John Templeton Foundation: Participação da Matrix/DNA

Big Questions Online

How Might Cooperation Play a Role in Evolution?

By Martin Nowak –

January 13, 2014

Evolution is a fundamental organizing principle of the living world. It is a theory that permeates all of biology. Evolution can explain the relationship between organisms and how biological traits arose. Evolution is a powerful and correct scientific approach. Yet our current understanding of evolution is incomplete. We are confronted with many open questions.

Post da Matrix/DNA at January,16, 2014 ( Post aprovado e publicado no artigo.)

Mr. Nowak: – “Evolution is a fundamental organizing principle of the living world. It is a theory that permeates all of biology. Evolution is a powerful and correct scientific approach. Yet our current understanding of evolution is incomplete. We are confronted with many open questions.”

Yes, evolution is a correct scientific approach, but, I think, the scientific approach is being driven by a non-complete world-view which is the cause of the majority non solved questions we have today.  Mr. Nowak points out that ” Evolution is a fundamental organizing principle of the living world.” This is just a statement as sample of this reductionist world-view. It leads to lots of questions that could be solved by another approach and method of investigation, like my own job: comparative anatomy between living and non-living natural systems. I am alone using this method, working in the middle of the Amazon jungle, with no technical resources more than cheap microscope and telescope, but, the unusual circumstances, isolated environment and philosophic naturalist approach, I have obtained hundreds of explanations about evolution still unknown by scientific community, explanations that must be “hypothesis” and “theories” by the Greek definition, lacking the opportunity for testing these possibilities.  My first question to the scientific thought expressed by Mr. Nowak here should be: ” Evolution of the living world? Do you thing that evolution emerged, was created and invented here at the terrestrial living world? Have not you considered that evolution is a universal process, itself under evolution, then, the basics for understanding biological evolution lays on prior non- biological evolution?”

Comparative anatomy between living and non-living systems leads us to results where there is no such division in Nature. There are natural systems, all with internal dynamics and must with external projections, ones less evolved, other more evolved, but, evolution has not created natural systems since the Big Bang: we known different shapes of a unique universal system under evolution by the same process that a human body evolves under the process of a life’s cycle, which produces these different shapes. Is it a blastula, a fetus, a living being? This question is about the evolution of a human body. The same question, applied to the Universe as a whole, should be: is an atom system, a stellar system, a galactic system, living beings? If you answered “yes”to first question, you must answer yes to the second. My theoretical results lead me to re-calculate the current models of atoms, galaxies, because these systems must have the principles of biological evolution, as the principles of forces and elements that produced the shape of biological systems, aka, living beings. The ancestors “non-biological systems” are electro-magnetic and mechanical thermo-dynamic system that shows a clear process of evolution, inclusively showing the three variables that is the whole body of Darwinian Theory (VSI – Variation, Selection, Inheritance), but, at these non-biological systems we learn that their evolution have more 4 variables, totaling 7. When we come back to biological systems and applies those ignored 4 variables, lots of questions, if not all, are answered. I would be very grateful for any criticism about my suggestions here. 

Resposta do Autor do Artigo à Matrix/DNA:

Martin Nowak

January 16, 2014

Re: TheMatrixDNA

You raise a number of fascinating questions. For a long time I have been intrigued by the thought that evolution could apply to a much wider range of phenomena than what we consider now. Could there be other matter (or energy) in the universe that undergoes evolution in a meaningful sense? Do stars or galaxies evolve by mutation and selection? As of now there is no clear suggestion that this might be the case. Stars are born and they die, but do they pass on their information? Do new stars inherit the properties of their parents?I agree that evolution is a universal process. Our biology here on earth is one instantiation of an evolutionary process. I have also suggested to use evolution as a definition of “life”. Life is that which evolves.

Reply da Matrix/DNA ao reply do Autor:  January, 17, 6:20 AM 

(Your comment has been queued for review by site administrators and will be published after approval.)

Thanks by the answer. Yours question, “Do stars (…) evolve by mutation and selection?”, could leads us to another question: Do stomachs or livers evolve by mutation or selection? These questions are wrong and they shows a lacking of systemic vision, or thought, and this is a big problem of Sciences today. Stars are parts of a system, then, we see systems evolving, not their parts. But, I thing that the Standard Theory suggests that yesm stars alone, has evolved: first there were atom’s nebulae, where the atoms were gaseous, lighters atoms; them, these atoms were grouped into stars, which could be very different than new stars today; then, those systems with those lightest stars produced the heavy atoms, which worked as feedback producing heavy stars… I think that it is an evolutionary process, with mutation, selection, etc.  In relation to galaxies the Standard Theory has its interpretation but I am the unique that is suggesting this other interpretation: there were two process for galaxies formation. LIke there is two process of cell;s system formation: first, the symbiotic process that produced the first original cell; second, the reproductive process, when the cells learned how to replicate. So, my theoretical models are suggesting that the first original galaxies were produced also by symbiotic process, and the new galaxies does not are reproduced, but they are self-recycling. Self-recycling was the mechanism at astronomical systems that evolved into reproduction process at biological systems.

Yours second question: “stars are born and dye, but do they pass on their information?”… I ask you: Which material produces new stars? If my astronomical model is right, stars dies, the whole system becoming interstellar dust. As the galaxy is rotating around an axis, any internal cloud of dust will rotate also, creating its own axis, like any vortex. I can’t describe here the whole process but, a new system arises from this dust, does not arises any other thing, only and just a new system equal the one that died. How and why… it is because the old system passed the information on… the particles of dust worked like genes, they were trained before for building the same old system. If the new environment is exactly equal the old one where was born the died star, I think there will be no mutations, it will receive the same properties. The Matrix/DNA”s astronomical models are suggesting that at Cosmological Evolution, from elementay particles to galaxies, yes, informations were passed on from system to system, but, this line of evolution has stopped at galactic systems; then, happened the Fall, where bits-information from galaxies are the seeds of biological systems… a very complex process. My big surprise seeing these final results is that it is  similar to the Bibble accounts in Genesis.

Yours thoughts placing evolution with life definition is a brilliant intuition, if the theoretical models of Matrix/DNA are right. They are suggesting that this Universe is a kind of womb where is occurring internally a process similar to genetic reproduction of the ex-machine system that produced the Universe through the Big Bang. I have no idea who or what is this creator system, but, it is very similar to the idea of Jesus Christ, when He look down to humans and said “the son…” and then look up to the sky and said “… the Father”. If there is father and son, there is a genetic process shaping the son. And Matrix/DNA Theory, when found the evolutionary link between cosmological and biological evolution was obligated to re-calculate the universal history, from consciousness here and now till the Big Bang: the final meaning of this version of Universal Natural History is a genetic process.  Evolution seems similar to life because the universal evolution obeys a process of life’s cycle, as any human body. The force that is pulling this evolution process is merely seen at any natural lightwave, then, I am thinking that light is the hands and arms of that unknown ex-machine creator.

Mr. Nowak: I would appreciate very much if you look the graphic showing the electromagnetic spectrum of lightwave, at my website. The graphic si suggesting that the different frequencies and vibrations are equal the sequence of any life’s cycle. If this theory is right, it means that natural light – like the lightwave emitted at the initial Big Bang – is the first element in this Universe that brought the code for life. This lightwave was materialized, producing a kind of universal matrix, which is the same shape and functioning of the DNA.  Of course, we have theories, which can be falsifiable like Matrix/DNA, but… if this theory is right, be sure that God ( for you, I don’t know the name and I call it the unknown ex-machine system that triggered the Big Bang), first did the light, then the dark matter, and left the process working by itself, because in that light was His genetic code, the force that ( you said it) that undergoes evolution in a meaningful sense, and the whole plan for tunneling this Universe like a womb, to produce by evolution process a final product: His own Son. Now, ask to all other theories, let’s bring on only the known real facts, and real proved scientific data, over the table… and try to debunking Matrix/DNA Theory. I am searching this “destroyer scientific fact” because I am after the Thru and not after to prove a theory, for 30 years and never found it.



 Continuação da cópia/analise do artigo:

I will discuss some of them in this article. I will also argue that a purely scientific interpretation of evolution does not constitute an argument against Christian theology, which holds that God is creator and sustainer of the universe. Science and religion are fundamental components in the search for truth. They should work together to solve the challenging problems that mankind is facing.

What is Evolution?

The basic idea of evolution is surprisingly simple. For evolution to occur we need a population of reproducing individuals.

Comentario da Matrix/DNA – Estará esta afirmação correta? Existe algum caso de evolução em população de não-reprodutores individuos? Em cosmological evolução não vejo sistemas auto-reprodutores. A evolução de atomos para sistemas estelares foi: 1) uma nebulosa de atomos leves, gasosos ; 2) O modelo atomico funcionou como um fractal organizando-se a si mesmo como um modelo astronomico. … mas por qual mecanismo? O modelo atomico ja possue si a formula da Matrix/DNA.  P modelo estelar é suspeito, pois ainda não foi detectada a formula nele. Porem, a nebulosa de atomos pode ter um prototipo de galaxia, e ja contendo uma astronomica formula da Matrix/DNA. Ela teria funcionado como uma cascata descendente, modelando seus tijolos? Bem, a isto devo voltar depois. 

These individuals can be molecules, cells or multi-cellular organisms. During reproduction they pass on their information from parent to offspring. The information is encoded in form of a genetic sequence. Sometimes mutations occur and offspring end up with a slightly modified genome. Mutation generates novel variants and thereby produces genetic variation. The population does not consist of identical individuals, but instead there are different types. If some of those types reproduce faster than others, selection operates.  The faster reproducing types increase in relative abundance. They outcompete the slower ones, which might face extinction.

Mutation and selection are the key components of any evolutionary process.

Time Line and Major Steps

Our universe originated 13.7 billion years ago. Our solar system is 4.6 billion years old. Most scientists believe that there was an origin of life on earth and that this happened about 4 billion years ago.

The earliest traces of bacterial life (procaria) on earth are 3.5 to 3.8 billion years old. Higher cells (eucaria), with a nucleus, more complex genetics and organelles, emerged around 1.8 billion years ago. About 600 million years ago these higher cells discovered complex multi-cellularity and gave rise to animals, fungi and plants. A few million years ago, one animal species discovered human language.

I would consider these to be the five major steps in evolution: (i) the origin of life; (ii) the origin of bacteria; (iii) the origin of higher cells; (iv) the origin of complex multi-cellularity and (v) the origin of human language. Bacteria discovered most of biochemistry, higher cells discovered unlimited genetics; complex multicellularity discovered intricate developmental processes and animals with a nervous system. Humans discovered language.

Human language gave rise to a new mode of evolution, which we call cultural or linguistic evolution. The enormous speed of human discovery and invention is driven by this new mode of evolution. An idea or concept that originates in one brain can quickly spread to others. Structural changes (memories) are imprinted from one brain to another. Prior to human language the most crucial information transfer of evolution was mostly in terms of genetic information. Now we have genetic and linguistic evolution. The latter is much faster.  Presumably the collective information in human brains evolves at a much faster rate than any previous evolutionary system on earth. The growing world wide connectivity speeds up this linguistic evolutionary process.Related QuestionsWhy Do We Care About Human Evolution Today?

Mutation, Selection and Cooperation

Mutation generates diversity, and selection acts on diversity. Selection is based on competition, but in the living world we also observe cooperation. Cooperation means that individuals help one another. A cooperator pays a cost for another individual to receive a benefit. Cost and benefit are measured in terms of fitness, which is rate of successful reproduction. Cooperation can occur among replicating molecules that form complex organizations such as the first cell. Cooperation can occur among cells. For example, in filaments of cyanobacteria some cells give up reproduction (they die) in order to feed others with nitrogen.

Matrix/DNA – Ver isto. Está me parecendo uma extensão do mecanismo de predação/presa já verificado no sistema galactico. Pesquisa: filaments of cyanobacteria – em aberto.

Multi-cellular organisms are based on cooperation among individual cells. Cancer is a breakdown of cooperation, where cells revert to their primitive program of selfish replication.

Matrix/DNA – Uau… esta forma de ver o cancer é espetacular. E leva à sugestao da Matrix/DNA  de que cancer é causado pela comjuntura do sistema. Pesquisa: copiar a frase acima e gogglar ela para ver se existe uma fonte da ideia.

Eusociality is an important phenomenon where some animals become `workers’ or `soldiers’ in order to help other animals to reproduce. Human society is based on cooperation. We need the good will and help of others.

Matrix/DNAPesquisa – eusociality – em aberto.

Therefore, cooperation is an important phenomenon in biology. I would argue that without cooperation there is no construction of higher levels of organization. Therefore, I  propose to add cooperation as a third principle of evolution, besides mutation and selection.

Matrix/DNA: Estamos acompanhando com atenção este raciocinio devido ao fato de que cooperação ja se revela existente na formula da Matrix/DNA, com a ressalva de que nos sistemas fechados em si mesmo, a cooperação é tambem um altruismo de cada parte visando a manutenção de um sistema total egoista.

The question arises: Why would natural selection favor cooperation?

Matrix/DNA: Porque o agente por tras da seleção natural aqui é um ancestral sistema fechado que procura se reproduzir biologicamente, portanto seleciona as espécies que apresentam não cooperação, porem, antes, servidão, ou seja altruismo em relação ao sistema. Por outro lado, a cooperação entre humanos, começou por esse mesmo modelo de cooperação anterior as suas origens, mas foi reforçada pelo despertar do aspecto software do sistema, ao qual se denomina “consciencia”. Sendo cada humano um gene consciente de uma nova e transcendental forma de sistema natural, e sendo que este novo sistema depende da união e fusão de seus frragmentos de consciencia, tambem o aspecto software seleciona a cooperação. 

Why should one individual reduce its own fitness in order to augment that of a competitor?

Matrix/DNA – Não,… isso não acontece, isso é caridade, não cooperação. Cooperação é um fenômeno simbiôntico, onde dois unidos produzem uma terceira fôrça que é maior que a soma das fôrças das duas partes. Nenhuma parte reduz sua totalidade, ao contrario, as duas partes são aumentadas. O que as tornam mais evoluídas e portanto, com maior sucesso na reprodução, o que termina em seleção natural. 

Natural selection should oppose cooperation. It turns out that specific mechanisms must operate for cooperation to be favored over defection. At present we know five such mechanisms.

(i) Direct reciprocity: there are repeated encounters between the same two individuals. I help you today, you help me tomorrow. (ii) Indirect reciprocity: there are repeated encounters in a group of individuals. Cooperators gain a good reputation and will receive help from others. (iii) Kin selection: cooperation occurs between close genetic relatives. (iv) Multi-level selection: competition occurs not only between individuals but also between groups. Cooperative groups might outcompete less cooperative ones. (v) Spatial selection: individuals interact in spatial situations, social networks or sets. Cooperators prevail by forming clusters. Neighbors help each other.

Matrix/DNA: Mas todos estes mecanismos fazem com que todos os indivíduos cooperantes aumentem sua totalidade, sua “fitness”. Na kin selection por exemplo, se dentro de uma familia alguns são reduzidos ao cooperarem com os outros da família, então não seria toda a familia selecionada, mas apenas aqueles que cresceram recebendo a cooperação?

The recent appreciation of the importance of evolution of cooperation shifts the perspective of evolution from a purely competitive scenario to one that includes the possibility of cooperation and altruism. Cooperation is crucially involved in the construction of higher levels of organization in the biological world.

Some Open Questions in Evolution

Similar to most other scientific endeavors, our current understanding of evolution is incomplete. This statement is not meant as a criticism of the approach, but rather as an impetus for further work. I will list three interesting open questions.

1. The origin of life and the very beginning of evolution

Life can be defined as that which evolves. Living systems are the product of evolution and are capable of undergoing further evolution.


Matrix/DNA: Não, nem todos, muitos sistemas vivos foram extintos e muitos em via de extinção, outros estacionários esperando o inicio de sua extinção. isto é importante estabelecer porque seria uma ideia contra a evolução cosmológica, pois sabemos que galaxias, sistemas estelares, pararam de evoluir a tempos, sendo mesmo passiveis de serem considerados fósseis congelados. Mas as formigas, devido seu sistema social fechado em si mesmo, pararam de evoluir a muitos milhões de anos, tambem.

But how does evolution begin? Evolution requires populations of reproducing individuals? But how do we obtain individuals that have the ability to reproduce? This question concerns the transition from chemistry to biology, from “prelife” to life.

Scientific explanation for this transition have been proposed, but they are not based on standard evolution. Evolution presupposes reproduction and therefore cannot lead to the origin of reproduction.  Therefore, evolution is not a theory that explains the origin of life.

Matrix/DNA: Excelente lógica que pode minar o edifico do Darwinismo, e ao mesmo tempo reforçar a teoria da Matrix/DNA. Ocorre que evolução veio da “pré-vida”, onde não requeria reprodução de individuos, e sim, auto-reciclagem de sistemas mais a reprodução interna de orgãos, que foi o mecanismo precursor da reprodução do sistema inteiro. Ponto para a Matrix/DNA.

2. Why is evolution constructive?

Imagine our planet 3 billion years ago when it was populated by bacteria. How do we get from such a world to what we have now? Which properties of the bacterial cell suggest that there is “open ended” evolution ahead? An evolution that would lead to higher cells, complex multi-cellularity and even to intelligent life? What makes evolution constructive on large time scales? Where in the mathematical formalism of evolutionary dynamics, do we find its constructive power?

Matrix/DNA: Excelente lógica que pode minar o edifício da Teoria Darwinista, ao mesmo tempo que reforça a Teoria da Matrix/DNA:  Para começar, a célula bacterial não era um sistema natural completo, do mais evoluído. A célula vegetal era mais, pois auto-suficiente pela fotossíntese, tanto que ela foi selecionada a se propagar mais pelo planeta. Então, a falta do cloroplasto para a fotossíntese já era um estado aberto a futura evolução. Mas se fosse apenas isso, a bactéria animal teria se tornado uma similar da vegetal e seria o fim da evolução.  O que existia como força evolutiva, não talvez como propriedade interna da bactéria ( se ainda a totalidade dos genes-fótons não estavam dentro dela), era a existência de um sistema natural muito mais evoluído que a bactéria, inclusive estando a bactéria vivendo dentro deste sistema. E este sistema não termina seu potencial evolutivo em nenhuma das antigas e atuais espécies, mas sim sua meta é a evolução da biosfera como um todo rumo a um sistema que seja sua cópia reprodutora.  Graças a Deus ( para contentar o cristão Mr. Nowak) que foi e é assim, pois do contrario, a consciência que estava esperando nos sistemas primitivos para despertar e se levantar no homem, nunca teria tido a oportunidade de existir. A evolução é construtiva aqui no meio biológico porque um sistema natural mecanicamente perfeito foi atacado pela degeneração entrópica, se fragmentou em seus bits-informação, a caminho de colapsar-se sobre si mesmo, porem estes bits vindos da periferia caíram e se reencontraram na superfície da terra, de forma desordenada, o que deu inicio a um estado de caos. Porem, a medida que bits encontravam-se com seus celestes vizinhos e se reuniam em pedaços cada vez maiores, começou a levantar-se do caos um fluxo de ordem, o qual, na verdade, é um processo de reprodução de um sistema em estado de ordem, mecânica.  ( Mas, raios, como eu explicaria isso num post para Mr. Nowak e seus leitores de mesma profissão de fé, se o meu pobre inglês já começaria por me desmerecer, se a cada palavra que lessem estariam comparando com o modelo cristão que tem em mente e pior, com a intenção definitiva de fazer o modelo cristão vencer? Posso ser até bom em encontrar soluções para os problemas do Universo, mas não sei como resolver estas pequenas querelas humanas…) 

3. The search space

Evolution is a search process that explores a huge space of possibilities. But what generates that search space? Is a theory for that space not a deeper description of biology, than a theory which only describes the search process. You can say evolution discovers intelligent life, but it does not generate the possibility of intelligent life. What generates the possibility of molecules that store information, of cells that can divide, of multi-cellular organisms of human language? Ultimately the answer must come from the laws of physics and chemistry, but no scientist can do this right now.

Matrix/DNA: “Novamente outro excelente e sábio exercício da lógica natural e do racionalismo. O problema do Sr. Nowak é que a premissa de sua afirmação esta errada, mas tão errada, que ele mesmo encontra uma resposta a questão que sua afirmação suscita, que contradiz sua própria afirmação. Se, como ele conclui, a resposta deve vir das leis da física e da química, e sendo estas leis das ciências exatas que pressupõem uma ordem pre-determinada aos eventos naturais, a evolução não poderia ser um processo de busca ao acaso. Não vou descer aqui a detalhes, apenas re-afirmar o conceito geral da cosmovisão da Matrix/DNA: neste Universo está ocorrendo um processo de reprodução genética do sistema natural que o gerou. E processos de reprodução não são buscas que exploram uma grande quantidade de possibilidades. Ele não descobriu a vida inteligente, ele já estava tunelado para produzir a vida inteligente. O que gera a possibilidade de moléculas estocarem informação é a prévia existência de sistemas que já estocavam informação; o que gera a capacidade de células se dividirem é p sistema ancestral que em si se dividia em duas simétricas contra-partes; o que possibilita células individuais se fundirem em multicelular organismos é o modelo do ambiente onde estas células estão, que por ser o mesmo modelo de cada célula, nada lhe custa organize-las em modelos maiores, desde que sejam menores que o ambiente; e o que gera a linguagem em humanos é o despertar do software, o qual é fatalmente composto de símbolos abstratos, portanto fácil de se projetar num sistema de símbolos fonéticos representando objetos e dinâmica entre estes objetos. 

God and Evolution

In Christian theology, God is the creator and sustainer of the universe. According to St. Augustine, God is atemporal and created the world ex nihilo (out of nothing). According to St. Thomas, God is the ultimate cause for everything that exists.

Matrix/DNA: Se esta é a definição de um Deus pela teologia cristã, ela está então também definindo o criador do Universo pela Teoria da Matrix/DNA. A teoria indica que o autor do Big Bang ( cujo mecanismo é o mesmo que até hoje ocorre e determina o momento inicial de qualquer corpo humano) e mistério que existia antes do Universo, e que deve ainda existir alem do Universo, é um sistema natural auto-consciente. Desconhecido e impossível de ser sequer imaginado pelo meu limitado cérebro humano. Sendo o Universo o aparato dentro do qual esta ocorrendo um processo de reprodução genética, ele deve estar, e, relação ao sistema criador, assim o barriga de uma mulher gravida esta sendo suportada pelo corpo da mulher. O sistema natural criou o Universo como ser hermafrodita como resultado da união de dois indivíduos de mesma especie. Nesse caso, se houve alguma criação de alguma coisa a partir do Nada, devemos então deduzir que o criador do Universo pertence a uma linhagem genealógica cujos primeiros ancestrais escapavam a todas as leis naturais conhecidas e tinham capacidades não possíveis de serem por nos imaginadas. O sistema natural criador é também a ultima causa de tudo que aqui existe, assim como a forma da especie humana é a ultima causa de tudo que existe dentro de um ovo ou dentro da barriga de uma mulher gravida. Não tenho a capacidade de dar um nome para o sistema natural auto-consciente criador, mas se outros lhe derem nomes que os satisfaçam, tais como “Deus”, que assim seja. Amem!”

God has chosen to unfold his creation in time according to laws of nature. Humans, created in the image of God, have begun to understand some aspects of these laws of nature. Evolution is an organizing principle of the living world. God uses evolution to unfold life on earth. The creative power of God and the laws of evolution are not in conflict with each other. God acts through evolution. God is the ultimate cause for evolution. In this world view, without God there would be no evolution at all. Similarly, God uses gravity to organize the structure of the universe on a large scale. Without God there would be no gravity. Neither gravity nor evolution constitute challenges for Christian faith. A purely scientific interpretation of evolution does not lead to an argument against the existence of God. Scientific atheism is a metaphysical position, which goes beyond a scientific interpretation of the available evidence.

God is not only creator, but also sustainer. God’s creative power and love is needed to will every moment into existence. God is atemporal. In my opinion, an atemporal Creator and Sustainer lifts the entire trajectory of the world into existence.  For the atemporal God, who is the creator and sustainer of the universe, the evolutionary trajectory is not unpredictable but fully known.

Matrix/DNA: Existe, a meu ver, uma pequena contradição no raciocínio acima. Se o homem é criado para ser a imagem de Deus, se o homem é assim criado através de um processo de evolução, e se tanto a evolução como o homem obedece as leis da Natureza, como poderia ser Deus, a imagem futura do homem, um ser não-natural?! Porque Deus teria criado a Natureza e as leis da Natureza se Ele mesmo não é natural?! Portanto, por eu entender que existe esta contradição  ( a qual pode ser resultado de minha reduzida capacidade de inteligencia em relação à inteligencia do Sr.  Novak , suspeita que portanto me faz suspeitar ainda que exista ai uma contradição), tenho este conflito com a teologia ( não com a teologia cristã, enquanto baseada no Novo Testamento, com a mensagem de Jesus Cristo, e não tenho nenhum problema porque é a mesma mensagem da bisca da Sagrada Universal Família da Teoria da Matrix/DNA), mas um conflito com a teologia judaica do Velho Testamento que insiste na afirmação que existe um Deus não-natural. Que o sistema criador acompanhe a evolução dentro do Universo numa atitude de amor para com o ser que está sendo gerado aqui, é também a sugestão da naturalista Matrix/DNA. que aponta para a cena de  dos pais que acompanham com amor o desenvolvimento fetal, embrionário, ainda dentro da barriga.  Que um pai muito mais consciente e evoluído que o pai humano tenha inserido em sua genética a propriedade do livre-arbítrio, e a seu filho universal essa propriedade do livre-arbítrio, para que, o filho se modele a si mesmo dentro das opções de muitas possibilidades, sem que seja obrigado, como no caso da local-genética humana, a seguir e aceitar um modelo imposto, também não tenho nenhum problema com a ideia. Que esta liberdade apenas seria completa se o feto-embrião tivesse liberdade no tempo e espaço, portanto sendo capaz de experimentar e errar vários modelos, até no final encontrar o melhor, cometendo nesta jornada vários pecados originais, ou seja, antes das origens de suas novas formas e modelos escolhidos, também não tenho nenhum problema. Que o sistema criador as vezes sinta a evolução de seu feto-embrião sob ameaça e tome remédios inoculando-os no ambiente uterino e no feto para correção, assim como toda mãe gravida tome remédios ou pratique outros cuidados quando o médico lhe avisa que algo vai mal com seu embrião, também não tenho nenhum problema. Quanto ao fato do sistema criador ser atemporal, também não tenho nenhum problema porque a Teoria da Matrix/DNA sugere que não existe uma entidade ou substancia ou processo chamado tempo interferindo no Universo, o que existe é uma simples longa cadeia de causas e efeitos chamados eventos que os sere humanos precisam fixar numa ordem cronológica para se situarem e entenderem o fluir dessa cadeia. O que ainda não conseguimos um acordo é na idéia de um Deus não-natural capaz de fazer magicas, inclusive a de fazer aparecer algo do Nada, se é que existe um Nada. Em outras palavras… que venha de lá um grande abraço dos irmãos cristãos, que apertem minha mão estendida, e oxalá que consigam provar sua tese sendo a verdadeira, pois assim economizarei tempo ao tentar provar que a minha seria a verdadeira, e me evitaria o grande impacto de chegar no final da vida me deparando que fui um grande erro. meus votos de sucesso, mas que vença a Verdade… se é que existe uma Verdade Ultima, nem disso tenho certeza!

Discussion Questions

1. What makes evolution constructive?

2. Evolution is a search process.  In order to succeed every search process requires a restricted search space.

What is a theory of the space that is being searched? Should we search for a “universal grammar” of life?

3. Evolution presupposes reproduction. Which process leads to the origin of reproduction?


Tentativa de adequar os textos da Matrix/DNA numa forma que os leitores entendam as respostas às questões acima:

Post enviado ao artigo:  TheMatrixDNA – January, 16, 2014 – Your comment has been queued for review by site administrators and will be published after approval.

1) O que faz a Evolução ser construtiva?

A resposta a esta pergunta é fácil para a mãe de todas as Ciências Humanas e todas as religiões, a Filosofia Naturalista. Ela se torna difícil e até mesmo negada para filhos que se perderam em seus caminhos. Para a Filosofia Naturalista que se mantem fiel aos princípios da Razão Natural, um Deus auto-Consciente que gera Universos para reproduzir-se como um filho à sua imagem e semelhança, é a unica conclusão possível. Mas como então explicar todas as coisas e eventos existentes nos 13,7 bilhões de anos deste processo de reprodução genética de um criador ex-machine? Como por exemplo o fenômeno da Evolução e o fato dela ser realmente construtiva?

Se Deus é o nome do criador ex-machine, Ele fez as Leis Naturais, e a Natureza não joga dados com suas criaturas, mostrando falsas informações que as levassem ao erro e armadilhas fatais. Portanto, se para dirigir sua vida com um plano sábio e em sintonia com as Leis Naturais, o homem precisa ter tambem uma resposta correta para esta questão, a Natureza responde mostrando aqui no pequeno mundo humano como ela atua na Evolução, a nivel universal.  E onde esta a Natureza mostrando como funciona a evolução? No simples e conhecido processo embriogenese de uma forma gerando geneticamente sua reprodução, que deverá incorporar alguma mutação. Em outras palavras, a evolução desde um genoma fornecido pelos pais, e o final resultado dessa evolução, um ser à imagem e semelhança dos pais.  Então, o que faz a evolução não apenas dos seres vivos, biológica, como o que fez a evolução dos sistemas ancestrais, a Cosmológica, é um agente por trás do processo da evolução, com um propósito, selecionando dentro dos acasos (ou das formas intermediarias do embrião e seu desenvolvimento), aqueles que se encaixam no seu propósito, e/ou inserindo informações que conduzam a maior complexidade. Em outras palavras, acabei de descrever a espécie humana resumida à soma de um médico e mais uma mulher grávida que acompanham a evolução de uma nova criatura no ambiente intra-uterino. O agente médico+mãe tem um propósito; a mãe e o pai forneceram as informações para todos os estágios da evolução, desde a mais simples forma da morula ate a ultima forma da especie humana; o ambiente intra-uterino é modelado, tunelado, para que de um inicial evento em que o envelope de um espermatozoide explode dentro de um óvulo ( evento que poderia ser chamado de Micro-Bang), se desenvolva uma forma final complexa, e isto é o que faz a evolução ser construtiva.

Um problema que dificulta o entendimento deste processo é que a evolução das espécies se dá a céu aberto, tendo as criaturas espaço e tempo com possibilidades de muitas escolhas, ocorrendo muitas mutações, enquanto no exemplo de micro-evolução do processo embrionário o ambiente é único e inalterável pela criatura, e ocorre apenas uma grande mutação a cada vez, quando a forma se transforma. Mas isto é perfeitamente explicável.

É preciso entender e aceitar que  a forma humana atual é ainda uma forma provisória da evolução, como a forma de feto é provisoria na evolução do corpo humano. Não sendo esta atual forma a final, é lógico que a forma humana não tenha ainda todas as propriedades da forma final expressadas em sua genética. A real capacidade genética é relativa a Evolução Cosmológica, da qual a Evolução Biológica é apenas um micro-ciclo. Portanto ao código genético que expressa ainda poucas propriedades, chamamos de DNA; ao mesmo código genético mas em pleno poder de expressar todas suas propriedades chamamos de Matrix/RNA Universal.

Uma destas propriedades ainda não expressadas pelo DNA,  é a capacidade de estender ao filho, não apenas o livre-arbítrio na escolha de suas decisões, mas também o livro arbítrio na modelação do seu mundo externo, a qual é uma propriedade expressada na Matrix Universal. Trial, error, aprendizagem, faz com o filho cósmico construa o que ele pensa sera seu paraíso e depois que o experimenta, vendo que não se satisfaz nele, tem seu modelo ambiental desfeito e retorna do principio a construir outro modelo. O erro anterior sera seu pecado original, ou seja, antes das origens da sua forma seguinte.

A Filosofia Naturalista se encontra com a teologia cristã onde interessa se encontrar, na mensagem final, no entendimento ultimo do significado da nossa existência. Vindo por dois caminhos diferentes, chegamos ao mesmo ponto final, quando olhamos para nós, para baixo, e vemos “um filho” e ao levantar-mos a cabeça para cima vemos “um Pai”. Assim Cristo definiu tudo: Pai e Filho! E nos encontramos no mandamento final que deve ser a meta ultima da nossa evolução: “A Sagrada Família Universal, na qual todos somos como genes conscientes criando o nosso único corpo consciente final, e onde todos os genes são irmãos e irmãs, pais e filhos”.


1 ) What makes Evolution constructive ?

The answer to this question is easy for the mother of all Sciences, Philosophy Naturalism . It becomes difficult and even denied to her offspring who are lost in their ways. For the naturalist philosopher, that keeps true to the principles of natural reason , a self-conscious God who creates universes as environments for to reproduce himself by natural genetic process in a final shape that must be His image and likeness is the only possible conclusion. But how then to explain all things and events featured in this 13.7 billion years of genetic reproduction of a former ex-machine creative process ? Such as the phenomenon of evolution and the fact that it is really constructive ?

If  God is the name of the former creator ex-machine, He made the Natural Laws , and Nature does not play dice with her creatures , showing false information that would lead to error and fatal traps . Therefore , to direct your life with wise planning and in tune with the natural laws , man must also have a correct answer to this question, and Nature responds here showing the evolution at the small human world as it acts in the evolution at the universal level . And where is Nature showing how evolution works ? In simple and known embryogenesis process in a way generating genetically breeding, which should incorporate transformations of shapes . In other words , the evolution from a genome provided by the parents , and the end result of this evolution , one being the image and likeness of parents . So what drives evolution – not only the Biological Evolution of the living beings , as what drove Cosmological Evolution of our ancestors non-living systems – is an agent behind the process of universal evolution, the genome of God, called Universal Matrix/DNA, with a purpose in selecting the hazards ( or forms intermediate of the embryo and its development ) , those that fit His purpose , and / or entering information leading to greater complexity . In other words , I have described the human species summarized in the sum of a doctor and a pregnant woman accompanying the evolution of a new creature in the intrauterine environment. The agent doctor+ mother has a purpose ; mom and dad provided information for all stages of evolution, from the simplest form of morula, blastula, until the last form of human species , the intrauterine environment is modeled , tunneled so that an initial event when the envelope of a spermatozoon explodes at the center of an ovule, (an event that could be called  The Micro-Bang ) , to develop a complex final form , and this is what makes the evolution to be constructive .

One problem that hinders the understanding of this process is that the evolution of species takes place in the opened sky, with the creatures in a space and time with the possibility of many choices, many mutations occurring. While in the case of embryogenesis the process in the embryonic environment is unique and unalterable by the creature and a large mutation only occurs every time when the shape is changed. But this is perfectly explainable.

You must understand and accept that the current human form is still a provisional form of evolution, such as how to provisionally fetus is in the evolution of the human body . Not being this current form, the final form , it is logical that the human form not yet have all the properties of the final form expressed in their genetics . The actual capacity is related to genetic Cosmological Evolution, and not Biological Evolution, which is just a micro-cycle. Therefore the genetic code that still expresses few properties , called DNA , and the same genetic code, but in full power to express all their properties called Universal Matrix/DNA.

One of these properties still not expressed by DNA , is the ability to extend to the child , not just free will in choosing their decisions , but the free will in shaping its external world , which is a property expressed in the Universal Matrix . Trial , error , learning, makes the cosmic child build what he thinks will be his paradise and after experiencing it , seeing that it is not satisfied , has scrapped its environmental model and returns the principle to build another model . The previous error will be your original sin , ie , before the origins of their follows .

The Naturalist Philosophy meets Christian theology where interests in the final message, the latter understanding of the meaning of our existence . Coming by two different paths , we arrive at the same end point , when we look at us, down, and we see ” a son ” and we lift our head up we see a ” Father ” . So Christ said everything in two words: Father and Son ! And we meet at the the final commandment that should be the ultimate goal of our evolution : ” The Universal Holy Family , in which we are like conscious genes building our unique and final conscious body, then, we are a universal family where all brothers are our brothers, all father and mother are our fathers and mothers…” .


Meu comentario postado em january, 16, 9:53 PM – 

( Your comment has been queued for review by site administrators and will be published after approval.)

