This is an old revision of the document!
related articles
is based on current research and very challenging theories to explain behavior of electrons in cell biology. Some extracts follow from Phys•Org NewsQuantum Criticality in life's proteins
The authors note that charges entering a critically conducting biomolecule will be under the joint influence of the quantum Hamiltonian and the excessive decoherence caused by the environment. Currently a huge focus in Quantum biology, this kind of conductance has been seen for example, for excitons in the light-harvesting systems.
In suggesting that biomolecules, or at least most of them, are quantum critical conductors, Kauffman and his group are claiming that their electronic properties are precisely tuned to the transition point between a metal and an insulator.
They do note that some biomolecules are actually fairly good conductors. Some of the essential steroids which are bioactive extremely low (nanomolar) concentrations, like testosterone, fall into that category.
We might call to mind.. that others have looked for similar kinds of extreme behaviours in other examples of life's proteins. Stuart Hameroff has been a long time champion of networks of polymerized tubulins in the conduction of information in the cells through as yet fully defined mechanisms. In particular, we should mention recent work on driving the rapidly polymerization of microtubules through external electromagnetic fields raises the question of what new kinds of physics may be at play here.
Quantum coherence was proposed as an intrinsic feature of life by Schrodinger in his book 'What is Life', and historically supported by Albert Szent-Gyorgyi, Herbert Frohlich and others. But artificial quantum systems are plagued by thermal and electromagnetic interactions with their environments, disrupting quantum states and causing 'decoherence'. ….However some scientists including Kaufman and Sir Roger Penrose have thought that biology could have developed mechanisms to avoid decoherence, or perhaps that life even originated because of quantum mechanisms. Biomolecules are generally 'amphipathic', with charged, water-soluble polar groups on one end, and an oil-like, non-polar group on the other. Oil and water don't mix. When amphipathic biomolecules self-assemble (e.g. in protein folding), the non-polar groups coalesce, forming intra-protein 'hydrophobic pockets', excluding water. The polar ends stick out into the charged, watery environment.
Virtually all biomolecules and organelles have non-polar interiors friendly to quantum coherence (the 'quantum underground').
Consciousness has been proposed to involve organized quantum mechanisms, and in the brain, anesthetic gas molecules selectively prevent consciousness in non-polar, hydrophobic regions of brain proteins.
Microtubules are protein lattice polymers which organize neuronal interiors and regulate synapses. Several theories including the Penrose-Hameroff 'Orch OR' theory suggest consciousness depends on microtubules acting as quantum computers whose quantum bits ('qubits') involve coherent dipole couplings among pi electron resonance clouds.
What do anesthetics do in the microtubule quantum underground? Quantum coherence in photosynthesis proteins are enabled by coherent mechanical vibrations. In microtubules, Bandyopadhyay's group has shown coherent vibrations in gigahertz (109 Hz), megahertz (106 Hz) and kilohertz (103 Hz) ranges, self-similar patterns each separated by several orders of magnitude.
Coherent vibrations enable quantum coherence in photosynthesis proteins. Their role in microtubules may be as important for cognition and consciousness. Microtubule vibrations are accordion-like compressions and relaxations, with each compression pushing the pi resonance rings slightly closer together, past the quantum critical point, beneath the van der Waals radii and enabling quantum coherence throughout large regions of the microtubule quantum underground, and overlapping van der Waals radii, causing nonlinear repulsion and return to classical states. Thus quantum and classical states alternate, in various frequency scales which interact, not unlike music.
The Capacitive Wave System (CWS) was developed by the Autoimmunity Research FoundationNon-profit foundation dedicated to exploring a pathogenesis and therapy for chronic disease. in 2014 as a research device for experimental use by members of our research site struggling with the symptoms of chronic disease.
This 'do it yourself' sleeping shelter was developed by the Autoimmunity Research Foundation in 2018
serious trouble began around 1985, well before WIFI or cell phones. If I had to guess it was around the time of doppler radar roll out, but also when digital hand held radios began to be widely used by contractors. Further, as I understand it, the military was well aware of the trouble with microwaves, but from a national security point of view they seem to have worried that if the information got out a critical tool would be curtailed. Therefore, in my thinking the first coverup began with the military which hid the research saying RF was dangerous.
The problem is that a little bit is one thing, full on saturation is another, and that is what is happening now. Further, the problem extends to animals and insects such as bees. How big the trouble is that we are getting into goes way beyond tobacco.
Looking backwards, I would say the biggest obstacle was a missing understanding of the quantum criticality of proteins and other mega-molecules common to all life and their interaction with RF. And so the safety focus was on much higher signal levels, those based on thermal effects.
Indeed, with research warnings of safety issues being hidden by national security censorship (and later commercial interests), RF has become so integrated with modern life as to be nearly impossible to roll it back. But, clearly, now, there will have to be some serious roll back (birds, bats, bees, and whatnots can't wear hats). Until then we will have to survive.
mvanwink Aug. 2015
Cairo Feb. 2016 You may be able to contact the power company to see what is involved in getting rid of the smart meter. I opted out of the smart meter program and had them replace my communicating meter with a non-communicating meter. It took them about 5 to 6 months. In the meantime you could look at what shielding you could use between the meter and your home.
With new electronic devices, follow a couple of simple rules and educate your children how to use these fancy items:
Consult the store personnel about the EMF from any device you plan to purchase
see also in school
10 Reasons Why Handheld Devices Should Be Banned for Children Under the Age of 12
1. Rapid brain growth Between 0 and 2 years, infant's brains triple in size, and continue in a state of rapid development to 21 years of age (Christakis 2011). Early brain development is determined by environmental stimuli, or lack thereof. Stimulation to a developing brain caused by overexposure to technologies (cell phones, internet, iPads, TV), has been shown to be associated with executive functioning and attention deficit, cognitive delays, impaired learning, increased impulsivity and decreased ability to self-regulate, e.g. tantrums (Small 2008, Pagini 2010).
2. Delayed Development Technology use restricts movement, which can result in delayed development. One in three children now enter school developmentally delayed, negatively impacting literacy and academic achievement (HELP EDI Maps 2013). Movement enhances attention and learning ability (Ratey 2008). Use of technology under the age of 12 years is detrimental to child development and learning (Rowan 2010).
3. Epidemic Obesity TV and video game use correlates with increased obesity (Tremblay 2005). Children who are allowed a device in their bedrooms have 30% increased incidence of obesity (Feng 2011). One in four Canadian, and one in three U.S. children are obese (Tremblay 2011). 30% of children with obesity will develop diabetes, and obese individuals are at higher risk for early stroke and heart attack, gravely shortening life expectancy (Center for Disease Control and Prevention 2010). Largely due to obesity, 21st century children may be the first generation many of whom will not outlive their parents (Professor Andrew Prentice, BBC News 2002).
4. Sleep Deprivation 60% of parents do not supervise their child's technology usage, and 75% of children are allowed technology in their bedrooms (Kaiser Foundation 2010). 75% of children aged 9 and 10 years are sleep deprived to the extent that their grades are detrimentally impacted (Boston College 2012).
5. Mental Illness Technology overuse is implicated as a causal factor in rising rates of child depression, anxiety, attachment disorder, attention deficit, autism, bipolar disorder, psychosis and problematic child behavior (Bristol University 2010, Mentzoni 2011, Shin 2011, Liberatore 2011, Robinson 2008). One in six Canadian children have a diagnosed mental illness, many of whom are on dangerous psychotropic medication (Waddell 2007).
6. Aggression Violent media content can cause child aggression (Anderson, 2007). Young children are increasingly exposed to rising incidence of physical and sexual violence in today's media. “Grand Theft Auto V” portrays explicit sex, murder, rape, torture and mutilation, as do many movies and TV shows. The U.S. has categorized media violence as a Public Health Risk due to causal impact on child aggression (Huesmann 2007). Media reports increased use of restraints and seclusion rooms with children who exhibit uncontrolled aggression.
7. Digital dementia High speed media content can contribute to attention deficit, as well as decreased concentration and memory, due to the brain pruning neuronal tracks to the frontal cortex (Christakis 2004, Small 2008). Children who can't pay attention can't learn.
8. Addictions As parents attach more and more to technology, they are detaching from their children. In the absence of parental attachment, detached children can attach to devices, which can result in addiction (Rowan 2010). One in 11 children aged 8-18 years are addicted to technology (Gentile 2009).
9. Radiation emission In May of 2011, the World Health Organization classified cell phones (and other wireless devices) as a category 2B risk (possible carcinogen) due to radiation emission (WHO 2011). James McNamee with Health Canada in October of 2011 issued a cautionary warning stating “Children are more sensitive to a variety of agents than adults as their brains and immune systems are still developing, so you can't say the risk would be equal for a small adult as for a child.” (Globe and Mail 2011). In December, 2013 Dr. Anthony Miller from the University of Toronto's School of Public Health recommend that based on new research, radio frequency exposure should be reclassified as a 2A (probable carcinogen), not a 2B (possible carcinogen). American Academy of Pediatrics requested review of EMF radiation emissions from technology devices, citing three reasons regarding impact on children (AAP 2013).
10. Unsustainable The ways in which children are raised and educated with technology are no longer sustainable (Rowan 2010). Children are our future, but there is no future for children who overuse technology. A team-based approach is necessary and urgent in order to reduce the use of technology by children. Please reference below slide shows on http://www.zonein.ca under “videos” to share with others who are concerned about technology overuse by children.
Cellphones more dangerous than cigarettes - health advisory: Neurosurgeon's 14-month study featured in The Economic Times