Mr. Swan says: "Science asserts that it employs a method that limits its scope of study to the natural world. It does not assert a philosophy of materialism."

The results from our natural and logical method are indicating that this assertions are not right.

Natural world is everything material in all space/time since Big Bang (or another beginning) until today. Right? Or not? Why not? And the scientific paradigma have its methodology over the idea that everything changed by changes at velocity. Right?

If change in velocity is the only factor, we can say that "the first change in velocity after Big Bang produced a effect which were the cause for the next effect." Right? Then everything existing at all times and space are inside of a unique and logical line., in the same lineages' sequence. Right? We can define this lineage: elementary particles> super-particles> atom's system >macro-systems (stellar and galaxies)> living systems> intelligence. If so, for example, the genetics processes applies over earliest universal evolution, and living systems appeared by previous design. Of course: the forces of vitalism, that appeared latter inside the living systems' structures are simplest evolution from physicals forces that was inside the atoms and astronomical forces inside galaxies structures. We are seeing the vitalism at our laboratories, only we do not understand it. With our models is possible understand it, clearly.

But, things are not so simple. For example we need consider that, since material particles eventually interact with each other over any length of distance, the interactions of the particles of the universe can be considered as the dissemination of information. And any information that leaves out this lineage, can, at some moment, comes back to this lineage, producing a mutation and deviation over the logical line. Then, nothing can be predictable if we do not knows every exit and melt of the streets crossing the universal highway. Ok. Thatıs a good point. I think that we can get here a good explanation for how and why happen mutation by chance. In this way, random is something testable scientifically, while science goes expanding its horizon. We will need know, at the micro and macro worlds, all space/time for to locating this deviated informations. Our science will go in slowdown until we reach more larger horizons. We will need know all species' diversifications that in any way contributed with the evolution of inanimates systems.

But, this hypothesis is valid? At living systems, the lineage that comes from the first animal's cell until reaching the man, had crossing-over with another species? It is a unique lineage? Or the humankind is results of complexity by adding and mixing with individuals that comes from another's lineage? I do not think that it is the case. The informations addicted over this lineage that made the increasing in its complexity was free at the environment. Our results showed that there are free informations at our environment because we can see it inside ours inanimates ancestral systems. And one of them is the galaxy system, our actual environment. Mutations by chance happened in relation of our small space/time viewpoint. Mutations and natural selections becomes more complex in relation of observers that reaches largest horizons in space/time.

.Why not to consider this hypothesis over the universal evolution? Why the paradigma can not suppose that the sequence "particles> superparticles> atoms,...and so on" are an unique lineage"?! Why the needs for separating it?! We supposed about this sequence, and the finally result is that you can get a big and revolutionary theory. This theory change a lot of things at our currently theories and models about atoms and celestial systems, by increasing in it, more complexity. And when the practical research knows another's models can happen two things: a) some research that stopped by apparently incoherence or lack of results faces suddenly another's opportunities for experimentations; b) where we are not seeing possibilities of research with our actual resources, suddenly appears these possibilities. It is why we said in another's posters here that we have thousands of plans for research that are stopped because we can not cross the wall made by the paradigmas that are in controls of the laboratories instruments. Of course, has a paradigma as guide of scientific theories and explanations. And the paradigma are making that chemistry and biology are considering that atoms and galaxies are supernatural phenomenon: they can not see the foundations of mechanisms, processes, laws, and deviations over living systems (that we are seeing clearly and intelligible) because they are separating the living systems from its natural ancestral. Materialistic, indeed, were we, when believes that nothing magic coming from outside of the natural and material universe broken the universal history in separated slices. The natural methodology need to be really, extremely materialistic: but not nihilist.

I agree that practical researches has not another way until now for its approaches, only the measurement and comparisons. The problem is that these comparisons, need amplify its horizon and it is not done until now due the paradigma, like "atoms and galaxies has nothing to see with living organisms". These big mistakes are the responsible for the slowdown of abiogenesis and astronomy, which has the mission of discover the brutes, physicals and mechanics foundations of the phenomenon occurring with living systems and elucidating, for example, how waves carries informations throughout the space/time, for we improve our technology."

-- Luis Morelli, Author (posted 2/11, 10:15 a.m., U.S. Eastern time)

previous response

next response

STEP 1: Your contact information (required)

Your name: Your title & institution: Your phone: Your e-mail address:

STEP 2: Your comments

STEP 3: Submit!

Be sure to include your name and affiliation. Legitimate requests for anonymity will be honored.

The Chronicle maintains Colloquy as an open forum where readers can comment on issues. Submissions may be condensed or edited for clarity, but editing is kept to a minimum. We correct errors in spelling, punctuation, etc. In addition, we remove statements that have the potential to be libelous or to slander someone. In cases in which people make claims that could be libelous, we will remove the names of institutions and departments. But in those cases, we will not alter the ideas contained in the submissions.

Please read our privacy policy or our Colloquy help page if you have questions.

Check this box only if you would like this submission to be considered for publication as a letter to the editor in the printed Chronicle.