Archive for the ‘Panspermia’ Category

Origens da Vida: Bom video sob a otica materialista e debate com a Matrix/DNA

sábado, setembro 5th, 2015



The Origin of Life – Abiogenesis – Dr. Jack Szostak

video no Youtube:

E meus comentarios, respostas, no Yotube:

Louis Charles Morelli · September, 04, 2015
” Life only appears to come from life…”Only appears?!!! When and where somebody saw any life coming from other thing than life?! All life come from life, there is no known and proved fact of other way, so, any human being that ” belief” there is life coming from non life is not rational, is metaphysics, is an appeal to something supernatural.Then we have the first living beings at Earth that we don’t know which life produced them. What’s the problem? Let’s go making theories ( maybe from extra-terrestrials, then prove that there are extraterrestrials, etc.) for investigations, but any rational theory must pointing to some kind of life. These people and the whole scholar mindset loose the control of their rationality.
E other post:

The building block of galactic systems are equal the building blocks of DNA and both are ancestors of the first biological system at Earth, a complete and working cell. So, an astronomical system composed by seven different shapes of astronomic bodies ( planets, stars, pulsars, quasars, black(white) holes, comets, cloud of dust and gases) performs the same functions that a cell composed by seven or eight organelles or parts ( ribosome, DNA, RNA-m, lysosome, mitochondria, chloroplasts, membrane) and that a DNA’s building block composed by seven elements ( two lateral sugars, four bases plus uracil).  Then, DNA is not a only the code for biological systems, it is merely the biological shape of a universal matrix, which is the code for all known systems, from atoms to galaxies to human beings. Abiogenesis was merely a process of astronomical reproduction and embryogenesis in a different environment and added with anew state of matter – the liquid water.At Matrix/DNA Theory ( vide its website) everything is detailed explained. But where this universal Matrix/DNA came from? We discovered that natural systems are elaborated by Nature applying the process of vital cycle upon a unique initial body. So the question was: from where came this process? And we also discovered it: the electromagnetic radiation ( aka waves of light) propagates in time and space by the same sequence of vibration/energy that a human body propagates in its time and space.So, life came from a wave of light, emitted at or by the Big Bang, and penetrating the dark matter. The problem now isL where these waves of light that contains the code for life came from?We don’t know, because as human beings we can only investigate what is inside this Universe, and these things came before and beyond the Universe. Final: Remembering Godel – ” nobody can know the truth of a system standing inside it” – if life was produced by Nature or God or something else non human we know it, never. For knowing it, we will need transcendence of our actual shape. But, with our intelligence we can know everything inside.
+Louis Charles Morelli You should learn some correct English first. Then you can start to tackle such advanced concepts as what a scientific Theory is.
Louis Charles Morelli 1 second ago

+JustinMShaw I know what theory is since my 12 years old when reading all Greek philosophers. Theory is a contemplative and rational type of abstraction, or the results of such thinking. Depending on the context, the results might for example include generalized explanations of how nature works. The owners of this name – theory – is those who coined the word, in ancient Greek.But,… when someone want to be rational and thinking about Nature, there is no chance for metaphysical appeals. Nature shows to us that all known life only comes from a previous existing life, that’s it.Neither the scientific mindset of this times ( which will be substituted by another more advanced at the next times, as always has been) is the owner of the word ” theory”, neither the English language is the owner of natural phenomena like the one here – life’s origins. Can you understand that ” life” has its electromagnetic version and its astronomical mechanical version also? So, searching the origins of life at 3,5 billions years ago and at Earth surface or some comets, makes no sense.

+Louis Charles Morelli  – Well it’s a good thing that science has not tried to wage a war against the continued use of the word theory that you just summed up – the purely philosophical and not even remotely dependent on empiricism version of the world. But your lament at the inaccessibility of the intangible to a scientific Theory suggests that you don’t know the meaning of the latter and clearly reveals your intolerance of it. That begs the question of what you’re doing on a video like this that is purely concerned with empiricism. But since you seem to enjoy babbling about scientific terms, what exactly do you mean about life having an electromagnetic form and an astronomical mechanical version? Are the two supposed to be mutually exclusive and if so then what’s the difference between them?
+JustinMShaw ” Well it’s a good thing that science has not tried to wage a war against the continued use of the word theory”
Hummm… among the founding fathers of the scientific method, there were those that was merely wishing to open a war against religion and there were those, like Francis Bacon, that was purely rationalists and from them we learn that Science is observation of natural phenomena, annotation, and from the data trying to get more data through experiments.  Pure Science opens war against humans enemies like viruses, meteorites falling from the sky, etc., not against abstract things like words, religions, etc., because the abstract is not business for Science. Is an ideology (as materialism) dominating the head of a scientists that produces behaviors like Szostack which leads them far away from rational thinking, like the imagination that life could coming from non-life.
” the purely philosophical and not even remotely dependent on empiricism version of the world.”
That’s funny. You says that I must learning English while you knows how to talk English but you does not know the formal definition of English words. Like theory and empiricism. Empiricism is not derivated and not limited to scientific experiments. It is a “theory” that states that knowledge comes only or primarily from sensory experience. And which rational theoretical scientist have a sensory experience of life coming from non-life?! Do you know why it happens? It is missing to learn with Einstein about the relativistic world. It teaches us for instance, trying to see things from a microscope perspective. Like the imagination that we are intelligent microbes inside an embryonary sac nurturing a human fetus. The microbes watches the development from a unique cell, blastulae, fetus, fish, reptile, mammals shapes and of course – since they never saw reptiles and mammals – everything is blind evolution by random mutations producing complex systems. They never could know that driving all events there is a natural formula, called genetic code, which comes form other life existing beyond the microbes’ universe. That’s what I am discovering with my Matrix/DNA Theory, after studying natural systems, applying comparative anatomy between living and non-living systems and discovering that abiogenesis was driven by the same formula, he same genetic code, coming from a half-living system – the building blocks of astronomical systems.
” what exactly do you mean about life having an electromagnetic form and an astronomical mechanical version?”
No, Justin, there was no life when the Universe began by an electromagnetic order of natural phenomena, neither when the universe was composed by astronomical systems… The magical thinking ( be it materialist, deist, atheist) needs that a universe not linked to a kind of life could create life by magic, be it magical gods or magical random movements. A magic event that brought from nothing the living principle, and inserted it inside itself as genetic code! Go to my website to see a model of atoms operating almost by electromagnetic forces already expressing life’s properties, and models of astronomical systems were all life’s properties are expressed in a mechanic fashion. At the Big Bang, the living principle was like a extreme singularity, but, you know, there is evolution, and then, we have this complex shape of the same life today. If the theoretical smallest atom that gave birth to this Universe had no living principle, forgets that atom and search another prior cause, as we did at Matrix/DNA Theory. Everything is natural, no supernatural creation as wishes Mr. Szostack.

” Are the two supposed to be mutually exclusive and if so then what’s the difference between them?”

The difference between lifes’ properties expressed at the primordial electromagnetic order of phenomena and the later astronomical order is less mass and more mass – and billions of years of evolution between then. Why they must be mutually exclusive? I can’t see Newton mechanics without electromagnetic effects, magnetic fields, etc. If you are saying that radiations like gamma-ray from the electromagnetic expectrum are mortal to life you are wrong: they are mortal to biological life only. Included, the sequence of electromagnetic frequencies/vibrations from gamma-ray to radio is the same sequence of the living energy that drives yours own body in yours lifetime, from blastulae to death.

(Obs.: Definition of Empiricism by Wikipedia):

Empiricism is a theory that states that knowledge comes only or primarily from sensory experience.[1] One of several views of epistemology, the study of human knowledge, along with rationalism and skepticism, empiricism emphasizes the role of experience and evidence, especially sensory experience, in the formation of ideas, over the notion of innate ideas or traditions;[2] empiricists may argue however that traditions (or customs) arise due to relations of previous sense experiences.[3]

Empiricism in the philosophy of science emphasizes evidence, especially as discovered in experiments. It is a fundamental part of the scientific method that all hypotheses and theories must be tested against observations of the natural world rather than resting solely on a priori reasoning, intuition, or revelation.


JustinMShaw 2 days ago

+Louis Charles Morelli
You really should work on improving your English, but I think I can decipher that. Let me know, does this paraphrasing come close to what you meant (I’ll separate it into the three paragraphs you did, but much shorter)?
~”Some of the founders of the scientific method wanted to wage a war against religion. Science can’t declare war against concepts, only against tangible things like viruses and meteorites. But ideology leads many scientists astray and Szostak has been compromised by his belief in materialism. By the way, abiogenesis is a joke.
In fact founders of the scientific method lived in an era when an accusation of atheism could earn them the death penalty. Of course we can speculate about their inner beliefs, but character witness is something that science has already shown us to be exceptionally bad at, besides the pointlessness of the endeavor. But what they did openly, if they criticized religion at all, is favor one at the expense of another. You don’t see rationalists really start speaking out against religion until the eighteenth century, and even then generally not from an atheist perspective but merely more of a deist one. The current acceptance of atheism is really just a generation old if that. So no, you are directly wrong about the history of religion and science. But you make it very clear that you’re intolerant of materialism and consider it a religion. That is an extremely dishonest and offensive position. Materialism means to invoke everything tangible but nothing else. By definition it means everything except the supernatural, everything except magic. Your pet definitions of those words are rejected.
You don’t know the definition of the words you use, empiricism means relating to the senses and we can’t sense abiogenesis happening. There are theories like the one that we’re intelligent microbes inside an embryonic sac that feeds a fetus. The microbes watch various animal shapes develop and assume it’s just natural selection. They never guess that there’s a hidden pattern guiding it all. That’s what I’m discovering with my Matrix/DNA Theory.
And you’re wrong in the exact same way about the definition of empiricism. Good for you getting into the root meanings of words, and shame on you for thinking that modern thinking must adhere to those roots. Though in this case there is a connection. Empirical things can be sensed even if we must enhance our senses with machines, and they are clearly distinguishable from things that can’t yet be sensed such as (again, by definition) the intangible. More to the point empiricism just refers to checking assumptions against experimental results rather than merely against our own inner logic. Anyway, to continue with your rant about intelligent microbes, you seem there to be trying to describe the mainstream scientific view, but are failing miserably. It is not assumed that we are intelligent microbes or that we see all those animal forms in sequence. Maybe if you were to dishonestly mix up some pseudoscience with some long outdated claims you could patch that together, but it’s extremely dishonest now. And you hilariously end trying to claim that you have the answer with your own pet pseudoscience. You’re not the discoverer of the universe’s great mathematical secrets, and if a pattern does repeat itself in and out of biological systems that isn’t necessarily evidence of a pattern from another universe. According to mainstream science it’s merely the consistent nature of the universe that makes science possible, and the symmetry that hopefully makes it within our grasp to someday fully understand.
Life appearing in this universe, whether by abiogenesis or by divine biogenesis, is magic. Only my theory of a pattern for life from another universe makes sense. And Szostak is invoking magic, I’m not.
” If that is what you meant to say then you clearly not only don’t get the definition of natural versus supernatural, you outright rebel against it and call natural phenomena supernatural. So don’t expect this conversation to stay civil for very long.
You did not clarify the difference between your own claims of “electromagnetic form” and “astronomical mechanical version,” instead you just acted the pompous and ignorant idiot and pretended that I didn’t realize life was younger than the universe. So you dodged the question, perhaps lost in the euphoria of expounding on your own pathetic fantasies, and then declared that only the involvement of a pattern from another universe could be considered “not magic.” Your stupidity just gets worse and worse. Any mathematical patterns we find are by definition within this universe, you idiot. And you invoking another universe while claiming that this one is not enough is invoking magic. I am so glad that your brand of pseudoscientific quackery is on a steep decline. It’s especially hilarious how transient your followers are, being sucked in one minute by some new quantum discovery and then falling out of favor when the scientific site that informed them about it explains a few things. The age of unsupported dogma is coming to a close. Granted, it’s throwing a loud temper tantrum as it’s put to bed, but it’s going down.
Justin, you did a great contribution  translating my text, now I can know how English speakers and totally ignorant about the new Matrix//DNA world view interprets almost everything wrong. I never said such stupid things like that life came from another universe and by magics, I never said that there is a theory about intelligent microbes, I never said that rationalists started speaking out against religion before the eighteenth century, there is no such confusion between natural and supernatural, etc.. Yours paraphrasing is not close to  the concepts that I was trying to explain, but yours fault is not due my English language errors, since that people of my native language makes the same interpretations error mistakes that you do.  Yours fault is due yours wrong interpretations about each real natural phenomena, because a wrong millenary human culture that are interpreting those phenomena has indoctrinated your mind. in the way that you will believe that an extraterrestrial intelligent life form made with non-organic materials has an absurd and stupid interpretation.     
But, if you are interested to learn how to check yours nowadays world view and how it will be difficult for humans to communicate with other lifeforms  that  have a world view totally weird and never imagined before by you,  it will be good to keep this conversation here…
You interpreted:  “…. By the way, abiogenesis is a joke.
I never wrote this word – joke – go reading again my post. The total time of abiogenesis ( maybe 3 billion years) was anything else than a process of embryogenesis at astronomical scale of time, because the mother of abiogenesis was this astronomical system inside which the first living being was born.  Human embryogenesis takes only 9 months, but the formation of a star takes millions or billions years, and here, embryogenesis and formation has the same meaning, they are the same process – one is the other, the difference is merely evolutionary. I could explain this process if I could bring here the picture of the model of an astronomic system by Matrix/DNA Theory, which is pretty different of yours ” Standard and Nebular Theories’ models” , despite that my facts and yours facts are the same facts – the theoretical connections and interpretations of these facts are different, and one theory has no fact for debunk the other.
The abiogenesis theory is well based on  facts and evidences, like the self-replicating molecules, the Miller/Urey aminoacids, etc. What is wrong with the theory is the  human imagination that tried to connect those data and evidences for to see the big picture, or to write the Natural History from the non-living matter of this planet till the first  living being. And the errors of these theorists was due their minds believing that there was an agent, a force, called ” random events” as guide of this history. It is not random  events that drives the process of embryogenesis, it was not random events that drove the formation of the first living being. Formation or embryogenesis is driven by the bodies’ parents, , and the parents of the first living being was the body of this astronomical system called Milk Way.  Or don’t was it ?!!! Which real proved known fact have you for convincing me that Nature has decided to apply an unknown different mechanism for formation of the first biological system? A mechanism other than that applied for formation of astronomical systems?
Oh….. I know, yours answer will be that random events also was the  mechanism applied for formation of astronomical systems. And you will throw over the table the academic model for astronomical systems. But this is circular reasoning, like any other mystical world view will bring its sacred scripture as proof. The academic model is wrong.
I am advocating that this connection was wrong because I did this ( also imaginative) connections and the final result is a different theory. So, we are debating  theories, yours against mine. But, please, be non-personal, without an ideology, a belief system like that the school of this time indoctrinated you towards the materialistic world view. I don’t believe that my theory ( which school is  the  wild environment of Amazon jungle), or any other human theory  is the ultimate thru, because I recognize that my little brain without good sensors and my dimensions as a microbe in this Universe is not able to grasp and to understand the ultimate truth. So, this  debate between ours different theories must be focused upon the real facts known by you and me, and  the motives that you connected the fact A with the fact L while I connected A with the fact  R.
( I will be back posting the corrections to yours others paraphrasing)

Existem 9 teorias sôbre as Origens da Vida, incluindo a minha ( Matrix/DNA Theory) e a da Biblia. Qual voce prefere?

segunda-feira, janeiro 19th, 2015

1) Teoria Electric Sparks

Electric sparks can generate amino acids and sugars from an atmosphere loaded with water, methane, ammonia and hydrogen, as was shown in the famous Miller-Urey experiment reported in 1953, suggesting that lightning might have helped create the key building blocks of life on Earth in its early days. Over millions of years, larger and more complex molecules could form. Although research since then has revealed the early atmosphere of Earth was actually hydrogen-poor, scientists have suggested that volcanic clouds in the early atmospheremight have held methane, ammonia and hydrogen and been filled with lightning as well.

2) Teoria Community Clay

The first molecules of life might have met on clay, according to an idea elaborated by organic chemist Alexander Graham Cairns-Smith at the University of Glasgow in Scotland. These surfaces might not only have concentrated these organic compounds together, but also helped organize them into patterns much like our genes do now.

The main role of DNA is to store information on how other molecules should be arranged. Genetic sequences in DNA are essentially instructions on how amino acids should be arranged in proteins. Cairns-Smith suggests that mineral crystals in clay could have arranged organic molecules into organized patterns. After a while, organic molecules took over this job and organized themselves.

3) Teoria Deep-Sea Vents

The deep-sea vent theory suggests that life may have begun atsubmarine hydrothermal vents, spewing key hydrogen-rich molecules. Their rocky nooks could then have concentrated these molecules together and provided mineral catalysts for critical reactions. Even now, these vents, rich in chemical and thermal energy, sustain vibrant ecosystems.

4) Teoria Chilly Start

Ice might have covered the oceans 3 billion years ago, as the sun was about a third less luminous than it is now. This layer of ice, possibly hundreds of feet thick, might have protected fragile organic compounds in the water below from ultraviolet light and destruction from cosmic impacts. The cold might have also helped these molecules to survive longer, allowing key reactions to happen.

5) Teoria RNA World

Nowadays DNA needs proteins in order to form, and proteins require DNA to form, so how could these have formed without each other? The answer may be RNA, which can store information like DNA, serve as an enzyme like proteins, and help create both DNA and proteins. Later DNA and proteins succeeded this “RNA world,” because they are more efficient. RNA still exists and performs several functions in organisms, including acting as an on-off switch for some genes. The question still remains how RNA got here in the first place. And while some scientists think the molecule could have spontaneously arisen on Earth, others say that was very unlikely to have happened.

Other nucleic acids other than RNA have been suggested as well, such as the more esoteric PNA or TNA.

6) Teoria Simple Beginnings

Instead of developing from complex molecules such as RNA, life might have begun with smaller molecules interacting with each other in cycles of reactions. These might have been contained in simple capsules akin to cell membranes, and over time more complex molecules that performed these reactions better than the smaller ones could have evolved, scenarios dubbed “metabolism-first” models, as opposed to the “gene-first” model of the “RNA world” hypothesis.

7) Teoria Panspermia

Perhaps life did not begin on Earth at all, but was brought here from elsewhere in space, a notion known as panspermia. For instance, rocks regularly get blasted off Mars by cosmic impacts, and a number of Martian meteorites have been found on Earth that some researchers have controversially suggested brought microbes over here, potentially making us all Martians originally. Other scientists have even suggested that life might have hitchhiked on comets from other star systems. However, even if this concept were true, the question of how life began on Earth would then only change to how life began elsewhere in space.

8) Matrix/DNA Theory.

Astronomical systems have their building blocks also, which was fragmented by entropy into photons-bits-information and is nannotechologized fitting very well as the building block of RNA/DNA. So there were no origins of life, DNA was not created at this planet and DNA is not a code, and this is not panspermia. Comparative anatomy between biological and cosmological evolution suggested an evolutionary link which was LUCA – the Last Universal Common Ancestor of all biological systems ( see LUCA, the astronomical building block at my avatar here). Since that LUCA fits very well as the lateral pair of nucleotides, which is the building block of biological systems, it means that DNA is merely an evolutionary product coming from a universal “Matrix”. The Matrix/DNA is a formula ( showed at Matrix/DNA website)

9) Teoria Biblica:

No inicio Deus criou a Luz por mágica e ….

Xanthine: Molécula Envolvida nas Origens da Vida e Encontrada em Meteóritos, Reforçam a Teoria da Matrix/DNA

sábado, dezembro 8th, 2012

Lendo o artigo sôbre Panspermia, descrito abaixo, descubro hoje a existência de uma molécula, Xanthine, e uma rápida pesquisa revelou que tudo nela, inclusive sia fórmula quimica, bate em tudo com as previsões dos modêlos teóricos da Matrix/DNA feitas há 30 anos atrás. É fascinante a explicação sôbre o que produziu esta molécula, porque ela foi feita aqui, e para que veio.  O artigo onde a encontrei estará em outro artigo a ser feito aqui porque n6ele estamos analizando a questào da panspermia:

Panspermia Theory for Life’s Origins Gets Boost from Top Scientists


By NewsWax

Life is all about information – its replication and processing.” — Professor Paul Davies

(Artigo copiado aqui para ser analizado e comentado item por item pela Matrix/DNA Theory)

A team of scientists from the United States, United Kingdom and the Netherlands have determined that chemicals in a meteorite that form the building blocks of DNA and RNA had formed before the meteorite fell to Earth. In a paper published in Earth and Planetary Science Letters on June 15, the team documents an examination of molecules found in the Murchison meteorite, fragments of which landed near the village of Murchison, Victoria in Australia in 1969.

Previous studies had identified amino acids and sugars in the meteorite that were believed to have formed in space. The samples the current study examined included molecules of uracil and xanthine,

Matrix/DNA: “Isto relembra a previsão feita a 30 anos atrás baseada nos modêlos teóricos da Matrix/DNA de que a uracil é a molécula dos nucleotídeos que foi feita pela função sistêmica universal numero 5, a qual, quando está na forma de building block de galaxias, faz os astros denominados “cometas”, e quando está na forma de sistema celular faz os RNA’s M e T ( mensageiro e transportador). Xanthine é uma novidade para mim, portanto vamos conhecer ela recorrendo inicialmente à Wikipedia:

Xantina é uma base purínica, composto orgânico encontrado na urina e também em diversos tecidos do corpo humano, além de estar presente em algumas plantas.

Um exemplo comum de xantina é a cafeína.

O termo Xantina deriva do grego Xanthos – que alude à cor amarela…

Lol!… Não precisou mais que 3 minutes para identificar na fórmula da Matrix de onde veio a Xanthine e saber para que veio. Ela é uma catalista, ou seja, é como uma bacia chacoalhando e mexendo as substancias dentro dela. Diferentes velocidades do chacoalho, diferentes durações dos chacoalhos e talvez diferentes direçôes dos movimentos produzem diferentes compostos finais. Isto é, a grosso modo, denominado “catálise”. A Xanthine foi produzida aqui na Terra pelas particulas-informação vindas de radiações estelares como o Sol, e/ou de radiação de nucleos planetários, na forma de fótons, que invadem átomos “inertes” obrigando-os à novas conexões, na tentativa de reproduzir o sistema de onde vieram ( pura ação genética).  As informações embutidas na Xanthine se referem ao trecho do circuito sustêmico da fórmula da Matrix/DNA que vai da Função 7 à Função 1. Ou seja, no corpo humano vai do órgão “fígado” ao órgão “coração”; no sistema celular é o trecho que vai da organela “lisossoma” ao nucleo celular: no building block astronomico é o trecho que vai do cadaver estelar ao vortex nuclear. Pela sua ação catalizadora, eu aposto que suas informações sejam mais relacionadas à ultima parte do segmento daquele trecho, devendo já conter metade de informações para elaborar o vortex: ela faz o que faz o vortex no espaço sideral – chacoalhar massa e energia degradada. Se no meteórito encontramos uracil e xanthine juntos, isto significa que a o vortex que está sendo iniciado na forma de Xanthine já está recebendo cometas, espermatozóides do espaço, o que, a nivel biologico significa que naquele meteórito já estava toda a infraestrutura instalada para se iniciar a construção da Vida, ou melhor, de um par de base de nucleotideos. Fantástico!

A fórmula quimica da xanthine reforça nossas interpretações. Vemos um ring completo, com seis átomos ou seja, hexagonal ( o que significa que a forma astronomica foi copiada uma vez e completa, mais uma estensão com uma figura pentagonal, cinco átomos, o que significa que uma segunda cópia da mesma forma foi parada na função 7 ( não conta a F5, que é o ramo interno do fluxo sistêmico, nem conta a F1, que representa-se como a primeira cópia em torno da qual se desenvolve a segunda).  A forte presença do átomo N ( nitrogênio) na segunda cópia (segundo anel) é sempre indicativa de que a fórmula quimica expressa dominantemente o aspecto entrópico degenerativo da face direita da Matrix, pois êste átomo tem numero atômico 7, justamente um a mais do que o Carbono, que na Terra é a cópia fiel da Matrix astronomica. Ora, se um átomo tem em si o sistema completo (6 atomos) e mais um somando 7, isto significa que êle está reforçando a espressão da Função 7 e já abrindo caminho para a construção da Função 1. Por isso a fórmula inteira da Xanthine é esta mensagem: ” aplique-se a êste composto movimentos expressados por mim ( direção, duração, velocidade) que faça um cadaver de sistema ser mais fragmentado, degradado, para ser ressuscitado, ou seja, que um sistema seja reciclado, reiniciado”. Veja na Wikipédia esta informação: “xanthine é o processo resultante da degradação de uma purina”, o que bate mais uma vez com nossas previsões.   Assim a descrição do fenômeno com palavras como está no texto da Wikipedia bate com a informação revelada pela fórmula quimica, e as duas descrições bate com a descrição da fórmula astronomica da Matrix/DNA e as três descrições batem com a descrição da Matrix/DNA sôbre o que são nucleotideos, para depois tôdas estas descrições baterem com o significado existencial que a Matrix/DNA sugeriu para atomos, galaxias, células, corpos humanos. Assim funciona uma lógica numa teoria racional (claro, uma pobre racionalidade como só poderia ser a racionalidade limitada ao nosso pequenino cérebro perdido nêste pontinho insignificante dêste imenso Universo. Com o avançar do nosso conhecimento deve avançar o alcance da nossa racionalidade e então, suponho, mais completa e rica será a descrição).

Copiemos aqui a fórmula da Xanthine:

Xanthine A Molécula na Origem da Vida do trecho entre F7 e F1

Xanthine A Molécula na Origem da Vida do trecho entre F7 e F1

E sua aparência como compôsto atômico:

Xanthine: A Molécula na Origem da Vida do Trecho entre F7 e F1 - Aparência Atômica

Xanthine: A Molécula na Origem da Vida do Trecho entre F7 e F1 - Aparência Atômica


Xanthine is a purine base found in most human body tissues and fluids and in other organisms. A number ofstimulants are derived from xanthine, including caffeine and theobromine.

Xanthine is a product on the pathway of purine degradation.

Terei que rever tudo sôbre purinas, guanine, PNP, para aprender mais como é isso tudo. Por enquanto, paro aqui porque o trabalho está exigindo minha presença lá fora, para retornar e continuar isto se a vida o permitir.

How Life Turned Left? Suggestion From Matrix/DNA Theory to NASA-Astrobiology Research

terça-feira, agosto 14th, 2012

At the “home” page of this website there is the news that The Matrix/DNA formula is suggesting a rational explanation for the question “Why life turned left” . Everybody can see it clear if looking to the formula. The left side of Matrix’s face ( from F 2 to F 4 ) is where a new body is born, growing, till arriving to maturity and ability for reproduction. The energy is up in a phase of construction. It is the force among the chaos that drives matter to an ordered state. But the energy is covered, occult, as the body’s nucleus, then, there is more mass than energy. If we see the formula in its state as astronomical system, this left face goes from the baby-astro to pulsar. In another hand, the piece of circuitry comprised from F 6 to F7 (and part of F 1) is the right side of Matrix’s face when the body got maturity and immediately the energy began to fall, a phenomenon that can be measured as entropy. The energy gains the surface of the body, and the mass begins to disappear. In its shape as astronomic system, this piece of circuitry begins with a supernova and goes to the stellar cadaver ( nebula off dust).

Then… why Nature choose only the left face for building biological systems? Why not a mixed moisture with left and right faces? The explanation is rational. If the first molecules were complete, life should be in its initial stage till today, forever. It never would be able to do the next evolutionary step. Because a complete molecule, containing the left and right faces, has the force of death with her. It would be a copy of closed system, just as the astronomic system. Nature needed a opened system, one that kept the doors opened to evolution, to the next evolutionary steps.

Ok, but, the problem of the NASA-Astrobiology team is how to identify, in the actual state of any planet or moon, those states that are suitable for beginning the biological formation. As a poor hard-work man I have no time just now for trying to get the suggestions from the Matrix formula. The issue becomes more complicated because I am very confused when calculating what kind of evolutionary product could be naturally obtained from a mechanical/Newtonian system, like the Matrix formula is suggesting as the astronomic system creator of life. It is possible to do that, I believe, but it needs a lot of theoretical calculations and I have no time for doing it. Another problem is that we need to study the atomic formula of several natural elements, like methane, sulfur, and making comparisons with the atomic formula of the first amino-acids, for detecting the complementary systemic circuits. I know that the NASA team will not do that because they don’t know and don’t understand the rationality behind the Matrix formula. The final conclusion is that our beloved Humanity needs to know where else there is life and where else is suitable for life, because we will need to move out from this loved planet-home one day and we need the wealth, the resources for improving the life of billions of human beings, which source can be in others life’s forms. So, I will continuing this research…

How Life Turned Left

July 25, 2012 / Written by: Bill Steigerwald

Left and Right Handed Molecules

Left and Right Handed Molecules - This is an artist's concept of excess left-hand aspartic acid created in asteroids and delivered to Earth via meteorite impacts. The line at the bottom is a chromatogram showing that left-hand aspartic acid (tall peak in the center) was four times more abundant in the meteorite sample than right-hand aspartic acid (smaller peak to the left). Credit: NASA/Hrybyk-Keith, Mary P.

