Home » Cell biology » Vid: Excellent demo reel of cellular animation

Vid: Excellent demo reel of cellular animation

From 2012 XVIVO

It’s not captioned, so you have to watch the other vids to see what is happening if you are not a cell biologist.

Here’s a featured vid: Antibody immune response:

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

7 Responses to Vid: Excellent demo reel of cellular animation

  1. Off Topic: For anyone who believes that super-string theory may have purchase as to accurately describing ‘ultimate’ reality (I have reservations myself), The following video may be very interesting for you to watch (actually it was very interesting for me to watch, and as I said earlier, I have my reservations about super-string theory)

    Dr. Sylvester James Gates, Jr. Presents Evidence For Intelligent Design – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BMYtnv_OnI

    “Doubly-even self-dual linear binary error-correcting block code,” first invented by Claude Shannon in the 1940′s, has been discovered embedded WITHIN the equations of superstring theory!

    Why does nature have this? What errors does it need to correct? What is an ‘error’ for nature? More importantly what is the explanation for this freakish discovery?

    The most obvious conclusion for this discovery is Intelligent Design.

    Recent NPR interview with Professor Gates:
    http://being.publicradio.org/p.....symbolsofp

    Gates original paper:
    http://arxiv.org/abs/0806.0051

    Gates wikipedia page:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvester_James_Gates

  2. @ba

    Wow, that’s pretty interesting. A couple questions:

    1. I’m pretty weak when it comes to comsology. What’s a good and recent book on the subject? I think Stinger and Krauss (was that him on the right?) have been arguing against it? Where can I find recent developments in the debate?
    2. With the discovery? of the higgs, is string theory on the way out?

  3. Well JoeCoder, I usually refer to Professor Peter Woit of Colombia University when dealing with some of the overextended hoopla coming from super-string theory. Here is his website:

    Not Even Wrong
    http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/

    His website is named after the book he wrote on the subject. His treatment of string-theory has been less than gentle to put it mildly:

    Here are some entries of his along that ‘not to gentle’ line:

    String Theory Fails Another Test, the “Supertest” – December 2010
    Excerpt: It looks like string theory has failed the “supertest”. If you believe that string theory “predicts” low-energy supersymmetry, this is a serious failure.
    http://www.math.columbia.edu/~.....ss/?p=3338

    This Week’s Hype – November 3, 2011 by Peter Woit (Ph.D. in theoretical physics and a lecturer in mathematics at Columbia)
    Excerpt: the LHC has turned out to be dud, producing no black holes or extra dimensions,
    http://www.math.columbia.edu/~.....ss/?p=4118

    SUSY Still in Hiding – Prof. Peter Woit – Columbia University – February 2012
    Excerpt: The LHC (Large Haldron Collider) has done an impressive job of investigating and leaving in tatters the SUSY/extra-dimensional speculative universe that has dominated particle theory for much of the last thirty years, and this is likely to be one of its main legacies. These fields will undoubtedly continue to play a large role in particle theory, no matter how bad the experimental situation gets, as their advocates argue “Never, never, never give up!”, but fewer and fewer people will take them seriously.
    http://www.math.columbia.edu/~.....ss/?p=4437

    The Ultimate Guide to the Multiverse – Peter Woit – November 2011
    Excerpt: The multiverse propaganda machine has now been going full-blast for more than eight years, since at least 2003 or so, and I’m beginning to wonder “what’s next?”. Once your ideas about theoretical physics reach the point of having a theory that says nothing at all, there’s no way to take this any farther. You can debate the “measure problem” endlessly in academic journals, but the cover stories about how you have revolutionized physics can only go on so long before they reach their natural end of shelf-life. This has gone on longer than I’d ever have guessed, but surely it has to end sooner or later, – Peter Woit – Senior Lecturer at Columbia University
    http://www.math.columbia.edu/~.....ss/?p=4194

    “string theory, while dazzling, has outrun any conceivable experiment that could verify it”
    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....verify-it/

    Theory Bubbles – Peter Woit – April 2012
    Excerpt: With no reality check, a less than rigorous hypothesis such as string theory may linger on,,,, By contrast, a hypothesis such as string theory, which attempts to unify quantum mechanics with Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity, has so far not been tested critically by experimental data, even over a time span equivalent to a physicist’s career.
    http://www.math.columbia.edu/~.....ss/?p=4558

    F-theory Phenomenology – Peter Woit – March 2012
    Excerpt: So, the long-standing ideology that supersymmetry stabilizes the weak scale, and seeing its effects will finally give evidence for string theory unification looks like it is crumbling. With this hope gone, string theory unification becomes a completely unpredictive subject, with no hope of connection to experiment. One has an infinite array of mathematically highly complex models one can spend time studying, but it’s hard to characterize doing so as any recognizable form of physical science.
    http://www.math.columbia.edu/~.....ss/?p=4506

    String theory now “thoroughly irrelevant” to Large Hadron Collider work? – May 8, 2012
    Excerpt: The extent to which string theory is now agreed to be thoroughly irrelevant to LHC physics is kind of striking. The few people like Kane claiming otherwise are being ignored as an embarrassment. If evidence for SUSY or extra dimensions had shown up, this would be very, very different.
    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....ider-work/

  4. JoeCoder, although I am certainly far from understanding the mathematical intricacies of string theory, one thing that the ‘computer simulation’ (Matrix) conjecture had going for it, in my view, is that ‘ultimate reality’ is actually shown by quantum mechanics to reduce to ‘bits of information’ (which I personally hold to be more conducive to the ‘Logos’ of John1:1 than to a computer simulation):

    Researchers Succeed in Quantum Teleportation of Light Waves – April 2011
    Excerpt: In this experiment, researchers in Australia and Japan were able to transfer quantum information from one place to another without having to physically move it. It was destroyed in one place and instantly resurrected in another, “alive” again and unchanged. This is a major advance, as previous teleportation experiments were either very slow or caused some information to be lost.
    http://www.popsci.com/technolo.....-computing

    The following articles show that even atoms (Ions) are subject to teleportation:

    Ions have been teleported successfully for the first time by two independent research groups
    Excerpt: In fact, copying isn’t quite the right word for it. In order to reproduce the quantum state of one atom in a second atom, the original has to be destroyed. This is unavoidable – it is enforced by the laws of quantum mechanics, which stipulate that you can’t ‘clone’ a quantum state. In principle, however, the ‘copy’ can be indistinguishable from the original (that was destroyed),,,
    http://www.rsc.org/chemistrywo.....ammeup.asp

    Atom takes a quantum leap – 2009
    Excerpt: Ytterbium ions have been ‘teleported’ over a distance of a metre.,,,
    “What you’re moving is information, not the actual atoms,” says Chris Monroe, from the Joint Quantum Institute at the University of Maryland in College Park and an author of the paper. But as two particles of the same type differ only in their quantum states, the transfer of quantum information is equivalent to moving the first particle to the location of the second.
    http://www.freerepublic.com/fo.....1769/posts

    “It from bit symbolizes the idea that every item of the physical world has at bottom – at a very deep bottom, in most instances – an immaterial source and explanation; that which we call reality arises in the last analysis from the posing of yes-no questions and the registering of equipment-evoked responses; in short, that things physical are information-theoretic in origin.”
    John Archibald Wheeler

    Why the Quantum? It from Bit? A Participatory Universe?
    Excerpt: In conclusion, it may very well be said that information is the irreducible kernel from which everything else flows. Thence the question why nature appears quantized is simply a consequence of the fact that information itself is quantized by necessity. It might even be fair to observe that the concept that information is fundamental is very old knowledge of humanity, witness for example the beginning of gospel according to John: “In the beginning was the Word.” Anton Zeilinger – a leading expert in quantum teleportation:
    http://www.metanexus.net/archi.....linger.pdf

    Zeilinger’s principle
    Zeilinger’s principle states that any elementary system carries just one bit of information. This principle was put forward by Austrian physicist Anton Zeilinger in 1999 and subsequently developed by him to derive several aspects of quantum mechanics. Some have reasoned that this principle, in certain ways, links thermodynamics with information theory. [1]
    http://www.eoht.info/page/Zeilinger%27s+principle

    Of note: Materialism had postulated for centuries that everything reduced to, or emerged from material atoms, yet the correct structure of reality is now found by science to be as follows:

    1. material particles (mass) normally reduces to energy (e=mc^2)
    2. energy and mass both reduce to information (quantum teleportation)
    3. information reduces to consciousness (geometric centrality of conscious observation in universe dictates that consciousness must precede quantum wave collapse to its single bit state)

    Yet even though the ‘MATRIX’ computer simulation has this information basis of reality going for it, it should be noted that this popular science fiction conception of the universe ultimately being ‘merely’ a computer simulation (as in the ‘Matrix’ movies), is far too simplistic in its conception as to accurately describing ‘ultimate reality’:

    Is God No Better Than A Special Computer? – William Lane Craig – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xinwkb_b4k4

    Quantum Computing Promises New Insights, Not Just Supermachines – Scott Aaronson – December 2011
    Excerpt: And yet, even though useful quantum computers might still be decades away, many of their payoffs are already arriving. For example, the mere possibility of quantum computers has all but overthrown a conception of the universe that scientists like Stephen Wolfram have championed. That conception holds that, as in the “Matrix” movies, the universe itself is basically a giant computer, twiddling an array of 1’s and 0’s in essentially the same way any desktop PC does.
    Quantum computing has challenged that vision by showing that if “the universe is a computer,” then even at a hard-nosed theoretical level, it’s a vastly more powerful kind of computer than any yet constructed by humankind. Indeed, the only ways to evade that conclusion seem even crazier than quantum computing itself: One would have to overturn quantum mechanics, or else find a fast way to simulate quantum mechanics using today’s computers.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12.....ef=science

    Moreover string theory ultimately tries to unify General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, yet the conflict of reconciling General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics is far more severe than most people realize. The ‘conflict’ primarily arises from the inability of either theory to successfully deal with the Zero/Infinity problem that crops up in different places of each theory:

    THE MYSTERIOUS ZERO/INFINITY
    Excerpt: The biggest challenge to today’s physicists is how to reconcile general relativity and quantum mechanics. However, these two pillars of modern science were bound to be incompatible. “The universe of general relativity is a smooth rubber sheet. It is continuous and flowing, never sharp, never pointy. Quantum mechanics, on the other hand, describes a jerky and discontinuous universe. What the two theories have in common – and what they clash over – is zero.”,, “The infinite zero of a black hole — mass crammed into zero space, curving space infinitely — punches a hole in the smooth rubber sheet. The equations of general relativity cannot deal with the sharpness of zero. In a black hole, space and time are meaningless.”,, “Quantum mechanics has a similar problem, a problem related to the zero-point energy. The laws of quantum mechanics treat particles such as the electron as points; that is, they take up no space at all. The electron is a zero-dimensional object,,, According to the rules of quantum mechanics, the zero-dimensional electron has infinite mass and infinite charge.
    http://www.fmbr.org/editoral/e....._mar02.htm

    Quantum Mechanics and Relativity – The Collapse Of Physics? – video – with notes as to plausible reconciliation that is missed by materialists
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/6597379/

  5. Moreover, this extreme ‘mathematical difficulty’, of reconciling General Relativity with Quantum Mechanics into the much sought after ‘Theory of Everything’, was actually somewhat foreseeable from previous work, earlier in the 20th century, in mathematical logic by Kurt Godel:

    THE GOD OF THE MATHEMATICIANS – DAVID P. GOLDMAN – August 2010
    Excerpt: we cannot construct an ontology that makes God dispensable. Secularists can dismiss this as a mere exercise within predefined rules of the game of mathematical logic, but that is sour grapes, for it was the secular side that hoped to substitute logic for God in the first place. Gödel’s critique of the continuum hypothesis has the same implication as his incompleteness theorems: Mathematics never will create the sort of closed system that sorts reality into neat boxes.
    http://www.firstthings.com/art.....ematicians

    In fact, in their postulation of string theory, of their postulation of a mathematical theory of everything, it seems that mathematicians and physicists have completely forgotten this ‘number 1 breakthrough’ in mathematical logic in the twentieth century:

    Kurt Gödel – Incompleteness Theorem – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/w/8462821

    Gödel’s Incompleteness: The #1 Mathematical Breakthrough of the 20th Century
    Excerpt: Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem says:
    “Anything you can draw a circle around cannot explain itself without referring to something outside the circle – something you have to assume to be true but cannot prove “mathematically” to be true.”
    http://www.cosmicfingerprints......pleteness/

    Taking God Out of the Equation – Biblical Worldview – by Ron Tagliapietra – January 1, 2012
    Excerpt: Kurt Gödel (1906–1978) proved that no logical systems (if they include the counting numbers) can have all three of the following properties.
    1. Validity . . . all conclusions are reached by valid reasoning.
    2. Consistency . . . no conclusions contradict any other conclusions.
    3. Completeness . . . all statements made in the system are either true or false.
    The details filled a book, but the basic concept was simple and elegant. He summed it up this way: “Anything you can draw a circle around cannot explain itself without referring to something outside the circle—something you have to assume but cannot prove.” For this reason, his proof is also called the Incompleteness Theorem.
    Kurt Gödel had dropped a bomb on the foundations of mathematics. Math could not play the role of God as infinite and autonomous. It was shocking, though, that logic could prove that mathematics could not be its own ultimate foundation.
    Christians should not have been surprised. The first two conditions are true about math: it is valid and consistent. But only God fulfills the third condition. Only He is complete and therefore self-dependent (autonomous). God alone is “all in all” (1 Corinthians 15:28), “the beginning and the end” (Revelation 22:13). God is the ultimate authority (Hebrews 6:13), and in Christ are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Colossians 2:3).
    http://www.answersingenesis.or...../equation#

