The Cosmobiont Hypothesis: Did Someone Just Argue 3I/ATLAS Is Alive?
Alright. I’ve gone through the full document titled 3I/ATLAS as an Interplanetary Cosmobiont, a 2025 preprint arguing that 3I/ATLAS might not be a comet, an asteroid, or an artifact… but a self organizing plasmatic organism moving through interstellar space.
Before you roll your eyes, let’s walk through what the author actually claims and what the data does and does not support.🧵👇
Alright. I’ve gone through the full document titled 3I/ATLAS as an Interplanetary Cosmobiont, a 2025 preprint arguing that 3I/ATLAS might not be a comet, an asteroid, or an artifact… but a self organizing plasmatic organism moving through interstellar space.
Before you roll your eyes, let’s walk through what the author actually claims and what the data does and does not support.🧵👇
2/
The starting point of the paper is simple, highlighting that traditional comet models aren’t matching 3I/ATLAS.
Strong non gravitational acceleration, a lack of volatiles, no measurable outgassing as well as a nucleated donut like morphology. Then there’s the extreme red spectrum, and orbital coincidences that shouldn’t statistically happen.
This is the same cluster of anomalies everyone has been fighting about for months.
The paper takes these anomalies and pushes them somewhere new.
The starting point of the paper is simple, highlighting that traditional comet models aren’t matching 3I/ATLAS.
Strong non gravitational acceleration, a lack of volatiles, no measurable outgassing as well as a nucleated donut like morphology. Then there’s the extreme red spectrum, and orbital coincidences that shouldn’t statistically happen.
This is the same cluster of anomalies everyone has been fighting about for months.
The paper takes these anomalies and pushes them somewhere new.
3/
The author’s premise is if an object behaves like nothing in the catalog… maybe it is nothing in the catalog.
He proposes a category outside biology and outside technology:
Inorganic plasma based life, self-organized plasma structures that can consume electromagnetic energy, form charged membranes, incorporate cosmic dust, show emergent behavior and navigate toward energy gradients.
Before you dismiss it, these ideas didn’t come from UFO literature. They came from peer reviewed plasma physics from the 90s–2000s, STS-75 footage analyses, and minimal plasma cell experiments.
The author’s premise is if an object behaves like nothing in the catalog… maybe it is nothing in the catalog.
He proposes a category outside biology and outside technology:
Inorganic plasma based life, self-organized plasma structures that can consume electromagnetic energy, form charged membranes, incorporate cosmic dust, show emergent behavior and navigate toward energy gradients.
Before you dismiss it, these ideas didn’t come from UFO literature. They came from peer reviewed plasma physics from the 90s–2000s, STS-75 footage analyses, and minimal plasma cell experiments.
4/
The big claim is that 3I/ATLAS matches the behavior of atmospheric plasma entities described in previous research. He points to things like pulsation, clumping, ring structures, late, slow ejecta along with a red spectral slope, sudden morphology shifts and the apparent steering through planetary alignments
His argument is if these thermospheric plasma structures exist (and we’ve filmed them), then nothing prevents similar structures from existing in interplanetary space, just scaled up and radiation hardened.
The big claim is that 3I/ATLAS matches the behavior of atmospheric plasma entities described in previous research. He points to things like pulsation, clumping, ring structures, late, slow ejecta along with a red spectral slope, sudden morphology shifts and the apparent steering through planetary alignments
His argument is if these thermospheric plasma structures exist (and we’ve filmed them), then nothing prevents similar structures from existing in interplanetary space, just scaled up and radiation hardened.
5/
The strongest evidence he cites is not the morphology.
It’s not even the color or the unusual tail.
It’s the non gravitational acceleration without a cause.
That one is impossible to ignore.
He basically says:
If it’s not outgassing and not a light-sail, the remaining option is internal energy redistribution which is something living plasmoids can do in lab conditions.
This is where the scientific community starts to squirm a bit.
The strongest evidence he cites is not the morphology.
It’s not even the color or the unusual tail.
It’s the non gravitational acceleration without a cause.
That one is impossible to ignore.
He basically says:
If it’s not outgassing and not a light-sail, the remaining option is internal energy redistribution which is something living plasmoids can do in lab conditions.
This is where the scientific community starts to squirm a bit.
6/
The Loeb Scale places 3I/ATLAS at Level 4, the weak technosignature threshold.
That number is based on the non gravitational acceleration, chemical anomalies, morphological complexity and again the improbable orbital encounters.
BUT... and this is important, he isn’t arguing it’s artificial. He’s arguing it could be alive, not engineered.
The Loeb Scale places 3I/ATLAS at Level 4, the weak technosignature threshold.
That number is based on the non gravitational acceleration, chemical anomalies, morphological complexity and again the improbable orbital encounters.
BUT... and this is important, he isn’t arguing it’s artificial. He’s arguing it could be alive, not engineered.
7/
The paper’s core model is the Cosmobiont self organized, electromagnetically supported plasma structure that is capable of maintaining form and capable of interaction.
A non carbon based entity that does not require water and is able to exist in a vacuum.
He says 3I/ATLAS fits this category better than comet or asteroid.
This is the most speculative part, but also the most interesting.
The paper’s core model is the Cosmobiont self organized, electromagnetically supported plasma structure that is capable of maintaining form and capable of interaction.
A non carbon based entity that does not require water and is able to exist in a vacuum.
He says 3I/ATLAS fits this category better than comet or asteroid.
This is the most speculative part, but also the most interesting.
8/
The most controversial part is the orbital synchronization.
He argues that the object’s approach to Venus, Mars, and Jupiter has a probability of <0.005% if its random.
He interprets this as navigation. This is where mainstream astrophysics will absolutely throw a brick at the paper.
The numbers need independent verification, but the coincidences are not imaginary they’re in the JPL Solutions.
The most controversial part is the orbital synchronization.
He argues that the object’s approach to Venus, Mars, and Jupiter has a probability of <0.005% if its random.
He interprets this as navigation. This is where mainstream astrophysics will absolutely throw a brick at the paper.
The numbers need independent verification, but the coincidences are not imaginary they’re in the JPL Solutions.
9/
What the paper does get right, is it doesn’t claim certainty. It frames the hypothesis as exploratory, not declarative.
It grounds its argument in observed anomalies, but he also admits the limitations clearly. There are no direct biological markers, no communication signals or replicative behavior. There is also no thermal signature that screams organism.
What the paper does get right, is it doesn’t claim certainty. It frames the hypothesis as exploratory, not declarative.
It grounds its argument in observed anomalies, but he also admits the limitations clearly. There are no direct biological markers, no communication signals or replicative behavior. There is also no thermal signature that screams organism.
10/
Where this paper slips is the thermospheric plasma life analogies are interesting… but the environments are incomparable.
3I/ATLAS is orders of magnitude larger, colder, and more stable.
Could plasma self organize in interstellar conditions?
Maybe, but we are missing evidence.
Orbital synchronization also needs deeper statistical review.
If that number is wrong, the whole argument collapses.
Where this paper slips is the thermospheric plasma life analogies are interesting… but the environments are incomparable.
3I/ATLAS is orders of magnitude larger, colder, and more stable.
Could plasma self organize in interstellar conditions?
Maybe, but we are missing evidence.
Orbital synchronization also needs deeper statistical review.
If that number is wrong, the whole argument collapses.
11/
Do I think 3I/ATLAS is a cosmobiont? No, not yet.
The real value of this paper is that it breaks the stranglehold of the just a comet narrative and lays out an alternative framework.
Right now, alternative frameworks are exactly what we need, because 3I/ATLAS has broken every category we tried to force it into.
#3IATLAS #Cosmobiont #UAP #Astrobiology #PlasmaLife #InterstellarObject #SkywatchSignal
Source:
researchgate.net/profile/Ricard…
Do I think 3I/ATLAS is a cosmobiont? No, not yet.
The real value of this paper is that it breaks the stranglehold of the just a comet narrative and lays out an alternative framework.
Right now, alternative frameworks are exactly what we need, because 3I/ATLAS has broken every category we tried to force it into.
#3IATLAS #Cosmobiont #UAP #Astrobiology #PlasmaLife #InterstellarObject #SkywatchSignal
Source:
researchgate.net/profile/Ricard…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
