Simultaneity paradox in epidemiology and the assumption of non separability in biology (NSB)

Re-enchant the world Introduction 40 million people in the world are infected with HIV, including 26 million in Africa and 150,000 in France (2005). « For the past 25 years worldwide, 25 million people died from diseases associated with AIDS and 65 million people were infected with HIV. » Combination therapies exist, better than nothing indeed, but far from sufficient (Fig. 1 and 1.3.1) Either it has been expected for a very long time that a traditional radical solution exists or one explores an “original” path, the solution chosen here, distancing oneself from the usual method used in basic research and with a critical look at the current evolution theories, especially the stochastic nature of genetic mutation. A process that is constrained, directed, correlative, but undoubtedly a random one, an approach one can assimilate to « Intelligent Design » (ID), except that it is experimental (criterion of Karl Popper: refutable or falsifiable proposal). ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 1 Evolutionary parallelism or simultaneity paradox (the concept of bioloqiqy non-locality) is at the heart of the proposal, simultaneity implying a temporal correlation. Action at a distance (quantum theory) is associated with uncertainty. We used to follow the action step by step, continuity being the rule: all theories of evolution are based on this a priori that underlies the paradigm. Yet at least two simultaneous epidemics, one with HIV, the other with Ebola are clearly to be seen in the empirical domain. They do not fit into the paradigm of « step by step action »: Why did the first HIV epidemic start at the same time in Africa and the United States in the early 1980s? We know that this virus was new in the New World although ancient in Africa, and that the affected populations were and still are totally different.(1) The way in which HIV arrived in the United States is known, it came from Africa to the United States via the Caribbean (2). In addition, there are two relevant viruses, HIV-1 and HIV-2. The dual Ebola epidemic occurred in the same way. Why in 1976 did an epidemic explode in Sudan (Maridi) and another one in Zaire (Yambuku) during the same week? These epidemics involved two strains from a common ancestor, strains that were related but distinct from the genetic point of view. Thus an epidemic of one strain (two different viruses) cannot be responsible for the other one - as it could have been previously. « This is the mystery of these two simultaneous epidemics caused by two variants of the same virus, new to science. » (3) The CDC Atlanta tells us that these two strains are apparently a remarkable coincidence(4), since absolutely no transport of the agent from Sudan to Zaire is possible. The two outbreaks are not linked, except in time (5)« the emergence of these viruses is even more paradoxical that are not consequences of virus passing from animals to humans, studies performed on samples after 1976 show that both strains circulated in human populations. At its reemergence in 1995 in northern Zaire, as in 1976, the virus was found in two locations separated by a hundred kilometres, apparently unrelated.(6) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 2 We must restate the theory of evolution : • Historical Darwinism, « Deterministic and mechanistic » a tautology (Fig. 2.1 1) • Gregor Mendel (1822-1884)) (Fig. 2.1.2) • Gradualism (the synthetic theory) and neo-Darwinism (adding discoveries about biological heredity) (Fig. 2.1.3) • “Punctualism” (Fig. 2.1.4) • The neutral theory (Fig. 2.1.5) • The gene robot (machine theory) (Fig. 2.1.6) • Finalism (Fig. 2.1.7, 2.1.8 and 2.1.9) • Images of DNA (Fig.2.4) • The proposed approach. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 3 The emergence of life on Earth 3.5 billion years ago (Fig. 3.2.1, Fig. 3.2.3 and Fig. 3.2.4) The observed facts (and their temporal coincidence): • the output of marine space • mammalisation (Fig. 3.2.4) • and, finally, human evolution (Fig. 3.2.5 and Fig. 3.2.6) « A random process could not explain these amazing phenomena of adaptive convergence observed between very distant groups that have given wings to insects, reptiles, birds and mammals » « At the end of the Oligocene a number of large primates engaged in the path that leads to humans. This trend reached, almost simultaneously and independently, a number of genres, in places very distant from each other . ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 4 One had therefore to test the hypothesis. After two successful series of experiments supporting the hypothesis at the CRSSA, under the direction of Dominique Dormont who considered that my work should be validated by a reference person and a place of reference, a third set of experiments was conducted by Prof.F.Barré-Sinoussi. This was, of course, only an in vitro result which consisted in infecting slightly HIV-permissive cells in 2 successives rounds and finding a few days later that the virus had apparently adapted to low permissive cells, although we had used the same virus and the same cells, and an identical protocol, with a surprising result: there was one chance in 1043 that this was only the result of chance. (Fig. 4.1 and Fig. 4.2) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 5 This very low probability should be explained. Causality is adapted to orthodox physical theory. We always think on a paradigm of continuity with an action which must necessarily be step by step. However. the idea of correlation comes naturally in quantum theory which is associated with a principle of action at a distance (or teleport) and correlations (no force or information). Hydrogen bonds lead to the tunnel effect (Chapter 5.5, see figure 5.3). Typical of this theory is originally a tautomerization (= isomerization) (Fig. 5.6) which leads to making mistakes, replication at the mesoscopic scale (see Figure 5.4), a key phenomenon in the process of mutation. This action at a distance has been demonstrated by Alain Aspect at the Institut d’optique; this tautomerization is related to the spinning (Fig. 5.7) of correlated particles whatever their distance from each other - quantum entanglement. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 6 What theoretical framework has been chosen: The strong anthropic principle has been chosen because it implies that all properties of matter (including the quantum properties) are used by living organisms (Cp 6.1). Furthermore, we approach the finalism (or rather teleonomy, more acceptable in the life sciences) to distinguish it from a trivial tautology but an intentional (anthropomorphic) design recognizing the irreducible complexity of nature, clearly opposed to any creationist ideas. The anthropic principle evokes the extraordinary coincidences of physical constants, cosmological observation expressed in a remarkably homogeneous universe, structured, where is the same everywhere in the universe. We believe that the non-separability of the field after quantum microphysics finds its relevance in the macroscopic world. For example, Heisenberg uncertainty has no relevance in the macroscopic domain: Schrödinger’s cat (see Figure 5.1) is not a paradox, but is of course the EPR paradox (see Figure 5.2). It is a fact (it is a property of matter and important as it establishes ontological indeterminism).On the other hand, from the point of view of action at a distance the macroscopic field is very important for theories of evolution for quantum non-separability is valid on macroscopic distances. We propose as a working hypothesis that living is macroscopic (see Figure 5.4), channeled and highly coherent (coherence = temporal simultaneity). The individual is not isolated from his environment but concerns and is concerned by an entire population. Common origin unites an entire phylum! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Conclusion This would therefore mean that if one deliberately alters the evolving course of a parasite in vitro, the hypothesis is that the same process will take place in vivo at a distance. We must find the right cell, the key cell, which would divert the evolutionary process of HIV to a variant which would no longer infect lymphocytes (monocytes, CNS cells, adipocytes and hepatocytes). In embryology, the functioning of the central nervous system, but also in other infectious diseases (viral, bacterial, parasitic) as well as in oncology. The change becomes paradigmatic if we assume solidarity between cells derived from a common origin, while the body is derived from a single cell. According to the Karl Popper criterion this hypothesis is falsifiable (experimentation), its demonstration could be acquired. A change of paradigm is essential! Notes: 1 http://wapedia.mobi/fr/Origine_du_virus_de_l%27immunod%C3%A9ficience_humaine 2 M. J Leibowitz J. Un virus étrange venu d’ailleurs. Édition Grasset 1984. 3 Professeur Sureau (enregistré sur un document de la FEMIS) Vidéo http://hnsb.org 4 C’est moi qui souligne 5 McCormick JB JID 1983 ; 147 (2) 4 C’est moi qui souligne 6 Encyclopédie universalis 1998