    Godel, who logically proved you cannot have a mathematical ‘Theory of Everything’, without allowing God to bring completeness to the mathematical ‘Theory of Everything’, also had this to say:

    The God of the Mathematicians – Goldman
    Excerpt: As Gödel told Hao Wang, “Einstein’s religion [was] more abstract, like Spinoza and Indian philosophy. Spinoza’s god is less than a person; mine is more than a person; because God can play the role of a person.” – Kurt Gödel – (Gödel is considered one of the greatest logicians who ever existed)
    http://www.firstthings.com/art.....ematicians

    And indeed, if one allows that ‘God can play the role of a person’ then a successful resolution to the zero/infinity conflict of General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics readily pops out at us:

    The End Of Christianity – Finding a Good God in an Evil World – Pg.31
    William Dembski PhD. Mathematics
    Excerpt: “In mathematics there are two ways to go to infinity. One is to grow large without measure. The other is to form a fraction in which the denominator goes to zero. The Cross is a path of humility in which the infinite God becomes finite and then contracts to zero, only to resurrect and thereby unite a finite humanity within a newfound infinity.”
    http://www.designinference.com.....of_xty.pdf

    The Center Of The Universe Is Life – General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, Entropy and The Shroud Of Turin – video
    http://vimeo.com/34084462

    Turin Shroud Enters 3D Age – Pictures, Articles and Videos
    https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1gDY4CJkoFedewMG94gdUk1Z1jexestdy5fh87RwWAfg

    Condensed notes on The Authenticity of the Shroud of Turin
    https://docs.google.com/document/d/15IGs-5nupAmTdE5V-_uPjz25ViXbQKi9-TyhnLpaC9U/edit

  6. Of note: I hold ‘growing large without measure’ to be a lesser quality infinity than a fraction in which the denominator goes to zero. The reason why I hold growing large without measure to be a ‘lesser quality infinity’ than a fraction in which the denominator goes to zero is stated at the 4:30 minute mark of the following video:

    Can A “Beginning-less Universe” Exist? – William Lane Craig – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8YN0fwo5J4

    Verse and music:

    Colossians 1:15-20
    The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.

    Empty (Empty Cross Empty Tomb) with Dan Haseltine Matt Hammitt (Music Inspired by The Story)
    http://www.godtube.com/watch/?v=F22MCCNU

  7. OT:

    Sun’s Almost Perfectly Round Shape Baffles Scientists – (Aug. 16, 2012) —
    Excerpt: The sun is nearly the roundest object ever measured. If scaled to the size of a beach ball, it would be so round that the difference between the widest and narrow diameters would be much less than the width of a human hair.,,, They also found that the solar flattening is remarkably constant over time and too small to agree with that predicted from its surface rotation. (HMMM?, is this just a ittle anomaly or is it profound insight into the structure of reality?)
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/re.....150801.htm

    Here is a interesting related note on ’roundness’:

    Bucky Balls – Andy Gion
    Buckyballs (C60; Carbon 60) are the roundest and most symmetrical large molecule known to man. Buckministerfullerine continues to astonish with one amazing property after another. C60 is the third major form of pure carbon; graphite and diamond are the other two. Buckyballs were discovered in 1985,,,
    http://www.3rd1000.com/bucky/bucky.htm

    The delicate balance at which carbon is synthesized in stars is truly a work of art. Fred Hoyle (1915-2001), a famed astrophysicist, is the scientist who established the nucleo-synthesis of heavier elements within stars as mathematically valid in 1946. He is said to have converted from staunch atheism into being a Theist after discovering the precise balance at which carbon is synthesized in stars. Years after Sir Fred discovered the stunning precision with which carbon is synthesized in stars he stated this:

    From 1953 onward, Willy Fowler and I have always been intrigued by the remarkable relation of the 7.65 MeV energy level in the nucleus of 12 C to the 7.12 MeV level in 16 O. If you wanted to produce carbon and oxygen in roughly equal quantities by stellar nucleosynthesis, these are the two levels you would have to fix, and your fixing would have to be just where these levels are actually found to be. Another put-up job? … I am inclined to think so. A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has “monkeyed” with the physics as well as the chemistry and biology, and there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. -
    Sir Fred Hoyle, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 20 (1982): 16.

    Sir Fred also stated this:

    I do not believe that any physicist who examined the evidence could fail to draw the inference that the laws of nuclear physics have been deliberately designed with regard to the consequences they produce within stars.
    Sir Fred Hoyle – “The Universe: Past and Present Reflections.” Engineering and Science, November, 1981. pp. 8–12

    Michael Denton – We Are Stardust – Uncanny Balance Of The Elements – and Atheist Fred Hoyle’s conversion from atheism to Deism/Theism – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4003877

Leave a Reply