28 thoughts on ““THIS IS PHYSICS-NOT PHILOSOPHY”-ALBERT EINSTEIN”

  1. This what I tell people when we discuss our soul….
    Our body has the ability to produce electricity, when we think, move, cough, talk, pee etc.
    When we love, hate, care, fight, feel, our electrical pulses whizz around our brain and we all know that electricity is energy. I believe that this ability to feel, for example love we produce energy in our brain and this is transformed to our soul, the life force within us and when we die its transformed. So imagine how much energy we must produce per day. With that thought I will let you produce more energy thinking about it. 🙂

    Like

      1. Thank you, I spoke to one of the teachers at school about this unk mm own to me she was a theology student and had never thought about the soul that way and it had got her mind working 🙂

        Like

      2. I see so many possibilities that are explainable in science and theology. There always seems to be a ‘one or other’ sort of argument that goes on. I don’t get that.x

        Like

  2. I love it! Albert was a genius in more ways than one. What will they do when they realise that we are both right, just coming from different directions? Imagine incorporating philosophy into a physics class. I can hear them squirming now! Thanks scottishmomus for the reblog and the follow. You’ve made my evening!

    Like

    1. I live physics but there are still things that we dont understand about how the world works, we cannot explain God just as we cannot explain how fish can live 2 miles at the bottomn of the sea without getting crushed, or how our brain works, yet science is fast enough to say God doesn’t exist. There is a book called ‘The Field’ by Lynn McTaggart, it will open a persobs eyes to the mysterious world. Scientists have been fired and ridiculed over what has been proven in this book. 🙂

      Like

      1. Great pictures. I just keep thinking they must have been frozen, despite animals and fire. Not much at all to these houses from what I can gather. How society has moved on. In some ways.x

        Like

      2. Surprisingly from old accounts I have read, they were quite snug, laying on mattresses stuffed with horse hair, beds boxes built to sleep in, the warmth of cattle, being wrapped in wool blankets and wearing wool clothing in layers. You also remember come winter people were sewn into their under clothes with just holes in in positions for nipping to the loo. in the spring you would get cut out and then you would bath in the nearest river.
        Thanks they are some of my favourite photos, they have been publushed in a few magazines 🙂

        Like

      3. Think about this, you have sheard the sheep, carded and spun your wool then you weave your cloth, you then use plant extract to produce dyes then use the urine you have collected over the last 3 to 4 weeks as a mordant to fix the dye. But you would not able to produce reds, blues or purples as they were very expensive to produce and thats why those colours are set aside for the wealthy and the church. so your clothes would be muted colours, greys etc. During the Englush civil war majority of the armies uniforms were greys as many of the fighting men belonged to the rich and they supplief the uniforms. In the photos the men belonged to Col. Hugh Fraser from Aberdeenshire. On the battlefield your allies and foes were distinguished by the colour of their bonnets, Frasers were a muted blue and they fought for Cromwell. 🙂

        Like

  3. This is an important realization. I’ve been following the Chomsky and Zizek debate and I am oft wondering what theory has to do with truth, where I take it as an assertion, and Chomsky takes it as a fact. You give me more to consider. Thank you.

    Like

    1. I’m not familiar with that debate. I just ‘feel’ certain truths. Or, at least, what I think may be true. Greater minds than mine or many have pondered questions still unanswered. Somewhere there is a marriage of thought that will see the connection between science and theology. I’m waiting for that day, when we can breathe a collective sigh and agree that, perhaps, we have all been right. Each of us holding little pieces of a giant, amazing jigsaw puzzle.x

      Like

      1. I agree with your feelings. That’s pretty much was I was saying in my critique of Chomsky for being critical of Zizek. After all Chomsky’s alledged scientific connections were to an ideology proposed by Roger Bacon in the 13th Century. You can see my proposals at:

        1. http://savioni.wordpress.com/2013/08/02/chomsky-v-zizek-part-1/

        2. http://savioni.wordpress.com/2013/07/27/chomsky-v-zizek/

        3. http://savioni.wordpress.com/2013/08/12/chomsky-v-zizek-part-3/

        I am working on Part 4.

        Like

      2. There are a few philosophers who view the extent of scientific discovery as dependent on the limitations of human senses, where language, for example limits our metaphorical capacities to understand the world since we are bound by words and numbers, for example to make the data meaningful.

        Like

      3. Unless, of course, understanding is implicit. Sometimes, words cloud the meaning and explanations become unnecessary. Thinking, partly, of dreamscapes and wondrous images whose visuals and meanings seem to be outwith words. And, on arising, only the impression of truth remains. Difficult, therefore, to put into words. No matter how wide the vocabulary. I struggle, certainly, to capture on paper all I feel and believe that would let anyone, including myself, imbue those sensations.x

        Like

  4. Yes, words are tricky things noting the story about the story passed around and changed. And two people can understand the same thing without having said anything. A beautiful landscape shared by two. Impressions of truth are what we have in the United States. We are hardly certain of what is going on in politics, for example, and so we cast aspersions in thinking we know.

    Like

Comments are closed.