A Proposed Explanation of The Bree Solution

kellylen · Post by **kellylen** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 7:20 pm

TOSG wrote:
kellylen wrote:well if the strand enters the blood straight it will get killed. so doesnt it need a medium to help it enter?

it would also need to enter cell nuclei in order to work on the DNA and RNA synthesis. so maybe something in the solution can help it do that.
Sure, it needs some kind of medium, but epogen is a hormone, not a buffer or vector.

And:
1) Red blood cells don't have nuclei.
2) Ribozymes are not generally located in the nucleus (at least not exclusively). So, there's no reason to assume that the strand needs to enter the nucleus. Just think of it as a macromolecular inhibitor, acting on a ribozyme that is probably cytoplasmic (or membrane bound?).

ok you got me on that one. but maybe it takes the thing somewhere?!?1 i dunno.

marlasinger · Post by **marlasinger** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 7:25 pm

unless a simple symptom of becoming trait negative includes low blood count, and epogen is the solution...?

Aponi · Post by **Aponi** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 7:32 pm

Who even knows.
DB need to do some b&e on the Order and steal more super secret documents to find this out.

And we need to get Bree back to even procede with any of this.

OOG: I don't think the Creators would have shown us Epogen if it wasn't important. I think it is, somehow. Just have no clue how at this point.

kellylen · Post by **kellylen** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 7:39 pm

marla epogen raises rbc count not lowers it

marlasinger · Post by **marlasinger** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 8:23 pm

that's what im saying kelly - that a SIDE EFFECT of becoming trait negative is LOW blood count, and that epogen is the SOLUTION to that by RAISING blood count.

kellylen · Post by **kellylen** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 8:49 pm

are you sure thats a side effect marla?

marlasinger · Post by **marlasinger** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 9:12 pm

no, it was proposing it - to explain epogen. hence the ?mark at the end of my sentence.

I have NO idea how that would happen, to be honest. But at this point, guessing which ribozymes and what side effects would be possible. To postulate that Bree would experience a low blood count because of a inactivated ribozyme really doesn't make much sense...bone marrow?

kellylen · Post by **kellylen** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 9:14 pm

ohh alright i understand now.

anniid · Post by **anniid** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 10:30 pm

Given the interpretation that Given Fact #4 says “this portion (the active strand) still functions, but you cannot block it because the complementary strand won’t copy,” this makes perfect sense. Without the complementary strand to “occlude the activity” of the active strand (Theoretical Solution #3), Bree’s ribozyme remains active.

This doesn't make sense to me. How can you use the theoretical solution to describe what makes bree different?
That is the part that throws this off for me.

marlasinger · Post by **marlasinger** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 10:44 pm

I don't get what you...don't get. We're using Theoretical Solution #3 as...a solution, not an explanation for how Bree is different.

#3 states that

3) Q.E.D. strand will bind to ribozyme and occlude its copy

and we're using that to back up the theory that we need the complementary strand to occlude the active strand.

err, i'm making a video. it might make more sense after that?

TOSG · Post by **TOSG** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 10:47 pm

anniid wrote:
Given the interpretation that Given Fact #4 says “this portion (the active strand) still functions, but you cannot block it because the complementary strand won’t copy,” this makes perfect sense. Without the complementary strand to “occlude the activity” of the active strand (Theoretical Solution #3), Bree’s ribozyme remains active.
This doesn't make sense to me. How can you use the theoretical solution to describe what makes bree different?
That is the part that throws this off for me.

I don't quite get what you don't get. "Theoretical Solution #3" is just citing a part of Isaac Gilman's document, not my own theory. Dr. Gilman's theoretical solution was made in the context of his knowledge of the state of Bree's ribozymes.

anniid · Post by **anniid** » Thu Jul 12, 2007 10:48 pm

marlasinger wrote:I don't get what you...don't get. We're using Theoretical Solution #3 as...a solution, not an explanation for how Bree is different.

#3 states that
3) Q.E.D. strand will bind to ribozyme and occlude its copy
and we're using that to back up the theory that we need the complementary strand to occlude the active strand.

err, i'm making a video. it might make more sense after that?

Opps! I get it now.
Sorry I am an auditory learner, and dyslexic... So I was just confused about what it said.
Thanks though!
This is a good theory now that I understand what it says.

TOSG · Post by **TOSG** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 6:28 pm

Check out the video that Marla made, presenting this theory much more coherently

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaCMKEVh1HY

kellylen · Post by **kellylen** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 6:50 pm

marla is fucking sexy

BrightSilence · Post by **BrightSilence** » Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:07 pm

Another lovely vid by marla. That really did help. I don't like to read all this stuff, you guys talk about it like it's common knowledge but it doesn't make any sense to me at all. The video cleared alot of that up...

By the way, was all of this in the 'wet' document?