Archive for the ‘Coment/Posts da Matrix/DNA na Internet’ Category

Origem da Vida: Nova Descoberta discute: Fundo de Oceanos ou Lagos na Superficie?

quinta-feira, maio 11th, 2017


Baseado no artigo ( ver meus comentarios postados no artigo e copiados abaixo):


Oldest evidence of life on land found in 3.48-billion-year-old Australian rocks

May 9, 2017

Fossil evidence of early life has been discovered by UNSW scientists in 3.48 billion year old hot spring deposits in the Pilbara of Western Australia – pushing back by 3 billion years the earliest known existence of inhabited terrestrial hot springs on Earth.

Previously, the world’s oldest evidence for microbial on land came from 2.7- 2.9 billion year old deposits in South Africa containing organic matter-rich ancient soils.

“Our exciting findings don’t just extend back the record of life living in by 3 billion years, they indicate that life was inhabiting the land much earlier than previously thought, by up to about 580 million years,” says study first author, UNSW PhD candidate, Tara Djokic.

“This may have implications for an origin of life in freshwater hot springs on land, rather than the more widely discussed idea that life developed in the ocean and adapted to land later.”

Scientists are considering two hypotheses regarding the origin of life. Either that it began in deep sea hydrothermal vents, or alternatively that it began on land in a version of Charles Darwin’s “warm little pond”. ( read the article, link above)


Morelli  – posted 5/9/2017
The land surface hypothesis is more plausible for life’s origins than the deep oceans, because abiogenesis needed sun’s energy. There are seeds for life everywhere inside galaxies because these seeds are galaxies’ genome. The destiny of any seed is the quality of the place it falls. But there is a big difference between biological systems and other systems non-carbon based. It is possible other kinds of “life” based on every element which the atomic number be multiple of seven in the periodic table, because these elements repeats all properties of carbon. (These are suggestions from Matrix/DNA Theory)
starfart – 5/9/2017
This looks like a marvelous find. I have no doubts that the materials examined exhibit good evidence for microbial life in the surface hot spring setting. However, I don’t see why this finding should dismiss seafloor hydrothermal vents as a potential setting for the origin of life. Its a bit puzzling that evaporate deposits on surface hot springs are stressed as a ‘concentrator’ of complex biogenic material as if undersea hydrothermal precipitate processes aren’t capable of doing that as well. In the end, though, it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if it turns out that either or both settings figured prominently in the origin of life. This isn’t an either-or dichotomy. Both hydrothermal vents and surface hot springs have the same important suite of properties for biogenesis…and they were no doubt equally ubiquitous on the early Earth
Morelli – 5/9/2017

“Both hydrothermal vents and surface hot springs have the same important suite of properties for biogenesis…and they were no doubt equally ubiquitous on the early Earth.”

Maybe you have found the exactly point. Matrix/DNA Theory has suggested that the first cell system ( aka, living thing) needed 50% of a planet’s nucleus energy and 50% of a star energy. The planet’s energy is able to build the primordial molecules and some organelles ( less mitochondria and chloroplasts) and no DNA, only RNA. The last elements are build with the concourse of a star energy. Than, it is possible that life began at thermal vents but was finished at land surface.
We are based on our theoretical model of a seed for life, which is a kind of astronomical genome at microscopic level.



Neurologistas numa afronta a Deus, numa heresia contra a Ciencia, e produzindo doenca mental nos estudantes e publico geral

domingo, abril 9th, 2017


Qualquer pessoa percebe – apos tomar conhecimento do que as Ciencias do Cerebro sabem de real hoje – que quase nada se sabe sobre a consciencia humana. Nesta aula-palestra em video, um dos mais renomados cientistas da area de neurologia, deixa claro que ele quase nada entende de consciencia. Mas assim como esta claro que quase nada sabemos sobre universos e mesmo assim tem gente vivendo no meio cientifico que acredita piamente que universos sao criados por Big Bangs e tal como interpretaram estes bigbangs – o orador tenta obnubilar nossa ignorancia sobre consciencia com a impressao que ele sabe muitas coisas arrolando suas pessoais interpretacoes de testes e experimentos sobre pequenos detalhes e propriedades expressadas pela consciencia. De maneira que teorias interpretativas sobre consciencia sao vendidas ao publico como se fossem fatos cientificos. Porem nao e’ a Ciencia que esta divulgando o que sabe – quase nada – e sim a ideologia imaginativa tendenciosa da pessoa usando o nome da Ciencia. O metodo frio, calculista e reducionista que a Ciencia tem aplicado na investigacao sobre a materia natural e’ conduzido a ser aplicado ao fenomeno ainda invisivel e intocavel da consciencia. A mentalidade mecanicista que resulta da doutrinacao academica derivada deste metodo e’ empregada na tentativa de descrever a mente impregnando-a com este pretenso mecanicsmo universal.

Qualquer humano que nao foi doutrinado pela academia nas universidades percebe sua consciencia e percebe que ela nao e’ uma maquina. percebe e se revolta quando ve o orador colocar como base criadora de sua consciencia, a “beast machine”, bem delineada no video. Entao temos que nos mover-mos, atuarmos com urgencia, gritando alto contra esta doutrina, pois ela esta destruindo e aprisionando a mente livre de nossos jovens e futuras geracoes. Por isso eu fiz questao de gritar colocando meus comentarios logo abaixo do video no YouTube ( copiados abaixo). Convido algum possivel perdido leitor que venha a este quase oculto e muito rustico website a fazer o que penso ser seu dever como humano que considera-se em compromisso com a grande causa de dar `as nossas futuras geracoes uma vida melhor do que a absurda vida que tivemos, lutando contra estas pessimas acoes que criaram e ainda alimentam esta nefasta cultura que tem produzido estas absurdas civilizacoes desumanas.

The Neuroscience of Consciousness – with Anil Seth

Meus comentarios postados no YouTube ( prometo que volto aqui para traduzi-los)

The Beast Machine?!! Mr. Anil: You can’t use Science – which is owned by the entire Humanity – for propagating yours bias tendency and evil ideology among young non prepared minds! You can’t be a professor of my kids.
Show here and now, over the table, Nature building “beast machines”. Show here and now Nature building any kind of machine. The unique real fact that I know from the purely, real, non-biased Science, when Nature builds complex architectures, and which I can show to you over the table and now, is a video 9 months long about embryology. Can you show another, as when Nature builds atoms, galaxies, etc.? Of course, not.
Is it yours interpretation from the final results of a process of embryology, a beast machine? What is a machine, Mr. Anil? If not an artificial human construction? But you are not talking about humans constructions in this video, you are pretensely talking about Nature’s constructions.
My biased and non-scientific interpretation is that Nature does not build machines, it builds “natural working systems”. Among these systems, one, the stellar systems, were once interpreted by Newtonian mechanics as a machine. Today we know it not works well, there are something else. It was almost corrected by general theory of relativity which grasped something of this some thing else. General relativity is being re-enforced by quantum theory towards to grasping more something that is not mechanic inside natural systems. But it does not works well because quantum level is being biased interpreted by people like you, ideological, that are pushing nature towards the aspect of mechanics at quantum level.
My biased and non-scientific interpretation ( Science does not interprets anything, theories does), is that natural systems are composed by 30% of mechanics – the beast side of systems – 30 % of biology – the angel side of systems – and 40% the results of mixing these two opposites, which I call ” in the process of transformation for transcendence of systems”.
And I require that my kids’ teacher teaching first of all, a class about pure, real, with non-biased interpretations, Science. After this first class, I will permit a class about theories, interpretations, where the teacher will teach the three sides of natural systems. This is for keeping my kids’ opened minds, for them to be motivating to look by themselves what we don’t know yet.
And every time I see someone trying to doctrine people with biased  ideologies using Science ( which I am yours partner and owner too as a citizen) I will refute loud, reporting it. I think you are doing a bad disservice to human species, that you will not succeed towards understanding real brains and consciousness wasting your time and taxpayers money, and you are leading humanity to the horrible destiny as a social machine – the Brave New World under the Big Queen as insect societies did. Shame on you, Mr. Anil. But you are younger, you still have time for correcting and re-hardwiring yours indoctrinated brain and producing something good for human kind: see at my website a non-biased and not scientific interpretation about natural systems – something you never knew or thought about.


Louis Charles MorelliLouis Charles Morelli – 4/9/2017

The draw about “The Great Chain of Being” is wrong. It begins with a piece of rock and makes a non-real, non-rational spectacular jump towards a plant, which is a very complex system. Following we see a mouse – another system – coming from the system “plant”. And following we see a human – another system – coming from a system “mouse”. How could it be that a system like plant came from a slice of a system – a piece of rock from a planetary system which is piece of a stellar system ?! Of course, it is an infant mistake. But, what the bad results of this mistake? It prejudices our search for the truth, for knowledge. Instead a piece of rock, there must be a planetary system and before it a stellar system and before it an atom system. Always systems down, that’s reality. I did the right thing and that’s why I am discovering biological properties expressed by atoms and galactic systems, as explained at my website. Hiding the priors systems that produced biological systems (aka, life), creates mythology, like the one that biological systems arose by chance – a magical accident. It is same mythology that created magical gods. Creates the mythology called biogenesis. It avoid new minds to see these priors systems looking for the natural forces and elements that contributed and evolved towards biological systems. it is wrong! You can not making comparisons between systems and pieces, slices, of another system. System must be aligned, compared, with systems! Please, correct it or advice people that you are showing the draws of a personal theory. Do not talk in the name of our Sacred Science in this way. it is very bad for our students

Corpo Humano é Onda ou Partícula? Questão relativística?

sexta-feira, abril 7th, 2017


Acabei de postar esta pergunta maluca no Quora:

Um observador macroscópico veria um corpo humano como uma onda; observadores microscópicos como nos, humanos, vemo-lo como uma partícula. Seria isto a estranheza quântica?

A macro-observer would see a human body as a wave; micro-observers, like us, see it as particle. Is this quantum weirdness?

Qual o fundamento da minha questão? Bem, … esse grilo na minha cuca começou a 30 anos atras quando descobri que os sistemas naturais são montados pelo processo do ciclo vital. E as partículas até agora observadas são em si mesmas sistemas ( compostas de quarks, leptons), portanto elas devem apresentar propriedades vitais, ou seja, elas também devem nascer, crescer, amadurecer e morrer, sendo que nesse meio tempo elas vão sendo transformadas em formas diferentes assim como o corpo humano é transformado em varias formas devido a força do ciclo vital. As partículas foram – são – nossas ancestrais, elas já apresentam alguns sinais de vida.

Mas as partículas tem um período de vida brevíssimo, apenas 17 bilionésimos de segundos. Por isso nunca conseguiram ver uma partícula, apenas seu rastro deixado num evento de choque, como veem no acelerador do CERN. Isto porque a partícula é microscópica, seu tempo é medido na escala microscópica, e em relacao a elas, nos somos macroscópicos, nosso tempo flui muito mais lentamente.

Praticamente eu diria que a proporção entre nosso tempo e o delas seria a mesma entre nossos 70 anos de vida e os 17 bilionésimos de segundo delas.

Ora, vamos agora supor que exista um observador do tamanho do sistema solar, ou da galaxia. Ele conseguiria ver um corpo humano? Certamente não. Com alguma tecnologia ele poderia ver os nossos rastros. Com uma tecnologia mais poderosa ele poderia fixar nosso corpo em relacao ao tempo, parando nosso tempo num momento qualquer da nossa vida, digamos, quando temos 40 anos de idade. Então ele veria a nossa forma de adulto e acreditaria erroneamente que essa é a nossa forma fixa, sem saber que transformamos nossas formas. se em outra situação ele visse um bebe humano ele juraria que se trata de outra especie. E se ele fixar nosso corpo em relacao ao espaço? Ele nunca saberia qual nossa idade, qual período de tempo vivemos.

Então penso que matei a charada da famosa questão denominada ” Principio da Incerteza de Heisenberg”, o qual foi o inicio da revelação do mundo estranho da quântica. Por este principio não é possível fixar uma partícula para medi-la pois se medimos uma coisa não conseguimos medir a outra.

E depois aconteceu o “split experiment” onde os cientistas atônitos viram que uma partícula se comporta como onda e vice-versa.

Vai dai que isso também deve acontecer com uma observador macrocósmico vendo um corpo humano. Imagine você rodando um filme sobre a vida de um humano que dura 70 anos de forma tao rápida que dure apenas 17 bilionésimos de segundo. O que vai aparecer na tela? Primeiro e com certeza, nenhuma forma. Segundo ver-se ia um rastro, se a tecnologia for igual a do CERN, mas pode parecer ser uma onda se aplicar o split experiment (talvez). Porque o anteparo com varias fendas só pode ser observado em um piscar de olho do macrocósmico e isso duraria para nos, uns 10 anos. Ora, em dez anos nos nos movemos muito, passamos por muitos lugares, muitas fendas, e no experimento estas passagens teriam que juntarem-se todas numa só, e isto seria uma superposição quântica, ou superposição de rastos, ou talvez ainda, de ondas.

Mas o desfecho final nesse grilo na minha cuca venho quando observei melhor a formula da Matrix/DNA e percebi que ali, o corpo rola como partícula em relacao ao espaço, mas também rola como onda em relacao ao tempo.

Agora vou correndo procurar um guarda-chuva para me proteger porque com certeza as pedradas e ovos chocos vão vir aos borbotoes… se os físicos e matemáticos lerem a minha questão e depois deixar eu explicar a razão dela com o texto acima. Com certeza não vão entender bulhufas e muito menos concordar com alguma coisa e vão me chamar de idiota para baixo. A minha justificativa é que eu venho da selva, outro mundo, e não dos laboratórios com ar condicionado como o CERN.


Primeira resposta que veio:

Ian MillerIan Miller, Independent physical scientist, author
Who says a macro observer would see humans as a wave? Quantum effects only apply when the interaction leads to a change of action in the order of Planck’s quantum of action. If it is big enough that h can be ignored, quantum effects can be ignored.
Minha resposta a Ian:
Louis Charles Morelli – 4/8/2017

Thanks, Ian. My question arises when thinking about the weirdness that arises from the split experiment ( wave or particle or both?), plus the observation of Matrix/DNA formulas, not about Planck’s constant.


A resposta do Ian me fez perder algumas horas pensando no tema e pensandop em como entabular um dialogo com Ian. Porem, no final conclui que por Internet e’ impossivel. Porem deixo abaixo escrito algo do que pensei em enviar como resposta para depois voltar nisso e continuar pensando no assunto:


Yours brain is hard-wired in a very different configuration than is mine, Yan. We are based on two very, very different interpretations of nature. I think both interpretations has more mistakes than thru, and if we makes the comparisons between these two, we could fixing some errors on both, and producing some new practical things.

Please, try to imagine the following:

A macro-observer of the size of this solar system or a galaxy. His scale of time is astronomical, ok? So, the lifetime for him runs very, very slower than the lifetime of humans runs for humans. In another hand, I read somewhere that there are particles which time of existence is about 17 billionth of a second (measured by human scale of time). So, time for particles runs very, very faster than time runs for humans. At Cern we do not see particles, we see the trails left by particles. The cause I think is due the different scales of time between particles and humans. Is it right? If it is right, the giant observer would see a human body moving at his lifetime as a trail.

But, at the split experiment, the interpretation of the trail becomes the interpretation as a wave. Am I wrong?

At split experiment we throw a particle by a laser canon, than, the particle leave a linear trail. But the weirdness is that it can pass on two points in space at same time. Humans normal behavior is moving around, going ahead and back, etc., but the giant observer has no time to see these movements. Our movements can result passing on two or more points of space, which will appears same time or one momentum, for the giant. Will he believe that are seeing a wave, also? Or we are seeing superposed trails at split experiment believing that we see waves?

Maybe the macro-observer see humans like we see particles. What do you think?

But nobody see particles. I think that’s why we have sometimes the belief that it is a particle, other time it is a wave. I am wrong?

My Matrix/DNA formula for natural systems is suggesting that, if the giant observer see the human body as an object with mass, he would believe that he is seeing a particle. Because mass shows things in relation to space and particles occupies a place in space. But if the giant observer see a human body acting normally as we do, moving towards different directions, going ahead and back, etc., and reducing our 70 years of a lifetime into 17 billionth of a second, he would see only only a linear trail. Am I wrong? If the giant places a wall with several holes over these trails, the human body would crossing several wholes at that reduced time. Because in reality, we had superposed several movements into one momentum.

Then, suppose that this macro-observer see a human lifetime as his one billionth of a second of his scale of time. I think that he would see only a trail, as particles are seeing at CERN. Do you agree with this hypothesis?

Observing the behavior of a human body at a very reduced time as it would appears to the macro-observerby someone that naturally reduces when reducing its scale of time , the results would be different than throwing a particle by a canon laser towards two holes in a plate?

I saw that you are very interested in the not solved problems of quantum theory, and I think here you have the opportunity to think about it from a very different approach and, maybe, creating yours own novelty. My question refers to the weirdness at the split experiment, not about the Planck’s constant.

You have the knowledge about quantum mechanics that I don’t have, but I have a kind of world view that you do not know. From my theoretical models and formulas arises lots of possibilities/questions which are related to what I am reading in the published literature about quantum theories. But nobody think or talk about the details that I would appreciate for developing my research. The reverse way could be thru: knowing the details of my theory, could help one developing quantum theory till suggesting new ideas/experiments.

But, my advice is that it would be a very hard intellectual work. First due our different native languages, second due our very different method of research and approaches, third due it is a very, very complex issue. So, if you have interest in continuing this dialogue, I would appreciate, if not, sorry by this time that you spent here.

if you will continue reading, I will advance that my formulas are suggesting that measuring a human body lifetime from astronomical scale of time, we see the body as particle – if we fix the body at a momentum in relation to space – and as a wave or superposed trails – if we fix the body in relation to time. The split experiment could solve this problem for the giant macro-observer, I think, if in the eyes of the giant observer the human body acting normally as we do, would show the behavior like the particle throw by a laser canon. Trail or wave? So I need details why the scientists believes that at split experiment the particle behaves as a wave and not as multiple superposed trails?

try to imagine the following:

A macro-observer of the size of this solar system or a galaxy. His scale of time is astronomical, ok? In another hand, I read somewhere that there are particles which time of existence is about one billionth of a second (measured by human scale of time). Then, suppose that this macro-observer see a human lifetime as his one billionth of a second. I think that he would see only a trail, as particles are seeing at CERN. Do you agree with this hypothesis?

When we try to understanding the Matrix/DNA formula for natural systems, we see lots of phenomena that the literature about quantum mechanics are publishing. And is unavoidable arising questions like this one. The formula suggests that any new shape of natural system is built when nature applies the force or process of life’s cycle upon a unique initial body. The body is transformed into new shapes ( like the human body is transformed from the shape of fetus to embryo to adult, etc), and these shapes are connected as part of a functional working system, like atoms, galaxies,cells, etc. If we try to see this body reducing drastically its lifetime, but fixing alternates momentum, at these momentum we see it as particle and the time between two particles makes the body invisible. I am not sure if these slices of time occurs as a trail or a wave in the eyes of the observer.

Now, he throws this human towards the two wholes at a metal plate, like the split experiment. He see the scene as his one second, which is too much slow for humans. In this astronomical one second, a human moves to several different pathways, included passing into the wholes. The giant macro-observer would believe that the human did it at the same momentum. I am wrong?

Duas diferentes cosmovisões debatem: Quais as diferenças entre o computador hardware/software e o humano corpo/mente?

quinta-feira, abril 6th, 2017


Minha questao postada no Quora e acompanhamento do debate:

What’s the difference between computer software/hardware and human body/mind?

Jonathan DayJonathan Day, 4/6/2017
Ultimately, none.

Alan Turing created an imaginary computer, the Turing Machine, that could perform a few basic functions, moving around a tape or set of tapes. He proved that all systems based on logic MUST be equivalent or inferior to a Turing Machine. No exceptions.

We now know that there are no quantum effects in the brain and that the sorts of quantum effects that you could get in regular cells can all be reduced to systems based on logic.

A human being, therefore, is a highly complex machine (the brain has 85 billion neurons and a neuron can have up to 3,000 synapses, so you’re dealing with 255 trillion connections that can amplify/suppress signals – we’re getting into serious numbers here). A machine so complex that attempting to reproduce it with modern technology would result in a computer around ten blocks square and two or three storeys high.

So, human brains are smaller for now. That’s kinda cheating because it’s not an intrinsic difference, merely a technological one.

Louis Charles MorelliLouis Charles Morelli – 4/6/2017

Very helpful, Jonathan. Thanks. But… I think that with yours world view we will not make progress towards quantum computation and knowledge of human mind and consciousness. Yours perspective is totally mechanistic, based on Physics and Math, as the modern scholar mindset. Maybe you are right, but is is not what my personal research and world view is suggesting.

First of all, Turing did not know what a natural system is. So he did not know the logic running in these systems. If you are interested go to my website to see the formula for all natural systems.

Second there is no quantum effects in the human mind as software because quantum effects are related to an inferior level of organization of matter: it fills the boundary between Newtonian mechanics and biological organization, the frontier between the hard and bone skeleton _ studied by the fields of Physics and Math – and the beginning of the soft meat ( where begins biological organization. The human psyche organization is a superior level).

Third, we can not build a computer reproducing the human brain with this actual technology, neither hundred blocks square: complexity has a limit at any evolutionary lineage. When reaching that limit, occurs an evolutionary jump, a transformation. As happened to human brain, the jump to consciousness. It means that we need to proceed a transformation of our actual technology. Not based on binary digits and so, based on seven variables, like the DNA code. By the way, I think it is good talking between different world views. Thanks.


Algumas das Nebulosas Influencias que Minha Teoria esta Exercendo no Mundo Hoje

domingo, março 12th, 2017


Do meu post publicado no meu Facebook em Mar/03-12-2017

 Louis Charles Morelli – Mar/03-12-2017




Minha teoria sendo usada num projeto de 100 milhoes de dolares!

Fiquei sabendo por acaso, surfando na Internet. Procurei pela sigla “Matrix/DNA” no Google, porque so eu uso esta sigla e descobri-a mencionada num jornal Americano de New Hampshire. Ali esta a copia de um comentario que postei num jornal e de um artigo que escrevi no meu website. Inclusive com todos meus erros de ingles, o trecho foi copiado fielmente, em ingles.

A unica e primeira pessoa no mundo que disse que os astros como a Terra tem uma existencia que imita o ciclo vital humano, fui eu, como resultado de meus calculos e modelos na selva amazonica, estudando os sistemas que compoem aquela biosfera – e cujas questoes me remeteram a questionar algo que eu nunca pensei que faria: o Cosmos! Porque e’ impossivel entender a cria (a nossa biosfera terrestre), sem entender o criador – o Cosmos. E o trecho no jornal fala desta minha teoria.

Um milionario excentrico fez uma doacao de 100 milhoes de dolares para uns cientistas que tem um projeto para procurar vida fora da Terra. Minha teoria da Matrix/DNA faz algumas sugestoes nao pensadas pelos cientistas, e ate’ agora ainda nao descobri como acharam minha teoria e porque esta mencionada no jornal. E infelizmente, sozinho e sem as necessarias condicoes para tocar meu projeto com eficiencia, tenho que ficar calado. Mas meus amigos do Facebook sao testemunhas. Clique no link abaixo e veja este meu texto que esta ali copiado.

Ha 5 anos atras um famoso radialista e evangelico dos USA criou um website para criar um novo movimento baseado na … (segundo suas palavras)… “fantastica descoberta da formula de Deus para criar o mundo, por um autor desconhecido…” Os ateus dos USA e Inglaterra deram em cima, combateram, ameacaram-no de plagio usando meu nome, e ele teve que parar seu website. E eu tive que ficar assistindo, calado!

“The study proposed a model Matrix/DNA model which the researchers think could tell how to look for aliens in space.
“It suggests that planets are developed by the life’s cycle process, suggests the ideal age and conditions a planet must have to harbor biological life, and suggests the ideal slice of electromagnetic radiation frequency/variation that could permitting planets to self-communicating”, said a researcher, René Heller. Various spacecraft and telescopes captured many images and data on Cosmos that do not hint life could be there. It suggests that the current models that astronomers are using are wrong.”

Study proposes Novel Method to Hunt for Aliens Looking at Us

Submitted by Jeanne Rife on Wed, 03/02/2016 – 15:21

Study proposes Novel Method to Hunt for Aliens Looking at Us


Reddit: Post Divulgado para Anunciar a Matrix/DNA Theory (testando)

sexta-feira, dezembro 9th, 2016


Nao tem jeito mesmo. Um alien tomando a forma humana e falando sua visão de mundo para terráqueos jamais seria sequer ouvido. Mais uma prova e’ a reação dos moderadores do Reddit, copiada abaixo.

The DNA is 13,8 billions years old! from philosophy

The DNA is 13,8 billions years old! (self.philosophy)

submitted – dez – 12/9/2016 -by TheMatrixDNA

A new theory (The Universal Matrix/DNA of All Natural Systems) is suggesting that astronomic and atomic systems are ancestrals of biological systems because has identified the building blocks of DNA as the building blocks of those systems, at less evolved shapes. But,… the theory has built different models of those systems, suggesting that the academic official models are wrong. Do you thing it is rational and possible? Or do you believe that the stupid matter of this lost planet has invented the DNA?

CanadaDuck 0 pontos

Human DNA confirmed present at time of big bang! Amazing!


Yes, CanadaDuck, the theory found that waves of light ( like those emitted at the Big Bang) contains the code for DNA. I can’t explain everything here, but if you see the figure of the electromagnetic spectrum by Matrix/DNA Theory, it shows how the seven different kinds of radiation composes end acts like the seven molecules of the DNA. But it is not “human DNA”, it is a universal Matrix evolving and changing shapes under a life’s cycle, which at humans we call “DNA”.


Um moderador removeu o post alegando o seguinte:


Your post was removed. A moderator determined that it broke the following rule:

Rule 1: Posts must put forth a substantive philosophical thesis and make a serious and sustained attempt to defend this thesis in English (with some exceptions, e.g. news about the profession, interviews with philosophers, and so on). Questions belong in /r/askphilosophy.

If this is a self-post, you may edit your post to fix this problem and message the moderators to have it reinstated.

E  minha resposta enviada ao moderador:

Message to moderators

from TheMatrixDNA sent 12/10/2016

Post in question:

I can’t agree this question has no “substantive philosophical thesis” and there is no “serious and sustained attempt to defend this thesis”. As we can see at

To sum up, a thesis statement should: Be specific. Be narrow enough as to be practicably defended within the length parameters of the assignment. Make an interesting claim, one over which reasonable people might disagree. Provide some hint as to what the main line of argument will be.

I think the very moderator’s problem seems to be “indoctrinated by known world view when at school”. Like when the philosophy academic course was dominated by the geocentric world view… any mention to a different other-centric view was seen as absurd.

There are three possible alternative as the cause fr DNA’s existence: 1) Was created by God and by magic; 2) Was created by matter of this planet ( or any other – panspermia) 3) Is the result of universal evolution, or the long chain of causes and effects that is coming since the Big Bang

Is there another alternative? Please, I don’t know. Human species has knowing only alternatives 1 and 2. Modern universities advocates alternative 2, so, alternative 1 must be absurd. As never nobody thought about alternative 3 ( or nobody has introduced a substantive frame of work like mine, developed during 30 years – after 7 years studying the Amazon biosphere, applying comparative anatomy among all its systems for identifying its connections and evolution as you can see at alternative 3 ( or any other) will be immediately classified as absurd, without learning and questioning the real facts enrolled as proof/evidences and don’t believing in those hundreds of confirmed right predictions. I understand it because before the jungle and learning to see the world from the brute nature perspective, I had reacted some way did by the moderator.

But, alternatives 1 and 2 are not rational. Both has broken the universal history into two blocks without any real evolutionary link between them, so, the big gap between cosmological evolution and biological evolution are fitted with magical gods or magical randomness. So, they are not substantive philosophical thesis.

There is no way to resume a new universal history of 13,8 billions years into a post on Reddit that contains the “serious and sustained attempt to defend this thesis”. They are listed in that website and would be introduced/debated in the comments section.

I think that any natural theory ( by the Greek definition of the world theory and not by the followed modern invention called “scientific theory”), is, at its essence, a philosophical thesis because it argues about the meaning of existence. Then, again: To sum up, a good introduction to a philosophical thesis should: (1) be concise, (2) contain a clear statement of your thesis, (3) introduce, very succinctly, your topic and explain why it is important, (4) indicate, very briefly, what the main line of argument will be, and (5) map out the overall structure of your paper.

Philosophy – as its very subject, the human mind – must be opened to its own evolution. Classifying any new tentative for openness as absurd is a kind of philosophical evolution-stopper. Maybe I am wrong here…? Cheers…


RNAs Auto-replicadores e a Controversia entre a Teoria Academica e Teoria da Matrix/DNA

domingo, novembro 6th, 2016


RNAs copiadores reforçam ideia de como a vida na Terra começou

Meu comentário postado no artigo ( aguardando moderação)

Louis Morelli – (NOV)11/06/2016

O método de investigação da Matrix/DNA Theory esta sugerindo uma diferente versão para este tópico. E nunca foi encontrado nada no mundo capaz de auto-copiar com 100% de exatidão, então esta ideia é metafisica e porque forçar em sua busca e não revisar sua teoria?
Seja como for, o mecanismo da replicação tem que ter vindo de um mecanismo mais simples do estado do mundo físico momentos antes da origem da da matéria orgânica. Isto é racionalismo, pois do contrario teria que se acreditar que a matéria orgânica e aqui na Terra inventou do nada pela primeira vez no Universo este mecanismo. Então de onde veio, quais eram as forças naturais e elementos que executavam esse mecanismo mais simples? Assim trabalha a Matrix/DNA Theory, levantando questões racionais e buscando suas respostas racionais, dentro da logica natural conhecida. E nos encontramos uma resposta racional.

O RNA é a contraparte na forma biológica de uma função dos sistemas naturais que já haviam se apresentado nas formas eletromagnéticas, mecânicas, etc. como átomos, galaxias,etc. Na formula geral para sistemas naturais, o RNA foi identificado como executor da Função 5, ou seja, a função da reprodução destes sistemas. Na forma mecânica de sistemas como é a forma astronômica, a auto-replicação era mais simples, um simples processo de auto-reciclagem, onde o sistema tem que “morrer”, se desfazer, e de sua matéria ele se reconstrói. Isto é replicação ou reprodução menos evoluída, mais simples. Então sua contraparte biológica – o RNA – jamais poderia se auto-replicar, pois para isso depende da presença de outras funções sistêmicas, e neste caso, proteínas e talvez enzimas fossem suficientes. mas isto implica que RNA e proteínas surgiram separadamente, na mesma época e lugar.

Esta implicação vai contra o que se acredita na ciência acadêmica com tendencia ateísta, pois implicaria também na conclusão de que houve não-reducionismo da complexidade a um cepo único primitivo comum. Erra também o pessoal que defende o deísmo acenando com a ideia de irredutível complexidade. Porem, o problema é que a teoria acadêmica ainda acredita que o cepo primitivo comum (LUCA) existiu na Terra, quando na verdade, a Terra era uma parte deste cepo, pois ele compreende o sistema astronomico dentro do qual a vida surgiu (veja seu modelo teórico em meu website). E tanto RNA como proteínas são redutivos a um cepo localizado no espaço sideral. Nunca vão conseguir Um RNA que se auto-replique sozinho e por si só, a não ser que alguma elaboração sintética artificial o faça. Para entender isto sera bom ver a formula para sistemas no meu website ( proteínas são pedaços do circuito esférico do sistema).



A Ciencia do Cerebro Busca as Origens da Compaixao e Empatia nos Humanos… e Entra em Conflito com a Matrix/DNA

segunda-feira, maio 25th, 2015


Seres humanos de uma parte do globo mostram o comportamento de separarem alguns de seus pertences e envia-los a pessoas no outro lado do globo que sofreram algum desastre. A isso se d’a o nome de ‘ compaixao” . Agora cientistas estao empenhados em buscar como este fenomeno da compaixao surgiu nste mundo e justo – Segundo eles – nos seres humanos. Interessante artigo com video explicativo foi motivo para eu postar um comentario no artigo, porque a cosmovisao da Matrix/DNA tem uma surpreendente sugestao sobre como esta propriedade apareceu aqui. Abaixo vai o link para o artigo e video e a seguir uma copia do meu comentario. Tambem inseri no final uma copia da fala no video paa aquels que tem dificuldade em ouvir o ingles ( espero ter tempo para retornar aqui e traduzir tudo).

Na selva amazonica observando que compaixao e empatia ja existia de uma forma muito simplista em animais e buscando mais explicacoes na formula da Matrix/DNA fui descobrindo que as raizes destas propriedades se estendem para alem dos animais, localizando-as em sistemas nao vivos como esta galaxia que nos criou e fui descendo ainda mais no tempo ate chegar a conclusao que ela veio mesmo do antes das origens deste Universo, carregadas por ondas de luz as quais por coincidencia sao as mesmas substancias que agora estao formando nossas mentes… ou seja: as propriedades da compaixao e empatia ficaram dormindo na materia durante sua evolucao, assim como a autoconsciencia de uma nova crianca ficou dormindo na morula, na blastula, no feto e so veio a se expressar de fato na crianca, porque esta era a copia final da especie humana que a gerou e a qual ja continha em si a autoconsciencia. Desta forma, a mente humana que esta se formando com a substancia luminosa de nuvens que resultam das sinapses dos pensamentos comeca a ser a copia completa da luz que a comecou antes mesmo do Big Bang, e apenas agora comeca a expressar estas propriedades da empatia e compaixao, significando que aquela luz original ja possuia estas propriedades. Arre!…

The Science of Compassion: Kindness Is a Fundamental Human Trait


– May, 25, 2015

Which were the primordial roots of empathy and compassion, when life was not existing yet? Matrix/DNA theoretical models from those past times had located those roots, included at stupid astronomic systems. And there is no full knowledge about something if we does not know its causes, origins, evolutionary history and universal meanings. Dr. Thupten Jinpa need to know what Matrix/DNA has to say here, looking to the image below. Any natural system ( be it the human brain, atoms or galaxies) is built and based on that universal natural formula for systems and observing it we can discover the systems’ properties, like empathy and compassion. Before life’s origins, the universal system reached an evolutionary top as perfect closed system in the shape of ” building blocks of primordial galaxies”. At that system all of its seven parts worked synchronized for keeping the system’s self-defense and functioning. So, there was altruism from each part in relation to the another six parts, besides the fact that there were no neuronal network neither consciousness about this property, like  working liver is “altruistic” in relation to the organs to whom it sends clean blood.

So, the seeds, the physical forces and elements that later were used by humans brains for producing these stranger and abstract properties were installed at our ancestral non-living natural systems, like atoms and galaxies. But,.. how these mechanistic altruisms evolved to empathy and compassion when this universal system reached the more complex shape as human brains? The answer can not be demonstrated yet, but we can suppose it by logics. We have identified all existing living properties of a chimpanzee body in its mechanistic shape at a building block of astronomical system through the formula in the image below. We can see there the digestive apparatus, the blood circuit, till the reproductive sexual system, in mechanic fashion. That’s why the body of chimpanzees are the most perfect biological system reproduction of the system that created and are had driven biological evolution through its also terrestrial created environment. There is a unique property in human bodies that we never located at our creator astronomical system: consciousness and its derivative, intelligence. It means that this new property came from some natural system superior in complexity and existing beyond this galaxy, it is coming from the Universe… or beyond it. And this unknown system is using those physical structures like the altruism that emerges from closed and stupid system for installing its specific more complex properties, like compassion and empathy, now in a conscious way.

Closed systems – like this astronomic Milk Way that created biological systems- are extremely selfish. They does not interacts with any other thing in this Universe. From this our ancestor we inherited the selfish gene and our tendency to be predators in our own species, family. The very true fact is that the altruism of every systemic part means, in reality, leaIty to a closed selfish system, which means that that altruism is in fact, selfishness.  I have not identified any process that could drive the mechanistic altruism/selfishness for to give the evolutionary jump into conscious empathy, that is why I am supposing that information from a superior conscious system is in the air and being absorbed by humans brains.


The Matrix/DNA Formula as Closed System

Transcricao do video:

Thupten Jinpa: When we talk about the science of compassion, it’s also tied down with science of empathy. Empathy is compassion, altruism, kindness. They are all very interrelated and much of the current scientific studies really fall into two main categories. One is the study of altruistic behavior, particularly in animals and very young children. And the thinking is that if we can see altruistic behavior in animals and very, very young children, that it must have very deep biological roots. So that’s the kind of logic behind why they are focusing more on animal studies and children. The other important area that overlaps the science of compassion is the study of empathy. And again here, a lot of the work has been done on nonhuman primate studies and there is an American professor at Emory by the name of Frans de Waal and he was one of the pioneers. Many people might have seen the video of apes, you know; there were two juvenile apes fighting and one of them loses and another ape who’s not a blood relation comes over and hugs him and consoles him. So it clearly is an indication that empathy can be found in nonhuman primates as well.

And then there are some interesting studies coming from the studies of meditators who meditate many hours on compassion and then looking at their brain. You can actually see the brain’s expression in action. So this is called functioning in an MRI, which has the ability to look at a brain in action as it were. At least the claim is that the meditators are, unlike novices like us, have some ability to consciously direct their attention and thoughts so in the scanner, the brain-imaging scanner, you can ask the meditator: Can you do this? Can you do that? Can you just stay on the level of empathy and feel the pain? Now can you move onto compassion, wishing the other person to be free of suffering or wanting to do something about it. And try to tease out what brain signature, brain regions get activated when you are just in empathy feeling and when you are moving onto compassion when you are wishing to see the relief. In this way, the whole mapping of the brain regions that are involved in something like compassion is beginning to be done.


Um Grave Pecado os Humanos estao Cometendo contra Deus, contra a Natureza, Sua Informacao Natural e Genetica

domingo, maio 24th, 2015


Para melhorar a qualidade de vida e ter uma mente mais fraternal e social, os humanos precisam comecar a buscar o entendimento da natureza feita por Aquele que disse – ” Se queres conhecer a Mim e saber como Eu penso, estude a Minha Obra que e’ o elo entre tu e Eu, ou seja, a Natureza” . Pois todo artista se revela na sua obra. Ora, a Natureza tem sido observada e estudada pelos humanos desde suas origens portanto era de se supor que ja tivessemos aprendido bastante como Deus pensa e faz as coisas da Natureza. Aprender como Deus pensa e’ aprender a ser cada vez mais sabio e amoroso. Aprender como Deus fez os detalhes da Natureza e’ aumentar a capacidade de melhorar a qualidade de vida pela solucao dos obstaculos ( desculpem a falta de acentos, cedilha, etc, porque estou usando um teclado ingles). E’ isso que voce pensa estar vendo na humanidade de hoje? Se sim, voce vai discordar do que esta escrito daqui para diante, porque eu penso que nao.

Pois vejamos um exemplo: o sistema social humano ainda esta imitando fielmente o sistema social selvagem dos animais. Na selva os animais se dividem em tres classes, e nas civilizacoes humanas tambem. Tem a classe dos grandes predadores ( a casta economica), a classe dos medios predadores ( a classe media) e o resto na classe das presas ( a classe trabalhadora e deserdada). Por outro lado estamos ainda tao fora da sintonia de vida com a Natureza do planeta que ele esta ameacando nos exterminar a todos. Outro exemplo e que nao aprendemos ainda a entender a Natureza nos seus aspectos dualisticos. Um deles e a dicotomia causada por um ciclo entre caos e ordem. Vivemos aqui numa biosfera que foi produzida pela entropia do sistema astronomico que nos envolve, a qual gera o caos, portanto somos produtos e filhos do caos ( o qual, na verdade, foi produzido por nossos antigos ancestrais, se a visao de mundo sugerida pela Matrix/DNA estiver correta em tudo). Mas basta levantar os olhos para o ceu e ver que nele impera o estado de ordem, nem precisa lembrar a mecanica newtoniana pela qual nosso sistema estelar funciona como um relogio perfeito. E nossas ciencias fisicas e astronomicas estao projetando o estado de caos do nosso mundo imediato para fazer seus modelos , calculos e teorias cosmologicas, num puro antropomorfismo narcisista. Estao levando para os ceus os monstros humanos, mesmo que seja apenas em suas fantasias, como e’ o caso da invencao de buracos negros canibais engolindo e triturando galaxias inteiras. A Matrix/DNA produz outro modelo teorico e poe no lugar de buracos negros uma ancestral parafernalia do sistema reprodutor feminino gerando estrelas bebes.  Em que temos evoluido? Onde a mente humana esta se tornando mais fraterna, social e amorosa, aproximando-se mais do Deus que os homens de bem desejam?

Se agora voce concorda comigo, tambem notaste que existe uma contradicao nisso tudo: apesar do milenar estudo da Natureza, e termos copiados varios mecanismos dela na forma de nossas tecnologias, a forma como nos a estamos interpretando nao esta nos fazendo distanciar-nos dos comportamentos dos animais irracionais e nem nos aproximando da forma amorosa como deve ser a forma de Deus.  Porque esse paradoxo?

Acontece que a Natureza tem sido estudada de varias maneiras todas erradas, sendo a ultima ainda mais errada, o metodo reducionista que chamam de cientifico e teimam em nao darem o salto para o metodo cientifico sistemico, o qual em muito ampliara nossos horizontes. Eu apenas percebi isso quando vivendo na selva amazonica e estudando-a da forma como Deus nos aconselhou que fizessemos, comecei a perceber que  as interpretacoes humanas de quase todos os fenomenos e eventos naturais estao errados. Isto porque, primeiro se interpretava toda a Natureza tendo em mente a crenca na mentira de que Deus violaria suas proprias leis naturais aplicando o metodo magico, depois se passou a interpretar a Natureza tendo em mente a mentira inexistente do acaso absoluto. Ta ai meu amigo, a explicacao para o gargalo em que estamos metidos. Nem magia nem acaso incontrolavel pois o significado de Deus ao produzir a Natureza Universal e’ o mesmo de uma mae humana naturalmente produzindo a placenta onde germinar o Seu filho e pelo metodo genetico natural, portanto a mente sabia deve se basear na pura genetica natural. Mas esta nova mentalidade muda totalmente a nossa visao da Natureza universal e por consequencia, as interpretacoes de cada fenomeno e evento natural.

Temos no artigo “Is ‘Information Theory’ Misnamed?”,  com link abaixo, um exemplo de como nossa maneira moderna dita cientifica de abordar a Natureza  e aprende-la esta errada. Criaram um campo complexo dentro desta ciencia denominado “Teoria da Informacao”, mas quem comecou foram matematicos e depois entraram os fisicos e juntos conduziram esta teoria para a area das ciencias da computacao, ou seja, informacao artificial. Esqueceram-se totalmente ate agora de estudar o que e informacao natural. Ja qu o Universo e sua natureza nao sao magicos e nao podem criar informacoes do Nada, quais e como eram as informacoes originais que aqui foram insridas junto com o Big Bang para que produzissem este complex universo ue vemos hoje? Apenas eu – sinto dizer – estou investigando isso e ja bastante adiantado nesse estudo. Enquanto isso os biologos incapazes de formularem uma grande teoria da biologia porque querem assentar a Vida terrestre em cima da interpretacao dos fisicos e dos matematicos sobre a Natureza cosmologica, estao comecando a perceber que a teoria da informacao deles nao esta se casando com o conceito de informacao que eles estao observando na genetica. E claro que desse jeito a interpretacao sobre o que e informacao natural nunca vai se casar com o que e informacao genetica, pois as primeiras informacoes que surgiram neste universo ja vieram para serem aplicadas ao processo genetico que e a meta do Criador. Os fisicos e matematicos estudam a parte da Natureza como so podem estudar um corpo humano, limitados a infra-estrutura instalada, ou seja, ao seu esqueleto, e nao a parte relacionada a carne suave e  a neurologia mental. E todo esqueleto, tal como o nosso, so existe porque foi gerado por informacoes geneticas, assim e’ o mundo limitado das ciencias fisicas e matematicas. Por isso a fisica e a matematica ignoraram a informacao no seu aspecto natural e se enveredaram a inventar a informacao artificial a nivel computacional. Sao os biologos, geneticistas e neurologistas que devem ir ao Big Bang estudar as origens de todas as informacoes naturais, as quais produziram as forcas e elementos da mecanica estudados pelos fisicos e calculados pelos matematicos.

Infelizmente eu nao tenho mais tempo hoje para traduzir o artigo e os comentarios que postei no debate que se seguiu ao artigo, por issome limitarei aqui a copier os meus comentarios em ingles, os quais dao uma ideia dos conflitos entre as interpreacoes da natureza feitas or eles e as feitas por mim dentro da cosmovisao da Matrix/DNA Theory. O artigo:

Is ‘Information Theory’ Misnamed?

Para melhor estudar este tma devemos tamber ler ests outros artigos relacuionados:

DNA Is Multibillion-Year-Old Software

E a seguir meus comentarios postados no debate:


DNA is not a code neither a message, it is merely a large number of different copies of a unique initial system – which was the evolutionary top produced by cosmological evolution and at Matrix/DNA Theory you can see this system in shape of a universal matrix formula for all natural systems. It does not makes sense to say that 8 billions human beings ( which are different copies of a unique system) composes a code and that Humanity is a message. I need studying more about academic information theory but I know that it is vey different from Matrix/DNA’s information theory, which says that natural information is a very solid and active agent resulting from the entropy of the natural system that produced this universe: bits-information has a physical presence but a genetic meaning even at quantum and cosmological scales. The image below is the building block of DNA, its unit of information, a lateral base-pair of nucleotides, but it is also the formula for first generation of galaxies and at its more evolutionary simplest shapes is the formula for atom systems (sorry, I uploaded the wrong image but it is the same formula and the right one you can see in my website). Any new natural information is like any new gene, produced by fuzzy logics resulting from the needs of a system plus the limitation of the previous existent hierarchic superior system ( the new system can be a human baby or a star-baby and the previous system can be the human parents or the star’s galaxy). That’s why we will see strange and weird life-forms at other planets.


A formula da Matriz/DNA como algoritmo de um sistema fechado:

F1) Existem ingredientes crus no espaco, na forma de massa e energia, e rodopiando devido rotacao do espaco?

Se sim, forme-se o rodamoinho e misture ingredients crus cozinhando-os ate que bolhas sejam ejetadas para o espaco externo. As bolhas serao o nucleo de um novo corpo astronomico;

Se nao, nao se forme o rodamoinho.

2) Uma bolha agrega mais ingredientes crus e congelados do espaco?

Se sim, continue se dirigindo para dentro do espaco sidereal, agora sob o nome de semente estelar ou planeta;

Se nao, desfaca-se como bolha.

3) O planeta passa perto de uma estrela?

Se sim, caia na sua orbita;

Se nao, continue vagando no espaco ate se desfazer.

4) O nucleo e’ alcancado pela energia da estrela?

Se sim, inicie reacoes nucleares se alimentando das camadas externas de ingredients, ou seja, das camadas geologicas;

Se nao, torne-se uma lua.

5) A reacao nuclear evolue comendo as camadas ate a superficie?

Se sim, a pressao forma os vulcoes que ejetam cometas que caem na espiral galatica rumo ao nucleo;

Se nao, congele-se como uma lua.

6) A reacao nuclear atingiu a ultima camada superficial?

Se sim, colapse-se como uma estrela supernova;

Se nao, congele-se como lua.

7) Esgotaram-se as particulas de energia dentro dos atomos das camadas de nutrientes?

Se sim, desfacao o resto em massa ingrediente para formar novo rodamoinho;

Se nao, torne-se um planeta gigante morto de gas inerte.

A formula da Matriz/DNA para sistemas abertos:

1) Repita todos os passos ate F5

2) Queres se eternizar nesta forma de corpo?

Se sim, vas internamente para o nucleo;

Se nao, vas externamente para se relacionar com o exterior desconhecido.

Traducao para o Ingles:





Another point is that you confuse information theory with computer science. They are quite different, although they of course overlap.


The big problem is that neither information theory based on mathematics, neither computer sciences are studying natural information. Only at Matrix/DNA Theory we are doing that. The weird thing is that our method arrived to a never imagined before conclusion: natural bits-information are photons particles resulting from the fragmentation of light waves emitted by pulsating big-bangs. Any natural light wave has a sequence of vibrations/frequencies that is the same sequence of shapes/state of energy of any living body. Since that the differences among living bodies’ shapes are result of a force called ” lifes cycles’ we arrive to the weird conclusion that light waves carries on the first code for life… I am sure that when human beings will remember that we need to study and investigate natural information our whole modern and academic world view will suffer a revolution like Copernicus did with the geocentric world view.


This is a very interesting article, but it follows from a fundamental misunderstanding of Shannon’s theory of communication. It is precisely the separation of the concept of information from those of meaning and reference that allows us to regard human communication and biological communication in the same frame. For Shannon, information is just entropy, and entropy is a statistical property of sequences that allows communication to take place. Communication in this sense — not in the hermeneutic sense of conveying meaning between minds — is the task of replicating a sequence between two points. Both biology and culture do this in various ways, the first through DNA, RNA, signal transduction, the second through texts and other media, and the application of information theory to both domains is entirely appropriate. However, in both cases there is the interesting question of how we proceed from the replication of sequences which are essentially instructions to things like bodies and ideas.


