Peter P. Gariaev*, George G. Tertishny, Katherine A. Leonova

Abstract: The basic assumptions of our work include the following: 1. the genome has a capacity for quasi-consciousness so that DNA “words” produce and help in the recognition of “semantically meaningful phrases”; 2. the DNA of chromosomes control fundamental programs of life in a dual way: as chemical matrixes and as a source of wave function and holographic memory; 3. processes in the substance-wave structures of the genome can be observed and registered through the dispersion and absorption of a bipolar laser beam. The present article brings forward considerable theoretical and experimental evidence in support of this model, and discusses its practical applications with respect to cancer and HIV therapeutic strategies.

The challenge of HIV and cancer and the essence of Life both lie on the same plane. As of now, we still don't understand the most crucial facts about Life: how did it appear on earth and in which way it is coded in chromosomes? Several hypotheses are available, and each of them at best represents just a piece of reality. This is where the theoretical and biological difficulties in interpreting the HIV and cancer phenomena come from - and the price we are paying for this misunderstanding are the mistakes emerging in the treatment of these diseases. Both pathologies affect the most vital part in any biological system, namely, its genetic apparatus - the organism’s “self-knowledge”. And this is the paradox: we seem to know quite enough about chromosomes and DNA - oncogenes have already been found, the HIV genome has been studied, and it’s clear how these informational structures function in chromosomes. The genetic code and ribosome operation principles also seem to have been investigated in detail. But for some reason all this information is not enough to develop universal methods for a successful intervention against cancer and HIV.

.

A half-lie is the worst lie, because people have reason to believe it - and this is especially true with respect to the genetic coding paradigm. In this field, everything is an impregnable bastion for critics, and everything is ruled by dogma. Even the key definition, the strategic scheme of genetic coding (DNA-> RNA-> protein), is called “the Central Dogma”. Until recently, all attacks on this dogma seemed trivial and doomed to failure. That was an incorrect assumption, as it turned out. The accuracy and effectiveness of research strategies dealing with HIV, cancer and many other pathologies depend on whether we orderly understand the genetic coding mechanism. The discovery of reverse transcriptase was the first spectacular breach in this dogma, which as a result was re-assigned a more discreet, working-hypothesis status: DNA Û RNA--> protein. However, our ideas on protein biosynthesis are gradually eroding: each new model is just an approach to the truth, to the understanding of the genome language-image pluralism as coding tool for the spatiotemporal structure of biosystems [32, 33].

In this paper we intend to propose ideas which are not aimed at the final destruction of the so-called genetic code “canonical” triplet model, but at the development and establishment of its exact position in the knowledge basis of the chromosome operational principles. Yes, it’s possible to state that the triplet code is the truth. However, this truth is as correct as the statement that we could write a word using an alphabet. That statement is certainly right. But if we try, based only on this knowledge, to go further and vouch that by means of this alphabet we can compile grammatically-correct sentences, this new statement won’t be accurate. Such a statement is incorrect, in fact, because for the compilation of human speech laws of syntax, logic and grammar have to be applied. As for the genome, it’s a very speech-like and logical structure, but its fundamental features are not the only way to express genome associative-semantic structures. Furthermore, we are inclined to agree with V.V.Nalimov’s ideas [43] leading us to the conclusion that a genome possesses quasi-conscious abilities. The logic we use and the models we developed are only an attempt to obtain higher-level understanding of laws pertaining to genetic text structuring or to other genome vital structures - knowledge which is now just beginning to emerge. The Russian researchers A.G.Gurwitch [38], V.N.Beklemishev [29] and A.A.Lyubitchev [41] laid the foundation of this science in the late 1920s.

What type of approaches might enrich the commonly-accepted genetic coding theory and how can these innovations assist in resolving the HIV and cancer issues, in particular? Let’s assume, until getting a final proof, three "axioms" which have already gotten definite theoretical and experimental confirmation [8, 32, 33, 37]:

DNA molecules, included in chromosomes, possess a substance--wave duality which is similar to the dualism of elementary particles. In accordance with it, DNA codes an organism in two ways, both with the assistance of DNA matter and by DNA sign wave functions, including coding at its own laser radiation level - [28].

The genetic apparatus can be non-local at the molecular level (holographic memory of a chromosome continuum) and at the same time quantum mechanically non-local in compliance with the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen effect [4]. The latter means that the genome genetic and other regulatory wave information is recorded at the polarization level of its photons and is non-locally (everywhere and in no time) transferred (plays out) throughout the entire space of a biosystem by the polarization code parameter. This helps to set a quick-response information contact among the billions of cells constituting an organism.

The genome on the whole and the individual nucleus of cells can generate and recognize text-associative regulatory structures with the application of a background principle, holography and quantum non-locality.

 

 

Let’s assume that final proofs of the above-mentioned statements have been obtained. Then the problem of HIV and cancer rises to an altogether different intellectual dimension.

For instance, what does the “DNA matter-wave dualism” mean - and in which way is it linked with the chromosome's numerous code functions? (Note: by code function we understand processes which are dramatically differed from the known triplet genetic code) In some sense, the genome operates like a complex multiwave laser with adjustable frequencies. It emits DNA light which is gene- and sign-modulated by amplitude, phase, frequency and polarization. Moreover, the genome is also likely to be a radio wave emitter converting a wide spectrum of coherent sign-polarized radio bands [37] (P.P. Gariaev, G.G.Tertyshniy, Ye.A. Leonova, etc. Radio wave spectroscopy of local photons: exit to quantum non-local bioinformational processes. Sensors and Systems (2000, N9, pp. 2-13). The genome is also a dynamical multiple hologram which is able to produce light and radio wave images [37] which carry out management functions by the biosystem. These structures are also the carriers of electromagnetic marking schemes (calibration fields) of biosystems’ space and time organization. And finally, the genome is a quasi-text form possessing elements of quantum non-locality, which can without any time delay “read” itself in billions of cells and use information, thereby received, as a control blueprint for living functions and structural organization [8, 37]. Many biologists and geneticists, let alone doctors, are likely to consider these new concepts of genome organization as extremely complicated. However, not all of them will: these ideas, whose seeds were first planted in Russia in the 1920s, have seen a dramatic and accelerating development over the last decade.

This clearly suggests that it’s necessary to modify our strategy in searching for HIV and cancer cures, as the traditional approaches to solving this issue increasingly resemble the wish to produce a good harvest, having planted an asphalt road. The new strategy has to be based on fundamental investigations of substance-wave duality and quasi-speech attributes of a higher system genome. Let’s stress once again that we consider a chromosome continuum as a sign laser & radio wave emitter [8, 33, 37], and direct experimental evidences allows us to think so. For instance, to demonstrate laser abilities of genetic structures, we showed that DNA and chromatin in vitro could be pumped as a laser-active medium for a consequent laser light generation [28].

If we accept these vital characteristics of a genome, then new specific issues arise: for example, does the sign character of chromosome laser & radio wave radiation change when a xenobiotic HIV genome inserts itself into it? And, at the same time, what happens to the radiation “semantics” during a transposition of oncogenes or any other mobile polynucleotide sequences as well as during B<--> Z and other conformational transitions of DNA in-vivo? Are these changes linked to an alteration of quasi- and real holographic programs, i.e. are new programs created and old ones changed, or are these programs erased, and so on? Does the radiation polarization parameter retain, in semiotic sense, its dynamic properties in the process of genome reorganization? Do all these changes influence ribosome operation? Further questions may arise. The answer to any of them can play a key role in interpreting the nature of HIV and cancer.

Let’s take another fundamental problem. Oncogene and HIV genomes, occupying certain positions in a 3D space of master cell chromosomes, do not express themselves as pathogenic factors until a certain time. In this sense, the behavior of HIV in the infected patient’s organism is unpredictable. HIV's latency period may vary from a week to 10 years. A specific mechanism of HIV-infection induction from the latent (sleeping) condition is thought to exist, but this mechanism is still misunderstood and, therefore, the opportunity to make HIV viruses permanently latent in the human organism is being missed. In this condition, the organism and the cells simply “don’t notice” them or even, as in the case of oncogenes, use them for their own benefit as a reproduction factor. Why does an organism adequately accept and contain them until a certain time X, and why they are semantically reborn, causing a management catastrophe in cell, after the X-time has come? Following our logic, it’s possible to think that both in the pathologic and normal state four factors are engaged, at least: genome “holography” and “linguistics”, genome background (context) self-organization, and its quantum non-locality.

In the course of evolution, biosystems have produced their own genetic “texts” and a biocomputing genome as a quasi- intelligent “subject” which “reads and understands” these texts at its level. The fact that natural human texts (it doesn’t matter what the language is) and genetic “texts” have similar mathematical & linguistic and entropy-statistical characteristics is extremely important for the genome elementary “intelligence”. This relates, in particular, to concepts such as the fractality of letters' occurrence frequency density distribution (in genetic “texts”, nucleotides execute function of letters) [21].

American researchers obtained another confirmation of the genome coding function linguistic interpretation [20]. Dealing with the “coding” and “non-coding” eukaryote DNA sequences [(in the framework of old concepts of a gene), they came to a conclusion which was similar with ours and which conflicted with the central dogma that meaningful functions are concentrated only in the protein-coding DNA sections. The researchers applied a statistical analysis method for studying natural and musical texts, known as Zipf-Mandelbrot’s law, as well as the known Shannon postulate of text information redundancy calculated as a text entropy (more information about text entropy and statistics of words distribution in texts is given in [1, 25, 27, 31]). As a result, they found that DNA “non-coding” areas (space, intronic and others) had more in common with natural languages than the “coding” ones. Taking this for granted, the authors inferred that “non-coding” sequences of genetic molecules were the basis for one or more biological languages. Furthermore, the authors developed a statistical algorithm for searching DNA coding sequences; the algorithm they developed demonstrated that protein-coding areas had significantly fewer long-distance correlations, compared with areas separating these sequences. The DNA-sequence distribution was so sophisticated that the methods the researchers applied stopped working satisfactorily at distances of over 10^3-10^2 base pairs. Zipf-Mandelbrot’s distribution for “words” occurrence frequency, where the number of nucleotides ranged from 3 to 8, demonstrated that natural language had more in common with the non-coding sequences, than with the coding ones. It’s worth noting that the authors considered the coding only as a record of amino acid sequence information. And that was a paradox which made them state that DNA non-coding areas were not merely “junk”, but the lingual structures designed for reaching some still unknown goals. Despite the discovery of hidden complexity in these non-coding areas, the authors didn’t understand the implications of the long-distance correlations characterizing these structures. (They illustrated the process based on a family of genomes of the myosin heavy chain and assigned it to the evolutionary transition from lower taxons to higher taxons). The data presented in [20] is in full compliance with the ideas we had independently put forward [32, 33]; according to our point of view, DNA non-coding sequences, or approximately 95-98% of a genome, are a strategic informational content of chromosomes. The said context has a substance-wave nature and, therefore, is multidimensional and functions as a holographic associative-image and semantic program of embryological origin, the semantic continuation and the logic end of any biosystem. Having intuitively understood that the old genetic coding model led to a dead-end, the authors [20] said a nostalgic good-bye to this now-obsolete paradigm, but didn’t propose anything to replace it.

Text homonymy and synonymy are the common fundamental semantic properties of natural and genetic texts. These features provide chromosomes, natural texts and speech with redundant and multivalent information and, thus, ensure some adaptive flexibility. Ambivalent genetic texts acquire their monosemantic meaning owing to a variation of DNA sequence position in genome space through their transpositions and/or a transposition of their environment. This resembles the situation with natural texts and speech, in which homonymous-synonymous ambiguities of a semantic field are eliminated by the context (this background principle is described in [44]). Homonymies of coding doublets are easily found in the traditional genetic code triplet model. The meaning of these homonymies is still misunderstood and isn’t taken into account, with some exceptions [33, 35]. The perplexing issue of mRNA codon homonymies emerged with the creation of the triplet model of amino acid coding in the process of protein biosynthesis. It immediately became a “time-bomb”, since the correct explanation of a biological (informational) meaning of these homonymies automatically leads to the necessity of significant correction or complete revision of the triplet model. How are codons homonymies produced? A set of different amino acids is coded in mRNA codons by similar doublets; the third nucleotides in codons can relocate chaotically: they are wobbling and may become any of the four canonical ones. As a result, they don’t correlate with the coding amino acids [3, 11]. That’s why semantic ambiguity appears regarding the ribosome’s choice of amino acid-carrying-tRNA anti-codons. For instance, each synonymous codon of the standard code of higher biosystems (AGT and AGC) codes for serine, while each synonymous AGA and AGG codon codes for arginine. Thus, the third nucleotides of mRNA codons in combination with a sign doublet don’t have exact amino acid correlates; at the same time, the first two sign codon nucleotides are similar with one another, yet code different amino acids - hence the ambiguity in selecting tRNA anti-codons. In other words, a ribosome may take serine or arginine tRNA with an equal probability ; such an outcome can initiate synthesis of abnormal proteins. In fact, these mistake don’t occur and the precision of the protein synthesis process is extremely high. These mistakes appear only in some metabolically abnormal situations (the presence of some antibiotics, a lack of amino acids, etc.). Usually a ribosome somehow correctly chooses the tRNA anti-codons out of the homonymous doublets.

We think that the correct choice out of doublet anti-codon-homonyms is realized through a resonant-wave or context (associative, holographic) and/or “background” mechanisms. Amino acid code homonymity can be overcome in the same way as they are in natural languages - by the placement of a homonym in a complete phrase; the homonym decodes the context and attaches a unique meaning to it, thus resolving the ambiguity. That’s why mRNA, acting as a “phrase”, should operate in the protein synthesis process as an integral coding system, non-locally determining the sequence of amino acids at the level of tRNA aminoacylated associates, which interact in a global and complementary way with the entire mRNA molecule. Macrosteric disagreement between mRNA and tRNA continuums could be eliminated due to a conformational lability of macromolecules. The A-P sections of a ribosome are responsible for accepting these associated amino acids, with their consequent enzymatic sewing into peptide chains. In this case, a context-oriented unambiguous choice and elimination of the doublet-anticodon homonymy will occur. Considering the above, it’s possible to predict that the interaction of aminoacylated tRNAs with mRNAs has a collective phase character and is effected by a type of re-association (“annealing”) of one-string DNA upon the temperature reduction after melting of a native polynucleotide. Does any experimental evidence for this contention exist? Yes. A great deal of such information is available and collected in the analytical review [45]. Here we will only present some of the data. For example, the correctness of terminating codons recognition by tRNA molecules is known to depend on their context (that’s a confirmation of our theoretical model), in particular, on the existence of a uridine after the stop codon. In Paper [9] the following information is presented: the insertion of a line consisting of nine rarely-used CUA-leucine codons in the position after the 13th one (in the compound of 313 codons of the tested mRNA) resulted in active inhibition of their translation, yet did not notably influence the translation of other CUA-codon-containing mRNAs. Here, the translation context effect is clearly seen as a strategic influence of distant mRNA codons on the inclusion (or non-inclusion) of certain amino acids in the composition of a protein being synthesized. This is a remote influence, connected with the protein synthesis continuum; it’s also an example of the genetic apparatus’ non-local functions, whereby the protein-synthesizing apparatus recognizes mRNA not only in parts (by nucleotides, locally), but in one piece (non-locally) as well. However, in the work being cited this key phenomenon is only stated and remains inexplicable to the researchers; and probably for this reason they don’t even discuss it. Similar results continue to appear in the literature at an increasing rate. In the work under discussion the authors refer to half a dozen analogous situations, whose explanation in the classical interpretation is rather difficult. This obviously points to inconsistencies in the genetic code triplet model. The model also fails to explain the existence of unusually swollen anticodons. When they are involved in protein synthesis, the number of base pairs in the ribosome A-site exceeds 3 [45]. This finding challenges the dogmatic postulate of code triplets . Furthermore, studies of tRNA-tRNA interactions on ribosomes are presented in [45]; they offer full confirmation of our model, in which we consider an amino-acid-loaded tRNA complex as the predecessor of a protein. In [45] an important idea, very close to ours, was put forward: the influence of the mRNA context on monosemantic incorporation of amino acids into a peptide chain reflects some basic, still unstudied, laws of genetic information coding in the protein synthesis process. It’s worth remembering that genetic information about protein synthesis occupies only some 1% of a chromosome's total volume. The remaining 98.5% of the whole contain programs of a significantly higher level.

As we can see, the previously-existing hypotheses regarding the genetic code and the operation of the protein-synthesis apparatus have been grossly simplified. The prion phenomenon is likely to be the last argument in favor of a final revision of the molecular biology central dogma.

Prions are low-weight molecular parasitic proteins (PrPsc) targeting the brains of animals (mad-cow disease) and human beings (Alzheimer’s, Kreutzfeld-Jacob’s syndrome, etc.). Virus-like strain-specificity is an inexplicable feature of prions. This strain-specificity is only attributed to microorganisms or viruses which have a genetic apparatus. And yet, it’s thought that prions don’t have a genome, since all efforts to find traces of DNA or RNA in them have failed. An acute contradiction, which once again discredits the molecular biology central dogma, arises: prions don’t have a genome, but genetic signs are present. Some scientists, unable to explain this phenomenon and trying to “save” the central dogma, nevertheless suppose that DNA or RNA traces are hidden in the prion molecule’s wrinkles [10]. However, investigations carried out in this field over decades and endorsed by the Nobel prize awarded to Stanley Prusiner in 1997, reliably demonstrated that prions had neither nucleic acids nor a genome [23]. How are we to resolve this contradiction? If we admit that the central dogma is correct, then this is impossible. Having rejected this dogma, we can imagine the following prion biogenesis scenario [34]: in this model, a “prion virtual genome”, i.e. a provisional genome "borrowed" from the master cells for a given time, is the chief player. To put it more exactly, this is a protein-synthesizing apparatus of master cells. Prions are likely to have retained the paleogenetic way as their way of reproduction; in some cases this breeding method enables prions not to use genes encoded in chromosomes, but to self-reproduce in another way, ignoring the central dogma of molecular biology and genetics. To synthesize prions, a cell has to address their genes: it’s a progressive, but, at the same time, organizationally and energetically difficult method. Prions can simplify this procedure. 

We believe that PrPsc (Prion-Protein-scrapy)  NH-group peptide bonds can react with the OH-groups of ribose remains of accepting CCA-sequences of respective tRNAs. In the course of a hypothetical fermentative reaction, an emerging poly-tRNA-complex, the collinear PrPsc, pairwisely in space draws together anticodons and forms a covalent and discrete “information RNA analog ” (iaRNA). This stage is practically a reverse process of the protein synthesis on a ribosome. The process is likely to take place on the ribosome’s A- and P-sites. Then, the synthesis of RNA on iaRNA takes place. For this purpose, a respective RNA polymerase, which can work with an iaRNA covalently-discrete matrix, is required. That’s the mechanism of “mutual usage” of the protein-synthesizing apparatus during the prion reproduction period. This impermanence creates the illusion that prions don’t possess a genetic apparatus. In this process, prion peptide chains are used as matrices on which poly-tRNA-continua in pairs arrange themselves on the ribosome’s A-P sections, forming discrete polyanticodons. The latter, joining in pairs , either become a direct matrix for the prion’s RNA-dependent mRNA synthesis, or (in the other case) polyanticodons may be specifically spliced and then alloyed in a covalently-undisrupted mRNA matrix of prions. Thus, prion’s mRNA polymerizes prions on a ribosome. That means that the ribosome operates in the reverse direction, being a “prion-polyanticodon-dependent mRNA polymerase” in the process. And, therefore, violating the dogma, information is transferred from a protein to RNA. Thus, the scheme of the DNA>RNA>Protein dogma completely changes. In this case, it isn’t the dogma any longer, but only a working model which needs further clarification and development. In accordance with this view on prion biogenesis, the prion stain-specificity is explained by peculiarities of reverse operation of ribosomes, temporarily recruited during the synthesis of each prion strain. These peculiarities reflect a taxonomic position of prion-producing biosystems. Now, back to the basic postulates of the genetic code model, still widely-accepted: the genetic code is a triplet, unoverlapped, degenerated and doesn’t have “commas”, i.e. codons are not separated from each other. Information flows from DNA through RNA to a protein. And finally, the code is universal. In light of the preceding arguments, what’s left out of the initial postulates? Nothing, essentially. Indeed, the code is likely to be a multi-letter fractal and heteromultiplet structure coding both individual proteins and functionally-linked protein associates. It has overlaps formed due to a shift in the ribosome’s reading frames. It has commas, since heterocodons can be isolated from one another by sequences with other functions, including punctuation functions. The code is not universal: in 14 cases, it is differed from the standard code of higher-level biosystems. The mitochondrial, yeast,  micoplasm, trematodian and other lower organisms’ codes are included in these cases [5, 6]. 

And finally: a protein can be a matrix for RNA, as we can see from the prion example. How should we understand an actual protein code, taking into account all the above-mentioned contradictions and in line with our theory? It is possible to postulate a qualitative, simplified, initial version of substance-wave control over the amino acids' line-up order, dictated by the associates of aminoacylated tRNA, the predecessors of proteins. Having admitted this assumption, it’s easier to understand the operation of the protein code and consider it as a hierarchically-structured program of the substance-wave biosystem organization. In this sense, the code is the first stage in a chromosome’s plan of building a biosystem, since the genome language is multidimensional and pluralistic and is capable of setting up more than just a protein synthesis task. The basic statements of this proposed preliminary model of matter-wave sign processes in protein biosynthesis are as follows:

Multicomponent ribonucleoproteid protein-synthesizing apparatus is a system which generates highly organized sign radiation of acoustic-electromagnetic fields which strategically regulate its self-organization and the order of inclusion of amino acids in a polypeptide chain.

Aminoacylated tRNAs are assembled in sequences, which are the precursors of protein synthesis. This assembling is realized before the contact with the A-P ribosome site. The resulting continuum of tRNA anticodons pool is complementary to the complete mRNA, excluding dislocations determined by the availability of non-canonical nucleotide pairs.

The sequence of aminoacylated tRNA in associates-protein precursors is determined by the sign collective resonance of all the participants involved in the amino acid sequence synthesis. In this process, pre-mRNA and mRNA, which function as an integral continuum (macrocontext) of heteropolycodons variously scaled by length (including an intronic fraction pre-mRNA) are the key wave matrices. The main function of the wave matrices is an associative-context orientation of the aminoacylated tRNA sequence; this orientation works on a global scale, compared to F.Crick's “wobble-hypothesis”, superseding the rules of canonical pairing of nucleotides in the unidimensional space mRNA-tRNA. Laser-like radiations, emitted by the participants in this process and correcting the order of insertion of the amino acid components into a peptide, also function on the ribosome in addition to and/or together with the resonance regulations of a mutual dislocation of the codon-anticodon continuums. A ribosome enzymatically “de jure” fixes the peptide covalent bonds of amino acid sequences, selected “de facto” in a polyaminoacid-poly-tRNA-associate, the predecessor of the protein.

The resonance-wave “censorship” of the order of inclusion of amino acids in a peptide chain emends the potential semantic disorder in the creation of false protein “proposals” following from the homonymy of codon families, and ensures their correct “amino acid conceptualization” due to the context lift of the homonymy of multisided even doublets in codons The same mechanism is engaged in a higher-ranked ambiguity when the number of codons is (n+1).

Genetic code degeneration is necessary for pre-mRNA-mRNA-dependent, context-oriented exact matching of aminoacylated tRNAs, determined by the nature of wave associative resonance interactions in a protein-synthesizing apparatus.

The mechanism of generating the correct sequences of aminoacylated tRNAs on the wave matrixes of pre-mRNA-mRNA may be considered as a particular case of a partially complementary re-association of one-string DNA-DNA and RNA-DNA or, in general, as a self-assembly process known to characterize ribosomes, chromosomes, membranes and other molecular- and super-molecular cellular structures.

Ribosome can facilitate RNA synthesis on a protein matrix.

Thus, the role the mRNA plays is many-sided and dualistic. This molecule, like DNA, is a cornerstone in the evolutionary process and is marked by the mutually-dependent, synergistic unity of material and wave genetic information. An ambiguity of the material (substantial) coding is resolved by the precision of the wave information, which is likely to be realized through the mechanisms of collective resonance and laser-holographic (associative, contextual and background) effects in the cellular-tissue continuum. A jump to a more advanced level of wave regulation of the RNA-->Protein translation is accompanied by a partial or complete departure from the canonical laws of pairing of adenine with uracil (thymine) and of guanine with cytosine, which were attributable to the early (and simpler) evolutionary stages of DNA replication and RNA transcription. Such a refusal is informationally necessary, unavoidable and energetically preferable at a higher biosystem level. It’s worth stressing once again that the context associative-holographic mechanisms of operation of an organism’s protein-synthesizing system are tightly linked with the so-called “background principle” [44] and also with a multivector and multisided logic of a sophisticated system management (Gerhard Thomas’ kenogrammer) [26]. From this point of view, macrocontexts of pre-informational and contexts of informational RNA might be considered as a background which in this particular case is an “information noise source”. This permits to significantly amplify a signal under which the correct choice (wave identification) is made of one in two homonymous aminoacylated tRNAs, where only one of the two is to be incorporated in a protein correct “phrase”.  This selection is only possible after a ribosome has managed to split a coherent component in the form of repeats of the same recognitions of one of the two similar doublets in codons. The following simplified example can explain the situation. Let’s suppose that it’s necessary to select one of two words (analogues of codons with doublets-homonyms). The words are “cow” and “bow”. It’s clear that the choice depends on the entire sentence, or on the context which helps to identify a signal, the correct word. If the sentence is “A good cow gives lots of milk”, then the replacement of “cow” with the word “bow” is equal to noise generation and to losing the signal. Pre-informational RNA and introns are likely to play a similar part; they are different levels of contexts which a live cell and its ribosome apparatus have to read and conceptualize to take a precise decision on tRNA anticodon selection in homonymy situation.

A family of various solitons (optical, acoustic, conformational, rotational-oscillating, etc.) excited in polynucleotides can become an apparatus for continual (non-local) “reading” of context RNA sequences on a whole. These solitons help gather semantic information on RNA contexts and then associatively regulate codon-anticodon sign interrelations. Genomes-biocomputers of cells carry out semantic estimates. Soliton reading, scanning the RNA surface, is a method of polynucleotide continual reading. For instance, the solitons of rotating torque vibrations of nucleotides on a sugar-phosphate axis we physically and mathematically considered for one-chain RNA-like DNA segments [30, 36]. These solitons respond to the nucleotide sequence alteration by the modulation of their dynamic behavior which acquires sign features and can probably be transmitted remotely, or over distances significantly exceeding the hydrogen bond length. Without a remote (wave, continual) migration of a signal containing information about the whole system, i.e. about pre-mRNA-mRNA-sequences, it isn’t possible to realize associative-context protein synthesis regulation. For this purpose, the wave capability of solitons (as well as of holographic memory) to deal both with separate parts and integral system as a whole, is required. This continuity or non-locality (which is the same) ensures that the ribosome apparatus recognizes and correctly chooses an actual codon from the two available doublet-homonymous ones, the codon, pseudo-noised with a background (context).

What is the link between the above discussion and the problem of HIV and cancer research? Obviously, the link is direct. The HIV genome and oncogenes as well as other DNA structures, pseudogenes for instance, “are silent” (as factors of destruction), and this silence continues until a certain time. This key moment for initiation of a genome's pathological condition in cells, potentially inclined to abnormal development, is determined by transpositions of oncogenes and the HIV genome, or by transpositions of their polynucleotide surroundings in the chromosomal space and time structure. In both cases, the context environment of the pathogenic genome changes. The latter is no longer homonymous, unrecognizable or acceptable as a normal one by the cell. Other signals aimed at HIV reproduction are turned on (“are read and conceptualized”). A cell under the new context recognizes oncogenes as factors having other (pathological) command functions. The changed background (context) identifies and amplifies in the new polynucleotide situation potential signals and other meanings, which were hidden so far. The situation looks like that taking place in protein synthesis (choosing a correct codon out of the homonymic codons). Under this new context, cells are “confused in giving meanings” of DNA sequences and take-in wrong “decisions” as correct; this results in the complete shift of metabolism and its re-adjustment to a “cancer/viral way” - to reproduce the HIV genome. Here, a dualistic situation occurs: the new decisions are wrong in relation to the organism, but are right pertaining to the HIV reproduction. That’s how pathogens identify themselves and uncover their real “targets”, keeping and multiplying themselves as allogenic particles through the destruction of a biosystem as a whole. The problem of the DNA sequences migration in chromosomes may be discussed more globally (oncogenes, HIV genome or any other transposons whose purposes are still unclear for us). Moving along a genome as if over a context continuum, they obtain new meanings and other semantics which depend on their location in a 3D space of interphase chromosomes. The same logic is also true for “genetically-engineered” transgenesises of plants and animals. A growing number of artificial transgenetic organisms threatens with a global and rapid degeneration of all creatures living on Earth, because an uncontrolled automatic sign reconstruction of higher-ranked genetic codes, occurring after the introduction of foreign DNA molecules, isn’t taken into consideration. Practically uncontrolled intertaxonic transfer of foreign DNA-sequences, an avalanche-like semantic chaos in chromosomes and metabolic chaos in all biosystems (including human beings) will be the result of these genetically-engineered manipulations. It’s becoming hard to slur over the first alarming signals.

The rather abstract theoretical structures of genetic material transpositions we propose are confirmed not only by the example of transgenetic biosystems, but also by R.B.Hesin’s fundamental work [47]. Euchromatic genes, moving to an intercalar heterochromatin, produce a positioning effect, i.e. they are inactivated in some somatic cells and continue to function in others. Oncogenic cellular sequences are able to build-in in retroviral structures which didn’t originally have their own oncogenes. As a result, relatively non-hazardous viruses sometimes become tumorigenic. For instance, the RaLV rat virus might transform, having included master’s determinants in the genome, into the RaSV sarcoma virus. Cellular oncogenes, like viral ones, acquire a transforming activity if the lengthy repeated viral end sequences (LTR) are alloyed to oncogenes’ 5’-ends. In appropriate surroundings, proviruses including HIV viruses (as we think) are converted into latent (“silent”) genetic elements. They can persist in a master’s genome without producing any harm to it namely owing to the cellular DNA’s neighboring sequences repressing their activity. Taking into account this statement of Hesin’s, it’s possible to imagine a reverse situation, namely, the HIV genome activation in an environment of other DNA sequences when a cell in another DNA context already interprets HIV as a hostile semantic structure, but can do nothing to defend itself. However, as Mr. Hesin stresses, both peculiarities of the chromosomal DNA adjacent sections and operational principle which determine a provirus activity, are still a mystery. The mystery will remain unresolved, unless we apply new measurement criteria (semantically-vocal, wave or image measurements, i.e. the criteria we propose) to the genome. In this aspect, an interesting comparison of chromosome semantic and holographic information appears. A higher biosystem genome has several levels of information non-locality, “smearing” and redundancy, with a chromosome continuum holographic memory being one of them. Information locality and unambiguity of the genome’s mobile elements, the transposons, is contraposed to it; however, the multi-vector meanings of this information are developed dependent on a changing context of the transposon context surrounding; at the same time, transposons themselves are the triggers initiating the appearance, disappearance and repetition of the texts. A context “game” (combinatorial analysis) depends on current metabolic requirements of cells, tissues and an organism. The difference between a text and a context is conditional and depends on the domain of a part and an integer in a genome. The boundaries between the part and the integer are conditional and are likely to have a morpho-functional character which depends on an organism’s part differentiation at the cell, tissue, organ and biosystem levels. A finer ranking - by functional and metabolic areas of a cell which are controlled by certain chromosome sections (up to protein-genetic and exon-intronic splitting) - may also exist. Each of these quanta is an integral system in relation to itself, and just a part if the division rank is higher. Is it here that metabolic pathologies and herontologic manifestations are rooted when a biosystem stops identifying and differentiating many-sided patterns of a part and an integer? The HIV genome, like a transposon and a conditional part, might be invisible for a cell under some DNA contexts of master chromosomes . This is the way in which molecular-semantic mimicry of pathogenic chromosome structures is produced. Each coding-noncoding homonymous (or synonymous) and any other DNA sequence can be considered as a potentially multi-meaning pseudo-noised signal (signals) or as an image (images) which has to be identified and understood on the background of other dynamic gene images. The genetic apparatus amplifies each image signal and picks up the amplified signals out of the background (context, noise) not through the noise suppression procedure. On the contrary, a cell, a tissue and an organism use the background changing context as a means of extraction, amplification and to understand the meaning of each of these available image signals. It’s also logical to discuss in the same way the role of 3’- and 5’ - flanking sequences of protein genes highlighting one or another meaning. If we realized that the proposed mechanism of the dynamic game of genetic text meanings could play an important role in HIV and cancer development and in an organism’s entire metabolic status on the whole and if we accepted the idea that the comparison of a genome with natural texts and images wasn’t just a poetic metaphor, then real opportunities for the creation of a new biosystem management strategy, including management of viruses and oncogenes behavior, would emerge.

We have already mentioned some similarities between the Background Principle and Gerhard Thomas’ multi-vector logic (keno-grammar) and the prospects of these methodologies for the extraction and recognition of genetic or even metabolic vectors of multicellular organisms’ live functions. There’s one other direction in the natural languages theory, which, we hope, is applicable to genetic linguistic. This direction was developed by V.V.Nalimov and is linked with a probabilistic approach to understanding a language [22, 43]. V.V.Nalimov proposed that the semantics of any actual text (including a genetic one, we believe) could be described by its own distribution function (probability density), r (m ). Text revision and evolution are linked with a spontaneous manifestation of the filter r (y/m ), multiplicatively interacting with the initial function r (m ), in a certain situation y. We consider a “y-change” in a genetic text to be the natural transpositions of the DNA mobile elements, recombinations, the slicing and the alloying. The incorrect (for a biosystem) transpositions of its own (or foreign) DNA mobile elements, mutations and artificial transgenic manipulations are considered “unnatural changes”. An introduction of viral genomes, the HIV genome for instance, into a biosystem’s chromosome material, relates to a “specific class of unnatural changes”. The interaction of the r (y/m ) filter with the initial function r (m ) is ruled by known Buys’ formula:

r (m/y) = kr(m ) r(y/m ),

where

r (m/y) = distribution function determining the semantic of a new text after the “y-changes”

k = normalization constant.

According to V.V.Nalimov, Buys’ formula comes forward as a syllogism: based on the two statements - 
r (m) and r (m/ y), a text with a new semantic r (m/ y) comes to life. Let’s assume that Buys-Nalimov’s logic is applicable to genetic “texts”. Then the “idea” of these “texts” taken as a whole is determined by 3 weight correlations which the r (m ) function specifies. “Meanings”, being a qualitative parameter in nature, obtain a new quantitative characteristic. With the help of the conditional distribution function r (m/y) V.V.Nalimov presents a new interpretation, somewhat different from that used in Buys’ statistics. In his theory, r (m/y) shows the distribution density of a random value y under the given value m . Therefore, not y, but m can be considered as an argument of for the r (m/y) function which plays the role of a filter. We think that the “y-changes” factor, initiating and exciting a new semantic situation, is a key element in this model. Namely this factor stimulates the unfolding of an increasing number of alternative and new meanings,  as well as of holographic and other images in a variable semantic space of mobile DNAs in a multicellular organism’s genome. The genome-carrying continuum passes through the dynamic filter r (y/m) responding to it by dramatic “y-changes”. It is significant that V.V.Nalimov had been puzzled by the question of what permitted the reproduction of the non-trivial r (y/m ) filters, but didn’t find an answer. Nevertheless, at the same time he put forward an idea about the role played by the environment and about a variety of situations which could act as a source and a reason for adequate filter formation. Here, V.V.Nalimov practically came up to the above-discussed Background Principle. After the unification and combination of Nalimov’s model and the Background Principle statements it’s logical to consider that the y-factor is nothing but a context (background) mechanism of switching on the r (y/m ) filters. These filters pick up the semantic loading and meaning which are determined by an actual metabolic, including genetic, situation: for instance - the necessity for a cell to synthesize a huge amount of catalase at a given moment, a process which is accompanied by a choice and the expression of the catalase gene from a gene multi-meaning continuum. Herein another, and perhaps the key mechanism of genome differential activation to produce different proteins, is seen. Therefore, the Background Principle and Buys-Nalimov’s logic became linked by identical natural definitions. G.Thomas’ keno-grammar [26], which is largely based on context orientations in choosing priorities to manage complicated situations, is likely convergent with the above-mentioned ideas.

Now back to the “genetic engineering”. Let’s also remind of the “chromosomal engineering”, when large blocks of a genome are used for production of useful hybrids. From the probabilistic approach to the mobile polysemantic chromosomal continuum, these “engineering” seem rather gloomy. Any manipulation here is an instant (as compared to the evolution pace) creation of new y-factors by people (and not by the evolution) and therefore, a mutation of the r (y/m ) purporting filters, unhampered by any time (evolutionary) frames. That’s the Earth’s genetic fund forthcoming chaos.

The paradox of the genetic apparatus lies in the combination of two normally opposite properties - the stability of the information transferred from one generation to another, and the genome's volatility [47]. Genomic mobility is provided by polynucleotide transpositions, soliton-like non-linear dynamics (electric acoustic), and conformative and halogen restructuring. These non-random (programmed) movements of a chromosome continuum in live tissues are subtly and extensively distributed in a biosystem's space-time. The said dynamics is a means of the wave management of re-distribution of an organism’s various parts among each other. At the same time, it’s a method of metabolic event sequence organization. This strong sign chromosomal non-linear dynamics, which is easily found even in vitro, is realized through its isomorphous image in an organism’s space and time structure [32]. As a result, in a chromosomal continuum, as in a polysemantic and multiplex holographic formation, a permanent and variable semantic “game” of meanings goes on. Some kind of “endogenous semiotic show” of optical-acoustic regulatory (sign) images, which also have variable meanings, takes place. One of these chromosome images was experimentally found in many laboratories and is generally known as the phantom leaf effect (ref. to [32]). The phantom leaf effect theory is based on the principles of holography [32, 37]. It’s possible to say that the “game of meanings” is a function of sign dynamics of interphase chromosomes. This is a prerequisite for storing and processing vast volumes of information when a super-small volume of zygote mesomorphic chromosomes is able to operate a multi-vector and many-sided logic of development of extremely sophisticated biological systems. This is the origin of the idea that an essentially novel approach strategy to HIV and cancer treatment presumes the understanding and the possibility of managing a multi-vector genome logic. If we manage, applying genetic engineering methods, to purposefully and site-specifically introduce certain context DNA sequences to the 3’ and 5’ ends of oncogenes or HIV-genome, then it’s reasonable to expect the inactivation of their pathologic expression. On the other side, if we know the principles of ribosome operation in a context orientation mode, then we can successfully fight HIV in a ribosomal wave (laser, solitonic, polarization and radio wave) regulation zone. Ribosomes, synthesizing HIV proteins, must have thin wave vectors for management through context-background paths. Knowing them, it’s possible to suppress viral protein synthesis by external artificial modified fields similar to those normal cells use.

Now, let’s turn to another genome operation phenomenon - that is, a supposed effect of quantum non-locality of chromosome sign conditions, which we have more or less experimentally confirmed [8, 37]. The idea of quantum non-locality was proposed by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen [4] (EPR-effect). This effect is well in line with quantum physics experimental evidence. In short, the EPR-effect states that elementary particles, two photons for instance, which have initially been in a so-called “entangled” state, retain a mutual bond (this bond may be called “informational”) by quantum parameters (for example, by polarization), even if these elementary particles are removed from one another by any arbitrary distance. If the polarization of one of the particles has changed for any reason (for example, the photon passed through an optically-active layer and recorded the polarization modulations, then this photon disappears, but it manages to instantly transfer the recorded polarization information to another photon. To be more correct, it’s not a “transfer”, it’s a transition of one photon into another by means of a permissive teleportation mechanism. The first changed photon turns into the second one, independent of the distance between them. The second photon becomes a complete analogue of the first one. If this situation is in some way reflected in the genetic apparatus, then we rocket to new and higher orbits in understanding a metabolic processes and the Life phenomenon as a whole. In strictly physical terms, the EPR effect as a phenomenon of photon teleportation was correctly confirmed only in 1997 [2].

Other researchers soon obtained similar results, and not only based on photons. Multi-frequency physical fields are now teleported. Based on this data, it’s possible to suppose that photon fields, emitted by chromosomes as sign fields, can be teleported within or even outside the organism’s space. The same is true for wave photon fronts, which were read from the chromosome continuum similar to reading from a multiplex hologram. If photons are transformed into radio waves (the situation we found - ref. to [8, 33, 37]) through the EPR-mechanism, then this phenomenon is vital. In fact, the importance of quantum non-locality existence for a genome is hard to overestimate. We put forward and published this idea when we identified, with the help of the equipment we had developed, what was probably a more sophisticated variant of the EPR-effect. The said equipment includes a specially-designed laser which is capable of transforming its own photons into radio waves [46, 37, 8, 34]. The laser features a unique light beam dynamic polarization which could in some way simulate a dynamic polarization of chromosome laser radiations. It converts its photons (l =632.8 nm) into kHz-MHz-band radio waves upon the interaction of its beam with matter and the introduction of probing photons back in the laser resonator. Under these conditions, we suppose, pairs of entangled photons born in a gaseous phase of the laser optic resonator are transformed during their splitting and interaction with any body, including the laser mirrors, into radio waves. Photons were found to be able to localize in fractal clusters of the laser metal mirrors. If photons are probing an outer object, then the mirrors “store” its spectral characteristics. In such a way we have managed to record polarization & radio wave information of DNA preparations. This information carries morphogenetic signals. This fact enabled us to develop a fundamentally new type of dynamic polarization laser-radio wave spectroscopy and to investigate quantum non-local (teleportative) genetic processes.

We’d like to make some additional comments on the importance of quantum teleportation of genetic & metabolic information for biology on the whole. Quantum non-locality of genetic (chromosomal) information as a method of manifestation of its wave total distribution (continuity) in the space of multicellular biosystems seems to be just a particular case. In biosystems, there are at least six non-locality levels:

The first level is the constitutional (organism) level. Here, non-locality is expressed through the regeneration ability that organisms such as the planarium worms possess. After sectioning off any part, the worms’ body is able to reproduce an entire organism through regeneration. In other words, in this case there’s no link point between the genetic information common pool and a part of a biosystem. The same is also applicable to vegetative reproduction of plants.

The second level is the cellular level. It is possible to grow an entire organism from each cell (not only from a zygote). Despite the difficulties, it’s also possible for animal biosystems. Each cell is a potential continuum of an organism.

The third level is a cellular-nuclear level. Removal of nucleus from somatic and reproductive cells with a consequent introduction of another nucleus inside doesn’t impede a normal organism development. Such type of cloning has already been carried out at a higher biosystem level, on sheep for instance. Each nucleus of a cell is also a potential continuum of a biosystem. There’s no localization of genetic potencies at the level of individual cells.

The fourth level is a molecular level. The ribosome “reads” informational RNA either by individual codons, or on the whole, with the consideration of context, i.e. non-locally and continuously.

The fifth level is a chromosomal-holographic level. A genome possesses a holographic memory [37] which in nature is a typically-distributed (non-local) associative memory. At this and the next level non-locality obtains a new feature - a dualistic substance-wave character, since electromagnetic and/or acoustic fields, bringing out gene-wave information outside chromosomal material, “read” holograms as a substance. A physical field (or fields), marking the organism’s prospective space (calibration), comes on scene. The brain cortex holographic memory, establishing mental, semantic and image spaces calibrating potential actions of higher biosystems, is likely to belong to this category. In this way, social and genetic processes are alike.

The sixth level is a genome quantum non-locality. At the levels of up to 6th, genetic information non-locality is realized in an organism’s space. The 6th level is of a special nature, since it acquires a new quality. It’s manifested within the frames of one of the quantum non-locality forms, namely, in the permissive form we postulate in the current paper. In this case, non-locality is realized both by biosystem space and by its own, shrinkable to zero, time. Gene-wave programs, instantly spreading in such a way, simultaneously operate in an organism “here and there” and therefore, the semantic construction “now and then” loses its meaning. And this is a strategic factor and a vital evolutionary achievement of multicellular biosystems. Billions of organism’s cells have to instantly “know” a lot of information about each other. Without the “wave information instancy” phenomenon, a giant multicellular continuum of higher biosystems won’t be able to completely coordinate a metabolic process and its physiological and other functions. The intercellular diffusion of signal substances and nerve processes are too inert for this purpose. Even if we assume that sign electromagnetic fields are involved in an intercellular transfer process occurring with the speed of light (this assumption is quite reasonable), it’s not enough. A quantum non-locality mechanism, applicable to the genetic apparatus and which can act as an instantly-distributed quantum (wave) object isomorphous with substantial chromosomes, is required. Using non-locality, the genetic apparatus of higher biosystems creates an unparalleled phenomenon, where for certain intervals of time the “here and there” and “now and then” structures operate within the biosystems’ “closed” space-time as a continuity providing the organism with intrinsic super-coherence, information overredundance, a super-informativity and linkage and, as a result, proper integrity (survival). The ability of lower organisms’ (hydros, worms, amphibian, lizards, crustaceans) tissues and organs to regenerate (people have largely lost this ability ) is a manifestation of this phenomenon. But, considering the biosystem wave self-organization principles we are developing, it can be re-activated. The world’s first successful adaptation of donor tissues implanted to a blind man, which helped to return sight function to the patient, is a good example of regeneration. The principles behind this surgical operation and regeneration process is described in [33-35].

At the same time, theoretical and experimental research in this field is just emerging and needs further physical and mathematical understanding and development.

Now, let’s return to some features of the phenomenon of long-term recording of dynamic photon polarization-radio wave information on laser mirrors. We think this is linked with the phenomenon of photon fields localization (compression) in the system of correlated dispersers of laser mirrors. Given that the disperser material possesses a low radiation absorption ability, the external light field is capable to persist in the system for a long time without dissipation into other forms of energy. The reason for localization is connected with the interference of many times-diffracted waves. An external electromagnetic signal (in our case, it’s a laser beam modulated by polarization, for instance, by a DNA preparation) is localized (“recorded”) in the system of non-uniform laser mirrors. Later, the signal can be “read” without a significant loss of information in the form of isomorphously (in relation to photons) polarized radio waves. Theoretical research on a strain state of localized photons [12, 14-19, 24] seem to support these ideas. If this opinion is correct, then a chromosomal apparatus may also be considered as a fractal medium of localized photons accumulation, creating a coherent continuum with a quantum-nonlocally-distributed polarization radio wave genetic information. To some extent, this is in correspondence with our idea of genome quantum non-locality manifesting in one of its forms - ref. to [8, 34, 37]. It’s possible that the apoptosis phenomenon, which is likely to be involved in the regulation of multicellular creatures’ life time, is connected with an abnormal compression of photons by the nucleus of a cell, which are accumulated to a maximal value and then destroy the nucleus. The background principle of gene operation (including anti-oncogenes) may be another supplemental apoptosis regulation mechanism. For instance, an anti-oncogene coding the p53 protein could be controlled through the introduction of the DNA artificial flanking contexts from 3’-and 5’-ends of the p53 gene.

We are unaware (with some exceptions, of course) of modern publications on wave genetic theory and practice, as available in the major scientific journals. In the 1920-1940s, A.G.Gurwitch, A.A.Lyubitchev and V.N.Beklemishev, who developed the first theoretical models, were pioneers in this field; their ideas are described in detail in [32, 33]. In this paper, we are trying to produce more developed opinions of some possible synthesis mechanisms and functions of wave genetic structures, attributable to higher biosystems, as well as of the methods applicable for simulation of sign wave processes in chromosomes and model units simulating chromosome field functions and transferring wave genes. A publication and a patent, granted for the development of a device for the transfer of wave genes from a donor biosystem to an accepting one, are worth mentioning as an example of a rarely-appearing event. The said research was carried out by Yu.V.Dzang Kangeng [39, 40]. Kangeng’s device for a directed wave transmission of oncologic, including genetic, information to change hereditary characteristics of a biological accepting object is of a special interest. Unfortunately, there’s no theoretical interpretation of the device operation principles. Kangeng’s device has some common functional features with the equipment we developed and whose operation is based on similar principles. Kangeng’s device includes space elements (forms) which make it possible to split the radiation of a high-frequency SHF electromagnetic field generator into two orthogonally-polarized beams which repeatedly, as in our installation (in our case, it’s a laser beam transforming into radio waves), were passing through a donor biosystem and an accepting biosystem. Dzang Kangeng used a hexahedron, a cone, a sphere and a parabolic-reflector aerial as types of special forms. These forms provide a specific spinning (polarization) of the SHF (super-high frequency) field electromagnetic vectors. In our laser design, one of the mirrors used also had the form of a parabolic-reflector aerial directed to a resonator. During numerous repeated passes through an optically-active (an electromagnetic wave polarization rotating plane) hetero-liquid-crystalline donor biosystem, the organism’s tissues modulate the radiation (in our case, this is laser-radio wave radiation) by polarization, which is strengthened owing to repeated passes and is repeatedly and over a long time delivered to the accepting biosystem. In this process, the generator electromagnetic field “stores” the donor biosystem gene-sign polarization modulations in its “memory” then resonantly interacts with gene-sign polarization distribution of the accepting biosystem electromagnetic field. If the donor biosystem is at an early morphogenesis stage accompanied by an intense cell fission rate, it can’t be excluded that the supposed polarization resonances are also of a holographic nature. This many times-amplified signal, carrying the wave information that was “read” from the donor biosystem chromosome continuum, passes through the substance-wave structure of the accepting biosystem and makes it execute new gene-wave-polarization programs by means of the variation of their differential polarization structure. Changes in the accepting biosystem's gene-wave-polarization structure induced by the donor in the process of the field integration (“wave heterosis”) leads to a restructuring of its morphologic (genetic and phenotypic) characteristics. Shear wave correlations of polarization angles during the donor-accepting mixing of physical waves resulted in the acquisition of new morpho-genetic and biological properties from the accepting organism, are one of the most important quantum-electrodynamic events of the “wave hybridization” process. This fact allowed Dzang Kangeng with the help of the wave method to transfer genetic information from ducks to hens, for instance. Hybrid chickens of hens had typical features of a duck - a flat beak, an elongated neck, larger internal organs ( heart, liver, stomach and bowels). The weight of a one-year-old hen-duck hybrid was 70% higher than the weight of hens grown from irradiated eggs. The second generation of the hen-duck hybrids retained all changes, which were obtained in the first generation, even without further re-radiation. A wave transfer of peanuts’ features to sunflower seeds resulted in the change of form, taste and odor of a hybrid plant, which became similar to those of peanuts. Productivity grew by 1.8-fold; new features are transferred from one generation to another even without further re-radiation.

Let’s highlight some common features of the experiments Dzang Kangeng and we independently carried out: first and foremost, they demonstrate the possibility of genetic information existence in a wave form. This similarity is in the polarization modulation of the radiation orthogonal beams with intensity re-distribution in primary orthogonal beams with a frequency secured in the radio wave spectrum we register, by a donor organism. The spinning polarization planes here act as gene-semiotic structures whose biological meanings are identified and coded by angular and intensity shifts by a frequency spectrum. Similarly-polarized waves are known to be able to interfere, while orthogonally-polarized waves do not interfere at all. Waves with a partially-coinciding polarization produce, dependent on their polarization coincidence degree, a more or less sharp contrast interference picture. In other words, an angle cosine of each vector in relation to their registration plane or to the wave interference plane is a crucial factor.

Biology, including genetics and embryology, has already come to a turning point in its development, which is similar to the period when physics first admitted the idea that the properties of waves and particles didn’t contradict each other and were even complementary in quantum objects. A huge number of facts and scientific research outcomes available in modern molecular biology, genetics and embryology, can’t be understood without such a definition as physical fields, for instance, or without the application of quantum electrodynamics principles. The idea of lingual attributes of higher biosystems’ genome is a kind of humanitarian counterweight to an apparently excessive physical interpretation of basic Life function phenomena. The pace at which this idea is gaining acceptance by society is rather slow - in fact furious resistance has been encountered from certain circles. The current situation is easy to explain: the subject of Life is too complicated. Nevertheless, the time has come. If we are too late understanding the wave gene-sign functions of biosystems, it is possible that such diseases as cancer and HIV will destroy our society, or at least cause irreversible damage. We’ll also lose the opportunity for a mighty jump in biotechnology and biocomputing. Last but not least, we’ll also lose an opportunity to purposefully, rationally and positively influence sociogenetic and demographic processes. Following the above-described logic, we are coming to the conclusion that human speech structures, which provide the major information influx for mankind, possess fractally-scaled supergenetic properties. Evolution of society is similar to an organism’s morphogenesis. Books, libraries, movies, computer memory and people’s live speech in the end are the functional analogues of a cell chromosomal apparatus. The aim of these chromosomes is to control the creation of society space (houses, roads, oil- and gas pipelines, telephony, the Internet) and to arrange functional and structural relationships among the people inside it. Chromosomal sign properties, which have a lot in common with organisms, have a substance-wave nature. For instance, a movie showing an ideal model of a social structure and people’s relations within its frames is a substantial (material) formation (video tapes). However, it uses a mental-wave method to input information (light, sound, speech, idea, image). That’s the method chromosomes apply. The latter produce marking and calibration fields to arrange the organism’s space and also control information & metabolic relations, using, in particular, quasi-speech methods (let’s remember context orientations in the protein synthesis and function of oncogenes and HIV). Therefore, people ought to carefully study the operational principles of their own genetic apparatus and the “tricks” HIVs play to “mislead” our chromosomes. This kind of study is especially crucial today when Russia, and not only Russia, could face a demographic and social collapse within the next 5 to 10 years.

We have declared the theoretical approach to describe the logic of sign speech-wave relationships between HIV genomes and a master cell as well as the oncogene behavior logic. However, it’s not enough. We must obtain a set of key tools which will enable us to follow up at least the simplest wave command biocomputing functions of our chromosomes (1) and the reprogramming of our chromosomes by nucleotide sequences of HIVs and oncogenes. We have already developed this set of tools - it’s a laser uniquely reflecting coherent polarization-laser-radio wave (PLRW) quantum-non-local sign processes in chromosomes. Physico-mathematical formalism characterizing the PLRW-quantum processes in such appliances is presented in our research ( 2). PLRW-spectroscopy is the basis of wave information recording on laser mirrors - the phenomenon we have discovered. We have also managed to record information from specially prepared mesomorphic DNA matrixes, to broadcast it in a waveform at a distance of 1 m and to introduce it in accepting biosystems. As an accepting biosystem, we took plant seeds. Using this phenomenon, we effected a “wave reparation” of a genome of radioactively-damaged old seeds of Athaliana gathered in the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant area in 1987, and initiated drastic changes in stem and tuber phenotype in the second generation of the Solanum tuberosum plant. These biological influences don’t have the nature of mutations, they only have a sense meaning and are just another evidence that genetic information can exist in the form of electromagnetic fields.

No less important is the fact that genetic information can be recorded, stored, read, transmitted and introduced in accepting biosystems. Here, two vital factors emerge. The first one is that the recording of vast information volumes (including the genetic one) is an unparalleled event which confirms that it’s possible to develop principally new carriers of the dynamic super-capacity analog memory (images, texts). This is rather important for future biocomputing. The second factor is that owing to the PLRW phenomenon we enter a huge area of genetico-metabolic wave sign processes. Numerous and unclear events of distant “recognition” of the antigene-antibody and tRNA anticodon-iRNA codon pairs, as well as complementary mutual recognitions of DNA single chains, self-construction of ribosomes, recognition sites of ferments, careful piloting and landing of transposons in the DNA and so on, are also well contained within the frames of these processes. None of these phenomena can be explained by only Brownian movement and adjacent van der Waals, ion, hydrogen and electrostatic interactions.

And finally, the most important thing for us in the context of the ideas we propose is a wave and sign behavior of viruses, HIV or influenza, for instance. Viruses can be considered as “orphaned” cells which retained a minimum of chromosomal information required for a wave search of landing site on a master cell and exact place to cut-in own DNA as a transposon in the master cell’s DNA with consequent possible precise re-transpositions. Wave “languages”, which viruses use during the information contact with a cell’s surface and its genome, are the most vulnerable parts of a virus. Viruses use these “languages” to enter the semantic space of a cell and then to “mislead” the cell; after that, they undergo mimicry and are reprogrammed, reproduced and thus survive in the end. Cells are likely to be able to “mislead” viruses as well, creating a kind of “wave immunity”. That’s why a certain balance of powers in the fight exists; the said balance can shift in favor of a virus - for instance, in favor of influenza virus if the temperature starts fluctuating. Cooling of a blood circulation in nose mucosa capillaries changes the temperature of liquid crystals in chromosome blood cells. At the same time, protective wave programs recorded on high topologies of chromosome mesomorphic phases can only be slightly distorted. As a result, the “cold temperature information breach” appears and is used by influenza virus to reproduce. As a response to this action, a compensatory reaction evolves in the organism, i.e. the body temperature goes up to a sub-lethal level of 41° C. According to our thinking, this reaction is designed to “submelt” mesomorphic phases of the virus nucleic acid and, therefore, to produce noise or completely erase virus wave programs which it needs to attack the organism’s wave semantic space, thus to kill the growing number of its cells. Virus genome acoustic fields tightly linked with photon ones might act as wave bioprograms. Using the method of correlative laser spectroscopy, we demonstrated drastic changes in acoustic performance of the DNA liquid crystals in vitro at temperatures of 40-41° C; the results obtained partially confirmed our suppositions. And that’s only an example of wave sign processes in the relationship between the influenza virus and the human organism. Similar sense relationships exist between HIV and human cells, and the same issues arise - how to correctly find a landing site on a cell’s surface and precisely build-in the DNA (reverse transcriptasal copy of a viral RNA) as a mimicking transposon into the master cell DNA. Thereafter, the task is to get accurately re-transposed in a proper place on a chromosome and to detect and realize itself as a reproducing pathogen.

For now we can initially list the bottlenecks of HIV wave programs and name countermeasures to eliminate the problems:

Searching and recognition of HIV on a landing site (by altering the radiation nature of a virus and/or sites of landing on a cell, it’s necessary to distort the system of resonance-wave recognition mechanisms).

Searching and recognition of a viral DNA on the landing site by the master cell’s DNA (altering the radiation nature of a virus and/or sites of landing on the cell’s DNA, it’s necessary to distort the system of resonance-wave recognition mechanisms).

Searching and mutual recognition: protein's mRNAs of HIV«tRNAs (codon-anticodon recognitions) and proteins of HIV«RNA of HIV (self-assemble) for wave distortion of this process.

Any violation of even small wave sign resonances in this triad will result in the loss of infectious ability of HIV and other viruses, and Nature has created an example. As it was already mentioned, it’s an organism’s temperature mode. In ways similar to the one found by Nature it’ll become possible to design a simple “wave” vaccine against HIV and other viruses and bacteria. Our goal is to study the “alphabet” and “grammar” of wave “languages” of viruses’ genomes. And the foundation for this study has already been laid. A laser capable to “read” PLRW-wave genetico-metabolic information has been developed. However, the research in this field is rather difficult due to intrinsically natural inertia of the material understanding of genetic and metabolic information. Technical issues also exist. The laser we use generates only red photons, while the chromosomal apparatus of human beings and viruses uses a wide spectrum of coherent radiation ranged from 250 nm to 800 nm. Therefore, it’s necessary to design lasers which function in a full span of the spectrum visible area. This aim is technically feasible, but significant investments are needed to achieve it. In our opinion, all attempts to produce a material vaccine or other drugs to fight against the HIV or influenza virus will fail. Viruses continuously change their antigenic composition and thus bury all efforts of immunologists and other scientists engaged in the vaccine development. Efforts to chemically block certain stages of virus morphogenesis are inefficient and only poison human organisms. Wave vaccine is a reality. This vaccine would be non-invasive and environmentally-friendly, since it touches only a narrow area of wave sign relations between a virus and a cell.

Boroda M.G., Polykarpov A.A. Zipf-Mandelbrot Low and Units of Different Text Level Organization.// Musicometrica. Bohum. 1988. ¹1.

Bouwmeester D., Pan Jian-Wei, Mattle K., Eible M., Weinfurter H., Zeilinger A. Experimental quantum teleportation // Nature. 1977. v.390, p.575-579.

Crick F.H.C. Codon-anticodon pairing: the wobble hypothesis. // J. Mol. Biol. 1966. v.19. p.548-555.

Einstein A., Podolsky B., Rosen N. Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? // Phys. Rev. 1935, v.47, p.777-780.

Elsanowski A., Ostell J., 1996. The Genetic Codes. National Centre for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). Betseda. MD. P.16 (Internet).

Fox T.D., 1987, Natural variation in the genetic code. // Ann. Rev. Genet., v.21, p.67-91.

Fractal in Engineering. Delft, Netherlands, 1999, p.355.

Gariaev P., Tertishniy G. The quantum non-locality of genomes as a main factor of the morthogenesis of biosystems. // 3th Scientific and medical network continental members meeting. Potsdam, Germany, May 6-9, 1999. p.37-39.

Goldman E., Rosenberg A.H., Zubay G., Studier F.W. Sequences of repeated and rarely-used leucine codons block translation only if they are near the 5’-end message in Esherichia Coli.// J. Mol. Biol., 1995, v.245, p.467, 473.

Hunter N., Prion disease and the central dogma of molecular biology. // Trends in microbiology, 1999, v.7, N7, p.265-266.

Lagerkvist U. Two out of Three: an alternative method for codon reading. // Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA., 1978, v.75.p1759-1762.

Lushnikov A.A., Maksimenko V.V. Quantum Optics for Metal Particle. JETP, v.76, 1993, p.497.

Maksimenko V.V. Antoine’s Localization of Photon inside Fractal Cluster, 4th conference.

Maksimenko V.V., Korobko A.P., Andreev G.V., Light-induced Rehbinder Effect in Systems with Eutectic. Russian Journal of Physical Chemistry, v.72, 1998, p.1559.

Maksimenko V.V., Krikunov V.A., Lushnikov A.A., Strong Localization of Light in a Closely Packed Granular Medium, Sov. Phys. JETP, v.75, 1992, p.848.

Maksimenko V.V., Localization of light in Fractal Cluster, Journal of Aerosol Science, v.30, 1999, p.291.

Maksimenko V.V., Localization of Photon between Pair of Particles.-1. Elastic Scatterring. Journal of Aerosol Science, v.30, 1999, p.287.

Maksimenko V.V., Localization of Photon between Pair of Particles.-2. Inelastic Scatterring. Journal of Aerosol Science, v.30, 1999, p.289.

Maksimenko V.V., Lushnikov A.A., Visibility-Invisibility Transition in a Fractal Cluster, JETP Lett, v.57, 1993, p.1993.

Mantegna R.N., Buldyrev S.V., Goldberg A.L., Havlin S., Peng S.-K., Simons M., Stanley H.E. Linguistic Features of Noncoding DNA Sequences. // Phys. Rev. Lett. 1994.v.73 N23. p.3169-3172.

Maslov M.U., Gariaev P.P., Fractal Presentation of Natural Texts and Genetic Code. “Qualico-94” (Second International Conference on Quantative Linguistics). September 20-24, 1994. Moscow. Lomonosov State University Philological Faculty. p.107-108.

Nalimov V.V., 1981. In the labirinths of language: a mathematician’s journey. Philadelphia, Pa.: ISI-Press. 246 p.

Prusiner S.B. (ed), Prions, prions, prions. Springer Press (1996).

Scattering and Localization of Classical Waves in Random Media. Ed. P. Sheng, World Scientific, Singapore, 1990.

Shannon C.E., 1948. Bell. Syst. Tech. J. 1949, v.27, p.379.

Thomas G.G., 1982, On permutograth. Proc. of the 10th winter school. Supplemento ai Rendiconti del Circolo Metematico di Palermo. Serie II, N2. Via archiraf, 34 - 90123 Palermo (Italy), p.275-286.

Zipf G.K. Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort (Addison - Wesley Press, Cambridge, MA).

Agaltsov A.M., Gariaev P.P., Gorelik V.S., Rakhmatullayev I.A., Tcheglov V.A. Double-photon-induced luminescent lighting in genetic structures. // Quantum Electronics. 1996. v.23, N2. p.181-184.

Beklemishev V.N. Systematics methodology. KMK Ltd Scientific Press (based on the manuscript of 1928). M., 1994. p.128.

Blagodatskikh V.I., Gariaev P.P., Leonova E.A., Maslov M.Yu., Shaitan K.V., Tcheglov B.A., 1996. Dynamic of dislocation emergrnce in a DNA cell. // Brief reports on physics. RAN Physical Institute, N3-4, p.9-14.

BorodaM.G., Polikarpov A.A. Quantitative linguistics and automatic text analysis. Tartu., 1984. p.35-59.

Gariaev P.P., Kaznacheev V.P., Vasiliev A.A., berezin A.A. Soliton-holographic genome with a collectively-symmetrical genetic code. Preprint. SO Acad. of Medical Sciences. Inst. of clinic and expert. medicine. p.50, 1990; Gariaev P.P., Wave genome. Dep. VINITI. p.279, 1993; Gariaev P.P., Wave genome. M. Obtch. Polza Press. 1994. p.279.

Gariaev P.P., Wave genetic code. M. 1997. Izdatcenter. p.107.

Gariaev P.P., Garber M.P., Leonova E.A., Tertyshniy G.G., 1999. On the issue of the molecular biology central dogma. // Consciousness and Physical Reality. v.4, N.1, p.34-46.

Gariaev P.P., Leonova E.A., Revision of the genetic code model. // Consciousness and Physical Reality. 1996. v.1, N.1-2, p.73-84.

Gariaev P.P., Maslov M.Yu., Shaitan K.V., Tcheglov B.A., 1997. The influence of nonlinear bonds between adjacent nucleotides on the dynamic of conformative disturbances spreading in DNA molecules. // Brief reports on physics. RAN Physical Institute, N3-4, p.3-8.

Gariaev P.P., Tertyshniy G.G., Gotovsky Yu.V., Leonova E.A. Genome holographic and quantum non-locality. // 5th International conference “Theoretical and clinical aspects of bioresonance and multiresonance therapy application”, part II. Imedis. Moscow 1999. p.256-272; Prangishvili I.V., Gariaev P.P., Tertyshniy G.G., Leonova E.A., Mologin A.V., Garber M.R., 2000. Genetic structures as a source ana a receiver of holographic information. Transdusers and Systems, N2, p.2-8.

Gurvich A.G. Selected works. M., 1977, p.351.

Dzang Kangeng Yu.V., Bioelectromagnetic fields as a material carrier of biogenetic information. // Aura-Z. 1993, N3, p. 42-54.

Dzang Kangeng Yu.V., Patent N1828665. A method of changing biological object’s hereditary signs and a device for biological information directed transfer. Application N3434801, invention priority as of 30.12.1981, registered 13.10.1992.

Lyubitchev A.A. Nature of hereditary factors. Perm. 1925. p.120.

Maksimenko V.V. Peculiarities of light absorption by fractal clusters. Atmosphere and Ocean Optics, v.10, N10, 1997, p.21

Nalimov V.V., 1989. Spontaneity of consciousness. Probability theory of senses and a man’s semantic architectonics. Moscow. Prometei, p.287.

Prangishvili I.V., Anuashvili A.N., Maklakov V.V. Regularities in object maneuverability development. Works of the RAN Institute for Managment Issues. M., 1993. Issue 1, p.7-10.

Ter-Avanesyan M.D., Inge-Vetchtomov S.G. Genetic control of protein synthesis. Works of the Leningrad (St.-Petersburg) University. L., 1988, p. 294.

Tertyshniy G.G., Gariaev P.P., Roslov V.N. A method and device for physical objects analysis. N99/01/l as of 06.01.1999. International application priority.