Posts Tagged ‘theory’

Outra teoria cosmológica: Criação continua como sugeriu os diversos mitos esotéricos.

Thursday, June 4th, 2020
Genesis of the Cosmos: The Ancient Science of Continuous Creation

Provides compelling evidence that creation myths from the dawn of civilization correspond to cutting edge astronomical discoveries

• Exposes the contradictions in current cosmological theory and offers a scientific basis for the ancient myths and esoteric lore that encode a theory of continuous creation

• By the scientist who was the first to disprove the Big Bang theory on the basis of observational data

Recent developments in theoretical physics, including systems theory and chaos theory, are challenging long-held mechanistic views of the universe. Many thinkers have speculated that the remnants of an ancient science survive today in mythology and esoteric lore, but until now the scientific basis for this belief has remained cloaked in mystery. Paul LaViolette reveals the remarkable parallels between the cutting edge of scientific thought and creation myths from the dawn of civilization. With a scientific sophistication rare among mythologists, LaViolette deciphers the forgotten cosmology of ancient lore in a groundbreaking scientific tour de force. In direct, nontechnical language, he shows how these myths encode a theory of cosmology in which matter is continually growing from seeds of order that emerge spontaneously from the surrounding subquantum chaos.

Exposing the contradictions that bedevil the big bang theory, LaViolette offers both the specialist and the general reader a controversial and highly stimulating critique of prevailing misconceptions about the seldom-questioned superiority of modern science over ancient cosmology. By restoring and reanimating this ancient scientific worldview, Genesis of the Cosmos leads us beyond the restrictive metaphors of modern science and into a new science for the 21st century.

The standard theory of the universe is known as lambda-CDM

Monday, January 27th, 2020

Pesquisar lambda-CDM

Predictions from Matrix/DNA Theory: Rules to obey

Sunday, January 19th, 2020

A suggestion from my friend:

To Louis Morelli:
You have a simple choice before you. You can spend your life as a crank, convinced of your own superiority and wondering why everyone else is refusing to acknowledge it. Or you can start making actual sense.

So, in the interest of helping you along with the second option, try this: Describe a practical prediction that follows from your “theory” and a method for testing it. The prediction should follow these criteria:

1) It should be an actual prediction. I.e. something we don’t already know.

2) It should be unique to your theory. I.e. it should be something that distinguishes your theory from every other idea out there.

3) It should be practically testable, with an objective measure of success or failure. I.e. no “you have to feel it”, no “if you use your left hemisphere, it’s obvious”, no “the jungle will tell you the answer”.

I’m sure a person as staggeringly intelligent and well-educated as yourself will recognize these as basic rules of proper scientific investigation and therefore have no objection to complying with them.

My answer:

Thanks, I will try it. But, first of all, I don´t think that I am convinced of my own superiority. I think it is actually the opposite – so humble that I never tried to go beyond my humble website. I don´t believe that I found the Ultimate Thru, neither a complete theory of it. I am, always was, a skeptical about humans knowledge, because I think our brain has no capacity to process the higher information beyond our senses. That´s why I am testing the theory against facts everyday, and selecting evidences, but, also, searching to facts that could debunk the entire theory. I am not selling anything, I am not selling myself, I don´t want to be in delusion due my wrong theory, I will not earn anything that I already have, I want the Thru, only that. If I talk about this theory with someone, it is because I am searching more minds joining and helping me in this search because I believe ( yes, here I believe) that if this theory has some thru in it, it will be beneficial to human kind, to our next generations.

Yes, I am wondering why everyone else is refusing to acknowledge the logistic and rationality in this theory. For me it is so clear, could not be in other way. We are systems, these systems has an essence, this essence is the DNA. Atoms and galaxies are systems. atoms and galaxies are our systems ancestors. They must have an essence also. This essence must be ancestor of our essence as systems. I heve applied the formula of DNA to atoms systems and astronomic systems and got how the ancestor shapes of DNA was there. If you go further, you will find the same formula as the single, natural anatomy of a wave of light, like the wave propagating from the Big Bang, what means that the code for DNA was existing before the Big Bang. It means that the first genome in this Universe came as a wave of light. This thesis is more rational than the thesis suggesting that the code in the DNA emerged here by miracles, like the one did by a supernatural God or by the inorganic matter. It is rational. I am wondering why people does not understand this rationality, this logistic. Not about why people does not understand the new theory, since I never explained it in full.

I have selected tens of predictions made by this theory in these last 30 years, that were latter proved. But the majority of these right predictions were scientifically known. I was not knowing them in Amazon jungle. The advantage here is that I didn´t need to do the experiments that revealed them, I saw them mentally by my own. Other predictions are about unknown mechanisms revealed by scientists. They see the thing happening, but they are not able to explain how or why it happens. My theory suggested the existence of these mechanisms or process and explain why it happens. But I never got to talk to the scientist and I am sure he/she will not believe in it without a long dissertation of the whole theory, for which the scientist is not wanting to waste his/her time.

I am dying. I will try, before it happens, to write a book with the must information I can do. For what? What if everything is wrong? Mendel spent his life crossing beans and wrote a manuscript about his observations. The manuscript was not saw by nobody and fell into the basement of a library. Then he died. For what he wrote it? Man, millions, billions of people are being saved due Mendels´hard work. Like me, I think Mendel has not built a family, had no kids. We spent our lives, all our energy to bring to light and feed a spiritual, or merely minded son. We write for the spiritual world, if there is one… dreaming that real people see it for the benefits of our loved human kind. It is good for us because we die in peace with our mind.

But, as suggested my friend, I must search time for trying to find a practical prediction just now…

Phrases for Matrix/DNA Theory

Saturday, October 12th, 2019


There never comes a point where a theory can be said to be true. The most that one can claim for any theory is that it has shared the successes of all its rivals and that it has passed at least one test which they have failed.” – Phillip Kitcher

Several times I have seen something like this: ” This new information, or data, or image, does not fit into our current theory. We will need to re-calculate the theory…”, while the data fits very well into Matrix/DNA models.

Other situation is when the researchers says: ” there is an unknow mechanism here”, or, “the mechanism here is unknown”, while the models of matrix/DNA Theory already contains a mechanism that could fit the results.

So, my theory has shared the successes of its rivals…. but, it is not a scientific theory….

Bom para Matrix/DNA Theory: A escolha teorica em controversias cientificas

Saturday, July 20th, 2019


Paper em PDF baseado em Kunh, Popper, muitos argumentos a favor de uma teoria controversa como foi a copernicana

Understanding why not the Milk Way, but its essence, produced us

Friday, August 25th, 2017


Teorias sobre Origens da Vida

My comment below explains the perspective of Matrix/DNA Theory about the “origins of life”, posted in the debate at this link:


luvdomus luvdomus – 8/25/2017

If living matter which is made from atoms and molecules, didn’t come from non-living matter, also made from atoms and molecules, where did it come from? Out of empty space?


Louis Charles Morelli Louis Charles Morelli – 8/25/2017

luvdomus: Forget the word “living”, which is antropomorfism, and things becomes clear. From Nature perspective, must say “systems”.

You are thinking in “atoms and molecules” as portion of organic mass coming from non-organic mass. Of course, a biological system can not comes from non-organic portion of mass. But, see that portions of non-organic mass can belong to a natural system, like atoms, galaxies. Now we has a better question: biological systems came from a non-biological system?

We need think about the jump in complexity, which would be very big. And what could happens in the process of transition for such mutation. The most complex non-biological system must be a galaxy. Making comparative anatomy between the first complete working biological system ( a Eukaryota cell system) and a galaxy, it seems impossible the jump. But,… maybe we are not knowing what a galaxy is. Maybe our theoretical model, the nebular theory, the spontaneous and random formation of bodies, are so wrong as when we were believing that Earth was the center of Sun’s system.

That’s what lead me to recalculate this models from the perspective of a cell system and calculating reverse evolution. The results – called Matrix/DNA Theory – shows a theoretical model of – not galaxies – but, building blocks of galaxies, that are equal to the building blocks of DNA. So, like the essence of an organism is not the organism but its DNA – it is the DNA that is transmitted to offspring, not the organism – is possible that the essence of this galaxy – the Matrix, its kind of non-biological DNA – was inserted into terrestrial atoms, driving them to biological organization and finally, composing a working system, due water and its production: organic chemistry.

So, we still have only theories, to be tested. But, now, after fixing this mistake caused by anthropomorphism, we can suppose that it is possible: biological systems were produced by evolution inside and by galaxies, which building blocks are half-biological/half mechanical described by Newtonian’s mechanics. Welcome to the new Milk Way, our physical grand-grandmother. Now, about our consciousness, its origins, I make no idea… Again the jump in complexity from the human brain to consciousness is not astronomic… maybe is universally ex-machine.