Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9077 total)
669 online now:
AZPaul3 (1 member, 668 visitors)
Newest Member: Contrarian
Post Volume: Total: 894,031 Year: 5,143/6,534 Month: 563/794 Week: 54/135 Day: 6/25 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   There is no evolution or creationism - this is the new Matrix/DNA world view
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 31 of 149 (762302)
07-10-2015 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by Bliyaal
07-10-2015 3:17 PM


Re: To Percy
I think it's time you give us something to evaluate. Your "formula" would be a good start.

I don't think he's talking about a mathematical equation.

The "formula", itself, is the thing he posted in Message 7:

quote:
The formula is the algorithmic shape of the flow of energy/information that runs inside the systemic circuity connecting the parts of the system.

If you look at his (?) website, you'll find a bunch of other systems that he tries to force-fit into that same pattern: http://theuniversalmatrix.com/en-us/index.html


This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Bliyaal, posted 07-10-2015 3:17 PM Bliyaal has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Bliyaal, posted 07-10-2015 5:05 PM New Cat's Eye has taken no action
 Message 34 by TheMatrix/DNA, posted 07-10-2015 5:52 PM New Cat's Eye has taken no action

  
TheMatrix/DNA
Member (Idle past 778 days)
Posts: 47
From: Newark-NJ-USA
Joined: 06-05-2015


Message 32 of 149 (762304)
07-10-2015 4:23 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by New Cat's Eye
07-10-2015 11:35 AM


Re: To Cat Sci
quote:
Well that right there is a big red flag. We have a lot of people come here telling us that they have some big grand theory. The ones who end up not having anything tangible to provide are the ones who complain that its just too big and complicated to post here. That's a load of bullshit.

But... but... all current elected cosmological theories are too big and end up not having anything tangible to provide. The final word from modern Physics is the best-seller Lawrence Krauss with his "Everything from Nothing". Nothing is not tangible. Dawkins is seeing purpose and intelligence and personalization in the behavior of a punch of atoms called genes! Intelligent genes are not tangible. Hawkings is seeing ghost black holes and multiples ex-machine universes... everything not tangible.

Why and how you can say that yours modern preferred cosmological theory is not a load of bulshit... it is what I don't understand, because I am keeping in mind that my whole theory could be a load of buklshit, even after 30 years testing it, 1800 articles showing evidences, and every day finding that a prediction was right. My friend, our brain is very limited, we have no sensors for grasping more than four dimensions while the new M- theory from String theory is suggesting 11 dimensions...

When Copernicus, Galileo, Darwin, launched their theories the academic staff occupying the religious dominated universities told that their theories were a load of bulshit. We never will learn these lessons...

Everytime I see a new big theory I go crazy trying to know its details and I am grateful that there is more a human thinker searching an explanation and a guide for our life. Instead killing the author I search questions, contradictions against real facts, for helping the author to correct or improve his job.

I am asking you which points in this theory is not tangible with reality or which other theory is more tangible than this theory and why you think so. Be sure that you will be surprised by yours precipitated judgements. Instead human concepts like yours text above, please, let's go directly into real facts.

quote:
For example, the Bohr model of the atom look kinda like a solar system. You could theorize that there is some overarching phenomenon that has caused atoms and solar systems to behave in the same way. But it's really only a superficial resemblance, and without testing your theory against a null hypothesis, you're only going to be able to convince yourself that the overarching phenomenon actually exists.

Cat Sci, first of all this theory was built applying the most rational methods as comparative anatomy between all natural systems, calculus of relationships and connections among these systems based on seven variables from cosmological/biological evolution, and formal logics reinforced by stabilizing the conclusions on the solid ground of existent proved natural parameters. Now you are coming from statistical science and its private interpretation of causes and effects which points out the existence of what you call 'null hypothesis". You need point out which section of my calculus reveals a null hypothesis, for me showing to you that it is not a null hypothesis.

You brought here the Bohr model of atom and yours interpretation about it based on yours world view built by branches like statistical probability. But statistical probabilities reveals that yours interpretation of the Bohr's model is a null hypothesis because you are based on the belief that solar systems and atoms are two things such separated that has no solar system behavior equal to atom behavior. This arbitrary separation comes from a world view where all phenomenons are result of chance and random events. Since there is no way to prove that any phenomena is result of random events alone, yours is a null hypothesis.

Rationally one can not say that the behaviors of atoms and solar systems are not linked by an overarching natural force - the cosmological evolutionary process. One can not bring on the ingenuous Bohr's model of atom as proof that there is no such overarching force.

You are saying here that there is no some overarching phenomenon that has caused atoms and solar systems to behave in the same way. One can think that there is no connections between solar and atoms behavior by the same way that one can think that there is no connections between bacterias and human behaviors, if his/her world view is based in emergence of bacterias and humans from random events. But yes, there are lots of connections between bacterias and human behaviors due they are linked by the evolutionary process. If you considers the rational hypothesis that solar systems are product from atoms evolution, you will find related behaviors, no matter how long they are located in the history of evolution.

Of course, electrons does not behave like planets in the same way that the diffuse nervous system of a bacteria dos not behave like a human nervous system centralized in a brain. If one does not have electronic microscopy for seeing the shape of bacterias and try to build a model of a bacteria based on the shape of a human, this model will be far away from the truth, and this was the problem of Bohr. He intuitively felt the evolutionary correlation but couldn't calculate the reductions of the evolutionary process, so, his model was very simplistic and ingenuous.

That's why Matrix/DNA Theory is building a new atom model, different from all existent models, from Bohr to the new model produced by quantum mechanics theory. My model of atom must include the brute forces that were the principles of life's properties because atoms systems are ancestral of biological systems, and this concept is an aberration from modern Physics world view.

A big problem for Physics to accept that is an evolutionary lineage between atoms and solar system is that they does not know that there is two processes for formation of solar systems, like there are two processes for formation of cells systems. And the process applied by Nature for formation of our solar system is not the process applied for formation of atoms, like the modern process for formation of our cells is not the process applied for formation of the first cell system, which was symbiosis. But the new and different process for formation of our modern cells does not cut the evolutionary lineage between our modern cells and the first cell. Apply it to atoms/solar models and you will see the evolutionary lineage between the modern solar system behaviors and the primordial atoms systems behaviors.

In fact any new theory more accurate than the existing ones will be very complex than the existing ones, Mr. Cat Sci. Nature is very complex and it does not works the use of Occam's Razor here as the famous theorists have done for avoiding hard work.


There was no origins of life and universe, astronomical systems are half-alive, light waves contains the code for life and DNA is not a code: Matrix/DNA Theory

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-10-2015 11:35 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Capt Stormfield, posted 07-10-2015 9:21 PM TheMatrix/DNA has taken no action
 Message 47 by ringo, posted 07-11-2015 12:25 PM TheMatrix/DNA has replied
 Message 58 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-12-2015 12:23 PM TheMatrix/DNA has replied

  
Bliyaal
Member (Idle past 1639 days)
Posts: 171
From: Quebec City, Qc, Canada
Joined: 02-17-2012


Message 33 of 149 (762306)
07-10-2015 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by New Cat's Eye
07-10-2015 3:38 PM


Re: To Percy
No wonder he won't be understood then...

I can fit anything in that even the shapes in my morning cereals bowl if I make them spin.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-10-2015 3:38 PM New Cat's Eye has taken no action

  
TheMatrix/DNA
Member (Idle past 778 days)
Posts: 47
From: Newark-NJ-USA
Joined: 06-05-2015


Message 34 of 149 (762307)
07-10-2015 5:52 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by New Cat's Eye
07-10-2015 3:38 PM


Re: To Percy
Cat Sci wrote:

quote:
I think it's time you give us something to evaluate. Your "formula" would be a good start.

Percy answered [Actually, it was Cat Sci. --Admin]:

quote:
I don't think he's talking about a mathematical equation.

Let me try another words. You know that the universal similarities among all biological systems ( aka, living beings), are existents because all biological systems are derived from a common natural formula, called DNA. Then if you draw a cell system in a transparent paper and put it over another paper with the human organism, you will notice that the configuration and internal movements are similars. If the organism have a liver for cleaning the system, the cell has the lysosome for doing the same function, and so on.

The common pattern between cells and superior organisms is the organization of mater into systems and the way that these systems works. You can draw in another sheet of paper this configuration and dynamics in shape of a formula with symbols that facilitates our job. But... when you do that, the formula fits also with the fundamental unit of information of the DNA, a lateral base-pair of nucleotides which are also the building blocks of the DNA. You discover that the same pattern is at the origins of life.

But... this pattern can not begins or finishing at life's origins.... Biological systems were produced by astronomical systems which were produced by atoms systems which were produced by electromagnetic systems... Evolution is not about the period between the primordial organic molecules and the modern complex living shapes, it is about a universal system that here is biological, at the space is mechanical, at microscopic primordial times was electromagnetic, and so on. Then it is rational that you look at those ancestral non biological systems the existence of that formula, of that pattern.

You will not find the formula in the modern current theoretical models of astronomical systems, atom systems, but you will notice that the pattern persist. For instance, cells an superior organisms have something like a nucleous and surrounding parts. Galaxies and atoms also have them. They could be very different but the pattern is there. And rationally it must be there if you suspect that there is a unique evolutionary lineage from atoms to human beings.

So, yours job is searching the biological common formula within the non-living non biological ancestor systems. Finally you get it, but you have built different theoretical models of atoms and astronomical systems. Different from the models accepted by the modern academia. And you discover that the real proved data can not debunk yours models. With time, more data is going to debunk the academic models and reinforcing yours models. Of course, you will not give up because human beings are telling that yours models are wrong.

Cat Sci wrote:

quote:
I don't think he's talking about a mathematical equation.

The Cosmos and its evolutionary history can not be translated into mathematical equations for humans to understand them. And can not be explained by Physics alone. I have at least two motives for saying that:

1) If Physics with its language and logistic called Mathematics were used by tiny microbes inside a human body believing that the human body is the Cosmos, they never would trespass the limits of the bone skeleton. When reaching the soft meat and its properties/dynamics, Physics and Math reaches its limits. And if they could reach the brain, they would have nothing to translating or to describe from it. It happens that my method is revealing that the properties and dynamics of the soft meat are parts of astronomical and atomic systems also. For instance, you can draw a systemic configuration revealing the entire reproductive sexual system in shape of a machine with non animated objects, but only biologists will see the meaning of that system, the meaning that it is a sexual reproductive system. My models are showing just that; there is a biological organization of matter covering the building block of astronomical systems composed by inanimate bodies that arises from the connections among these bodies. Physics and Math has described the skeleton of the Cosmos, but there is something else for a Theory of Everything, the something that finally produced and expressed the biological organization of matter here and now. it does not means that the Cosmos is something alive, only means that there is no natural system that is not alive, if we considers that a living thing is those that has the properties of life.

2) Mathematics can not translate the entire history of any micro evolutionary cycle, thus, can not translate the whole universe evolution. Math can translate in real grounds the initial history of an evolutionary cycle but then it stops, disappears from History, for resuscitating again at the initial phase of the next cycle. And here lays the marvellous power of math predictions: it can predicts events of the future, or events that are beyond our event horizon.

You discovers this alternate presence of Math logics in Nature when you calculates in a Cartesian graphic having as coordinates time and space and putting the first initial system arising from the Big Bang and rolling under the laws of evolution. Surprising you will get a final picture drawn inside the graphic, the picture of the DNA. Universal evolution is curve and not a linear process, like the history about an embryonary sac is not linear, it makes a general curve because the end meets the beginnings and the placenta is discarded. But the curved evolution has long slices of linear events, like the lateral streams of DNA are spiral but have long slices as linear. While this linear events are following up, Math is the useful logics for translating them to human logics, but when begins the curves, Math goes out of the highway of evolution. The surprising thing is that after the mountains, Math is back in the highway. That is why Einstein, Newton, etc., forcing the math exercise could not predict things next to us, but could predict things like universal gravitation and photoelectric effect in the sidereal space

Same way that there is no mathematical equation for representing DNA, there is no mathematical equation for representing the DNA at cosmological level, which is called Matrix/DNA formula. But, the way I put the formula the service is done.

Edited by Admin, : Fix quote.


There was no origins of life and universe, astronomical systems are half-alive, light waves contains the code for life and DNA is not a code: Matrix/DNA Theory

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-10-2015 3:38 PM New Cat's Eye has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Bliyaal, posted 07-10-2015 8:01 PM TheMatrix/DNA has taken no action
 Message 36 by Capt Stormfield, posted 07-10-2015 8:49 PM TheMatrix/DNA has taken no action

  
Bliyaal
Member (Idle past 1639 days)
Posts: 171
From: Quebec City, Qc, Canada
Joined: 02-17-2012


Message 35 of 149 (762314)
07-10-2015 8:01 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by TheMatrix/DNA
07-10-2015 5:52 PM


Re: To Percy
May I give you an advice?

SLOW DOWN! You're not even keeping track of who said what!

Take a break, recollect your ideas in a structured manner and start with the beginning here. Start with a simple example and how your hypothesis works better at explaining things than science we know of. You're probably unaware but you're not making a lot of sense right now and it's not because your ideas are way over our heads.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by TheMatrix/DNA, posted 07-10-2015 5:52 PM TheMatrix/DNA has taken no action

  
Capt Stormfield
Member
Posts: 427
From: Vancouver Island
Joined: 01-17-2009


(1)
Message 36 of 149 (762322)
07-10-2015 8:49 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by TheMatrix/DNA
07-10-2015 5:52 PM


Re: To Percy
Let me try another words.

That would seem to be the essence of the problem. You might try less words, more meaning.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by TheMatrix/DNA, posted 07-10-2015 5:52 PM TheMatrix/DNA has taken no action

  
Capt Stormfield
Member
Posts: 427
From: Vancouver Island
Joined: 01-17-2009


(1)
Message 37 of 149 (762326)
07-10-2015 9:21 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by TheMatrix/DNA
07-10-2015 4:23 PM


Re: To Cat Sci
...searching an explanation and a guide for our life.

That might be the problem. Why not just stick with religion or philosophy or politics and call it a day. Trying to wrap up all your anxieties about life into a festering ball of obfuscation, and then trying to pretend it explains anything at all about science, just makes you look like a crank.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by TheMatrix/DNA, posted 07-10-2015 4:23 PM TheMatrix/DNA has taken no action

  
Capt Stormfield
Member
Posts: 427
From: Vancouver Island
Joined: 01-17-2009


Message 38 of 149 (762327)
07-10-2015 9:36 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Percy
07-10-2015 7:48 AM


Re: To Percy
We humans divide up the electromagnetic spectrum into ranges in other ways, too. The Wikipedia article on the electromagnetic spectrum divides the spectrum into 19 ranges in the table at the top, and then further on they present another way of dividing the spectrum into 9 ranges. And there are other ways to divide the spectrum. Some birds can see in the ultraviolet, which merges ultraviolet into the visible part of the spectrum, leaving you only six divisions. Some animals can detect the infra-red, putting that also in the visible portion and leaving you only five divisions.

This goes to the actual problem. He doesn't understand what language is. His words map no reality. He takes symbols that only roughly (or arbitrarily, as you illustrate above) approximate reality and shuffles them around, and lays them end to end, and stacks them in neat piles and all the time imagines that reality is somehow following along behind his rearrangement of the words.

Throw in a liberal dash of equivocation on words like I mentioned earlier:

Reproduction
Process
Evolutionary
Generated
System
Formula

...and you have classic crank gibberish.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Percy, posted 07-10-2015 7:48 AM Percy has seen this message

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Capt Stormfield, posted 07-10-2015 9:52 PM Capt Stormfield has taken no action

  
Capt Stormfield
Member
Posts: 427
From: Vancouver Island
Joined: 01-17-2009


Message 39 of 149 (762328)
07-10-2015 9:52 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Capt Stormfield
07-10-2015 9:36 PM


Re: To Percy
If I might be forgiven one more post, since I am killing time waiting for the ferry back to the Island, this thread puts me in mind of Mark Twain's character Mr. Ballou, from "Roughing It".

"We could really have accomplished the journey in ten days if we had towed the horses behind the wagon, but we did not think of that until it was too late, and so went on shoving the horses and the wagon too when we might have saved half the labor. Parties who met us, occasionally, advised us to put the horses in the wagon, but Mr. Ballou, through whose iron-clad earnestness no sarcasm could pierce, said that that would not do, because the provisions were exposed and would suffer, the horses being "bituminous from long deprivation." The reader will excuse me from translating. What Mr. Ballou customarily meant, when he used a long word, was a secret between himself and his Maker. He was one of the best and kindest hearted men that ever graced a humble sphere of life. He was gentleness and simplicity itself--and unselfishness, too. Although he was more than twice as old as the eldest of us, he never gave himself any airs, privileges, or exemptions on that account. He did a young man's share of the work; and did his share of conversing and entertaining from the general stand-point of any age--not from the arrogant, overawing summit-height of sixty years. His one striking peculiarity was his Partingtonian fashion of loving and using big words for their own sakes, and independent of any bearing they might have upon the thought he was purposing to convey. He always let his ponderous syllables fall with an easy unconsciousness that left them wholly without offensiveness. In truth his air was so natural and so simple that one was always catching himself accepting his stately sentences as meaning something, when they really meant nothing in the world. If a word was long and grand and resonant, that was sufficient to win the old man's love, and he would drop that word into the most out-of-the-way place in a sentence or a subject, and be as pleased with it as if it were perfectly luminous with meaning.

We four always spread our common stock of blankets together on the frozen ground, and slept side by side; and finding that our foolish, long-legged hound pup had a deal of animal heat in him, Oliphant got to admitting him to the bed, between himself and Mr. Ballou, hugging the dog's warm back to his breast and finding great comfort in it. But in the night the pup would get stretchy and brace his feet against the old man's back and shove, grunting complacently the while; and now and then, being warm and snug, grateful and happy, he would paw the old man's back simply in excess of comfort; and at yet other times he would dream of the chase and in his sleep tug at the old man's back hair and bark in his ear. The old gentleman complained mildly about these familiarities, at last, and when he got through with his statement he said that such a dog as that was not a proper animal to admit to bed with tired men, because he was "so meretricious in his movements and so organic in his emotions." We turned the dog out. "

I fear a childhood addiction to reading and rereading every bit of Mark Twain I could get my hands on has left me overly familiar with a certain type of character before I even meet him.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Capt Stormfield, posted 07-10-2015 9:36 PM Capt Stormfield has taken no action

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 322 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 40 of 149 (762329)
07-11-2015 12:13 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by TheMatrix/DNA
07-10-2015 2:34 PM


Re: To Percy
The rational thing to do is trying to fell the phenomena intuitively, with yours mind, without trying to translate it to human languages

And yet you are trying to translate it into human language despite your own doubts about the rationality of the attempt. Well, apparently your doubts were well-founded, since we cannot understand your translation from feeling into language. Nor does cause us to have the same feeling as you have. If you want to achieve that, try writing a poem, a kōan, an aphorism, or a really good joke: these are hit-and-miss methods, but they are occasionally effective. But your unmeaning jumble of scientific terminology just brings on the feeling that is usually brought on by reading an unmeaning jumble of scientific terminology.

After that, it is hand at work testing the theory against real facts and trying experiments that could prove or debunk the predictions from the theory.

But how can anyone do that? If you cannot say what the theory is, how can anyone derive predictions from it?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by TheMatrix/DNA, posted 07-10-2015 2:34 PM TheMatrix/DNA has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by TheMatrix/DNA, posted 07-11-2015 5:54 AM Dr Adequate has replied

  
ICANT
Member (Idle past 223 days)
Posts: 6426
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 41 of 149 (762330)
07-11-2015 12:25 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by TheMatrix/DNA
07-10-2015 2:34 PM


Re: To Percy
Hello Matrix/DNA,

TheMatrix/DNA writes:

So we had the atom system, the stellar, the galactic, the cell system and finally the self-conscious system( all these natural systems were our ancestrals).

Your theory is then that there was a:

Atom system,
Stellar system,
Galactic system,
Cell system and,
Self-conscious system which is the present system.
All these natural systems evolved by small evolutionary steps.

TheMatrix/DNA writes:

my method of investigation/calculations can't go beyond the natural limits of universe's spacetime, so I don't know what's or who is the ex-machine creator

Message 1

So are you saying you don’t have a clue to what existed prior to the Big Bang?
But you admit there had to be something there. I call that something existence.

This sounds like what these guys have been telling me for years just using different words. And since they can not tell me how existence began to exist from non existence they have not convinced me.

TheMatrix/DNA writes:

1) This is a common pattern identified at all natural systems, from light waves to atoms to astronomicals to cells, etc.

Now you have added a light waves system before the atom system.

TheMatrix/DNA writes:

3) The formula is the algorithmic shape of the flow of energy/information that runs inside the systemic circuity connecting the parts of the system. Nature self-assembles systems applying the force of life's cycles upon an initial body containing mass, light and the energy carried by light. This force leads the body to change its shapes.

Message 7

If I understand what you are saying, it is that natural laws determined what we see today from what existed at the Big Bang. Is that correct?

TheMatrix/DNA writes:

Same happens with the history of the Universe. Before the beginning there was something, which we don't know, but let's call it, a system.

Message 12

So how long would that system of something exist in the past?

TheMatrix/DNA writes:

No, Percy, I don't mentioned it in my first post, only at the second for beginning to explain the formula, and if you don't do that - mentioning what is the end and the final of a new unknown world view - talking only about the middle of the history, it seems to be a building without foundations and roof. Like any cosmological theory, it is necessary to give the famous initial jump in the dark. Standard Theory do that when talking about the Big Bang and the smallest ex-machine atom and the final Big Crunch, the Bible'a theory do that when talking about genesis and the final judgement.


Message 29

The Bible explanation of creation does not take the initial jump in the dark. It tells exactly how many things began to exist unlike your theory or the BBT.

God Bless,


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by TheMatrix/DNA, posted 07-10-2015 2:34 PM TheMatrix/DNA has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by TheMatrix/DNA, posted 07-11-2015 5:05 PM ICANT has replied
 Message 53 by TheMatrix/DNA, posted 07-12-2015 2:29 AM ICANT has replied
 Message 56 by TheMatrix/DNA, posted 07-12-2015 4:25 AM ICANT has replied
 Message 57 by TheMatrix/DNA, posted 07-12-2015 5:04 AM ICANT has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 322 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


(5)
Message 42 of 149 (762331)
07-11-2015 1:46 AM


Bring me the finest popcorn in all the land.

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by TheMatrix/DNA, posted 07-11-2015 4:52 AM Dr Adequate has taken no action

  
TheMatrix/DNA
Member (Idle past 778 days)
Posts: 47
From: Newark-NJ-USA
Joined: 06-05-2015


Message 43 of 149 (762333)
07-11-2015 4:05 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by Bliyaal
07-10-2015 3:17 PM


Re: To Bliyaal
quote:
Bliyaal wrote: If you want to pretend to do science, at least use the terms accordingly.
Things like this:

quote:
Matrix/DNA wrote: ... that's why I named my results as a theory ( not a scientific theory, but in the Greek sense of the word, who coined the word)

quote:
Bliyall wrote: ... makes people very suspicious here.

Why, Bliyall... it would make people very suspicious ( sorry, my keyboard has no interrogation point). I can't understand that. I pretend to know Nature in first place, this is my supreme goal. And I am alone in the jungle doing just that, asking Nature, applying methods that are not usually applied by human sciences outside the jungle. Then I got a bunch of data, tried to connect the data for seeing the big picture and the result is what I called "The Universal Matrix/DNA Formula for All Natural Systems and Life's Cycles... Theory".

Besides that, far away from the jungle, in human civilization, there was another group of people also searching data from Nature applying other method, called scientific method. They got also a big theory called the Standard Model and like my theory it has lots of sub-theories, like abiogenesis, BBT, the Nebular Model, Darwinian evolution, etc.

