In 1997, the author concluded that living cells use a molecular language (cellese) that is isomorphic with the human language (humanese) based on his finding that the former shared 10 out of the 13 design features of the latter. In 2012, the author postulated that cellese and humanese derived from a third language called the cosmic language (or cosmese) and that what was common among these three kinds of languages was waves—i.e., sound waves for humanese, concentration waves for cellese, and quantum waves for cosmese. These waves were suggested to be the symmetry principle underlying cosmese, cellese, and humanese. We can recognize at least five varieties of waves—(i) electromagnetic; (ii) mechanical; (iii) chemical concentration; (iv) gravitational; and (v) probability waves, the last being non-material, in contrast to the first four, which are all material. The study of waves is called “cymatics” and the invention of CymaScope by J. S. Reid of the United Kingdom in 2002 is expected to accelerate the study of waves in general. CymaScope has been used to visualize not only human sounds (i.e., humanese) but also sounds made by individual cells (cellese) in conjunction with Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM) (unpublished observations of J. Gimzewski of UCLA and J. Reid). It can be predicted that the gravitational waves recently detected by the Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) will be visualized with CymaScope one day, thereby transforming gravitational waves into CymaGlyphs. Since cellese in part depends on RNA concentration waves (or RNA glyphs) and humanese includes hieroglyphs that were decoded by Champollion in 1822, it seems reasonable to use cymaglyphs, RNA glyphs, and hieroglyphs as symbols of cosmese, cellese, and humanese, respectively, all based on the principle of waves as the medium of communication.
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited