Archive for the ‘Macro Evolução’ Category

Na Busca de Entender o Universo, o Atual Método Acadêmico Foi Aqui Analisado de Maneira Brilhante

sexta-feira, setembro 6th, 2013

New groundbreaking research may expose new aspects of the universe

http://phys.org/news/2013-09-groundbreaking-expose-aspects-universe.html

New groundbreaking research may expose new aspects of the universe

Matin Mojaza. Credit: Matin Mojaza/SDU

No one knows for sure, but it is not unlikely that the universe is constructed in a completely different way than the usual theories and models of today predict. The most widely used model today cannot explain everything in the universe, and therefore there is a need to explore the parts of nature which the model cannot explain. This research field is called new physics, and it turns our understanding of the universe upside down. New research now makes the search for new physics easier.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-09-groundbreaking-expose-aspects-universe.html#jCp

xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Apesar das importantes informações no artigo, o mais interessante são os comentários brilhantes de especialistas na área da Física criticando a própria disciplina. Copio partes mais relevantes dos comentários e mais abaixo tem o comentário que postei no artigo. 
FRANKLINS – Sep 04, 2013

Closing windows is a great opportunity in physics as it helps us narrow our search to what might be true

This is just another “diplomatic” (actually hypocritical) term for the lack of quantitative prediction of theory. Such a theory cannot be falsified with experiments, so it doesn’t belong into science. Try to imagine, how the acceptation of heliocentric model would happen, if the finding of parallax or order of Venus phases would just “close the window” to epicycles. With such approach I could say easily, that the negative result of M-M experiment didn’t disprove the aether model, it just closed one of windows to it – I think, many proponents of mainstream physics would heartily protested against such an interpretation.

The reality simply is, the SUSY/stringy theories have fed too many theorists in the past and now, when these theories are getting gradually disproved, nobody of them wants to admit, he dedicated whole life to fringe hypothesis.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-09-groundbreaking-expose-aspects-universe.html#jCp

I can feel no sorry for these guys, because they all got a pretty money for it already and they all were warned by the apparent lack of testable predictions of these models in advance. In general, when some theory doesn’t provide testable predictions – only “windows”, it should serve as a first indicia for us, that such a theory is untestable, i.e. nonscientific and as such unphysical. In addition, I explained before few years already, why these theories CAN NOT work in logical easy to follow way, so I did my very best in this matter already.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-09-groundbreaking-expose-aspects-universe.html#jCp

xxxxxx

Teech2 –

Nesmysl… how about aether monsieur Franklin? Where can we test it?

How we could test the existence of water surface if we would life at it? From perspective of water surface ripples it’s fully transparent environment. We would rely to tiny density fluctuations of underwater, which don’t manifest directly, but with various composite effects: the Brownian noise, which is observable as a CMBR noise in vacuum, with virtual particle field, which manifest at proximity of massive bodies like so-called Cassimir force and of course with quantum uncertainty and quantum noise. For example the helium atoms never freeze at room pressure, because they’re in neverending motion like pollen grains at the surface of water. All these phenomena may serve as an evidence of dense aether model.

But the science tends to ignore the postdictions as an evidence of theories. The string theorists suffer this ignorance too, because all the above phenomena may serve as an evidence extradimensions as well.

We are facing the so-called professional blindness, during which the physicists tend to overlook the notoriously known phenomena, just because they’ve another explanation for it in context of former theories. This ignorance is often employment driven, as my well known example illustrates:

This story begins in dark ages. A group of theorists seeks for violation of gravitational law at short distances. They indeed find nothing, because their wooden experimental device is not sensitive enough. OK…

The sensitivity of devices improves gradually, until some experimentalist finds the solely unexpected electrostatic force, which no gravity theory considered so far…

Next generation of theorists already knows about it – so they arrange their experiments in such a way, the electrostatic force doesn’t interfere their gravitometric measurements. And again, they find no violation of gravitational law at short distances…

The sensitivity of devices improves gradually, until some experimentalist finds the solely unexpected Van DerWaals dipole force, which no gravity theory considered so far.

Next generation of theorists already knows about it – so they arrange their experiments in such a way, neither electrostatic force, neither dipole forces interfere their sensitive gravitometric measurements. As usually, they find no violation of gravitational law at short distances…

The sensitivity of devices improves gradually, until some experimentalist finds the solely unexpected Casimir force, which no gravity theory considered so far.

Next generation of theorists already knows about it – so they arrange their experiments in such a way, neither electrostatic force, neither dipole force, neither Casimir force interferes their extra-sensitive gravitometric measurements. As usually, they find no violation of gravitational law at short distances…

The sensitivity of devices improves gradually, until some experimentalist finds the solely unexpected thermal Casimir force, which no gravity theory considered so far.

Next generation of theorists already knows about it – so they arrange their experiments with single neutrons in such a way, neither electrostatic force, neither dipole force, neither Casimir force, neither thermal Casimir force (..ffffuuuu…!) interferes their ultra-mega-sensitive gravitometric measurements. As usually, they find no violation of gravitational law at short distances…

This is a roughly described but still real history of search for extradimensions with gravitometric experiments. In each step the physicists looked for forces violating the gravity while carefully compensated all instances of these forces, which were revealed before. What physicists are doing is actually both a good joke, both school of life for those, who are paying their nonsensical activity from their taxes.
The professional blindness has its analogy in relativistic description of space-time around black holes, where the relativists insist on their assumption, that the space-time is curved, while the light is spreading along straight line even at the case, when they already revolve the black hole in tight circles together with all photons – thus effectively staying at place. Apparently the relativistic perspective is nonsensical from every extrinsic if not practical perspective – but from perspective of observer inside of gravity field around black hole everything vents normally according to general relativity. 

This happens because the physicists are indeed looking for violations of their theories, but they less or more consciously adjust the conditions of their observations in such a way, that these theories will actually remain unchanged. Which enables them to seek for violations of these theories for ever – until the tax payer’s money are going, indeed.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-09-groundbreaking-expose-aspects-universe.html#jCp

no fate

Hmmm. Was it my example?

I meant no knock on particle physics by it. Nuclear physicists, anyone who deals with science of the atom, are among the most intelligent people on earth and we wouldn’t know what we know today without these people. The fact that they can construct a working mathematical model to explain how DM can form the structure I alluded to indicates theoretical and mathematical abilities beyond anything I am capable of.

I used that example to illustrate that it just wasn’t necessary to explain the observation in this way. The Lagrangian for this system with magnetism as a conservative force is simpler than the Hamiltonian and is consistent with low density ion transport in a vector field.

If it was because used Tesla instead of Weber, I like him more.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-09-groundbreaking-expose-aspects-universe.html#jCp

Teech2

nuclear physicists, anyone who deal with science of the atom, are among the most intelligent people on earth

It’s not about intelligence but about willingness to doubt about own model and to consider it from many dual perspectives. The overly excessive level of expertise harms this ability often from objective reasons, which were analyzed with many people already (123). 

That is to say, it’s difficult to be a good expert of wider comprehension – it sounds like an oxymoron. As Lucius Seneca has said “To be everywhere is nowhere. When a person spends all his time in foreign travel, he ends by having many acquaintances, but no actual friends.”

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-09-groundbreaking-expose-aspects-universe.html#jCp

Franklins

The inflationary standard models predicts 100 % of the universe content

Do you want to say, it’s fitted to 100% of the universe content. When the dark matter was confirmed, it was adjusted to deal with dark matter (23% of the universe), when the dark energy was confirmed, it was adjusted to remaining 70% of the universe. These “artifacts” weren’t predicted with standard cosmology model, they were added to it.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-09-groundbreaking-expose-aspects-universe.html#jCp

no fate

New physics isn’t required, just proper application of what we know. For example: Particle physics dictates that a filament of high temp hydrogen between 2 galaxies requires an equation to compute the amount of DM and the other effects present to explain how this filament exists. Experience says that a concentration of gravity as great as earth mass has no effect on ionized hydrogen but magnetic flux can accomplish the observations, based on a given tesla of flux over the distance travelled. Overthinking is just as detrimental to science as not thinking enough. The fact that we can’t measure the flux means we can’t confirm it is there, any more than we can confirm a concentration of DM particles is there. Experiments demonstrate how to make ions behave this way and gravity is never involved (at earth mass). If the road from problem to solution is straight there is no point in searching for an alternate route, until you see someone fly over you. That’s new physics.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-09-groundbreaking-expose-aspects-universe.html#jCp

Lurker2358

The standard model is obviously insufficient to describe the universe, but that also obviously doesn’t make it useful.

“A model need not be what a philosopher would seek as the ‘Truth,’ so long as it makes good predictions.” – Rene Descartes (paraphrase).

The point is it all depends upon what you are trying to do with your model, and how much margin of error you can afford to have.

There are quite a few things which are at the very least odd, if not totally wrong about the standard model, such as how particle collisions produce other particles with masses higher than the original particle’s mass. Though this “mass” may come from the kinetic energy in an accelerator, it is still somewhat silly.

Techni-quarks are proposed to explain Dark Matter, but recent studies of MOND, even reported on this same site, show that Dark Matter is not necessary.

Additionally, Dark Matter is not actually scientific, because we cannot use the conjecture of Dark Matter to make predictions for testing.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-09-groundbreaking-expose-aspects-universe.html#jCp

AntonKole

“The most widely used model today cannot explain everything in the universe…..One of the Standard Model’s major problems is that it cannot explain gravity, and another is that it cannot explain the existence of dark matter, believed to make up app. 25 percent of all matter in the universe.”

Incorrect!

Too many scientists still ‘assume’ that aether doesn’t exist. With only half the experimental set of data available, too many ‘assumptions’ are still being made today. That is not a true scientific method.

Just one simple experiment in our earth orbit, may solve this dilemma once and for all. And if the experimental results come back negative, then, we should start looking at the “Alternative” Science Models.

For more details on how the Standard Model ‘may’ actually explain gravity, dark energy, and dark matter, check out:

https://www.faceb…59787252

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-09-groundbreaking-expose-aspects-universe.html#jCp

Torbjorn_Larsson_OM

So they have a new method.

But that doesn’t merit the erroneous criticism of the SM, that it doesn’t incorporate all the physics we know exist. As an effective field theory it isn’t supposed to predict higher energies, such as dark matter or gravity.

If anything, it is likely doing its job too well, since people have started to question its naturalness on the grounds that it seems to be extendable to higher energies. Indeed, if it doesn’t build on naturalness it is instead of an effective field theory something of an isolated theory. Which means it not only isn’t expected to predict new phenomena at higher energies, it is _unable_ to.

Getting back to the method improvement, pity it is mostly on technicolor, which LHC has recently rejected AFAIU, and on colors, since recent LHC results seems to make the new physics if any all about the electroweak sector instead. (See the SEARCH 2013 workshop web material.)

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-09-groundbreaking-expose-aspects-universe.html#jCp

Torbjorn_Larsson_OM

@MB: Don’t feed the anti-science trolls.

Speaking of science, the blow to supersymmetry is against obvious ways it should be natural, and lend its naturalness to SM. It can still be valid despite all that, latest at the planck scale.

@DH: Philosophy is inherently anti-science, as it is unfactual story telling. The ones who barks loudest wins. Plato is among the worst.

Of those mentioned I would rate Popper though, since he gave some ideas on how to model how testability (hypothesis testing) plays out between models in competition, and could be part of what is needed to predict why bayesian methods are insufficient in practice. Mandelbroth made math FWIW.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-09-groundbreaking-expose-aspects-universe.html#jCp

XXXXXXXXXXX

Meu post

Agradeço a Phys.org e aos comentadores aqui como Franklins, Teech2, no fate, Lurker2358, AntonKole, Torbjorn, etc., pois fiquei admirado com o surpreendente nível de inteligencia e honestidade nos comentários que não tenho visto em outros lugares. Sou  leigo em Física e estou aqui porque preciso da ajuda de mentes abertas como as destes comentadores para um grande problema existencial que estou enfrentando. Sou apenas filosofo naturalista e como tal tive que viver isolado na selva amazônica que me tornou obcecado na busca de respostas para nossa existência aqui e agora como humanos e a existência deste mundo que produziu aquela biosfera caótica e selvagem.  Tal caos me pareceu um efeito de degeneração da ordem mecanicista que sinto ao observar o sistema solar, mas esta ordem se desvanece outra vez quando observo o caos das estrelas espalhadas aleatoriamente na galaxia. No entanto, a própria existência dos humanos e suas civilizações com seus construídos ambientes se parecem com um novo fluxo de ordem que levantou da biosfera caótica. Isto me obrigou a buscar mais informações na Cosmologia Acadêmica e perceber que ela esta sendo estudada apenas pela Física e suas teorias desenvolvidas apenas pela logica Matemática.

Isto me conduz a supor que a Ciência esta seguindo um caminho que não pode ser o correto para uma Teoria do Tudo, porque o resultado da historia do mundo que vemos aqui, o ultimo produto da sua evolução, é o ser humano, um sistema que não pode ser limitado ao campo de estudo da Física e não pode ser traduzido pela linguagem Matemática. O corpo humano é composto pela sua estrutura óssea que pode ser explicada pela Física, mais sua estrutura “mole” que pode ser explicada pela Biologia, e mais agora sua super-estrutura mental que talvez sera explicada pela Neurologia. Ora, na minha humilde racionalidade de leigo acadêmico sinto que o Universo só poderá ser explicado pela soma, no minimo, destas três áreas de estudo. A vida e a auto-consciência de alguma maneira tem que ter tido seus princípios, manifestados ou não, já no Big Bang, e tais princípios devem ter interferido com a evolução do Universo, descendo ao nível de sua física e influenciando-a, assim como a parte mole do corpo humano, o DNA. etc. desceu ao nível dos esqueletos dos cretáceos para altera-los e produzir os esqueletos das formas posteriores.

A Matemática pode ser aplicada a sistemas biológicos como os cretáceos para desvendar seus exo-esqueletos porem nunca vai detectar e explicar seu interior mole. No entanto, um esforço do pensamento matemático sobre o que se obtêm dos exo-esqueletos pode dar um salto sobre o interior mole, ignorando-o e ressurgir na frente fazendo previsões corretas sobre os endo-esqueletos de mamíferos, nisso esta o valor da Matemática. Ademais, quando tentei calcular a Historia do Universo desde o Big Bang ate o cérebro humano num gráfico cartesiano tendo como coordenadas o tempo e o espaço, e no meio a rolar o primeiro sistema conhecido como átomo, a figura final mostrou que a evolução é curva e não linear. Como toda longa linha curva pode ser vista como soma de pequenas linhas retas mudando de direção, a Matemática pega os trechos em reta mas não pega a curva geral. De onde emergira uma Teoria do Tudo.

Tentei aplicar o que sei do atual conhecimento da Biologia e Neurologia sobre o que sei da Física no tocante a acadêmica Teoria Cosmológica. Como resultado final obtive um quadro que chamo de “teoria” segundo a definição grega da palavra e não segundo a definição cientifica desta palavra. O que este quadro esta sugerindo de mais evidente é que os sistemas naturais, como átomos, estelares, galácticos, apresentam todas as propriedades vitais que vemos nos corpos humanos, mas estas não estão constatando das teorias acadêmicas. Deduz-se portanto que os Físicos devem fazer o enorme esforço de desacelerar seu pensamento físico e matemático e voltar-se para os inícios da Biologia, Neurologia, aprendendo estas disciplinas, se querem realmente entender o Universo e chegarem a uma teoria do tudo. Se alguém tiver interessado, minha teoria chama-se ” The Universal Matrix/DNA of Natural Systems and Life Cycles”, basta googlar e ver o website com os modelos teóricos. Qualquer critica seria bem-vinda pois não estou vendendo uma visão de mundo, estou buscando a Verdade, simplesmente, e aqui eu voltaria para debater nossos diferentes modelos. Mais uma vez, gratos por suas valiosas informações e brilhantes pensamentos.