I did not science in the way that human species at 21 century understand it, which is very different from the way that Orionnesis from Orion, Nebula, understand Science and apply different methods. You need understand that each kind of intelligence would have different kind of science, because different brains, different sensors and different methods. For instance, ants can not understand any kind of natural phenomena if not from the optics that contains knowledge of magnetic fields, because ants have antenna. If they develops a science, the rules of science does not change, but at the beginning their scientific knowledge and methods would stands far away off the beam from the human scientific viewpoint.

What the western human science knows about the effect of each human body magnetic field affects its health... nothing. Then, the millenar diseases like cancer, diabetes, etc., caused by the body as a system, are still here. The technical instruments developed by a kind of brain are merely extensions of the brains' sensors and so, its scientific knowledge. You need be prepared because we are entering in a new big adventure, knowing another kinds of intelligence and consciousness spreaded in the Cosmos and we will face kinds of science and technology that we never could imagine before.

I am better prepared for understanding this issue due my own experience. I could feel and grasping Nature in the jungle almost like a monkey does, because my brain was washed from the human culture that I learned before. You believe that those wild natives believes in spirits and talking with elements in the jungle like trees, stones, the moon, etc, because they should be ignorant, merely imagination. it is not, they have their science based in their specific knowledge.

I pretend to do natural rational philosophy, not human science. I think the world from the systemic perspective and I apply systemic methods; human sciences think the world from the reductionist viewpoint and apply reductionist methods. The Matrix/DNA formula is the first complete working formula for natural systems that appeared in human history. While human sciences does not know completely any natural system and is talking about processes inside systems thinking that are talking about systems.

Of course the human sciences have become more powerful than mine. They are a big group, I am alone. They are rich, I have anything at hands for practicing my science in the way that my world view is suggesting. But their science is powerful for:
1) destroying their habitat,
2) for building this modern social system where 95% of the world population still are being tortured as slaves of non voluntary work. In the jungle a monkey wake up in the morning, look around and have the freedom for to choose what will do with its day; in the civilization, humans wake up in the morning and has no free will for choosing what to do, they are pushed like cows to a unique destiny where they will not see the light of the Sun. Who has the better science is who is more happy and adapted to natural conditions.

3) for abortion of this embryo of consciousness that is being nurtured inside every human head and enslaving it forever. We were materially created by the most perfect machine in this world, which is described by Newtonian mechanics. This machine is inside us as genetic code and is surrounding us, as the constructor of our biosphere. This machine is driven biological evolution for to reproduce itself here, the whole biosphere as an ordered machine and humans as pieces of this machine. Which will be the Brave New World under the Orwellian Big Queen, like any insect societies were driven to. The embryo of consciousness will be imprisoned before reaching its maturity.

No my friend, I do not pretend to do human science. I do not pretend to be another guilty by this absurd human condition today and its dark future. I pretend to bring the seed of a new different kind of science and scientific method, one that never was experienced before by human beings, because I am sure that worst than this one that is being practiced today it is not. It is a dream, I do not believe that I will get it because I have nothing at hands and my voice is not listened from the jungle neither when I am in New York, and I am at the end of my forces... but I will dye trying it because Humanity is the unique thing that I love in this world and I can't stop to fight against its enemies. The worst enemy of human kind is inside us, surrounding us and its name is the dark face of the cosmological Matrix, its face as selfish closed system. It felt from the sky about 4 billion years ago and it is going to fall again due keeping the same sin... and here, the biblical tale was pretty right.


There was no origins of life and universe, astronomical systems are half-alive, light waves contains the code for life and DNA is not a code: Matrix/DNA Theory

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Bliyaal, posted 07-10-2015 3:17 PM Bliyaal has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Bliyaal, posted 07-11-2015 6:41 PM TheMatrix/DNA has taken no action

  
TheMatrix/DNA
Member (Idle past 778 days)
Posts: 47
From: Newark-NJ-USA
Joined: 06-05-2015


Message 44 of 149 (762334)
07-11-2015 4:52 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by Dr Adequate
07-11-2015 1:46 AM


To Dr Adequate
quote:
Bring me the finest popcorn in all the land.

