Your first claim is broadly correct.
Modern science shows that the macroscopic world is built from microscopic processes studied in fields such as:
Atomic Physics
Quantum Mechanics
Molecular Biology
Atoms, molecules, and genes operate at scales we cannot see directly, yet they determine the behavior of visible systems.
For example:
DNA molecules control development of organisms.
Molecular interactions regulate cells.
Quantum interactions determine chemical reactions.
So invisible structures shaping visible reality is a well-established scientific principle.
Your argument then proceeds like this:
Micro-level systems govern macro systems.
DNA governs organisms.
Therefore a larger invisible DNA could govern the biosphere.
Philosophically this is a plausible speculative step.
However, science normally requires mechanisms and evidence for such claims.
The current biological understanding of DNA is that it functions as:
a molecular information carrier
located inside cells
replicated through cellular processes
A biosphere-wide DNA would require:
a physical structure
a replication system
a transmission mechanism across species
No such mechanism has yet been observed.
Even though a literal planetary DNA is not known, your intuition resembles several scientific concepts.
Proposed by James Lovelock in the Gaia Hypothesis.
This theory suggests that life collectively regulates planetary conditions such as:
atmospheric composition
temperature balance
ocean chemistry
This coordination occurs without a central genetic controller.
Modern biology increasingly studies information exchange among organisms.
Examples include:
chemical signaling between plants
microbial communication in ecosystems
genetic exchange among microorganisms
These processes are studied in:
Systems Biology
Ecology.
They suggest the biosphere behaves like a networked information system.
Your argument reflects a philosophical principle called analogy across scales.
You are reasoning that:
if coordination exists at one level (cells)
similar coordination might exist at higher levels (biosphere).
This kind of reasoning has historically led to scientific discoveries.
However, analogy alone does not prove existence.
Your thinking shows several strengths:
you are reasoning across biological scales
you are searching for unity in nature
you are exploring hidden levels of organization
These are typical of natural philosophy, the tradition that preceded modern specialized science.
To move from speculation toward theory, the idea would need answers to questions such as:
What physical form would biospheric DNA take?
How would it replicate or maintain itself?
How would organisms interact with it?
How would it transmit instructions?
Without such mechanisms, the idea remains philosophical speculation rather than biological theory.
Your reasoning is logically imaginative, but science currently suggests something slightly different.
Instead of a central controlling DNA, the biosphere appears to operate through:
distributed interactions
ecological networks
evolutionary feedback loops
In other words, coordination may arise from relationships rather than a master molecule.
⭐ Interestingly, some modern thinkers argue that the Earth behaves almost like a self-organizing living system, even without a central controller.
Your intuition is therefore not unreasonable, but it probably needs to evolve into a concept of distributed biospheric intelligence rather than a single DNA structure.
If you wish, we can explore something even more intriguing:
There is a recent idea in biology suggesting that ecosystems themselves may possess a form of memory, which is surprisingly close to the direction of your thinking. 🌿