Posts Tagged ‘Astronomy’

A busca da Matrix/DNA num mundo com galáxias dentro de galáxias dentro de galáxias

Wednesday, April 29th, 2020

https://www.livescience.com/hoags-object-perfect-ring-mystery.html

Hoag’s Object Is a Galaxy Within a Galaxy Within a Galaxy (and Nobody Knows Why)

By Brandon Specktor – Senior Writer December 03, 2019

Para quem refuta que não pode haver sistema astronomico como o meu modelo, aqui está um argumento: o que sabemos de galaxias? Por exemplo, o que são os Hoag´s objetos? Galáxias dentro de galáxias dentro de galáxias, mas na verdade são completos misterios ainda, não sabemos nada a respeito.

Luz e a Origem do Universo: Teoria Oficial Acadêmica em Video

Wednesday, April 15th, 2020

Video na Lbry:

https://lbry.tv/@DeepAstronomy:0/first-light-the-dark-age-of-the-universe:7

First Light: The Dark Age of the Universe

October 5th, 201233.01 LBC • 48 Views Deep Astronomy@DeepAstronomy

O mesmo video no Youtube:

00:21 – For the first three hundred thousand years, our universe was a hot, dense ocean of protons, 00:26 electrons and photons.

Matrix/DNA: This theory is not right. Where came from these particles? Protons and electrons are compounds of smaller particles, and as such, these super-particles already were a system in itself. The code for creating these systems was encrypeted in light waves, maybe the light wave fromm or with the Big Bang. That light wave expanded trhought the spatial substance, which could be dark matter. While expanding, due fricction with dark matter was created eletricity ( or energy) and the smallest, non-material particles, like quarks and leptons. From the wave were excaping its own particles – photons – wiich are smallest fractals of the big wave, so photons had the code also. Then, the photons, as free radicals, tried to joining again for re-creating the big wave, but, for some reason, they needed to mimic the wave as a technological tool made off matter, like we build airplanes mimicking birds. So, the photons drove those quarks and leptons to organize as copies of the wave as system, and got protons, electrons. The mass came from the dark matter, or the Higgs field. With those super-particles the photons built bigger systems – the atoms. And so on…

My comments posted on Lbry: ( Não consegui postar, retornar e tentar novamente

Thanks, beautiful video. I need to remember that this is a theory. O prefer another theory, called Matrix/DNA. Why I prefer this theory? Because the theoretical academic model of the beginning and evolution of the Universe, til the time when all these things produced life – biological systems – has nothing to see with the final product: life. if a theory about the unseen does not explain the very fact, the final product we can see now, this theory can not be right. There is no evolutionary link between cosmological and biological evolution in the academic model. In another hand, the most simplest rational exercise – comparison anatomy and dynamics – between the embryogenesis of the Universe and the embryogenesis of a human body – solve all these problems. This video is like a Chemist and Physicist watching the embryogenese of a baby without knowing the existence of DNA and describing what they see as chemistry and physics events inside the ovule. I have found that light waves propagates moved by the process of vital cycles and its different phases works like parts of a complete natural system. So, a light wave must be the DNA, the photons are the genes, at the Big Bang. They are right, as right would be when describing human embryogenesis without seeing the DNA and genes. They are not seeing the light.They use the expression “so, suddenly something extraordinary happened…”. Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence. The cosmic radiation background is coming from the initial light wave, which still is spread at the whole Universe being fragmented into its particles, the photons. If we have here and now a real natural parameter that explains what happened 13,8 years ago, why we need to create very complicated models based on things that we never saw anywhere?! Please, apply Occam´s Razor here.

Cont. of transcrit:

00:29 This ocean was a plasma so thick, and the particles so close together, that a photon

00:34 could only travel a short distance before running into one of the closely packed particles, 00:39 scattering it in different directions. 00:43 Because a photon could not travel very far without hitting something else, the universe 00:47 was opaque. 00:48 In the very early days of the universe, photons were imprisoned by the crowd of seething particles. 00:56 As time passed, the universe expanded, creating more space between the jostling protons and 01:01 electrons. 01:03 Then something extraordinary happened, after three hundred thousand years, the cosmos freed 01:09 the photons, the particles of the early universe had spread enough that a photon could run 01:14 unhindered and finally escape its prison. 01:20 As photons were released from their bonds and became decoupled from matter, the event 01:24 became immortalized in a snapshot of the cosmos when it was just a baby. 01:29 These unleashed photons became forever imprinted in the Cosmic Microwave Background. 01:37 This event is known as Recombination, and with it, the universe had just entered the 01:42 era known as The Dark Ages.

Análise sobre o ciclo de vida de uma estrela: Teoria Academica

Wednesday, April 1st, 2020

Obs: artigo não lido no total, fazer uma analise minuciosa para comparar com minha teoria. Notar que isso foi escrito em 1992,

https://super.abril.com.br/tecnologia/um-ciclo-da-vida-e-da-morte-no-ceu/

Um ciclo da vida e da morte no céu

Análise sobre o ciclo de vida de uma estrela.

Por Da Redaçãoaccess_time31 out 2016, 18h36 – Publicado em 31 out 1992, 22h00.

Meu astro-baby?!

Thursday, February 27th, 2020

O modelo teórico astronomico da Matrix/DNA sugere um processo de formação dos astros, iniciado no elemento que estiver executando a função de F1 da formula Matrix/DNA, o qual ejeta de si um germe ou semente de um novo astro, que seria F2. Este germe seria constituído de um núcleo escaldante ferroso apenas, contendo em si as informações para toda o desenvolvimento posterior, desde a forma de planeta, pulsar, estrela, etc. No espaço circundando F1 o germe se desenvolve como um feto tendo agregado a si a matéria da nuvem de poeira e rochas e energias das estrelas mortas, e esta matéria agregada vai formando coroas sobre o germe, na forma de camadas geológicas. Devido geralmente o elemento gerador – um vórtice turbilhonar no centro ou núcleo dos sistemas astronômicos – ser circundado por denso horizonte de eventos constituído dessa poeira interestelar, torna-se difícil enxergar ou detectar a existência do germe estelar sugerido pela teoria.

No recente artigo com link abaixo, as primeiras informações correspondem ao que seria previsto na existência do germe, ao qual denominei “astro-baby”:

An artist's depiction of a stellar flare from an L dwarf star.

Tiny star’s violent outburst catches astronomers’ attention — years late

https://www.space.com/tiny-star-with-huge-flare.html

Para quem critica minha teoria de que a primeira célula foi criada a imagem e semelhança dos building blocks astronômicos

Saturday, February 8th, 2020

Esta imagem é da chamada “Nebulosa da Bolha”, ou Bubble Nebula

The Bubble Nebula - NGC 7635 - Heic1608a.jpg

NGC 7635, também conhecida de Nebulosa da Bolha, Bubble Nebula, ou Shaspless 162 e Caldwell 11 é uma nebulosa de emissão localizada na constelação de Cassiopeia a 11 mil anos luz da Terra. A bolha que caracteriza essa nebulosa é criada pelo forte vento estelas que provem de uma fonte de quente, que é uma estrela jovem (SAO 20575) de 8,7 magnitude e de massa solar de 15 ± 5. Essa nebulosa esta perto de uma grande nuvem molecular. A estrela jovem que esta em seu centro brilha e esta nebulosa emite o brilho da estrela. Foi descoberto em 1787 por Friedrich Wilhelm Herschel (Wikipedia)

Neste video ela é impressionante como algo pré-vivo no Cosmos…

Mais um duro golpe na visao do mundo dos acadêmicos que favorece a minha visão do mundo: galaxias sem dark matter!

Friday, October 18th, 2019

xxxxx

Informação obtida no link:

Hubble reveals that galaxies without dark matter really exist

The new research may have dramatic implications for galaxy formation. 

http://www.astronomy.com/news/2019/10/hubble-reveals-that-galaxies-without-dark-matter-really-exist

Se o fato for realmente comprovado, será mais uma evidência para Matrix/DNA Theory e mais um fato que não se encaixa na corrente teoria oficial acadêmica.

” What does a galaxy without dark matter mean?

Um texto do artigo:

If these latest results hold up to the scrutiny that’s likely to come, then discovering the first (and possibly second) galaxy without dark matter would fundamentally change our understanding of how we think galaxies form and evolve.

“[DF4 and DF2] point to an alternative channel for building galaxies — and they even raise the question whether we understand what a galaxy is,” van Dokkum says. Right now, he says, we think that galaxies begin with dark matter, which is how they’re able to gravitationally attract the massive amounts of gas and dust needed to kick-start star formation…”

Nos meus modelos teóricos, as primeiras estrelas só poderiam ter sido formadas por gazes penetrados por ondas de luz vindas do Big Bang. Pois o meu modelo teórico do que é uma onda de luz era a única coisa existente no Universo que tinha as propriedades para formar as primeiras estrelas. A dark matter apenas contribuiu antes para a formação das partículas materiais que vieram a se constituírem em átomos produzidos pelas ondas de luz que vieram a constituir os gazes que depois vieram a constituir estrelas.

xxxx

Tem um debate correndo no REDDIT:

https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comments/djvk0k/new_hubble_data_suggests_galaxies_without_dark/

Meu post postado no REDDIT

MatrixDNA – 10/19/19

My non-scientific cosmological models has predicted it 30 years ago. If “galaxies without dark matter exists”, it means that the current elected theory about the formation of the matter that composes galaxies is wrong or not complete, and the current theory about dark matter also is wrong or not complete. Yours question made me to waste a whole day into research and after seeing about luminiferous aether, the Michelson-Morley experiment, the final Einstein conclusion of his “new aether”, etc. I arrived to the conclusion that without knowing the opinion of Einstein 30 years ago I arrived the same conclusion that “there is a spatial substance” which does not affect matter in any way. Physics of XIX century had the idea of a wind coming from the aether which would be the carrier of light and affecting the bodies speed was different from my results because they did not know what my calculations were suggesting: all movements in this Universe has an initial motor, which is the waves of light coming from the Big Bang and which has encrypted in it the process of life cycle. This process makes your own body to self-propagate into time and space growing in size and becoming old and changing yours shapes. There is a spatial universal substance, you can call it aether, dark matter, new aether, quantum foam, what you want. But it is like the terrestrial soil in relation to a human factory. The factory takes soil for self-building, is supported over the soil, but the soil does not affect the factory in anything. But, the standard theory of Physics gave the name to the soil got by the factory as “Higgs bosons” and the soil under their shoes as “Higgs field”… instead the not defined spatial substance.

Outro post publicado em 10/20/19

He questions our theories of galaxies formation, our theories about dark matter, but forgets to ask the meaning question: our theory that Math and Physics could explain galaxies and dark matter. It is funny how works a temporary dominant mindset. Look how they reacts when someone says that “theory” is produced philosophically, not by Science: they becomes furious. Yours galaxies built by humans business like Physics and Math are not real, everybody that does not are indoctrinated, still keeps an open mind, can see it. The real galaxies produces “life” so for explaining these galaxies, for to formulate a theoretical model of galactic formation, origins, and development you need to include the final result, which is biological systems, an issue for Biology, organic chemistry, so on. I made my own investigation, but starting from what I can see and touch here and now inside this galaxy, the final result of galactic evolution, which is life, and I got a theoretical model about these things – galactic systems, atoms systems, universal spatial substance, etc., totally different than the current dominant models. Which are and where were the real forces and elements in these theories of galaxies that, by its evolution, produced genetic code, metabolism, sexual reproduction, etc? You don’t know? So, biological systems were made with forces and elements coming from outside this galaxy?! By magical gods or magical accident events? Oh… com’on… stop and think a little bit outside the temporary mainstream… they always proved to be wrong, like the geocentric model, spontaneous generation, etc.. This galaxy produced life, so, it must have less evolved properties of life in it and Math, Physics, can not find them. My models found… but they are also theories…
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx











ASTRONOMY: They are seeing an explosion where I am seeing the blossom up of a flower

Friday, August 13th, 2010

See the article:

Fermi Detects ‘Shocking’ Surprise from Supernova’s Little Cousin

08.12.10

at: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/GLAST/news/shocking-nova.html

It is not a explosion: the white dwarf is a pulsar, an old and giant planet,  the nuclear reactions from its core has reached the last geological layer, and then, there is a collapse, when the remnant matter of the surface is a new strong nutriment of food to the germ of a star being developed through the nucleus. It is like the birth of a flower.

Why human beings trends to project themselves to unknown phenomena in the sky? We are product from a biosphere in state of chaos, but, in the sky, the astronomic organization of matter is in the state of order. There are no violence, no explosions. See in the article how many details on this event are against the current Nebular Theory, as recognized by the authors.

Comments about the article:

1)      Article: “The discovery overturns the notion that novae explosions lack the power to emit such high-energy radiation.”

The Matrix: The explosion of novae is an error of nebular Theory models. The models of Matrix/DNA Theory were not affected by this discovery.

2)      Article: “The outburst occurs when a white dwarf in a binary system erupts in an enormous thermonuclear explosion.”

The Matrix: The outburst occurs when a pulsar, which always is in a binary system, is transformed into a new star.

3)      Art: “The system is a so-called symbiotic binary containing a compact white dwarf and a red giant star about 500 times the size of the sun.”

Ther Matrix: “Yes, the transformation of a pulsar indicates that the system is old, then, must there is a red giant star.”

4)      Art: “”The red giant is so swollen that its outermost atmosphere is just leaking away into space. The white dwarf intercepts and captures some of this gas, which accumulates on its surface. As the gas piles on for decades to centuries, it eventually becomes hot and dense enough to fuse into helium. This energy-producing process triggers a runaway reaction that explodes the accumulated gas. The white dwarf itself, however, remains intact..”