XXXXXXXXXXX      INGLES       XXXXXXXX

Thank Phys.org and commentators here as Franklins , Teech2 in fate , Lurker2358 , AntonKole , Torbjorn , etc.  I was amazed with the surprising level of intelligence and honesty in the comments here that I have never seen elsewhere . I am a layman in Physics and I’m here because I need help from open minds as these commentators for a big existential problem I’m facing . I’m just a naturalist philosopher and as such had to live isolated in the Amazon jungle. I became obsessed in finding answers to our existence here and now as humans beings and answers to the existence of this world that produced this biosphere chaotic and wild. Such chaos seemed an effect of degeneration of the mechanistic order I feel when observing the solar system, but, this order vanishes again when I watch the chaos of stars scattered randomly in the galaxy.  However , the very existence of humans and their civilizations with their built environments resemble a new order flow that raised from this chaotic biosphere. This forced me to seek more information on Academic Cosmology and realize that it is just being studied by physics and theories developed only by logic Mathematics. These fields and me, as a human observer, can’t grasp that where it seems chaos, there are physical vital forces at action.

This leads me to suppose that Science are following a path that can not be correct for a Theory of Everything , because the outcome of world history we see here , the last product of its evolution , is the human being , a system that can not be limited to the field of study of Physics and can not be translated by the language of Mathematics . The human body was made by the Universe, so, the Universe itself must have the properties of life as its total configuration. The human body is made with a bone structure that can be explained by Physics , more the “soft” structure  that can be explained by Biology , and now, more its super – mental structure that will be perhaps explained by Neurology. Now, in my humble layman’s rationality, I think that the universe can only be explained by the sum, at least, of these three areas of study . The life and self – consciousness must have had its principles , manifested or not , since the Big Bang , and these principles must have interfered with the evolution of the universe , down to the level of their physical skeleton, and influencing it , as well as the soft part of the human body , the DNA . etc. . descended to the level of the skeletons of Cretaceous to alter them and produce skeletons of later forms.

Mathematics can be applied to biological systems like Cretaceous to unveil their exo-skeletons, however will never detect and explain its soft interior. However , an effort of mathematical thinking about what you get from exo-skeletons can leap over the soft interior , ignoring him, and resurface in front making correct predictions about the endo-skeletons of mammals. This is the value of Mathematics . Moreover , when I tried to calculate the History of the Universe from the Big Bang until the human brain as a Cartesian graph with time and space coordinates , and in the midst rolling the first system known as atom, the final figure showed that evolution is curved and non-linear. Like any long curved line can be seen as the sum of small straight lines changing direction , Mathematics takes in straight stretches but does not catch the general curve . From which must emerges a Theory of Everything .

I tried to apply what I know of the current knowledge of the biology and neurology on what I know of physics regarding academic Cosmological Theory . As a final result got a picture I call ” theory ” according to the Greek definition of the word and not according to the scientific definition of the word . What this picture suggests as more evident is that natural systems, such as atoms, stellar , galactic , have all  vital properties that we see in human bodies , but the academic models of these systems have not found these properties. It follows therefore that physicists should make great effort to slow down their Physicist thinking and mathematical jumps back to the beginnings of biology , neurology , learning these subjects , if they really want to understand the universe and arrive at a theory of everything . If anybody has interested , my theory is called “The Universal Matrix/DNA of Natural Systems and Life Cycles ” , just google it and see the website with the theoretical models . Any criticism would be welcome as I’m not selling a worldview, I am seeking the truth, simply, at my rough salvage conditions, and here I will return to discuss our different models . Again , grateful for yours valuable informations and brilliant thoughts.

xxxxxx

Pesquisa:

” One of the Standard Model’s major problems is that it cannot explain gravity”

Gravity, is a natural phenomenon by which all physical bodies attract each other. It is most commonly experienced as the agent that gives weight to objects with mass and causes them to fall to the ground when dropped.

From a cosmological perspective, gravitation causes dispersed matter to coalesce, and coalesced matter to remain intact, thus accounting for the existence of planetsstarsgalaxies and most of the macroscopic objects in the universe

Vou parar por aqui porque isto, a Gravitacao Universal, precisa ser revista pela Matrix/DNA depois da sua interpretacao da Luz.

 

Animais, e ate polvos, possuem auto-consciencias tambem – afirmaram cientistas na Conferencia de Cambridge. Mais um ponto para Matrix/DNA

domingo, setembro 1st, 2013

Prominent scientists sign declaration that animals have conscious awareness, just like us

http://io9.com/im-not-going-to-sit-here-and-advocate-that-all-animals-277388566

E o meu comentario postado no artigo, contendo como esta a minha definbicao atual de “auto-consciencia” segundo o que estou entendendo da formula da Matrix/DNA:

MatrixDNA to Dr Emilio Lizardo

The problem of consciousness’ definition is solved by Matrix/DNA Theory, which suggests a formula that has created all natural systems composed by hardware (the particle/dense matter) and software (the wave/energetic systemic circuity where informations flows). The phases of human embryology is a good analogy for explain when a natural system – from atoms to galaxies to plants to animals – is at the evolutionary state for expresses consciousness. As said the eastern mindset, consciousness exists at atoms but mot expressed, sleeping at galaxies, waking up at animals and becoming a complete system at humans. The discovery by Matrix/DNA that natural light is the initial carrier of code for life meets the end of universal evolution as a coming back to this universal light – that is the substance of consciousness. Then, consciousness totally expressed is the state when any natural system, like the human brain, can receive, decodes and operates far away points in time’space other than its own point in time’space. Ok, the models are under testing… it is a theory. The formula’s configuration for every natural system is the same configuration of consciousness configuration, as you can see the formula at Matrix/DNA website. Just now

 

O Polvo se Come a Si Próprio! Mais Uma Evidencia Confirmando as Previsões da Teoria da Matrix/DNA

sábado, maio 25th, 2013

Assim não dá !!! A todo momento estou sendo bombardeado por todos os lados com fenômenos naturais que são evidencias para minha teoria e que precisam serem registrados, pesquisados… já não tenho mais tempo nem para cuidar da Marylin, a baratinha que vive aqui dentro do meu computador e é sócia no meu cafe… Agora a noticia que polvos se comem a si próprios! Mas isto estava previsto pela formula da Matrix que descobri na selva a 30 anos atras! O polvo é um grandes animais que mais imita o nosso criador, esta galaxia super-egoísta que se tornou um sistema fechado e nos ferrou a vida, nos transmitindo seu gene egoísta que esta aqui causando todos os males da nossa sociedade. A galaxia se recicla a si mesma e tem um circuito de energia na forma de uma serpente engolindo a própria cauda, o que significa que ela se come a si própria. Então não admire que seu representante fiel dentre os animais – o polvo que tem a forma de galaxia –  faça o mesmo… Vou ter que pesquisar isto…

Noticia veio do Facebook:

This Page Will Blow Your Mind

https://www.facebook.com/ThisPageWillBlowYourMind

E o Facebook obteve informacoes aqui:

http://library.thinkquest.org/J001418/octopus.html

E meu comentario postado neste site:

Louis Charles Morelli It eats itself ?!!How could be? Could you explains? Any links? Thanks. Octopus mimics the shapes of galaxies, the last common non-biological ancestor of all living beings. So, octupus should mimics a perfect closed system. And the news that it eats itself is just the behavior of galaxies as closed systems. Very interesting…

Luz: Emitida por Galaxias – (EBL) Extragalactic Background Light – Origens da Vida

sábado, maio 25th, 2013

How Much Light Has Been Emitted By All Galaxies Since The Cosmos Began? –
Scientists Know The Answer

http://www.messagetoeagle.com/cosmicgammaraysmeasured.php#.UaETFrWkpaQ

Ondas de luz emitidas pelo Universo (cosmic microwave background – CMB) vibram no espaço vazio ou vácuo que subjaz este Universo material, influenciando cada região do Universo, cada diferente corpo, de acordo com sua intensidade vibratória em diferente locais. Esta luz aplica a dinâmica da Evolução a matéria inerte ( fótons penetrando as partículas de massa ou Higgs bosons) porque cada onda de luz carrega o processo do ciclo vital assim o Universo evolui mudando de formas (ou o sistema universal gestado dentro do Universo) como os corpos humanos mudam de forma devido seu ciclo vital. Mas para identificar-mos estas influencias da luz sobre nossa região e mesmo sobre nossos corpos é preciso calcular os resultados de encontros dessa luz universal com outras luzes emitidas pelos sub-sistemas, como os galácticos  os estelares, e ate mesmo os átomos  Tarefa super difícil  mas nada nos resta senão a alternativa de observar, desenvolver nossos instrumentos de pesquisas, colher dados, tentar conectar estes dados elaborando teorias que podem nos sugerir ideias para experimentos e testes. Portanto estamos aqui registrando na medida do possível tudo o que colhemos dos avanços das pesquisas e obtenção de mais dados.

Que tipo de efeitos no ambiente seriam produzidos pela energia eletro-magnética que seria emitida pelo corpo de mulheres… A resposta para esta absurda pergunta poderia nos dirigir na pesquisa de qual o tipo de energia e seus efeitos emitida pelos quasars nos nucleos das galaxias, porque os quasars (ou blasars) sao a bela aureola luminosa que reveste os buracos negros e faz o papel feminino atraindo os cometas dos machos pulsares… mas isso aqui já é conversa intima inconfessável dentro dos círculos da Matrix/DNA. Para nos a energia emitida pela galaxia foi necessária como criadora dos sistemas biológicos e dessa biosfera, porem agora se torna inconveniente porque é um obstaculo para outra energia emitida pelo superior sistema de onde emana “auto-consciência”. Irônico é que tudo o que vemos aqui quando um homem cai na armadilha pela paixão a uma mulher egoísta e consumista, bate exatamente com os efeitos do que a energia da galaxia – que é o mais extremo egoísta sistema fechado em si mesmo, operando como uma maquina perfeita mas estupida – esta produzindo no cérebro e mente humana.

MessageToEagle.com – The evolution of the extragalactic background light (EBL) has been measured for the first time by a team of scientists led by Alberto Dominguez, a postdoctoral researcher in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of California, Riverside.

Click na Imagem para Ver Ampliada

This-figure-illustrates-how-energetic-gamma-rays-dashed-lines-from-a-distant-blazar-strike-photons-of-extragalactic-background-light-here-as-wavy-lines-and-produce-pairs-of-electrons-a

This-figure-illustrates-how-energetic-gamma-rays-dashed-lines-from-a-distant-blazar-strike-photons-of-extragalactic-background-light-here-as-wavy-lines-and-produce-pairs-of-electrons-a

Sensacional presente da University of California para a Matrix/DNA, pois alem de confirmar o que havia-mos calculado a 30 anos atras, ainda fornece mais elementos para melhor desenvolver nossa pesquisa. 

A new research is based on observations spanning (abrangendo) wavelengths from radio waves to very energetic gamma rays, obtained from several NASA spacecraft and several ground-based telescopes-describes the best measurement yet of the evolution of the EBL over the past 5 billion years.

Observemos a formula da luz pela Matrix/DNA:

Light - The Electric-Magnetic Spectrum by Matrix/DNA

MessageToEagle.com — After all, almost every photon (particle of light) from ultraviolet to far infrared wavelengths ever radiated by all galaxies that ever existed throughout cosmic history is still speeding through the Universe today. 

Matrix/DNA – Porque limitar ao trecho entre ultravioleta e infra-vermelho os fotons ainda existentes… Preciso saber disso.

MessageToEagle.com — If we could carefully measure the number and energy (wavelength) of all those photons-not only at the present time, but also back in time-we might learn important secrets about the nature and evolution of the Universe, including how similar or different ancient galaxies were compared to the galaxies we see today.

Matrix/DNA — Mais importante ainda, nos poderíamos aprender os segredos das origens da Vida e causas da diversificação de formas de vida em diferentes astros.

MessageToEagle.com — An accurate measurement of the EBL is as fundamental to cosmology as measuring the heat radiation left over from the Big Bang (the cosmic microwave background – CMB) at radio wavelengths.

Matrix/DNA — Aqui existe um conflito entre a corrente teoria do Big Bang e a teoria do Big Bang pela formula da Matrix. A CMB não seria radiação de calor mas sim de luz. Seja como for, a CMB esta para o Universo assim como esta para nos a irradiação do DNA através de suas funções nos corpos e na Evolução. Ela faz com que o Universo se mantenha tunelado para produzir sistemas biológicos e… auto-consciência.

MessageToEagle.com —Now, astrophysicists developed an ingenious work-around method: measuring the EBL indirectly through measuring the attenuation of-that is, the absorption of-very high energy gamma rays from distant blazars.

Wikipedia – – Blazar is a very compact quasar (quasi-stellar object) associated with a presumed supermassive black hole at the center of an active, giant elliptical galaxy. Blazars are among the most energetic phenomena in the universe and are an important topic in extragalactic astronomy.

MessageToEagle.com — Blazars are supermassive black holes in the centers of galaxies with brilliant jets directly pointed at us like a flashlight beam. Not all the high-energy gamma rays emitted by a blazar, however, make it all the way across billions of light-years to Earth; some strike a hapless EBL photon along the way.

Obs da Matrix/DNA: desde que estes EBL fotons são bits-informação da galaxia como sistema, e desde que as galaxias são as produtoras de sistemas biológicos  a dispersão destes fótons por todo o espaço interno da galaxia funciona como genes ou sementes, espalhando e tronando possível a existência de Vida em muitos astros que reunirem as condições favoráveis para estas sementes desabrocharem…

Alberto Domingues: Um Brinde a Este Grande Trabalhador Para o Beneficio da Humanidade

Alberto Domingues: Um Brinde a Este Grande Trabalhador Para o Beneficio da Humanidade

MessageToEagle.com — When a high-energy gamma ray photon from a blazar hits a much lower energy EBL photon, both are annihilated and produce two different particles: an electron and its antiparticle, a positron, which fly off into space and are never heard from again

Matrix/DNA – – Espere ai! Isto parece muito importante! Pode estar aqui o principio da diversificação de formas de vida em diferentes planetas, pois esta mistura produzindo “fuzzy logics” pode gerar mutações horizontais dentro de uma especie – não significando mutações verticais que criariam novas especies a partir da formula da galaxia. Esta mutação ou transformação da forma da galaxia para a forma do sistema celular foi possibilitada pela aparição do estado liquido da matéria e sua cria, a química orgânica. Mas pode ter influenciado na diversificação de especies dos sistemas biológicos. Muito importante para relembrar em nossas pesquisas.

MessageToEagle.com — for the first time detected that gamma rays from distant blazars are indeed attenuated more than gamma rays from nearby blazars, a result announced on November 30, 2012, in a paper published in Science, as theoretically predicted.

MessageToEagle.com — The paper “Detection of the Cosmic ?-Ray Horizon from Multiwavelength Observations of Blazars,” is published in the Astrophysical Journal.

– – – – –  –

Ver neste website este artigo relacionado com esta materia:

LUZ: Terra e Vida no Amalgama Resultante de Vibrações Entre Radiação Solar, Radiação Galáctica e Radiação Cósmica Universal

Imagem de superfície de planta com crateras e polens igual imagem de pulsar com vulcões e cometas!

quinta-feira, maio 16th, 2013

Esta ev  uma imagem da superficie de uma planta com crateras e polens. Interessante ev que ev uma imagem muito semelhante a ideia sugerida pelos modelos da Matrix/DNA de como deve ser a superficie do pulsar com seus vulcoes emitindo cometas. Como a funcao do polen no sistema vegetal ev a mesma funcao do cometa no sistema astronomico, as coincidencias aumentam, para reforcar a sugestao da Matrix/DNA que as primeiras criacoes biologicas na Terra imitaram ou copiaram o ancestral celeste…! Tenho que pesquisar isso e essa imagem servira de inspiracao para o desenho do pulsar.

