Kama chanzo cha uhai kinaweza kubadilika basi uhai wenyewe hauna msingi thabiti hadi sasa. Je, ni upi msingi wa uhai?

Dhana nzima ya "chanzo" si ya msingi wala ukweli. Ni dhana ya kufikirika na ina maana katika muktadha fulani tu.

Kimsingi chanzo kinategemea chronology, time, cause and effect.

These things are not real. They are not absolute.

Time is relative. One has to only read Einstein's Relativity to know that.

Cause and effect are not always synchronous, one has to only read quantum physics to know that.

If you can travel at the speed of light in a vacuum, the flow of time ceases to exist. In fact, from the perspective of a ray of light in a vacuum, the flow of time does not exist.

Everything, the past, the present, the future, happens at once.

So in reality, time appears to pass because of our position in the universe, because of the fact that we do not move as fast as light in a vacuum.

So time is not absolute, it is an illusion that appears because of the increasing entropy of the universe due to the second law of thermodynamics.

So, if time is not real, chanzo, which depends on causality and time, is also not real.

We can only speak of "chanzo" in relative terms. Not in absolute terms.
 
Mkuu Mimi naamini uwepo wa mamlaka yenye nguvu kuliko sisi, kwahiyo mtu yeyote ambae anaamini uwepo wa hiyo mamlaka bila kujali yuko upande gani Mimi nafungamana nae, iwe wa msikitini, wa kanisani, kilingeni na kadhalika😅😅😅
Kwa hiyo huna dini maalum?
Na mamlaka yenye nguvu kuliko sisi ni yapi hayo?
 
Ili kiumbe kiweze kutumia hiyo nishati inapaswa kiwe hai kwanza,. Si ndiyo? sasa ingekua vizuri kwanza utuambie msingi wa uhai ni nini?
 
Kwahiyo hii point yako inakubaliana na Mimi ya kwamba Mungu ni neno la jumla kama ambavyo neno binadamu lilivyo sio
Ndio ila lazima awe ni mmoja sio kundi sababu ikiwa ni kundi ina maana kuna mwingine aliumba viumbe wengine na sifa moja kubwa ya uungu ni miliki hivyo lazima kungekuwa na vita ya miungu na viumbe wake ili kuwe na mungu mmoja anaye miliki ulimwengu
 
Amini kwamba yuko MUNGU ambaye ni chanzo cha dunia, ulimwengu,viumbe, na vyote vijazavyo ulimwengu.
Ni wazo zuri kufikiria tulitokea wapi na msingi wa chanzo cha yote ni nini. Lakini licha ya brain complexity yetu na intelligence bado hatutapata jibu kamwe, na kama tukijaribu tutaishia kujitengenezea nadharia ambazo hazipo.

Kwa imani (naamini usitake nithibitishe maana ni imani huenda unaamini tofauti)
Kumb 29:29
Yaliyofunuliwa kwa mwanadamu ni ya mwanadamu yaliyofichwa ni ya Mungu

Aliposema tumfanye mtu kwa mfano wetu, huenda (naamini tena) alimaanisha viumbe waliopo mbinguni kama wazee 12, wenye uhai wanne, malaika, ama viumbe wengineo walioumbwa kabla yetu.

Mtu chanzo chake cha uhai ni Mungu, aliumba kiumbe kisicho na uhai (udongo) kikabadilishwa kuwa na nyama(flesh),damu,mishipa,mifupa na misuli lakini hakikumilika mpaka pumzi ya uhai(sio oxygen) akawa mtu kamili. Chanzo cha mtu wa pili Hawa hakikuhitaji kuanza upya maana msingi tayari upo Adam.
Mungu hana chanzo(naamini) hana mwanzo wala mwisho
 
Ili kiumbe kiweze kutumia hiyo nishati inapaswa kiwe hai kwanza,. Si ndiyo? sasa ingekua vizuri kwanza utuambie msingi wa uhai ni nini?
Kwa kutumia theories zipi (sababu nadhani theories zipo za kutosha tafuta) ingawa kuna zina za imani na zile ambazo they are known to be factual..., Uhai wa kitu chochote ni favorable conditions ndio maana kuna species zilikuwepo kabla sasa hivi hazipo na kuna nyingine ambazo hatukujua kwamba hazipo sasa hivi zipo....

Mfano huu nautumia kila siku chukua chupa (ondoa kila kitu kwa macho yako ambapo wewe utadhani ni utupu) ingawa sababu kuna space hapo hakuna nothingness, baada ya siku kadhaa with favorable conditions utakuta life forms..., sasa as far as ecosystem is concerned hayo ni kama mashamba unapanda chakula ili kiliwe na ukitaka nikwambie mwisho wa uhai as we know it (current species ambazo zinategemea Nishati ya Jua) ni pale fuel ya jua itakavyokwisha na hata kama ule mlipuko au aftremath haitatuua basi sababu our main Source of Energy will have died na sisi tutafuatia watakaobaki ni some species which can adapt....

Nadhani hapo nimeanzia mbele ili mwenyewe uweze kurudi nyuma na kugundua kwamba uhai / viumbe ni happenstances....
 
Mwanzo 3:22 Bwana Mungu akasema:huyu mtu amekuwa kama mmoja wetu.
hili fungu huwa nalitafakari sana hata jana usiku
cha ajabu leo nakutana na huu uzi
 
Nimesoma na kurudia tena. Ngoja nikujibu kwa mtindo huu nafikiri itakusaidia na wewe.

Niliwahi kumuuliza Mwalimu wangu swali, "Sir hivi unaamini uwepo wa freemasons na ni kweli wana nguvu?".

Majibu ya teacher " rafiki yangu, muda wa kutafuta ukweli juu ya swali lako ni vyema ukautumia kuendelea kusoma Aya/sura za kitabu chako kitakatifu unachokiamini, (akimaanisha Bible au Quran) hio itakujenga zaidi."

Jibu la teacher wangu, naomba nikupatie na wewe japo wewe hauhoji kuhusu freemasons though somehow unachokihoji ndio point zao kudhohofisha uhalali wa nguvu za huyu tunaemuita na kuamini ni Mungu.

Mwandishi Una IQ kubwa kwa namna umestructure content ya Uzi wako. Naamini ukielekeza IQ hio katika Imani utapata majibu sahihi kabisa.

Huko utafanya tafakari more spiritually na huenda sikumoja ukaanda andiko kutujibu swali lako la chanzo na Msingi kwa mlengo wa kiimani zaidi.
 
Time is relative. One has to only read Einstein's Relativity to know that.
Sagittarius would tell you that Time is absolute. And I always stand with Sagittarius.

Time is absolute not relative. It's just Albert Einstein didn't understand how to master the art of timing.
 
Sagittarius would tell you that Time is absolute. And I always stand with Sagittarius.

Time is absolute not relative. It's just Albert Einstein didn't understand how to master the art of timing.
What is Sagittarius?

Do you understand what is Einstein's Relativity?
 
Sawa twende taratibu,.. ulisema "uhai wako ni wewe kutumia nishati,...." nikakuuliza kwamba ili kiumbe kiweze kutumia nishati si inabidi kwanza kiwe na uhai? Je, huo uhai msingi wake ni nini before an organism consumes the energy? mbona kama nishati inapelekea uhai uendelee na sio kwamba ndiyo msingi wa uhai wenyewe?


NB: UKishasema theory maana yake hiyo si fact kama unavyosema,.. ni assumptions tu.
 
ulimwengu wa roho ni mpana sana na una mambo mengi sana
na haya yote yanayoendelea hapa duniani yote yanatoka huko
Sasa Inategemea na wewe unaleta nini huku
Na hiv vitabu vya kiimani vinatusaidia na vinatupa msingi wa kujua yaliyoko huko
Tuendelee kutafakari
 
Sawa twende taratibu,.. ulisema "uhai wako ni wewe kutumia nishati,...."
Nope nimesema wewe faida yako (kwa nature) ni kutumika kama nishati ya viumbe wengine
nikakuuliza kwamba ili kiumbe kiweze kutumia nishati si inabidi kwanza kiwe na uhai?
Nishati hio ndio huenda ni chanzo ya kiumbe hicho lets start na mbegu ukipanda kwenye favorable conditions inatumia chakula ilichotunza inakuwa kubwa na kuanza kunyonya nishati ya jua (na mwisho wa siku ni chakula cha wengine)

hata wewe ni muunganiko wa single cells (wanyama kwa ujumla) now ukiniambia hata hizo single cell zilitokea wapi ndio hapo nakuuliza does nothingness really exists ? To me that's a fundamental question....
Je, huo uhai msingi wake ni nini before an organism consumes the energy? mbona kama nishati inapelekea uhai uendelee na sio kwamba ndiyo msingi wa uhai wenyewe?
How did you come to that conclusion, leo hii ikitokea mlipuko fulani mkali tunajua kwamba we are all elements (humans are made up of chemical elements. The human body is made up of about 99% of six elements: oxygen, carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, calcium, and phosphorus. The remaining 0.85% is made up of sulfur, potassium, sodium, chlorine, and magnesium. ) kwahio kama nishati hio ikipelekea formation ya kitu fulani ambacho sasa hivi hakipo huenda kukawa na different life form...
NB: UKishasema theory maana yake hiyo si fact kama unavyosema,.. ni assumptions tu.
Nimesema kuna theory ambazo ni known to be factual.....; sio assumptions kutokana na mtiririko wa what we know, sasa kama unapinga njoo na plausible arguments with some vivid proofs na logically sound uone kama hatutaamia kwako na kuchukulia unachosema kuwa factual... (that's the beauty about science tunatafuta majibu na sio kuanza na jibu na kutumia maisha yetu yote tunajaribu kutetea na kubadilisha kila hoja iendane na majibu yetu)
 
Kitu kizuri ni kwamba umetumia neno "Huenda" that means unadhania huna uhakika kuhusu hilo,.. umetoa mfano mzuri wa mbegu,. ambapo hapo tunapaswa maswali au swali lingine la kujiuliza, Kama nishati ndiyo msingi wa mbegu na uhai kwa ujumla,. Je nishati imetumia mechanism gani mpaka kufanya mbegu fulani (let's say mbegu ya Parachichi) kubeba taarifa za Parachichi tu na sio taarifa za mmea mwingine? Je nishati ni Intelligent being? inajua kuweka code ambazo ni ngumu au impossible kuwa completely manipulated/modified?

Narudia kwamba,. Something cannot be a theory and a fact at the same time; it doesn’t make sense logically...... Mimi naona kinachotokea ni kwamba kuna muda tunaamua kuita idea fulani ni fact then baada ya miaka 100, 1000, 2000........ tunagundua kwamba tuliuishi uongo baada ya kupata njia mpya ya kuelewa jambo husika.
 
Mkuu unajua maana ya Nishati ? Kwamba nikitumia nishati ya moto kupika nyama ni moto ndio unaiambia nyama zile protein ziwe denatured ...

Unaongelea kwamba kwanini parachichi isitoe muembe au ? Mbona hio ni rahisi sana ukienda leo kutoa photocopy ya NIDA kitatokea kitambulisha cha kupigia Kura.

Na kuhusu mbegu mbona rahisi sana kuna chakula kipo stored kwenye mbegu ukikipa favorable conditions; maji n.k. kunatokea germination ambayo baada ya majani kutoka inaanza kupata chakula kwa usaidizi wa jua... (photosynthesis

Narudia kwamba,. Something cannot be a theory and a fact at the same time; it doesn’t make sense logically.
What don't you understand na ninaposema what is known to be factual ?!!! Which means kutokana na kufuatilia tumefikia conclusion fulani hata kama we can not prove it directly hence we know it to be a fact (the truth)
 
Hoja kwamba muda si kitu halisi kwa sababu ya nadharia ya Uhusiano wa Einstein na hiyo Relativity theory yake pamoja na fizikia ya Quantum kwa maana ya Quantum Mechanics, ni sahihi kwa muktadha wa kisayansi, kwamba ni kweli mwanga unasafiri bila kufuata mtiririko wa muda kwa mtazamo wake, na ni kweli pia kuwa sababu na matokeo yaani cause and effect hayafuati utaratibu wa kawaida katika kiwango cha quantum.