You will have it. My lovely Almighty Lord Pink Unicorn told that he like you too and will give to you pink popcorn in the paradise for all eternity. You must come with us believing in the unique god Pink Unicorn. Think pink because the Universe is pink. Cheers...


There was no origins of life and universe, astronomical systems are half-alive, light waves contains the code for life and DNA is not a code: Matrix/DNA Theory

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-11-2015 1:46 AM Dr Adequate has taken no action

  
TheMatrix/DNA
Member (Idle past 778 days)
Posts: 47
From: Newark-NJ-USA
Joined: 06-05-2015


Message 45 of 149 (762335)
07-11-2015 5:54 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by Dr Adequate
07-11-2015 12:13 AM


Re: To Dr Adequate
quote:
And yet you are trying to translate it into human language despite your own doubts about the rationality of the attempt. Well, apparently your doubts were well-founded, since we cannot understand your translation from feeling into language. Nor does cause us to have the same feeling as you have. If you want to achieve that, try writing a poem, a kōan, an aphorism, or a really good joke: these are hit-and-miss methods, but they are occasionally effective. But your unmeaning jumble of scientific terminology just brings on the feeling that is usually brought on by reading an unmeaning jumble of scientific terminology.

Dr. Adequate, the dialogue between two different cultures and two different hard-wired brains is very difficult and painful. I am telling that you are interpreting several natural phenomena and events in the wrong way for tying to keep you interested in the dialogue and because the way that you are behaving due yours interpretations are prejudices to my life.

It is difficult in the beginnings of the talking because we need to learn the other language for begin to understand the meaning of his/her words. For easing yours way I am trying to use yours terminology, not because I approve this terminology. For instance we can talk about the period of abiogenesis using this word that is yours terminology but I don't approve the word because in my world view there was no abiogenesis. I cal that period as "mutated cosmological embryogenesis". I my world view life did not came from the abiotic matter of this planet because this matter and the planet itself was merely parts of a system, and life must came from another system. But if I talk it, I will need to explain that I have a different model of astronomical system and showing to you where were each lifes properties at that model, for advocating my theory that it was a half-biological system. But for explaining it I would need to explain my different model of cells systems and its organelles, and after that my different model of the building block of DNA. Then, at the same time I would talking about ribosomes, guanine, pulsars, the pion between protons and neutrons... they are all correlated.

This is the language of the systemic viewpoint which is very different of the language that you are used to have, from the reductionist viewpoint. If I was talking with another systemologist things would be easy, I don't need remember that ribosomes produces proteins due the same function that planets produces biological diversity. The systemologist already knows what is systemic function and all material representative of each function in each system. You are not trained for it.

I told that first ( in the jungle) I try to fell the phenomena avoiding to write it for avoiding to translate it into human language. I should say human culture instead human language. It is because the milenar human culture of 10 or 20.000 years is an accumulation of errors and if you bring on the new phenomena into this culture, you will make the usual distortion of human culture and will go in a wrong way. You will be driven for to fit in the box.

So, first I built the theory alone with the wild Nature, I forgot that was a human being and the human culture. Only after having the whole theory I left the jungle and now I am putting over the table the Matrix/DNA culture side by side with the human culture and trying to translate it to human language, using its own terminology. It is very difficult and doing a lot of mistakes but i don't know another way for telling you that there are different interpretations of a given phenomena, like abiogenesis and mutated cosmological embryogenesis.

For continuing the dialogue it is necessary that every time you think that something is an unmeaning jumble of scientific terminology you stop me and say that. My first reaction will be bringing on over the table the real proved known fact that is the foundation of what I am talking about.

Our two different feelings about a unique natural phenomena is due the relativism between two different observers located at different point in time and space. Yours feeling is from the space of urban modern life while mine is from the wild jungle; yours is from the urban city of the 21 century while mine is the state of nature at million or billion years ago.


There was no origins of life and universe, astronomical systems are half-alive, light waves contains the code for life and DNA is not a code: Matrix/DNA Theory

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-11-2015 12:13 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-11-2015 3:21 PM TheMatrix/DNA has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022