Para pensar neste domingo, veja este artigo sobre a questão da nossa existencia, e o debate que se segue

Encontrei-me com meu calcanhar de Aquiles agora. O mais temido momento, que de vez em quando volta à tona e me derruba por dias. Trata-se da exata oposta visão do mundo em que normalmente acredito. O problema é que sinto que ela pode ser a real, e a minha pode ser a falsa. Por qual visão do mundo tende você? Ela está bem explicada num comentário que peguei agora na Internet:
“A Física governa o universo, independe se nós queremos ou não reconhecer isto. As mensagens de humanismo na literatura e na cultura são justamente uma destilação de uma rede complexa de reações biofísicas. DNA sendo transcrito em proteínas, proteínas comunicando e interagindo-se umas com outras, neurônios disparando sinapses. Entender sómente uma fração destes mecanismos produz um show de humanismo muito mais deslumbrante e inspirador.”
Isto está no link:

‘Life Keeps Changing’: Why Stories, Not Science, Explain the World

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2014/01/life-keeps-changing-why-stories-not-science-explain-the-world/283219/

Esta afirmação eloquente e tão segura de si, não tenho fatos reais para refutá-la. Foi pronunciada por um físico, é a norma no pensamento dos cientistas, eles foram educados pela elite moderna e mais poderosa do conhecimento humano, para ver o mundo por esse prisma. Faz parte dessa visão de mundo pegar um telescópio, apontá-lo para o espaço sideral, tendo em mente que os pontos luminosos que se está vendo não são estrelas, mas sim galaxias com milhões de estrelas, e isso nos traz para a realidade da nossa pequenez e valor, menos que um ponto sub-microscópio no conceito das existências. Na mente a crença que somos meros produtos de poeira estelar, que a qualquer momento uma região de estrelas pode explodir, desaparecer dentro de um buraco negro, e tudo que pensamos ser, desaparece num momento. Terrivelmente deprimente, tenho que encontrar um meio de lutar contra essa afirmação, pois se eu souber que ela é a verdade fatal, desisto de tudo pelo que tenho lutado, vivido, e retorno ao estagio instintivo animal, procurando viver o melhor possível no momento, não existe o amanhã, não existe nenhuma moral, os outros que se danem como eu estou danado. Antes disso acontecer, e aproveitando esta oportunidade de agarrar pelos chifres um representante autentico do mundo contrario, vou me esgueirar por aqui, por ali, sondando, envolvendo, interrogando, torturando, tentando aniquila-lo. Ou eu o aniquilo, ou ele me aniquila, aqui não tem meia alternativa.
Vamos começar, por partes: 
Meu comentario introdutório no debate:
Avatar
TheMatrixDNA – january/26/2014

If you knows the interactions between a pulsar, a black hole, and a comet, you can’t say the difference of this process and the process of sexual reproduction among living beings. The meaning is the same, the final result is the same: a new baby of that species. Then, my question should be: Is it right to say that physics produced biology or biology produced physics? But, I don’t make this question because it does not makes sense at human level. Nobody has the answer. We don’t know what is the odd thing that triggered the Big Bang: if it was a living or a non-living thing. For those that believes in one or other alternative, I will remember the Godel’s theorem: nobody can knows the truth about a system standing inside the system. Since that nobody went outside the universe, any belief does not make sense. In this way, human science is storytelling like any other cultural or religious storytelling.

Então tem este post:

Avatar
stampece – • 2 hours ago

Why would anyone ask science to compete with “stories”? First people ask science to compete with religion; now, stories. How silly. People can’t make basic distinctions anymore? Stories are important, but there’s nothing inherently true or moral about them. They can reflect cultural prejudices, ignorance, fear, they can be propaganda. Most people understand that storytelling, art, literature, and other culture fill a role that science does not, particularly in fulfilling the desire for meaning, tradition shared values and the like. The idea that all tat constitutes a greater “truth” than science, or should be in competition with science is odd to say the least.