Obtido em:

http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0001-37652013000100147&lng=pt&nrm=iso&tlng=en

Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências

Relationship between pollen morphology and chromosome numbers in Brazilian species ofLippia L. (Verbenaceae)

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0001-37652013005000010

XXXXXXXXXX

 

Pollen Formation: Development Of A Pollen Grain Within The Pollen Sac Of An Anther – A cross section of the developing anther displays four chambers. These chambers are called pollen sacs (see upper left illustration). Each pollen sac is filled with cells containing large nuclei. As the anther grows, each of these cells goes through two meiotic divisions, forming a four-celled tetrad. These cells are called microspores. Each one of these microspores eventually becomes a pollen grain. First, each nucleus divides by mitosis to become two nuclei. One is the tube nucleus. The other is a generative nucleus. The wall of the cell thickens to protect the developing pollen grain. As the anther ripens, the wall between the paired pollen sacs disappear. The pollen sacs burst open and the mature pollen grains are ready for dispersal.

 

Ovule Formation: Development Of An Ovule Within The Ovary At The Base Of The Pistil – While pollen grains are forming in the anthers, there are also changes in the ovary. An ovule starts as a tiny knob on the ovary wall. Each knob contains one cell. The ovule grows away from the wall on the end of a short stalk through which it is nourished. It is completely enclosed except for a tiny pore called a micropyle. The single ovule cell now goes through two meiotic divisions, resulting in four megaspores. One of these survives. This megaspore get larger and turns into an oval embryo sac ( see upper right illustration). More cell division occurs and a polar nucleus is formed in a cell in the center of the embryo sac. This sac goes on developing until it is ready for fertilization. In order for fertilization to take place, a pollen grain must get to a stigma pad of the pistil – pollination.

xxxxxxxxxx

REPRODUCAO DAS PLANTAS – WIKIPEDIA

Na maioria das espécies de plantas verdes, os indivíduos podem reproduzir-se tanto assexuada (agâmica) como sexuadamente (reprodução gâmica, ou por meio de gâmetas).23

Assexuadamente, as plantas se reproduzem através da separação de partes do indivíduo que podem dar origem a novos indivíduos. Neste processo, não há recombinação genética, e portanto os descendentes são geneticamente iguais aos “pais”, podendo ser considerados clones de um indivíduo. A reprodução assexuada nas plantas ocorre de várias maneiras: por brotamento (ou gemulação), por fragmentação, pela formação de estolhos, e poresporulação. Na esporulação podem se formar células especiais os esporos que podem ser aplanósporos (normalmente transportados pelo vento ou por animais) ou zoósporos (móveis) com dois ou mais flagelos.

O homem tirou partido desta capacidade de reprodução assexuada nas plantas, desenvolvendo métodos especializados de multiplicação, como aestaquiaalporquia e enxertia.24

reprodução sexuada nas plantas verdes ocorre normalmente com alternância de gerações, em que ocorre um esporófito (o indivíduo “adulto” nasplantas vasculares) e um gametófito – o indivíduo que produz os gâmetas – que pode ser “parasita” do esporófito, como nas espermatófitas ou ter vida independente. Nas plantas verdes aquáticas (por exemplo, as Chlorophyta e Charophyta, ou algas verdes) existe a produção de gâmetas móveis, podendo o processo ser por isogamia (gâmetas iguais) ou oogamia (gâmetas “femininos” grandes e imóveis e masculinos, móveis).

 

Vídeos Youtube Sôbre Controvérsia Deístas-Ateístas: Mais uma participação da Matrix/DNA

sábado, fevereiro 2nd, 2013

Bill Nye: Teaching Evolution? Think Thriller. (legendado)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXdUTJqI7u8

Comentário postado por nós em Sat – Feb – 02 – 2013

TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNASat – Feb – 02 – 2013

There are bad things for kids in Bill’s beliefs also. Non-human moral values like “the good design is justified when eats the bad ones”. And salvage competition. In Nature evolution does not works bottom-up only.There is a hierarchic systems superposition, every system is composed by minor system and is inside bigger systems. Then, every evolutionary steps seems bottom-up from a local observer viewpoint, but it reveals being up-down for a bigger observer that is seeing the whole. Nanotechnology.

Aviso: O limite de 500 caracteres no Youtube impede um post de uma cosmovisão estranha, desconhecida, que teria de descer a muitos detalhes para explicar suas conclusões. Portanto tais posts parecem virem de lunáticos, ao observador/julgador imediatista. Aqui nos sentimos agradecidos pelos bons efeitos do discurso de Bill Nye porem tem maus efeitos tambem. Defeitos em seu discurso:

1) Condiciona a mente de crianças com a crença de que a Natureza caminha cegamente, pois sistemas emergeriam por chance nos niveis menores, microscópicos, e a partir daí estariam sujeitos a forças competitivas para sobrevivencia, sendo que aqueles melhores desenhados no momento que emergem comem os piores desenhados. Isto passa à criança a crença num mundo onde competir seria a regra imposta e a aplicação da astucia, da força bruta seria justificada. Isto leva a racismos, idéias de genética superior, e fornece aos que querem poder sem fazer seu trabalho justificativas para seus atos contra os mais fracos. Etc.

Acontece que a interpretação de Bill Nye sôbre como a natureza funciona pode estar errada por ser imediatista, lilmitada a um pequeno observador situado num infimo ponto do espaço-tempo, sem ter a visão de horizontes mais amplos e portanto um maior entendimento de como a natureza funciona. Para se interpretar os resultados biológicos aqui é preciso sentar=se em algum ponto alem da galaxia e dos 4 bilhões de anos da origem e evolução biológica, pois as razões estão nas mãos do criador e não da criatura. Foi a galaxia que criou os sistemas biológicos dentro dela, ou ao menos ela é o molde que dirige as formas que a ela se adaptam. E a galaxia é uma má criadora, sdua ideologia, suas regras não convem à espécies inteligentes.

A evolução avança “de baixo para cima”? Existe um processo natural observavel aqui e agora onde se observa a evolução fazendo o caminho contrario, avançando de cima para baixo, mas que para todo observador assistindo o processo localizado ao mesmo nivel do processo parecerá um movimento “de baixo para cima”. me refiro ao processo da embriogenese humana. Imagine uma espécie de micróbios inteligentes vivendo dentro da barriga de uma mulher grávida. Desde que eles vivem apenas alguns dias, muitas gerações passarão durante os nove meses de gravidez. Eles assistirão “emergir” do liquido amniótico sistemas como genes, verão uma massa disforme como a blastula, dela emergirá formas, estas se transformarão em órgãos, etc. Cada órgão vivo parecerá um ser vivo gigante como dinossauros, ou melhor, estrêlas-do-mar, medulas, polvos, que não se movem mas comem o que existe nas redondezas e crescem. ACREDITARÃO PIAMENTE QUE ESSE PROCESSO EVOLUCIONARIO QUE ASSISTEM AVANÇA A PARTIR DA BASE, DA BLASTULA, NA DIREÇÃO DE FORMAS CADA VEZ MAIORES E MAIS COMPLEXAS. Mas para um observador situado fora do ambiente onde se dá o processo, tudo será ao contrário. Êle está vendo a espécie humana, o pai distante, o corpo da mãe alem daquele universo dos micróbios, sabe que aquela espécie humana foi miniaturizada, comprimida, dentro de microscópicos squinhos cromossomicos, invisiveis aos microbios, mas que estão ali no meio da blastula, e eles são os instrumentos do verdadeiro criador e diretor daquele processo evolucionario. Assim acontece em relação à galaxia Via Láctea e os sistemas biológicos que emergiram e evoluem na superficie da Terra. A falta da consideração e do entendimento da galaxia leva Bill Nye a incutir errados e perigosos valores morais nas crianças, pois paras a humanidade não convem reproduzir aqui uma maquina estupida como a galaxia e se tornar mais uma mera peça funcional estupida dela. Se o ensino religioso deísta-criaciocionista está evidentemente errado, tambem o está o ensino religioso ateísta-evolucionista. A Matrix/DNA é a opção do meio-têrmo, a mais inteligente e a que melhor convem à Humanidade.

Ninguem me “Cutuca” No Maior Debate da História que Está Acontecendo Agora No Youtube? Brasileiros! Tucuta-me…please! (11)

sábado, janeiro 12th, 2013

Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHbYJfwFgOU

Êste já é o “11” capítulo incluído nêste website sobre o debate que segue a êste vídeo no Youtube, com nossa participação

XXXXXX

Posts da Matrix/DNA para debates:

TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA6: 57 PM – Jan – 15 – 2013

I am asking permission to commentators, to Bill Nye and Youtube, for adding one approach, which is forgotten here. We are adults debating what we should transmit/transfer from our experience of life to our loved next generations. But, what about the other side? There are no children here speaking for themselves. We should try “empathy”, changing informations about “who are them”, thinking from their “mysterious” wishes, and making comparisons between their bias and the real world as we know it.

TheMatrixDNA – 6: 57 PM – Jan – 15 – 2013

When I try to think from the “children perspectives”and the world that is waiting for them, some issues comes quick to my mind. First of all, the issue about over-population.This world will become very unsuitable for them. It seems this issue is solved in first world of Europe, but till Europe will face the effects of world over-population. We need acting over education at third world countries. What we will teach: the control by scientific methods or this “non-control” by their religions?

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA3:26PM – Sat – jan – 12 – 2013

Apes, are healthier and perfect physical machine than human beings.They are the fittest for getting better life at this biosphere built by a kind of perfect machine, described by Newtonian mechanics. But human mind is a natural production that changed the environment, in a way that apes aren’t more adapted.Then, physically, there are degradation of the inherited ape with 75% of bad mutations and 24 neutrals. Humans are the dark reverse light at the same avenue that is advancing the white light

XXXXXX

INICIO DOS DEBATES

XXXXXX

Dave Kim 1 minute ago

So the fact that males have genes encrypted for a uterus, this implies a creator rather than common ancestry?

You’ve lost me, here. This definitely seems to imply the latter..

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

No. It just implies that the common ancestor of all living beings is in the sky. Which means that had no abiogenesis, but, cosmological embryogenesis with a big mutation due the ancestor was made with solid and gaseous states of matter, and the first living being was nurtured in a womb where emerged the liquid state, hence chemistry.

·  in reply to Dave Kim (Show the comment)

Dave Kim 17 minutes ago

is… in the sky?

wow…

and you say that this “first living being was nurtured in a womb where emerged the liquid state…”?

So correct me if I’m wrong here: a magic baby turned into this thing we call Chemistry as we know it today?

AWESOME! Makes perfect sense now. Thanks.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Well…it is not in the sky in relation to earth, because earth is part of it. It is in sky like you are just now. Have you thought about that? The “womb” for the first living being was this planet…in this cosmic region. Stellar systems and galaxies were nurtured in environment existing only solid and gaseous states. At least organic Chemistry is a recent emerged process. Something wrong here?

·  in reply to Dave Kim (Show the comment)

Dave Kim 2 minutes ago

Then you sound like a New-Age Pantheist or Gaia worshiper of some sort…

Still cold?

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

No human names for world views. My method was applied by the forst time in Human History: comparative anatomy among all natural systems, from atoms to galaxies to brains… and now, consciousness. Academic Science is missing to do that and the result is very bad: they had shared Universal Natural History into two separated blocks, with no evolutionary link between them. That’s why they can’t understand the emergence of life here. matrix/DNA has a better rational theory about

·  in reply to Dave Kim (Show the comment)

Dave Kim 2 minutes ago

Wait, what? Comparative anatomy of galaxies?

Is this a course they teach at universities? Or is it perhaps something someone made up and then wrote in a book (or YouTube comment section)?

I wonder. Hm.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Comparative anatomy of natural systems. Galaxies are merely one of those. This method is rational because it is the right thing to do if you make the rational question: the first living being was a system, the cell system. So, its creator must be a system. Which natural systems were existing at that time? Which is the most suitable for to be the past evolutionary link? The right question brings on the right answer.

·  in reply to Dave Kim (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 43 minutes ago

Super-nova is not explosion and emergence of a new star. It is the opposite:implosion. Of a dark giant planet turned on a pulsar. All planets has as nucleus the germ of a star, which nuclear reactions goes eating the layers of rocks from inside to outside. When the last layer is tiny, it collapses and the internal light is released to the external world. A new baby was born. Our ancestor made everything like we do now.

·  in reply to LagrangianL4 (Show the comment)

Dave Kim 2 minutes ago

I’m all for this “ancestor” theory of yours… but what does this “ancestor” consist of?

Is it/he/she material or immaterial? If material, then which elements make up this “ancestor”?

Is this ancestor anthropomorphic or is it some kind of amorphous gaseous blob that floated around in an eternal vacuum until it “decided” to fart out the universe?

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

This ancestor is seen when galaxies are observed from Biological perspective, I mean, by the reverse way of evolution, knowing the last product (cells) and calculating the ancestors…It is the opposite way used by Physics perspective.There was a nebulae of lighter atoms about 12 billions years ago. The nebulae made the first lightest stars. These stars were under forces that imprint the process of life cycles. They changed shapes and composed an almost living system. Lots of evidences for it.

·  in reply to Dave Kim (Show the comment)

Dave Kim 5 minutes ago

But why are you looking at galaxies from the “Biological perspective”?

You do realize that you’re simply making an “analogy” between “biology” and “astronomy”?

Then I hope you realize that in most schools of Logic, analogies are considered technically “fallacious” (though you can come up with “good” and “bad” analogies)… Why? Because you’re ultimately comparing apples to oranges. Yours falls under “False Analogy”.

Go google: “False Analogy”

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Dave, the human idea about evolution was made based in analogy between species, fossils, DNA, etc. Why? It is the unique rational alternative we have for inquiring the unknown past times. Where Biological systems came from? Be it what to be, it was inside an astronomical system. You will not agree with that if you believe in magics, by gods or randomness. So, if biological came from astronomical, the principles for biological must be hidden in the astronomical. That’s so clear!

·  in reply to Dave Kim (Show the comment)

Dave Kim 20 minutes ago

Ok. Just because we call a cell a “system” and a galaxy a “system” doesn’t imply that they have some relationship.

I’m not saying they aren’t related, I mean obviously a cell is part of some galaxy…

But to claim that the name “system” creates some kind of palpable relationship between the two is REALLY stretching it.

What about this cool “Lean System Success Plan” i can buy online for 100 dollars that guarantees I will lose 10 lbs in one month? It’s called a “system” too! Is it relevant? NO

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

It really doesn’t imply, but, implying that a cell system came from a non-system, like the primordial soup, is less rational.I think what is missing for modern academic Science is knowledge about natural systems. I think there are only three: atomic, astronomic and biological. I had aligned them in this sequence for you notice that there was a movement from the simple to most complex in right chronological time. This is evolution. Universal Natural MacroEvolution. There is genetic relationship

·  in reply to Dave Kim (Show the comment)

XXX

Martin Koch 3 minutes ago

Adam didn’t have a uterus, did he?

Where did Eve get hers–you claim she needed Adam to have all the parts that she had….

·  in reply to Edmond Goo (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Yes Adam had a uterus. All males have it. Encrypted In the genes. It is not expressed because the gene for phallus is expressed two times. If you see the cosmological model of the state of the world when the Bible says that Adam existed you will see that those primordial galaxies were hermaphrodite, Adam and Eve encrypted. Things are more, lots more complex than you think…sorry.

·  in reply to Martin Koch (Show the comment)

XXX

Edmond Goo 1 minute ago

I’d believe in fairies before I would believe the universe once could fit on the head of a pin.

Can you see the error of atheistic science yet?

·  in reply to narco73 (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

But yours body once time could be fitted on the head of a pin, Goo. Why not the Universe? The smaller initial size of the Universe is not food for atheism, it is food for agnosticism and creationism. What was existing before your body being smaller than a pin? Yours parents, right? Why not the Universe? You need to understand that nature applies nanotechnology ( making a big body as a microscope one) and giantology ( making a microscope body being a big one)

·  in reply to Edmond Goo (Show the comment)

XXX

Edmond Goo

Edmond Goo 6 minutes ago

I don’t think the sun is a fusion event.

The lack of Neutrinos is telling.

So are sun spots, 11 year cycle and speed of the equator.

I believe it to be an electrical plasma process and the sun is probably a giant anode.

·  in reply to DarwinsFriend (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

This issue is very important because if we knew the truth about the sun we could built a mechanical copy getting another kind of energy. And an important factor should be a better understanding about life origins and operations. There is a problem with the method used today: they are calculating the sun from Physics perspective only. But, since that all life is dependable of Sun’s energy, and life was created by this energy also, we need the biological perspective of the sun, made by Matrix/DNA

·  in reply to Edmond Goo (Show the comment)

XXX

NewSoulSam 17 seconds ago

I just let it play out and continue as is. :) In a way, I’m sure it is kind of mean. My area is neuropsych, though, and I intend to study clinical psych (in fact, just got an RA position in a neuropsych and social cognition lab so we’ll see how that goes). From what I understand so far about it, cognitive behavioral therapy is actually fairly difficult and challenging, in that the therapist or clinician challenges the client’s beliefs and cognitions where they are maladaptive.

·  in reply to fremiamagus (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

How do you know that the client’s beliefs and cognition are the wrong ones and not the social system’s beliefs, which erected the wrong social system?!

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)

NewSoulSam 29 minutes ago

Because the cognitions are maladaptive. Examples would be, “I am worthlesss”, “I am God”, or “I hear voices which tell me to kill myself”. Also, cultural considerations are made. For instance, an American might say that a particular Japanese person is neurotically shy when it may turn out that he is just culturally reserved. I will learn a lot more about this later, but I know some now. Just please know my knowledge is incomplete.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Ok. I think the area of neuropsych is very important for future of human kind but it needs urgent self-analyses. You will think that this idea is odd, but, for neuropsych professionals to understand what is going on in the brain they will need study astronomy also. Nature produced the brain which neurons must mirror the connections among natural phenomena for to be healthier. Culture can works as a kind of malignant virus, when culture has the wrong interpretation of reality. Am I wrong?

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)

NewSoulSam 28 minutes ago

I need to go out, but I will check back because this is an interesting conversation.

NewSoulSam 2 minutes ago

I don’t understand your idea of self-analyses in terms of astronomy. You are correct that neuropsych scientists and clinicians must understand the brain. We do, however, spend a great deal of time understanding basic brain processes such as neurodevelopment and the basic concepts in learning like plasticity, sensitization, and habituation with model animals in controlled experiments such as those done with aplysia.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I will try to explain, but, be advised, it is merely my theory. I am trying to follow the everyday new discoveries published by neuropsych scientists and clinicians.But I apply the knowledge of the brain for trying to understand the Universe and vice-verse.The brain is shared into two hemispheres. Do you know why Nature did it this way? The building block of galaxies is shared into two hemispheres also, the connections between them help us to understand the connections here. Same functions

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Only for yours sake: Physicists Find Evidence That The Universe Is A ‘Giant Brain’ – If you are interested, Google it

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
NewSoulSam

NewSoulSam 2 minutes ago

Well, the idea of culture being wrong about something is very touchy. There are psychologists who devote themselves to cultural psychology, such as culturally specific mental illnesses. The definition of a mental illness may help here, which is that it is only a mental illness if it 1. Causes you mental stress and 2. Interferes with your daily functioning.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

And how is the definition of the whole society mental illness? How to diagnose the social mental illness? How we know if a social behavior is naturally healthier or more one collective mental illness that is not synchronized with the laws of Nature? But.. there is no way for to know what is Nature here and now if we don’t know what is our astronomical system. For instance, the cosmological model resulting from a biological perspective is different from the cosmological model made by Physics

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

You need understand that civilizations are built by a specific interpretation of the world = culture. All human interpretation of the world must be wrong, with some few degree of rightness.But, human beings have the resource of self-cure, or self-correction. When an individual is under this process of social self-correction, his behavior will be not normal in relation to that “wrong” civilization, which causes stress. What we can do? The patient is the society, not the individual

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)

werriboy55 9 minutes ago

Because our brain has 2 halves and thinks and some pre-galaxies have 2 halves you believe that they think.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

No, it is not so simple like that. Only for yours sake: Physicists Find Evidence That The Universe Is A ‘Giant Brain’ – If you are interested, Google it. The fact that human brains are not an entire whole, or that is not shared into 3, 4, 19 parts is because this bi-lateral symmetry is a constant pattern of natural systems, from galaxies to biological systems.

·  in reply to werriboy55 (Show the comment)

werriboy55 19 minutes ago

Here’s some more of the Huffington Post article

“No, it doesn’t quite mean that the universe is ‘thinking’ – but as has been previously pointed out online, it might just mean there’s more similarity between the very small and the very large than first appearances suggest.”

And the piece of speculation you are basing your claim on is “might just mean”. Hardly concrete evidence

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Yes, but it doesn’t quite mean that the universe is “not” thinking also. We don’t know. My personal investigation using anatomy comparative method already suggested that the first cell is an exactly copy of primordial galaxies – if astronomical bodies are under the process of life cycle formation. I have lots of evidences suggesting it is. And “if” the cell is a copy of galaxies, the brain must be a copy of Universes. There is nothing more reasonable: the creature is the face of the creator

·  in reply to werriboy55 (Show the comment)

NewSoulSam 37 minutes ago

All I know is how the two hemispheres develop in neurodevelopment but I will look up that paper. Is that the title of the paper and do you have the authors and/or journal it came from?

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

This is a big opportunity for you being a famous and helpful professional for Humanity. I am suggesting a new approach for neuropsych area that nobody tried before. I can’t do it because I am researching thousands of other issues and I have no knowledge/resources you have about this field.

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)

NewSoulSam 2 minutes ago

I disagree. That would be an opportunity for me to commit career suicide before I even start. I would prefer by continuing to study cognitive rehabilitation in post surgical epileptics and learn what I can from that experience.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Ohhh…sorry, I was forgetting to talk only the things that are safe for you being a good synchronized citizen of your “health” society. I have committed my career suicide, it is very painful, I ‘must not suggest to others doing it.There are centuries people are “studying” cognitive rehabilitation and it does not works yet, without forcing the cure with drugs. be a good professional following this mindset, it is about money.

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)

NewSoulSam 15 minutes ago

What? I don’t understand your first comment. I can, however, say that cognitive rehabilitation is a very specific therapy that has not been around for centuries and is a valid form of therapy. We are looking at a specific implementation of cognitive rehabilitation. Cognitive rehabilitation works based on the idea that the brain is plastic, which wasn’t known centuries ago.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I am not resumed to cognitive rehabilitation therapy, which deals with injured brains ( If I remember it right) but I am thinking the broad sense of cognitive remediation therapy which deals with traditional diseases like schizophrenia, ADHD, and major depressive disorder.

For yours sake: The US Department of Defense has declared that cognitive rehabilitation therapy is scientifically unproved. As a result, it refuses to cover the cost of cognitive rehabilitation for brain-injured veterans

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

It is enough paste the title at Google. It does not talks about two hemispheres, this issue is about Matrix/DNA Theory’s models. If you see the configuration of a bi-lateral pair of nucleotides you see two hemispheres. Remember that brains are evolutionary result from evolution of nucleotides. If you try to understand how was the state of the world that created nucleotides, you need a cosmological model. If you get the right one, you will understand each division and function in the brain.

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)

werriboy55 2 minutes ago

The way to tell if a society is healthy or not is simple. Is society (objectively) growing or declining. If it’s growing it’s healthy. “naturally healthier” is a subjective judgement, requiring you to impose your personal values which are not necessarily valid in the society you are commenting on.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

So, when the dinosaurs society were growing it was naturally healthier? ( Don’t tell me that fare tale about meteorites) Same for lions, wales, eagles… all of then going to extinction. No, growing in not indicative that nature is happy and will support a species. It can grow in wrong way. Besides that, who is growing now and well adapted to this environment will be sick and destroyed by the next environment due natural changes.

·  in reply to werriboy55 (Show the comment)

NewSoulSam 2 minutes ago

I disagree. That would be an opportunity for me to commit career suicide before I even start. I would prefer by continuing to study cognitive rehabilitation in post surgical epileptics and learn what I can from that experience.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

NewSoulSam 56 seconds ago

Actually, you can study neurodevelopment in early organisms and in humans to understand how the brain developed over time, from the nerve ganglion in some flatworms to our brains. In order to understand the organization and function of the brain, you need to study the brain using various methods, including neuroimaging, nothing more.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Nothing more? In order to understand the organization and function of the brain we need to know about natural systems, a forgot area by modern mindset. Brains are the new evolutionary shape that came from atoms systems, astronomical systems, cells systems, early organisms systems, etc. Don’t do that and you never will know what a brain is about.

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)

NewSoulSam 15 minutes ago

What? I don’t understand your first comment. I can, however, say that cognitive rehabilitation is a very specific therapy that has not been around for centuries and is a valid form of therapy. We are looking at a specific implementation of cognitive rehabilitation. Cognitive rehabilitation works based on the idea that the brain is plastic, which wasn’t known centuries ago.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

NewSoulSam 53 minutes ago

I appreciate your wikipedia search for my sake, but I am well aware that of what cognitive rehabilitation is and in what ways it has been shown effective. We will be the first to test the effectiveness of cognitive therapy in epileptics. I am aware that the Dept. of Defense will not cover cognitive rehabilitation, but I’m unaware of what relevance any of this has. Our lab’s work is our lab’s work and you are welcome to read the paper when it is published. I’m not exactly sure what your point is.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 14 minutes ago

What is my point? Cognitive therapy is actually fairly difficult and challenging due wrong approach due wrong interpretation of the brain due wrong interpretation of origins and meanings of brains. If we don’t know this Nature here and now we don’t know if the unusual behavior is illness of the individual or of the society.

I am grateful for you keeping this conversation because it is constructive for my job.But I understand why you never have thought outside the box.

·  in reply to NewSoulSam

XXX

fremiamagus

fremiamagus 56 seconds ago

That is what I said right here

“What you are citing is a program that only checks for the version of that particular os to make sure that it has not corrupted during the transfer process.”

·  in reply to Alan Clarke (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Nature does not permit to systems that she creates to be eternally perfect closed operating system. It is because the very foundation of this material Universe: he is assented upon the expansionist light-wave triggered by the Big Bang.This light-wave produces fragments, photons, which go out from direction of the wave. Same way, the unique perfect closed system reached by matter had fragments of mass/energy going out of the systemic circuity. With time = there is whole corruption/mutation

·  in reply to fremiamagus (Show the comment)

XXX

g24417

g24417 34 minutes ago

try to stay consistent. You said their is no evidence for spontaneous life. In fact there is evidence and some of that is that 1 – RNA and lipids arise naturally and 2 – RNA and lipids together perform all the functions of life. Also you should be concerned about Prion’s. They arise naturally and can replicate themselves. That is more evidence that life can arise naturally.

·  in reply to Tom Adams (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

No. The fact that RNA and lipids arise naturally is not proof for spontaneous life. They arise by the same process a new human baby arise inside the womb. Should we say our bodies arose spontaneously, by chance? What is missing for you is to see and understand the larger big picture, the state and shape of the world where the first RNA arose. If you try do it you could be more helpful for Humanity. Just now you remembered me that I need go back to study prions-diseases and Matrix/DNA models

·  in reply to g24417 (Show the comment)

g24417 7 minutes ago

You fail to understand both the conversation and the point you are trying to make. 1st, RNA and lipids arising naturally is not “proof” – only an idiot would say that. It is however evidence. RNA and lipids do not arise in nature through the same process as they arise in our body. For example, if you freeze a solution of amino acids, they will form RNA. Hint: your body does not freeze amino acid solutions to form RNA. There are other ways they form in nature as well.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I think I can understand your point because I know your world view, but, you can’t understand my point because you don’t know mine.The emergence of RNA at abiogenesis could be an evidence for spontaneous generation only if one does not know the informations inside atoms, molecules and aminoacids. Same way, the emergence of an embryo inside a womb being watched by a microbe living in that womb should be for him evidence of spontaneous generation. He does not know DNA. You don’t know Matrix

·  in reply to g24417 (Show the comment)

g24417 12 minutes ago

You do not understand my point because you do not know what you are talking about. You are using the terms completely wrong and nothing you are saying makes any sense. Its like you are saying the “rabbit ran fast unicorn eats soup” (WTF?). Additionally, your idea of a world view is nonsense, we live in the same world that follows the same rules of logic and evidence, this “world view” idea is simply a dishonest way to avoid your own ignorance.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

You don’t know what you are talking about. Why a long post totally off the topic that initiated our debate? It is about yours beliefs in spontaneous generation of RNA and lipids. Let’s check yours evidences? First: why carbon atom was chosen for to be the basic atom for organic matter? Second: Why carbon choose to link to N and O for building aminoacids?

·  in reply to g24417 (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Ok, you are talking something that I don’t know and I need know it. I will search the paper/articles about freeze aminoacids making RNA, but if you could advance the best paper, I will be grateful.The Matrix/DNA models are suggesting that it is impossible inside a lab to built naturally those 20 aminoacidos and naturally they will compose as RNA. If it is possible, I must throw Matrix models into the garbage. But I want to see it

·  in reply to g24417 (Show the comment)

Terncote 3 minutes ago

“First: why carbon atom was chosen for to be the basic atom for organic matter?”

Chosen? Why choose that very slanted word? That seems careless or prejudicial.

Why not ask, *why is carbon so well suited as the basis for life*?

“Why carbon choose to link to N and O for building aminoacids? ”

It didn’t choose, like all elements, it’s a mater of complimentary valences. There is no self awareness involved.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I am not worried with semantics, but about facts. So, *why is carbon so well suited as the basis for life?*. What is your explanation? It is not enough to say that carbon is able for several connections, etc. It does not works at other different planets. Why Earth is the right catalyst for carbon making the right compositions for life? Of course there is no self awareness involved, but why linking to N and O results into aminoacids fitted for biological systems?

·  in reply to Terncote (Show the comment)

Dave Kim 4 minutes ago

“At the moment, since we have no idea how probable life is, it’s virtually impossible to assign any meaningful probabilities to any of the steps to life except the first two (monomers to polymers p=1.0, formation of catalytic polymers p=1.0). For the replicating polymers to hypercycle transition, the probability may well be 1.0 if Kauffman is right about catalytic closure and his phase transition models, but this requires real chemistry and more detailed modelling to confirm…”

TALKORIGINS

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

The modern academic worldview have no idea how probable life is because this worldview is denying that every son must have a father with same genetic code. This worldview is suggesting that the first cell came with a genetic code built spontaneously at abiogenesis, but they do not show where and how this genetic code was in the state of the world during abiogenesis. Do you need to apply probability calculus for to know how a female womb is suitable for creating a new life?

·  in reply to Dave Kim (Show the comment)

Dave Kim 53 seconds ago

Do you need to pretend like you know the answer to this impossible question?

Join us in trying to find the truth instead of pontificating all over my new shirt.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Impossible question?! Are you talking about the question: “Which were the natural forces and elements that contributed for building the first biological system? Where were them? How and why those forces and elements converged to this planet surface at same time?”

These is the unique most rational questions we can do. And the method for finding the answers is: “Go looking them at the ancestral existing natural systems: atoms, galaxies, etc.” Yes I did it because I am not denying our ancestors.

·  in reply to Dave Kim (Show the comment)

Terncote 30 minutes ago

“How and why those forces and elements converged to this planet surface at same time?”‘

Again with the loaded verbiage.

Every mote of stardust contains three things, silica, water and hydrocarbons.

It is impossible to avoid the basic materials for life – they are pervasive in the universe!

Earth just happens to be in the habitable zone of our sun. There are potentially millions if not billions of planets where these conditions exist.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 minute ago

Hummm…Yours argument is irrefutable. Really, it is impossible to avoid the basic materials for life – they are pervasive in the universe! Yours problem will begins when you take a little bit of those ingredients, mixing them for getting the right 20 aminoacidos, only the left handed molecules, and leaving them by themselves continuing the process towards the first cell system. Since they will not do that, you will go back, to the Universe – as the designer – for asking the same question.

·  in reply to Terncote

Terncote 1 hour ago

We are semantic creatures so words matter, especially loaded ones.

Because of its structure, carbon easily forms long chain polymers and these are essential for organic life.

“It is not enough to say that carbon is able for several connections, etc. It does not works at other different planets.”

What more can you say about it? And you are wrong – carbon has the same qualities anywhere in the universe, just like every other element.

Earth chemistry is the same as chemistry everywhere else.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Yes, but why the carbon structure easily forms long chain polymers for organic life? Why the oxygen or Nitrogen structures are not such suitable? I think academic establishment never did these questions, so, they have no explanations. I will advance the explanation from matrix/DNA models: carbon has number atomic 6, which is the exactly copy of Matrix natural formula for composing natural systems. Each particle is a tool performing a specific universal systemic function. And goes on…

·  in reply to Terncote (Show the comment)

XXXXXXXXXX

Edmond Goo

Edmond Goo 55 seconds ago

They can’t see what’s under the photosphere of the sun.

No one knows what’s there.

I say iron.

Do I know?

Nope.

·  in reply to NewSoulSam (Show the comment)
Louis Charles Morelli

Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago

The sun is going to dye because he is eating himself, Goo. The lesson of his existence, the big mistake of being supreme selfish, composing his own body as his own Paradise as a closed system, is spread to the external world in shape of light, a lesson for his offspring don’t do the same mistake.Creationists did not learned the lesson. They don’t love Humanity and Nature, they makes an alliance with a powerful god and lives their selfish life. Your light is our darkness. We’ll do different

·  in reply to Edmond Goo (Show the comment)

XXX

DarkHoundNero

DarkHoundNero 6 minutes ago

ok then, again I say, they believe the universe only existed that long. where did the universe COME FROM?

·  in reply to tsub0dai (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Every time you have a question about Nature (the Universe is Nature) search the answer in nature.nature does not play dice with us. So, you will see that all elements and substances inside a cell system came from outside, through holes at the membrane.Now, try to make yours theoretical model about “where the Universe came from” based upon what you see. It is better than appeal to imaginations going far out away from Nature. That’s was the method used by Matrix/DNA models

·  in reply to DarkHoundNero (Show the comment)

TheOneTheOwnLak 21 minutes ago

Funny how when I mentioned that fractal patterns are in this universe from the atom to the solar system to the galaxy…..you all said i was mad

funny goats.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I never said that. But…natural fractal patterns are in need of analyse from a different approach, other than Math. The universal pattern that Matrix/DNA models are suggesting seems a living thing that evolves, creates different appendices, changes time from micro to macro, etc. It is the universal formula that nature uses as template for organizing matter into systems. It is better seeing as a bi-lateral pair of nucleotide, the unit of information of DNA.

·  in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak (Show the comment)

XXX

DarkHoundNero 43 seconds ago

Technically, science is a product of your brain. and then if there were no organisms on the planet during the Big Bang, how did they come from nothing? Macro evolution also doesn’t make sense, in the terms that everyone came from a single cell that multiplied and already had the function to multiply if it was the first one

·  in reply to davermiava (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

DarkHoundNero, our known data were rationally connected and the result is the Big Bang Theory. It requires that something came “through” “nothing” and not that something came from nothing. It means that the Universe is surrounded by a kind of membrane remembering nothing, with holes. And the first cell was not the first natural system able to self-replicate: our ancestors, galaxies and stars already does that.These theories are very pretty rationals under the light of what we see here and now.

·  in reply to DarkHoundNero (Show the comment)

DarkHoundNero 25 minutes ago

I believe in God, but Matrix, I give you props.

You’re the first person to actually make some sense and answer me.

So science says that an organism was not present on the earth when the Big Bang happened and it was formed? So where exactly did an organism come from?

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Organism is the name that we call any natural biological organized system. Then you have the same question I had 40 years ago and since nobody had the answer, I went to Amazon jungle - the still living world that witnessed the origins of life – searching the answer. There the jungle sent me to ask to the sky, because at the sky was the answer. Then, I saw the Matrix/DNA in shape of astronomical system, working exactly as an ancestral organism. Maybe my answer is wrong, but it is interesting…

·  in reply to DarkHoundNero (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

The Matrix/DNA does not have seen supernatural interference upon the long chain of causes and effects that began with the Big Bang and is coming to our days.But absence of evidence is not proof for non existence. I will not destroy yours faith and hope in the existence of a lovely God, but only I will debate the events and real facts of this world that my little brain can grasp

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

DarkHoundNero 5 minutes ago

I agree, sounds interesting.

LQG on CNN

Was just found like yesterday

might be intriguing

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

“LQG on CNN: might be intriguing”

I am not well informed about LQG, which means I need to dedicate more time studying. But…theoretical Physics seems that are going away off the beam. I don’t appreciate the idea of existing ghosts black holes as theorized by Hawking, I think that it is result of deviation of Maths from the natural world due the excess of Maths and computer simulations. Matrix/DNA is suggesting that at galactic nucleus there are merely vortexes formed by dust of died stars

·  in reply to DarkHoundNero (Show the comment)

XXX

Edmond Goo

Edmond Goo3:00PM – Sat – Jan – 12 – 2013

Genes do mutate.

75% of mutations on a typical gene are bad, 24% are neutral (waiting to go bad) and less than 1% give an arguable benefit.

No life form can survive those numbers and the more time you add, the worse it gets.

I know it seems simple and logical to you.

HERE is your problem.

Your Philosophy of “No God, Nature did it” creates a perception problem for you.

You become incapable of discerning what is real because a Philosophy has replaced objective reality.

TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

It’s reasonable that any natural system 75% bad mutations goes worse and the 1% good, by logics, never should get fixed. But the macro-evidences of this world, the analyses of whole Natural History, shows that the long natural chain of causation is not linear as wish our logics. The carriage makes a curve and so, there is an evolutionary movement from simple to complex that is curve also.Have you heard about white light and dark light? It does that a system must became worst for becoming better

·  in reply to Edmond Goo (Show the comment)

xxx

TheFallibleFiend 28 seconds ago

“I don’t know that humans are apes, but I do ‘know’ that life is a kind of energy. Despite my science illiteracy, I KNOW that all the actual scientists are liars or idiots.” –TheOneTheOwnLak

TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Life is a kind of energy?! So, this guy has no Higgs bosons at his body?! Shouldn’t… since he says life is no mass…

·  in reply to TheFallibleFiend (Show the comment)

TheOneTheOwnLak 38 minutes ago

life is energy…I stand behind it as matter is energy…you dont know how physics works?…go see einstein.M=E/c2…

No Higgs boson…itll never be found

electromagnetism.

you guys hate to look stupid dont you…and then you make shit up like I said it…HAHAHAHAH

what will you guys make up next?

Unicorns? haha

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 5 minutes ago

My definition of “life” is: “The shape of the universal natural system that began simplest as a vortex at the Big Bang, but containing all seven brutes natural forces that became the seven life’s properties. This shape correspond to our shape as “fetus” when our body is changing shapes due the action of vital cycle process. So, this Universe is a genetic reproduction process of something ex-machine, performed by steps known as Evolution, but, which, really, is the Universe under a vital cycle

·  in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

If my definition will be proved the right one, life is not merely “energy”. Energy is merely a natural state got by accelerated mass and mass is the state of low energy. Both, mass and energy are not essence DE per SE, but derivations of a deepest essence: information. Informations are those quantum vortexes that appeared at Big Bang working like genes and composing quarks, leptons, etc.Reproduction of Universes…or Gods? I don’t know.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
emfederin

emfederin 2 minutes ago

I’ve seen AI programs that make more sense then you do.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Really? Thanks by this information, I will go back for repeating my research about AI, maybe is there something new that I don’t know.Any suggestions for correcting my mistakes are welcome.

·  in reply to emfederin (Show the comment)
XXX
cupera1

cupera1 37 minutes ago

how did light sensitive pigments become light sensitive?

·  in reply to tsub0dai (Show the comment)
TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

cupera1- how did light sensitive…?

Every material body that still belongs to any natural system is light sensitive. All matter is supported by an ocean of light that produces wavelengths with different intensities of vibrations.All seven vibrations are shapes of a single vital cycle process. So, the shape of “green”color always are sensitive to “yellow” and “blue” colors due the same cause that a baby is the shape that links to embryo and child. There is symbiosis among material bodies

·  in reply to cupera1 (Show the comment)
XXX

When a kid lose his parents and becomes homeless, his inner tendency forgets parents and turn on as hate against the hell in the streets and the world, becoming a criminal. But, if the kid is kept by relatives and grows on the same land, he keeps the memory of parents, like Uudam did, and the missing parents’ love becomes great potential tendency in some kind of arts. Usually he does nothing in relation to the whole Humanity, this species abandoned here without spiritual protectors parents. But.

Debate no Youtube: How the Universe came from “Nothing”, Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss discuss

domingo, dezembro 30th, 2012

How the Universe came from “Nothing”, Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss discuss

https://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=CXGyesfHzew

XXXXXXXXXXX

TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNADec – 30 – r:03 AM

Dawkins, like Darwin, had reduced the Universe into terrestrial events for analyzing biological history. They conclude by evolution and tried to identify its mechanisms. But… a microbe living inside a womb watching the embryogenese of a human fetus should conclude by evolution. We, outside the womb knows that evolution is not the ultimate event, it is “reproduction”. Amplifying our vision to the time/space of universal history leads us to see reproduction of Universes with another mechanisms.

XXX

TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Universe is not magic,he can’t create new information from nothing. So, he only can make a new thing, system, by the same process he was made. He can’t invent from nothing new information for other kind of process. We are a new system, so, if we want to know how the Universe was made, we have the process by which we were made. Our body started with a Big Bang, explosion of spermatozoon from initial singularity. What’s was before our fecundation? Another thing like us, conscious, natural. So?

Ninguem me “Cutuca” No Maior Debate da História que Está Acontecendo Agora No Youtube? Brasileiros! Tucuta-me…please! (10)

quarta-feira, dezembro 26th, 2012

POSTS DA MATRIX/DNA PARA ABERTURA DE DISCUSSÕES

XXX

Living in the jungle I woke up for the salvage chaotic state of this biosphere. All creatures, from any plant to any animal are tortured in this existence. But, then, suddenly we see a beautiful small flower. It seems not belonging to that world. We see a bird nurturing its offspring. We see the tall tree offering flavor fruits. And we see the salvage natives. A mother holding her baby and a male bringing on food to them. This is order lifting up from chaos. This is divine evolution.

XXX

Creation plus Evolution is a process much more complex than all guys are thinking here. The deeper template where natural history is established is the history of light light and dark light, ( vibrations popping out of a membrane of nothing that separates different worlds). Matter only is adjusted over this template. Driven by this universal force, biological systems (aka life) evolves in relation to Earth and degenerates in relation to this galactic system. The source of light is creation.

XXX

God said to humans: “Grow and multiplicate!”

But…he forgot to say the same thing to this planet. Now that human had grow, we have super-population, but the planet stands the same size…

What fuck…bad designer retard god!

XXX

Thanks America! This debate is signal that a collective mind of a whole Nation has the courage to face its inner conflicts, thinking about then, suffering the pain of self-correction,but just it keeps the strong creative power of this great nation. What’s about the European and the Asian religious countries, South America, etc., which already discovered the ultimate “Truth” and has no capacity for fix what is sure wrong? There is no such debate. Yours voluntary suffering here is an heroic act!

XXX

What’s beyond the Membrane of Nothing?! The astonished idea coming from Theoretical Science, is Lawrence’s “something from nothing”. Since that Matrix/DNA calculations arrived to the astonishing idea that the seven frequencies of electric-magnetic spectrum of lightwaves are the source that imprints the vital cycle, life, into matter, we are searching the source of this natural light. The unique situation where things emerges is through membranes, then, I think there is a Membrane of Nothing.

XXX

TheMatrixDNA

NoGoodScienceForYou is here suggesting a video ( /watch?v=HRyXauc0h04) which uses real scientific reality as propaganda for his theory. I think the best education for children is showing the images of reality but, being careful self-watching for not using any kind of concepts related to adult’s interpretations, no imposition of theories. I could make a video with same images having in parallel images of spermatozoons as comets, oocyte as nuclear black holes, etc. This is for philosophy class.

XXX

TheMatrixDNA – Dec – 26 – 7:35 PM

Creationists frequently are using the probability calculus for refuting the odds of evolution and evolutionists are using the same calculus for reinforce the odds produced by chance. Both are wrong. The “individual” evolution of a new being inside a womb is driven by the external environment (human species as the non-intelligent designer) which acts internally (through DNA) and externally. Biological evolution is being driven by an yet unknown external environment, probabilities does not applies.

XXX

TheMatrixDNA 10:11 AM – DEC – 29 –

Atheists: “How man was made?”

Creationist: “By magics of God”.

Atheist: ” Hummm… how the planet was made?”

Creationist: ” By magics of God!”

Atheist: ” Hummm… how was made…

Creationist: “Stop with these stupid questions… it is magics always down!”

Really, really that’s the Science they want for kids?

· 

XXX

TheMatrixDNADec – 27 – 2:28 AM

Creationist woman – “My grandfather was not a monkey!”

Lawrence Krauss – ” Well… yours case is not so clear… ” (maybe a pork?)

Evolutionists could be more intelligent if they explain the real state of Science today. All known facts suggests strongly the physical body of human beings came from primates. But Neurology – the field really expert in this matter – says that it still does not found how neurons produces thoughts and how they are related to human mind. This is hope for dignity

XXX

TheMatrixDNA – Dec – 30 – 4:23 AM

Edmond Goo: “Evolution was spoken into existence”
No. Biological Evolution is a point of time/space located at the long chain of causes and effects started with the Big Bang beginning with particles evolution, atomic and Cosmological Evolution. All forces of Biology were there at the last non-biological ancestor, the top pf cosmological evolution and I can show you where. But… we don’t know if the very seen steps of evolution is universal evolution or merely reproduction of universes.
XXX
TheMatrixDNA – Dec – 30 – 4:23 AM

GoodScienceForYou: “Mitochondria in most species has lost over 1200 complete genes”

And you says it is due degeneration from Adam’s DNA. You have a point, you are right. Adam was a closed selfish astronomical system, also called LUCA, his DNA was the formula of Universal Matrix. The decay or Fall of Adam into the microscope shape of biological system due entropy was a change from closed to opened system. Mitochondria tried to close it doing photosynthesis, and got it as cell plants.

XXX

TheMatrixDNA

The mistakes of “degeneration theory”:

About the graphic made at “evolution-is-degeneration dot ComSindex dot asp?PaginaID =1102”

Matrix/DNA:The graphic doesn”t shows a complete period of micro-evolution, nothing about universal evolution. Biological systems are result of the decay of astronomicals systems described by Newtonian mechanics plus Relativity plus Quantum Mechanics theories composing a quasi-perfect closed system, half-alive. This “evolution” has been reproduction of that ancestor

XXX

The mistakes of “degeneration theory”:

As introduction, they says: evolution theory says all life has started as single cell organisms”

TheMatrixDNA: It is wrong. There is no separation of life and no-life when talking about natural systems. Then, “life” has not started as single cell organisms. Biological systems (aka, “life”) had all principles of its forces, elements and properties inside atomic, astronomical systems, expressed or not. See them at Matrix/DNA models.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

INICIO DOS DEBATES

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Peer reviewed scientific paper shows there hasn’t been enough time in the history of the universe for evolution to take place.

Journal BIO-Complexity, “Time and Information in Evolution,” Winston Ewert, Ann Gauger, William Dembski, and Robert J. Marks, II once again show that a mathematical simulation of evolution doesn’t model biologically realistic processes of Darwinian evolution at all.

bio-complexity(dot)org/ojs/ind­ex(dot)php/main/article/view/B­IO-C.2012.4

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

This debate between Dembski team and Ewens team will not be solved while Humanity doesn’t know the entire context that affects our biosphere and living things. The existence of biological systems is not due a simultaneous act of magical creation neither a long process obeying natural selection as agent of immediate environmental changes. For instance, the process of Earth nuclear reactions and Sun’s reactions are stronger forces composing NS, any change there means changes here. See Matrix/DNA

XXX

Evolution has been destroyed and is now in the level of archaic mythological science. These priests of the past faith based pseudo science will be known for how they retarded biology and any progress towards cures for diseases. They’ll be mocked as they should be.

NOT ONE cure has ever come from the medical industry! We have rampant NEW genetic diseases eating away at us and killing our babies.

The rise in genetic diseases under their watch is horrendous. thanks to this Evodelusionism. LOOK!

The souls of the creators of the Selfish Paradise, Adam and Eve, that remains at Earth in shape of humans, are joined around the creationist world view, has been corrected. These people wants to reproduce at Earth the falling paradise, but they reserves to them the residence at the palace, while all other humans beings should be the slaves. You can see the design of that Paradise at Matrix/DNA Theory: You see Adam and Eve, the serpent, the tree, the apple, the Fall, and you will know the truth

XXX

I’m very glad to hear that you got saved. I certainly agree that the effects of Evolutionist propaganda are tragic. We need to fight for what’s true, but I don’t think comments on a YouTube video are exactly the frontlines I’m looking for. 😛

(For Evolutionists reading this comment: yes, spreading Evolutionism is only tragic from my Creationist viewpoint.)

· in reply to ncwdane (Show the comment)

The effects of Judaism and its Bible and its production as Christianism approving human slavery, sharing Humanity into predators and preys, and as Islam, the violence that never ends, are most tragic. You are a bad human when propagating that anti-Humanity book. It is rational to suppose that there is some thing as God, but one needs never forgetting the size of this Universe, then, giving to a “possible God” his real dimensions above the Universe. The bible stupidly reduces Reason and God

· in reply to Peter Markley (Show the comment)

XXX

The earliest writings on that subject come from the satanist Helena Blavatsky. She was busted several times scamming people and making up history. I take it you believe in her channeled demonic writings or one of the copycat offshoots like Zeitgeist the movie. The history lesion in Zeitgeist comes from Blavatsky’s imagination.

· in reply to geezusispan (Show the comment)

Yeahh… Blavatsky, a woman that challenged the Russian status quo established by imperators supported by arm and religion, a woman that abandoned a powerful Russian military husband, for travelling alone to Tibet searching other kind of knowledge. Was she a satanist? You, as supporter of an established power ruling at Vatican, unable to challenge the status quo, that had enslaved populations inside industries, is a saint? I prefer Blavatsky.

· in reply to Edmond Goo (Show the comment)

XXX

I have thought that the Earth is an amusement park. Where beings come, inhabit us and share our life experiences, feelings, etc. I’m not sure if the science fiction story has been written or not..

Your thought maybe is right, but, it includes the supposition that should have a parallel spiritual Universe, is it right? If so, I remember that there is no evidence/comparative parameters here for parallels universes and spiritual existences. Why not thinking that those beings that come, inhabit us, are really bubbles of consciousnesses that pops out of this planetary matter? Think about computers: software (as bubbles of intelligence) and hardware (material living bodies) in feed-back.

· in reply to geezusispan (Show the comment)

XXX

Have you ever written down your complete philosophy? It would make a great book… I would couch it in science fiction, personally.

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

I think it is not “my philosophy” because it is a normal natural effect given some circumstances. Any one, included you, should get the same world vision if – known the modern scientific data and with single scientific tools – go to live in some virgin jungle by 4 or 7 years. It is the jungle that produces this philosophy over modern hard-wired brain by scholar education. But Darwin took 30 years for written a book, the jungle is big, there are lots of data, I need doing lots of work yet.

· in reply to geezusispan (Show the comment)

XXX

GoodScienceForYou 1 hour ago

There is no evolution. There is no evidence for it. Not one species had evolved more complexity. You are a liar and are part of the denial of humans and their compulsions that destroy not only human lives but all life on earth. Putting your faith in humans has never worked. Why are you so stupid you want to thing now is different. They have killed so many people in the name of some idea.

· in reply to RipleySawzen (Show the comment)

Maybe you are right. Maybe there is no evolution inside this Universe. Millions of generations of hypothetical intelligent particles living 17 seconds each one and inside a fecundated ovum should watch the steps of evolution from single zygote to a human embryo believing that was watching evolution. We, outside their “universe” knows that it is “reproduction”. Maybe we are watching and working the reproduction of the son of some god. But… for while, we are watching evolution, that’s reality.

Changing the faith in humans for faith in supernatural ghosts produces the preys (95% of world population?) and hating humans by loving the salvage past animalism inheritance produces predators (the 1%?). Why human beings has followed these stupid millennial social models, shared into salvage capitalism, salvage communism, etc? It is the work of the “serpent” that convinced “Eve” in the “Paradise”. It is the stupid universal material tendency to be extreme selfish closed system. Not humanism…

XXX

“There are millions of single celled species that never evolved into multicellular organisms.” Exactly and that means there is no evidence of any form of advancement from a single cell to 2 cells with the new cells performing new functions. Thanks.

· in reply to RipleySawzen (Show the comment)

Don’t you know embryogenesis?! Fecundation, zygote, meiosis, morula…etc? You need learn something new, but for doing it, you need change your magic supernatural ghost creator in the sky by the real, natural, creator in the sky. Functions comes in two types: the systemic function (which is the effect over the external world from the projection of the shape of the whole system) and internal systemic function, which is related to each part of a system. There are different expressions of (cont.)

of internal functions and each system has its tendency expressed by the most strong expressed part. Any bit of external change makes changes at internal expressions. The interactions between internal parts creates infinite numbers of internal functions, called “fuzzy logic”. The initial process of eukaryotes merely replicating its cells is the first phase of biological evolution mimicking the process by which stars, galaxies are replicated, by self-recycling (see Matrix/DNA models)

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)
XXX

I want you to name one disease that “modern” medical science has cured.

I want you to find one positive mutation ever found in the human genome.

Where is your absolutely irrefutable physical evidence of simple life evolving into complex? NO opinions allows and no religious books.

· in reply to TheArgonianbeast (Show the comment)

“I want you to find one positive mutation ever found in the human genome.”

The Matrix/DNA models explains how and why the genome is continually mutated. The fundamental unit of information which is the building block of RNA/DNA is a bi-lateral pair of nucleotides, which is the biological microscopic counterpart of the building block that came evolving from quantum vortexes after Big Bang, to atoms to galaxies. This universal “matrix” diversifies into infinite different kinds of nucleotides

Medical science is going away off the beam due Biology being seen as separated from Physics. It’s the same that one try to understand the existence of human body composed by flesh organs and substance without the skeleton and nervous systems which are related to the entity of natural systems. They had separated Universal Evolution into two blocks, with no evolutionary links between them. The abysmal hole created between two blocks are being fulfilled with the myth of absolute randomness.

· in reply to GoodScienceForYou (Show the comment)

XXX

I use evidence and the DNA is fantastic evidence for only DE-EVOLUTION.. All creatures are losing gene functions and we can easily see this in the DNA. Fossilization is not rare. We have samples of over 200 million fossils from most creatures that have ever lived. WE have 88% of the non bird, NOW LIVING, vertebrates as fossils and the original looks FAR more fit than what we see now. Go look! You cannot use faith and belief!!

You are watching the reduction of ENIAC into a laptop and saying it is degradation?!

But… the difference between things produced by ENIAC/apes and laptops/humans are not de-evolution.

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

XXX

“suboptimal function”

This has to be the dumbest argument for evolution of all of them.

The famous laryngeal nerve “evidence”. If the path of this nerve is not optimal then God is a screw up.

The fact that “evolution” only leads to screw ups from the original far more fit condition means that the laryngeal nerve is evidence for genetic dysfunctions of original “engineering” when the nerve was in a much shorter path at one time and “Evotards” still don’t fully know the purpose of this nerve.

·

We know. The purpose of this nerve is transforming chemical operations for connections between organism’s organs into sounds waves (voice) for connecting separated brains into a whole Humanist system. When you need transformations of signal waves you need apply quantum superposition and following separation. Then, the left and right nerves superposed makes the complete circuit of an established system, and when are separated they can be turned into a new different system. But…this is complex

XXX

In the first paragraph they clearly define “anti-evolution” or loss of good genetic engineering as the creatures “degrade” from the more “optimal” to the “suboptimal”.

This is the MOST compelling evidence for anti-evolution or gradual degrading of the best genetic engineering to the more defective genetic engineering we see today that I have ever seen and that we can see today.

·

The problem is that yours “more optimal” is good for stupid monkeys, but unsupportable for who has some intelligence. Yours optimal is called “Adam’s DNA”, a creature that was living like a stupid monkey eternally at a garden full of animals and plants. Any intelligent being would prefer the suicide, if they think that would be condemned to that life by all eternity. Thankfully had the Fall, the “Adam” genetic degradation, even that we were condemned to beginning as microscope cell here

XXX

The famous The Left Recurrent Laryngeal Nerve is totally evidence for genetic degradation. These people are “nuts” by the way in not being able to see the obvious, because they are brainwashed into seeing things BACKWARDS.

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

You are still blind to the deeper secrets of Nature Why the left RLN os different from the right RLN? This question makes no sense, there is no right and left nerves, there is a complete circuit of a system, separated into two slices. Make the superposition of those two nerves… you gets a complete circle. Why they makes a circle and why the left has several branches? Well… see the Matrix/DNA formula for natural systems, you will understand everything. No degradation


XXX

“protein functional redundancy”

There are only a very few amino acids available to make living tissue from, so OF COURSE it will be used in different creatures to make similar body parts.

Look at the amino acids chart and tell me how many do you see? (20)

We live on a tiny finite little planet with fixed resources.

We do not have infinite resources to build body tissue from.

Drive your eyes down to look to those 20 aminoacids and now drive yours eyes up to see the galaxy, the Universe, that produced them. Ask “why”, “how”, “for what”? Do you see the evolution of aminoacids? First step: Carbon is called by Nature to be the central atom. Why? Because Nature has several different faces, states, and our astronomical system was standing at the specific state as closed perfect natural system. Which is composed by six universal functions. Just carbon atomic number. So on..

“protein functional redundancy… our tiny finite little planet with fixed resources.”

This doesn’t means that life was tunelled due intelligent design. Proteins are slices of a kind of complete systemic circuit – the system around us – so the slices are limited in number. Planets has limited variations, resources, because limited is the specific state of Nature that produced them. But biological systems (aka, “life”) are just a rebellion against the creator system, so, open for mutations

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

XXX

“anatomical and molecular parahomology”

It is ridiculous crap “pseudo science” and a stretch of the imagination.

It goes along with the idea that fools think that any similarity of use, appearance can only mean a direct genetic linage link.

This is utterly ridiculous and in fact all that we have seen of this idea in fossils of the “ancient version” of the creature are shown to have far more usable features and the “homology” becomes more complex as you go back in time.

“De-evolution”

XXX

I was “informed ” yesterday that Darwin was wrong in places and so they changed it to whatever the heck they wanted.Even when I said Thats what I was taught in school they said I was wrong…and that was only 35 years ago.So arguing “evolution ” is pointless, as they now believe SOMETHING else.Bit sad really.They dispute their own “simple to complex” .. if youcan believe that…apparently it goes BOTH ways now….very sad.

· in reply to jhawkinsjs1

While Naturalists are struggling trying to understand this world, trying to discover mechanisms and processes that can be transformed into technology for increasing Humanity power, spiritualists are criticizing them, being obstacles to their job?! No spirits and supernatural beings has made anything good for human kind till now and still 95% of our brothers in species are being tortured in this stupid conditions of life. Evolution is the idea that arose from a man that sacrificed his life for us

· in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak (Show the comment)

XXX

I was “informed ” yesterday that Darwin was wrong in places and so they changed it to whatever the heck they wanted.Even when I said Thats what I was taught in school they said I was wrong…and that was only 35 years ago.So arguing “evolution ” is pointless, as they now believe SOMETHING else.Bit sad really.They dispute their own “simple to complex” .. if youcan believe that…apparently it goes BOTH ways now….very sad.

· in reply to jhawkinsjs1

That’s the cause we agnostics prefers the naturalist/rationalist community than the religious community. Our life experience as humans at Earth have been too much bad, our dream is to change everything. The naturalists woks in rhythm of changes, while creationists are conservationist of this stupid “status quo”, so, they are obstacles and unuseful.

· in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak (Show the comment)

XXX

Even the “father” of evolution mentioned sripulations under which evolution could not be true. Those stipulations were met. Darwin discredited evolution in his own words. But you all havent actually taken any time to study it, you just assume blindly.

Why aren’t you honesty and respectful enough? If you want to destroy the worldvision of a man due you think it has bad effects, what you should do? Repeat his experiments, contest his evidences. Take a ship and go by 4 years facing the hell in a salvage world, do observations by yourself, applying the modern knowledge, show what was wrong with Darwin idea. Or do you want to refute such sacrificial heroic job standing under air conditioned? Taking Reason off Nature by magical thinking is easier

· in reply to jhawkinsjs1 (Show the comment)

XXX

@”Christianity is a theory”

No it isn’t. It’s an assertion.

· in reply to SheepTheAsian

Christianity is a theory by the real definition of “theory” by the Greeks that coined the word. It is not a theory by scientific definition, but here is not a scientific community congress, it is a public debate. Theory is “a contemplative and rational type of abstract or generalizing thinking, or the results of such thinking”- Wikipedia. Christianism is product of earlier human consciousnesses recently formed as any modern baby impregnates its surroundings with magics and ghosts friends.

· in reply to emfederin (Show the comment)

@”Christianity is a theory by the real definition of “theory”

The guy was equating christianity as a “theory” to evolution as a “theory” and was attempting to put them on the same plane.

They are not.

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

Both can not equating at the same plane as the operations of a baby brain (Bible authors) is not the operations of a teenager brain (Darwin). All big religious theories were built from an unique source: the real little world seen by an infant intelligence plus flashes of memories popping up in the baby brain about a not seen but lived womb’s world. Ancient founders of all religions were visionaries (embryos) that had real visions about the womb were our ancestors shapes lived: the Cosmos.

· in reply to emfederin (Show the comment)

You will not believe in my narrative as I don’t believe in it, I am still searching a better explanation as skeptical that I am. The narrative is: a native xaman living in Amazon jungle 30 years ago, with altered state of mind due their beverages, described visions of black holes and cosmogony identical to descriptions of black holes and cosmogony seen at Blavatsky books about “The Secret Doctrine”, or “theosophy” made by ancient eastern 5.000 years ago. I have a theory about: same baby brains

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

Rational – based on or in accordance with reason or logic, able to think clearly, sensibly, and logically, endowed with the capacity to reason.

Christianity hardly fits the criteria for “rational”.

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

Yes, Christianity is not rational in the sense that Reason must be a natural product of nature. But… the non-rational productions of Bible’s authors can be rationally understood, using an analogy: the excessive installations of an industry is used to produce different sub-products. My theory is that the fusion of Chrom-2 suddenly produced an abrupt augment of cerebral mass beyond the normal installation that should be produced by the normal evolutionary chain. Earlier hominids had imaginations

· in reply to davermiava (Show the comment)

I an sorry that I am not finding now a recently published paper showing that human fetus suddenly produces neurons twice more fast than apes/monkeys fetus. I think it is a good evidence for this theory about the development of consciousness at the level of the human species, when I separated the stages of its evolution between babies/teenagers/adults shapes. But… why still there are people that believes in the Bible, which was a baby’s minded production? Missing education, denial to be adult?

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

XXX


I honestly don’t know what to think. The idea that there’s a guy upstairs pulling all the strings sounds silly, and completely illogical, yet for macro-evolution contradicts itself in more ways than one.

While it makes absolutely no sense how or why we’d choose to go back to primal technology after conquering the galaxy, the only thing I’m truly comfortable with is that we developed on another distant planet and migrated to earth.

Yes, makes no sense the idea of some intelligent powerful being responsible by this chaotic biosphere and the struggle for species to become powerful. And makes no sense that an intelligence in shape of quasi-apes after conquering galaxies with high technology arrived here forgetting all that technology. The unique explanation that makes sense to me is Matrix/DNA Theory. Intelligence was merely potential at ancestors that were, themselves, the building block of any shape of natural systems.

· in reply to SoulofaDeity

XXX

Macro evolution sounds silly because there is no such thing. Its just evolution. There is no reason to split it into micro and macro.

· in reply to tsub0dai (Show the comment)

Biological evolution is merely a micro-evolutionary cycle which must be added to lots of others micro-cycles and finally composing the Universal Evolution, from the extreme singularity resumed to a central point towards complexity expanded to astronomical size. How should you call the period of evolution that goes from yours body shape as teenager until the final shape of adult? As biological systems we are one transitional shape of a universal system that evolves by vital cycle process.

· in reply to NegridoPie

XXX

from simple to complicated

· in reply to NuggetKazooie (Show the comment)

Things does not change by themselves from simple to complicated, this should be creating new information from nothing, by magics. But there are things like atomic, astronomic, biological systems that changes from simple to complex, at individual and populations levels. Individual occurs at embryogenesis, a body transforming from extreme singularity to complex. The mystery is that this world has a hierarchy of systems and you are not seeing the system the informations are coming from.

· in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak

XXX

Panspermia, there is no real evidence, but it seems logical…

· in reply to SoulofaDeity (Show the comment)

Panspermia only transfers the question how biological systems arose, from Earth to other astronomical body. The natural elements and informations for transforming non-organic into organic and electric-magnetic-mechanical systems into biological systems does not arises by magics or absolutely randomness. Those necessary and enough for building biologicals must come from a stellar system described by Newtonian mechanics turned into half-biological galaxy, as described by Matrix/DNA Theory.

· in reply to geezusispan

@”Panspermia only transfers the question how biological systems arose, from Earth to other astronomical body”

And there you have it, folks.

You see this, soullessdeity?

Even matrixdna, world-class expert at butchering logic, reason and lucidity, not only completely understands the inherent conflict contained in your ridiculous statement, but can even state it on a level that approaches eloquence.

That alone should have you burying your head in utter shame.

· in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

I don’t understand why posts like yours are being flagged as spam. You, as everybody, has the right to express opinions, we are debating theories, one can read or ignore what he/she doesn’t like. This is not honesty. About logic I do my best advocating the logics that I learned from nude. virgin, salvage Nature living 7 years at Amazon jungle were was elaborated Matrix/DNA worldvision. Conflicts with modern scholar logic is an issue to be solved by time, not by us. Who is away off the beam?

· in reply to emfederin (Show the comment)

XXX

Look! There are trees. Someone must have designed them. See? Tree elves are real and great designers engineering trees for everyone. How else did trees get here, if not by the mysterious powers of the chief tree elf?

· 

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Yes, trees were designed. Genetically, by transmission of “Matrix/DNA” from their creators…living in the sky. Trees are the same image of galaxies.The trunk represents the central nuclear axis. The branches are the galaxy’s arms. The leaves are the planets. The yellow fruits pending on the arms are the stars. The plant cell is the biological tendency to reproduce the closed astronomical system with chloroplasts making photosynthesis linking the cell to the star, which is an evolution-stopper.

·  in reply to PinkUnicornIsLord (Show the comment)

XXX

Mikezzz749 25 minutes ago

Question: why can’t humans create a self replicating machine? We can’t even create a machine that can eat breakfast. Intelligent designing humans can’t come close to the technology, complexity, efficiency, eloquence, etc of any type of life. Why would random chance processes be better able to produce life (even when the laws of physics, entropy, are against their natural creation?). I’m interested in an intelligent response! Do you have one?

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

“Machine” and “life” are cultural symbols used for describing real states and details of Nature. We learn mechanisms, processes existing at Nature and we see matter organized as working systems. Our technology is mimicking natural phenomena, sometimes applying fuzzy logics, mixing mechanisms and materials from different phenomena and producing new arrangements. We produces “machines” because our limited sensors and brain capability see only mechanical and biological aspects of natural systems.

·  in reply to Mikezzz749 (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

If you want to debate your theory about this yet unknown world first of all you need be honest and a method. You post this exactly post here yesterday, got several answers, now answers that answers.

·  in reply to Mikezzz749 (Show the comment)

Martin Koch 46 minutes ago

Man has created self replicating machines.

·  in reply to Mikezzz749 (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Could you elaborate this information? Are you referring to synthetic molecules, like those from Craig Venter? Matrix/DNA is researching the extensive already published papers related to NASA research of self-replicating robots, but any additional information about other sectors will be welcome.

·  in reply to Martin Koch (Show the comment)

Mikezzz749 42 minutes ago

@Martin Koch really? That’s all you got? Just flat out denial? Oh brother.

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

NASA has a sector dedicated to study self-replicating machines. The goal is sending robots like Curiosity to other astronomical bodies, self-replicating robots that could use the matter of those bodies for populating the astro, maybe extracting some valorous mineral, etc. I am preparing a descriptive suggestion because the Matrix/DNA models arrive to a theoretical formula, a software’s diagram about a natural self-replicating machine. It is about the Newtonian mechanics aspect of systems

·  in reply to Mikezzz749 (Show the comment)

JoshuaWaller 41 minutes ago

The same question would have been asked as to why humans can’t get to the moon a hundred years ago. Not only have we done that, but we’re getting closer to building a self replicating machine.

Also, technically, we absolutely can create a self replicating creature that eats. We can create some that are even capable of learning on a fundamental level. Programmers have done that for quite some time. It’s limited to another, simulated universe. Technically, those programmers could be gods.

·  in reply to Mikezzz749 (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

This issue is good food for thought. Nature makes self-replicating machines: a stellar system (working with the principles of Newtonian mechanics) degenerates, decomposes, its dust composes again as a new stellar system. But this process is self-recycling, when the original machine needs “dying” and its matter be used for a new one. Suppose that we could insert a software inside each atom of Curiosity and when the robot become oldest, we keep it at same place, the atoms would joining again…

·  in reply to JoshuaWaller (Show the comment)

XXX

Joe Shmoe 31 minutes ago

Then why doesn’t 1 human have at least 1 wing growing out of their back. The fly did it, w/ less of a need to fly, than we have. They can walk around all day and find poop. That is their life “poop”, poop is on the ground, they do not need wings.

·  in reply to g24417 (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Joe, the causes are deeper than we think. Wings can be a result of personal effort (anfibians jumps) or can be imposed into a specie by informations flowing in this environment. Wings are specific shapes of accessories developed from cellular cilia which was produced by a universal systemic function number 5. This same function produced the tails of comets for realizing an operation. Here, the system that built biosphere was in need of something being the transporter of pollen. It was imposed

·  in reply to Joe Shmoe (Show the comment)

XXX

Alan Clarke 18 minutes ago

@tsub0dai “humans are far more diverse as a species than any individual person”

The population of human species is comprised of individuals. Theoretically, one individual from today’s human population could be compared to one individual, Adam, in the creation model for genetic diversity. The quagga is an example of selective breeding (artificial selection) used to restore lost genetic information to a few individuals. Natural selection works oppositely toward genetic entropy, i.e. loss.

·  in reply to tsub0dai (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Yes, Adam/Eve were/is the most perfect genome possible to be made by Nature. Their genome was the formula for building their bodies, which was a closed non-minded system, merely extension of their genome. You can see their “photo” published by Matrix/DNA theory. Natural Selection worked oppositely to their tendencies, entropy causing the big Fall. As microscopic biological systems, the offspring of Adam/Eve lifted up at planets, as opened systems. The sinner father in the sky is driven NS now.

·  in reply to Alan Clarke (Show the comment)

XXX

GoodScienceForYou 53 minutes ago

The land of militant Evotards who constantly give me death threats:

Austrailia: “The incidence rate for all cancers combined increased by 27% from 383 cases per 100,000 people in 1982 to 485 cases per 100,000 people in 2007.”

This is the highest rise in cancer of all the social liberal states I have found 127% rise in cancer in 25 years.

Cancer is only caused by genetic defects according to 449087 peer medical papers on PubMed, the international library of genetic diseases.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Yes, cancer is an issue that needs urgent attentions. If you see the picture at my website tipping “The Cycle Of Cholesterol And The Matrix” you will know a new approach for understanding diseases. We have the formula for perfect systems, any disease is dysfunction of that formula. My problem is that I am alone doing this, have no time and resources. I did only fast research about bad cholesterol, Alzheimer. For analyzing cancer under Matrix models is necessary reading lots of informations.

·  in reply to GoodScienceForYou (Show the comment)

XXX

GoodScienceForYou 20 seconds ago

Germany, with militant socialists liberalism has 7.5 million functionally illiterate adults out of a population of 81.7 million.

That is a great sign of how well that works. Germany used to be the country where science and engineering prevailed and German engineering was well known. Now 9% of the population can’t read or write. They are setting up programs to educate people who have already been through the school system

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I think this is normal result from WW2: generations of people went to hard work instead schools. But this is also a suggestion that Matrix/DNA models are right. They are suggesting a different kind of targets for the Science enterprise, producing a different kind of technology, medicine, human habitat, different design for urban life. Different from that produced by Germany, whose unconscious target was driven to be a kind of Brave New World ruled by the Big Brother, mimicking insects societies

·  in reply to GoodScienceForYou (Show the comment)

XXX

GoodScienceForYou 1 minute ago

OUR DNA closely maps out our history of self destruction. Its clear that we have been destroying our genome for a long time and it shows in the huge numbers of deaths directly due to genetic diseases, 30.4 million is less than half of the real number each year. Considering that we created all the viral fungal and bacterial infections by our stupid actions that kill us from infections.

We seem to have become animals with sexual compulsions owning us completely, never aware of what that is doing

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

The building blocks of DNA, bi-lateral pair of nucleotides, are diversified copies of a unique system. each copy expresses a particular particle, a specific function, different of all others. These copies self-assembly themselves, free in biosphere and cell environment. Some kind of biological behavior selects among these copies which will be increased in their genomes. But the constructors of these copies does not want us as biological minded creatures, they want pieces for a natural machine.

·  in reply to GoodScienceForYou (Show the comment)

XXX

GoodScienceForYou 2 minutes ago

We now have the all time record of childhood congenital disease rates and at astonishing accelleration. 120% rise in Autism in 2 years! 1 in 88 diagnosed by 8 year old. 1 in 125 babies born with congenital heart disease. A rise of 135% in childhood invasive cancer in 34 years. 200% rise in 10 years of STD’s affecting 1 in 4 and young fertile girls have the highest rates. Evolution is a denial mechanism that supports this genetic suicide. “evolutionforum.info”

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I should leave these statistics for atheists answering them. But, my personal technique is searching causes based on Matrix/DNA models. They suggests that degradation of humans genetics and bodies is the predicted results from this biosphere evolution. This biosphere was produced by chaos through fragments coming from the decay of a ordered half-mechanical/half-biologica­l system. The action of these fragments is to reproduce the machine, humans must be pieces, so, it is fixing our genome.

·  in reply to GoodScienceForYou (Show the comment)
XXX

GoodScienceForYou 3 minutes ago

History’s shown from the dark ages; the advent of many diseases that nearly wiped out humans, like the plague , wiping out 1/2 the population of Europe; resulted in extreme political measures, using the state religion, Gods authority, to stop diseases. Prison time public whipping, death to homos & anyone who had sex outside of a virgin marriage was a criminal period. It took a lot of suffering to learn to stop killing families children mothers fathers. Used to use a sharp pole for punishment.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I had no time yet for analyzing those plagues based upon Matrix models, but these models suggestions about the origins of viruses also suggests that diseases caused by them are produced by specific psychological states – individual or collective. Viruses are organic constructs from Matrix/DNA genetic code – which exists inside living beings and flowing in the environment – produced by universal function number 5. So, those plagues were produced by specific state of mind, which were religious.

·  in reply to GoodScienceForYou (Show the comment)
XXX

GoodScienceForYou 1 hour ago

33% of people ages 15 to 64 will die from cancer in the USA. Source CDC. Childhood invasive cancer in the US has risen by 135%;34 years. STD’s in the US up 200% in 10 years with the highest rates: young women ages 14 to 24.

It seems that also the fastest growing religion is atheism.

It turns out that Evodelusionism is the religion of atheists, homos, sex addicts, socialist liberals, communists, politicians, prostitutes (no kidding) and scientists. What a group of people to model after. Eh?

· 

TheMatrixDNA 44 minutes ago

It is just the opposite. This degradation of human bodies is the corolary of millenniums of religious thought ruling societies with wrong social systems, wrong technology and wrong science. Religion is a minded-stopper, it separates men from its Nature for alliance with supernatural. Then, the whole body is driven not by the intellect, but by the laws of atoms composing the body. These atoms are matter which supreme tendency is closed inertial equilibrium. We got it, but Nature is responding.

·  in reply to GoodScienceForYou

TheMatrixDNA 35 minutes ago

A good sample is the biggest religions of the planet, the Asian religions, which supreme goal is the search for personal equilibrium and nirvana. We have a model of a natural system just in this exactly state: the building block of astronomical systems, our ancestor since 10 billion years ago. It is a closed system into itself, cutting relations with the whole natural world, a self-constructed paradise, where the two aspects of matter, mass and energy got its targets. Extreme selfishness.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

These building blocks grew and built galaxies. Its shape is like a perfect machine, a perpetuum motor, self-recycling. The Universe was populated by them. But, above galaxies are forces like the Clausius Law, which produces degradation, measured by entropy and the pretense eternity falls down. Today the Universe is composed by their fossils, ours ancestors. Meanwhile, consciousness was sleeping at galaxies, woke up in shape of animals and lifted up as humans. Religious aret repeating the sin

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

emfederin 1 minute ago

@”But, above galaxies are forces like the Clausius Law, which produces degradation…”

First off, it doesn’t produce degradation. It simply states that isolated systems will always achieve maximum entropy, manifested as thermal equilibrium. This is the ultimate destiny of our universe.

Secondly, galaxies aren’t isolated systems within the context of “the universe”.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Are you based on Thermodynamic Theory for systems? First of all, those theorists never knew how and what is a perfect closed system. It is built by any lightwaves invading inertial mass and modeling matter accordingly to its seven different frequencies of vibrations, from gamma-ray to radio. Entropy is the name of unit of measurement, not the sate itself. Degradation is not loosing quantities of energy/mass, is fragments escaping from the circuit flow and diminishing the quality of closed system

·  in reply to emfederin (Show the comment)

XXX

ozredneck22 3 hours ago

EVOLUTION is a fairytale for grown-ups, complete with its abiogenetic virgin birth, apes that talk and tell lies, “survival of the fittest “moral code, The prophet called Charlie, a magical process that’s never been observed while its happening, cows that tried to walk on water but became whales, a story about how a primordial soup made a chef.

· 

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Almost equal to the collection of fairytale in the Bible, eh? The big difference is that Charlie really sacrificed his best years abandoning a good life in London for facing the hell of the salvage world, observing facts for building conclusions, while the prophets of Bible forgot the real facts of nature and jumped to imaginary conclusions. Any other man that go back to the salvage world with the modern scientific knowledge will find models that solves all problems pointed by you, rationally

·  in reply to ozredneck22 (Show the comment)

XXX

odinata 10 seconds ago

DNA proves evolution.

shut your retarded hole.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

No, DNA proves that he has all informations for doing all species at Earth. DNA proves to aliens that there are diversification of species at Earth. It does not prove Evolution, it merely suggests that evolution is possible.

·  in reply to odinata (Show the comment)

XXX

Nathan Londrie 1 hour ago

I’m sorry, but last time I checked, not matter what you believe, there’s only so much evidence, and at some point you have to go on faith. Tell me again how evolution is a fact?

·  in reply to PinkUnicornIsLord (Show the comment)

odinata 16 minutes ago

DNA proves it.

FACT.

·  in reply to Nathan Londrie

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

DNA proves for a microbe as observer located inside the womb and watching the progress of a fetus that he is seeing evolution. As observers outside the womb, we know that it is reproduction. This Universe is a cosmic egg – or is an agglomerated of bodies still alive or of died fossils (galaxies) – where is occurring a normal natural process of reproduction. And we – like all conscious living beings at millions of other planets – are the minded “genes” making the embryo for the final Big Birth

·  in reply to odinata (Show the comment)

XXX

Alan Clarke 2 minutes ago

@van der Meer “[Creationists] provide an answer, just not the correct one”

Considering that scientific theories are only temporal and never absolute (e.g. Newton’s gravitation theory was replaced by Einstein’s general theory of relativity), how do you know what the “correct” answer is concerning man’s origin? Modern-day scientists admit that they don’t know how life began nor has anyone ever created an artificial environment that facilitates the spontaneous generation of life from non-life.

·  in reply to Peter van der Meer (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Newton’s theory was not replaced by Einstein’s theory because they were dealing with different dimensions of time/space. Newton’s theory is for Einstein’s the same that atoms are for cells, it means, the new arrangement of atoms inside a cell changes their behaviors and functions. Newton was dealing with mechanics at stellar system level which is an mechanic arrangement like a watch – but Einstein was dealing with galaxies which is half-mechanical/half-biologica­l acting over stellar systems

·  in reply to Alan Clarke (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

We don’t know man’s origins in relation to human mind/brain, which could have aggregated new informations coming from a superior natural system located at a superior level of complexity in relation to the total systemic environment (Milk Way) that supplied informations for man’s body, about which we have the most strong evidences that came from primates. For creating biological systems from the evolutionary top of non-biological systems we need more knowledge about natural light, it is the code

·  in reply to Alan Clarke (Show the comment)

XXX

kamphwagon1 2 hours ago

I would hardly think the lack of 100% confirmed theory in the branches of science would drive children into the wrong path, most depending on age wouldn’t grasp the Matrix /DNA theory anyway ,and most likely be taught at the college level.. Where as religion prefers to brainwash children at a young age before their logical abilities are fully developed and are still easy prey to mythical fairy tale stories and fear of invisible boogie men and good fairies … 😉

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

You are right, religion has not worked for improving human existence, so, they are not the solution, our futures generations needs search other alternatives, while the empirical scientifically proved facts must be known. The observation of fossil record and another known facts strongly suggests that there is a natural process from simplest to complexity, which is called “evolution” But this process happens at universal macro scale, unknown, so biological evolution is a non-complete theory.

·  in reply to kamphwagon1 (Show the comment)

XXX

RogerS4JC 1 week ago

@NuggetKazooie “negative factors you described wouldn’t apply to the other populations”

Then you get a net positive. Even very small positives soon leads to huge numbers & small negatives quickly lead to extinction.

“Human evolution thus appears like an hourglass, with a narrowing population of Homo erectus leading to possibly one single mutant, whose improved genes emerged into a new era of unprecedented progress. The transformation from failure to success is startling.” Alan F. Alford

·  in reply to NuggetKazooie (Show the comment)

Martin Koch 1 week ago

Not true. Alan F. Alford is not an reliable witness–His first book Gods of the New Millennium (1996) drew on the ancient astronaut theory of Zecharia Sitchin

·  in reply to RogerS4JC

RogerS4JC 12 hours ago

@Martin Koch “Alan F Alford is not an reliable witness”

“however, he admitted to serious faults in his use of Sitchin’s theory and proposed an alternative, cataclysm theory of ancient myth: “I am now firmly of the opinion… the descent of the gods was a poetic rendition of the cataclysm myth…” wiki

Alan Alford is thus a “hostile witness” for creationism. Too bad he was forced to consider what he thought was a better mechanism than TOE.

Do “reliable witnesses” only have your same viewpoint?

·  in reply to Martin Koch

Martin Koch 5 minutes ago

Again, the crackpot claiming “ancient aliens” is not a valid source.

·  in reply to RogerS4JC

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

“Human evolution thus appears like an hourglass,…”

But his observation above is known, being the human genes emerged by evolution or by other unknown source. Alford almost touched the deeper secret of Nature and the deeper source for religious myths. In fact happened a cataclysmic event and the descent of gods as source for human genes. But this cataclysm was not the Noah’s flood neither the explosion of Nibiru, Matrix/DNA suggests other kind of “cataclysm” and descent “gods”

·  in reply to Martin Koch (Show the comment)

odinata 1 minute ago

No, there is no known observations of any aliens, ancient or otherwise.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Yes, that is what Matrix models are suggesting: no aliens, ancient or otherwise. We need to remember the initial state of this biosphere and the jungle is the best witness still existing about the life’s origins. It indicates that this biosphere is product of chaos. Chaos is product of cataclysm that happens on ordered environments. The environment existing before biosphere’s origins was made of atomic and astronomical systems. So, there was the Newtonian machine and ours ancestors, the “gods”

·  in reply to odinata (Show the comment)

odinata 31 minutes ago

There is no “Matrix Model”

There is only “Matrix Gibberish”

You’re an idiot.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

The Matrix model still is a theory explaining this worlds’ existence, under tests facing real proved facts. It is a natural formula used by Nature for assembling matter into systems, like atoms, galaxies, trees, humans, cells, etc. This formula is under evolution since the Big Bang ( initially the Matrix was shared by billions of vortexes as bits-information or ex-machine quantum genes) and here the formula is resumed into a base-pair of nucleotides, the building blocks of DNA. Theories…

·  in reply to odinata (Show the comment)

XXX

khoraski 1 hour ago

How is Science inappropriate for children?

TheMatrixDNA 55 minutes ago

Only when Science as real knowledge of real facts is used by someone that did the mental exercise for connecting the facts, got a big picture, and teach to children that his picture is Science. Since we for sure don’t have all facts ( maybe neither 30% of all facts of this Universe) any big picture will be product of imagination, then, should be taught as theory. Any big picture (as Matrix/DNA Theory) now will be a driven into wrong pathway for children or a closer mind

·  in reply to khoraski (Show the comment)

khoraski 38 minutes ago

Well, yeah. That’s true for both Evolution and Creationism.

My point is, Creationism, by definition, is Science.

Throwing away an entire branch of science simply because you don’t believe in it, and disallowing any studies in that field is extremely unscientific.

Personally, I think we should teach all science behind all theories of our existence, or we should teach none.

And besides. Natural Selection is not the theory of Evolution, like a lot of Atheists try to combine as one single idea.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

I agree and I will talk to kids about ToE, ID, panspermia, Matrix/DNA, etc., mentioning that I don’t know which theory is more appropriated and my personal thought has indicated that there is a natural process of transformation that have increased complexity. But, all these theories must be taught in a Philosophy class, not Science class. Science only inform about real known facts, has no conclusions. The most important thing is to be certified that kids will be opened minds, free for choices

·  in reply to khoraski (Show the comment)

odinata 48 minutes ago

Shut your gibbering hole, fuckwit.

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

That’s funny. You make me remembering when Morelli was in Amazon jungle and elaborated the Matrix/DNA Theory. He saw lots of snakes in his pathway, they were static waiting any attack for expelling their venom. Louis usually touched them with a long piece of wood, and the snake bites the wood, before going away. Here in Internet, we find snakes in needs of expelling poison of their souls and any comments contrary to their beliefs works as the wood branch. Funny is that Interned is enough long

·  in reply to odinata (Show the comment)

mrtalos 51 minutes ago

@khoraski ok fine, give me a proven testable hypothesis, just like every single real scientific thory must do, and we will start calling creationism scientific.

·

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

You have a testable hypothesis. The Last Universal Common Ancestor – LUCA – of all living systems, is pictured in a intelligible astronomical model that’s testable. Taking out LUCA from Earth and out of abiogenesis, putting LUCA in the sky, all tools of a cells system can be reduced to the astonishing singularity of LUCA. Broken LUCA into small pieces, you have as result all living species seen at earth. But, LUCA was found coming from before the Big Bang, its origins is unknown.

·  in reply to mrtalos (Show the comment)

odinata 6 minutes ago

A theory is well established set of facts.

Your gibberish is not weel established.

Its not “factual”

It doesn’t qualify as a “theory” it is a madman’s rant.

·  in reply to TheMatrixDNA (Show the comment)

TheMatrixDNA 1 second ago

Ok, they you think you have the right for taking the word “theory” from the ancient Greeks that coined the word and give a new definition. No, my friend, the modern schools are not the owner of this world, they applied the wrong word to jobs resulting from a specific method of connecting real data, which method can be wrong. The Matrix?DNA Theory is a theory in the strictly sense obeying the right of its creators.

·  in reply to odinata (Show the comment)
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Good Ideas/Informations

The constant assertion of belief is an indication of fear.

All anyone has to do is see an animal react to noise or movement in the woods and watch it assume something is there, something invisible to be wary of. Some unusual invisible force that must be respected and scared of, and how easily this assumption can be extrapolated into an all mighty invisible being at the cause of all things unknown by sentient beings. Belief in god is more proof of evolution.

· in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak (Show the comment)

Sentient animals put a face to phenomena – the evolution of the ‘god’ concept. All anyone has to do is see an animal react to noise or movement in the woods and watch it Assume something is there, something invisible to be wary of. Some unusual invisible force that must be respected and scared of, and how easily this Assumption, this Instinct can be extrapolated into an all mighty invisible being at the cause of all things unknown by sentient beings. Belief in god is more proof of evolution.

· in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak (Show the comment)

Mas então tem o contra-argumento dos criacionistas, o qual precisa ser notado, considerado, pensado, para procurar a explicação:

TheOneTheOwnLak 1 minute ago

Yes we all see monkeys with Gods ….talking of evolution when primates dont worship anything kinda contradicts your words…Primates with Gods?…oh dear.

· in reply to mechanicmike69 (Show the comment)

E esta analize me fêz produzir a seguinte resposta:

That’s your big mistake! yes, primates and all animals worships real things which symbolizes divinity. Primates, dogs, worship caves. black caves, they do holes in the soil, because in their brains are flashing images of black holes, which is encrypted into DNA. Flies worship any lighting lamp, because their atoms is a scene of electrons worshiping the luminous proton. Bees and ants worships the model of astronomical closed system and indeed, they built social system as the real copy.

· in reply to TheOneTheOwnLak (Show the comment)

Sensacional! Imagens do Momento da Ovulação Idênticas às Imagens do Modêlo Cosmológico da Matrix/DNA

quinta-feira, dezembro 6th, 2012

Momento da ovulação é fotografado pela primeira vez

http://hypescience.com/momento-da-ovulacao-e-fotografado-pela-primeira-vez/comment-page-1/#comment-240015

HypeScience

Óvulos e Imagens Iguais à Cosmologia da MatrixDNA

Óvulos e Imagens Iguais à Cosmologia da MatrixDNA (click na imagem)

Incrível como isso possa acontecer! Desenhos feitos precáriamente nas árduas condições da selva amazônica, há 30 anos atrás, agora são fotografados como fatos reais! E maior a surprêsa quando sabemos que a observação da natureza biológica aqui na Terra nos conduziu a suspeitar que estes fenômenos seriam evoluções de fenomenos que ocorrem no espaço sideral, e que poderiamos calcula-los, desenha-los. Mais uma vez mais uma previsão correta, quando esta nova visão do mundo previu que a formação de óvulos e tôda a sequencia que leva ao nascimento de humanos é exatamente igual a toda a sequencia que leva ao nascimento de astros, planetas e estr6elas!

Observe o desenho calculado na selva para origens dos astros:

Matrix/DNA Universal - Modêlo Cosmológico Original

Matrix/DNA Universal - Modêlo Cosmológico Original

Estás vendo como se trata exatamente do mesmo processo, até as formas são imitadas biológicamente aqui?!

Texto do artigo e a seguir, comentário explicativo:

“Observar a ovulação em humanos é extremamente raro e as imagens anteriores foram confusas. Jacques capturou o evento por acidente enquanto preparava uma histerectomia parcial em uma mulher de 45 anos. A liberação do óvulo foi considerada um evento repentino e veloz, mas as imagens, que serão publicadas na revista científica Fertility and Sterility, mostram que o evento leva, ao menos, 15 minutos. Pouco antes da liberação do óvulo, enzimas decompõem o tecido do folículo maduro, uma bolsa cheia de fluído na superfície do ovário que contém o óvulo. Isso leva à formação de uma protuberância avermelhada e, depois de algum tempo, surge um buraco, do qual o óvulo emerge envolto por células de apoio. Em seguida ele entra na trompa de Falópio, que o leva até o útero.”

Comentário postado pela Matrix/DNA:

Louis Morelli6.12.2012

Muito grato por estas imagens que são mais uma evidência para os modêlos evolucionarios da Teoria da Matrix/DNA. Estas imagens foram desenhadas e registradas há 30 anos atrás como resultado dos modêlos teóricos, porque são exatamente iguais às imagens do nascimento de uma nova estrêla, como se pode ver no site da Matrix/DNA Theory. Mera coincidência? Não, isso é evidencia de Evolução Universal. Compare os dois textos descritivos:

Matrix/DNA: “Antes da formação e uma nova estrêla, a entropia (enzima)decompõe uma velha gigante vermelha em fragmentos os quais formam uma nebulosa (ovário) a qual gira em rotação formando um vortex central (folículo maduro)contendo a massa degradada com todas as informações do sistema (genes). O turbilhão produz esferas incandecentes e se fundem com cometas capturados (óvulos mais espermatozóides) e com certo pêso são emitidos ao espaço sideral onde passarão pelas fases de baby-stars, planetas, pulsares, supernova, gigante vermelha e o ciclo recomeça…

Como vemos, o que está em baixo é cópia do que está encima e nós somos filhos das estrêlas.

Mas na Natureza, para realizar um processo, muitas vêzes um mecanismo é várias vêezes repetido. Podemos ver tambem os óvulos como sendo as partículas e fragmentos que resultam da fragmentação da estrêla na Função 7. Assim o cadaver estelar que é formado e aparece na imagem como metade da estrêla se decompondo pode ser visto como folículo maduro, e o canal que conduz os fragmentos a se contituir no vortex pode ser visto como a trompa de Falópio. Na verdade o óvulo é o fragmento estelar. pois apenas ele serás misturado aos cometas para formasr a esfera incandescente, que representa o óvulo depois da fecundação.