What they call it a constant is not constant! | JamiiForums | The Home of Great Thinkers

# What they call it a constant is not constant!

Discussion in 'Jamii Intelligence' started by .Daniel., Feb 15, 2012.

1. ### .Daniel.Member

#1
Feb 15, 2012
Joined: Oct 19, 2011
Messages: 30
Trophy Points: 13
mara nyingi kwenye kusoma kwangu sayansi nimekutana na maneno,'assume other terms are constant'. kuna wakati i also assumed so as to proceed with my calculations, "fake calculations". siku moja nilipokuwa kwenye lecture ya fluid mechanics, lecturer aliandika formula hii; PV=nRT kisha ikafuatiwa na hii; PV/T= constant,mwanafunzi mmoja akauliza what is that constant? akajibiwa ni nR mwingine akauliza is that real constant? lecturer akasema; unajua sometimes we assume so as to simplify life! hahahaha

if you are intelligent enough utakubaliana na mimi there is no science without assumption and this is the weakness of science because those terms what they are calling them constants are not constant,they are always changing and affecting the results.

kuna Engineer mmoja nilikuwa naongea nae kuhusiana na suala hili la assumptions in science akaniambia kama watu wangekuwa wanajua assumptions made while designing aeroplane wasingepanda! nikamwambia they are moving with faith ndiyo maana wanapanda.hitimisho tulilofikia ni kuwa sayansi haina ukweli kwasababu haizingatii vigezo vyote,kwanza hawavijui vyote na kwa vile wanavyovijua wanashindwa kuvidhibiti because they are always changing na changamoto kubwa zaidi ni kuwa those factors are changing randomly, hii ina maana kuwa those factors will never be controlled and therefore science will never be real. science is all about probability!! never trust science,it is changing randomly.

fikiria hili 0-2 wanasema ni -2,swali unawezaje kutoa vitu kutoka sehemu ambayo havipo? kiuhalisia jibu ni kuwa haiwezekani!,jibu la -2 ni la kufikirika,ila jibu halisi ni kuwa haiwezekani.

"make assumptions to simplify life"

2. ### EiyerJF-Expert Member

#2
Feb 17, 2012
Joined: Apr 17, 2011
Messages: 28,238
Trophy Points: 280
Ewaaaa!Tupo sawa hapa!Nilishaacha kuamini blindly zamani sana,siamimi chochote mpaka aje wa kunithibishia hilo,siamini pia kwamba dunia ni ya mviringo,siamini kama dunia inalizunguka dunia!Ujingaeeeh!Ila kumbuka werevu na ujinga ni maneno tu,havipo!****** eti!Lakini pia ****** ndo msingi wa ujuzi!

3. ### KipimaPembeJF-Expert Member

#3
Feb 17, 2012
Joined: Aug 5, 2007
Messages: 1,287
Trophy Points: 145
Tatizo lako ni kuwa unafikiria Constant Maana yake ni namba isiyobadirika. Kuna constants kama PI ambazo hazibadiriki. Lakini katika milinganyo kama hiyo, constant ni namba ambayo kuwepo kwake hakuathiriwi na "variables" za mlinganyo wenyewe. Kwenye mlinganyo huo ulioutoa maana yake ni kuwa nR haiathiriwi kwa vyovyote vile na P, V na T.

Sasa tuje kwenye "assumptions". Nadhani unajidanganya kwa kusema eti kwa sababu kuna "assumptions" ndo maana huamini sayansi!!! Mhhh, hapo naona ajenda yako ni nyingine. Ungesema kuwepo kwa "assumptions" kunafanya vitu vishindikane!! Hapo ungeleleweka! Sasa ukiangalia mfano wa ndege ulioutoa na eti zimefanyika "assumptions" nyingi!! Ni kweli zimefanyika, je ndege hairuki na ikatua?? Ni mamilioni mangapi ya watu wanasafiri kila mwaka kwa kutumia ndege?

"Assumptions" ni vitu ambavyo madhara yake kwenye matokeo ya mwisho ni madogo mno pamoja na kuwa vipo. Nadhani "assumptions" zinaonesha ushindi zaidi kwa sayansi kuliko kushindwa. "Assumptions" zinaonesha kuwa yule anayezifanya anazijua kuwa zipo; zinaweza kuleta madhara katika mazingira fulani; ila katika jambo hilo hazina madhara. Kwa mfano unapojumlisha namba moja kubwa sana na namba moja ndogo sana, katika matumizi ya kawaida tunasema ile namba ndogo sana ni sifuri na hivyo mchango wake kwenye jumla nzima hauna maana (tunaupuuzia - neglect).

Kuzungumzia 0-2 na kupata -2 mbona hili ni jambo linaloelezeka kirahisi sana. -2 ni deni. Hiyo mbili umeikopa kutoka sehemu fulani ndo ukaiweka pale (ndo maana inabidi uweke - kumaanisha kuwa hii mbili imekopwa kutoka mahali). Pengine wewe ulisoma hesabu tu kama kasuku hukufundishwa matumizi ya mahesabu ndo maana unachanganywa na mambo yanayoelezeka kirahisi mno. Ni kweli kuwa waalimu wengi huwa wanapofundisha hawayaweki mambo haya katika "context", kwa hiyo, "casual learner" unaona kama unafanyiwa mazingaombwe au viinimacho. Hapana, si viinimacho hivyo!!

4. ### AnheuserJF-Expert Member

#4
Feb 17, 2012
Joined: Mar 23, 2011
Messages: 1,962
Trophy Points: 145
Lakini Mkubwa, sheria yenyewe yenye hiyo "constant" nR hata wenyewe wanaiita sheria ya kufikirika tu, ideal gas law, inafanya kazi kwenye ideal conditions tu, yani gesi hiyo molecules zake zinagongana perfectly elastically na hakuna intermolecular forces zozote baina yao, kitu ambacho si kweli.

"The ideal gas law is the equation of state of a hypothetical ideal gas. It is a good approximation to the behavior of many gases under many conditions, although it has several limitations." Wikipedia.

Kwa hiyo mshikaji is right kuhusu assumptions zinazotumika kurusha ndege, ndege inaruka kwa misingi ya masheria ya hewa na vimiminika, fluid dynamics, including sheria za PV=nRT ambazo ni approximations tu.

5. ### MzuvendiJF-Expert Member

#5
Feb 17, 2012
Joined: Apr 28, 2009
Messages: 436
Trophy Points: 35
Wow,

I guess if majority of Tanzanian engieers and scientists continue to think like this, the country has a long way to go. In school we learn ideal models, abstract models, or analytical models. However, in real life other factors play signifacant roles and here is where the assumptions and constants came into usage.

Take for example, free fall of objects. In a classroom, expect the teacher to take an ideal case which is the motion of a body where gravity is the only force acting upon it. However, if you are an engineer working in a parachute factory, you will have to take other factors such as air resistance, the material of the parachute, and many other things.

6. ### KipimaPembeJF-Expert Member

#6
Feb 18, 2012
Joined: Aug 5, 2007
Messages: 1,287
Trophy Points: 145
Sasa mbona tunakubaliana. Umeshasema kuwa equation ile ni "good approximation!!". Maana yake ni kuwa katika matumizi halisi (practical applications) madhara ya migongano kutokuwa "perfectly elastic", madhara ya "intramolecular forces", madhara ya hivyo vitu vingine vyote ni madogo tu. Hapo ndo maana ya approximations.

Tunatengeneza hypothetical ideal gas ili tuweze kutumia milinganyo kukokotoa matokeo fulani fulani. Ndiyo maana inabidi ukokotoaji huo ufuatwe na majaribio halisi. Majaribio hayo huthibitisha kuwa madhara ya vitu vile tulivyovipuuzia kwenye milinganyo ni madogo mno kwenye tokeo la mwisho. Tukishajiridhisha hivyo kwa kufanya majaribio ya kutosha na kulinganisha na matokeo ya kimahesabu ndio maana inawezekana watu kujua hata kiwango cha kosa (Margin of error). Kutokana na kujua kiwango cha kosa, kwenye matumizi halisi (practical application), Callibration hufanyika ili kuondoa kosa hilo.

Ndugu yangu, ndo maana watu walikwenda kwenye mwezi na wakarudi salama. Ingekuwa "approximations" maana yake ni uongo matokeo yake ungeyaona. Ndo uzuri wa sayansi. Tena akija mtu mwingine akatumia milinganyo ile ile na kufanya "assumptions" zile zile, matokeo yake huwa ni yale yale. Hapa ndo tunasema sayansi ni "superior" kuliko maalifa mengine ambayo binadam ameshayapata.

Tatizo la maarifa mengine kama yale ya dini na ushirikina, au mazingaombwe; mtu mwingine hawezi kuiga ulichofanya wewe na akapata matokeo sawa. Kwenye dini mtu unaweza ukafanya yale yale aliyofanya mwenzio, yeye akafanikiwa, wewe ukashindwa; halafu mtu akasema aaaa si mapaenzi ya mungu!!!! Mungu huamua pale anapotaka!!!!! n.k. Inaonekana maarifa kuhusu mungu anataka nini na wakati gani hayatoshi na kilichobaki tunakuwa tunadanganyana tu!

Sayansi ni mwisho wa uongo. Approximations na assumptions kama zimekosewa, ni wazi kiwango cha kosa (error margin) kitakosewa. Kiwango cha kosa kikikosewa "callibration" ya kuondoa kosa hilo haitafanikiwa. Kosa lisipoondolewa, balaa litaonekana kwenye matokeo ya mwisho; yaani kama ni jengo litadondoka, kama ni ndege italipuka hewani au kuanguka, n.k. Uhandisi wote uliopo, tiba, n.k. vyote hutegemea approximations na assumptions. Ukiona hizo fani zinafanikiwa na kutoa matokeo halisi, ujue assumpitions na approximations ni halisi!!!

7. ### MbimbinhoJF-Expert Member

#7
Feb 18, 2012
Joined: Aug 1, 2009
Messages: 6,027
Trophy Points: 280

Pole sana asee, it seems Math with it's koligi walikutenda vibaya hadi ukaamua "Kuassume" kuwa they ain't real, mbaya zaidi "Ukaassume" kuwa wherever the side you went were safe, Ain't blaming you hence your "assumptions" made you who really are today:lol:

8. ### .Daniel.Member

#8
Feb 21, 2012
Joined: Oct 19, 2011
Messages: 30
Trophy Points: 13
hujanielewa kwa kuwa umeathirika na elimu ya kufikirika.kusema nR haiathiriwi kwa vyovyote na P,V or T ni kujidanganya sana,kama haviathiriani visingekuwa na uhusiano,nakushauri tafakari upya bila kufungwa na written documents za wanasayansi,read in details hizo factors sambamba na n,R.utauna vinavyoathiriana, hakuna kilicho constant

coming to PI nianze hivi;kuna mwanafalsaya mmoja aliwahi kusema matatizo yaliyopo duniani hayawezi kuisha kwakuwa wakati wa kuyatatua watatuzi wanajikuta kuwa ni sehemu ya matatizo.ni dhahiri umeamua kuiamini sayansi bila kujua misingi yake,nini hasa kipo ndani yake.mfano uliyoutoa kwamba PI ni constant you are very wrong,nakushauri akili za wengine changanya na zakwako.PI is not constant,kaangalie how PI were derived na hii pia ni kwa formula zote,if you analyse them critically utagundua wakati wa kuzipata hizo mnazoziita constant kuna some parameters which are not constant but assumed constant,huu ni ubatili.ni sawa na TANESCO kuwalipa kihalali DOWANS kwa mkataba fake wa RICHMOND.na unapoongelea PI unaibua hoja ya msingi inayodhihirisha kushindwa kwa sayansi,ni hiki kitu wanakiita 'infinity' hebu gawanya 22 kwa 7 halafu unipe jawabu kamili.

hakuna mtu mwenye uwezo wa kufanya chochote kuwa constant.hakuna mtu mwenye uwezo wa kudhibiti all factors afecting his/her results.narudia kusema,"what they are calling it constant is not constant".A well recognized genius Albert Einstern ambaye nahisi ni scientist mzuri kuliko wewe,hisia zangu ni kutokana na majibu yako ya hovyo hovyo,wakati Einstern anafanya analysis zake about subatomic particles,about energy!, alikwamia hapo.alipoona things are moving randomly na hakuna mtu mwenye uwezo wa kuvidhibiti, he came to conclusion kwamba 'things were as they were because of ALMIGHTY GOD' na ili asionekane yupo biased akasema or any name you can call the source.kwangu jina hilo ni MUNGU.Ni MUNGU tu ndiye mwenye uwezo wa kudhibiti vyote,yupo above the nature.

umekubali kuwa assumptions zina madhara kwenye matokeo,japo madhara hayo umeyaita madogo kwa upeo wako,disasters zote unazoziona zinatokeo zinathibitisha kushindwa kwa sayansi,ni matokeo ya kushindwa kudhibiti some factors and they will never control them because they are changing randomly,tutaendelea kufanya assumption kwa ajili ya kujiridhisha lakini hatuna majibu ya mwisho.kusema assumptions ni ushindi kwa sayansi ni mtazamo finyu sana,ushindi wa sayansi ni pale tu watakapoweza kudhibiti all factors affecting their results,watakapoweza kuidhibiti infinity.ndege inaporuka kuna assumption zimefanywa na inapoanguka ni matokeo ya assumptions hizo,this is a failure of science.

about 0-2 napo hujanielewa,nimesema huwezi kutoa vitu mahali ambapo havipo,hiyo haiwezekani.unajibu hoja bila kutafakari,inaelekea kwako kila unachofundishwa darasani ni sahihi ilimradi aliyekuambia ni mwalimu wako,habari za madeni zinatoka wapi? hayo ndiyo mambo ya kufikirika ninayoyazungumzia.swali ni 0-2.huwezi kunidai kama sina kitu chako,huo ni ubatili.nipe halafu unidai, iwe hivi 0+2-2.kunidai ndiyo unipe,yaani 0-2+2 ni usanii,ni uchizi, na ukija kunidai zaidi ya kile chako nilichonacho ni ubatili vile vile.

mkuu,come out of the box! you have a free mind,think critically.wakati unaendelea kubishana na mimi huku unatumia dhana za watu wengine bila kuzipima kwa kina (kama uwezo wa kuzipima unao) huku unasema naona mazingaombe,tafakari the following nonsense; 0!=1! but 0 is not equal to 1,.narudia kusema ni ubatili mtupu.

jibu hili ni kwa wote wenye mtazamo kama wako.

9. ### KipimaPembeJF-Expert Member

#9
Feb 22, 2012
Joined: Aug 5, 2007
Messages: 1,287
Trophy Points: 145

10. ### .Daniel.Member

#10
Feb 23, 2012
Joined: Oct 19, 2011
Messages: 30
Trophy Points: 13
Tafakari the following nonsense with your mathematics teachers; 0!=1!,but 0 is not equal to 1.

11. ### HP1JF-Expert Member

#11
Feb 23, 2012
Joined: Feb 4, 2012
Messages: 3,353
Trophy Points: 145
Assumptions lazima ziwepo na zinafanya kazi. Yupo mtu ambaye anajua physics aliweza kutembea juu ya maji. Mwingine alivyoona hivyo akakurupuka kumfata akaanza kuzama na kuomba msaada ili aokolewe. Hakujua mwnzie aliweka assumptions na kuweka kila kitu constant, isipokuwa that force on the water surface that when not disturbed one can freely walk on the water surface

12. ### .Daniel.Member

#12
Feb 24, 2012
Joined: Oct 19, 2011
Messages: 30
Trophy Points: 13
ni kweli scientific assumptions zitaendelea kuwepo because kuna factors ambazo scientist can not control them.kuhusu kutembea juu ya maji,I guess you are talking the story of JESUS CHRIST,if my guess is correct sina tatizo na story yenyewe,ila napenda niboreshe lugha ili kuondoa missleading words.The truth is this;YESU KRISTO NI BWANA!,haassume any factor kuwa constant na wala hashughuliki nazo kuvifanya kuwa constant ili afanya analotaka,ila vyenyewe vinalazimika kuwa ili kutimiza matakwa yake.yeye ni master of nature akisema upepo tulia unatulia na wote wanaona umetulia na unakuwa umetulia kweli, lakini mwanasayansi na assumptions zake akiuona upepo unavuma kwa kasi atasubiri kuona itaanguka nyumba nzima au yataezuliwa mabati tu ili arudie kuyaezeka.my concern is this;MUNGU HAFANYI ASSUMPTIONS KUPATA ANACHOTAKA,AKISEMA INAKUWA.KWAKE HAKUNA LIMITATIONS
IN SCIENCE THERE ARE LIMITATIONS BUT NOT TO ALMIGHTY GOD,MUNGU YUPO JUU YA VYOTE.

13. ### dav22JF-Expert Member

#13
Feb 24, 2012
Joined: Feb 22, 2012
Messages: 1,902
Trophy Points: 145
I guess kijana masuala ya class yamekuzingua ukaja pata usaidizi hapa jamvini.....anywe katika sayansi assumptions are part and parcel katika almost 99% percent of any think you can think of in science

14. ### AnheuserJF-Expert Member

#14
Feb 25, 2012
Joined: Mar 23, 2011
Messages: 1,962
Trophy Points: 145
Wewe unanambia mimi madarasa yamenizingua wakati mtu mwenyewe huwezi hata kuandika neno 'anyway'?

"99% percent" ndio nini we kilaza mkubwa?!

15. ### Nkwesa MakamboJF-Expert Member

#15
Feb 29, 2012
Joined: Aug 26, 2011
Messages: 4,765
Trophy Points: 0
That being the case is science really real or ? Hapa thread zitajaa tu bila makubaliano,sababu kubwa ni kwamba kwa wengi kukubali ukweli kwamba science imejaa fix ni ngumu mno,wanatembea vifua mbele kwa kujiamininsha kuwa wao ni mabingwa wa kila kitu kwa kuwa ni wasomi wa sayansi, sasa uwaambie walikuwa bize na kusoma fix,hapata tosha...

16. ### KirangaJF-Expert Member

#16
Feb 29, 2012
Joined: Jan 29, 2009
Messages: 34,606
Trophy Points: 280
Is the speed of light in a vacuum (c) a constant or not?

17. ### Nkwesa MakamboJF-Expert Member

#17
Feb 29, 2012
Joined: Aug 26, 2011
Messages: 4,765
Trophy Points: 0
Dhana ya CONSTANT ni muhimu sana kwa watu wanaokariri,ukianza kutafakari tu,CONSTANT ni uzushi kweupe,wanasayansi wengi sana walitumia Constant ili kufikia hitimisho ya kile ambacho wameshindwa kukitambua kutokana na mapungufu ya kibinadam, Kama wahasibu vile,trial balance ikigoma unaweka balancing figure, kwa kuweka suspense akaunti,wakati wahasibu wanakuwa na kibarua cha kuondoa hiyo balancing figure,wanasayansi wanakomea hapoooooooooo hapo. Na wengine huendeleza utafiti kwaanzia na fix husika na kwenda mbele,huku wakitegemea peer review,kwa miaka mingi sana mwanafizikia Isaac Newton kwa kutumia sayansi hiyo hiyo aliupiga fix ulimwengu,na kwa kuwa wengi sayansi ni kukariri kwa kwenda mbele,baada ya kuoneshwa mapungufu ya kazi nyingi za Newton baadala ya kufunguka na kuona Fix zilivyonyingi kwenye sayansi ndio wanajikita kueneza imani kwa sayansi ndiyo mwake kila kitu kiko waaaah.

18. ### ZakumiJF-Expert Member

#18
Feb 29, 2012
Joined: Sep 24, 2008
Messages: 4,817
Trophy Points: 180
Shule gani Mwenzetu ulikwenda na sisi tupeleke watoto wetu huko. Shule tulizosoma Constants zote tulipewa kwenye tables na kulikuwa hakuna sababu ya kukariri.

19. ### KibiriziJF-Expert Member

#19
Mar 4, 2012
Joined: Feb 19, 2011
Messages: 602
Trophy Points: 35
Du watu wote wangekuwa kama wewe sijuia dunia ingekuwepo wapi, lakini mimi ninachojua hizo constant ndio zinafunya tu-enjoy maisha ikiwa pamoja wewe hii haina ubishi, bila shaka unatumia TV, Computer, Simu, upo ndani ya nyumba, unapanda gari, unakaa kwenye kiti, unatumia kadi ya ATM, unatumia fredge kama si maji ya baridi, unavaa nguo, unatumia mafuta kama si perfume n.k hivyo vyote vimetengenezwa na assumptions, approximation na constants za kumwaga kama kweli haukubaliani na hii kitu acha kuvitumia kwanza tuone hata kama jf tutakuona kwanza hata mawazo yako tusingeyajua, lakini vile vile argument zako zimejikita kama kwa mawazo ya kidato cha sita failure, sijaona argument za ki-intelectual, lakini wahenga husema ' dont argue with fool people may not notice the difference' sijasikia ukizungumzia manning eqn, dacrs eqn lunge kuta eqn n.k, go back to school. Wewe kama unapinga you have to prove mathematically and not otherwise, telling us merely story.

20. ### ceekayJF-Expert Member

#20
Mar 6, 2012
Joined: Dec 22, 2011
Messages: 378