Lakini nikuulize mkuu, je, hii hoja yako inamaanisha kwamba muda haupo kabisa kwa hali zote?

Kwasababu tukiangalia katika uhalisia wa kila siku, muda ni jambo lenye athari kwa wanadamu, na ndio maana ulivyokua miaka 20 iliyopita sivyo ulivyo leo, na hii inamaanisha kutokea kuzaliwa, hadi kuzeeka na hadi kufa ni kwamba muda umetumika, kwasababu wewe na Mimi wote ni mashahidi ya kwamba mabadiliko haya yote yana mwelekeo fulani kwa maana ya kwamba haubaki kama ulivyo (ndio maana mtoto huanza kuzalia, anajifunza kukaa chini, anatambaa, kisha kusimama na kutembea, hivi vyote hutokea baada ya muda fulani).

Kwahiyo ingawa nadharia za kisayansi zinaonyesha kuwa muda ni wa mlinganisho kwa maana ya relative, lakini hii haiwezi kuwa sababu ya kutufanya tuukane kabisa katika maisha yetu ya kawaida, hivyo basi, kwakua chanzo ni kitu kinachotegemea sana muda na uhusiano huo wa kisababishi basi si sahihi kusema eti chanzo ni kitu ambacho hakipo kabisa.

Na hapa wacha niseme hivi, ya kwamba chanzo kinaweza kuwa hakipo katika uhalisia wa juu kabisa kwa maana ya ultimate reality, lakini ni kitu ambacho kipo katika uhalisia wetu wa kawaida kwa maana ya practical reality na sidhani kama unapingana na hii hoja.

Ila kama hiyo haitoshi, basi chukulia mfano huu, tunaposema "mimi ni chanzo cha furaha yako," hatumaanishi kwamba hakuna hali nyingine inayoweza kuleta furaha ila tunamaanisha kuwa katika mazingira fulani, uhusiano wa kisababishi upo, na ndio maana chanzo kina maana katika muktadha huo lakini chanzo hiki kinaweza kubadilika baadae (naongelea juu ya muda kaka).

Na kama wewe bado utaendelea kupinga chanzo kwa misingi ya nadharia ya uhusiano au Quantum Mechanics, basi pia unapaswa kukana dhana ya maisha ya kila siku, pamoja na effect zake (na sidhani kama unaweza kufanya hivyo).

Kwa hiyo, badala ya kukana kabisa uwepo wa chanzo, ni bora tukubali kwamba ni dhana inayotegemea muktadha, iwe ni katika maisha ya kila siku, falsafa, au imani za kidini, kwahiyo rudi katika mada na tuendelee kujadili chanzo cha uhai ni nini katika muktadha ambao andiko limelenga.

Tusijibane kwenye kaeneo fulani kadogo na kujinyima uwanda mpana wa Kutafakari juu ya mambo fulani fulani, embu tujipe uhuru wa Kutafakari kwanza halafu tuone tunaweza kufikia wapi.
 
Huwa nasoma maandiko ila maandiko karibia yote yanazungumzia chanzo na wala sio msingi.
 
Hujajibu direct, Nimeuliza nishati ni intelligent being maana ina uwezo wa ku transfer taarifa na kuzihifadhi kwa code kiasi ambacho haziwezi kuwa modified easily,.yaani What naturalistic process explains the origin of this information, given that information is not a property of matter or energy but requires an intelligent source?......unaongea simple lakini uhalisia ni complex zaidi,.. ngoja nisiende deep maana hutokua na majibu ya maswali husika.


What don't you understand na ninaposema what is known to be factual ?!!! Which means kutokana na kufuatilia tumefikia conclusion fulani hata kama we can not prove it directly hence we know it to be a fact (the truth)
Ila si unajua kwamba Dunia nzima tunaweza kukubaliana kwamba jambo fulani ni fact lakini kumbe kiuhalisia wote tupo wrong? Yaani kimsingi ni kwamba baada ya kudadisi tunafikia hitimisho at a certain point in time na kuona kwamba tumefikia ukweli even though hicho tunachoita ukweli sio ukweli halisia!
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…