2. Evolution is a search process.  In order to succeed every search process requires a restricted search space.

This is theoretical and I don’t agree, I will explain. Godel’s Theorem: “Nobody can knows the thru of a system standing inside the system”. We are inside the process of Evolution, and Evolution is a universal process, we will need go beyond the universe for known its thru. So, there is no scientific statement about the finality of evolution. My method of investigation – comparative anatomy between living and non-living systems – is suggesting that universal evolution is a previous ex-machine determined process at same time that is an in-machine search process. My method have suggested the existence of an evolutionary link between Cosmological and Biological evolution – there are astronomical building blocks half-mechanical/half biological, the model is at my website, and it is ruled by Newtonian mechanics but the whole system has a initial coberture with biological functions. The surprising thing here is that the technical description of this astronomical system is exactly equal the metaphorical description of “The Eden Paradise”, seen in the Bible. That’s why an extreme materialist, applying the most materialist rationalization (formal logic) suddenly is obligated to pay attention in what was considered a mystical fable. Observing the model of this evolutionary link – which was the state of the world at 4 billions years ago, just moments before life’s origins – we see there all symbols used by the authors of the Bible: an internal energetic circuit in shape of a serpent, two flows of information running in this circuit performing the whole of male and female functions at a hermaphrodite system (Adam and Eve?), the clear presence of a kind of software (the soul?), the shape of a tree, of the apple, the state of a thermodynamic equilibrium like a paradise, etc. And then, we see that the building block of astronomical systems is a giant copy of the microscope building block of DNA – a lateral base-pair of nucleotides. It seems that universal evolution is ruled by a kind of Matrix/DNA, which origins leads us to quantum dimension and is lost at the frontiers of the Universe, suggesting an ex-machine precedence. If DNA has an ancestor at Cosmological Evolution, how an astronomical system could be transformed into a microscope system? Applying the process of genetics we get it, but, then, we see that the whole event is just the Fall, as described metaphorically in the Bible.  The whole thing about yours question – from my models view point – is that evolution is an universal internal process of search because is respected the property of free-will for this Matrix/DNA. It happens that the models suggests that this universe is merely the womb where is occurring a universal process like genetic reproduction, reproduction of the unknown system that produced this womb. So, evolution is, ultimately, a guided process, like any other reproductive process. 


Terceira questao de Mr. Nowak:

3. Evolution presupposes reproduction. Which process leads to the origin of reproduction?

Resposta da Matrix/DNA: January, 17, 7:42 AM  ( Your comment has been queued for review by site administrators and will be published after approval.)

There is biological reproduction which has evolved from astronomical mechanical reproduction which has evolved from atomic reproduction, and so on. Reproduction is a process that is coming under evolution since the Big Bang, becoming more and more complex. At the model of astronomical system at my website you can see how occurs astronomical reproduction ( see the model of astronomical origins of chromosome X and Y), at very simple shape. There is evolution because reproduction is a slow process requiring evolution. I should say that reproduction presupposes evolution.

God did not magics when wanted His son, He used the very simple and natural process of His genetic reproduction through Universes. That’s why universal evolution contains the process of reproduction from its most simple shape at cosmological systems and most complex shape at biological systems. That’s why the formation of living bodies by embryogenesis shows the process of evolution doing its way.  That’s the explanation for the first initial moment of yours own body occurred by the “explosion”of spermatozoon at the center of an ovule, the biological face of the Big Bang at the first moment of this Universe. That’s why Jesus Christ pointed his finger to the soil and Himself saying “the son” and lifted up His eyes to the sky saying “The Father”. He did not said “God here and God there”. Because between a father and a son there is a process of genetic reproduction. And please, try applying the genetic process over the whole history of 13,7 billions years of this Universe, go from atoms to galaxy to human beings… and the whole Universal natural History comes to yours hand, making rational sense.

If you was powerful, and could making choices, should you making yours son by magics? Puff… and it is ready? This is not fun, you never could know the love that humans fathers and mothers knows waiting their babies. Don’t do this to God! Don’t be bad to God! Let Him to know the love that to you were given.

The vortex at the center of an atomic nebulae produces seeds of astronomical bodies which are born, grows. emits a lateral flow that turns back to the vortex, and follow its cycle going to be a supernova, dying, self-recycling the system. It is the same that a human body does: it was born, grows, reaches a state of maturity when emits a lateral flow of its DNA towards a female, perpetuating the species. The stupid matter of this lost planet did not created the phantastic engineering of biological reproduction, it is result of a long process coming from the Big Bang and beyond it, because we can see the first elementary particles already applying reproduction. It happens that at the building blocks of astronomical systems, it is not the system that is reproduced, but, their internal organs: be it a star, a planet, a pulsar… when they disappears, the system produces other for replacing it. The process has the same meaning of biological sexual reproduction. And you can be sure: the glue linking protons and neutrons at atoms nuclei, producing “pions” is already a primitive shape of reproduction of  particles that gives material existence to its circular layers.

Once more thing: please, look to the figure of a brain with its tail, the medulla. It is the same figure of a spermatozoon entering an ovule, when its tail still is outside. Merely coincidence? Or it means that nature applies the same creation method every time that develops a new complex system? The brain is inside the head and the head is the ovule, the egg, where is occurring the embryogenesis of a new system: consciousness. When you are waiting the embryogenesis of yours son, you know that it is transforming its shape from morula, blastula, fetus, embryo… and then, the final shape: it is yours image and likeness. This is the most beautiful moment and beautiful history in this world. Please, give this pleasure to God, also. He is watching His son transforming from shape to shape since the Big Bang, waiting the final shape, the Big Birth, just at His image and likeness: consciousness. Yes, evolution presupposes reproduction, when you see evolution, be sure, it is merely steps of a bigger process, called “reproduction”.

But… remember… everything in this response to yours question is product of a humble theory, a different world view, elaborated by a human brain, which is too much small for discovering the final Thru. There are lots of errors here, for sure. Because theories are under evolution too.



January 17, 2014

Qualitative or quantitative differences?

I’ve long been inclined to consider a continuum between ‘life’ and ‘nonlife’, based on a universal evolutionary process of the kind TheMatrixDNA outlines (mostly, admittedly, from popularisations such as Dennett’s notion of natural selection as a “universal acid”).

My short response here would be a kind of set-theoretic query about your definition of life:  if “life is that which evolves”, is also everything that evolves – which *could conceivably* include atomic or cosmological structures – alive? (which seems to be the broad implication). Or would ‘life’ best be considered a subset of those things that evolve?

Relatedly, if we are to consider evolution as a universal process in the sense which you seem to advocate in your reply to TheMatrixDNA, I think you need to make a stronger case here for why reproduction is still a problem or an ‘open question’.  In your responses to blindboy, I don’t think you’ve yet made a case for what is special, unique, or distinct about “reproduction” over and above a non-life or prelife process of “replication”.  You talk about reproduction making available the “full power” of mutation and selection; you seem here to want to distinguish, qualitatively rather than quantitatively, between replication and reproduction?

Given that you are also interested in the continuum between life and nonlife, and the universality of evolution, I’m curious to know whether you think that as we know them in a biological sense are qualitatively or (merely?) quanitatively different from those seemingly analogous processes that could take place in other structures. And also, if you think the difference is qualitative, given what we already know about the ways in which non-living systems can be shown to self-replicate, where you would draw that line, and in what that qualitative difference consists.