This question is easy for Matrix/DNA Theory. We could refer to an analogy. Think about Chineses from different places of China arriving at different times and places in the United States. No matter the obstacles all them will go to the place of the first settlement of Chineses, like Chinatown. And in Chinatown a recent arrived Chinese from Beijing will live next other already settled Chinese from Beijing. The previous neighborhood in China will determine the sequence of Chineses/houses composing the neighborhood of Chinatown. And the cause of immigration is that China was under economic entropy, so, Shannon was right. But he forgot that every state of chaos have the seeds for the state of order and vice-versa. Human language is the state of order emerged from chaotic humans sounds, genetic order is the state of order from chaotic dispersion of primordial molecules such aminoacids. And those aminoacids selected for composing biological systems were like small settled groups of immigrants that came from the Milk Way fragmentation by entropy, that’s why the first living cell is just the copy of galactic building blocks. If you don’t put cosmological evolution and biological evolution inside the same bag, you will never understand the origins and evolution of natural information, genetics and biological systems like human beings.
Saying that replication of sequences are instructions only makes sense if you considers that the instructor is the prior and outside system fragmented by chaos. Because the new sequences will merely mimics the old systemic sequence. That’s why human parents ( the prior and outside system in relation to the new embryogenesis) generates human babies and not giraffes babies. And that is why the human life’s cycle is mimicking the astronomical bodies life’s cycles as expressed by my avatar here.


Information theory might have a focus different than what the term “information” means in different contexts, but, above there is an unfortunate level of understanding of what “information theory” covers, epitomised in the sentence “To a signaling engineer, the messages “set” and “ant” have equal amounts of information, three symbols each.” This is incorrect, without the knowledge of prob. of occurences of symbols from a codebook (which are presumed to be defined for the problem at hand in a way compatible with the rigorous constructs of the theory requires) it is not meaningful to talk about information as in information theory in the first place. Chaitin, as far as I remember, uses “Algorithmic information theory” in which the constructs are programme strings. In that sense, it is a theory with different constructs, although there are strong connections with information theory (which can be traced back to, e.g., Kolmogorov’s algorithmic information concept and surrounding theorems). It might be worthwhile to dig the literature a bit deeper before jumping on to conclusions.


Should it be worthwhile to dig the biblical literature a bit deeper before jumping on to conclusions about how nature works? Where is the guarantee that Nature is based on algorithms like the Mathematicians have theorized it? I agree that sometimes our extensive academic curricula of information theory really works producing good effects, but, it also works the Bible when suggesting prays since that it produces the placebo effect. The messages ” set” and “ant” will be misunderstood if based on the symbols from the wrong codebook. A wrong codebook is the opposite of the Germany ” Enigma” at second war: the lies for to elude the enemy is not in the symbols of what were said by radio, but, in the cryptography message underlying the words. That’s Nature as based on human algorithms.
The very problem is that it need to be biologists, geneticists and neurologists that must go to the Big Bang investigating the primordial original natural bits of information that produced this complex Universe we see today, included the mechanical and skeletal aspect of the world studied by Physics and Math, because those information had genetic origins and meanings. Like the human body’s skeleton is a physical and mechanical structure, but it is produced by genetic information. I am telling this ” weird things” because my personal investigation is suggesting that the living formula called Matrix/DNA is more appropriated as natural information than algorithms. But… I could be wrong, who knows…


No time for straw man arguments as in “Should it be worthwhile to dig the biblical literature a bit deeper before jumping on to conclusions about how nature works?” sorry. If you are criticising a theory, you need to learn more about it.


Yes, this is the same answer I get from advocates of biblical theories. They acts as straw man. Of course we need learn a theory, but never forgetting it is a theory to the point that we loose the ability to criticize and questioning it. Then, these people says that have no time for it. Do you know what is the solution for both of us? You never will read my posts because you are head-closed by yours world view, and I will continuing to read yours posts because they are good for testing my world view. Cheers,…


Oportunidades para Militancia da Matrix/DNA: Anti Nova Ordem Mundial

domingo, maio 10th, 2015


Se a Humanidade não usar com inteligencia o presente que recebeu caído dos céus ou produzido pela simples evolução natural chamado “auto-consciência”, o nosso destino será o mesmo de Adão e Eva no Paraíso: existir pela eternidade infinita num paraíso ajardinado como mais uma de suas criaturas estupidas, sem Internet, viagens em naves espaciais, com a mente totalmente atrofiada, etc., o que para mim seria pior que o inferno. A força natural que tenta nos conduzir a este destino se infiltra na psique da elite economica do planeta utilizando-a como inocente util e essa elite assim obedece inconscientemente. Existem movimentos por aí com certas ideologias que eu posso não concordar por achar que estão no caminho errado, como alguns combatendo teorias da conspiração ( veja o caso da teoria dos humanos reptilianos), mas no fundo muitas destas pessoas estão sendo tocadas intuitivamente pela mente cósmica que se sente ameaçada na sua evolução e liberdade, por isso tento me aliar e participar de alguns destes movimentos, tal como o link a seguir:

Fórum Anti Nova Ordem Mundial

E a seguir o meu comentario como mensagem de apresentação no website do movimento:

Nome de Usuario: The Matrix/DNA

Senha: xxxxxxx

Muito obrigado pela admissão. Desde que realizando um estudo na selva amazõnica suspeitei que o rumo civilizatório sendo agora trilhado pela humanidade é o mesmo que dirigiu a evolução dos animais irracionais ( sistemas sociais das abelhas, formigas, dinossauros, etc.), cuja versão humana seria o estupido Admiravel Mundo Novo de Huxley sob o Big Brother de Orwell, suspeitei tambem que existe uma força natural emanada pelo ancestral que criou a Vida na Terra e dentro do qual ainda existimos, o qual é uma maquina descrita pela mecanica newtoniana, força esta que tende a organizar esta biosfera como uma maquina e o homem mais uma mera peça dentro dela, e que está encriptada como uma Matrix dentro do DNA e nossa genética, por isso tanto a abelha rainha como os Illuminatti são conduzidos intuitivamente e tendem a instalar um sistema onde no final eles próprios se tornam escravos do sistema. Passei então a militar de todas as formas possiveis na midia para tentar evitar este destino terrivel pois no ser humano desceu ou emergiu uma nova propriedade que os irracionais não possuem – a mente ou auto-consciencia – que não pertence ao nosso ancestral criador imediato e por isso, se adotar-mos certos comportamentos, poderemos evitar o trágico destino. Concordo que é uma proposta estranha e incomum que causa de impacto um certo desconforto intelectual por vir de uma visão de mundo desconhecida ainda, mas lembro que a diversidade de abordagens e idéias só pode enriquecer e tornar mais eficaz a grande causa do movimento da AntiNovaOrdemMundial. Tenho um website expondo esta nova cosmovisão e diariamente publicando artigos que visam desconstruir esta cultura milenar predatória cujas estatísticas mostram cerca de 500.000 paginas lidas/por mês no mundo todo. Aprecio que me corrijam nos meus erros mas espero não infringir as regras do forum e agradeço a admissão porque a sua causa é a minha causa. Abraços…

Leia mais: