Fun Tricks Portal: PHILOSOPHY

Showing posts with label PHILOSOPHY. Show all posts

::The mystery of Mona Lisa::

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
 
<div>
<div align="center">
<img alt=":*:The mystery of Mona Lisa:*: - nov leonardo da vinci mona lisa la gioconda" hspace="0" src="http://f1.pepst.com/c/CF7F96/846958/ssc3/home/023/unsolved.mysteries/nov3leonardo_da_vinci_mona_lisa__la_gioconda_.jpg_480_480_0_64000_0_1_0.jpg" vspace="0" /></div>
</div>
<div>
<div class="space2" style="padding-bottom: 0.5em; padding-top: 0.5em;">
<div class="hr" style="border-top-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); border-top-style: solid; border-top-width: 1px;">
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div align="center">
 The mystery of Mona Lisa </div>
</div>
<div align="center">
 </div>
<div align="center">
 </div>
<div align="center">
summit of the Italian Renaissance work, whose official name is "La Gioconda" but it also responds to "Madonna Elisa," hides under his canvas, many mysteries to be solved. History The painting, owned by Leonardo da Vinci, dating from the period between 1503 and 1506. It is an oil on poplar board of 77 x 53 cm, whose technique was the "sfumato", a procedure very typical of Leonardo da Vinci in which overlapping layers of paint very thin and delicate, achieving an effect that vaguely vaporous the sense of giving contours blur. In addition, the painter would play with prospects, thus drawing a horizon higher than another, which makes La Gioconda show higher if it is observed from the right side. The play is property of the French State since the sixteenth century and can be seen from the Louvre Museum in Paris. But despite the amount of technical and historical information we have about the Mona Lisa, the fact is that never have come to know a number of things: who is this mysterious woman, and above all why he smiles. According to information gathered, processed and even historical studies, the most popular theory is that this woman was the wife of Francesco Bartolomeo Giocondo (hence as "La Gioconda"), whose name was Lisa Gherardini. This theory is supported in his book "Mona Lisa, naive woman" the Italian historian Giuseppe Pallanti, convinced that it was Gherardini, a lady from Florence who had been married for a second time with Francesco. It would have been widowed and would have had five children with Lisa pins. According to studies, have been married when Lisa was 16 and would have posed for Leonardo when it had 24 or 25. The historian would have called the "donna naive" because he was an affectionate nickname that her husband used to it. Other scenarios suggest that it was a courtesan, or an unrealistic model imagined by the artist. Even, it has come to say that it was Leonardo's own. However, the initial argument seems to be the most convincing. Pallanti gives strong evidence of that. Thus, it would confirm the theories put forward by the Italian writer Giorgio Vasari in "Lives of the best painters, sculptors and architects Italians," which was published in 1550 and would be expanded in 1568. Once completed, the question is what about what laughs Mona Lisa? Until Yale University in the U.S. we get closer to explain the research carried out there. They say the lady smiles because he is expecting a child. One reason is that, as the symptom of a pregnant woman, Lisa's hands are swollen. In addition, the manner in which they rest on the belly is feeling protective of her baby. It is said that Leonardo painted getting the effect by which if you look directly smile, it disappears and reappears only when you look anywhere else in the box. Whatever happens, never has come to know the real mood of the Mona Lisa. What is behind this mysterious and disconcerting smile, which seems to look as naughty, protective, sad, calm or even malevolent. So rest myths and legends in reference to the work, even more so when the Aug. 21, 1911 was stolen from the Louvre Museum. The author of the theft would be one Vicenzo Perugia, which the police managed to pick up in December of that year. After touring a number of cities such as Florence, Rome and Milan, again, safe and sound, the Louvre in 1914. He is currently protected by some potentísimos security systems and protection. In the same way, is also assured the survival of thousands of questions unanswered. Unknowns that always adorn the fame of the work. ****************** </div>
</div>

:*:The mystery of Mona Lisa:*:

The mystery of Mona Lisa summit of the Italian Renaissance work, whose official name is "La Gioconda" but it...

Saturday, December 22, 2012

:: The Mystery of Acambaro::

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
 
<div style="text-align: center;">
The Mystery of Acambaro </div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
 </div>
 History Officially, we know the existence of dinosaurs from just over 2 centuries ... Therefore, officially, it is impossible for men who lived 3 000, 4 500 and 6 500 years, have been able to describe and produce figurines representing animals just now discovering. With regard to this dogma, many discoveries, like that of Acambaro are denied despite the evidence of dated ... because they do not fit with what is believed to know. Dispensed and capable of new features to develop our knowledge. So far we have come ... 1923, is the co Waldemar Julsrud of civilization Churicuaro, discovery disputes, a local collector, will seek to rival that discredit. 1944, near the hill of Toro, discovered thousands of pottery figurines style unknown. Strives to interest scientists, it offers the curious and the press, which makes a mistake. At the insistence of the issues, assign to the point of revealing his own theory, which will "put the scream in the sky" all archaeologists: according to him, these figurines which are in the company of men come from dinosaurs Atlantis. From 1945 to 1946, Carlos Perea, head of the archaeological region Acambaro for the Museum of Anthropology in Mexico, will see more official excavations undertaken by the National Museum and the American Museum of Natural History, during which they also found dinosaur figurines. Although the findings are not officially Julsrud, there is no doubt as to their authenticity. In 1952, American archaeologist Charles C. Di Peso Acambaro attend for 3 days and lasts for 4 hours at home Julsrud. Convinced of the authenticity of the piece, wants to buy some for his museum. Julsrud refuses because he never had the intention of profiting from their discovery and do not want to see spread before his collection to be examined by archaeologists. Just made a new enemy. Di Peso finds a rival collector figurines to buy, but the latter has no more than artifacts Tarascans. To avoid losing the sale and will no doubt adjust to old accounts, the seller has andalusia American archaeologist whole thing is mounted on a mixtificación Tinajero (Julsrud employee) and her two children. Di Peso satisfy this explanation is without any verification. Upon return, your account will not suffer any doubt, the whole affair is nothing more than a sophisticated joke that Julsrud deceived (no one dares to put his honesty into question). In his article in April 1953 of American Antiquity, explains how he came to this conclusion: during an excavation by Tinajero noted that the earth had been moved before, and logically concluded that the devices were placed to be discovered again in his presence. The explanation is very different and will be tested later: Tinajero actually found hiding, but did not have enough time to complete a thorough job to prevent looting and plugged the hole. Again with Di Peso, glad not to disappoint the archaeologist and not wasting any time. Hell is paved with good intentions, it is said ... Di Peso ensure his conviction of fraud after a thorough review of each of the 32 000 pieces discovered at that time. And that in a span of 4 hours! Claims to have meticulously examined 133 pieces per minute! over 4 hours without stopping! is not an archaeologist but Superman ¡! Pretend that the parts are false due to the absence of residues in the hollow earth. Julsrud was honored just to clean them thoroughly as I would have done any real archaeologist. Moreover, the fact was confirmed by witnesses, the pieces that had not been cleaned carrying such waste, etc ... Play here an important point in history when scientific arguments over the true development of an honest inquiry, not being able to take figurines, to discredit Take revenge on the matter, for spite, for we not jeopardize their reputation? We will never know. Scientific measures taken less than 20 years later contradict. But the evil is done, for any archaeologist classic "Julsrud people" is nothing but an invention and no one will dare to look into the matter forward and risk his career and fame. In 1954, the Mexican government sends a team of archaeologists, led by Dr. Eduardo Noguerain, ruins on the site and dig into another site, where other figurines were found. Conclude the authenticity of the site and filled with enthusiasm Julsrud in front of numerous witnesses. But 3 weeks later, in his report, deny the authenticity of the figurines of Julsrud due to representations of dinosaurs, too! Fantastic to be true! Between truth and a ruined career, the choice is difficult for some ... And they risk denying their own discoveries ... In 1955, the first visit by Charles Hapgood (professor of history and anthropology at the University of New Hampshire) ....during which Acambaro in fixed sites and witness the excavation. You will be convinced of the authenticity of the discovery.  
In 1968, the second visit of Charles Hapgood in Acambaro to take samples and submit them to the latest reliable methods of dating: Carbon 14 and thermoluminescence. 3 samples were delivered to the Laboratory of Isotopes Inc. of New Jersey to be dated with carbon 14: Show No. 1 (I-3842): 3590 + 100 1640 BC Sample No. 2 (I-4015): 6480 + 170 - 4530 BC Sample No. 3 (I-4031): 120 + 3060 - 1110 BC In 1972, Arthur Young delivers samples to the laboratory at the University of Pennsylvania dated by thermoluminescence to: The dates of these samples were uniform, about 2 500 years BC These measures are reliable science. Therefore ¿archaeological opinion changed? No, because they cling to their dogma. It's impossible that men have known the dinosaurs! And that despite the evidence ... In 1978, 2 poachers are caught in flagrante delicto salvage excavation near the hill of the goats. Stop 3 300 of which figurines dinosaurs. These figurines are used as currency in exchange for weapons (do gunrunners would pay with trinket?). The Court found that these artifacts were authentic and sentenced to imprisonment. In 1990, an independent archaeologist, Neal Steedy chosen arbitrarily, for excavation, from a remote location Julsrud. Found some helmets, but no figurines. Carbon 14 tests gave them an antiquity of between 4 000 and 1 500 years. But these data were rejected and proclaimed that such fragments could not stay longer than 20 years in the soil. The remains of what may Chupicuaro, but not those of Julsrud ... ******************* </div>

:*: The Mystery of Acambaro:*:

The Mystery of Acambaro History Officially, we know the existence of dinosaurs from just over 2 centuries ... Therefore, officially, ...

Thursday, December 20, 2012

ON TRUTH AND REALITY

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
 
<div style="text-align: center;">
<img alt="ON TRUTH AND REALITY :" hspace="0" src="http://f1.pepst.com/c/0BC02C/675672/ssc3/home/032/blog.subha/114.jpg_480_480_0_64000_0_1_0.jpg" vspace="0" /></div>
What is the relation between truth and reality? Is there any link between truth and reality? What is reality TRUTH STATEMENTS : PHYSICAL REALITY Reality cannot be found except in One single source, because of the interconnection of all things with one another. ... I maintain also that substances, whether material or immaterial, cannot be conceived in their bare essence without any activity, activity being of the essence of substance in general. (Gottfried Leibniz, 1670) (Bradley, 1846-1924) We may agree, perhaps, to understand by Metaphysics an attempt to know reality as against mere appearance, or the study of first principles or ultimate truths, or again the effort to comprehend the universe, not simply piecemeal or by fragments, but somehow as a whole. "The Truth is far more powerful than any weapon of mass destruction." ('Mahatma' Mohandas Gandhi) I think, hence I am, was so certain and of such evidence, that no ground of doubt, however extravagant, could be alleged by the sceptics capable of shaking it, I concluded that I might, without scruple, accept it as the first principle of the philosophy of which I was in search. (Rene Descartes) TRUTH STATEMENTS : PHILOSOPHY, METAPHYSICS and SCIENCE. 1. We think therefore thinking things (minds) exist. 2. We all experience having a body. 3. We all experience our mind and body moving about in space. 4. We all experience many other minds and bodies (other humans) and many other material objects - but always interconnected in one common space. 5. To unite Science with Metaphysics we must describe Reality in terms of One thing we all commonly experience - Space. 6. Space (one substance) has properties. 7. Space (one substance) must be infinite (not bounded by another substance), eternal (not created by another substance), continuous (not contain another substance). 8. Light and matter have a particle / wave duality. 9. We cannot add particles to space. 10. We can add waves to space. 11. Space is a continuous wave medium that propagates waves. 12. Matter is spherical. 13. A spherical wave forms a 'point like / particle effect' at its wave center. 14. The electron is a spherical standing wave. 15. The wave center forms the 'particle' effect of matter. 16. The spherical in and out waves explain matter's dynamic activity and interconnection. TRUTH STATEMENTS : QUANTUM PHYSICS and PHILOSOPHY 1. Matter has a particle wave / duality - the wave center forms the 'particle'. 2. Light has a particle / wave duality - standing wave interactions (resonance) are discrete thus like a 'particle'. 3. Schrodinger's wave equations determine the discrete energy states of bound electrons due to discrete standing wave patterns. 4. Matter moves through space in discrete 'steps' due to the formation of each successive in wave. 5. Antimatter is the opposite phase standing wave (positrons have opposite phase to electrons). 6. In phase standing waves repel (like charges repel). 7. Opposite phase standing waves attract (opposite charges attract). 8. Destructive interference of opposite phase standing waves causes matter / antimatter annihilation. 9. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is deduced from wave equations. 10. Probability waves are mathematical constructs caused by lack of knowledge of an interconnected system of spherical standing waves within infinite space. 11. When two spherical standing waves (electrons) are in relative motion you get Doppler shifts of the in and out waves that deduce both the de Broglie wave of quantum physics and the relativistic mass (frequency) increase of Einstein's special relativity. 12. The de Broglie phase wave is non-local where its velocity = c2 / relative velocity. 13. David Bohm's Non-Local Pilot Wave is the de Broglie phase wave. 14. Matter interactions (energy exchanges between wave centers) are local due to the velocity of the spherical in and out waves which is the velocity of light c. 15. The allowed energy states of matter (wave patterns of electrons in atoms / molecules) are non-local due to the de Broglie phase wave. 16. The ray diagrams in Feynman's quantum electrodynamics are mathematical constructs based upon spherical waves. 17. Interference for both light and matter in the two slit experiment occurs because both light and matter are made of waves. 18. Space has waves flowing through it from 10^80 other spherical wave structures. These background wave oscillations explain quantum field theory. TRUTH STATEMENTS : Albert Einstein's Theory of Relativity 1. A wave is an oscillation between two energy states of the wave medium. 2. As matter is made of waves, thus matter and energy are equivalent. 3. Wave Equations in an Elastic Medium Space deduce E = mc2, E= hf, F=ma. 4. Principle of Relativity - Because both light and matter are made of waves any change in wave velocity has a corresponding change in wavelength such that the wave velocity is always measured to be the same. 5. Lorentz Transformation - When matter is in motion it has an ellipsoidal shape. 6. Matter (wave centers) can never move faster than the velocity of their spherical in and out waves which create them - the velocity of light c. 7. Einstein's Special Relativity - When two spherical standing waves (electrons) are in relative motion you get Doppler shifts of the in and out waves that deduce both the relativistic mass (frequency) increase AND the de Broglie wave of quantum physics. 8. A spherical wave is 4 dimensional (Einstein's 4D space-time continuum). 9. Any changen the velocity of the spherical in waves (from one direction) causes a change in the position of the wave center when this spherical in wave meets at the wave center. (A 'force' accelerating a 'particle'.)  
 10. Einstein's general relativity - This change in wave velocity causes a change in the ellipsoidal shape of the 'spherical' in wave, thus there is a relationship between ellipsoidal geometry and acceleration. 11. Gravity is simply the slowing of waves in higher mass / energy density space. 12. Gravitational and inertial mass are equivalent because both are related to changing the velocity of the spherical / ellipsoidal in waves (force) which causes the re-positioning of the wave center (acceleration). TRUTH STATEMENTS : COSMOLOGY 1. The electron (wave center) is a finite spherical wave structure of the observable universe within infinite space. 2. The electron's in waves are formed from the out waves of other matter in their observable universe. 3. Mach's principle is true - the mass (wave energy) of an electron is determined by all other matter in their observable universe. 4. Every electron sees itself at the center of its observable universe in infinite space. 5. The equation of the cosmos deduces the size of the observable universe. 6. There are an infinite number of finite spherical universes within infinite space. 7. Redshift with distance occurs as there is less common overlap of each electron's finite spherical universe with distance that causes decreasing wave interactions with distance and thus decreasing energy exchanges (redshift). 8. Redshift with distance is quantised because wave interactions are quantised. 9. Our observable universe is not expanding. 10. The evolution of complexity occurs because the second law of thermodynamics only applies to closed systems (not infinite space). 11. We have limited freedom and limited determinism in a necessarily connected universe within Infinite Space. 12. Black holes and worm holes are mathematical constructs - infinite energy densities do not exist - time travel does not exist - faster than light travel does not exist. 13. The motion of galaxies at the edge of our observable universe is determined by matter outside our observable universe (they will be at the center of their observable universe within Infinite Space). Truth Statements: Mind 1. Our mind (and body) did not always exist - we are born, we age, we die. 2. Our mind (and body) display traits that can only be understood with Darwinian Evolution. 3. Our mind is always in motion because reality is in motion (the wave motion of space). 4. Our mind has logical knowledge because interconnected repeating wave motions behave logically. 5. Our mind has empirical knowledge because of the spherical in-waves. 6. Our mind (and body) has limited freedom, limited determinism in a necessarily connected universe. 7. Our mind has a creative imagination. 8. Our mind can imagine physical reality - the wave structure of matter in space. 9. Our mind can deduce absolute truths from physical reality that correspond to empirical truths that we all commonly experience (Science). 10. While words may be metaphors, the word space does correspond to a real substance that we all experience existing in - this space around us. 10. Our mind and body are wave structures of the observable universe within infinite space.</div>

ON TRUTH AND REALITY

What is the relation between truth and reality? Is there any link between truth and reality? What is reality TRUTH STATEMENTS : PHYSICAL...

Wednesday, December 19, 2012

PHILOSOPHY v/s SCIENCE

<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Please read carefully and write comment on this topic:
;->
Long before the birth of Aristotleor Plato, a Greek philosopher called Heraclitus came up with the strange idea that the entire cosmos was made of fire.
Whilst Heraclitus’ claims were actually a series of metaphors drawing up a conception of theworld governed by unchangingnatural laws, it is tempting to dismiss Heraclitus’ philosophy as the kind of nonsense that flourishes in the absence of scientific enquiry. It seems that today, the idea that science is the guardian of human knowledge, periodically intervening whenever philosophy gets carried away, isall too common.
Indeed, it is easy to see why mostpeople have much a higher opinion of science than of philosophy. After all, science’s impact on our day to day life is huge, having brought us intercontinental flight, vaccination, electric light and four-bladed razors. By contrast, two of the phenomena most commonly attributed to philosophy are doubt and – if Nietzsche mis-interpreters are to be believed – Nazism.
It is often forgotten that the relation between philosophy and science is reciprocal: just as science has the right to intervene with philosophy every time a philosophical theory radically contradicts empirical evidence, philosophy has an important role in criticising the practices and assumptions upon which scientificenquiry depends.
At the vanguard science’s attack onphilosophy is Stephen Hawking, who recently claimed that religion and philosophy are superfluous to human understanding. Hawking’s dismissal of religion as a genuine source of human knowledge – though stupendously banal - is fairenough. Hawking’s dismissal of philosophy, however, seems quite odd.
For a start, it is simply false that, as Hawking claims, philosophers havefailed to keep up to date with developments in physics andbiology. An excellent example of how scientific enquiry has changed the terms of philosophicaldiscussion is the ongoing debate on the consequences of advances in evolutionary psychology for ethics. Moreover, if philosophers do not always take heed of scientific advances, it is more oftendue to (quite reasonable) scepticism regarding the relevanceof empirical findings rather than ignorance of them.
Hawking’s distain for philosophy isalso spectacularly hypocritical given the status of his own discipline: theoretical physics. Much like metaphysics, theoreticalphysics is characterised by competition between theories that are equally compatible with empirical findings and, much like metaphysics, theoretical..physics would be dismissed as meaningless by the philosophical school of Logical Positivism. Though physicists might here mention the fact that that their theories are backed up by maths, metaphysics is equally substantiated by formal logic.
To give an idea of how, like philosophy, theoretical physics attempts to answer questions far beyond the remit of empirical enquiry, one need only to refer toHawking’s own book ‘The Grand Design’. Here, Hawking attempts to answer three questions: ‘Why is there something instead of nothing?’, ‘Why do we exist?’ and,‘Why does this particular set oflaws govern the universe?’ Not only is the subject matter of Hawking’s book no different to that of the philosophy he so criticises, but a few minutes of philosophical consideration revealsthe futility of his project. ‘Why is there something instead of nothing’ is, as Parmenedes observed round about the same time as Heraclitus, a logical absurdity. ‘Why do we exist?’ or rather, I suspect, ‘How is it that we exist?’ is answerable by science but not by theoretical physics. And because science, as Hawking himself observes, is dependent on the idea of unchanging natural laws, the question, ‘Why does this particular set of laws govern the universe?’, cannot be answered by it without appealing to some, morefundamental set of natural laws and thus leading into an infinite regress.
In ‘An Essay Concerning Human Understanding’, John Locke describes himself as an under labourer, tasked with clearing away the logical and linguistic confusion obstructing the path ofthe natural sciences. What scientists such as Hawking fail to realise is that the task of the philosophical under labourer an ongoing one. Whereas the matterof whether philosophy itself can provide new knowledge is hotly contested, what is unequivocal is that all fields of human enquiry - and particularly science – are dependent on the philosophical drudgery that keeps the path of human progress clear.
Perhaps though, the sight of Hawking’s unconsidered scientific triumphalism makes thecause for the utility of philosophy better thanphilosophers themselves ever could.
Whats ur mind? Comment please:</div>

PHILOSOPHY v/s SCIENCE

Please read carefully and write comment on this topic: ;-> Long before the birth of Aristotleor Plato, a Greek philosopher called He...

Sunday, December 16, 2012

Fun Tricks Portal

::The mystery of Mona Lisa::

:: The Mystery of Acambaro::

ON TRUTH AND REALITY

PHILOSOPHY v/s SCIENCE

Popular Posts

Blog Archive

:*:The mystery of Mona Lisa:*:

:*: The Mystery of Acambaro:*:

ON TRUTH AND REALITY

PHILOSOPHY v/s SCIENCE

Subscribe updates on your Email | RSS

::The mystery of Mona Lisa::

:: The Mystery of Acambaro::