Thanks in advance.


The response abaixo nao foi enviada ainda:

Primeira resposta: “reproduction, life, and evolution …. where you would draw that line, and in what that qualitative difference consists?”

My question: Taking a human body as the object, at the time when occurs its life’s cycle,  there are qualitative differences of its evolution, life and reproduction process? Yes, a baby has expressed sexual apparatus that are not expressed at the fetus, an adult have mustaches that is not expressed at a child, and so on. What is the force behind these difference? The timing control of expression of genes, the ideal state of the body for receiving new informations.  The answer here must be the answer there. Where we draw the line between self-replicatiions of those initial cells and the reproduction of the body? At the moment that those dormants genes entering at action?



Mr. DBallam,

Before Nr. Nowak’s rsponse, I ask permission for commenting yours very insightull post, helping my own research. I wish that you try to consider just for a moment, the following hypothesis: The current theoretical model of galactic system (nebular theory?) is non-complete and suggests a wrong final meaning about its existence, maybe the final model will be as such revoltionary as went the heliocentric model to the Earth-centric model. Try, please, by a momment, considering this hypothesis could be right. The best argument for this hypothesis is that the current model does not offers a description of the state of the world at those last minutes before life’s origins, that lead that world to produce things like RNA, DNA, proteins folding, and the firstn cell’s system. Then, the current model implies the interference of an external agent acting over the long chain of causes and effects that produced that state of the world. And our reasoning suggests that something wrong is going inside the current astronomical  model.

We are like microbes in relation to the size of this galaxy and we have no enough scientific proved data for a scientic final astronomical model. But we can build theoretical models. The current model was built based on Physics and Mathematics alone. Could a theoretical model of a cell’s system, which is the final product of this astronomical model, be built only by Physics and Math? First of all, where was the liquid state of matter in that initial atomic nebulae that produced the modern galaxies? I can’t see it, then, we rationalizes that the process for formation of galaxies is not the process for formation of cells system, which requires a universal solvent that creates organic chemistry. Physiscs and Math can penetrates organic chemistry and describes lots of chemicals operations, but not all them, and they can not penetrates the matter organized as biological system. I think that trying to describe the last product of ythis evoltionary process, which is a human both, Physics and Math can describes the structure and functionality of the bone skeleton, but, stopping there. What about the organs, the brain, the thoughts? Sumarising my argument, I am suggesting the obvious: Physics and math does not grasp the phenomena that arises at biological organization of matter. So, supposing the hypothesis that the state of the world before life’s otigins had in it the forces and elements that produced biological systems, our current model built by Physics and math did not catch them. Organic chemistryn experts and Biology experts need go there, to the model of astronomical systems, for a better model.

How could standing a primitive biiological principle at an astronomical system? Not for sure at stellars systems, they are composing galaxies like atoms composing biological cells. Is at the galaxie system, as a whole, that we should searching them. But galaxies shows movements described by Newtonian mechanics and something by general relativity ( I am ignoring quantum mechanics). How and where, the hells, are hidding here the peinciples for biological organization of matter?! I went back to the first method we have applied for reaching evolutionary theory: comparative anatomy between the body of humans and monkeys, dogs, etc. And then, heureka!, we discovers that a mechanic natural system shows that beyond its structural mechanic state, shows a surface coberture that seems biological phenomena! But, this mechanical system is a theoretical model of galaxies, different than the model of current theoretical model. There are no real proved facts, there are no last images sent by Hubble telescope or any other, that debunks this new model, then, why not?

Mutation of natural system first occurs at the surface of systems, because it is the surface that are in touch with external enviroment. Only after that the mutation is incorpotrated internally and assimiled by the genome…, I think. So, if there was no external non-natural agent, if there were no events by chance producing results that could not be selected by a previous design, the previous design for biological system was located at the surface of the galaxy. If there were an external agent and events by abolute chance changing evolution, I am going out of the job, and I think that all of all scientific enterprise should do the same.

How and where are hidden the principles for building biological systems in the surface of galaxies?! Those spiral, spherical, portions of stars, pulsars, black holes, etc.,  distributed in a chaotic way? Comparative anatomy: look to the final product, a cell system, to the nucleus, organelles like ribosomes, muthocondrias, and try to find the order at the galaxy that produced the order of a cell system. After thousands of tentatives, trial and error, finally we can get a model where the order is there. The hidden order inside the chaos, the final meaning of that system that reveals the biological principles. All life’s properties are there in primitive state. Sexual reproduction, metabolism, autonomy of movements, life;s cycle, everything is there working in a mechanical fashion. But you have merely a theoretical model, which seems impossible. But, the Copernicus model was impossible at his time. Physics and Math, no computational ……, no Hubble telescope can grasp these properties at galaxies. Comparative anatomy, any child and any layman like me is able to apply,  it can.

The new models suggests answers to any question related to universal evolution. Makes no sense the division of natural systems between living and non-living systems, because, exists only a unique natural universal system: we are seeing different shapes of this system like we see different shapes of a human body. Inside the Universe there is a system evolving under the rules of a life’s cycle process, so, there is the atomic shape, the stellar system shape, the hgalactic shape, the biological shape, as there is the blastula shape, the fetus shape, the adult shape… if we don’t understandin this simple character of this worls’s existence we can’t understand evolution and the meaning of our own existence here and now. Our problem lays on the wored “life”. It leads us to pressupose an event producing its origins that was not inserted in the long chain of natural causes and effects. An event coming from outside, then we appeal for magics, be it by a human idea of an reduced God that needs going at every planet creating life when any human enginneer could make a living software that creates universes and biological systems, or be it magics produced by random events. There was no origins of life inside this Universe, there is a continuum process of evolution which are merely steps of a bigger process: reproduction.

So yours must unsolved questions have a suggestion for answer at this new cosmological model. The answer begins with another question: is there qualitative or quantitative mutation expressed by an enbryo while it is inside the womb? Or – if there is a mutation – it is only expressed after the birth? I don’t know the answer, but,  I can’t see the importance in this question. I was prompt to say: No, there is no increse in quality neither in quantity because the son can not be bigger than the father, if we suppose that this Universe is unique, a closed system, isolated, and the father is unique.  But could have incresases if this Universe is an opened system, changing informations with other universes, and the father belongs to a species. It never will be a scientific answer.