Posts Tagged ‘Science’

Ciência acadêmica vai mal: longa lista de falsificações e irregularidades contra peer-reviews

Monday, November 2nd, 2020


by William A. WilsonMay 2016

Materialismo: “O Universo e a Vida podem ser explicados pela Física e Matemática com as 4 forças naturais mais uma carrada de acidentes”

Thursday, September 3rd, 2020

Assim afirma o físico Premio Nobel no vídeo com link abaixo, mas antes deixa-me registrar o comentário que postei no TED abaixo do vídeo:

Louis Charles Morelli – Posted at 9/3/2020

Poor man. At the next corner there will be a discovery that a known natural element is a force more important and universal than anything he knows, which contains and rules the four natural forces and will reveal that only 5% of this world is grasped by Physics and Math.

Why we find the same Math equation when opening the next order of natural phenomena? Because when we opens the next body of a new species, and any next natural system, we find the same universal natural formula, which we say “Matrix/DNA”, the fifth and more important natural law, which contains Physics and Math, that’s why you find the same Math equations. Which is the best indication of beauty and elegance in nature? The roots at its foundation or the buildings of life, emotions ans consciousness? Mr Gell-Mann believes that the natural world is only from the Big Bang till the last galaxy, he is blind to what came before the Big Bang and what comes after the galaxies, which he says that are accidents. But in the real world is the meat that produces the bone skeleton and not the skeleton that produces the meat.

All natural orders of phenomena are properties of natural systems, there is a unique universal natural system that is coming under evolution since the Big Bang, which had the shapes of atomic systems, astronomic systems, cell systems and now is getting the shape of consciousnesses system. And all these shapes were built by a unique and same natural force, a kind of universal genome, which we call “Matrix/DNA”. We can see it encrypted into natural light waves. When he says “you don’t need to search something more” he is not different from those religious medievals dominating the universities and saying that “you have the Bible and God, does not need search anything more”. This is a science-stopper, inhibiting the students from keeping the open mind and searching.

Beauty, Truth and… Physics? by Murray Gell-Mann

TED – Beauty, Truth and… Physics? by Murray Gell-Mann

O que é a Ciência? Como a vejo

Friday, December 13th, 2019

Uma resposta a Skinner:

“A Ciência é uma disposição de aceitar os fatos mesmo quando eles são opostos aos desejos” – BF Skinner ( o pai da psicologia do condicionamento)

Mania de confundir o instrumento com o musico. Como instrumento a Ciência não tem disposição e nem desejos, o homem cientista os tem. A Ciência não escolhe os fatos a observar e experimentar, o homem os escolhe dentro dos limites do que seus sensores captam e segundo seus desejos mundanos. A Ciência é como um robot que tem por olhos os microscópios e telescópios, por sensores os medidores, mas nem um pensamento, nem mente, portanto a Ciência não interpreta fatos elaborando teorias, os homens o fazem. A Ciência não informa sobre fatos que ela nunca alcançou, como as origens do Universo, da Vida: o homem imagina os Big Bangs. A Natureza aqui e agora revela que as leis da vida na carne geram os esqueletos ósseos mecânicos que a suportam e falando a linguagem biológica; os manipuladores da Ciência afrontam essa logica natural e dirigem a Ciência a provar que as leis do esqueleto mecânico do Universo (átomos e galaxias) geraram a carne da vida falando a linguagem mecanicista matemática. Assim os desejos discriminam fatos e selecionam outros se aproveitando da muda voz e ausência do livre-arbítrio da Ciência. A Ciência não tem intenções como se ocupar de atividades que gerem lucros aos seus investidores, traindo a intenção dos pais fundadores da Ciência no iluminismo que era emprega-la apenas na busca do conhecimento pelo conhecimento. A Ciencia [e um todo que nao se separa em partes para separar os fatos naturais em quimicos, fisicos, biologicos, cegando-se para os aspectos sistemicos; os homens criaram estas separaoes estanques reducionistas para manipula-las segundo seus desejos. Entre meus desejos está o de dirigir a Ciência a observar fatos tais como a evidencia do ciclo vital nas ondas de luz, que aos atuais dirigentes não são convenientes.

Apesar disso tudo, que a Ciência retorne a ser o instrumento que nos revela todas as possíveis notas musicais da Natureza e o homem como maestro possa compor a sinfonia do Cosmos. Eu amo a Ciência mesmo sendo prostituída como está, principalmente pelo seu honesto e eficiente método dito “cientifico”. Que ela seja mantida no altar dos sagrados ao lado da roda, do fogo, do arco e flecha, sem os quais seriamos ainda os animais frágeis e nus das selvas ou teríamos perecido.

What’s Science? From Matrix/DNA perspective

Wednesday, August 23rd, 2017


This definition occurred to me intuitively when watching a debate at the link:

and I posted the following comment:

Louis Charles Morelli Louis Charles Morelli

Science had several owners since it was born, although the owners comes and go, Science will continuing walking by itself along the time.
Science has no theories, the very scientific act is solely the observation and experimentation of real facts and events happening in the material world, and the clear identification of what is Science is the accumulation of data got by its acts. So, at Earth, humans are merely a tool, an instrument used by Science. But Science is universal, then, at other planets, aliens are its tools.
Science can not think by itself, it can not elaborate theories, linking facts here and now with supposed facts far away. There are rocks, rocks are subject of Science investigation. Linking rocks with the far away event of life’s origins is merely human business. It is a valid tentative, although, I like human’s theories because has theories that have driven Science to successful investigations, as have others driven Science to nowhere. But, this is how human knowledge advances: trial and error. This painful method would not be necessary if humans decides not be owners of Science, searching for profits or power, only knowledge, as was the goal of the Founding Fathers of the new Enlightenment.
It happens that humans sometimes drives the scientific acts to points of their personal interests for profits or ideologies, like the ancient apostles did and the modern are doing also. Who decides which point, are those “fundraisers”, the big corporations and their apostles inserted into universities, like the big corporation Catholic Church did. Driven Science means repeating acts upon a unique dimension of reality, selecting a line of research and ignoring others, in the way that these acts works as feed back to the prior acts, and only a fake face of Nature is revealed. This is the opportunity for Science applying a painful lesson. “Do you want a mechanistic reality? Science will give it to you, and then, will slaving you inside yours mechanical reality.” That’s why we are going towards the Brave New World under the rules of the Big Brother.
And that’s why I choose to live isolated at Amazon jungle leaving Science working through me, without driven it, without any other personal interest than the search for knowledge, and got the face of an living Universe, described the most by Biology than Physics and Math.
Please, never forget that those that were believing they was the owner of academic knowledge and our schools, were replaced when Copernicus opened the doors to the modern apostles. Who, for sure, will be replaced again… Meanwhile, Science walks free its own way…

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 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?