Scientists Challenge Assumptions About Physics
and Genetic Codes
suaragarut.id 10/12/26
(You know Im gonna read something like that right?)
"Scientists have discovered that tiny changes
to the laws of physics
could make life as we know it impossible."
"Two lines of scientific research are challenging assumptions about the conditions required for life, from the physical properties of liquids to the genetic instructions that cells use to build proteins. Research led by physicist Kostya Trachenko at Queen Mary University of London examines how fundamental physical constants may constrain life's existence, while an independent study by scientists at the Earlham Institute identified a protist with an unusual genetic code."
"...suggests that small changes in certain physical constants could alter liquid viscosity enough to disrupt biological processes. Separately, researchers discovered that Oligohymenophorea sp. PL0344, a previously unidentified microscopic organism collected from a freshwater pond at Oxford University Parks in England, uses two genetic signals normally associated with stopping protein production to encode different amino acids."
(Life is a miracle and anybody that has
ever witnesses the birthing process
should be able agree with that statement.)
"The physics research builds on work published in 2020, when Trachenko and colleagues demonstrated that fundamental physical constants impose a lower limit on liquid viscosity. A subsequent study in 2023 examined how the relationship between these constants and fluid behavior could affect biological systems."
(To thick or to thin = no life.)
"Understanding how water flows in a cup turns out to be closely related to the grand challenge to figure out fundamental constants. Life processes in and between living cells require motion and it is viscosity that sets the properties of this motion. If fundamental constants change, viscosity would change too impacting life as we know it."
(They always say that:
"life as we know it."
It takes a brain to get the information
that every living cell has ever had in it.
It's never been proved otherwise.
Therefore, until it has been
"proven otherwise"
the only life that has ever existed
takes a brain, a living intelligence
to come into existence..
There are no
physical, biological or chemical processes
that create enough "new information"
to create new life.
The first life had to be "new"
so this is a very serious problem
for the evolutionist and all they do
is just ignore it like it don't matter.
As in, it can not be overcome.
Something outside of the laws of nature
(they are the same throughout the universe.)
had to have created life.
Well gee, I wonder what it was?)
"For example, if water was as viscous as tar life would not exist in its current form or not exist at all. This applies beyond water, so all life forms using the liquid state to function would be affected." said Kostya Trachenko, a physicist at Queen Mary University of London."
(We live in a Goldilocks universe.
Everything has to be "just right."
for the universe to even exist
and for us to be in it.)
"According to Trachenko's analysis, changes affecting viscosity could make biological fluids either too thick or too thin. The study suggests that changes of only a few percent in certain constants, including the Planck constant or electron charge, could affect blood flow and other liquid-dependent processes. These conclusions come from theoretical modeling rather than experiments that alter the constants themselves.
Trachenko also emphasized that changes in either direction could affect the conditions needed for life."
"Any change in fundamental constants including an increase or decrease would be equally bad news for flow and for liquid-based life. We expect the window to be quite narrow..."
"The same constants influence nuclear reactions inside stars, where elements such as carbon and oxygen are produced. Trachenko's analysis indicates that a universe could potentially form the elements needed for life while still having liquid properties that prevent cellular processes from functioning normally."
(It's not enough to just have the ingredients.
A cake doesn't self assemble and then bake itself
at the right temp and for the correct amount of time.
The main ingredient needed for life is information
which
REQUIRES
a sentient, intellect
as it needs: pre-planning, sequence,
organization
and logic.
So It's really not complicated.
Just find me an evolutionary biologist that will admit
"The main ingredient needed for life is information"
there might be some, but there sure aren't many
because they know what that statement means.)
"The genetic discovery emerged from a different research project designed to test a DNA sequencing method capable of analyzing extremely small quantities of genetic material. Dr. Jamie McGowan, then a postdoctoral scientist at the Earlham Institute, worked with researchers there and a group led by Professor Thomas Richards at the University of Oxford."
(So where did the
"genetic material"
come from?
Its my first time through this article,
I haven't even read the whole thing yet.
Generaly with these types of "research projects"
it is always pre-existing, so we'll see...)
"While assembling and examining the organism's genome, the team found that the previously unidentified protist interpreted genetic instructions differently from the standard pattern. The findings were published in PLOS Genetics in October 2023."
"A protist is any eukaryotic organism (an organism whose cells have a defined nucleus and membrane-bound organelles) that is not classified as an animal, plant, or fungus."
(Here is what nobody
even wants to look at
or try and figure out:
"genetic instructions"
Thats information, t
he cake recipe doesn't
and in fact can not write itself,
so where did the:
"genetic instructions"
that this particular organism
"interpreted differently"
come from?
It takes a sentient intellect yo...
Holla at us when figure it out.
Cause
this community already has
a long time ago.
And?
Like always:
"While assembling and examining
the organism's genome, the team..."
So, "the team" assembled the genome.
It requires information
and
it takes something outside of itself
to put it together.
Interesting.
Never knew.
)
"Eukaryotic cells contain a nucleus that houses most of their genetic material, and protists occupy a wide range of ecological roles and evolutionary lineages."
(Awesome,
so where did
the genetic material come from?
And what was the method by which
it was imputed into the organism?
Naturally that is...
Because it can not exist without it
and it can not create it
if it doesn't exist to begin with.
Its an unsurmountable problem
the researchers know so
and thats why there isn't even any research into
"where did the genetic material come from?"
and instead they will focus on
any and everything else besides that source.
Like I said, this community already knows
come holla someday etc...)
"In the standard genetic code, DNA instructions are transcribed into messenger RNA, which ribosomes read in groups of three nucleotides called codons. Most codons specify amino acids, while three commonly recognized stop signals—TAA, TAG and TGA in DNA notation—normally tell the protein-producing machinery to end translation."
(Instructions don't:
Self create, they don't self assemble,
they don't "evolve" themselves into existence.
They dont just randomly appear.
So where did they come from?
Something had to have created them.
"You killed the author of life"
the book of Acts says.
And remember, there are no physical,
biological or chemical process that create enough
"new information" to create new lifeforms
of which the first life would have been.
And transcribed means
"to copy or convert information
into a written, typed, or different format."
So how and why
did that evolve?
So now you got:
Where did the information itself come from?
How was it imputed into the organism?
And what was responsible for creating the
"copy mechanism"?
These are each and everyone
insurmountable issues individually
let alone collectively.
So fuck your illusions.
Grow up.)
"Follow-up research has identified additional genetic code variations in related microorganisms, according to the Earlham Institute report. The discovery demonstrates that genetic instructions can differ from the familiar pattern, while the physics research identifies additional theoretical conditions that may govern whether liquid-based biological processes can operate."
(So dear researchers
all of ya, not just this team
where are all of the codes
and instructions coming from?
I wouldn't be holding my breath lol.
And besides, we already know.)
Quantum 'birthmarks' hold lasting traces
of a system's past
phys.org 10/11/26
First a lil background before the piece
and the accompanying commentary.
From my good buddy
"the AI overview" lol
and I only use that
if I know for certain that it is correct.
"A quantum system is any physical object, collection of particles, or engineered structure whose behavior must be described by the laws of quantum mechanics rather than classical physics.
Key Features of Quantum Systems
• Superposition:
A system can exist in multiple states
or configurations at the same time until it is measured.
• Entanglement:
Two or more quantum systems
can become deeply linked
so that the state of one instantly influences
the other, no matter the distance.
(And it doesn't violate the speed of light
as at that scale
they are merely two parts of the same whole.
At the subatomic level,
locality simply ceases to exist.
Scientific fact yo.
So ya might just wanna think about that for a minute...maybe...just sayin...its getting dark outside ya know?...So your lamp full? Did you bring some extra containers of oil?
Cause you're gonna need it.
See: Matthew 25:1-13)
• Quantized Energy:
Unlike macroscopic objects
that can have any continuous amount of energy,
quantum systems have discrete, fixed energy levels.
• Probabilistic Outcomes:
Measuring a quantum system
yields results based on probabilities
rather than fixed, deterministic values.
• Wave-Particle Duality:
Entities like electrons and photons
behave both as localized particles
and as spread-out waves.
Common Examples
• Fundamental Particles:
Electrons, photons,
and atomic nuclei.
• Atoms and Molecules:
Individual atoms
or bonded molecular structures
exhibiting interference and discrete energy jumps.
• Engineered Quantum Devices:
Superconducting circuits, quantum dots, trapped ions, and neutral atom arrays used to build Quantum computing and sensors.
Okay so got all of that?
Good, here goes:
Quantum 'birthmarks' hold lasting traces
of a system's past
phys.org 10/11/26
"A quantum birthmark in a stadium-shaped enclosure. The long-term probability of finding a particle retains patterns linked to its initial state and early motion, rather than becoming uniform throughout the enclosure."
"Some classical physical systems can explore many configurations over time until their long-term behavior no longer reveals their starting conditions. The sampling of available configurations according to the appropriate statistical distribution is a property called ergodicity."
"Quantum systems, which are governed by the laws of quantum mechanics, could instead retain some traces of their beginnings. In a paper published in Physical Review X, researchers at Harvard University and other institutions introduced the idea of quantum birthmarks, statistical traces of initial states and early development that persist in quantum systems that do not exchange information with their surroundings."
"The paper grew out of a simple tension in quantum chaos: classically, an ergodic system is expected to forget its initial conditions, but quantum evolution can retain traces of its past through coherence effects," Joonas Keski-Rahkonen, senior author of the paper, told Phys.org. "We wanted to know whether this memory is a special feature of phenomena like quantum scars, where individual eigenstates break the expectation of classical-like ergodicity, or something far more general, as it turned out to be."
"An illustration of classical motion in a stadium-shaped enclosure. A ball repeatedly bounces off the walls, tracing a path that progressively explores the interior. The green lines show successive segments of its trajectory."
"For a long time, we had been thinking about how to generalize the key ideas behind quantum scarring," said Keski-Rahkonen. "Remarkably, in our recent work, all our different threads converged in a single concept: the quantum birthmark."
"The term quantum scarring is used to describe patterns in which a quantum particle has an unusually high probability of being found near specific repeating paths, even if its classical counterpart would explore the available space. Building on this idea, Keski-Rahkonen and his colleagues started exploring the possibility that a quantum system could exhibit a lasting statistical trace of its starting state and early evolution."
"In the everyday world, chaos essentially resets the system to a blank state," said Keski-Rahkonen. "What we found is that quantum systems can't fully hide their history, even amid chaos. This fact manifests as a quantum birthmark: a persistent memory of where a quantum state started and how it evolved early on. Even after the initial state appears to have become fully scrambled and featureless, it remains more likely to revisit its own history than an otherwise comparable random state would—even though, from the standpoint of classical chaotic dynamics, all such states should be equally likely."
"In sharp contrast to the common narrative, a quantum system not only remembers its origin forever (the universal factor)—surprising enough on its own—but also retains traces of its early history (the revival factor)."
"Keski-Rahkonen and his colleagues hope that their recent work will contribute to the reestablishment of the lost connection between quantum mechanics and the classical, dynamics-based view of chaos and ergodicity. Instead of focusing only on the individual fixed-energy states of quantum systems, their framework examines how they change over time and retain traces of their past."
"Another active line of research is to explore more thoroughly how broadly the birthmark picture extends beyond the model systems studied here," added Keski-Rahkonen. "Particularly interesting directions include many-body and open quantum systems, quantum simulators, the role of decoherence, and identifying which experimentally accessible observables reveal the effect most clearly."
And now the simplified version lol:
vis uncoverquantum @IG
“Quantum systems can’t hide their origin even in the middle of chaos.” — Dr. Keski-Rahkonen, Tampere University.
In the classical world chaos
destroys information permanently.
That’s why you can’t un-stir milk from tea.
But in the quantum world
information is never truly destroyed.
The birthmark persists in the wave function forever.
(Here we go again, that information
REQUIRES a sentient intellect.)
"When the birthmark fades — that signals decoherence.
The exact moment quantum reality
becomes classical reality.
"The quantum birthmark is literally
the boundary between two worlds."
"Quantum chaos:
Information permanently encoded.
Never lost."
Information permanently encoded.
1) Where did it come from?
As just like in the biological systems shown above
it REQUIRES a sentient intellect to create it.
2) Encoding requires a coder lol.
"Encoding is the process of
converting information,
data, or spoken language from one system,
format, or code into another."
At the smallest level man can access?
Information can not be destroyed.
I got a different question than:
"If quantum systems never forget
where they came from
Do we?"
Goes like this:
Where is
the information
(Genetic code, unique to everyone of us
Your serial # for the resurrection
and transformation
(Missler)
into glorified body's like
Christ when he was transfigured.
1 John 3:2
Beloved, now are we the sons of God,
and it doth not yet appear what we shall be:
but we know that,
when he shall appear,
we shall be like him;
for we shall see him as he is.)
that makes you, you?
Going to spend it's eternity?
Because it can not be destroyed
Hum?
Did I mention
it's dark outside?
Another satellite breakup
raises concerns about space junk
earthsky.org 10/09/26
(Image is AI generated)
It is only a matter of time.
Not if, but when.
"On October 5, 2026, another satellite breakup occurred in low-Earth orbit. LeoLabs — a company that tracks satellites and space debris — witnessed the satellite breakup when it passed over Australia and said the fragments “may pose a threat to surrounding spacecraft.”
"Another satellite breakup raises concerns about space junk
This week, a Soviet-era weather satellite broke apart in low-Earth orbit, creating tens of new pieces of debris that could threaten other spacecraft. This information comes from LeoLabs, a company that operates a global network of radars for tracking satellites and space debris. LeoLabs said that it detected the event on October 5, 2026, with the company’s system, LeoLabs Delta. It spotted multiple objects near the inactive Meteor 2-7 satellite after it passed over a radar station in Western Australia. Follow-up observations from other radars confirmed that a debris-generating event occurred.
"LeoLabs said the event is the latest in a series of debris-generating events its network has detected over the past six months. The company called it a:worrying trend for space safety and security."
("It is only a matter of time.
Not if, but when.")
"A satellite launched in 1981
The satellite that broke up — Meteor 2-7 — was launched by the Soviet Union in May 1981. It was part of the Meteor series of weather satellites. Its purpose was to observe clouds and gather information about Earth’s atmosphere.
"But the satellite has now been inactive for decades. Today, it travels around Earth at an altitude of roughly 500 to 560 miles (800 to 900 km), according to orbital data."
"That altitude makes the new debris particularly concerning."
"NASA says debris at about 500 miles (800 km) can remain in orbit for decades or even centuries, depending on its size and other factors. The atmosphere is simply too thin at that altitude to slow objects down quickly. The Meteor 2-7 debris could therefore remain a hazard to spacecraft for a very long time."
"What happened to Meteor 2-7?
There are a couple scenarios that might explain why Meteor 2-7 broke up. First, an internal failure or explosion might have occurred. On the other hand, it might have collided with another object in low-Earth orbit."
"Jim Shell, an orbital debris expert, has narrowed down the time of the event to 09:45 UTC +/- 10 minutes on October 5, 2026. Shell speculates the cause might have been a collision but said it will likely remain a mystery. Shell said on X:
"Meteor 2-7’s altitude of 855 km is in a dense region for orbital debris. Might we have experienced an impact from one of the numerous untracked debris objects? It is furthermore observed that the event time estimate places the 81 degree inclined satellite near its highest latitude position where the debris spatial density is highest. We will likely never know…."
"This graphic shows the orbit of the satellite that broke up on October 5, 2026. The satellite was in a dense region of low-Earth orbit when the breakup occurred."
"A growing orbital debris problem
This isn’t the first recent fragmentation event to attract attention. In March, LeoLabs detected dozens of objects around the SpaceX Starlink 34343 satellite after it experienced an anomaly. SpaceX said the event was probably due to an internal energetic source rather than a collision."
(Yeah...right...sure...gotcha...)
"In August, LeoLabs also detected the fragmentation of a Chinese Long March rocket body, producing potentially tens to hundreds of fragments."
"Each event adds more material to an already crowded orbital environment. Objects in low-Earth orbit travel at roughly 17,500 mph (28,000 km/h). At those speeds, even a small piece of debris can seriously damage or destroy a spacecraft. NASA estimates that there are hundreds of thousands of pieces of debris at least a centimeter across, along with millions of smaller fragments."
"Could this lead to the Kessler Syndrome?
The growing number of objects raises the specter of Kessler Syndrome, a potential chain reaction in which collisions create debris, that debris causes more collisions, and those collisions create still more debris."
"NASA scientist Donald Kessler and NASA colleague Burton Cour-Palais proposed the concept in 1978. The concern isn’t that one satellite breakup will suddenly create an impenetrable cloud around Earth. Instead, repeated collisions over many years could gradually make certain orbital regions increasingly hazardous. And each new satellite breakup brings us closer to an unstoppable chain of events.'
(And they always always always
leave out the fact
"an unstoppable chain of events"
could render all of them 100% useless
because it is the biggest concern.)
"Bottom line: An inactive Soviet weather satellite has broken apart above Earth. It has added tens of debris fragments to an already crowded low-Earth orbit."
(100% incorrect.
The bottom line is:
Not if, but when:
"an unstoppable chain of events"
could render all of them 100% useless.
And that event
is getting
closer all the time.
Did I mention
its dark outside yet?
John 8:12
"I am the light of the world."
Whoever follows me
will not walk in darkness,
but will have the light of life,"
As in eternal security.
And it is simply
not available anywhere else.
I'd be thinkin about it
if I was you...
I treally would be...
.jpg)
