Відео

‏ ‏ for pets sake - it’s almost 2025 now, that’s the best sound that you can manage for a UA-cam video?

This video's sound quality is RELATIVELY poor.

Most of the papers are linked in the description of the UA-cam video. Even more are linked in the paper it is summarizing, by the same name, also lined in the video. The EM pulse experiment is linked at the end of my comment above. This is the most recent, where the propagation delay of an EM pulse was measured in the nearfield, and no propagation delay was observed. This shows that the front speed (or information speed) is instantaneous in the nearfield, proving Relativity wrong. The speed of gravity was also determined by Simone LaPlace in the late 1700's to be instantaneous, by noting the stability of the orbits of the planets about the sun. If gravity propagated at speed c, gravitational forces tangential to the orbits would result, causing the planets to spiral away. Since the planets have been stable for a very long time, the speed of nearfield gravity must be instantaneous. See speed of gravity Wikipedia.

What can we do if we add one extra spatial dimension to the "Twistor Theory" of Sir Roger Penrose. It can be "chiral" with two directions of twist, and it can be "Quantized", based on the number of twist cycles. If Physicists describe electrons as point particles with no volume, where is the mass of the particle? Can one extra spatial dimension produce a geometric explanation of the 1/2 spin of electrons? The following is an extension of the old Kaluza-Klein theory. Can a twisted 3D <---> 4D soliton containing one extra spatial dimension help solve some of the current problems in Particle Physics? What do the Twistors of Roger Penrose and the Geometric Unity of Eric Weinstein and the exploration of one extra spatial dimension by Lisa Randall and the "Belt Trick" of Paul Dirac have in common? Is the following idea a “Quantized” model related to the “Vortex Theory” proposed by Maxwell and others during the 19th century? Is the best explanation of the current data a form of “Twistor Theory” first proposed by Sir Roger Penrose during 1967? During recent years Dr. Peter Woit has explored Twistor Theory as a possible solution to help explain the current Standard Model. Has the concept of the “Aether” been resurrected from the dead and relabeled as the “Higgs Field”? In Spinors it takes two complete turns to get down the "rabbit hole" (Alpha Funnel 3D--->4D) to produce one twist cycle (1 Quantum unit). Can both Matter and Energy be described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature? (A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.) Mass= 1/Length, with each twist cycle of the 4D Hypertube proportional to Planck’s Constant. In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137. 1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface 137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted. The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.) If quarks have not been isolated and gluons have not been isolated, how do we know they are not parts of the same thing? The tentacles of an octopus and the body of an octopus are parts of the same creature. Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. Are these the “Flux Tubes” being described by many Physicists today? When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. The "Color Force" is a consequence of the XYZ orientation entanglement of the twisted tubules. The two twisted tubule entanglement of Mesons is not stable and unwinds. It takes the entanglement of three twisted tubules to produce the stable proton. The term “entanglement” in this case is analogous to three twisted ropes being wrapped around each other in a way which causes all of the ropes to move if someone pulls one of the ropes. Does the phenomenon of “Asymptotic Freedom” provide evidence that this concept is the correct interpretation of the experimental data now available? Can the phenomenon of "Supercoiling" help explain the "Multiple Generations" of particles in the Standard Model? The conversion of twist to writhe cycles is well understood in the structure of DNA molecules. Within this model neutrinos are a small, twisted torus produced when a tube becomes overtwisted and breaks producing the small, closed loop of tube and a tube open on each end, which is shorter than the original. (Beta Decay)

Bad acoustics!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hvala vam na ovakvim postavkama Ovo predavanje o Bogu je veoma poučno

Young Betty Allen Betty Brown Angela

When will Alice and Bob get their Nobel Prize?

That refers to Heisenberg's formula. No two opposites can exist at the same time at the same place. The second law I added to that is. They can. When they are at the same place in another time. Or at the same time at a different place. The problem is you are using Euclidian geometry to space time. Which cannot be quantum mechanical.

pozdrav mojoj profesorici, tada jos asistentici na FF u Zadru

By determining the constancy of speed, all experiments and Michelson-Morley experiments are indirect and incomplete. If the Michelson-Morley experiment was carried out on a bus or airplane and was used to determine speed. only then will this experience be direct. Therefore, Einstein does not rely on the Michelson-Morley experiment. Question. Do you have an example of such direct experience?❤! New technologies, new research tools Let me suggest for schoolchildren and students on one's own to measure the Universe, dark energy, black holes, etc. To do this, I propose two practical devices. «laser tape measure *+reference distance* 1,000,000 m”» and «Michelson-Morley HYBRID Gyroscope». I am writing to you with a proposal for the joint invention of a HYBRID gyroscope from non-circular, TWO coils with a new type of optical fiber with a “hollow core photonic-substituted vacuum zone or (NANF)” where - the light travels 250000 (In a laser tape measure, the length of the optical fiber is fixed at 1000000 ) meters in each arm, while it does not exceed the parameters 84/84/84 cm, and the weight is 24 kg. Manufacturers of “Fiber Optic Gyroscopes” can produce HYBRID gyroscopes for educational and practical use in schools and higher education institutions. Einstein dreamed of measuring the speed of a train, an airplane - through the Michelson-Morley experiment of 1881/2024, and only then would the experiment be more than 70% complete. This can be done using a fiber optic HYBRID gyroscope. Based on the completion of more than 70% of Michelson's experiment, the following postulates can be proven: Light is an ordered vibration of gravitational quanta, and dominant gravitational fields adjust the speed of light in a vacuum. you can make scientific discoveries; in astronomy, astrophysics, cosmology, higher theoretical physics,... (We are not looking for ether, we will see the work of gravitational quanta) The result is a «theory of everything» in a simple teaching device and a new tape measure for measuring the universe.

The level of indecision throughout the arena of science thinking at least are agreed that they can't fathom wave-particle quanta effect and something fundemental is missing having settled on a speed of light and noooo way can it be exeeded maybe don't know everything as admitted about the universe and still argue stuck to historical science calculations that could infact not be the whole picture. Everyone has a favourite camp of theories but the truth is its own camp.

Maudlin does a great job showing why many people believe a tension (or worse, “a contradiction") exists between special relativity (SR) and quantum mechanics (QM). However, “the usual understanding of John Bell’s famous theorem … that certain observed correlations between experiments done far away from each other cannot be predicted or explained if no causes go faster than light” is not strictly true. Indeed, not only is there no contradiction between SR and QM due to the QM prediction and observed violation of Bell’s inequality, but the axiomatic reconstruction of QM from information-theoretic principles shows that the two theories actually follow from the same principle. Specifically, the kinematics of SR (Lorentz transformations) and QM (finite-dimensional Hilbert space) both follow most fundamentally from the relativity principle -- the laws of physics (to include their constants of Nature) are the same in all inertial reference frames. We spell all of this out for the "general reader" in our book, "Einstein's Entanglement: Bell Inequalities, Relativity, and the Qubit" Oxford UP (2024), but here is a synopsis. According to Einstein, SR is a "principle theory," i.e., a theory whose formalism follows from an empirically discovered fact. For SR that empirically discovered fact is the light postulate -- everyone measures the same value for the speed of light c, regardless of their relative motions. Since c is a constant of Nature according to Maxwell's electromagnetism, the relativity principle says it must be the same in all inertial reference frames. And, since inertial reference frames are related by uniform relative motions (boosts), the relativity principle tells us the light postulate must obtain, whence the Lorentz transformations of SR. Likewise, quantum information theorists have rendered QM a principle theory and its empirically discovered fact is called Information Invariance & Continuity. In more physical terms, Information Invariance & Continuity entails that everyone measures the same value for Planck's constant h, regardless of their relative spatial orientations (let me call that the "Planck postulate"). Since h is a constant of Nature according to Planck's radiation law, the relativity principle says it must be the same in all inertial reference frames. And, since inertial reference frames are related by relative orientations in space (rotations), the relativity principle tells us the Planck postulate must obtain, whence the finite-dimensional Hilbert space of QM. Quantum superposition is one consequence of the Planck postulate and that leads to 'average-only' conservation, which is responsible for the mystery of quantum entanglement. However, once you understand how ‘average-only’ conservation follows from quantum superposition, which follows from the Planck postulate, which follows from the relativity principle and Planck’s radiation law, there is nothing mysterious about the Bell-inequality-violating correlations of QM. Here is how those correlations make perfect sense using spin-1/2 (as Maudlin introduced). Suppose you send a vertical spin up electron to Stern-Gerlach (SG) magnets oriented at 60 deg relative to the vertical. Since spin is a form of angular momentum, classical mechanics says the amount of the vertical +1 angular momentum that you should measure at 60 deg is +1*cos(60) = 1/2 (in units of hbar/2). But, the SG measurement of electron spin constitutes a measurement of h, so everyone has to get the same +/- 1 for a spin measurement in any SG spatial orientation (as Maudlin pointed out), which means you can't get what you expect from common sense classical mechanics. Instead, QM says the measurement of a vertical spin up electron at 60 deg will produce +1 with a probability of 0.75 and it will produce -1 with a probability of 0.25, so the average is (+1 + 1 + 1 - 1)/4 = 1/2. In other words, QM says you get the common sense classical result on 'average only' because of the observer-independence of h. [Notice that indeterminism follows necessarily, since we have to average the required +/- 1 results.] Now suppose Alice and Bob are measuring the spin singlet state (the two spins are anti-aligned when measured in the same direction, as shown in this video) and Alice obtains +1 vertically and Bob measures his particle at 120 deg relative to Alice. Obviously, if Bob had measured vertically he would have obtained -1, so at 120 deg Alice says he should get 1/2 per our single particle example. But of course, Bob must measure the same value for h that Alice does, so he can't get the fractional value of h Alice says he should (otherwise, Alice would be in a preferred reference frame). Instead, his outcomes at 120 deg corresponding to Alice's +1 outcomes vertically average to 1/2 just like the single particle case. And, of course, the data are symmetric so Bob can partition the results according to -*-his-*- +/- 1 outcomes and show that Alice's results satisfy conservation of spin angular momentum on 'average only'. In the end, Alice partitions the data per her +/- 1 outcomes and says Bob's results must be averaged to satisfy conservation of spin angular momentum, while Bob's partition says Alice's outcomes must be averaged (Answering Mermin’s challenge with conservation per no preferred reference frame, Scientific Reports volume 10, Article number: 15771 (2020)). This should remind you immediately of an analogous situation in SR. There when Alice and Bob occupy different references frames via relative motion, they partition spacetime events per their own surfaces of simultaneity and show clearly that each other's meter sticks are short and their clocks run slow. In other words, the mystery of quantum entanglement resides in 'average-only' conservation that results from "no preferred reference frame" (NPRF) giving the observer-independence of h (NPRF + h). And, the mysteries of length contraction and time dilation reside in the relativity of simultaneity that results from "no preferred reference frame" giving the observer-independence of c (NPRF + c). So, whose meter sticks are really short and whose clocks really run slow? This question arises in the (wrong) constructive perspective, there is no causal mechanism shortening meter sticks and slowing down clocks in SR. Length contraction and time dilation are not dynamical effects, they are kinematic facts due to the light postulate, as justified by the relativity principle. Likewise, who has to average their data to conserve spin angular momentum? This question arises in the (wrong) constructive perspective, there is no non-local or superdeterministic or retro causal mechanism responsible for Bell-inequality-violating correlations of QM. ‘Average-only’ conservation is not a dynamical effect, it’s a kinematic fact due to the Planck postulate, as justified by the relativity principle. Give up your constructive bias for QM (just as is done for SR) and physics makes perfect sense, i.e., no “contradiction exists” between QM and SR. But, the implications for your worldview are profound; given the result from quantum information theory and the conclusion of this video, reality is not fundamentally about causal mechanisms.

Request for Tim Maudlin, look at the work of Eric Reiter. Eric Reiter’s experiments maybe telling us the illusion that is happening in quantum mechanics. He goes back to Planck then traces the historical errors that happened. Planck second hypothesis is revised and theoretical counters to it addressed. Once the problem is known and accounted for in experiments that Eric has done over the last 20 years then the quantum effects disappear. Is Eric right? What do you think. See all his papers and videos at his website called thresholdmodel

Excellent brilliance of today's science. Quantum gravity, loop quantum gravity when invented to bridge the two pillar of fundamental physics to have a cocktail for one . A cocktail of correlation and locality exposed a mathematical limit is not a sufficient for physics of space-time. Bell's power of reasoning is also proved in LHC for heavy matter- anti matter pair of ( particles) beyond relativistic time cone. The question Dr. TIM elaborate in this long lecture that what is breaking??? When we know what relativistic physics is all about but quantum system have shown it's own relativistic domains. In my own QG a specific perfect state of superluminal professes other than virtual hypothesis. A paradoxical field is a extension of physics for standard parameters. It is where limitations collapse with core of science. Namaste 🙏 to this channel and all.

It's 2024, and people still ruin a lecture with bad audio and video that doesn't show the slides clearly.

Superdeterminism is the answer, but ironically, religious bias is stopping scientists from accepting reality.

QM is a local theory. Tim just doesn't like the idea of relative states on philosophical grounds for contradicting with the intuitive notion that there can be an privileged frame of reference, i.e. some sort of foliation in spacetime, so he insists it must be wrong. He never even defends this assumption, he just dismissed the alternative as "I don't know what that means," meaning he refuses to even engage with the literature on the subject.

The incompatibility of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics is due to Relativity. The speed of light is not a constant as once thought, and this has now been proved by Electrodynamic theory and by Experiments done by many independent researchers. The results clearly show that light propagates instantaneously when it is created by a source, and reduces to approximately the speed of light in the farfield, about one wavelength from the source, and never becomes equal to exactly c. This corresponds the phase speed, group speed, and information speed. Any theory assuming the speed of light is a constant, such as Special Relativity and General Relativity are wrong, and it has implications to Quantum theories as well. So this fact about the speed of light affects all of Modern Physics. Often it is stated that Relativity has been verified by so many experiments, how can it be wrong. Well no experiment can prove a theory, and can only provide evidence that a theory is correct. But one experiment can absolutely disprove a theory, and the new speed of light experiments proving the speed of light is not a constant is such a proof. So what does it mean? Well a derivation of Relativity using instantaneous nearfield light yields Galilean Relativity. This can easily seen by inserting c=infinity into the Lorentz Transform, yielding the GalileanTransform, where time is the same in all inertial frames. So a moving object observed with instantaneous nearfield light will yield no Relativistic effects, whereas by changing the frequency of the light such that farfield light is used will observe Relativistic effects. But since time and space are real and independent of the frequency of light used to measure its effects, then one must conclude the effects of Relativity are just an optical illusion. Since General Relativity is based on Special Relativity, then it has the same problem. A better theory of Gravity is Gravitoelectromagnetism which assumes gravity can be mathematically described by 4 Maxwell equations, similar to to those of electromagnetic theory. It is well known that General Relativity reduces to Gravitoelectromagnetism for weak fields, which is all that we observe. Using this theory, analysis of an oscillating mass yields a wave equation set equal to a source term. Analysis of this equation shows that the phase speed, group speed, and information speed are instantaneous in the nearfield and reduce to the speed of light in the farfield. This theory then accounts for all the observed gravitational effects including instantaneous nearfield and the speed of light farfield. The main difference is that this theory is a field theory, and not a geometrical theory like General Relativity. Because it is a field theory, Gravity can be then be quantized as the Graviton. Lastly it should be mentioned that this research shows that the Pilot Wave interpretation of Quantum Mechanics can no longer be criticized for requiring instantaneous interaction of the pilot wave, thereby violating Relativity. It should also be noted that nearfield electromagnetic fields can be explained by quantum mechanics using the Pilot Wave interpretation of quantum mechanics and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (HUP), where Δx and Δp are interpreted as averages, and not the uncertainty in the values as in other interpretations of quantum mechanics. So in HUP: Δx Δp = h, where Δp=mΔv, and m is an effective mass due to momentum, thus HUP becomes: Δx Δv = h/m. In the nearfield where the field is created, Δx=0, therefore Δv=infinity. In the farfield, HUP: Δx Δp = h, where p = h/λ. HUP then becomes: Δx h/λ = h, or Δx=λ. Also in the farfield HUP becomes: λmΔv=h, thus Δv=h/(mλ). Since p=h/λ, then Δv=p/m. Also since p=mc, then Δv=c. So in summary, in the nearfield Δv=infinity, and in the farfield Δv=c, where Δv is the average velocity of the photon according to Pilot Wave theory. Consequently the Pilot wave interpretation should become the preferred interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. It should also be noted that this argument can be applied to all fields, including the graviton. Hence all fields should exhibit instantaneous nearfield and speed c farfield behavior, and this can explain the non-local effects observed in quantum entangled particles. *UA-cam presentation of above arguments: ua-cam.com/video/sePdJ7vSQvQ/v-deo.html *More extensive paper for the above arguments: William D. Walker and Dag Stranneby, A New Interpretation of Relativity, 2023: vixra.org/abs/2309.0145 *Electromagnetic pulse experiment paper: www.techrxiv.org/doi/full/10.36227/techrxiv.170862178.82175798/v1 Dr. William Walker - PhD in physics from ETH Zurich, 1997

Bravo!🎉

Najjači Je Mislav Ježić

genijalno kako netko s toliko entuzijzma moze govoriti o tako nebitnim stvarima

Daß das Genie im Alltagsleben als Tolpatscher hilflos ausgeliefert ist, ist wohl bekannt. Jedoch, der Genius im seinen eigenen Wesen, in seinem Eigensein, das sein Sein konstituiert, kann nie einen Fehler machen. Falls er den fatalen Fehler begehe, dann geht er zum Teufel, Umnachtung und Wahnsinn. In dieser Hinsicht ist Weder Kant, noch Fichte, noch Hegel, dessen Dialektik/Denken ein Mißverstandlich von Platons Philosophie und Plagiat von Schellings Einsichten ist, kann Genie genannt werden. Was sagt der Hanswurst? "Das Ich setzt sich absolut, und das Ich setzt das Nicht-Ich." Mit anderen Worten wiederholt der Clown die Stupidität der Bibel: am Anfang war Gott und Gott hat die Welt aus dem Nichts geschaft. Entweder hat man es oder hat man es nicht. Arbeit macht nicht frei, Herr Professor . Denkenkönnen kann nicht gelernt und gelehrt werden. Ein Esel kann nicht mit einem Vollblut schritthalten.

Jbt led znaci do pola snimka si već 347 puta rekao- aaaa eeeee aaaa eeee užas !

Ty

what is the summary.

