrids compatibility or identity and integrity issues are much less severe because hybridization always occurs among closely related species and varieties.
Fitzpatrick says that besides the salamander hybrids, he only knows of one other sustainable animal hybrid and three sustainable plant hybrids. Salamander hybrids are naturally sustainable hybrids between California Tiger Salamander and Barred Tiger Salamander. Visit:- http://www.tititudorancea.com/z/salamander_species_interbreeding_hybrids.htm
Keeping in view rarity of naturally occurring sustainable hybrids despite enormous opportunity, incidence of naturally sustainable genetically modified organisms can only be the rarest of rare events and can’t be regarded as a threat for all practical purposes. As a matter of fact introduction of new species and varieties from one geographical region into another poses much greater ecological and environmental threat and has happened many times in the past. In fact all epidemics and uncontrollable weeds such as congress grass in India can be attributed to such events.
Hence, there can’t be any non-verifiable potential risk due to genetically modified organisms that might catch us unguarded. Therefore, let us not fight the Phantom. Summing up, genetically modified organisms are reasonably safe for all environmental and ecological purposes and let us not be carried away by our phobias.
Author: Dr Mahesh C. Jain is a practicing medical doctor and has written the book “Encounter of Science with Philosophy – A synthetic view”. The book begins with first chapter devoted to scientifically valid concept of God and then explains cosmic phenomena right from origin of nature and universe up to origin of life and evolution of man. The book includes several chapters devoted to auxiliary concepts and social sciences as corollaries to the concept of God. This is the only book that deals with subject matter of origin of nature and universe beginning from null (Zero or nothing).  This article is inspired by author’s understanding of nature.
Visit:http:// www.sciencengod.com
          http://www.sciencengod.com/clipboard.htm
http://www.sciencengod.com/clipboard.htm

Tuesday, 17 July 2012

What is the origin of wants and desires?

What is the origin of wants and desires?
Summary: We all have wants and desires beyond our material needs. But what is the source of these wants and desires is an enigma. Source of these wants and desires is traced to universal instincts to exist, evolve and diversify. The need to regulate the same is emphasized.
Have you ever wondered, why at all do we have wants and desires in the absence of any material need? Why can’t we sit idle with all our biological needs satiated? Why at all I am writing this article? Why don’t we ever want to leave this world despite all the hardship we may be facing in this world? Why do we want to progress from one pillar of strength to another? Why the stronger we are, greater is the desire to progress? Why does the rich say that one doesn’t really have enough money? Why rich wants to get richer? Why wise wants to get wiser? Why men of knowledge are haunted by their ignorance and want to know more? Why women are never satiated by their wardrobe and their beauty? Why does the man in authority ever crave for more authority? Why do people climb mountains and indulge in other adventurous acts? Why do we listen to music when it has nothing to do with our biological needs? Why do we want to keep our emotional relations? Why parents worry about their children and why children want to grow bigger?
This can go on and on but for the sake of brevity it may be stated that the key issues are why we want to keep existence, why do we want to progress in life and why do we seek variety and change despite there being no material need? Alternatively, why do we want to progress along our chosen line of natural progression?
We all have biological needs, being living organisms. We all have emotional and intellectual needs for being humans possessed with self awareness or voluntary consciousness. But we still have wants and desire much beyond our needs. Alexander the great wanted to rule the world and Nero wanted to see burning Rome. This is despite the fact that we are born perfect of our type since this is the mandatory precondition to our existence. The Darwinian notion of imperfect forms trying to perfect themselves is absolutely and totally wrong. Therefore, so long as we are able keep our existence our needs must stand more or less satisfied. A Kollicker in 1864 has rightly stated that each animal suffices for its own ends, is perfect of its kind, and needs no further development. A Kollicker has further stated “Assuredly, every organ has and every organism fulfills, its end, but its purpose is not the condition of its existence. Every organism is also sufficiently perfect for the purpose it serves, and in that it is useless to seek for a cause of its improvement. 
To find answer to the question paused in this article, let us travel backward in time when there was no universe, not even time and space existed then. There existed only null (zero or nothing) and not even void (space) but even this null was in a state of dynamic equilibrium with ‘change’ as its inherent property. So we had an ever-changing/ever-oscillating null that was perfect of its type. There was nothing to challenge its existence. Yet within this null existed besides universal instinct to exist, universal instinct to evolve and diversify. All its descendents carried its spirit and hence were endowed with universal instinct to exist, evolve and seek variety or diversity.
These three universal instincts are trans-hierarchically valid principles of nature, valid across the natural hierarchy. Universal instinct to exist operates as a matter of law but universal instinct to evolve and diversify being subject to constrained development do not operate as a matter of law.  In real world variable expression of these instincts is seen along different lines of progression.
Our wants and desires have their origin in innate nature of universe. Our needs can only partly account for our wants and desires. Hence our wants and desires may not always be grounded in necessity. But keeping in view range and reach of human wants and desires, to prevent consequential self destructive conflict of interests, regulation of human wants and desires is mandatory so as to keep dynamic equilibrium of both – nature as well as human society.  
Author: Dr Mahesh C. Jain is a practicing medical doctor has written the book “Encounter of Science with Philosophy – A synthetic view”. The book begins with first chapter devoted to scientifically valid concept of God and then explains cosmic phenomena right from origin of nature and universe up to origin of life and evolution of man. The book includes several chapters devoted to auxiliary concepts and social sciences as corollaries to the concept of God. This article is inspired by author’s understanding of nature.
Visit:http:// www.sciencengod.com
          http://www.sciencengod.com/clipboard.htm
http://www.sciencengod.com/clipboard.htm

