Things that benefit babies



After it is harmless for babies to enjoy recreational voluntary immersion in water and computers are able to perceive they enjoy swimming lessons they could find out what temperature of recreational swimming and bathing water babies most actively enjoy,
photonic brain scanning, and facial recognition and audio interpreting software could get it figured out to .5 degrees C, also different babies might differ, and something like a hot water bottle or blanket that continuously varied it temperature to
find the temperature where a baby would volunarily pull up the blanket over itslef or snuggle next to it would find each babies’ preferrred voluntary water immersion temperature



ultrasoft microfiber blankets and washcloths are already used for babies, I think babies might enjoy these and seek these out now, so is it possible to have disposable diaper linings that are made with the same material



There are baby massage classes, I do not know if babies enjoy massages, but a massage chair pad, attached to a computer could be placed at aprt of a crib, then if the baby voluntarily seeks out laying on it when a light turns on that says it will
activate in 20 seconds babies could learn to seek it out if they liked it, and it would be harmless to test out as a baby gift to see if the baby liked the automatic massage



I saw an image online of a baby in an approximately 2.5 foot diameter 3 foot long inflatable mini pool that looked sort of like a tube, the baby’s head is supported with an inflatable pillow, after they figure out this is safe and harmless, they could
find out if babies actively like it and it is neutral or good for cognitive development, they could also measure if it causes babies to cry less, sort of a very loose aqua swaddle, the babies being happier is a benefit, and the lack of crying is also
beneficial



I have never seen waterproof electric blankets or electrically heated pool chairs at the side of a public or private swimming pool, I think these would make being out of the water more pleasant.



it is possible everytime you make a new krypton atom you make a material that emits white light as a plasma, so aiming protons at Br atoms might make Kr, or aiming alpha particles which have 2 neutrons at Se might make Kr, the thing is I read that proton
capture is high energy, alhtough, at every universe where there actually is a proton capture than their is a new krypton atom, so however often it works, that MWI universe would always have one more krypton atom to emit white light, so can you just dip a
uranium glass rod in Se, then at whichever MWI universe that entire alpha particle becomes a part of the Se nucleus making Kr



there are 3D printers that use UV light, “When the laser beam “touches” the resin tank, it cures the resin at that specific point. “ What if the resin contained a free radical releasing chemical that activated when UV illuminated it, then say 90
different levels of UV, or passes of UV light could produce 90 levels of stiffness. UV cured resins are well known



2019 cheapest car in China $2115 (forbes)

Drinking more water may cause greater longevity, That suggests that kidney gneticsl along with GDF15 could be longevity genetics



A more durable positive mood, they could find out if this genetically adjustable thing causes better mood all day, “The researchers found that participants with greater white-matter compactness tended to display a greater ability to sustain a positive
mood during sleep deprivation.”



Variations in the human REST gene may be longevity genes, this gene effects could effect cognition so supercentenarians at the 99th percentile of g (like IQ) could be characterized as to what variety they have



Hi, I’m Treon and I take suggestions



I sense there is a synchronized pattern to things, and I was told there is a person who guides the people of earth. I think that person may read this, and I urge you to make suggestions.



longevity technology

Longevity technology:

the King’s Holly has lived 1.46 million days thus far, other trees have a lifespan of just 3650 days, ceasing to be alive even before a human reaches puberty; Finding longevity drugs based on the 400,000 percent different longevity difference between
trees goes with doing HPLC, something better than electrophoresis like laser spectroscopy, electrophoresis or some other thing, to find all the chemicals, proteins, peptides, lipids, in the plants, as well as at human tissue, then finding those chemicals,
proteins, peptides, lipids difference between the 1.46 million day longevity plant, the 3650 day plant, and the human;



I read humans share 60% of their genome with the banana, that suggests some plant genes, and plant gene products, and the amount of those chemical plant gene products, have most longevizing molecule versions that can be quantified as to longevity effects
at yeast and mice;



finding longevity chemicals: the group of chemicals (and genes) at both the (3650 day tree and the human) that are different than the chemicals that the (kings holly and the human share) are places where the chemicals (and the genes) at the humans could
improve and the king’s holly is the source of improvement;



At homologous genes an organisms that noticed it had the 3650 day plant version rather than the kings holly would notice an opportunity to have more longevizing chemicals endogenously produced



finding longevity chemicals: dosing yeast and mice with the chemical that the kings holly gene makes, that the human does not, noting the homologous but different gene, could find longevity drugs;



engineering mice and yeast to make that shared homologous kings holly gene then finding out if it longevizes them produces new longevity genes



This same approach works for finding longevizing chemicals between groups like million year lifespan endoliths comparison grouped with similar-to-endolith with different habitat organisms with 365 day lifespans, 214 year old whales, and whales with
briefer lifespans, 400 year lifespan clams, and clams with annual lifespans, and supercentenarian humans with 18 year marmosets;



The genes and gene products (chemicals) that the 400 year clam shares with the annual clam are ignored when narrowing the list of chemicals and genes at the human to find 400 year clam genes with longevity effects;



Now, although the amount of the chemicals matters the same thing can be done with chemicals, proteins, peptides, and lipids at the bodies of the various trees and other organisms



If the chemical is the the 3650 day plant and the king’s holly, ignore it, if it is only at the king’s holly put it in a database;



This works better at varieties of the same species with widely varying lifespans, if there are any species that interbreed but have 2-4 times different longevity, then ignoring the chemicals they share, then making a database of the chemicals only at the
long lived variety, then at humans finding if any of the database chamicals



