Archive for setembro 11th, 2017

Ciclo Vital das Células: Oscilação do Núcleo

segunda-feira, setembro 11th, 2017


Internal clock is discovered in a living human cell

Sugestao da Matrix/DNA = Ele é produzido pelo circular de informação no circuito. Tal como acontece com uma onda de luz (a qual é a primeira ocorrência deste fenômeno no universo e desde o qual o fenômeno é repetido em todos os sistemas naturais), a vibração ou intensidade dos flashes cintilantes começa forte, na maior intensidade do circuito, e continua forte em crescente ate a F4, quando começa a decair porque começa a entropia.)

Matrix/DNA suggestion – It is produced by the flux of information in the circuit. As it happens with a light wave (which is the first occurrence of this phenomena in the Universe and from which the phenomena is repeated at natural systems), the vibration or intensity of the scintillating flashes starts strong at the highest intensity of the circuit and continues strong in increasing to the F4, when it begins to decay because entropy begins.)

The discovery may give insights into how and when diseases start – 11 Sep 2017

Cells dramatically change their shape and size during a lifetime. But this is the first time the changes have been seen over short time periods.

O ritmo da  cintilacao num  precise point of a cell in its life cycle…. During the lifetime of the cell, the amount the cell changes in shape during these ‘flickers’ also gets smaller. This means measuring the fluctuations can give away the age of the cell.

“However, with this discovery, which shows that the nucleus exhibits rapid fluctuations that decrease during the life cycle of the cell, we can enhance our knowledge of both healthy and diseased human cells.”

the nucleus of the living cells, and saw a part of it, known as the nuclear envelope, flickering over a period of a few seconds. 

(Este mecanismo de oscilacao do nucleo das celululas foi projetado nos organismos? De que forma os corpos de organismos sinalizariam estas pulsacoes?)

“This process can serve as an internal clock of the cell, telling you at what stage in the cell cycle the cell is,”

“We know that structural and functional errors of the nuclear envelope lead to a large number of developmental and inherited disorders, such as cardiomyopathy, muscular dystrophy, and cancer,” she said. “Illuminating the mechanics of nuclear shape fluctuations might contribute to efforts to understand the nuclear envelope in health and disease.”


A proposito, eu postei esta resposta num debate:

God of War – Q1. what are the type of mathematical equations that describe the growth of organisms?

Matrix/DNA : – Lol, good! I am just coming back from reading the best scientific news today, it is related to “grow of organisms”, which is related to life’s cycles and here you have a little idea how the knowledge of Matrix/DNA models and formula works in parallel with official science and offers different interpretation for natural phenomena. The news is in the link:
Please, read the article and come back to this post….
I never knew that cells’ nucleus are flickering. But, missing this knowledge was my fault, because my formula predicted it 30 years ago. My fault is due no enough time for analyzing all predictions from the formula, which must be millions. So, look what Matrix/DNA says now:
” This internal clock is produced by the flux of information in the systemic circuit. As it happens with a light wave (which is the first occurrence of this phenomena in the Universe and from which the phenomena is repeated at natural systems like cells), the vibration or intensity of the scintillating flashes starts strong at the highest intensity of the circuit and continues strong in increasing to the F4, when it begins to decay because entropy begins. It is merely the life’s cycle pathway.”
Since you don’t know how to analyzing the formula, I think you will not understand this says from Matrix/DNA, but my long time doing it ( 30 years), I am very practical doing it.
Where and when the researchers would have this interpretation, linking a reductive detail of a phenomena to the whole Cosmos, linking it with the first waves of light emitted at the Big Bang? When they will linking thermodynamics like entropy to this phenomena for having new glimpses how to control it and finding ways for avoiding the diseases they are looking for? That’s why I am here alerting that the current scientific method and scientists world view must be amplified for inserting the systemic method upon the reductive method, and how is the new kind of lab we are in needs just now.
Organisms grow and decay are very well represented by Matrix/DNA formula, which is not showed as mathematical equation but by software’s diagram because the dynamics of life are based on codes, genetics codes, and computational codes are not writing with mathematical equations. Now I will take my beer in commemoration of more one victory of my theory… Cheers…

Diferenças no trabalho entre Darwin e o autor da Matrix/DNA Theory

segunda-feira, setembro 11th, 2017


Tem pessoas adiantando que estou me comparando a Darwin. Entao copio abaixo uma resposta que enviei a um destes criticos ( e a registro aqui porque com certeza tereii que envia-la a outros mais):
There are differences:
1) We both applied comparative anatomy, but, he applied the reductive method, working details, I applied systemic method, searching the division, location and relationships among systems, starting with the whole biosphere as unique system and calculated the reverse of evolution, arriving to a point. Then the point pointed out to the solar system, so, from the point I went to the whole Universe, applying now comparative anatomy and reverse mechanisms of evolution between living and non-living systems (atoms and astronomic systems): Here I discovered the mechanisms of cosmological evolution and that these mechanisms continuing to driven biological evolution. Darwin did not perceive it. So, I re-calculated evolution applying the Darwinian mechanisms plus the cosmological mechanisms. The final results explained all gaps in Darwinian theory.
2) The idea of evolution was existing before Darwin’s travel to the field, at the tropics. He went to confirm the idea. The idea about an evolutionary link between cosmological evolution and biological evolution, and the idea that those non-biological systems linked evolutionary to biological system must be formed by the same biological formula (an ancestor of DNA); the idea that the building blocks of galactic systems has expressed or not the seven properties of life; and the final idea that in fact, there is no evolution, but, merely, a universal process of reproduction of the thing that triggered the Big Bang… these ideas were nowhere at my time, never existed before, and till now I am the unique human being with these ideas and formulas, models, supporting them. plus 1.600 evidences enrolled at my website and lots more at home, and hundred of previous predictions from 30 years ago confirmed by data obtained by official Science. Neither I had these ideas before going to the field, it was the pure nature never touched by human beings that suggested them. My unique idea before was that the first cell system was the first complete and real living thing, systems only comes from prior systems, less evolved or not, biological or not, and nobody in any time has searched a system when searching the cause of life’s origins. I went searching such system that, probable, was inside the primordial soup.
3) Darwin worked limited to the planet Earth and stood in the field 4 years: he discovered micro-evolution, 3,5 billion years old, because biological evolution is micro: I stood in the field 7 years, putting all time the whole universe on the table when drawing and calculating my models, i worked with universal macro-evolution which is 13,8 billion years old;
4) There are ideas that you suspects it is real, you work hard on it, sometimes given your life for it, you build a new theory, but, reality approves one idea and not approve others. Biological evolution is approved already, Darwin was lucky. Universal evolution still is not approved and can be debunked ( I am almost convinced that it will not, but, not sure yet), I will lose. Still I will leave my contribution: nobody will do the same mistake again.