Batahira Vidyawa Pattapal Boru 3 බටහිර විද්‍යාව පට්ටපල් බොරු
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 жов 2024
- බටහිර විද්‍යාව පට්ටපල් බොරු මැයෙන් චින්තන පර්ෂදය විසින්සංවිධානය කළ 2014 ජනවාරි මස 23 වැනි දින මහනුවර තැපැල් ශ්‍රවණාගාරයේ දී පැවැත්වූ රැස්වීමේදී නලින් ද සිල්වා මහතා විසින් කළ දේශනය.
ආචාර්ය නලින් ද සිල්වා සර්ගෙ පැහැදිලි කිරීම් අති විශිෂ්ටයි.🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
තවදුරත් මෙවැනි දේශන තියන්න.ඔබට ස්තූතියි
😂😂😂😅😅
බුද්ධාගම වෙනුවෙන් කතා කල මෙතුමාගෙන් ස්වාමීන්වහන්සේලාවත් හරියට ප්‍රයෝජනයක් ගත් වගක් පේන්න නෑ අනික සියල්ල අනිත්‍යයි කියල රයිට් බ්‍රදර්ස්ල උත්සාහ නොකර හිටිය නං අපිට තාම නැව් වල යන්න වෙන්නෙ මේ කතාවෙ මැදුම් පිලිවෙත නෑ වගේ ඒ උනාට
ගුරුත්වාකර්ෂණ බලය ගැන මෙයා බලන කෝනෙන් හිත දිහා බැලුවොත් හිත කියල දේකුත් නෑ. බැන්නට තර්කයක් බිදින්න බෑ. තවත් තර්කෙකින් ඇරෙන්න
හිත කියලා දෙයක් ස්ථිරවම පවතිනවා කියලද කියන්නේ.. එහෙනම් ඔබ තුමාට වැරදිලා..
@@induwara-be4wp mnnam hitanne sitha kyl api hadunagnne molaya kyl
මෙතුවක් කල් අයින්ස්ටයින්ටත් නිව්ටන්ටත් උඩින්ගිය මිථ්‍යාවෙන් මිදෙමු කියා u tube එකේ පණ්ඩිත තර්ක ඉදිරිපත්කර ඇති MBBs උපාධියෙන් බුදු දහම වනසන්නට නවීන විද්‍යාව අල්ලා නොදන්න පච ඇද බායී.ඔව්නට මේ ඇත්ත පෙන්විය යුතුයි.මෙවැනි හේතුවාදීන්ට අප අනුකම්පාකළ යුතුයි.
වෛද්‍ය සෙනරත් වේරගම
ගුවන්වයානා හදල තියෙන්නෙ අපිට උගන්නපු තියරි වලින්නම් අපිත් ගුවන්යානා හදන්න එපෑ.
එමෙම වෙලත් නෑ
කවදාවත් වෙන්නෙත් නෑ.
අන්න ඒකයි එතුමා කියන්නෙ.
හැබැයි ඇත්තටම එතුමාගේ දැනුම මේ රටට බර වැඩියි.
එතුමා දරන මතයන් බටහිර බලවත් රටක ඉදන් ඉදිරිපත්කලානමි එතුමා නූතන නිව්ටන් , නූතන ගැලීලියෝගැලීලි වගේ විරුදාවලි ලබයි.
දේශකතුමනි ක්වොන්ටම් යාන්ත්‍ර විද්‍යාව පිළිබද ඔබගේ අදහස පැහැදිලි නැත එය නැවත වතාවක විග්‍රහ කරන්න
Ow ow eka gananm onemai
සත්යවූ දේශනාවට මහාචාර්ය නලින්ට මේ උපහාරය
සාදූ සාදු!
Thanks
මචං 🤣
ඔක්කොටම සාදු කියන්න එපා 🤣
ඔය බණ නෙවෙයි 🤣
ප්‍රායෝගිකව දකින විද්‍යාව බොරු ඖරුදු දාස්ගානකට කලින් ප්‍රාථමික සමාජයක මිනිස්සුන්ට හිතන්න බැරි නිසා හදපු සුරංගනා කතා ඇත්ත😂
Three cheers for Dr. Nalin De Silva. Not only Western Science but also Western Mathematics is Totally False. Here are some quotes on Mathematics by Western Mathematicians / Philosophers : -
How can it be that mathematics, being after all a product of human thought which is independent of experience, is so admirably appropriate to the objects of reality? … In my opinion the answer to this question is briefly this:- As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.
Albert Einstein; (1879-1955); Sidelights on Relativity; Dover; 1983; p28
It is the merest truism, evident at once to unsophisticated observation, that mathematics is a human invention.
Percy W. Bridgman; (1882-1961); The Logic of Modern Physics; 1927/1951; p60
Is geometry derived from experience? Careful discussion will give the answer- no! We therefore conclude that the principles of geometry are only conventions … Whence are the first principles of geometry derived? Are they imposed on us by logic? Lobatschevsky, by inventing non-Euclidean geometries, has shown that this is not the case.
Henri Poincaré; (1854-1912); Science & Hypothesis; 1905/1952; pxxv
… number is entirely the creature of the mind.
George Berkeley; (1685-1753); Principles of Human Knowledge; 1710; s12
… mathematics … although it can be applied to an exterior world, neither in its origin nor in its methods depends on an exterior world.
L. E. J. Brouwer; (1881-1966); Brouwer’s Cambridge Lectures on Intuitionism; Dirk van Dalen, ed.; 1951/1981; p92
Mathematics is a human artefact, a human conception, in which there is no truth … there is no absolute unity; no absolute space and no absolute time, there is no mathematics.
Gerrit Mannoury; (1867-1956); Quoted in Mystic, Geometer, and Intuitionist: The Life of L. E. J. Brouwer; Dirk van Dalen; 1999; p121
Non-Euclidean geometry is proof that mathematics … is man’s own handiwork, subject only to the limitations imposed by the laws of thought. … [its] creation signalized the realization that mathematics in no sense depends upon our environment.
E. Kasner; (1878-1955); & J. Newman; (1907-1966); Mathematics and the Imagination; 1940; p359,361
Mathematics is the language of physical science and certainly no more marvelous language was ever created by the mind of man.
R. B. Lindsay; (1900-1985); On the Relation of Mathematics & Physics; 1963; p151
The scientist’s world
is perfectly mathematical,
but the sense world is not.
Gordon Clark; (1902-1985); A Christian View of Men & Things; 1952/1981; p210
Modern astronomers might agree with Kepler that the heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament showeth His handiwork; however, they now recognize that the mathematical interpretations of the works of God are their own creations …
Morris Kline; (1908-1992); Mathematics and the Search for Knowledge; 1985; p85
All mathematics begins with a set of axioms. Any set of axioms is as valid as any other as long as it avoids contradictory assumptions.
Billy E. Goetz; (1904-1986); The Usefulness of the Impossible; 1963; p189
… Science, and especially Mathematics, the ideal form of science, are creations of Intellect in its quest for Harmony.
Cassius J. Keyser; (1862-1947); The Human Worth of Rigorous Thinking; 1913/1925; p23
… the number 2 … is a metaphysical entity about which we can never feel sure that it exists…
Bertrand Russell; (1872-1970); Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy; 1919/1993; p18
… the mathematician … derives from the axioms only what he puts into them, since all conclusions that follow are logically implicit in the axioms.
Morris Kline; (1908-1992); Mathematics: Method and Art; 1963; p165
… numbers are free creations of the human mind …
Richard Dedekind; (1831-1916); Essays on the Theory of Numbers; 1901/1963; p31
Nature does not count nor do integers occur in nature. Man made them all, integers and all the rest …
Percy Williams Bridgman; (1882-1961); The Way Things Are; 1959; p100
… mathematics is something that has been created over time as a means of conceptualizing the natural world. We should not be surprised by its effectiveness at doing what it is designed to do.
Why is it that so much of science can be explained mathematically? Because, so much of mathematics is speculative brainstorming.
The unreasonable effectiveness is an illusion.
Paul Cox; What is Mathematics? Part 2
The mathematician is entirely free, within the limits of his imagination, to construct what worlds he pleases. … he is not thereby discovering the fundamental principles of the universe nor becoming acquainted with the ideas of God.
J. W. N. Sullivan; (1886-1937); Mathematics as an Art; 1963; p271
Not only are there no two identical objects, no single unchangeable object exists in nature.
… we see that an object with identity is an abstraction corresponding exactly to nothing in nature.
P. W. Bridgman; (1882-1961); The Logic of Modern Physics; 1927/1951; p35
π
“The most beautiful equation in mathematics.”
Euler’s Identity
1 = -eiπ
π
No two real things are precisely equal.
Billy E. Goetz; (1904-1986); The Usefulness of the Impossible; 1963; p188
… language imposes subjects and predicates on a world that does not have stable, enduring units corresponding to its terms.
F. Nietzsche; (1844-1900); Will to Power; cited in Truth in Philosophy; Barry Allen; 1993; p46
… no two objects are ever completely identical.
Gottlob Frege; (1848-1925); The Foundations of Arithmetic; 1884/1999; p44
We are prepared to say that one and one are two, but not that Socrates and Plato are two …
Bertrand Russell; (1872-1970); Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy; 1919/1993; p196
It is certain that all natural bodies, even those said to be of the same kind, differ from each other, that no two portions of gold are exactly alike, and that one drop of water is different from another drop of water.
Nicolas Malebranche; (1638-1715); The Search After Truth; 1674/1997; p253
A typical statement of empirical arithmetic is that 2 objects plus 2 objects makes 4 objects. This statement acquires physical meaning only in terms of physical operations, and these operations must be performed in time. Now the penumbra gets into this situation through the concept of object. If the statement of arithmetic is to be an exact statement in the mathematical sense, the “object” must be a definite clear-cut thing, which preserves its identity in time with no penumbra. But this sort of thing is never experienced, and as far as we know does not correspond exactly to anything in experience.
P. W. Bridgman; (1882-1961); The Logic of Modern Physics; 1927/1951; p34
If we are to add at all, we must add unlikes, in violation of all mathematical regulations.
Billy E. Goetz; (1904-1986); The Usefulness of the Impossible; 1963; p189
A simple arithmetic statement like “7+5=12” is true, not because it conforms to a set of empirical facts, but because it is a theorem of arithmetic which is deducible from certain prior theorems which in turn derive from the postulates, rules and basic concepts of that system.
Joseph Gerard Brennan; The Meaning of Philosophy; 1953; p85
… we must concede that no material object is truly and simply one.
St. Augustine; (354-430); De Libero Arbitrio; p45
You cannot step into the same river twice.
Heraclitus, 500 B.C.
You cannot step into the same river
even once.
Cratylus, 400 B.C.
THERE IS NO TRUTH
IN MATHEMATICS
Mathematics has been shorn of its truth; it is not an independent, secure, solidly grounded body of knowledge.
Morris Kline; (1908-1992); Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty; 1980; p352
How can it be that mathematics, being after all a product of human thought which is independent of experience, is so admirably appropriate to the objects of reality? … In my opinion the answer to this question is briefly this:- As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.
Albert Einstein; (1879-1955); Sidelights on Relativity; Dover; 1983; p28
The object of mathematical theories is not to reveal to us the real nature of things; that would be an unreasonable claim.
Henri Poincaré; (1854-1912); Science & Hypothesis; 1902/1952; p211
… the exact validity of mathematical laws as laws of nature is out of the question.
L. E. J. Brouwer; (1881-1966); Intuitionism and Formalism; 1912
Truth to the mathematician merely means freedom from internal inconsistencies.
Billy E. Goetz; (1904-1986); The Usefulness of the Impossible; 1963; p189
In fact, consistency, not truth, is the key word to mathematical thought. … The thought that the axioms underlying a mathematical system must be “obvious truths” slowly became a thing of the past.
Carroll V. Newsom; (1904-1989); An Introduction to Modern Mathematical Thought; 1963; p75
In recent years consistency replaced truth as the god of mathematicians and now there is a likelihood that this god too may not exist.
Morris Kline; (1908-1992); Mathematics: Method and Art; 1963; p161
… Mathematics is still the paradigm of the best knowledge available.
Morris Kline; (1908-1992); Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty; 1980; p352
Although there is at present still considerable disagreement about the ultimate foundations of mathematics, nobody can nowadays hold the opinion anymore that “arithmetical propositions” communicate any knowledge about the real world. … Their validity is that of mere tautologies; they are true because they assert nothing of any fact …
Moritz Schlick; (1882-1936); Form and Content: An Introduction to Philosophical Thinking; in v2 Philosophical Papers; H. L. Mulder; ed.; 1979; p344
Thus the absence of all mention of particular things or properties in logic or pure mathematics is a necessary result of the fact that this study is, as we say, “purely formal.”
Bertrand Russell; (1872-1970); Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy; 1919/1993; p198
Thus mathematics may be defined as the subject in which we never know what we are talking about, nor whether what we are saying is true.
Bertrand Russell; (1872-1970); Recent Work on the Principles of Mathematics; International Monthly; vIV; p84; 1901. In The Monist; v22
The critical mathematician has abandoned the search for truth. He no longer flatters himself that his propositions are or can be known to him or to any other human being to be true…
Cassius J. Keyser; (1862-1947); The Human Worth of Rigorous Thinking; 1916; p221
In the words of the philosopher Wittgenstein, mathematics is just a grand tautology.
Morris Kline; (1908-1992); Mathematics: Method and Art; 1963; p165
The propositions of mathematics are devoid of all factual content; they convey no information whatever on any empirical subject matter.
Carl G. Hempel; (1905-1997); On the Nature of Mathematical Truth; 1945
The propositions of mathematics are of exactly the same kind as the propositions of logic: they are tautologous, they say nothing at all about the objects we want to talk about.
Hans Hahn; (1879-1934); Logic, Mathematics and Knowledge of Nature; 1933
… for a period of over two thousand years, mathematicians pursued truth. … Creations of the early 19th century, strange geometries & strange algebras, forced mathematicians, reluctantly and grudgingly, to realize that mathematics proper, and the mathematical laws of science were not truths.
Morris Kline; (1908-1992); Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty; 1980; p3,4
… arithmetic is a calculus which starts only from certain conventions but floats as freely as the solar system and
rests on nothing.
Friedrich Waismann; (1896-1959);
Introduction to Mathematical Thinking; 1951; p121
The current predicament of mathematics is that there is not one but many mathematics … It is now apparent that the concept of a universally accepted, infallible body of reasoning- the majestic mathematics of 1800 and the pride of man- is a grand illusion.
… one cannot speak of arithmetic as a body of truths that necessarily apply to physical phenomena. … Thus the sad conclusion which mathematicians were obliged to draw is that there is no truth in mathematics, that is, truth in the sense of laws about the real world.
Morris Kline; (1908-1992); Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty; 1980; p6, 95
… we do not experience numbers as we experience colors and sounds, numbers are nothing in and by themselves…
Hans Hahn; (1879-1934); Empiricism, Logic and Mathematics; 1931/1980; p15
Gradually … mathematicians granted that the axioms and theorems of mathematics were not necessary truths about the physical world. … As far as the study of the physical world is concerned, mathematics offers nothing but theories or models.
Morris Kline; (1908-1992); Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty; 1980; p97
The philosophical aims of the three schools [Intuitionism- Brouwer, Logicism- Frege, Formalism- Hilbert] have thus not been achieved, and it seems to us that we are no nearer to a complete understanding of mathematics than the founders of these schools.
Andrzej Mostowski; (1913-1975); Thirty Years of Foundational Studies; 1966; p8
The fundamental concepts of mathematics are … empty space, empty time … points without extension, lines without breadth, surfaces without depth, spaces without content. All these concepts are contradictory fictions, mathematics being based upon an entirely imaginary foundation, indeed upon contradictions. Upon these foundations the psyche has constructed the entire edifice of this amazing science. Mathematicians have occasionally realized that they were dealing with contradictions, but seldom or never was this made the subject of any profound study. The frank acknowledgement of these fundamental contradictions has become absolutely essential for mathematical progress. The efforts made to conceal this fact have all worn threadbare.
Hans Vaihinger; (1852-1933); The Philosophy of “As If”; 1924; p51
… all mathematics is a gigantic tussle with nonexistent impossibilities.
Billy E. Goetz; (1904-1986); The Usefulness of the Impossible; 1963; p189
THERE IS NO TRUTH
IN GEOMETRY
Geometry is not true, it is advantageous.
Henri Poincaré; (1854-1912); Science & Method; 1908
… we can no more say that Einstein’s geometry is “truer” than Euclidean geometry, than we can say that the meter is a “truer” unit of length than the yard.
Hans Reichenbach; (1891-1953); Philosophy of Space and Time; 1958; p35
A straight line has no width, no depth, no wiggles and no ends. There are no straight lines. We have ideas about these non-existent impossibilities; we even draw pictures of them. But they do not exist … A straight line hasn’t even a definition.
A point has no dimensions, no existence, and no definition. … Euclid lists twenty-three definitions which define more than twenty-three figments of the imagination. … He assumes all right angles are equal, although there are no right angles. … Lastly, Euclid introduces five “common notions” as axioms, that is, as self-evident truths, the very first of which is impossible, let alone true: “Things equal to the same thing are equal to each other.” No two things are precisely equal. …
The whole of geometry is consciously, willfully, deliberately antagonistic to reality.
Billy E. Goetz; (1904-1986); President of MIT 1958;
The Usefulness of the Impossible; 1963; p187ff
… for geometry as a mathematical science, there is no problem concerning the truth of the axioms. This apparently unsolvable problem turns out to be a pseudo-problem. The axioms are not true or false, but arbitrary statements.
Hans Reichenbach; (1891-1953); Philosophy of Space and Time; p5
… there is no reason to suppose that [a] triangle is a revelation of an eternally pre-existing truth- such as a thought in the mind of God. It is an arbitrary creation of the mathematician’s mind, and did not exist until the mathematician thought of it.
J. W. N. Sullivan; (1886-1937); The Limitations of Science; 1933; p152
Geometry predicates nothing
about the relations of real things …
Albert Einstein; (1879-1955); Sidelights on Relativity; Dover; 1983; p35
The theory contends that an innate property of the human mind, the ability of visualization, demands that we adhere to Euclidean geometry. In the same way as a certain self-evidence compels us to believe the laws of arithmetic, a visual self-evidence compels us to believe the validity of Euclidean geometry. It can be shown that this self-evidence is not based on logical grounds.
Hans Reichenbach; (1891-1953); Philosophy of Space and Time; p32
It was thought till recently that geometry dealt with space and spatial points, and laymen probably thought that, even if they themselves did not succeed in grasping what a point of space was, mathematicians at least had a perfect grasp of it. But this was an enormous error: mathematicians had no better grasp of it, and they were no more capable of saying what a point really was than the nearest layman.
Hans Hahn; (1879-1934); Empiricism, Logic and Mathematics; 1931/1980; p13
The ideas expressed in the preceding considerations attempted to establish Euclidean geometry as epistemologically a priori; we found that this a priori cannot be maintained and that Euclidean geometry is not an indispensable presupposition of knowledge.
Hans Reichenbach; (1891-1953); Philosophy of Space and Time; p31
MATHEMATICS IS NEVER TRUE
YET IT CAN BE USEFUL
I shall not attempt to prove that mathematics is useful. I will admit it and so save myself the trouble that here is a great and respected discipline where all is impossible yet much is useful. The usefulness largely flows from the impossibility. Mathematical concepts have been simplified and generalized until they describe an imaginative world no part of which could possibly exist outside men’s minds.
Billy E. Goetz; (1904-1986); The Usefulness of the Impossible; 1963; p189
Though the axioms of non-Euclidean geometry appeared to be contrary to ordinary human experience, they yielded theorems applicable to the physical world.
Morris Kline; (1908-1992); Mathematics: Method and Art; p160
Every mathematical system contains undefined terms: for example, the words ‘point’ and ‘line’ in a geometric system. In deductive proof from explicitly stated axioms the meaning of the undefined terms is irrelevant. … pure mathematics is not … concerned with … meanings (of) undefined terms. … it is concerned with deductions that can be made from the axioms …
Morris Kline; (1908-1992); Mathematics: Method and Art; p166
Mathematicians do not know what they are talking about because pure mathematics is not concerned with physical meaning. Mathematicians never know whether what they are saying is true because, as pure mathematicians, they make no effort to ascertain whether their theorems are true assertions about the physical world.
Morris Kline; (1908-1992); Mathematics: Method and Art; p167
Thus, the analysis outlined on these pages exhibits the system of mathematics as a vast and ingenious conceptual structure without empirical content and yet an indispensable and powerful theoretical instrument for the scientific understanding and mastery of the world of our experience.
Carl G. Hempel; (1905-1997); On the Nature of Mathematical Truth; 1945
We modify the mathematics when applications reveal misrepresentation or downright errors in the mathematics.
Morris Kline; (1908-1992); Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty; p344
Freeman Dyson agrees: “we are probably not close yet to understanding the relation between the physical and the mathematical worlds.” … it is important to realize that nature and the mathematical representation of nature are not the same. The difference is not merely that mathematics is an idealization, the mathematical triangle is assuredly not a physical triangle.
These … “explanations” … say rather little … in impressive language that tempers the admission that they have no answer to why mathematics is effective.
Morris Kline; (1908-1992); Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty; p349
It is sometimes assumed that the effectiveness of mathematics … shows that mathematics itself exists in the structure of the physical universe. This, of course, is not a scientific argument with any empirical evidence.
George Lakoff; (1941-); Where Mathematics Comes From; 2000; p3
How then under this view can mathematics apply to the physical world and especially to physical phenomena? There are several answers. One is that mathematical axioms use undefined terms and these can be differently interpreted to suit the physical situation.
Should we reject mathematics because we don’t understand its unreasonable effectiveness? … Should I refuse my dinner because I do not understand the process of digestion? … mathematics deals with the simplest concepts and phenomena of the physical world. It does not deal with man but with inanimate matter.
Morris Kline; (1908-1992); Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty; p342, 350
The question of the existence of a Platonic mathematics cannot be addressed scientifically. At best, it can only be a matter of faith, much like faith in God. … The burden of scientific proof is on those who claim an external Platonic mathematics does exist … At present there is no known way to carry out such a scientific proof … as far as we can tell, there can be no such evidence, one way or the other. There is no way to tell empirically whether proofs proved by human mathematicians are objectively true, external to the existence of human beings or any other beings.
George Lakoff; (1941-); Where Mathematics Comes From; 2000; p2, 342
Why then should the deductions still apply? Poincaré’s answer is that we modify the physical laws to make the mathematics fit.
Morris Kline; (1908-1992); Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty; p343
Let us grant that the pursuit of mathematics is a divine madness of the human spirit.
A. N. Whitehead; (1861-1947); Science and the Modern World; /1958; p22
Source: -
www.truthdefined.com/3-NoTruthInNumbers.htm
Warm Regards,
Ravi.
Shinhalen dannako bn 😒
Great professor
මට දන්න විදියට නම් ඔය ටැම් කාර් කතා වෙන් කීවෙ මේ වගේ දෙයක් නම් නෙමෙයි. රාමු දෙකක් එකට සලකන්න බැරි නිසා ම තමයි ඒකට සාපේක්ෂ චලිතය කීවේ..සර් කියන්නෙත් නැවත නැවත එයමනෙ
කාලය යනු බොරුවකි
කාලය කියන්නේ කිසිම කෙනෙකුට පැහැදිලි කරන්න බැරි දෙයක්. ඔරලොසුව දින සති මාස අවුරුදු කියන්නෙ මිනිසා විසින් කාලය මනින්න හදාගත්තු මිනුම් දණ්ඩක් මිසක් කාලය ගැන අර්ථයක් දක්වන්න පුලුවන් දෙයක් නෙමෙයි. කාලය කියන්නේ බොරුවක්නම් අපි වයසටයන්නේ කොහොමද. මේක ගැන කතා කරනවනම් මේක ලොකු මාතෘකාවක්.
oya wahana sadda adu karanna widihak nadda oya pasal ashrawa
He is the only person in the world telling the TRUTH.😇
If you know some wrong logic with his speech please let us know. otherwise he is right
Ehekota me lokeye athe kiyala deyak nadde
Samanthabadra rahathungen bana Ayala Meath RAHATH wela.,!,
Samantha badra hamuduruwo monawath reject jedermann karan na meya wage,
methuma hema deyak pilibandawama dweshayakin pasuwana bawa nam penei!!
Ammo gammak batahira gathiyanta kane parak gahuwa wage
The great speech....well done........
පන්දිතයාට එදන්ඩෙ යන්න බෑලු. වචනනම් නියම මාලු කාරයෙක් වගෙ. නාත දෙවියො අදහන මෙ මනුස්සය බෞද්දයෙක් වෙන්නෙ කොහොමද?.
ඇත ,නැත යන අන්තය න් පටලවා ගත් විට මේ අකරතැබ්බය සිදු වෙයි
නලින් ගේ නියමයෙන් වෙන්න ඇති අහස් යානා එහෙම හදන්න ඇත්තේ...අය්යෝ මෙහෙමත් මහාචාර්ය වරැ.......
me miniha okkoma iganagena rate minissunta ewa borui kiyanne..thiyana kuhaka kamata..
He has been suffering from a rare kind of inferiority complex. This is common to some men of that nature. They just hide the real grounds for them to be against the west, instead making every effort to criticise them. But the question would be his offsprings to be sent to abroad for higher studies why ? Wimal weerawanse s son is reported to be studying at one of the renowed chinese university, how come the man of that radical nature to send own ones to abroad being that against foreign studies. All these prove these men are caught by their selfish agendas and born hypocrites.
igena ganna wenawane naththam kohomada paper welata liyanne sudda kiyana vidihatane apita paper walata liyanna wenne
Mr Silva@
Please THE NAME of God (or any other invisible forces) challenge Post Doctoral Scientists in the field by joining them in world forums. It is so simple, what can achieve by explaining your kind of repeated arguments to a gathering whose level of education is lower to even basic natural science degree holders.
It is obvious that the kind of audience cant help that much. Nor woudl you ever be able to achieve an inch if the motive is to collect good counter arguments. What is at all the purpose of your lectures of this nature ? You prove them you are a LEARNT stupid man.
We respect your degrees, but your idiosyncratic behaviours make you a laughing stock only.
Lol😂
Lorentz transform!
Einstein said "Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds."
It can be seen towards this man too, which if funny :)) Though he is very NUTTY :D
Moda pruthugeesi karayek.