Hvala za Info. Sigurno je interesantna knjiga... Kako se može doći do nje s obzirom da ne živim u Hr.? Imam jedno pitanje što se tiče povijesti?! Kako je mogla tadašnja Njemačka da snabdijeva svu svoju inzinjeriju sa gorivom s obzirom da nisu posjedovali naftne bušotine?! Pitam zato što kažete da ste i Povjesničar... Lijep pozdrav i svako dobro 🤗🤗🤗

Paraziti beskorisni prodavači magle, ovi tipovi filozofiji nisu niti znaju niti mogu dati nikakv doprinos. Prdaljavina , od koje se samo širi smrad. Zadnji filozof je bio Hegel, iza toga ništa, Marks nije bio filozof no je bio teoritičat za najveći zločin u ljudskoj povijesti, on je napisao pravilnik kako izvršiti zločin u najmonstruoznijim pravilnikom i priručnikom kako poubijati sve neistomišljenike a to je komunistički manifest. Filozofiju su utemeljili stari Grci,i do Dekarta se nije ni milimetar pomaklo, iza Dekartova, i Spinozina Racionalizma paralelno je u Engleskoj razvijao se empirizam, zatim dolazi zadnje što je filozofija , to je Njemački idealizma iz toga se je razvio hegelov filozofski svijet i gotovo. Najveći doprinos filozofije što su se iz nje razvile korisne prirodne znanosti u prvom redu Fizika koja je iznjedrila sve što danas postoji, a filozofija je ostala na početku nije dala odgovor što je čoivjek, najveći filozov Aristotel nije znao što je čovjek jer Roba je nazvao "oruđe koje govori", pri kraju života je doživio da je skoro i on postao rob, šteta što nije, tek da je postao rob možda bi shvatio da je i rob čovjek, Platon je prodat na Siciliji kao rob, vlasniku je bio beskoristan i pustio ga je da slobodno odleprša.

Damn I love this guy.

Gospodine Ćubelič, koliko sam vidila, pogađam da ste porjeklom iz Dobranja. Jesam li u pravu? Bog.

Podcijenjeni.

Čudo da čovjek ima ovako zdrav razum... Svaka čast sve jasno... 👍

Nur wer Philosophie, ihre Geschichte und Probleme gründlich kennt, komplexe Gedanken elegant zum Ausdruck zu bringen fähig ist, kann diesen brillanten Vortrag so schön halten. Danke für diese exemplarische Größe!

Sie glaubt ersichtlich nicht an das, was sie referiert.

The French physicist Pierre Duhem, as well as the great German Nobel laureates Philipp Lenard and Johannes Stark proved that quantum theory and the theory of relativity are the most common Jewish fabrications and constructions. We have been living in the Anglo-Zionist paradigm for over 100 years. This lecture has nothing to do with philosophy.

Što je demokracija od epohe moderne do danas u svojoj biti, bez obzira o kakvoj se radi? SLABA DRŽAVA. Kome odgovara? ZIO oligarhiji koja svugdje može imati intervenciju gdje god poželi, dakle, instalirati vlast koju ona hoće. Delibracija komitetlija u komunizmu je danas delibracija (čitaj brbljanje ) bezveznjaka u demoNkraciji.

Kristjanstvo (radi se o Kristu) je SEMITSKA RELIGIJA, svaka religija je refleksija DUHA jednog naroda, rase, civilizacije, za razliku od hinduizma, budizma i paganstva koje su ARIJSKE RELIGIJE. Sve sakralne vrijednosti su se reflektirale u profani politički život, filosofiju, umjestnost itd...Dok je kristjanstvo univerzalna (najmanje univerzalno je pravoslavlje i time najbolje) što je fatalno za EU narode, judaizam je strogo rasna religija, dakle, židovska teza - antiteza.

Really. Rambling on big academia language but nothing definitive. Theorys just theorys

Theory of QM, cannot have ambiguous interpretations. There is nothing wrong about the interpretations of QM. But there is some confusions about observation/measurement and interpreting locality/non-locality and what do you do when you know a state changes upon measurement. What particle physicists do when for example a proton changes into neutron and decays into say an electron and a neutrino by borrowing W or Z boson from the QF and paying it back in a short time. Physicists, it is true, do not know how these virtual exchanges take place. It is just a way to explain the observed data. It certainly is a limitation of our knowledge, and can have other interpretations, which we don't know yet. One interesting interpretation, promises to explain much more of the secret working of QM, like consciousness or how observation leads to collapsing the QF into particles, etc. Just like classical physics with no exact definition of space, time, mass, force, charge etc., so QM is based on vaguely defined (or only mathematically defined) quantities, like fluctuation of QF of virtual particles (Cashmere experient shows nothing metaphysical about virtual particles), non-locality of quantum wave function, even the notion of spin, analogous to a spinning top, or what is meant by self-error correcting quantum computers entail (not to mention what underlying mechanism show us about quantum reality). Yet it is possible to draw conclusions like 'phase transition, transforms non-life matter into life and consciousness, due to self-organizing (SO) and self-simulating (SS) properties of matter'. Similarly, the QF can self-simulate intelligent conscious 'observer', that collapses the field into fine tuned particles (matter), implying divine purpose, or even self-organization or self-simulation of 'life after death', due to phase transition. Some (Maldacena) even claim the whole universe is a self-error correcting quantum computing function. At least, it is easy to show that life is a QC function, because we damage 50-70 billion cells daily, that are repaired/regenerated at 99.99 % efficiency and at lightning speed, implying matter and field can SS QC.

Tri videa u istom ''jelenko'' dzemperu.....kosmicka slucajnost, ili dokaz koliko su placeni znanstvenici

Do you have any names? 25:45

Tim Maudlin is always fascinating to listen to. Thanks for sharing.

Dakle, to je hrvatski akademik. Lik koji pred penziju nije u stanju održati predavanje a da ne čita!!!!!!!

Dvadeset deveti lipnja, Brišić, treba reći kada piše 29. lipnja !!!! Također na 9:31 ne u EVVVVRopi nego u EUUUUUROPI , bre bolane!

Physics is based on observations. That is all ye know on earth and all ye need to know.

Tu užasnu besmislicu "filozofija kao sluškinja teologije" je koja nastala u doba ANTROPOCENTRIČNE renesanse treba RADILAKLNO REVIDIRATI. Još više su je pojačali prosvjetiteljski zločinci i neznalice. SKOLASTIKA je vrhunska filozofija i uopće se ne može shvatiti zapadni filozofski PAD od Decartesa do analitičkih degenerika bez temeljnog poznavanja skolastike. Njemački idealisti kao i Schopenhauer, Nietsche svi su redom bili protestanti. To nije slučajno jer je zločinački protestantizam put u ateizam i najveće divljašvo: epoha moderna i kapitalizam i propast Zapada.

Tja, wer seinen eigenen Vortrag nicht kennt, kann auch nicht natürlich betonen.

Thank you for posting this lecture.

SUĆE, BISTVO (οὐσία ‖ essentia ‖ das Wesen ‖ существó, суть, сýщность ‖ суштина) --> SUBSTANCIJA BITI (εἶναι ‖ esse ‖ sein ‖ быть), biti / ne biti (sein / nicht sein), bitak / nebitak (das Sein / das Nichtsein), buduće (ὄν ‖ seiend), Buduće (τὸ ὄν ‖ das Seiende), budućost (die Seiendheit), ontologija BIVATI (γίγνεσϑαι ‖ werden), bivanje (γένεσις ‖ das Werden), PRISUĆE, PRIBISTVO (praesentia ‖ das Anwesen ‖ присýтствие), NUŽAN / SLUČIV, nužnost, slučenje, slučaj (Zufall ‖ слýчай) itd...

Engleski jezika ima 70% riječi podrijetlom iz francuskog jezika, etimološki gledano po prof. Filipoviću. Francuzi su većinom Germani (uz Kelti+Romani) koji su izgubili svoj germanski: Franci, Burgundi, Normani. Langobardi su potpuno u 6 st. izgubili svoj germanski jezik. Njemački i starogrči su jezici. Sve drugo su podjezici. Hrvatski je superioran engleskom jer je izvoran za razliku od engl. koji to nije.