There is a thing here though that kind of makes it improvable, for each 14 million chemicals the kings holly contains, and the 3650 plant overlaps 90% of them, that is still 1.4 million chemicals that might have longevity effects;



I think geneticists who write computer programs already know all about this, but if you have like 100 groups of related-organisms pairs (king’s holly 3650 day tree),(mouse, beaver), (214 year whale, less longevity whale), (human, primate with 1/5th
human lifespan) with the group members as far apart as possible as to longevity, and then compare the amount the very different most long lived species converge towards each others gene versions, notably moving away from their species-similar organisim,
then you find a possible math convergence around better versions of genes, or better versions of physiochemicals



The high longevity organisms at each of the 100 bowls of 2 or 3 longevity heterogenous organisms each



This technique can be used for other things like, 100 bowls of 2 or 3 mammals each, and the species similar mammals differ as much as possible on behavior, then you look at how the bowl leaders (of very different species) converge on various
characteristics, these can be genes, fMRI of brain areas, even things like parenting styles; a human, or niftily, a deep learning AI can then make a list of trends



(Mathematically you would expect the beaver to be more like the mouse, but if the beaver is more like the whale, the human, and the King’s holly then there might be a longevity trend at that homologous gene, similarly you might expect a human to be
more like a marmoset than a whale or the king’s holly, but at genes where the king’s holly is more similar that could suggest a “different chemical is better” trend, then noting the upper longevity organisms at each of the 100 bowls each with two
or three species in them (mouse beaver, 214 year whale, less longevized whale) (longevized bat, less longevized bat) (human, primate with 1/5th human longevity)



The 100 bowls of three high distalness (long lived, otherwise) yet each bowl with similar species could be repeated at species that have particularly wide longevity ranges, perhaps birds as well; if this finds a longevity trend for a group of genes at
very different birds, then the genes the different bowl gnes most share



also the 100 bowls thing of 2 or 3 organisms thing works with longevity chemicals as well, if 100 bowls find like 5000 circulatory chemicals shared at the long lived organisms out of each bowl, then those 5000 chemicals are compared to the chemicals in a
human, any of the 100 bowl shared longevity chemicals the human does not (yet) have could be tested on yeast and mice and human tissue culture to find out if they are longevizing; this works with homologous genes as well, if you have 100 bowls of clams,
birds, sharks, endoliths, plants, and other things, and the distal organisms in each bowl have and above-chance occurence of shared genes, then those could be longevity genes and a human would compare their genome to that shared at the 100 bowls of very
different species; mathematically it would be possible to list in order the genes shared between bowls, and the longevity trend of just that group of bowl-set organisims, so it would be possible to find the likely most longevizing versions of the bowl-
shared genes;



at endoliths, 100 bowls as a way to find new human longevity genes has nifty characteristics; endoliths can be bacteria, fungi, algae or lichen, very different species, but they all share lifespans longer than the entire span of human culture; first find
briefer species that are most genetically similar to the endoliths, (3 century lichens) (24 hour bacteria) to put in the bowls, with each of the 100 bowls having an endolith; do HPLC on all the organisms chemicals, and sequence the genomes of the 200 or
300 organisms in the 100 bowls, then find where the endoliths converge towards each other, across widely differing species, and away from the other organisms at their bowl,



The chemicals (proteins, peptides, others) that subsets of endoliths produce that have varied amounts of convergence at different subsets of the 100 bowls can be tested as longevity cheimcals;



encouragingly, the 10,000 year lifespan creosote bush produces NDGA, which is also published as causing greater longevity at mice, so chemicals that 100 different endoliths converge on, at unexpected divergence from the other organisms in their similar
species bowl, could be longevity drugs and chemicals;



similarly, the long lifespan but species heterogenity of endoliths (algae, bacteria, fungi) if there are any converged on homologous genes could actually suggests genetics of greater longevity at humans, that can be tested on mice, let’s say the
endoliths all have mitochondrial DNA that causes mitochondrial uncoupling, then a human could look through a database of mammal genetics and genomes and find out if any mammals had uncoupled mitochondria, and the effect it had on that species being above
the median, or high above the median on longevity; (I read that mitochondrial uncoupling actuallu doubles c elegans lifespan, it just seems possible to have a 100 bowl convergence be able to find it as well)



do the “are there any mammals like the converged endoliths’ homologous genes unusualness of form, and, how is it going for them?” thing automatically with computers, also, the technique can be used with any group of species like birds, or
tortoises, or even bowls of plants, along with the kings holly there are many trees with multimillenia lifespans



when they do, that version of that mammal gene is unusually likely to be a longevity gene, and using yeast and mouse full lifespan to quantify its effects is beneficial and produces a longevity gene; notably though the gene sometimes makes a product like
a protein, endolith converged, then found at mammal genes’ proteins could be screened as to longevity effect; I read that sme endoliths, after you put them in a comfy environment grow rapidly, and a kilogram of cultured endolith might provide enough
converged-endolith-gene product to dose shrews, c elegans, yeast, and human tissue culture; (it is kind of nice with 100 bowls you get to skip screening a library, you just culture and gather material from of the species at one of the bowls that makes
the converged on chemical, a mathematician would be able to suggest the optimal number of bowls, with endoliths perhaps it is 300 because, if there is convergence on some chemicals, rather than the numerics of screening a library you already have a
source)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)