Tuesday, 10 July 2012

What Really Ails God Particle Business?

    What Really Ails God Particle Business?
Summary: Following the news of God Particle discovery on July4, 2012, various issues pertaining to God Particle were re-examined by the author and have been reported herein. Several infirmities about the concept as well the experiment are pointed out. It is concluded that Higgs Boson even if truly exist represent nothing more than a process of transformation.
On July 4, 2012, we all heard that scientists at CERN have been able to nearly discover God Particle but the world press preferred to report conclusive discovery of God Particle with all the euphoria associated with the claimed discovery.
This article is a sequel to my earlier article “Why God Particle Demonstration is a Flop Show?” Contents of previous article are not being repeated herein for the sake of brevity but stand valid till date. However recent claims of CERN have led to some fresh thinking on my part. Hence the present article. 
About the concept: To call Higgs Boson, God Particle is a misnomer in itself.
1.     The real issue is explaining cosmic phenomena having a beginning from presumed null and not even void. Since ‘void’ means ’space’ and in my understanding time, space, matter and energy have always coexisted in   universe wherein time and space are non-particulate, and matter and energy are particulate. But God Particle concept is totally silent about what preceded particulate stages of the universe i.e. even the so called dense matter of Big Bang Theory. The attribute of God can only be justifiable if given to something that preceded particulate stages of nature or universe as common denominator of universe. Therefore, the phrase “God Particle” fails to deliver its claims. God Particle can never provide comprehensive explanation of natural phenomenon.
2.     Even if we are able to explain origin of mass on the basis of God Particle, how does it explain consciousness or Natural Intelligence without which there can’t be any biological phenomena including human beings?
3.     To understand nature, we have to postulate constancy of natural laws and there is no evidence that natural laws once established have varied thereafter. Therefore if God Particle played any role in origin of mass and origin of universe then it must be doing the same even now and that must be reflected in known natural phenomena. However no evidence supporting such a contention is known so far. Influences leading to origin of universe can’t be purely historical in character. The said influences have to be concurrent in character and must be reflected in concurrent natural phenomena, one way or the other. Therefore historical Big Bang and historical God Particle can be nothing but myths perpetuated by scientific community.
4.               Even Photons, though devoid of mass, have mass equivalent known as Gravitational mass of Photon. Therefore, why should origin of mass in a material particle be such a big issue is beyond comprehension? It can be stated that energy facilitates motion but energy transformed in to mass as per the famous equation E = mc2 resists motion. So the dividing line is transformation of mass equivalent into mass. This dividing line is crossed in the reverse direction in all light emitting devices and other electromagnetic radiation emitting devices under ordinary conditions every day, for example in an electric bulb, X-ray machine etc. Similarly conversion of mass equivalent into mass must be happening whenever and wherever electromagnetic radiations are absorbed. So what is the big deal about LHC experiment?
5.     Photons are interactive with gravitational field as reflected by Gravitational deflection of light but suffer no space drag or friction in their sojourn through gravitational fields filling the so called empty space but on the contrary particles passing through Higgs field and interactive with Higgs field suffer space drag or friction and are said to acquire their mass from Higgs Boson through Higgs field and it is said to happen because of interaction. It suggests that physicists are indulging in convenient as opposed to real explanations of natural phenomena.
6.     The real question is why objects in universe have mass and the answer is to acquire stability and hence structure which is essential for evolution of natural hierarchy. This leads us the next question as to how objects acquire mass and this question is, precisely speaking, the subject matter of present debate.
7.     The whole God Particle phenomena even if interpreted positively can’t be regarded as anything more than transformation mechanism.
About the experiment
1.     Originally scientists at CERN wanted to accelerate Protons (Hydrogen atoms) to velocity of light. Since Hydrogen atoms at a velocity of 750 Km/sec mutually collide leading to nuclear fusion and formation of Helium. So how this nuclear reaction was prevented? This being essential to meet their experimental objectives. In the press releases authorities at CERN have not addressed this question to themselves.
2.     No press release has reported that scientists at CERN actually accelerated Protons (Hydrogen atoms) to velocity of light before collision. All that they have claimed is that they have seen certain particles travelling at the velocity of light with Photonic properties. Therefore observed particles are the result of transformation resulting from collision of Protons and if they have Photonic properties, than their velocity needs no further examination. But such transformation is a daily occurrence in all light emitting devices and other electromagnetic radiation emitting devices. So how can one attach any extraordinary meaning to such an event in LHC experiment?
How can such transformation be the key to comprehensive explanation of Cosmic Phenomena is clearly beyond comprehension?  All that may be positively said about the whole episode is that Particulate physics is attempting to discover technical framework for inter-particulate transformation in subatomic plane. But how far they succeed is to be seen.
Author: Dr Mahesh C. Jain is a practicing medical doctor has written the book “Encounter of Science with Philosophy – A synthetic view”. The book begins with first chapter devoted to scientifically valid concept of God and then explains cosmic phenomena right from origin of nature and universe up to origin of life and evolution of man. The book includes several chapters devoted to auxiliary concepts and social sciences as corollaries to the concept of God. This article is in line with author’s understanding of nature.
Visit:  http//www.sciencengod.com       http://www.sciencengod.com/clipboard.htm   http://www.sciencengod.com/blog/why-god-particle-demonstration-is-a-flop-show

Wednesday, 4 July 2012

Do We have Unlimited Freedom

Do We have Unlimited Freedom?
Summary: Freedom is a universal sentiment and has been so granted even by law. But in practice it is subject to several constraints. Resolution of these constraints demands perpetual intellectual efforts. Often freedom does not mean more than freedom to perform one’s duties without fear of repercussions and reservations. It does not mean freedom to enjoy one’s whims and fancies.  
Freedom is a universal sentiment which we all relish. We all have a craving for freedom. Freedom to enjoy life according to our values, preferences, selections, interests, fantasies, whims and fancies etc. is something we all desire. We all have idiosyncrasies and we want the freedom to enjoy them too.
In USA, there is even a Statue of Liberty. Article 21 of Constitution of India confers upon its citizens, fundamental right to life and liberty. I presume that this must be true of constitutions of other nations also. Ironically, the fundamental right to liberty is ambiguous in its statement with inbuilt contradiction. It is ambiguous because it leaves freedom undefined and moreover, freedom can never be total. It is self-contradictory because each and every law is a constraint on human freedom. Twentieth century has witnessed several social movements designated as freedom movements. Teenagers can often be seen singing the tune “This is my life”. Spouses can often be seen breaking homes to enjoy personal freedom. Their craving for personal freedom prevails over the need to have homes. Even women liberation movements have moved in the direction of freedom unlimited.
So freedom is individually, socially and legally recognized sentiment. Freedom is easy to dream but difficult to realize. Because of conflict of interests in human society, one has to struggle throughout one’s life to achieve and sustain freedom. Human freedom is subject to several constraints.
1.     Material constraints: One can enjoy one’s freedom only from the material position one is holding at the given moment, like Nero by virtue of his material position had the liberty to enjoy burning Rome. Since material position evolves over a period of time, hence historical or time dependent constraints to freedom are inevitable.
2.     Natural Laws: As stated before that every law is a constraint on human freedom, same is true of natural laws as well. Nature does not function in derogation of its laws. Hence relevant natural laws determine scope, limits and potential of available freedom.
3.     Man made laws:  Law in human society, in the absence of proper understanding of its nature has evolved into a plethora of mutually conflicting principles or a jig saw puzzle upon which judiciary is supposed to adjudicate in the final analysis. Therefore in the absence of proper definition of fundamental rights, all the fundamental rights are subject to descriptive and narrative, event specific definitions evolved by the esteemed judiciary. Even the well defined legal rights are subject to compliance with large number of so called procedural laws, administrative laws, contractual obligations, customs and usage, systemic infirmities etc. Hence no legal right is absolute; it is always subject to a plethora of attendant conditions.
4.     Rationality: The general demand for rationality as we see in human conduct is because nature is self-organizing. Anything can exist and function within the constraints of some harmonized ‘order’ and ‘system’ only. Teilhard de Chardin has summed up the general nature of organization in nature as “a distinct centre radiating at the core of systems of centers”. It implies that nature is organized in to self sustaining units or harmonious wholes and each and every unit has to exist in harmonious interaction with surrounding units. But contradictions’ being inherent in nature such as desire for freedom is antithetical to the need for discipline. Therefore, for anything to exist and function, it has to dynamically and harmoniously resolve all the contradictions it faces all the time. In day to day living in human society it transforms into test of reasonableness of conduct, fair-play and justice.
Therefore, even though emotionally we all stand for unlimited freedom but in fact it is a mirage. We need to understand limits to our freedom as well its scope. We must learn the manner in which freedom is to be enjoyed. We can enjoy our freedom only by following the path of reasonableness, fairness and justice. Otherwise, we are bound to run into additional contradictions and controversies which besides being detrimental to our freedom are bound to be self destructive and socially disruptive. It demands a perpetual intellectual effort. So the sentiment of freedom can’t be enjoyed without commensurate intellectual efforts. This is precisely the reason that if you are in conflict with a fool, you don’t have to hang the fool, the fool will hang himself. You only have to facilitate his movement in the right direction.
Human freedom has as many facets as diversity of human activities, wants, desires and duties. Material definition of freedom is bound to be context dependent but the underlying essence has to be dynamic balancing of various factors and need for harmony in pursuance of defined goals and objectives.. Its determination may often demand intellectual efforts besides sentiment of freedom.  So, merely granting fundamental right to freedom or constructing Statute of Liberty or echoing the sentiment of freedom time and again by celebrating Independence Day year after year is not enough. It requires perpetual intellectual efforts.
To circumvent difficulties due to constraints upon human understanding, this task has often been performed by great thinkers of the past as well as the present in the shape of religious prescriptions, legal principles, morals and ethics etc. even if with imperfections.
In general, in material terms, freedom only means freedom to perform one’s duties without fear of repercussions or reservations. Duties are context dependent and therefore may vary according to nature of relationship, faiths, beliefs, religious prescription, peer group prescriptions, ethics and morals determined by professional bodies, law whether natural or man-made etc.
Therefore deprivation of freedom only means preventing an individual from enjoying performance of his duties. It does not and it can’t mean freedom to act according to one’s whims and fancies or without any rhyme and reason.
Author: Dr Mahesh C. Jain is a practicing medical doctor has written the book “Encounter of Science with Philosophy – A synthetic view”. The book begins with first chapter devoted to scientifically valid concept of God and then explains cosmic phenomena right from origin of nature and universe up to origin of life and evolution of man. The book includes several chapters devoted to auxiliary concepts and social sciences as corollaries to the concept of God. This article is inspired by author’s understanding of nature.
Visit:http:// www.sciencengod.com
          http://www.sciencengod.com/clipboard.htm
http://www.sciencengod.com/blog/feed/