What directs stem cells to create specific organs...

what directs stem cells to create specific organs? if you tell me the brain for example then you must say what directs that answer and so on and so forth

>what directs stem cells

That's a false premise, there is no direction involved. They act the way they do because the ones that didn't act that way didn't survive long enough to propagate their behavior to another generation.

if there is no direction how can they make other stem cells work on the same organ if other stem cells have their own directions. something is telling them to.

>if there is no direction how can they make other stem cells work

The ones that work well enough to survive and propagate their behavior to another generation, do. The ones that don't, don't.

>something is telling them to.

Given enough time and natural selection, the ones that remain will be the ones that behave in the way that allows them to survive and propagate their behavior to another generation. The amount of complexity this requires isn't an argument in favor of magical directing spirit entities controlling them. More complexity just means it took more failures before a working pattern emerged.

do stem cells in our body go to organs that are failing to repair it? or would we have to put the stem cells our selves into a failing organ?

He's talking about embryogenesis and prenatal development(timescale of weeks or months). If stem cells actually worked the way you describe on this timescale, then they'd turn into cancer cells.

so since they dont spontaneously join together someone has to put them together right

What you're asking about is called differentiation, basically chemical signals from outside the cell change what genes are expressed and repressed (on or off). Stem cells can differentiate into any type of tissue (teratomas, which are tumors originated from stem cells usually grow into freaky shit like teeth and hair and cartilage at the same time).

The process itself is actually very very complicated but that's the gist of it.

God

there is no chemical signal by stem cells

Nothing I described is incompatible with embryogenesis and prenatal development.

> If stem cells actually worked the way you describe on this timescale, then they'd turn into cancer cells.

No. If they all turned into cancer cells they wouldn't survive and propagate future generations for very long. What we see is what works and what doesn't work we don't see.

Signals from the mom's womb tell the developing fetus what to create. In your body, the signals come from the brain.

In differentiation for embryogenesis, the mother's womb sends signals to set up the axis of development, from ventral to dorsal, and then left to right (a circulating fluid flows one way in particular and that's how your fetus knows which way is left and which way is right) and it uses gravity for up and down.

can we not jump to conclusions

what do you mean? that stem cells do not emit signals or that they do not differentiate after receiving signals?

Natural selection does not directly govern stem cells. There are chemical cues and switches, like those expressed by Hox genes. It is those cues that are shaped by natural selection over many generations, even if those cues themselves act over only a few weeks.

okay, now i said in the question if you use brain as the answer you have to explain how cell division originated from and then how stem cells originated

then why dont these cues assist in organ failure? do we need an outside authority for these stem cells is what im asking

Cells differentiate via epigenetic regulation of their transcriptomes altering their morphology and behavior.

When appropriately differentiated cells position themselves properly, they interact with surrounding cells via adhesion molecules and paracrine signaling mechanisms to provide a sense of their position.

Long run, yadda yadda, makey structures n shit.

Natural selection can't 'think ahead'. Cells which can replicate more easily, 'signal' for more nutrients, and move to places where there is less 'competition'

Organs fail because, among other things, the cues and other mechanisms that would fix them are broken and/or overwhelmed. If you want to survive this situation, then you would need some medical intervention, but this isn't necessary for the genepool to survive.

>Natural selection can't 'think ahead'.

It doesn't need to 'think ahead' to result in structures that display behaviors like that. All that is required is that those behaviors were what allowed those structures to survive and propagate future generations and that structures without those behaviors were not able to do the same.

are you referring to general cells having transcriptions or stem cells or both?

Every cell, totipotent or not, contains a complete set of all your genetic information. Whether a totiipotent cell becomes a liver cell or a neuron depends on which genes are expressed. The expression of which genes is determined by certain indicators, environmental cues, programming...etc. pluripotency can sometimes be induced in cells through the use of modern technologies, and these cells can be programmed to become any kind of tissue, and this is central to current research.

so if they cant think ahead you would need an outside person to join the stem cells to other cells together right

Marginal changes in the cellular development and the way DNA and RNA is cut during and after mitosis signals cells to develop a certain way. The complexity grows exponentially in an embryo, but begins to round off as a fetus develops. By the time the offspring is born, the development has rounded off. In humans, by the time the individual is 25 to 35, all new developments have ceased and the individual just maintains until death.