Archive for the ‘Pesquisas da Matrix/DNA’ Category

IPATI – Grava vozes e Imagens dos Mortos

sábado, outubro 21st, 2017

xxxx

IPATI – Instituto de Pesquisas Avancadas em Transcomunicacao Instrumental

http://ipati.org/index.html

Um primeiro fato notavel e’ uma confirmacao do que eu ja tinha suspeitado. Os mortos nao mais falam nossa linguagem, mesmo que falem nosso idioma. As respostas dos mortos sao sempre em forma de codigos, nunca repetem as palavras das perguntas ( o que significa que nao estao ouvindo as palavras e sim lendo pensamentos).

Falam muitas frases que eram chavoes usados em vida aqui, sem qualquer conotacao com pergunta ou sem explicar nada. E so falam em monossilabos, nunca falam mais que tres ou quarto palavras.

Um doente em estado terminal, inconsciente, diz que esta fora do corpo sendo assistido por espiritos. Mas ele tambem fala como os mortos, mudou totalmente o modo de falar.

Isto significa que em outras dimensoes as mentes sao hard-wired diferente, as leis de seu mundo sao tao diferentes daqui que as vezes o certo la’ e’ a negacao aqui.

Quer ser Bom em Filosofia? Estude Ciencias e Matematica

sábado, outubro 7th, 2017

xxxx

Porque esta tendencia do homem moderno para a matematica, enquanto a minha tendencia e’ se afastar dela? A matematica e’ a logica e a linguagem da organizacao da materia por processos mecanicos. Entao esta explicado: deixando-se conduzir pela natureza imediata, devido ao intelecto e conciencia ainda embrionarios, fracos, o homem deixa-se ser a reproducao desta maquina celeste que se impoe e impede a ascencao das organizacoes biologicas e neurologicas da material, as quais dominam meu intelecto.

Mas nao adianta eu ficar falando de outras dimensoes influents em nossas vidas e ambiente enquanto o resto dos humanos so podem captar a dimensao iluminada pela luz visivel. Tenho que estudar a logica e linguagem deles para saber como puxa-las para estas dimensoes. Entao,… vamos la’… 

Want to Be Good at Philosophy? Study Maths and Science

http://www.philosophersmag.com/essays/131-want-to-be-good-at-philosophy-study-maths-and-science

( Limpar o google, puxar este link no google, copiar o artigo sem os defeitos do edge, delectar esta copia abaixo, e traduzi-lo)

” One key role for philosophers is to help science ask the right questions and make contextual sense out of the answers it obtains.”

” In On the Origin of Species, for example, there are no equations, but it abounds with observations and inferences.”

(Spinoza, Descartes and others, for example, are known for using the “Geometric Method” in philosophy.) > Pesquisar “geometric method”

Peter Boghossian and James Lindsay argue that philosophers must be scientifically informed.

If you want to be a good philosopher, don’t rely on intuition or comfort. Study maths and science. They’ll allow you access the best methods we have for knowing the world while teaching you to think clearly and analytically. Mathematics is the philosophical language nature prefers, and science is the only truly effective means we have for connecting our philosophy to reality. Thus maths and science are crucial for good philosophy – for getting things right.

Truth is not always intuitive or comfortable. As a quirk of our base-ten number system, for example, the number 0.999…, the one that is an infinite concatenation of nines, happens to equal 1. That is, 0.999… is 1, and the two expressions, 0.999… and 1, are simply two ways to express the same thing. The proofs of this fact are numerous, easy, and accessible to people without a background in mathematics (the easiest being to add one third, 0.333…, to two thirds, 0.666…, and see what you get). This result isn’t intuitive, and – as anyone who has taught it can attest – not everyone is comfortable with it at first blush.

The sciences, which were largely born out of philosophy, are also replete with nonintuitive, and even uncomfortable truths. The most extreme examples of this are found in quantum mechanics, with interpretations of double slit experiments, quantum entanglement, and the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle confounding essentially everyone. But even sciences investigating scales more familiar to us, like biological evolution, are nonintuitive and uncomfortable to the point of being rejected by surprising numbers of people despite overwhelming scientific consensus spanning nearly a century and a half.

Thinking philosophically requires the capacity to logically and rigorously engage ideas and then either accept the results or reject our assumptions – no matter how nonintuitive or how uncomfortable those assumptions may be. Mathematics is an ideal tool for teaching this as it is deeply abstract and simplifies reality nearly to the point of ignoring it. This does not mean that mathematics qua mathematics is always important for good philosophy, though it certainly can be. It does mean that learning to organise, think, and denote like a mathematician reaps enormous benefits for clear philosophical thought. Philosophers who can think like mathematicians are better at clear thinking, and thus philosophy.

For instance, consider the application of basic set theory to linguistics. Set-theoretic thinking – particularly, the applications of subset relations, intersections and unions, set inclusion, and even the relevant mathematical notation to modifiers such as adjectives, adverbs, and participial phrases – has proven fruitful in helping linguists clarify the relationships between words and the classes of ideas they represent. This application has allowed a more precise, deeper understanding of the ways that different uses of words create meaning in sentences and thus a capacity for clearer and richer expressions of ideas, including philosophical propositions. It has done so despite the fact that linguistics is not nearly as mathematically dependent as fields like physics.

Even philosophical efforts on desperately difficult topics like ethics – the apparently subjective nature of which serves quite reasonably something of a cordon sanitaire against the intrusion of too much objective empiricism into the provinces of philosophy – benefit from the habits of mathematical thought. For example, take Sam Harris’s controversial 2010 contribution to the field in his bestselling book, The Moral Landscape. He argued for determining human values scientifically. The metaphorical moral landscape itself is most easily comprehended by picturing multidimensional topographies in which some measure of flourishing and suffering ranges in the vertical and peaks and troughs can be visualised as local maxima and minima. Further, Harris’s entire argument rests in part upon his ability to articulate an objective nadir, an absolute minimum, in that space – the maximum possible suffering of every sentient creature. The entire moral landscape can be thus thought of as a partially ordered set of moral positions together with their resultant consequences as measured on hypothetical metric related to well-being and suffering.

Of course, mathematics is most clearly applicable to philosophy where it intersects with the mathematically hard sciences, like physics. Much in physics, for example, depends upon clearly understanding the scope, power, and impact of Noether’s (first) theorem, named for Emmy Noether. Her theorem, proved a century ago and published in 1918, was truly revolutionary for physics because it completely changed how we understand conservation laws, revealing that conservation laws follow automatically from certain assumptions of invariance of physical laws (for example, if the laws of physics do not vary with locations in space, conservation of momentum automatically follows). Whether Noether’s theorem is best classified as a result in abstract mathematics or theoretical physics isn’t important, but that philosophers need to understand it is, at least if they want to work competently on ideas related to that which it pertains. Fully understanding and appreciating Noether’s theorem, however, requires a solid grasp of abstract algebra, at the least at an advanced undergraduate level. Cosmological metaphysicians don’t have much choice, then, but to learn enough mathematics to understand such ideas.

However, philosophy in general, and metaphysics in particular, isn’t as ‎puro‎ as mathematics because it must engage with the messiness of the world to help us ‎verificar‎ its truths. It therefore does not have the luxury of being purely abstract. Metaphysics attempts to extract truths about the world and articulate those truths in propositional format. It does this by examining the logical consequences of assumptions about reality which are based as closely as possible on reality, almost exactly like mathematics (counting and geometrical figures are empirical starting places for much of our mathematical reasoning) – and so metaphysics must begin with the recognition that the sciences are the only legitimate way to ‎gancho‎ our ideas to reality. Even a powerful result like Noether’s theorem is of no real application if we don’t have good, data-supported reasons to think that conservation laws apply to the universe. Metaphysical pursuits that become too tangential to the world by being ‎alheado‎ to science are little more than academic hobbyhorses.

One might contest that some branches of philosophy, like ethics, don’t need to articulate truths about the world, or even that no branch of philosophy does because the ‎alçada‎ of philosophy is inherently abstract. Whatever merit resides in this objection is lost to the fact that even if philosophy simply works out the logical consequences of various assumptions, the real-world worth of those assumptions comes down to being based upon observations of reality. Further, if philosophical inquiry is to have real-world significance – which has been the goal of every ethicist since Socrates – the results of one’s inquiry must be capable of being applied. Peter Singer’s eloquent adjurations against eating animals, for example, may be logical consequences of his assumptions, but both his assumptions and his conclusions are immediately tied to reality – don’t eat animals, a real applicable behaviour, because of the real suffering of real animals.

Moreover, the sub-disciplines of ethics in particular require tremendous insight into the nature of complicated real-world systems and a sincere willingness to revise beliefs in light of new discoveries – both of which are fostered by understanding science, the scientific methods, and the manner of scientific thought. Ethics plays out on the constrained system of human and other sentient psychology, which is a set of in-principle determinable facts about the world. (John Rawls, one of the most influential philosophers of the last century, explicitly acknowledged this in The Theory of Justice, as did Robert Nozick, one of Rawls’ principal detractors.) These facts are unlikely to be neat and clean in the same way as calculating ballistics for a rocket going to Jupiter, but they still represent a hypothetically knowable set of facts about the world. Poignantly, much within that set of facts is not arbitrary. Everything in that set depends entirely upon the realities of minds that perceive pain and pleasure, joy and despair, pity and schadenfreude. (Further, varied as we are, we’re not that varied, so normative statements are remarkably powerful, for all that they may miss in the particulars.) Ethicists, therefore, should be scientifically informed in multiple domains of thought, like psychology, neuroscience, sociology, and the particulars of any science applicable to their specific projects, such as medicine, biology, and genetics.

In having contributed to the development of the scientific method, philosophy can be said to be a cart that brought forth and hitched its own horse. It can hardly escape notice that both science and philosophy begrudge the hitching. Scientists, not unfairly, often criticise philosophers for making speculations that are untethered to reality and for failing to make substantive progress. Philosophers, not unfairly, tend to disparage scientists for a lack of philosophical savvy, whether that savvy is relevant to working in the sciences or not. Science, however, unambiguously gets exactly what philosophy is after: correct answers relevant to the world. At times, those correct answers are the desired outputs of the philosophical process, and at other times, they are necessary inputs since one key role for philosophers is to help science ask the right questions and make contextual sense out of the answers it obtains.

As a necessary result of this arrangement, no matter how much grumbling it stirs in the philosophically inclined, the fact is that good philosophy should be scientifically informed – the cart must be hitched to the horse to be of much use. Fortunately, the idea that philosophy should be more mathematical and scientific has a strong precedent in the history of the discipline. (Spinoza, Descartes and others, for example, are known for using the “Geometric Method” in philosophy.) And eminent philosophers recognize both the historical significance of maths and science on the discipline of philosophy and the consequences of its absence. Take, for instance, Daniel Dennett, who likened many philosophical projects to exploring the logical universes of a fictional and irrelevant variant on chess, and the harsher Peter Unger, whose Empty Ideas is devastating to enormous swaths of philosophical pursuit, especially those that are scientifically uninformed. If philosophy hopes to achieve its truth seeking epistemological and metaphysical ambitions, and thus have “abiding significance,” it must be rooted in science.

Still, just as good philosophers gain competence by being scientifically informed, good theoretical scientists gain competence by knowing more and deeper mathematics. This does not imply that all good science is heavily mathematical, as biology is a conspicuous example of good science that isn’t primarily mathematical. In On the Origin of Species, for example, there are no equations, but it abounds with observations and inferences. Even evolutionary biology, however, is deepened by the ideas in graph theory (the “tree of life,” for example), set-subset relationships (taxonomy), probability and combinatorics (gene inheritance), dynamic modelling (differential growth rates of populations to describe effects of environmental pressures, say as modelled by the Lotka-Volterra equations and others), stochastic processes (random variation of traits), and the combinatorial approach to thinking about DNA as “mathematical words” in a four-letter alphabet. No discipline is better than mathematics for tuning an intellect to think in such a manner.

Some may object that the onus to develop mathematical competence and habits of thought lays upon theoretical scientists more than on philosophers, but this sells short the capabilities of good philosophers and the demands of good philosophy. The lines that divide theoretical science and good philosophy of the sciences are both blurred and thin, and hence many branches of philosophy necessitate that philosophers are in fact theoreticians. In that case, just as theoretical scientists are ultimately beholden to the data, no matter the elegance of their models, so too are good philosophers. Therefore, it’s necessary that philosophers are scientifically informed and it would be worthwhile for philosophers to be mathematically adept.

When the conclusions of sound argumentation proceeding from evidence conflict with common sense, it should be the latter that we dismiss and not the former. Good philosophers don’t rely on intuition or comfort. They use maths and science to clarify and inform their philosophy. Maths helps hone skills of clear, rigorous thinking, and science is unparalleled at determining facts and explanatory theories describing reality. Maths and science are therefore crucial for philosophy to make contributions of enduring worth, and so those who wish to be good at philosophy should study both.

xxxx

Teorema de Noether: Matematica Necessaria aos Filosofos

Of course, mathematics is most clearly applicable to philosophy where it intersects with the mathematically hard sciences, like physics. Much in physics, for example, depends upon clearly understanding the scope, power, and impact of Noether’s (first) theorem, named for Emmy Noether. Her theorem, proved a century ago and published in 1918, was truly revolutionary for physics because it completely changed how we understand conservation laws, revealing that conservation laws follow automatically from certain assumptions of invariance of physical laws (for example, if the laws of physics do not vary with locations in space, conservation of momentum automatically follows). Whether Noether’s theorem is best classified as a result in abstract mathematics or theoretical physics isn’t important, but that philosophers need to understand it is, at least if they want to work competently on ideas related to that which it pertains. Fully understanding and appreciating Noether’s theorem, however, requires a solid grasp of abstract algebra, at the least at an advanced undergraduate level. Cosmological metaphysicians don’t have much choice, then, but to learn enough mathematics to understand such ideas

xxxx

Pesquisa:

Origem: Wikipédia

O teorema de Noether é um resultado da teoria de sistemas dinâmicos. A primeira versão do teorema foi demonstrada em 1918 por Emmy Noether.

Ela provou que toda grandeza física conservativa corresponde a um grupo contínuo de simetrias das equações. Simetria aqui é entendida como uma transformação matemática que deixa as equações inalteradas em sua essência, sendo que todas as simetrias possíveis formam um grupo (no sentido matemático do termo). Um grupo contínuo é um grupo de simetrias definidas por um número que pertence ao conjunto dos Reais.

Pesquisar “Algebra Abstrata”

xxxx

Pesquisar “geometric method”

xxxx

Inserir e pesquisar artigo do “Universo Racionalista” sobre o filósofo espanhol Jesus Mosterim (Musterim?), que foi lutador pela filosofia com base na ciência e tem muitos links para outros filósofos nesta linha… 

A morte pode ser anunciada pelo quarto quadrante da formula espiral da Matrix/DNA?

sábado, outubro 7th, 2017

xxxx

Esta quarta fase de declínio espiral imediatamente lembra a formula, na qual o circuito espiral também termina com a morte do sistema ( entre funções 7 e 1). Esta descoberta parece estar indicando que a o período de vida de uma pessoa é determinado pela velocidade com que o fluxo de energia corre no circuito. Se a velocidade for muito elevada, a pessoa vai morrer mais cedo, e assim os entrópicos sintomas das funções 6 e 7 começam a aparecer mais cedo na vida da pessoa do que o normal. E esta variação de velocidade lembra as velocidades dos giros no ciclo de Krebs, o qual, segundo o vídeo que estou assistindo, tem vários efeitos nos organismos a nível molecular. Precisamos reler e pesquisar isto, ver se foram publicados outros artigos com seção para comentários e ver a fonte original, o paper..

Death Spiral: 4th Phase of Life May Signal the End Is Near

https://www.livescience.com/55557-death-spiral-is-fourth-phase-of-life.html?utm_source=notification

 

A Formacao do Planeta e a Origem da Vida

terça-feira, outubro 3rd, 2017

xxxx

(Artigo em construção: rever e anotar novidades)

32:32 – Termal vents (black smoker) resulta da constante movimentacao das placas tectonicas que provocam a penetracao da agua no interior do planeta reagindo com magma e sendo expelida como vapor negro, e nisso traz consigo informacoes matriciais do nucleo da Terra.

33:08 – Sulfite minerals – provindo das aguas profundas misturadas com magma, estes minerais tem a propriedade de catalizar reacoes quimicas que produzem moleculas primordiais da vida, o que confirma a nossa teoria matricial de que  os primeiros 50% da abiogenese foi dirigido por informacoes do nucleo planetario. Mas este fato chama atencao para outro aspecto matricial que estamos tentando desvendar. Parece que os elementos atomicos que formam as primeiras moleculas vitais possuem um estado vibracional/frequencia de onda especifico do espectro da onda de luz (traduzido em energia). Quando estao em ambientes dominados pelas outras seis faixas da onda estao instaveis, e assim nao podem formar mutuas conexoes duradouras entre si. Mas quando estao num ambiente dominado pela mesma faixa que a sua, se estabilizam e formam as conecoes. Entao, catalise seria isto: um elemento do ambiente externo de identidade igual dos elementos reagentes. E nisso vai bater a teoria matricial, pois o sulfite pertence ao nucleo planetario entao a uma das primeiras faixas de onda, enquanto a vida comeca por suas combinacoes iniciais que dizem respeito tambem as primeiras faixas de onda.

Ciclo de Krebs: Um Intermediario entre o building block da galaxia e o building block do DNA

domingo, outubro 1st, 2017

xxxx

Importante pesquisa a fazer. Material importante deste vídeo sugerindo ser o ciclo de krebs um dos precursores da vida. 

O ciclo de Krebs, ou ciclo do acido cítrico, existiu antes das origens da vida (antes do RNA, do DNA e das células), eles existem no fundo dos oceanos formados pelos ventos termais, em volta dos quais existem abundante vida primitiva. O ciclo começa com o encontro entre duas substancias as quais se juntam formando uma terceira molécula, Esta evolui para um quarto tipo de molécula, e assim por diante ate o ciclo fechar-se novamente. Parece a formula da Matrix. Acontece que as moléculas formadas neste ciclo interagem com o mundo exterior e produzem os elementos essenciais da vida: aminoacidos, sugars, ácidos nucleicos, ácidos gordos, cofatores. E enquanto o ciclo parece uma roda girando, ele produz ou libera energia que e’ estocada para formar ATP, a energia das células… tal como a F4 faz na formula.

A razao entre velocidades deste spin afeta tudo, desde o envelhecimento, o risco para cancer, o status da energia no organism,

So falta agora ver cada molecula do ciclo para confirmar que a razao porque ocorrem estas reacoes e’ imitar o processo do cilo vital.

Interessante ‘e que enquanto o normal nos seres vivos e’ o ciclo correndo no sentido horario, formando moleculas cada vez mais complexa (?), tem bacterias nas quais o ciclo corre em reverso. Sao melecuals anaerobicas que nao respiram oxigenio. Um dos diferentes resultados do ciclo em reverso e’ que, enquanto no ciclo horario o ciclo libera o produz energia, no reverso ele precisa de abastecimento de energia exterior. Dando as bacterias energia, elas sugam Co2 e hidrogenio e formam novas moleculas – que tambem sao os building blocks da vida.

E de onde estas iniciais substancias ( moleculas) que deram origem ao ciclo, vieram? Vem do acetyl-phosphate (acetyl- CoA), ou phosphate (fosfato ou fosforo?), o qual foi encontrado em quantidade nos meteoritos ( outra vez a F5)

O ciclo comeca com

xxxxxx

 

 

 

Mais completo documentário atualizado sobre o conhecimento científico sobre as origens da vida

quinta-feira, setembro 28th, 2017

xxxxx

http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20161026-the-secret-of-how-life-on-earth-began

Bioluminescência: o inicio da captura de luz pelos organismos

quinta-feira, setembro 28th, 2017

xxxx

Capitulo novo aberto para pesquisa.

http://biolum.eemb.ucsb.edu/

Transporte e Circulação de elétrons nas moléculas: Grupos de Pesquisas e Sugestao da Matrix/DNA

quarta-feira, setembro 27th, 2017

xxxx

Imperial College London – Lista de pesquisas ( continuar a ver cada area)

http://www.imperial.ac.uk/a-z-research/

xxxx

Albrecht Group – Grupo de Pesquisa

http://www.imperial.ac.uk/albrecht-group/

( continuar enviando o e-mail abaixo para o staff )

The group’s research interests focus on electrochemical processes on the nanoscale.

“We are interested in both fundamental and applied aspects of single-molecular electron transport. How does the immediate environment of a molecule influence its electron transport properties? Can one use such a configuration as device components in nanoscale electronic circuitry? Is it possible to use such a concept in innovative sensor applications?”

xxxx

Meu E-mail: ( mandar para todo o staff no link : http://www.imperial.ac.uk/chemistry/about/contacts/all-staff/

Title: Suggestions for you making new researches at your field

How does the immediate environment of a molecule influence its electron transport properties?

Sorry if I am wrong but maybe I can contribute to your valuable research at least offering more food for thought.

Molecules are composed and evolves due its electrons containing information from a universal natural formula for to be a complete working natural system plus the action of the environment which is composed and driven by the same formula. So, the internal circuitry of any molecule is the slice of the whole formula’s circuitry which its components mimics the components at the formula. When a molecule provokes an  input of energy is the molecule looking for environments’ ingredients that could help her to compose the next missing slices of the formula. When the molecule produces the output is delivering its waste. Each identical molecules has its own properties due – in the formula – its circuitry obeys the same process of life’s cycle, which means that a specific point of the circuitry is the representation of a specific phase of this process.

Only seeing the single formula ( at my website, the Matrix/DNA formula for closed perfect systems) and understanding it, you will grasp what I am suggesting. About organic molecules, for instance, the carbon atom was selected to be the central biological systems atom because the carbon is – among all atoms 0 which is the most approximate copy of the formula ( the formula contains six universal systemic functions which built the atoms systems in diversified copies from itself, but the atom with atomic number six – each particles representing a specific systemic function – is the best working copy). So, the formula penetrated Earth matter represented by the Carbon, which became the nucleus for composing a larger system towards multimolecular structures as proteins. So, you can see the 20 amino acids for life being composed piece by piece following the formula’s pieces sequence. Knowing the formula and identifying these pieces/functions at the molecules, you can understanding the circuitry properties, which is the level of performance, which new ingredients could optimizing and growing the internal transport and quality of the output.

The last word: this formula was detected as a universal pattern as template of all natural systems, from atoms to galaxies to organisms. Later, searching the origins and precedence of this formula we detected the same pattern at the resulting light wave of the seven kinds of electromagnetic radiation. So, it strongly suggests that the first original formula is made of natural light, which indicates that its bits-information are its photons, which penetrates these electrons, assuming the atomic machinery, driving it to connections with another surrounding atoms which contains photons from the prior neighborhood systemic circuitry sequence. The tendency of these photons is to compose a network among the right photons that composes the formula and when they does it, they assembled the system with atoms. After that, they assembles molecules, proteins, cells, etc.

I know that this is a weird text and the poor English prejudices its understanding, plus the novelty of this issue. My intention here is merely that you read it as curiosity and food for thought, which you will thinking about when practicing at the Lab, which could leaving you to a new surprising discoveries. If you do that, it is what I need, testing the predictions of my theory to see if it has really solid foundations. I have written an article in my website about yours team and research with a copy of this e-mail, so, if you want more information, can use the comments section. Cheers,…

xxxxx

Enviado para… na data de….

t.albrecht@imperial.ac.uk em 9/27/2017 ( nao tem nome pessoal penso que este e’ o e-mail geral do grupo)

alexander.al-zubeidi13@imperial.ac.uk em 9/27/2017

Raios Cósmicos de Outras Galáxias Chegam a Terra Trazendo Fótons

terça-feira, setembro 26th, 2017

xxx

Bem… isso ja era suspeitado pela Matrix/DNA Theory, pois nao e’ muito confortável a ideia de que um único exemplar da formula vindo de apenas uma galáxia  contenha todas as informacoes para sistemas biologicos. Detectado que a Terra e’ de fato bombardeada por raios cósmicos vindos de outras galáxias as quais devem estar trazendo “fótons”…

Paper: NATURE

http://www.nature.com/news/high-energy-cosmic-rays-come-from-outside-our-galaxy-1.22655#/b1

Os raios cósmicos de alta energia vêm de fora da nossa galáxia

O mais curioso nesta notícia e’ a loucura humana. 1600 tanques de agua a cada intervalo de 1,5 kilometros em cerca de 3.000 kilometros para… captar raios cosmicos!

Para detectar esses chuveiros, o Observatório Pierre Auger tem 1.600 tanques de água de tamanho de carro colocados a intervalos de 1,5 km, para cobrir 3.000 quilômetros quadrados de planícies gramíneas na província argentina de Mendoza.

Quatro conjuntos de telescópios monitoram o céu sobre a disposição, e – nas noites sem lua – podem detectar flashes de luz ultravioleta gerados pelos chuveiros. A partir da sua localização relativamente próxima ao equador, a matriz pode pegar raios cósmicos provenientes de todo o céu do sul, bem como de grande parte do céu do norte, cobrindo 85% da esfera celestial.

Os raios cósmicos foram detectados usando 1.600 tanques de água colocados em intervalos de 1,5 km

Matrix/DNA Tecnologica: Em busca do algoritmo para energia eficiencia dentro de sistemas

segunda-feira, setembro 25th, 2017

xxxx

https://wp.doc.ic.ac.uk/aese/project/energy-neutral-operation-of-wireless-sensor-systems/

( ver mais)

Energy Neutral Operation of Wireless Sensor Systems

Energy Neutral Operation of Wireless Sensor Systems

( Matrix/DNA: A pesquisa acadêmica e’ baseada em matematica: energia fornecida pelo exterior, energia armazenada na bateria e energia consumida por cada parte (sensor) do sistema. Então formulam as equações matematicas e algoritmos abaixo. No entanto, sistemas naturais possuem um recurso para máximo aproveitamento da energia que os pesquisadores desconhecem. Trata-se da parte da energia inicial que levanta o foguete (sensor) e reverte para manter o foguete quando inicia o decréscimo de sua energia. Na formula da Matrix/DNA e’ o fluxo F5 que vai de F4 para F1. temos que inventar um sensor que tenha duas saídas de energia. Uma direcionada aos outros sensores para manter o sistema trabalhando. Outra direcionada a bateria para retroalimentar as operações iniciais do sistema. para isso temos que pesquisar no sistema que as operações finais consomem menos energia que as iniciais, portanto, estão recebendo imput de energia maior do que necessitam, o que pode causar dissipacao da energia em gasto inútil. Portanto, pesquisar agora o que sao estes sensores que eles pesquisam.)

(Copia do texto para traduzir:

Energy neutral operation is a mode of operation where the energy consumption of the node is always less or equal than the energy harvested from the environment. Once in this state, the sensor is capable of operating perpetually. In order to achieve energy neutral operation, energy optimisation methods need to fulfil the energy neutrality constraints while maximising performance.Energy neutrality constraints deals with the relationship among the three different types of energy: the energy harvested by the harvesting device, the energy consumed by the sensor and the energy stored in the battery/supercapacitor. This relationship can be described through mathematical models, which helps to understand the energy behaviour and the amount of available energy for the next time slots. These models can then be used by an optimisation algorithm, such as an energy-neutral MAC protocol or task scheduling, to dynamically adapt the sensor or network behaviour. An energy neutral optimisation methodology, therefore, must have an optimisation algorithm associated with a good energy model in order to achieve better results.

ENO Final