Yes, I do know how self-collapse or Objective reduction could have created new or identical sequences , as described by Stuart Hammeroff:
Pi cloud arrays in host cell proteins coupled their EG with that of flagellar microtubules, the mutual superpositions avoiding random distractions from the polar environment and allowing orchestration. OR threshold was approached more gradually, harmonically, with orchestrated pi stack coherent contributions. When threshold was finally reached by EG ¼ h/t, climactic and pleasurable Orch OR moments occurred.
This is how additional Hox genes were created.
If the model I just presented is true, fossils will show animal orders and families, had sufficient microtubule capacity for OR by �≈ℏ/�� of less than a minute, resulting in rudimentary Orch OR, consciousness.
Your claim has just been falsified.
No, it does not predict anything and everything. For instance…
According to the model, only key events in life’s evolution were significantly helped by this particular self-collapse because they were crucial to early events in evolution. This means that the proximal design objectives to create animal body plans were reached.
So we would not expect this type of design bias to happen after created kinds appeared on the scene. This is no different than what we see with human designers. They have certain goals in mind when making a particular design.
Once these goals are achieved, they just focus on maintaining it afterwards. This is exactly what we observe in the regions of the DNA that code for proteins as pointed out before.
What is your point here? Are you saying that the studies on incongruency do not meet the criteria for falsification of his claim.
What do I not understand about the article that you do instead?
Unlike you, I know and research enough about the subject to make my case while you choose to stay willfully ignorant about it.
You actually never explained why HRT or HGT could not have been the mechanism of distribution. You previously said…
You refer to HRT, but Hox clusters are not regulatory sequences (e.g. enhancers and repressors); they’re linear sets of protein-coding genes. None of the irrelevant events or processes you describe has anything to do with duplicating or adding linears sets of protein-coding genes to a genome.
But, why is it not possible for linear sets of protein-coding genes, such as hox clusters, to be transmitted between and within species through by HGT or HRT as well?
This study has certainly suggested that it can:
The ultimate prokaryotic origin of some algal genes and their simultaneous presence in both primary and secondary photosynthetic eukaryotes either suggest recurrent gene transfer events under specific environments or support a more ancient origin of primary plastids. Algal Genes in the Closest Relatives of Animals | Molecular Biology and Evolution | Oxford Academic (oup.com)
And how do you know it is irrelevant if you are not an expert in the field or willfully ignorant about their model?
No, it happened alright. For instance, Lawrence M. Krauss argued that measurements of the cosmic microwave background radiation and the large-scale structure of the universe have greatly reduced the uncertainties in the cosmological parameters, including the cosmological constant. He concluded that the observed value of the cosmological constant is consistent with a universe that will expand forever, and that there is no longer an “age problem” that would require the universe to be much older than its observed age.
However, Krauss noted that the cosmological constant problem remains one of the most puzzling and challenging problems in physics, as the predicted value of the cosmological constant based on quantum field theory is many orders of magnitude larger than the observed value.
Krauss, L.M., 1998. The end of the age problem, and the case for a cosmological constant revisited. The Astrophysical Journal, 501(2), pp. 461-466.
No, it can be achieved, as this article has pointed out:
So far all astrophysical evidence supports the cosmological constant idea, but there is some wiggle room in the measurements. Upcoming experiments such as Europe’s Euclid space telescope, NASA’s Wide-Field Infrared Survey Telescope (WFIRST) and Chile’s Simons Observatory being built in the desert will look for signs that dark energy was stronger or weaker in the past than the present. “The interesting thing is that we’re already at a sensitivity level to begin to put pressure on [the cosmological constant theory].” Steinhardt says. “We don’t have to wait for new technology to be in the game. We’re in the game now.” String Theory May Create Far Fewer Universes Than Thought - Scientific American
Let me clarify what I said before. When I suggested my theory is unsuited to be a scientific model for physics, I meant this for only epistemological reasons.
In contrast, my theory is very much a scientific model for testing whether God ontologically exists. But again, it can’t be used to test whether the God hypothesis is a useful theory to help us learn more about the universe outside of biology.
Nonetheless, the predictions I provided do help in confirming the truthfulness of the theory rather than usefulness from a strictly physics standpoint.