The Matrix: “That’s a new fact that I never thought about. Indeed, before the pulsar’s transformation, it must be reached by the first degraded matter from the giant star. But, the next step is to broken the binary system because the supernova falls away out of the star’s gravitation force. Then, the degraded matter will build a vortex, called black hole. The nebular Theory is saying that the gas creates suddenly the hell at the white dwarf atmosphere. Ok: maybe the whole process really happens, then, the event was not the transformation of the pulsar. Maybe this kind of event is normal, happening before the transformation. But, let’s see now if the white dwarf will go back to the same. I don’t think so”

5)      Art: “It takes thousands of years for supernova remnants to evolve, but with this nova we’ve watched the same kinds of changes over just a few days,” he said. “We’ve gone from a photo album to a time-lapse movie.”

The Matrix: “Then you must to re-think your theoretical models.”











New Victory for Matrix Theory and new data against the Standard Model

Thursday, April 2nd, 2009
See the article: 

A “Hot Saturn” That’s Not So Odd

By Phil Berardelli
ScienceNOW Daily News
1 April 2009
http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2009/401/2#comment-blockAnd see the coment below posted under that article:ALERT ! This is not Scientific Journalism!The author, Mr. Phil Berardelli is doing a bad service to Science Institution.The error is here: “… Each system basically starts out from a diffuse cloud of gas and dust, called a protoplanetary disk, within which gravity begins to clump material together. When the parent star ignites,..”.  And here: “ giant, gaseous planet to migrate toward the star, as have gas giants in other solar systems”.  Never, but, never, nobody and nowhere have seen, or documented, the event of formation of a solar system. Never, anybody has watched a giant gaseous planet travelling toward a star.  We have no scientific theories, the standard model of solar system formation is only a hypothesis, since that the last ones planets saw showed too many contradictions. So, the student and layman when reading something like that (… each system basically starts out from…) will believe that it is thru, scientifically approved and confirmed. It is not, it is merely an individual supposition from people of a given epoch. Mr. Berardelli never saw any solar system formation, like nobody saw God creating life, so, the two affirmations is about religion, no Science.The right thing to write should be: “Accordingly whit the theoretical models, they suppose that each system…”, or something like that in a better English. And this: “ … as we suppose that there are such kind of migration…” If you are a scientific thinker, passionate, and advocate of scientific method, you must be alert and correct such mistakes. See what is happening with Neo-Darwinian Evolution Theory, being attacked from every side and being banished from some schools: they did the mistake of selling a theory as it being the ultimate truth.There are other models, even hypothesis, about cosmology and astronomic bodies’ formation where the last discoveries fill better. For instance, the models of The Universal Matrix Theory: it previews the existence of astronomic bodies like HD 149026b. Who has the authority to choose “the standard model”? The models of Matrix Theory do not deal with solar system formation, like cell molecular biology does not deal with atom formation. The models deal with cosmic bodies’ formation, like Biology deals with cellular organelles formation. Those models have no problem with the quantities of iron and nickel, neither has with bodies with giant rocky core and thick envelope of gas. The models suggest it must happen when a old planet is becoming a new pulsar. The models suggestions is that the hot gas envelope is due increasing volcanoes activity (  then, we will looking for volcano activity in HD 149026b).  The models suggest that only younger planets, without volcano activity migrate toward stars          The standard model must be investigated serious because it has a lot of problems. Here is a sample: “The most plausible explanation was that it resulted from a primordial collision between two or more gas giant planets.”. Never nobody saw collisions between astronomic bodies. What we have seeing about the sky it is suggesting that, there, reigns the natural state of order, not chaos, like in the biosphere. But the standard model, because it is basically based in the believe of events like “origins of something (as life, astronomical bodies and systems) by absolute chance”, or accident, leads normally the believer to suppose cosmic accidents like collisions. So we have “cannibals black holes”, supernova explosions, etc. Never any event like that has saw, but the student is forced and reinforced to believe in it, and when the student becomes astronomer, he/she will be ferocious advocate of a myth! The fact is that the standard model of solar formation has no link with the scientifically proved event which happened inside a solar system: the development of biological systems (mistakenly called “life”). Where is the forces, the elements, the ingredients used for the formation of a system that is the ancestral of the biological systems? Nobody even asked this question, the human rationality is not working, because astronomy became a matter of faith.

The method and instruments used here (they examined HD 149026b’s parent star and found that it contains twice the concentration of heavy elements, such as iron and nickel…) is totally proved? When we got real material from a distant body which previous analyze by the same method confirmed the prevision? Standard models with a Cosmo vision that offers no rational think for life origins and a health hope in human existence must not be sell to our children before a rigorous scientific examination. The problem of too many controversies around Evolution Theory is due the scholar texts making the same error here: they begins talking that it is a theory, but, at a given moment ahead, in the same text, it is no more a theory, they are catching doing strong affirmations as it were scientific approved… We must avoid the same happening with Cosmology and Astronomy… . But… I could be wrong… or not?