AP's 162nd book of science, Part2// First Multicellular Organism on Earth was a cancer of a single cell in mitosis/ Cancer is actually when parent cell cannot detach from daughter cell causing uncontrolled replication to try to free the attachment//

First Multicellular Organism on Earth was a cancer of a single cell in mitosis/ Cancer is actually when parent cell cannot detach from daughter cell causing uncontrolled replication to try to free the attachment//Biology Science

Alright, when I am not stressed by a Drought filled summer, and I have the big physics textbooks out of the way, I can almost write a book every few days. A book of importance. Not these namby pamby clutterbooks you see on science, but a book of substantial importance. Remember what the philosophy of Pragmatism defines "importance" to mean. Pragmatism defines importance as something you use in future actions. So if you read something, and none of it appears in any future actions by you, not in a year, not in a decade, not in a lifetime, that that reading was of 0 importance. On the other hand, if you read this book by AP and immediately go to check out if a cancer was originally caused by mitotic division which could not detach the parent cell from daughter cell and that signalled for more mitosis, which ends up as uncontrolled replication in hopes of freeing the original two cells and thus a full blown cancer under way.

So if you read this and your mind starts thinking about-- how does cancer really start and then you investigate mitosis of various cells of various organs. Well, this book is important.

So tonight I went ahead and explored and researched various cancers to see if I can make a mathematical connection linking up all the various type of cancers and this fundamental idea-- cancer starts when two cells under mitosis cannot detach, and then signalling for more mitosis in hopes of freeing the glued together cells, stuck by envelopes or stuck by something else.

So I started to look for cancers with little mitosis to see if they had rare cancers. I looked at red blood and white blood cells and bone marrow. And in blood cancer, it is the white blood cells which have mitosis in bone marrow, but not red blood cells.

Then I looked at lung cancer today and yesterday and there is massive amount of mitosis of cells going on in the lungs.

So here I am venturing on a semi-proof that my hypothesis is true-- cancer starts because of mitosis cannot detach, signalling for more replication to try to free the stuck or glued together parent and daughter cells.

If I can get a numbers math correlation of how prevalent a cancer is and how much mitosis occurs in that cancer relative to other cancers, then I have more than a semi-proof but almost a strong supporting proof of the hypothesis, and then this all becomes a theory of Medical Science.

Of course, once proven, we have to investigate immediately of the hard wiring connection between telophase of mitosis and a signal that calls for the more replication (to free the glued together parent-daughter cell).

Now I researched one of the most common of all cancers in males, prostate cancer, to see if there is elevated mitotic division. And the very first search hit was of that of saying "Mitotic figures are rare in the epithelium of benign and neoplastic prostate cells, but mitosis progressively increases during the transition from benign to PIN to malignancy. Mitotic figures in BPH are found in the basal cells, with a mean value of 0.002%. -- 26Feb2020, medscape dot com".

Of course I need a relative comparison with other cancers. For women, breast cancer is all too common, and so here again, is there a lot of mitosis division? More so than in other areas of the body. And is there a large probability of parent and daughter cell not able to detach?

Perhaps the prevalance of nondetachment in breasts of women is comparable to the prevalance of nondetachment in prostate for men.

So if I can get a wholesome numbers data linking detachment in mitosis with frequency of cancer, means, we have a theory of what and why cancer occurs..

And this is very astonishing to think that we were all so very blind into thinking cancer cancer cancer is uncontrollable replication, when in truth, cancer is when cells cannot detach from one another. The part about uncontrolled replication is a side effect of not able to detach.

AP, King of Science, especially Physics

I suspect there is an easy proof of this claim-- Cancer is Primarily a stuck envelope of two cells parent-daughter in mitosis with uncontrolled replication a secondary aspect of Cancer.

Proof I believe comes from the fact that cancer tumors originate only in mitosis division for there is no skin cancer until we get to the stratum-basale. There is no red blood cell cancer until we get to the bone marrow that produces red blood cells in mitotic division. There are two different kinds of Lung cancer-- small cell and the non-small cell because there are two different cell types that undergo mitosis division.

These are facts that prove the claim that Cancer is an error in detachment of mitosis division. Once the cells cannot detach, a signal is sent in each of the two cells to attempt another mitosis in order to free itself of the attachement. And this claim needs be proven true by the fact that Mitosis sequence start is Prophase which shares the factor of attachment and detachment with the last phase of Telophase. So both cells that are stuck or glued together in telophase and cannot detach themselves, send a signal in each of those stuck cells to beging Prophase once again (hence the endless replication), sends the signal in hopes that two new cells will unfree the stuck two cells, only to end up starting a Cancer tumor of 4 cells now.

Now, it is extremely difficult to study the most common cancer-- lung cancer by factoring out smoking nicotine and all its carcinogens. The lungs are the perfect target of air pollution and filthy bad habits and thus of course the largest victims of cancer. But if we could factor out smoking, can we have a direct math relationship of cells undergoing mitosis, and cells stuck together in Telophase which then initiate Prophase to attempt to unstick themselves and then resulting in cancer. I believe we can factor out that excessive pollution of the lungs to arrive at a direct math relationship for the most mitotic cells are the most cancer generating cells.

AP, King of Science, especially Physics

In the old way of looking at cancer, all that comes to mind is uncontrolled replication, and because uncontrolled replication is only a secondary side-effect, that the disease of cancer was never able to be streamlined categorized, streamlined comprehensive. Instead we had all these huge variations of cancer separated compartments of this type of cancer and that type of cancer with no one unifying thread running through them, other than uncontrolled replication and never able to understand cancer on a fundamental basis. And this is a lesson into the future of science. If you have a science with a huge variations, means that you have not yet found the underpinning mechanism that explains it all.

But when we infer that cancer primarily is two cells in mitosis stuck together and unable to complete the task of 2 new free cells, then we can form a complete view of cancer. The stuck together, the glued together parent cell and daughter cell in mitosis is cancer, and the secondary side effect is uncontrolled replication.

It is this idea, this concept of cancer that is able to make a tidy order of cancer disease of its huge list of variations.

And it is funny for me that I started this book on explaining that the Earth's first Multicellular Organism was formed not by a bunch of single cells forming a colony and "feeling a need" to get together and join and become a multicellular organism. No, it did not go that way. Instead what happened is that single cells replicated via Mitosis. And then one day, a single cell in mitosis replication could not detach the parent cell from the daughter cell. This inability to detach of their envelopes became henceforth a Multicellular organism. And at the point of not detaching was the newly forming "skin" of the multicellular organism. Of course, millions of years later that skin would have evolved to cover the entire multicellular organism.

But honestly I have never seen a book of mine start out with a simple concept and instead, solve two concepts with such ease. For the idea of detaching in mitosis solves how multicellular originated, but also, solves the perplexing question of modern day medical science of what is cancer?

So I have never experienced such inspiration before, where I aim to solve one problem-- multicellular and end up solving 2 major problems, multicellular and cancer, all under the one umbrella of parent and daughter cell glued together in mitosis. Now I mean stuck or attached, not glued.

But it can be a form of glue of a carcinogen of the environment. Asbestos is sharp spear like fibers that can pierce two cells and cause them to stick together and then signaling for uncontrolled replication and thus a cancer.. Or some metal, via galvanic reaction is a glue like substance that really does cause one cell to glue to another cell in mitosis. How about benzene, and how it causes cancer. Does the benzene screw up the telomeres and then in mitosis the Telophase has screwed up telomeres causing the parent and daughter cells inability to detach from one another.

But in that recent report of cancer cells piercing into immune cells and sucking out the mitochondria like some straw sucking up a malted-milk-shake, New Scientist, 27Nov2021 "Cancer cells steal mitochondria from nearby immune cells... Two T-cells connected by a cancer cell nanotube."

So where do cancer cells form nanotubes? And are nanotubes some of the connective tissue (glue) that sticks the parent cell to daughter cell in Mitosis?

So many questions, so very many questions.

AP, King of Science, especially Physics