Tatizo linalowakumba wengi ni kufikiria ''time'' wakati wanapo-discuss singularity. Ukishaweka au kuwaza ''time'' ni lazima ukwame. ''Time'' haikuwepo hivyo huwezi kuhoji zilikotoka components..Primordial singularity inasema ni point moja ambapo all matter,space , energy and time was compressed in a tiny point. Lakini haisemi hizo components zilitokea vipi.
Kama kila kitu lazima kiwe kimetokea sehemu fulani, Hata hiyo sehemu fulani vinapotokea vitu hivyo lazima iwe imetokea sehemu nyingine fulani.Hapo ndipo kwenye swali la msingi. Asante. Kama wanafizikia wote wamefikia kwenye cosmic singularity basi tujadili na hiyo condensed matter au energy imetoka wapi. Tusije kuwa tuna elimu za kwenye makaratasi tu (B.Sc M.Sc,PhD,Postdoctoral.........) lakini we still can not answer these fundamental questions.
Daima Usihofu kuhusu Urefu,Nashukuru. Andiko lako ni refu ila nitapata nafasi ya kulipitia
Anybody seen a waiter? Tell him bring more fursana ~ Ace HoodKula,...Kunywa....,Dinya,....Furahia maisha....we only live ones....Acha kuumiza kichwa dunia iliumbwaje!
Utapata ulemavu wa afya ya akili!.... Utapasuka kichwa!
Maisha tuliyonayo ni mafupi mnoo chief
Soma kitabu Cha Quran mkuu,kule Kuna majibu yote yanayowasumbua watu kuyajua....kasome kwa NIA ya kuelewa.Mimi naheshimu mawazo ya kila mchangiaji. Nitayapitia na hayo maandiko uliyoyaleta. Shukrani sana kwa mchango wako.
Mkuu,Wow, so ulichoandika ndo uelewa mpana? hahahaha, nadharia ya causality loop inaelezeka kiuhalisia na kwa hoja timilifu za kimantiki? jibu ni "hapana" - ni dhana tu, kwa heshima na taadhima nanukuu maneno yako katika kufafanua kama ifuatavyo "huwezi kusema A ndiyo inaanza kusababisha B au B ndiyo inaanza kusababisha B"
Sasa suppose A ni BABA na B ni MTOTO (law of identity - LOGIC)
Questions:
(a) Je, mtoto anaweza kumzaa baba yake?
(b) Je, mtoto anaweza kujizaa mwenyewe?
Jibu: Hapana, ni non logical sequitur, nadharia ya causality loop haina mashiko katika ulimwengu halisi
ZIADA: Tafadhali tujikite kuchagiza mada - tuache kushambuliana kifikra (nanukuu "uelewa finyu"), kwa mujibu wa changizi zako kwenye baadhi ya mada plausibility we ni rika la baba/babu yangu, tuheshimiane kifikra, we can agree to disagree, si lazima tuafikiane mambo yote
Nakwambia hivi, ukisisitiza kuwa causality ni muhimu, kimsingi unasema ulimwengu hauna chanzo.Hii ni infinity regress
(i). Je sayansi inaelezeaje sifa za "entities" zilizoasisiwa?
(ii) Je ulimwengu umezihadaa na kujinasua na sifa hizo?
(iii) Je material entities inaweza kujiumba/kujitokeza/kuibuka pasina kichocheo?
Aiiiiiiiiiiiight, majadiliano mema, i'm outNakwambia hivi, ukisisitiza kuwa causality ni muhimu, kimsingi unasema ulimwengu hauna chanzo.
Kwa sababu chochote utakachosema ni chanzo, nacho kitahitaji kingine kikianzishe.
Huelewi wapi?
Umeelewa au unakimbia tu?Aiiiiiiiiiiiight, majadiliano mema, i'm out
The big question is, je kuna other intelligent being in the universe? If the universe is infinite why only human are intilligent and only on earth what about other planets and stars?? Are there super intelligent being that sees human the way we see chicken??
1. I could present a counterargument but i have decided not toUmeelewa au unakimbia tu?
Present your counteragument so people could see it and learn.I could present a counterargument but i won't, i am not here to win a contest or prove i am more knowledgeable than anyone, we have different perspectives, so we can agree to disagree and moves on
Well, thanks MR. KIRANGA, unfortunately now days i am not drawn to this kind of contest, the way things were going - won't end well, so let's call it a dayPresent your counteragument so people could see it and learn.
This is not a pissing contest.
Hapana, hapo ama unajua kitu unatunyima au umeshindwa hoja unadanganya na kukimbia.Well, thanks MR. KIRANGA, unfortunately now days i am not drawn to this kind of contest, the way things were going - won't end well, so let's call it a day
🤞
AiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiightHapana, hapo ama unajua kitu unatunyima au umeshindwa hoja unadanganya na kukimbia.
Yote mawili majanga.
Zaidi,Hakuna ajuaye chanzo cha ulimwengu.
Wote wanaojaribu kuelezea, wanafanya hivyo kwa kukisia tu.
Na ndo maana maswali kuhusu chanzo cha ulimwengu hayaishi.
Kuna mambo mengi mno hapa ulimwenguni ambayo hatuyajui.
Majuzi hapa James Webb Space Telescope imegundua galaxies ambazo zinafikirisha kuhusu dhana/ nadharia ya Big Bang.
Hapo umezungumzia dunia. Just a tiny speck in the observable universe!Zaidi,
Inawezekana dhana nzima ya chanzo katika muktadha huu ni potofu, inabidi tuitazame upya, tunaisema kwa anthropic bias. Ni kama tulivyokuwa wadogo tulikuwa tunafikiri ukitembea saaana utafika mwanzo wa dunia na ukiendelea utaanguka nje ya dunia.
Tunautafuta huo mwanzo.
Wakati dunia ipo kitufe zaidi na unaweza kutembea sana ukarudi ulipoanzia.
Ukisoma sana quantum physics utagundua kuwa kuna mambo mengi sana hatujayajua vizuri, dhana kama ya causal quantum loop, inayosema kwamba unaweza kuwa na A ambayo inaisababisha B wakati huo huo B nayo ikawa inaisababisha A kwa namna ambayo kati ya A na B huwezi kusema nini kinasababisha nini, inakuwa very counterintuitive tukiifikiria kwa scale yetu na models zetu za classical physics ambazo tumezoea kuona kuna mama anazaa mtoto, na mama ndiye anasababisha mtoto awepo.
Sasa hapo ukiambiwa kwenye quantum physics kuna kitu kama mama anazaa mtoto na mtoto naye vile vile ndiye aliyemzaa huyo mama, inachanganya.
Sasa kama quantum physics tu hatujaieleea vizuri (watu wote wa dunia bado hatujaielewa vizuri) hatuwezi kisema tunaeleza chanzo cha ulimwengu ni nini.
Yani hata dhana nzima ya chanzo , dhana yenyewe, hatujaielewa bado.
Tunaielewa katika classical physics tu. Tukienda katika quantum physics hatuelewi chanzo ni nini.
Zile virtual partickes zinazotokea out of the vacuum of spacetime hatujui chanzo chake ni nini, hatujui kama zinahitaji chanzo au zinaweza kuibuka tu randomly.
Hatujui chanzo cha quantum entaglement ni nini, inakuwaje particles zilizo million of light years away ziwe zinageuka pamoja kama mapacha alnost instanltly defying the soeed of light limit. How does this work?
Huo muda wenyewe hatujaweza kuu define vizuri.
Suala la chanzo ni suala la muda. Lakini muda ni nini?
Ukiondoa vyote katika ulimwengu, muda utakuwepo bado? Utakuwapo vipi?Muda ni relation ya vitu, unapimwa kwa movement ya vitu. Ukiwa huna kitu katika ulimwengu huna muda, au hata uki freeze kila kitu huna muda. Au kwa kitu kinachokwenda at the speed of light muda unasimama.
Sasa kama hatujaweza kueleea hayo mambo mengi vizuri, tutasemaje tunaelewa hata dhana ya chanzo maana yake ni nini na ni ya msingi kwa kiasi gani?
Kwa nini ulimwengu katika upana wake wote usiweze kuwa ulikuwepo tu daima na sisi tunaposema hapa ukimwengu ukianza, kwa mfano kwa Big Bang Theory, pasiwe ni cycle moja ya sehemu moja tu ya ulimwengu? Kuna sheria gani ya kisayansi inayozuia hilo?
Zaidi,
Inawezekana dhana nzima ya chanzo katika muktadha huu ni potofu, inabidi tuitazame upya, tunaisema kwa anthropic bias. Ni kama tulivyokuwa wadogo tulikuwa tunafikiri ukitembea saaana utafika mwanzo wa dunia na ukiendelea utaanguka nje ya dunia.
Tunautafuta huo mwanzo.
Wakati dunia ipo kitufe zaidi na unaweza kutembea sana ukarudi ulipoanzia.
Ukisoma sana quantum physics utagundua kuwa kuna mambo mengi sana hatujayajua vizuri, dhana kama ya causal quantum loop, inayosema kwamba unaweza kuwa na A ambayo inaisababisha B wakati huo huo B nayo ikawa inaisababisha A kwa namna ambayo kati ya A na B huwezi kusema nini kinasababisha nini, inakuwa very counterintuitive tukiifikiria kwa scale yetu na models zetu za classical physics ambazo tumezoea kuona kuna mama anazaa mtoto, na mama ndiye anasababisha mtoto awepo.
Sasa hapo ukiambiwa kwenye quantum physics kuna kitu kama mama anazaa mtoto na mtoto naye vile vile ndiye aliyemzaa huyo mama, inachanganya.
Sasa kama quantum physics tu hatujaieleea vizuri (watu wote wa dunia bado hatujaielewa vizuri) hatuwezi kisema tunaeleza chanzo cha ulimwengu ni nini.
Yani hata dhana nzima ya chanzo , dhana yenyewe, hatujaielewa bado.
Tunaielewa katika classical physics tu. Tukienda katika quantum physics hatuelewi chanzo ni nini.
Zile virtual partickes zinazotokea out of the vacuum of spacetime hatujui chanzo chake ni nini, hatujui kama zinahitaji chanzo au zinaweza kuibuka tu randomly.
Hatujui chanzo cha quantum entaglement ni nini, inakuwaje particles zilizo million of light years away ziwe zinageuka pamoja kama mapacha alnost instanltly defying the soeed of light limit. How does this work?
Huo muda wenyewe hatujaweza kuu define vizuri.
Suala la chanzo ni suala la muda. Lakini muda ni nini?
Ukiondoa vyote katika ulimwengu, muda utakuwepo bado? Utakuwapo vipi?Muda ni relation ya vitu, unapimwa kwa movement ya vitu. Ukiwa huna kitu katika ulimwengu huna muda, au hata uki freeze kila kitu huna muda. Au kwa kitu kinachokwenda at the speed of light muda unasimama.
Sasa kama hatujaweza kueleea hayo mambo mengi vizuri, tutasemaje tunaelewa hata dhana ya chanzo maana yake ni nini na ni ya msingi kwa kiasi gani?
Kwa nini ulimwengu katika upana wake wote usiweze kuwa ulikuwepo tu daima na sisi tunaposema hapa ukimwengu ukianza, kwa mfano kwa Big Bang Theory, pasiwe ni cycle moja ya sehemu moja tu ya ulimwengu? Kuna sheria gani ya kisayansi inayozuia hilo?
Robert: What is the relationship between the Obelisks and the Pyramids? If there is any? What were they for or what do they indicate?
Swaruu: Yes.They are all over the world. It is Atonism, based on Egypt. It is a phallic symbol pointing upwards holding a pyramid that represents the 3 deities of the constellation of Triangulum, Enlil, Anu and EA. The obelisk is an offering to those 3 deities. It is a ¨look up¨. Where there is an obelisk it means that the Illuminati have control over that place and / or it is one of their main bases / cities. It is power antenna too.
Gosia: What do those Obelisks have to do with Enlil then? The Obelisks people are Cabal.
Swaruu: Not only Enlil, also Anu and Ea. Anu = Almighty Creator God, / EA = Yahweh or Allah / Enlill = Elohim gods (plural). Yahweh is not a person, it is an event, it is a creative orgasm, it is the "Big Bang as a Yahweh". Creative explosion. It is a hijacked symbol like so many others.
Swaruu (9): The biggest difference is that time is malleable here and totally personal. It seems like little but the implications of that are monumental. The most obvious implication or consequence is that we do not get old. But yes, our mind expands. And we generally can be as we want physically.
The understanding of everything also expands, like the concept of the beginning of the universe with a Big Bang, we do not recognize it. The universe has always been. It´s just that the human mind cannot hold the concept of infinity. The Taygetan mind can. The universe never had a beginning... it will never have an end.
It is said that the universe is expanding. And the astrophysicists of the Earth take as evidence of this that the spectrum of light they receive from certain parts of the universe, galaxies and distant stars, is towards the red. This tells them that they are moving away as the wavelength is longer. Therefore, the displayed object is moving away. But this is a serious error.
What happens is that with the distance, the light loses energy because the space is not a vacuum, it is a fluid, therefore there is refraction and resistance to the advancement, to the movement. The light looks red because it loses energy. It is a tired light <--- The universe does not expand.