E minha resposta: 

Avatar
TheMatrixDNA  to stampece

Because Human’s Science is a story of an age, one époque. Where and when have someone seen any violent event in the sky? Where is the video about a black hole eating galaxies? What is the difference between the flourishment of a supernova and the flourishment of a flower at earth surface? Is it the suddenly appearance of a flower, a violent event? How could Jennifer’s father to prove that the atoms in our bodies began in stars millions of years ago? Which is the proof that they are the same atoms? Which is the proof that atoms does not change if photons with new and specific information penetrates them, leading them to a new level of matter organization, never seen before?

Why are these people educated by the modern academic world view, projecting humans values and the chaos seeing at this biosphere, over the sky, if everyone that see the sky see only order and harmony? Ruled by rigid Newtonian mechanics? Is it a new idealism, opposite to religions that see only beautiful things here and makes the projection of this beauty to the sky for seeing paradises? If one – the later – is considered by you – is odd storytelling, why not the other is also storytelling?

E este outro post:

Avatar
ApacheTomcat  Ian

Physics governs the universe whether we want to recognize it or not. If Joe Fassler would have stuck with his previous path, he’d recognize that the messages of humanity in literature is just a distillation of a complex web of biophysical reactions. DNA being transcribed into proteins, proteins communicating and interacting with each other, neurons firing. Understanding only a fraction of that mechanism makes a show of humanity that much more awe inspiring.

E minhas perguntas:

Avatar
TheMatrixDNA  to ApacheTomcat

Where in the state of the world prior to the time when DNA was first transcribed into the first protein those Physical forces that produced the event? What were they like, what their names in the language of physics, why these forces focused on atoms on the surface of the Earth, where they came from? Remember: if you can not answer, it means that you are merely sending a message produced by yours imagination that in any way could be considered a scientific statement. I am waiting the answer.

(tradução):

Onde, no estado do mundo anterior ao momento em que o primeiro DNA foi transcrito na primeira proteína, estavam as forças da Física que produziram este evento? Como eram elas, quais seus nomes no linguajar da Física, porque incidiram sobre átomos na superfície da Terra, de onde vieram? Lembre-se: se você não souber responder isto significa que você está meramente emitindo uma mensagem produzida na sua imaginação que de maneira alguma poderia ser considerada uma afirmação cientifica. Conforme for sua resposta, você tem uma teoria, racional ou irracional, ou uma hipótese, ou ainda, pode não ser nem uma hipótese. Aguardo a resposta. 
Xxxxxx
E este outro post:
Avatar
TheMatrixDNA  to Russ Dowell – 1/29/2014, 2:20 PM 

Mr. Russ: yours own body had its initial moment with a Big Bang inside an ovule, when the membrane of a spermatozoon at the center of an ovule was abruptly opened. Why – I can’t understand how is wired the brain of people educated at universities, from my view point living at the jungle with monkeys and brute salvage Nature – do you consider absurdity when I make comparisons between the origins of the Universe and the origins of a human body and concluded that both were made by same process?! Why are you appealing to pictures never observed here and now?!

I don’t think that Nature plays dice with her creatures, driven them to traps, mortal traps. I think, if you have a question about yours existence, ask it to yours mother, yours grand grand mother. Nature will point out a scene that you can see here and now as her answer, because nature do things by a unique process, the touch of an artist is visible at every picture that he paints.

Yours theory about light is surprising like my theory shown at my website a graphic called “the electromagnetic spectrum by Matrix/DNA Theory”. Any natural light wave is shared into different frequencies, vibrations but it has a wonderful surprise hidden there: the sequence of vibrations are the same sequence of our life cycle. With this process of life’s cycle, natural light imprints at inertial mass, the dynamics and the code for life. But then, we need supposing that instead yours theoretical space as an empty void, total and complete nothingness, must have something fulfilling the space, the ancestor of the nowadays amnion that fulfills an ovule ( maybe a dark matter, or the Higgs field, etc.). By the way, thanks by yours efforts trying to help Humanity in search of knowledge, which is driven sometimes by good theories, and you helped my theory with new thoughts. Cheers… but, let’s be a good son of our natural universal mother, don’t saying that Her ovules are empty.

Tags: