Cambridge University Is the Second Ancient Rome Vatican Curia of the Scientific Community
Author {{{{{{http://tcfmer.com/volumes/vi-n2/}}}}}
(1) Akm Ainy (2) Azguly Keyum
Main content:
The common error which all the science masters from the time of Aristotle to Newton made is that they summed up the object as the matter, 150 years ago Engels pointed out this huge mistake of this approach, but Engels’s view was not accepted and used by scientists of math, physics and chemistry.
About 150 years earlier than Engels’s time, Newton summarized the whole universe as a huge mechanical clock, discovered the three laws of motion; in fact the entire universe and the great mechanical watch is not the same concept. Because calculating according to the Bible, the time in which the universe began to move is 4004 BC, however, the time in which Newton’s mechanical watch started to move was about 1685, the time difference is more than 5600 years. It can be seen from this evidence that Newton set himself another God.
Modern British educator and science writer, and the author of The World’s Greatest Scientists, John·Fan Dayton as the representative further admitted publicly in Chapter Newton of this book that the universe was like great mechanical watch while Newton's laws were the clockwork springs which controlled it to move.
The God the Christian College of Cambridge studied is omniscient, omnipotent and wholly good, nevertheless the God invited by Newton did not know even the general knowledge such as the four seasons of the year and the change of day and night etc , which scientists represented by Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo knew well…
Key words: The logic contents of Newton's three laws of motion are contradictory, the first driving force and the universal gravitation which Newton believed are actually of the same concept. Engels’s new development (of basic form of movement).
{1}Newton's law of universal gravitation and the first law was discovered by Galileo, the contents of these laws are very similar with what Robert Hooke issued in 1674 in his paper to explain the celestial movement, that is, “The gravitational force exists between all celestial bodies, if there is no effect of the gravitation, celestial bodies will move in a straight line under the effect of inertia, the closer the distance between objects, the gravity will be stronger”. This is almost a qualitative description of the law of gravitation. When Robert Hooke on behalf of the Royal Society wrote to Newton in 1679 and asked Newton to write an article, Robert Hooke mentioned “The size of the gravity is inversely proportional to the distance”. Twelve years later, Newton issued the book Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy; Robert Hooke’s paper name did not appear in the references of the book. However the information which appeared later showed it was Newton who discovered the law of universal gravitation, but the Law was not published, in order to set a typical personnel the writers of popular science and literary artists recorded the merit of Hooke’s discovery of universal gravitation on Newton, turning Newton into a worshipful target for all physicists, and after the truth was out, this worship did not change at all.
{2} In China we also have a similar example, for example, Mr. Zhuge Liang (Zhuge Liang (181-234，a statesman and strategist, prime minister of Shu Kingdom in the period of the Three Kingdoms （220-265）, who became a symbol of resourcefulness and wisdom in Chinese folklore) and Confucius, Prof. Yi Zhongtian says in Comments on the Three Kingdoms of CCTV Experts Lecture: “In Three Kingdoms Times, Zhuge Liang was a statesman, not a military strategist, his military talent was doubtful, but in the novel The Romance of Three Kingdoms, Zhuge Liang was described as an outstanding military strategist, statesman and embodiment of Chinese wisdom etc. This is the results out of all literature artists shaping typical model, for example, Empty City Trap was invented used by Cao Cao, the emperor of the Wei Kingdom to attack Lü Bu, a general at that time, it had nothing to do with Zhuge Liang. Borrowing Enemy’s Arrows was a scheme used by Sun Quan, the emperor of the Wu Kingdom to deal with Cao Cao, this method also had no relation with Zhuge Liang. In the history the event of Borrowing East Wind has never occurred. At the time the event of Zhuge Liang Burning Bowangpo had never occurred. But the feudal society's literature artists made up a story with these elements, recording all the credits on Zhuge Liang, making him perfect, thus they changed Zhuge Liang from the man to god.
｛3｝Prof. Yi Zhongtian says in Episode 52 of Comments on the Three Kingdoms, CCTV Experts Lecture: “Westerners worship God, the Chinese worship person”, his theory is illogical for Newton's issue. In the western and Chinese theories, Newton is also a shaped object. In 1685 Newton accepted Hadley’s advice, and almost finished the writing of Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy. After its publication, Newton became a great scientist. In this respect, there is information to deny all Newton’s performances in mechanics. This paper named Inextricable Chains was published in a journal UFO Exploration, Volume VI, 2002, it says: “The first milestone of theoretical physics is Newton, his view of the universe is mechanical, and he believed that the universe was a huge clock, everything goes accurately, this clock completely exclude the role of spirit (God) ”. Newton's theory was a shock to the imperious theology. Newton's work had contribution, but he found his big universe clock lacked a first push, that is, who will start the clockwork for the big clock? Newton was helpless, had to invite external forces (God's force). But after the external force (God's force) gave a full power to the clockwork, Newton would not let the exterior force (God's force) meddle the things in the universe. Later everything was controlled by the laws discovered by Newton. As we have known, Cambridge is a first class university in the world. Newton became a mathematics professor in his 26 years old; of course, this is an affirmation for Newton's mathematics talent. When Newton finished his Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy, he was 49. All Europe knows, Britain has four seasons all the year round, day and night changes over in turn; this simple truth proves that the universe is in motion, Newton was in unilateral thinking, just like the idle mechanical clock in the universe, the view point of all the physicists who support Isaac Newton have the same viewpoint as that of Newton's. So excuse me to ask you: the God’s idea is also the same as Newton’s one? In order to explain his own theories, Newton did not admit the movement of the universe; could the God agree with Newton's view point? 26% of the world population believes the God of Christianity is “omniscient, wholly good and almighty”, thinking problems in Christian standpoint, God is not possible to participate in the movement of Newton's great mechanical clock; people who do not believe in the Christian also consider: God is not necessary to join in it because the universe is originally moving. Since over 320 years, Christian’s philosophy logic has made a serious error in logic and has not cared about this problem, when Newton invited God and set up Newton's laws (extremely disgraced God, rebelled against God), should this be done by the persons who believe God? This Newton's theory always exists. He wrote books of 15 million words to propagandize Christian theory. The book can satisfy the desire of the Christian believers, but can it meet God's wishes? It is Marxist viewpoint “material first, consciousness second” which does not believe God and found the problem, since one year ago our viewpoint in this the aspect was published in China’s Foreign Trade, a journal of Grade A in China, which is issued in more than 170 countries, our viewpoint has not brought much debate, except for 80,000 network friends’ counterview of more than 10 Uygur-language websites. Besides, the existence of Newton's laws also prove that it is Newton who invited God, the response of Christian Institute of Cambridge University is to keep silent; this issue reminds us of a very important problem, the Board of Directors of Cambridge University can only have one God, so the God Newton invited is also the God Christian teaching worships, this God in the classical physics understands nothing, but he is omniscient in the Christianism, doesn’t it be a controversial issue? Could it be that a Cambridge has two kinds of God. During more than five years in which we contacted with Christian Institute of Cambridge University, although over thirty Christian professors replied our letter, up till now they dare not express their own position to God. In 16th century, the times of Copernicus and Galileo, the ancient Roman Curia controlled people’s mouths, could 400 years later in turn the science control religious scientists’ mouth? Don't Cambridge University became instead of the Ancient Roman Curia? Daren’t the PhD candidates from Christian College say “Newton cannot invite God”? This proves that their PhD diploma is true, but they learn nothing in Cambridge. For those Christian PhD candidates, God is important or doctor's degree is important, 300 years later after Newton invited God, even God cannot find the opportunity to defend his dignity in the Board of Directors of Cambridge University, even God dare not to talk, isn’t academic atmosphere in Cambridge very hypocritical?
{4} ‘Force’ is the most basic concept in classical physics, if one does not know what the ‘force’ is, the research of classical physics has no way to go, then what is the force? The force-the influence of one object to another is called ‘force’, when Newton set up his third law of motion, this point of view was used to confirm the meaning of the force, that is “The acting force and reactive force between of two bodies are on a straight line, with equal size, and opposite in direction”. When a teacher of physics explained this law, he or she called the human beings and animalia as starters of the acting force. This proves that Newton also admitted that people are the object.
{5} Although Newton determined in his third law of motion that the human beings are objects, but he denied in his first law, for example, “Every object persists in its state of rest or uniform motion in a straight line unless it is impelled to change that state by force impressed on it.” Excuse me, isn’t in Newton's third law of motion that he defined human beings and animalia are also objects? In that way, what effect of exterior force makes this person to move? It is because the movement of the human beings and animals do not need external force from beginning to end? How to explain this matter.
{6} In Newton's second law of motion “The acceleration of an object is directly proportional to the net force acting on the object, is in the direction of the net force, and is inversely proportional to the mass of the object” he also determined the definition of the force, i.e. the impact from an object to another object. In this point of view, the human being is always the object, but in the first law of motion it isn’t, can’t this prove that Newton's did not fully understand his own logic. Newton did not know what to say and the entire physics field has a very superficial understanding of Newton's laws.
{7}According to Newton's logic, the huge mechanical clock is the whole universe: i.e. the whole universe is like a giant mechanical clock, then the universe and huge mechanical clock should move at the same time. If Newton admitted this, there is no need to invite God, you see, it is the gravity which constitutes the basis for the movement of the universe. When Newton invited God in about 1685, this math professor could not work out correctly that the universe had moved for 5600 years, the more interesting matter is, it true Newton invited God; up to now God always dares not say his opinion, isn’t the old man does not know what Newton was doing? If God really exists, God may not come over to give the first push to Newton's mechanical clock, if the solar system is really like a mechanical clock, it began to move on October 23, 4004 BC; Newton's logic mechanical clock began to start in 1684. the Nestorian scientists of Cambridge admitted that God pushed the movement of the solar system, also admitted that he gave the first start to Newton's mechanical clock in 1684. For a huge mechanical clock, how could it need twice the first driving force, do the scientists please Newton or please God?
{8} Newton did not understand his theory enough, After 160 years of his death, the airplane was invented, satellites and long-range missiles etc were invented in the modern times, Newton said once that these had nothing to do with his theory, for example, Won Karman’s Teacher, an article published in the magazine Reader issued in Nov. of 2008 by Xinjiang People's Publishing House tells us a story: In 1908, the aircraft flight became a very hot sport in young men in France, at that time, the airplane was just invented, Won Karman, Hungary astronomy PhD went to France to interview the flight champion, Ferman, a truck driver, Won Karman said to Ferman: “An authority scientist said in his book “Any object which is heavier than the air cannot fly in the air, how could you realize it?”, the truck driver answered: “Whom you mentioned is the scientist who studied the falling of the apple to the ground (Newton), luckily I haven't read this book, otherwise today I cannot fly either, nor get my reward, you are a PhD, you should study this issue, wish you good luck, goodbye.” Their conversation was over in this way. From then on, Won Karman started to study science of flight and mechanics knowledge and put forward many ideas and speculation of the flight, they are man-made satellites, long-range missiles, supersonic flight, air resistance free flight and so on, and the scientific practice after Won Karman proved one by one these speculations are correct and feasible. Logically, these satellites, long-range missiles, supersonic flight and air resistance free flight etc should be credits of Won Karman, however these credits were all attributed to Newton.
As it were, these are matters of the popular science writers and literary the artists, on the literature viewpoint, their approach complied with the law of literature. But their behaviors denied completely Newton's position, besides it was illegal in the issue of the right of invention. The purpose to write monographs is to express better scientists’ contribution to mankind and to encourage teenagers around the world to learn from Newton. We can read a book called Einstein believed God?, which was written by a Chinese writer Fang Zhouzi and we can read the following contents in Page 24, just like above-mentioned, “Part of the right of invention of the universal gravity should belong to Mr. Hooke” because Hooke had more or less the same contribution as Newton, besides there were also Halley and Reyn. Now when we read the physics teaching materials, or watch TV trailers on the gravitation, the gravitation was discovered by Newton. Regarding the right of invention of infinitesimal calculus, recently scientists found Newton had written to Leibniz, because Leibniz’s discovery helped a lot for Newton's study of infinitesimal calculus. However Newton vied with Leibniz, a German mathematician and philosopher, for the right of infinitesimal calculus in many ways of immoral methods when Leibniz was alive and after Leibniz died. In short, as we abovementioned, Newton’s interpretation for power and the object is not logical at all. The answer to the objects will not find in the physics, then where is the answer? It is in Engels’s logic.
In the 1840s, on the basis of the scientific level of the human beings at that time Engels summarized the movement forms of all objects as five forms of movement i.e. mechanical, physical, chemical motion, biological and social. In Engels’s logic, these movements arranges from simple forms to advanced forms; low level forms of movements are the basis of origin and development of advanced movements, so we can't summarize the advanced forms of movement as low level forms of movements, or we can never regard the low level forms of movements as advanced movements. Through this viewpoint, the logic for Newton's first law is found but it has never been used in physics.
{9} “Spirit first, material second” is the idealist world outlook, on the contrary, material first, spirit second" is a Marxist viewpoint, so how is birth and movement of the object, is there any relationship between the materials created by God supported by idealism and the objects mentioned in Newton's laws? Couldn’t say God created the materials but he did not create objects? If God did not create object, then where does the object come from? Do the objects and materials studied in physics and astronomy from the times of Aristotle to Hawking have any common point? The answer is very simple, the object and material is of the same concept. Regarding the material, philosophers of different eras expressed their own viewpoints. Now in Marxist philosophy, the most popular is the Lenin's viewpoint of materials: for the objects, “Material (object) is of the philosophical categories marking objective reality, this objective reality is perceived through the sense; it exists without depending on our sense and offering replication, photography and reflection for our felling.”.
-- According to the size of material (object), Lenin's view point is 99.9999% logical, according to the Engels’s “basic form of the movement”, Lenin’s viewpoint is 80% correct, 20% is illogical, because labor created mankind, the fruits of the labor must exist by relying on our consciousness, for example, labor tools, cold weapons, modern nuclear weapons, biological weapons in the primitive society, slaves society, feudal society, capitalism society and socialism society; the houses covering the earth, transport tools and highway and polluted rivers are all manifestation of consciousness, besides unfortunate reasons for six million of victims of Jews in the Second World War have direct relation with the consciousness of German fascists headed by Hitler, whereas Lenin's material (object) viewpoint does not include these contents, thus through combining Engels’s logic and Lenin's viewpoint, a new viewpoint of material (object) should be set up. If you want to know these contents, please read our new papers Basic Form of Material and Human Physiological-Psychological Movement. Akim Aini{1}: Agricultural Bank of China Limited, Urumqi, Xinjiang Construction Road Branch. <2>Azguly Keyum{ xinjiang yinduolan uygur pharmaceutical co ,ltd》
Adviser: Wuper Yunus, director and chairman of Board of the Xinjiang Modern Occupational Technology College, associate professor
:Abdurousuli Keqike Ahong, deputy managing editor of Xinjiang University Academic Journal and associate professor
Turdi Wumer, PhD and researcher from Research Institute of Physics of Xinjiang Academy of ScienceGLOBAL RESEARCH JOURNAL ON MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE EDUCATION.ISSN 2278 – 0769
a peer reviewed journal.
Skip to content
Home
About GRJMSE
Advisory Board
Contact Us
Editorial Board
Guidelinces for Reviewers
Guidelines for Authors
Journals
TCFMER
Volumes
Search Results for: Cambridge University Is the Second Ancient Rome Vatican Curia of the Scientific Community
VI-N2
Posted on December 24, 2012by gaaer
VOLUME I NUMBER II CONTENTS 1.Clearing the Path to Solving Equations:Analysis of current research and a framework proposal. … Continue reading →
| Leave a comment
窗体顶端
窗体底端
Archives
December 2012
September 2012
Meta
Register
Log in
GLOBAL RESEARCH JOURNAL ON MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE EDUCATION.ISSN 2278 – 0769
Theme: Twenty Ten Blog at WordPress.com.
Follow
Follow “GLOBAL RESEARCH JOURNAL ON MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE EDUCATION.ISSN 2278 – 0769”
窗体顶端
Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.
ئىگىسى: akim
يوللىغان ۋاقتى 2013-3-30 21:07:21
