Dear HG,
Thank you for reading my slide and share your thoughts. I am proposing my idea to some organizations. This week from Jul 8 to 9, I will attend the annual meeting of supercomputer users in Japan. I will open a discussion panel on Slack for two days and have a zoom presentation from 13:30 to 14:00 (UTC +9) on Jul 9th. So I am glad to have some communications here before it and hope you could attend it as well if possible. Unfortunately, I could not find a full English site but you can visit it and find my name at the bottom
https://jhpcn-kyoten.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp/en/sympo/13th
The guest speaker is Dr. Daniel Rückert from the University of Munich, you may know him. I would like to answer your questions one by one as much as possible.
* What is your medical or molecular biology education and research track record?
> I am a nonscientific expert but had written some physics-related papers for over 20 years. (You may find them at
http://www.ryoji.info). I just started to learn medical or molecular biology after the Coronavirus pandemic.
* What is your "computing method"?
> For example, please see section 6.b. I have a link to the MD record at the bottom. It used GROMACS format. So if we use this record to find a natural vibration, GROMACS will be the easiest method to start.
* How do you propose to irradiate only the virus selectively (it circulates the bloodstream, and is never isolated)?
> There may be side effects like taking medicine affects untargeted parts. However, if we can find more precise natural vibrations, EM irradiation would reduce the side effects better than medications. And irradiation time could be for hours to the whole body if necessary with lower-level irradiation to reduce side effects. It may be better to set up a large irradiated room to place many patients at once.
* What is the basis for your assertion that 50°C won't damage human tissue?
> Most Japanese take bath every evening. And some prefer a hot bath around 50°C though I sometimes prefer below 40°C for over an hour. Also, non-thermal effects will be expected less damage to the body as answered to the last question.
* Where is any previous research work about using vibration stimulation to break up proteins inside the body?
> I have looked for this on the web for a while but I recognize it is one of the radical approaches. I can show you an article related to it.
https://www.eenewseurope.com/news/terah ... ving-cells
* Those citations that do talk about manipulating molecules with EM radiation are patent applications. Patent applications do not need to demonstrate efficacy, let alone practicality, or even theoretical possibility
> I referred to the patent because it was the unique document showing that the natural vibrations exist on high molecular like nucleobases. So yes, I referred to it as only a theoretical aspect, not as a patent.
* The Patent applications talk about terahertz EM waves, whereas this "paper" continues to talk about 2.45GHz and 1 MHz.
> As answered above, I do not think about its patent nor I do not apply a patent to my idea either. I have already contacted a co-researcher of the patent's main author who has passed away. We have never talked about the patent.
* How would additional computational overhead (blockchain) benefit work distribution above and beyond what FAH achieves? (Which is: almost all CPUs and GPUs work almost all the time)
> I am seeking a better engine for parallel computing as shown in sec 7.c. It is called Proof of History developed on a blockchain, Solana. Now I am contacting its developers if it is possible to apply to any of the MD computing. I can not answer if it can be above and beyond at the moment. Finding coronavirus's natural vibration is an emergency so I wish anyone would start it on FAH or supercomputer or other methods. I believe it could be one of the medical tools in the future. Thank you again.
