"In the search for the miraculous, we find that its often right before our very eyes but we fail to see it. " - Jason L. Silva
Perhaps a cytoplasm vortex at the nano scale differs from water vortices at the macro scale that people are used to observing, so that evidence of them goes unrecognized for 40 years? The "internal helix" in centrioles was first observed in the 70s, or, the first mention I have seen at least is from 1967.
Water molecules have a width of 0.275 nanometers, and the centriole is 500 nm high and 250 nm wide, and the width is dynamic since the entire centriole as a turbine-pump contracts to pump cytosol through the central axis also causing it to rotate similar to a turbine.
In most vortices a strong sub pressure (vacuum) is generated in the center, and concentrates substances, seen as a string of particles following the sub pressure. In the cytosol vortex within the centriole as a turbine-pump, the vacuum string is about the width of a microtubule wall (see middle and bottom image), roughly 5 nm, the same width as 18 water molecules if each has a diameter of 0.275 nm. Because the centriole itself is rotating, the sub pressure string in the cytosol vortex, the part of the vortex that is discernible in electron photographs, is spiralling down the central axis of the centriole, also taking a more turbulent path at times (see bottom image. )
WARNING - The message you received from @stayathomestead is a CONFIRMED SCAM!
DO NOT FOLLOW any instruction and DO NOT CLICK on any link in the comment!
For more information about this scam, read this post:
https://steemit.com/steemit/@arcange/phishing-site-reported-steemiz
If you find my work to protect you and the community valuable, please consider to upvote this warning or to vote for my witness.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thanks and good job, voluntary decentralized reputation :) Will not vote for you as a witness since I do not have time, but if you are a human behind this comment who reads this response, have a look at proof-of-power, it's a new mining system that "powers" validators with people-vote instead of stake, so, one-person one-vote, I see it as a third generation of the Nakamoto consensus, and it is built on proof-of-personhood => proof-of-suffrage => proof-of-power. Works the same as proof-of-stake, dPoS, Casper, any PoS system, with the difference that people "power" validators with proof-of-suffrage instead of with money like Steem, EOS or ETH.
Proof-of-power, using a swarm to select miners through majority consensus
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Cytosol it looks very complicated to me because of less knowledge.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit