In this Paper I investigate – and enunciate the relative Principles – as to how although gene particle are conserved yet over a period (geological time) changes occur : progress and thus they are transformed without losing the most basic of their original ‘arcane’ status.
2. The gene:particlae likewise as matter:energy in to the mass universe are governed by the above mentioned Principle 0f Conservation of Mass and Energy q.v.
3. Consequently as a corollary of all this we assert that No gene, no gene:particla can ever be destroyed but will always be conserved.
4. This is a corollary of the above but is also a Principle of its own which I shall name the Principle of Conservation 0f Gene:Particlae q.v.
5. But following this Principle does not one land into the resultant that arcane Principles of archaeo protoplasms of ens will so remain conserved as to exclude evolution?
Is this not a dilemma here?
A dilemma as between two trains that are both fast and going namely : the train of conservation and the train of evolution?
How is it that these trains do not drive in to each other?
This dilemma I term the Dilemma 0f the Gene:Particlae q.v.
6. Therefore and accordingly a solution to this dilemma had to be found and was found (as by:in evolution itself)
7. The solution and the Principle of Transformation of Genes, Gene:Particlae are equivalent:identities in terms of the Principle 0f Equivalent:Identity q.v.
8.I shall enunciate this Principle 0f Transformation 0f Gene:Particlae thus :
As in to the mass universe all and any gene:particla is always conserved but is also always gradually transformed
This Principle I term the Principle 0f Transformation 0f Gene:Particlae q.v.
9. Thus I shall recollect how in Cambrian times species ‘inter-married’ and the resultant was the wonderous (and since then unparallelled) evolution:bringing forth of newer and newer species.
Now all this as by our present ethics:morals is ‘scandalous’ : take the case if we Humans:Homines Sapientes q.v. were to connect with dogs or cats or other enta.
This ‘state of affairs’ would be considered as too far between our ethics:morals and the ethics:morals of the Cambrian period.
But this ‘scandalous’ ethics:morals still is conserved : it had to be conserved
: therefore and accordingly it did not conserve the ‘ethics:morals’ of the Cambrian period : this was too ‘extreme’ – yet a less extreme ethics:morals blueprint of those times still lingers on (and will) with us : I shall cite the example of gay attraction (instead of opposite sex attraction)
Thus I shall put forth : as :
Extreme A - the Cambrian ‘ethics:morals’ of inter-marriage of species
Infill – the ‘gay attraction’
Extreme Non-A - the opposite sex attraction
Thus too all this manifests that ethics:morals moves and has to move as with and hand in hand with the Biology q.v.
As we shall hopefully manifest in our work The Philosophy 0f Ethics which is still ‘in the pipeline’ but already ‘in mind’