1) Comment by Louis Morelli ( waiting moderation) (Tue, Aug, 14, 2012)

Please, why we are calling “left” and “right” if there is no possible point of reference? Look to the draw above. If you take the left-hand aspartic acid (tall peak in the center) and turn it 180* horizontally and at same time, vertically, and put it side by side with the molecule at smaller peak, keeping both vertically, the right will be left and vice-versa. But, then, the result is a figure in the same shape of DNA, which was the normal course of evolution. I know that this issue is only a human concept, like the concept of left and right human hands is wrong since that Earth is rounded and has no point of reference. But the position of molecules here is very important because at every natural system’s circuitry the left side is always “energy up” and the right is “energy down” ( if the model of natural system in the Matrix/DNA Theory is correct). This is about the direction of information inside a system, and if we don’t know the right direction our research and meanings could be wrong. Why life has chosen the left hand? Because it is energy up, where there is no entropy for stopping the initial start of life. Any answers? Thanks…

2) Ask a Question to an Astrobiologist, by Louis Morelli

In the Tagish Lake meteorite there was less alanine than aspartic acid, both left-handed. Possible explanations should be:
1) Alanine is as common in living bodies as aspartic acid today, but not in Nature at life’s origins. The strong presence of heavy atoms in alanine suggests that it performs the functions of right handed bi-lateral symmetry. So, why a left handed performs right handed functions? because right handed are entropic functions that brings death to systems, and at the beginning, Nature was in needs of molecules that could fix a reproductive process before dying.
2) Biological systems, aka “life” were created by and inside astronomic systems. So, the later is merely evolutionary step from the earlier. Informations from astronomic systems are transmitted by photons from stellar radiation in a clockwise direction, then, first, are created biological molecules left handed, despite that non-biological are equal amount. Aspartic acid is genuine left-handed with light atoms, then, it is produced more than alanine;
3) Primordial aminoacids were produced by mechanical/Newtonian process and not by biological process, so, the production of both aminoacids could be equal, but nature has selected the left ones because they contains energy up. Please what do you think about these suggestions from a different theoretical cosmological model, called Matrix/DNA Theory?


How Life Turned Left

(Sorry to authors of this article that I am coping it here, but this copy will be here only temporary: is the unique way I have for to study it in deep and registering the useful data end the suggestions from the Matrix.)

Researchers analyzing meteorite fragments that fell on a frozen lake in Canada have developed an explanation for the origin of life’s handedness – why living things only use molecules with specific orientations. The work also gave the strongest evidence to date that liquid water inside an asteroid leads to a strong preference of left-handed over right-handed forms of some common protein amino acids in meteorites. The result makes the search for extraterrestrial life more challenging.


Comment from Matrix/DNA:

From Wikipedia: Aspartic acid (abbreviated as Asp or D)[3] is an α-amino acid with the chemical formula HOOCCH(NH2)CH2COOH. The carboxylate anionsalt, or ester of aspartic acid is known as aspartate. The L-isomer of aspartate is one of the 20 proteinogenic amino acids, i.e., the building blocks of proteins. Its codons are GAU and GAC.



Aspartic Acid 1

Aspartic Acid 1 - Left or Right Handed ? - Red (Oxygen), Black (Carbon), Blue (Nitrogen) White ( Hidrogen)

Liquid water and ice structures

Liquid water and ice structures - Red ( Oxygen), White ( Hidrogen)


“Our analysis of the amino acids in meteorite fragments from Tagish Lake gave us one possible explanation for why all known life uses only left-handed versions of amino acids to build proteins,” said Dr. Daniel Glavin of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. Glavin is lead author of a paper on this research published in the journal Meteoritics and Planetary Science.

In January, 2000, a large meteoroid exploded in the atmosphere over northern British Columbia, Canada, and rained fragments across the frozen surface of Tagish Lake. Because many people witnessed the fireball, pieces were collected within days and kept preserved in their frozen state. This ensured that there was very little contamination from terrestrial life. “The Tagish Lake meteorite continues to reveal more secrets about the early Solar System the more we investigate it,” said Dr. Christopher Herd of the University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada, a co-author on the paper who provided samples of the Tagish Lake meteorite for the team to analyze. “This latest study gives us a glimpse into the role that water percolating through asteroids must have played in making the left-handed amino acids that are so characteristic of all life on Earth.”

Proteins are the workhorse molecules of life, used in everything from structures like hair to enzymes, the catalysts that speed up or regulate chemical reactions. Just as the 26 letters of the alphabet are arranged in limitless combinations to make words, life uses 20 different amino acids in a huge variety of arrangements to build millions of different proteins. Amino acid molecules can be built in two ways that are mirror images of each other, like your hands. Although life based on right-handed amino acids would presumably work fine, they can’t be mixed. “Synthetic proteins created using a mix of left- and right-handed amino acids just don’t work,” says Dr. Jason Dworkin ofNASA Goddard, co-author of the study and head of the Goddard Astrobiology Analytical Laboratory, where the analysis was performed.

Since life can’t function with a mix of left- and right-handed amino acids, researchers want to know how life – at least, life on Earth — got set up with the left-handed ones. “The handedness observed in biological molecules – left-handed amino acids and right-handed sugars – is a property important for molecular recognition processes and is thought to be a prerequisite for life,” said Dworkin. All ordinary methods of synthetically creating amino acids result in equal mixtures of left- and right-handed amino acids. Therefore, how the nearly exclusive production of one hand of such molecules arose from what were presumably equal mixtures of left and right molecules in a prebiotic world has been an area of intensive research.

The team ground up samples of the Tagish Lake meteorites, mixed them into a hot-water solution, then separated and identified the molecules in them using a liquid chromatograph mass spectrometer. “We discovered that the samples had about four times as many left-handed versions of aspartic acid as the opposite hand,” says Glavin. Aspartic acid is an amino acid used in every enzyme in the human body. It is also used to make the sugar substitute Aspartame. “Interestingly, the same meteorite sample showed only a slight left-hand excess (no more than eight percent) for alanine, another amino acid used by life.”


Comments by Matrix/DNA:

Wikipedia: Alanine (abbreviated as Ala or A)[2] is an α-amino acid with the chemical formula CH3CH(NH2)COOH. The L-isomer is one of the 20 amino acids encoded by the genetic code. Its codons are GCU, GCC, GCA, and GCG. It is classified as a nonpolar amino acid. L-Alanine is second only to leucine in rate of occurrence, accounting for 7.8% of the primary structure in a sample of 1,150 proteins.[3] D-Alanine occurs in bacterial cell walls and in some peptide antibiotics.

Alanine Aminoacid

Alanine Aminoacid

Alanine 1

Alanine 1

I need reading the topic in Wikipedia that has a lot of information, included the fact alanine is linked with the liver. Liver is an organ F 7 – a function of right handed, and it is re-enforced by the presence of heavy atoms from right hand at alanine composition. What it means? Observe the strong presence of carbon giving balance to the structure. By the way, alanine is non-essential for humans so, it appears that alanine has entered in proteins at a later stage of life’s formation. It brings from the sky the sentence of death to complexes molecules ( or the necessary entropic function).


“At first, this made no sense, because if these amino acids came from contamination by terrestrial life, both amino acids should have large left-handed excesses, because both are common in biology,” says Glavin. “However, a large left-hand excess in one and not the other tells us that they were not created by life but instead were made inside the Tagish Lake asteroid.” The team confirmed that the amino acids were probably created in space using isotope analysis.


Comments by Matrix/DNA:

Correct! Wonderful! Mr. Glavin and the Matrix are in total agreement here. Today, both, alanine and aspartic acid are common in biology, maybe equal amounts in human beings, due later in evolution, when the operations for beginnings of life was finished, Nature inserted the death functions of the right Matrix’s face for bringing on the ability for biological systems incorporating mutations. Since the meteorit is from the beginning of solar system, it is repository of the first informations that came with photons from solar radiation, and these informations are about the left face. Every random photon-information about the right face should be dissolved quickly, because the entropic effect. We see above that Matrix was confused suggesting that alanine has the appearance and functions of right face, so, why she was present in earlier times, and next to other aminoacids? The explanation comes from the very fact that its quantity were less than aspartic acid. The answer is that solar radiation in the beginning of solar system was less able to produce molecules from the right face, and those produced was quickly dissolved. Then, this alanine in the meteor, and the aspartic acid were not created by life and so, by the mechanical Newtonian astronomic system.

Another issue that we need to solve here is how Nature created biological molecules that are left handed but performs right handed functions. I think that it is easy if we know that the right side of DNA stream is merely the continuation of the flow of information coming from the left side. It is the left side of DNA that creates its right side (at least in the RNA world).

xxx ( I have stopped here today).

Isotopes are versions of an element with different masses; for example, carbon 13 is a heavier, and less common, variety of carbon. Since the chemistry of life prefers lighter isotopes, amino acids enriched in the heavier carbon 13 were likely created in space.

“We found that the aspartic acid and alanine in our Tagish Lake samples were highly enriched in carbon 13, indicating they were probably created by non-biological processes in the parent asteroid,” said Dr. Jamie Elsila of NASAGoddard, a co-author on the paper who performed the isotopic analysis. This is the first time that carbon isotope measurements have been reported for these amino acids in Tagish Lake. The carbon 13 enrichment, combined with the large left-hand excess in aspartic acid but not in alanine, provides very strong evidence that some left-handed proteinogenic amino acids — ones used by life to make proteins — can be produced in excess in asteroids, according to the team.

Some have argued that left-handed amino acid excesses in meteorites were formed by exposure to polarized radiation in the solar nebula – the cloud of gas and dust from which asteroids, and eventually the Solar System, were formed. However, in this case, the left-hand aspartic acid excesses are so large that they cannot be explained by polarized radiation alone. The team believes that another process is required.

Additionally, the large left-hand excess in aspartic acid but not in alanine gave the team a critical clue as to how these amino acids could have been made inside the asteroid, and therefore how a large left-hand excess could arise before life originated on Earth.

“One thing that jumped out at me was that alanine and aspartic acid can crystallize differently when you have mixtures of both left-handed and right-handed molecules,” said Dr. Aaron Burton, a NASA Postdoctoral Program Fellow at NASA Goddard and a co-author on the study. “This led us to find several studies where researchers have exploited the crystallization behavior of molecules like aspartic acid to get left-handed or right-handed excesses. Because alanine forms different kinds of crystals, these same processes would produce equal amounts of left- and right-handed alanine. We need to do some more experiments, but this explanation has the potential to explain what we see in the Tagish Lake meteorite and other meteorites.”

The team believes a small initial left-hand excess could get amplified by crystallization and dissolution from a saturated solution with liquid water. Some amino acids, like aspartic acid, have a shape that lets them fit together in a pure crystal – one comprised of just left-handed or right-handed molecules. For these amino acids, a small initial left- or right-hand excess could become greatly amplified at the expense of the opposite-handed crystals, similar to the way a large snowball gathers more snow and gets bigger more rapidly when rolled downhill than a small one. Other amino acids, like alanine, have a shape that prefers to join together with their mirror image to make a crystal, so these crystals are comprised of equal numbers of left- and right-handed molecules. As these “hybrid” crystals grow, any small initial excess would tend to be washed out for these amino acids. A requirement for both of these processes is a way to convert left-handed to right-handed molecules, and vice-versa, while they are dissolved in the solution.

This process only amplifies a small excess that already exists. Perhaps a tiny initial left-hand excess was created by conditions in the solar nebula. For example, polarized ultraviolet light or other types of radiation from nearby stars might favor the creation of left-handed amino acids or the destruction of right-handed ones, according to the team. This initial left-hand excess could then get amplified in asteroids by processes like crystallization. Impacts from asteroids and meteorites could deliver this material to Earth, and left-handed amino acids might have been incorporated into emerging life due to their greater abundance, according to the team. Also, similar enrichments of left-handed amino acids by crystallization could have occurred on Earth in ancient sediments that had water flowing through them, such as the bottoms of rivers, lakes, or seas, according to the team.

The result complicates the search for extraterrestrial life – like microbial life hypothesized to dwell beneath the surface of Mars, for example. “Since it appears a non-biological process can create a left-hand excess in some kinds of amino acids, we can’t use such an excess alone as proof of biological activity,” says Glavin.

The research was funded by the NASA Astrobiology Institute, the Goddard Center for Astrobiology, the NASA Cosmochemistry Program, and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

The paper, “Unusual nonterrestrial l-proteinogenic amino acid excesses in the Tagish Lake meteorite,” was published in the journal Meteoritics and Planetary Science, and is available at:

Bill Steigerwald
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md.

Panspermia: A diferença em Relação ao Reprodutivismo da Teoria da Matriz/DNA Universal

quinta-feira, setembro 30th, 2010

Muita gente está confundindo a hipótese da origem da vida da Teoria da Matriz com a hipótese da panspermia, a qual tem sido ressuscitada e revigorada ultimamente devido à presença de materiais orgânicos vindos com meteóritos de Marte e do espaço sideral. Nêste artigo pretendo delinear as diferenças entre as duas visões do mundo.

Definição em Português na Wikipedia:

Panspermia é a hipótese segundo a qual as sementes de vida são prevalentes em todo o Universo e que a vida na Terra começou quando uma dessas sementes aqui chegou, tendo-se propagado.

Reprodutivismo: É a hipótese segundo a qual as sementes dos sistemas biológicos – aka “seres vivos” – são prevalentes em todo o Universo e que as produzidas pela própria Terra são mera continuidade evolucionária de astros como a Terra, que se apresentam como “semi-vivos/semi-mecânicos” quando observados através do modêlo de proto-sistema formado pelo astro sob um ciclo vital. Desde que em tal modêlo a estrêla Sol está incluida como mera forma do astro durante seu ciclo vital, o produto da irradiação da estrêla mais a irradiação do nucleo terrestre fornece os bits-informação necessários e suficientes para organizar a matéria terrestre em sistemas biológicos, desde que esta matéria tenha sido tratada pela novidade terrestre que é o estado líquido da matéria possibilitando as reações químicas orgânicas.

A panspermia apenas transfere o problema da origem da vida da Terra para outro astro, sem soluciona-lo. O que teria a mais a sôpa primordial do outro astro que a sôpa primordial da Terra não teria tido?! É preciso apresentar a procedência dos elementos e substâncias que constituíram o primeiro sistema vivo, apresentar quais foram as fôrças naturais atuantes e seus níveis de intensidade apropriados, descrever os mecanismos e um parâmetro factual razoavel e sobejamente conhecido por todos de processo pelo qual se desenvolveu todo o enrêdo… como apenas a Teoria da Matriz o faz.

(a continuar)

Panspermia:A diferença entre esta teoria e a teoria da Matriz Universal

quarta-feira, setembro 22nd, 2010

Como veremos no artigo abaixo sôbre como anda hoje a Teoria da Panspermia, nota-se que a Panspermia andou rondando a região onde estava escondido o tesouro – a arca contendo o segrêdo por trás da origem da Vida na Terra – mas nunca encontrou-o, sendo que este feito só foi realizado pela Teoria da Matriz Universal.

Muitos pesquisadores hoje estão convencidos que a vida veio do espaço e não se originou de uma sôpa primordial terrestre como se acreditou até a década passada. Mas a Panspermia apenas transfere o problema, não o resolve. Ou seja, a questão de como a vida se originou aqui torna-se a questão de como a vida se originou no espaço. A Teoria da Matriz resolve a questão quando descobre duas novidades:
1) O processo da Macro-Evolução Universal:
A Evolução funciona como a expansão das ondas na água de um lago quando nela se choca algum objeto. O espaço que o objeto ocupa na água desloca por meio de pulsos a água circundante para o espaço externo enquanto as ondas de informações criadas pelo objeto, como a onda do som viaja através dos pulsos como a espuma que se forma sôbre as águas. Em tôdo ponto das águas existem partículas, ciscos, objetos, os quais vão sendo empurrados para as ultimas ondas mais externas. Ora, então cada nova onda formada recebe os ciscos e as informações da ultima onda, e quando enfraquece a fôrça de seu pulso, estes ciscos e informações estagnam antes que o pulso termine, o qual, ao avançar ainda na água, atinge novas regiões onde existem novos ciscos e informações, os quais são aduzidos aos anteriores. Êstes novos ciscos e informações é o que aumenta a complexidade dos corpos sob evolução. Portanto, evolução recapitula e complexifica.

2) Um Novo Modêlo Teórico Cosmológico onde o Estado Evolucionário do Mundo Astronomico teria sido Transmitido Macro-Genéticamente à Matéria na Superficie da Terra, ou qualquer outro astro celeste em idênticas condições.

O planeta Terra, assim como qualquer astro, está sujeito a um ciclo vital, o qual demanda um certo período de tempo, mas quando se alinha todas as diferentes formas de um astro apresentadas durante um ciclo vital num unico momento obtem-se um protótipo de proto-sistema que se manifestado ou construído com matéria torna-se um par simétrico de nucleotideos os quais são as unidades fundamentais de informação do RNA e DNA, os quais por sua vez organizam a matéria ao redor em sistemas biológicos.

Portanto, creio que a explicação do porque a Panspermia não encontrou o pote com o tesouro foi devido a uma traição da Teoria Astronômica, que estava informando serem os astros uma coisa diferente do que eles são na realidade. Vejamos o artigo:

by William Hamilton III

from AstroSciences Website


Panspermia: An idea whose time has come.

On March 27, 2002 a news story broke on that announced:

“In two separate studies, scientists mimicked conditions of outer space, doused frozen interstellar cocktails with ultraviolet radiation and created amino acids, which are critical components of life.

The work shows that amino acids could be created around many developing stars, which emit high doses of UV radiation, and that life would have had just as good a chance of forming on planets that might exist around those stars as it did here on Earth.

The studies also support a growing expectation among many scientists that life on Earth may have been seeded from space, rather than having been forged only from raw materials that developed on Earth.”


This story went on to say:

“Already, scientists have found amino acids in meteorites — chunks of asteroids or comets that landed on Earth. Amino acids, though not life itself, may have jumpstarted life on Earth with their arrival, some scientists have long suspected.

Another theory has held that life on Earth developed out of a soup of lesser materials.
Remarkable as it might be to think of life’s ingredients arriving on a space rock, researchers have sought to show that amino acids might also form in interstellar space and thus be ubiquitous. If so, then the raw material of terrestrial life would date back to an earlier time, before comets and asteroids were born.


Amino acids are literally raining down out of the sky,” said one of the team’s leaders, Max Bernstein of the SETI Institute and NASA’s Ames Research Center, “and if that’s not a big deal then I don’t know what is.”

The laboratory experiments, one conducted by Bernstein’s U.S. team and the other by a European group, irradiated mixtures of ice that contained molecules known to exist in interstellar space. The work was done in vacuum chambers under the low temperatures found in space.
Svante Arrhenius is one of the major figures in physical chemistry and had a major role in the development of ideas about ions, solutions, acids and alkalis, and rates of reactions. His recognition of the role of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has perhaps been neglected as this problem is considered to be a late twentieth century phenomenon. Arrhenius conjectured that bacteria may be able to survive the cold of space and survive heating as they entered earth’s atmosphere from space. This revived the old concept of panspermia. Svante Arrhenius theorized that bacterial spores propelled through space by light pressure were the seeds of life on Earth.
This idea was further expanded on by Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe who reintroduced the idea of panspermia as an alternative theory on the origin of life. Since Hoyle believed that life could not have arisen on earth by chance, that evolution was not the product of chance, he advocated a strong theory of panspermia. Some scientists have united this theory of panspermia with James Lovelock’s teleological theory of earth as Gaia and call the new theory Cosmic Ancestry (1)

Some of the findings of Hoyle and Wickramasinghe are quoted here:

“In 1968, polycyclic aromatic molecules were detected in interstellar dust.

In 1972, convincing evidence that the dust contained porphyrins was obtained.

Then in 1974 Wickramasinghe demonstrated that there are complex organic polymers, specifically molecules of “polyformaldehyde” in space. These molecules are closely related to cellulose, which is very abundant in biology.

By 1975, Hoyle and Wickramasinghe were convinced that organic polymers were a substantial fraction of the dust. This line of thought was considered wildly speculative at that time. Now, however, that organic polymers in space are abundant and may be necessary for life is well accepted. Today we often see stories about things like vinegar among the stars, or “buckyballs” from space as “the seeds of life”. To that extent the scientific paradigm for the origin of life on Earth has already shifted. “

The means by which spores, microbes, and other biochemical matter arrives on earth is principally through the agency of meteorites and comets that frequently impacted the earth in its youth. Bacteria has been detected in the highest regions of the atmosphere where some scientist suppose it arrived from space.
There is even some indication that microbes have been found in lunar soil.
Another form of panspermia is ballistic panspermia. This refers to debris being knocked off a planet like Mars, reaching escape velocity, and entering the atmosphere of another planet with passenger microbes intact. The ALH84001 Martian meteorite found in Alan Hills, Antarctica, is an example of possible ballistic panspermia.

Benjamin Weiss is a graduate student in planetary science at the California Institute of Technology and Joseph Kirschvink is Professor of Geobiology at the California Institute of Technology and they had this to say about tests conducted on the Martian meteorite:

“Confirming Evidence
These results demonstrate that ALH84001 had not been heated to even 40 degrees Celsius (104 degrees Fahrenheit) since before leaving the Martian surface, confirming Melosh’s theory that rocks could be ejected off the surface of Mars without being heat sterilized.

click above image to enlarge
At such temperatures, prokaryotes (simple, one-celled organisms without well-defined nuclei) and even many eukaryotes (organisms with well-defined nuclei) like fungi or plant seeds might survive the launch. Unfortunately we cannot constrain the formation temperature of the carbonate globules-although we think the observed magnetization originated on Mars, we don’t yet know exactly when that took place. (Constraining the temperature at which the carbonate globules in ALH84001 formed would help settle the debate over possible life traces in the meteorite. A high temperature could rule out life as we know it in the rock; a low formation temperature would be conducive to life.)
Although it’s unlikely that ALH84001 itself brought Martians to Earth (it spent nearly 15 million years wandering through cold, airless space), it is not unreasonable to assume that if there were life on Mars, other rocks have already transferred it here. Computer dynamic simulations suggest that about a billion tons of Martian rocks have landed on Earth since the solar system formed, and every million years about a dozen fist-size rocks are transferred from Mars to Earth in just a couple of years. In fact, one in ten million of the arriving Martian rocks could have been transferred in less than a year!
Other researchers have brought back living bacterial spores from an orbiting satellite where they spent more than five years bathed in strong ultraviolet light in a deep vacuum. We know, too, that such bacteria can survive the high pressures and shock they might encounter during ejection. Evidently, it is likely that if there were Martian microorganisms, they have been transported to Earth throughout most of our planet’s history. Maybe, then, we don’t need to go all the way to Mars to find Martians.”


There is even a society for launching our own seeds into space and populating other worlds with life from earth.
To put all of this in perspective, the idea that genetic information which developed and evolved elsewhere in the universe and planted itself on earth through panspermia so as to evolve organisms that are similar to organisms that have already evolved on other planets might be the reason why intelligent, artifact-making lifeforms elsewhere may be as human as those on earth.
In fact neuroscientist and astrobiologist Dr. Rhawn Joseph makes this bold statement on panspermia:


“The genetic seeds of life swarm throughout the cosmos, and these genetic “seeds,” these living creatures, fell to Earth, encased in stellar debris which pounded the planet for 700 millions years after the creation.
And just as DNA contains the genetic instructions for the creation of an embryo, neonate, child, and adult, and just as modern day microbes contain “human genes” which have contributed to the evolution of the human genome, these “seeds,” these living creatures, contained the DNA-instructions for the metamorphosis of all life, including woman and man.
DNA acts to purposefully modify the environment, which acts on gene selection, so as to fulfill specific genetic goals: the dispersal and activation of silent DNA and the replication of life forms that long ago lived on other planets. “



Outros artigos sôbre panspermia:

InfoEscola » Biologia »


Por Mayara Lopes Cardoso

Proposta no final do século XIX, a panspermia é uma das teorias de origem e evolução da vida, que afirma que a vida é fruto de sementes dispersas no Universo, e que a Terra é apenas um dos planetas que recebeu essa semente, que se propagou com o passar do tempo, dando origem a todos as formas vivas existentes hoje.

Anterior à Panspermia, a teoria aceita era a de Geração Espontânea, que defendia que a vida era oriunda de matéria desprovida de vida. Depois de vários estudos científicos, a abiogênese (do grego, a = sem, bio = vida, gênese = origem, “origem não biológica”) foi derrubada, hoje sabemos que a vida é somente procedente de matéria viva.

Segundo a teoria da Panspermia, formulada pelo físico sueco Arrhenius, a Terra teria sofrido uma inseminação por organismos, partículas provenientes de espaços externos ao planeta, chegando à Terra através de poeira cósmico ou meteoritos. O argumento apresentado para tal hipótese é a presença de matéria orgânica em meteoritos encontrados na Terra, como certos tipos de aminoácidos, formaldeído, álcool etílico, tese que foi contradita pelo fato de não ser admitida a sobrevivência de microrganismos a temperaturas tão diferentes da qual são procedentes. Além disso, tais moléculas podem se arranjar de maneira natural no ambiente, sem ter, para isso, qualquer influência biológica.

A Panspermia deu origem a duas novas vertentes: a Nova Panspermia e a Panspermia Dirigida. A primeira, estabelecida pelos cientistas Fred Hoyle juntamente com Chandra Wickramasinghe, defendia que vida foi disseminada não só pela Terra, mas por todo o Universo, e que esses “esporos de vida” lançados nos planetas, já eram dotados de “comandos” que seriam responsáveis pelo seu desenvolvimento. Nessa teoria, ainda, os vírus são mencionados como organismos vindos do espaço, advindos de outros planetas. Em estudos de poeira interestelar, cientistas encontraram polímeros orgânicos que muito têm em comum com a celulose, mais um indício de que a vida poderia sim, ter origem cósmica.

Já a Panspermia Dirigida, proposta pelos cientistas Francas Circo e Lesei Orle, afirma que seres de outras galáxias, dotados de uma inteligência relativamente superior à nossa, teriam colonizado a Terra e vários outros planetas também, deixando em cada uma dessas colônias, determinadas moléculas orgânicas e elementos como o molibdênio, elemento raro na Terra e de grande importância para o bom funcionamento das enzimas essenciais ao metabolismo dos seres vivos.

Tais teorias geraram discussões acaloradas pela comunidade científica, e, embora a Panspermia seja irrefutável, não se chegou, até hoje, a uma conclusão acerca da origem da vida no nosso planeta, e ainda, se há ou não vida em outros planetas do Sistema Solar.


Outro artigo meu sôbre panspermia publicado aqui nêste website, excluído e copiado para cá para fazer uma síntese final:

Panspermia: A diferença em Relação ao Reprodutivismo da Teoria da Matriz/DNA Universal
quinta-feira, setembro | 30 | 2010

Muita gente está confundindo a hipótese da origem da vida da Teoria da Matriz com a hipótese da panspermia, a qual tem sido ressuscitada e revigorada ultimamente devido à presença de materiais orgânicos vindos com meteóritos de Marte e do espaço sideral. Nêste artigo pretendo delinear as diferenças entre as duas visões do mundo.

Definição em Português na Wikipedia:

Panspermia é a hipótese segundo a qual as sementes de vida são prevalentes em todo o Universo e que a vida na Terra começou quando uma dessas sementes aqui chegou, tendo-se propagado.

Reprodutivismo: É a hipótese segundo a qual as sementes dos sistemas biológicos – aka “seres vivos” – são prevalentes em todo o Universo e que as produzidas pela própria Terra são mera continuidade evolucionária de astros como a Terra, que se apresentam como “semi-vivos/semi-mecânicos” quando observados através do modêlo de proto-sistema formado pelo astro sob um ciclo vital. Desde que em tal modêlo a estrêla Sol está incluida como mera forma do astro durante seu ciclo vital, o produto da irradiação da estrêla mais a irradiação do nucleo terrestre fornece os bits-informação necessários e suficientes para organizar a matéria terrestre em sistemas biológicos, desde que esta matéria tenha sido tratada pela novidade terrestre que é o estado líquido da matéria possibilitando as reações químicas orgânicas.

A panspermia apenas transfere o problema da origem da vida da Terra para outro astro, sem soluciona-lo. O que teria a mais a sôpa primordial do outro astro que a sôpa primordial da Terra não teria tido?! É preciso apresentar a procedência dos elementos e substâncias que constituíram o primeiro sistema vivo, apresentar quais foram as fôrças naturais atuantes e seus níveis de intensidade apropriados, descrever os mecanismos e um parâmetro factual razoavel e sobejamente conhecido por todos de processo pelo qual se desenvolveu todo o enrêdo… como apenas a Teoria da Matriz o faz.