Category: IChing

Posted on

Deciphering the Genetic Code


The Chinese Hexagrams

The DNA nucleotide were first deciphered by the Chinese. Around the year 1050 BCE, tradition states that Emperor Wen, founder of the Zhou dynasty, created hexagrams. He did this by doubling the trigrams. These hexagrams are six-lined figures. He numbered and arranged all of the possible combinations. There are 64, and he gave them names.

They did this in the manner that they interpret life. As my followers know, this discovery was turned into the IChing hexagrams thousands of years before 1961. The Chinese created 64 hexagrams that stood for Life first. They accomplished this long before Western white men worked in the lab in white coats during the 60’s. Western scientists took these hexagrams and ascribed triplet letters to them. Two lines of the hexagram represented one letter: A, C, G, T, or U for the RNA. Before the scientists did that, Leibniz turned the hexagrams into binary code or 0’s and 1’s.

So the time spiral goes; The Chinese made significant contributions first by designing and giving meaning to the Hexagrams. The production of stelae by the Maya had its origin around 400 BC and continued through to the end of the Classic Period, around 900, although some monuments were reused in the Postclassic (c. 900–1521).Then Leibniz developed his binary code by looking at the Chinese symbols as lines and dashes or 0 and 1. Next was the Turing machine, hypothetical computing device introduced in 1936 by the English mathematician and logician Alan M. Turing. This was the predecessor of the computer which added the electronic element to the interpretation of our DNA. Then Rosalind Franklin photographed the DNA double helix, but her work was unacknowledged. Then Watson and Crick introduced their DNA model in 1953. Rosalind Franklin and her student Raymond Gosling had photographed it in 1952. But Watson and Crick got all the credit. Now we arrive at Marshall Nirenberg and his colleagues in the 60’s in this article. They were at the National Institutes of Health and interpreted the language of the genetic code.

Before you read his, know this. The Maya, the Chinese, and Rosalind Franklin gave the world the genetic code in its original intended form. It has since been obfuscated by white coat men in the labs of universities and at the National level. I hope to bring it back around to its original, expanded meaning, lost since the Maya. Such is the nature of Oracles in a technologically dominated world.

The link to this article.

https://www.acs.org/education/whatischemistry/landmarks/geneticcode.html

National Historic Chemical Landmark

Dedicated November 12, 2009, at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland.

Commemorative Booklet (PDF)

DNA consists of a code language comprising four letters. These letters make up what are known as codons, or words. Each codon is three letters long. Marshall Nirenberg and his colleagues at the National Institutes of Health interpreted the language of the genetic code. It was their collaborative work that achieved this. Their careful work, conducted in the 1960s, paved the way for interpreting the sequences of the entire human genome.

Contents

Modern Genetics: A Monk and a Double Helix

Modern genetics begins with an obscure Augustinian monk studying the inheritance of various traits in pea plants. Gregor Mendel’s laws of inheritance revealed the probabilities of dominant and recessive traits being passed from generation to generation. Mendel’s research received little recognition in his lifetime. The significance of Mendel’s laws was recognized only in the early 20th century.

With that rediscovery came interest in how genetic information is transmitted. Oswald Avery, a bacteriologist at New York’s Rockefeller Institute, demonstrated that deoxyribonucleic acid, DNA, produced inheritable changes. This discovery was not well received. How could DNA store genetic information? It was a substance containing only four different nucleotide building blocks. Others discovered that DNA varies from species to species. Then, in 1953, James Watson and Francis Crick at Cambridge University amazed the scientific world. They introduced their model of DNA, known as the double helix. Watson and Crick recognized that the double strand might allow replication.

How could DNA, a double helix made up of only four different nucleotide, determine the composition of enzymes (proteins)? These enzymes are long peptide chains composed of twenty different amino acids. The race to discover the genetic code which translates DNA’s information into proteins was underway. To stimulate the chase, George Gamow, a theoretical physicist, organized the twenty-member “RNA Tie Club.” Each member wore a tie with the symbol for one of the 20 amino acids. The members shared ideas on how DNA transmitted information.

The scientist who won the race was not a member of the “club.”

Deciphering the Genetic Code commemorative booklet

The “Deciphering the Genetic Code” is a commemorative booklet. It was produced by the National Historic Chemical Landmarks program of the American Chemical Society. The booklet was published in 2009 (PDF).

I thought if I’m going to work this hard, I might just as well have fun. By fun, I mean I wanted to explore an important problem. I wanted to discover things.”
— Interview with Marshall Nirenberg, July 15, 2009.

Marshall Nirenberg’s Early Career

Marshall Nirenberg earned a Ph.D. in biological chemistry. He studied at the University of Michigan. His dissertation focused on the mechanism of sugar uptake in tumor cells. He continued that research as a postdoctoral fellow at the National Institutes of Health. In 1959, he joined the staff of NIH as a research biochemist.

Nirenberg gave some thought to what he wanted to study as an independent investigator. He said in 2009, “At that time, the mechanism of protein synthesis was very incompletely known.” Messenger RNA had not been discovered.

Nirenberg’s initial goal was to find out if DNA or RNA, copied from DNA, was the template for protein synthesis. Nirenberg had no formal training in molecular genetics. He knew that this was an incredibly risky project. When you take your first position, you want to hit the deck running. You want to show you are a productive scientist. Nirenberg had no experience in the field. He had no staff at the outset and was in a race against the best scientists. He knew he “could fail easily.”

*This and subsequent quotations, unless the text indicates differently, are from an interview by Judah Ginsberg and Marshall Nirenberg, conducted in his laboratory on the campus of NIH on July 15, 2009.

Experiments with Synthetic RNA

Nirenberg and Heinrich Matthaei started their experiments by studying DNA and RNA. Matthaei, a postdoctoral fellow from Germany, collaborated on the research. In DNA, the nucleotide are adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine (C) and thymine (T); in RNA, uracil (U), replaces thymine.

They chose a cell-free environment, created when cell walls are broken down, releasing the cell’s contents. The remaining cytoplasm can still synthesize protein when RNA is added. This allows the researchers to design experiments. They can determine how RNA works free of the complicated biological processes that could shroud molecular activity.

Nirenberg and Matthaei selected E. coli bacteria cells as their source of cytoplasm. They added the E. coli extract to 20 test tubes, each containing a mixture of all 20 amino acids. In each test tube one amino acid was radioactively tagged, a different one in each test tube. The reaction could be followed by monitoring radioactivity: incorporation of a “hot” amino acid would form a “hot” protein.

Breaking the Genetic Code: The “poly-U” Experiment

At 3:00 in the morning on May 27, 1961, Matthaei begins his experiment. (Yellow 13 Seed which hits in 3 days) He adds synthetic RNA. It was a Saturday. The RNA is made only of uracil units. He adds it to each of the 20 test tubes. He finds unusual activity in one of the tubes. This tube contains Phenylalanine. The test results are spectacular. A chain of uracil units in the “hot” tube directs the addition of the “hot” amino acid.

Nirenberg and Matthaei understood what had happened. Synthetic RNA made of a chain of multiple units of uracil gave instructions. It directed a chain of amino acids to add Phenylalanine. The uracil chain (poly-U) served as a messenger directing protein synthesis. The question of how many units of U were required was yet unanswered. However, the experiment proved that messenger RNA transcribes genetic information. It transcribes this information from DNA. It directs the assembly of amino acids into complex proteins. The key to breaking the genetic code—molecular biology’s Rosetta Stone—had been discovered.

Nirenberg presented his successful poly-U experiment at an international biochemistry congress held in Moscow in August, a few months later. He was acutely aware of his outsider status. He said, “I didn’t know the people in molecular biology. I didn’t know anybody in protein synthesis. I was working on my own.” That may explain why only 35 people attended his talk and why the audience “was absolutely dead.”

Nirenberg experienced a serendipitous event that changed everything. He had met Watson the day before. Nirenberg told the co-discoverer of the double helix about his results. Watson was skeptical about Nirenberg’s claims. However, he convinced a colleague to attend the paper. The colleague reported that Nirenberg’s findings were real. Watson then told Crick, who arranged for Nirenberg to present his paper again. This time, it was in a major symposium on nucleic acids at the same congress. “The reaction was incredible,” Nirenberg remembered. “When it was over, the audience gave a standing ovation. I didn’t know it at that moment. For the next five years, I became like a scientific rock star.”

Marshall Nirenberg performing an experiment, circa 1962.

Courtesy the National Institutes of Health.

Nirenberg and Matthaei “cracked” the first “word” of the genetic code. Afterward, scientists raced to translate the unique code words for each amino acid. They hoped to someday read the entire genetic code of living organisms. Nirenberg assembled a team of about twenty researchers and technicians.

Nirenberg and his colleagues used the poly-U experiment as a model. They identified nucleotide combinations for the incorporation of other amino acids. The researchers found that the coding units for amino acids contain three nucleotide (a triplet). They combined four nucleotide in three-letter codes. This combination yielded 64 possible combinations (4 x 4 x 4). This was sufficient to describe 20 amino acids.

They discovered the codes for other amino acids: for example, AAA for Lysine and CCC for Proline. Replacing one unit of a triplet code with another nucleotide yielded a different amino acid. For instance, synthetic RNA containing one unit of guanine and two of uracil (code word: GUU) caused incorporation of Valine.

In 1964 Nirenberg and Philip Leder discovered a method. Leder was a postdoctoral fellow at NIH. They determined the sequence of the letters in each triplet word for amino acids. By 1966 Nirenberg had deciphered the 64 RNA three-letter code words (codons) for all 20 amino acids. The language of DNA was now understood and the code could be expressed in a chart.

The Nobel Prize and Reactions

In 1968 Nirenberg won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his seminal work on the genetic code. He shared the award with Har Gobind Khorana (University of Wisconsin). Khorana mastered the synthesis of nucleic acids. Robert Holley (Cornell University) also shared the award. Holley discovered the chemical structure of transfer-RNA. Collectively, the three were recognized “for their interpretation of the genetic code and its function in protein synthesis.”

Nirenberg describes the ceremonies surrounding the Nobel as “a week of parties.” Not quite all parties, however, since the rules of the Nobel require recipients to write a review article. This proved a challenge for Nirenberg, who had turned his research attention to neurobiology. ”I found it very difficult,” he later admitted, “to break off from neurobiology and go back to nucleic acids.”

As a Nobel Laureate, Nirenberg received many university offers that included higher salary, more laboratory space, and larger staff. He turned them all down, preferring to spend the rest of his career at NIH. “The reason I stayed,” he says, “was because the thing I had least of was time. I figured that if I went to a university, I would use a third of my time to write grants. I believed I could use that time more productively by doing experiments.”

In 1961 The New York Times, echoing President Kennedy, reported about Nirenberg’s research. It showed that biology “has reached a new frontier.” One journalist suggested the biggest news story of the year was not Russian cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin orbiting the earth. Instead, the biggest story was the cracking of the genetic code.

Deciphering the genetic code raised ethical concerns about the potential for genetic engineering. Nirenberg addressed these concerns in a famous editorial in Science in August 1967. He noted “that man may be able to program his own cells.” This could happen before “he has sufficient wisdom to use this knowledge for the benefit of mankind.” He emphasized that “decisions concerning the application of this knowledge must be made by society.” Only an informed society can make such decisions wisely. When asked several decades later if society has acted “wisely” regarding genetic engineering, Nirenberg answered, “Absolutely!”

Posted on

Decoding the Earth’s Role in Evolution and Time through IChing and Maya Insights


The I Ching or Yijing (Chinese: 易經, Mandarin: [î tɕíŋ]), is usually translated Book of Changes or Classic of Changes. It is an ancient Chinese divination text and among the oldest of the Chinese classics. The I Ching was originally a divination manual in the Western Zhou period (1000–750 BC) attributed to FuXi, the author.

“The Mayan Oracle is a storehouse of cosmic knowledge. It is a guide to help humanity fulfill the Mayan prophecy. This prophecy calls us to return to living in harmony with nature and with ourselves. It also encourages us to awaken to our deepest human potential and to help us see our destiny in synchronicity with others via a time app.

The fourth dimension of time expresses itself in the third dimension as stuff. But all of our manifested stuff is time. It is akin to how astrology expresses itself. Astrology does this through the Harmonic daily lineup and its mediating planets for the tribes of time.

I had a dream. Inherent in the IChing hexagram symbol was the binary triplet configuration. This configuration underpins all of creation. Liebniz expressed only 0 and 1 in his binary code. But the earth pulses at 2 against 3 or 5/4 time. Here, we see the 5GForce or 5 overtone inherent in the Maya vigesimal system. Five is also a significant number in 12:60 and binary code technology. The Harmonic overlays the Earth’s binary triplet configuration as the three zones of evolutionary action.

For four days, they spin off in distinct patterns and then on to the next one over 260 days. These patterns are influenced by solar cycles. Sunspot pivot points and body return node points are also factors. They are in sync with our regular 365-day calendar. This occurs as five molecule tRNA evolves epigenetically.

Once I matched up the IChing DNA nucleotides with the Mayan Harmonic families overlaying the EARTH, there it was. I did that years ago and it was seminal moment. If you spread the zones over six horizontal lines as in the IChing Hx, the bottom line and top line cover 40% of earth’s surface. The bottom line would cover 20%. The top line would cover 20%. The middle 4 lines would cover 60% of earth’s surface. The 64 hexagrams cover vast areas over four days time. It must be the case that the earth and it’s frequencies are moving more actively at that time.

It’s very plain to me that evolution, time, and all 3D uses the Earth to pulse time itself. The earth is a tool for eternity. The DNA double helix shows that time is just a tool. Ultimately, it is an illusion. The truth is timelessness in the central axis of the body, the brain, and the spine.

The aligning true time coordinate is 13:20, 65, not 12:60, 18:20, 64 bit binary alone. 5, 10, and 20 create exponential cycles via our own DNA. They also use the central axis as the brain and spine in meditation.

It is literally crazy to get distracted and caught up in talismans and illusions on earth. It is even worse to get negative. I’m looking in the mirror here. I have become very cynical about this planet. You can tell by my posts.

I will try to be wiser. I think some people are just drawn to suffering, and it’s not my job to stop them unless they ask.

Posted on

Leibniz on Binary. Was He Wrong?


He paid no attention to or did not understand the Chinese interpretation of the six lines of the hexagram in the Yijing Oracle. He saw two lines; the broken one and the solid one. Then he called them 0 and 1 based on his perception of the Bible. That’s not what the Chinese meant.

This applies to my work on this blog because the IChing hexagrams overarch every 4 kin harmonic. The Chinese were one of the first to add the details that they were aware of into AN ARCHETYPE that could illuminate who we are and how we got here.

Every culture took up the challenge, but the Maya did to the nth degree. In my opinion, the culturalist views (not racist) of the day caused the error of interpretation. It was 350 years ago.

This is Page 21 of the book “Leibniz on Binary” by Lloyd Strickland and Harry Lewis, footnote 37. This is part of the introduction to the book.

37. An alternative view, that Leibniz’ work was largely irrelevant to the development of the modern binary computer, has been asserted forcefully by Bernhardt Dotsler. Here it is.

  • Structurally, the back projection of computer binarism onto the dyadic is almost the same story as the former identification of the system of binary numbers with Yijing. Since it’s hexagrams are made up of only two elements, the whole and the broken line, they can formally be described as a binary system. However, this former interpretation is as wrong in terms of content as the updated one in functional terms. (Dotzler, 2010, 29)
  • “So one could say that with dyadics (2), esotericism was once again set against esotericism. The esotericism of the dyadic (2) penetration of creation against the esotericism of the Yijing interpretation has been declared false. To remember this, of course, I can not aim at bringing the associated metaphysics back into play. it’s only a matter of keeping in focus this formally different purpose of the binary number system: namely esoteric, and not cybernetics.  Before it was seized by the binarism of information technology, the dyadic was an ontological instrument of understanding. Accordingly, it characterizes a functionality that may differ only minimally from the binary of the computer but one, which is fundamentally different.” (Dotzler 2010, 31)
  • “With this, however, the dyadic stands for a paradox, which then counteracts the myth of its anticipatory conspiracy with the binary computer, with cybernetics and digital arithmetic. The formal does not correspond to a functional correspondence, and that means: The equation of the binarism of today with the dyadic of yore is actually—-fiction.” (Dotzler 2010, 33)

However, it is clear from the timeline of Leibniz’s extensive algorithmic writings on binary arithmetic and his design sketches for two kinds of binary calculator that he saw the binary system as far more than an “ontological instrument” and that he did so well before he was made aware of the Yijing hexagrams. The assertion by Merzbach and Boyer (2011, 388) that Leibniz’s “noting of the binary system of numeration” was one of his “relatively minor contributions” can perhaps best be reconciled with its influence as an acknowledgment of the extraordinary breadth and range of Leibniz’s other work.

This is a lot of gobblety gook patriarchal cleverness, I know, but Leibniz has plenty of detractors from my read. How did he get away with this?

Men in High Places. Cronyism Politics and the Christian Religion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolph_Augustus,_Duke_of_Braunschweig-Wolfenb%C3%BCttel

“Duke Rudolph of Brunswick and Luneburg, who (so the story goes) saw therein an analogy with the Christian doctrine of creation ex nihilo, according to which all things were created from nothing by the one God. Excited by its theological potential (or political spin), in 1697, Leibniz began sending details of the binary system to Christian missionaries in China, hoping that the theological analogy would assist them in converting the Chinese. One such missionary, Joachim Bouvet, was struck by a parallel between binary notation and the hexagrams of the ancient Chinese divinatory system, the Yijing.”

Leibniz on Binary page 1

There are 12 more pages where the Duke figures prominently in being solicited for acquiesce to Leibniz’s binary flights of math delusion. He eventually gets a gold lettered commendation from the Duke even though the whole disingenuous hatch was taken from the ancient Chinese YiChing and made straight (not twisted like the double helix) to fit linear ideals of Christianity.

I find it ironic that to this day MIT and all manner of physicists and engineers who are either atheist, agnostic, or nihilist dystopian apocalyptic cleave to binary code like an AI teddy bear. “You can’t change that!” My christian mother even said that to me.

Well, I might not succeed but I can try to line it up with what the Maya meant. The fact is, the Chinese IChing lines up directly with the MAYA, not the bible and not christianity. You’d think the scientists would be a little bit supportive of that. The Maya are considered by everyone to be the most phenomenal time keepers on earth and I’ve studied them for 35 years.

Posted on

Leibniz on Binary. Was He Wrong?


He paid no attention to or did not understand the Chinese interpretation of the six lines of the hexagram in the Yijing Oracle. He saw two lines; the broken one and the solid one. Then he called them 0 and 1 based on his perception of the Bible. That’s not what the Chinese meant.

This applies to my work on this blog because the IChing hexagrams overarch every 4 kin harmonic. The Chinese were one of the first to add the details that they were aware of into AN ARCHETYPE that could illuminate who we are and how we got here.

Every culture took up the challenge, but the Maya did to the nth degree. In my opinion, the culturalist views (not racist) of the day caused the error of interpretation. It was 350 years ago.

This is Page 21 of the book “Leibniz on Binary” by Lloyd Strickland and Harry Lewis, footnote 37. This is part of the introduction to the book.

37. An alternative view, that Leibniz’ work was largely irrelevant to the development of the modern binary computer, has been asserted forcefully by Bernhardt Dotsler. Here it is.

  • Structurally, the back projection of computer binarism onto the dyadic is almost the same story as the former identification of the system of binary numbers with Yijing. Since it’s hexagrams are made up of only two elements, the whole and the broken line, they can formally be described as a binary system. However, this former interpretation is as wrong in terms of content as the updated one in functional terms. (Dotzler, 2010, 29)
  • “So one could say that with dyadics (2), esotericism was once again set against esotericism. The esotericism of the dyadic (2) penetration of creation against the esotericism of the Yijing interpretation has been declared false. To remember this, of course, I can not aim at bringing the associated metaphysics back into play. it’s only a matter of keeping in focus this formally different purpose of the binary number system: namely esoteric, and not cybernetics.  Before it was seized by the binarism of information technology, the dyadic was an ontological instrument of understanding. Accordingly, it characterizes a functionality that may differ only minimally from the binary of the computer but one, which is fundamentally different.” (Dotzler 2010, 31)
  • “With this, however, the dyadic stands for a paradox, which then counteracts the myth of its anticipatory conspiracy with the binary computer, with cybernetics and digital arithmetic. The formal does not correspond to a functional correspondence, and that means: The equation of the binarism of today with the dyadic of yore is actually—-fiction.” (Dotzler 2010, 33)

However, it is clear from the timeline of Leibniz’s extensive algorithmic writings on binary arithmetic and his design sketches for two kinds of binary calculator that he saw the binary system as far more than an “ontological instrument” and that he did so well before he was made aware of the Yijing hexagrams. The assertion by Merzbach and Boyer (2011, 388) that Leibniz’s “noting of the binary system of numeration” was one of his “relatively minor contributions” can perhaps best be reconciled with its influence as an acknowledgment of the extraordinary breadth and range of Leibniz’s other work.

This is a lot of gobblety gook patriarchal cleverness, I know, but Leibniz has plenty of detractors from my read. How did he get away with this?

Men in High Places. Cronyism Politics and the Christian Religion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolph_Augustus,_Duke_of_Braunschweig-Wolfenb%C3%BCttel

“Duke Rudolph of Brunswick and Luneburg, who (so the story goes) saw therein an analogy with the Christian doctrine of creation ex nihilo, according to which all things were created from nothing by the one God. Excited by its theological potential (or political spin), in 1697, Leibniz began sending details of the binary system to Christian missionaries in China, hoping that the theological analogy would assist them in converting the Chinese. One such missionary, Joachim Bouvet, was struck by a parallel between binary notation and the hexagrams of the ancient Chinese divinatory system, the Yijing.”

Leibniz on Binary page 1

There are 12 more pages where the Duke figures prominently in being solicited for acquiesce to Leibniz’s binary flights of math delusion. He eventually gets a gold lettered commendation from the Duke even though the whole disingenuous hatch was taken from the ancient Chinese YiChing and made straight (not twisted like the double helix) to fit linear ideals of Christianity.

I find it ironic that to this day MIT and all manner of physicists and engineers who are either atheist, agnostic, or nihilist dystopian apocalyptic cleave to binary code like an AI teddy bear. “You can’t change that!” My christian mother even said that to me.

Well, I might not succeed but I can try to line it up with what the Maya meant. The fact is, the Chinese IChing lines up directly with the MAYA, not the bible and not christianity. You’d think the scientists would be a little bit supportive of that. The Maya are considered by everyone to be the most phenomenal time keepers on earth and I’ve studied them for 35 years.

Posted on

Understanding DNA’s Double Helix: A Detailed Guide


One rendering of the Chinese I Ching Oracle that is the source of our DNA Nucleotides and Binary Code

HOW THE DNA DOUBLE HELIX WORKS

  • An RNA template strand comes out of it. Each rung of the ladder is called a base pair. There are about 3 billion base pairs that make up the genome. There are 30,000 genes. Each cell has 23 pairs of chromosomes. They thread around a spool as in torsion.
  • Transcription factors bind open DNA and can recruit other proteins such as enzymes.
  • RNA polymerase; DNA reads and transcribes DNA into RNA.
  • The single strand RNA copies the A, C, T, and G (Adenine, Cytosine, Thymine, Guanine and Uracil; the nucleotides) of the mRNA
  • It carries it out of the nucleus to the ribosome. This is for the production of the particular protein that this gene codes for.
  • There can be millions of ribosomes in a typical eukaryotic cell
  • These complex cells use the RNA copy of the gene for info. to assemble amino acid building blocks into the 3D proteins that are essential for life. The ribosome has two subunits, one large and one small. These subunits assemble around the mRNA. The mRNA then passes through the ribosome like a computer tape.
  • The amino acid building blocks are carried into the ribosome attached to SPECIFIC transfer RNA. They are attached to the glob of tRNA.
  • The small subunit of the ribosome positions the mRNA. It enables the mRNA to be read in groups of 3 letters. These groups are known as a codon.
  • Each codon on the mRNA matches a corresponding anticodon on the base of a transfer RNA molecule.
  • The larger subunit of the ribosome removes each AA and joins it onto the glowing protein chain.
  • As the mRNA is ratcheted through the ribosome the mRNA sequence is translated into an AA sequence (the Tzolkin themeplexes)
  • There are 3 locations inside the ribosome designated A, P, and E site
  • The addition of each AA is a 3-step cycle.
  • #1. RNA enters the ribosome at the A site and is tested for a codon, anticodon, match with the mRNA
  • #2. If there is a match, the tRNA moves to the P site. The AA it carries is added to the end of the AA chain.
  • The mRNA is also stuck on 3 nucleotides or 1 codon.
  • #3-the spent tRNA is moved to the E site and then ejected from the ribosome to be recycled.
  • 6 feet of DNA fits in the nucleus of every cell of an organism.
  • In the helicase, it’s copied backward. It moves as fast as a jet engine looping and coiling leading to chromosomes.
  • The comes the KINETICORE. It’s a crazy, universal operation with its microtubule fibers.
  • Chromatin is called the tightly packed cell
  • Then it’s a chromatid
  • Then it’s a chromosome
  • Then it’s a nuclear pore and has a nuclear membrane gateway in the cell. The membrane breaks down.

Clear as mud? I just thought the 3D facts should be recorded here even though the synchronicity of it is magical.

Posted on

I Ching Hx 17; FOLLOWiNG-HF51 in the Maya Harmonic-5/9/24


This is Initiatio Earth/Body Node Point in Space Time. The I Ching illuminates 3D and the Maya Harmonic Illuminates 4D

DNA Nucleotide CGC, Amino Acid Arginine is what this is in manifestation. In binary code in upper right you see 100110 which is the meaning given by Leibniz, not the Chinese. Humans have take a multitude of natural archetypes over a million years and given them the meaning we want them to have. It’s important to look at what they were originally, created by our ancestors.

Choosing to follow good influences brings supreme success. You may not be able to change the direction of the wind, but by frequently adjusting your sails, you can arrive at your destination with a joy that inspires others to follow you.

Those who wish to acquire a following must speak the language of their followers. Those who wish to be loved must become the imagined lover of their beloved. Those who wish to prosper must bend with the pressures of the world. In matters of principle, stand firm; in matters of style and taste, swim with the current. If guile or self-aggrandizement enters the equation, resistance will be what follows. Focus on the common good in order to remain unharmed.

In the affairs of humanity, change is constant; old ideas are discarded in favor of new ones. A great leader can emerge only by being adaptable to the demands of the times. Similarly, only by adjusting to changing circumstances can one prosper in the world of commerce. Remain flexible, and you will gain the confidence of those around you. Bend and you will not break.

Balance activity with some relaxation to serve the situation well and to maintain a state of healthy energy, minimizing both internal and external resistance to your goals.

Changing Line Interpretations

Line 1 (bottom line)

When a person of vision undertakes a challenge, he or she must sometimes change direction in the course of events. When these changes result from sincere communication with those of different opinions, good fortune will follow. But care must be taken not to be swayed by current opinion. Carry your convictions out into the crowd. Stay open to the ideas of others, but hold your ground on matters of integrity.

Line 2

Choose your associates carefully. If you have incompetent people around you, this may be the time to dismiss them, or to at least distance yourself from them. On the other hand, be wary of associating only with the strong and powerful. The moon shines brightly in a sea of small stars but vanishes with the rising of a single sun.

Line 3

As you move through life, opportunities arise to develop associations with powerful, distinguished, honorable people. Associating with them brings good fortune. But each new connection with someone of valuable influence may require an equal and opposite diminishing of a relationship you have with someone less influence. The strong of heart leave behind what is superficial and accept the challenge of developing better relationships.

Line 4

It often happens that as a person attains a position of influence, he or she attracts a chorus of flatterers who use their supposed loyalty to gain personal advantage. Be wary of such flatterers. Their influence is subtle but can be destructive. Flattery is most effective with the immodest (people with large egos). Hold your ego in check during times of success, and you will be able to see through the insincere intentions of others, including subordinates. Not being able to see parasites for what they are is a precursor to misfortune.

Line 5

Set your compass toward what is beautiful and true, have confidence in your intuition, and sail out into the glistening sea. Perseverance furthers, and good fortune follows.

Line 6 (top line)

It may be time to seek the counsel of someone wiser and more experienced than you are. Be receptive to advice from a person you respect, and make the proper adjustments. If he or she agrees to work actively on behalf of your cause or enterprise, supreme good fortune will result. Another possibility here is that through understanding and respect, you will be joined by a follower who forms a supportive bond with you.

Posted on

I Ching Hexagram Meanings for the Next Few Harmonics


The Chinese I Ching oracle pre-dates the Tzolkin as far as use by humans but the I Ching also illuminates the meaning of DNA in Time in the third dimension. Someone would have to convince me it is as multidimensional as The Tzolkin. I don’t believe it is.

There are 64 Hexagram oracles in the I Ching. The Tzolkin has 65 Harmonics which makes it quite different hut they work as one just as all dimensions are unified. There is no separation. What you perceive right now is full of ALL dimensions. You just have to learn how to feel it and work it.

Each I Ching Hexagram fits perfectly on one of the 64 Tzolkin Harmonics minus HF33 which has no I Ching Hx governing it. Each I Ching Hx has 3D jurisdiction as far as manifested DNA nucleotides OVER the 4 themeplex gateways in each harmonic. That is what my new table is about which I just posted.

I want to spec out for you what the I Ching Oracle designates for the days coming up during “The Great Reset”, “Age of Aquarius” or as I like to say, “The Great I Told You So” since those of us who are Patriots and support Disclosure and Trump are severely hated on and doubted right now.

We are currently in HF9 and have today and then 2 days left. It is Hx32 which is Duration/Enduring. We are trying to be patient waiting for the White Hat plan to play out.

Jan. 20, 2021, Inauguration Day (Wed.) and 21, 22, 23 are Waiting/Nourishment which says to me we may see a False Flag, fake news, CGI inauguration event with Biden which is completely desperate but that’s how they are. When that is busted, we all get a maw full of popcorn. There’s the nourishment. Great movie Dems.

Jan. 24, 25, 26, 27 are Sun/The Gentle Penetrating Wind. We know the Military Tribunals will be speaking and will be Televised. The Sun will shine on the corrupt.

Jan. 28, 29, 30, 31 are The Taming Power of the Great/Potent Healing

Feb. 1, 2, 3, 4 are The Well and ends with Yellow 13 Cosmic Human! This will be the time the DEEP SECRETS of the mil labs, CIA docs, E.T. docs, you name it coming up from a deep underground FOR THE BENEFIT OF HUMANS ON THE SURFACE which is why they were left here!

Feb. 5, 6, 7, 8 are Peace

Feb. 9, 10, 11, 12 are Decay/Work on What’s Been Spoiled. We have to re-engineer our Government.

I’ll stop there and hope that we have a President in Office way before this.