How does Prince William make himself king- the only qualification he needs is to be alive when the previous monarch dies and he has control over neither.
I read a thread about this already, and it was closed after 4 posts as the poster felt the answer was satisfactory. I would like to point out that in fact the answer was the reverse of the actual meanings.
Although the words are used interchangeably all the time, there is a definite difference.
Fate is a religious term (or spiritual, not necessarily organized and defined by any church) and means that an event or person is a prisoner to it, everything is predetermined. If you have a particular fate, nothing can change it, everything you do is part of that fate. Even if you find out about that fate (which you cannot), that itself was in your fate. It is unchangeable, the opposite of free will.
Destiny on the other hand is something that one makes for myself, or declares to oneself once achieving some goal. For example, one can say "I'm destined to become the best fighter in the world", and then work on it to make it so, destiny has far more in common with a goal than fate. Once the person becomes a great fighter, he/she would say, "I was destined to be the best, nothing could stop me". That being said, if such a thing as fate existed, and this same person was fated to become the best fighter in the world, it would happen no matter what actions the person takes, but these actions are ultimately predetermined already in order to make the end event happen, this person may never think about fighting but find himself being the best after 10 years of cause and effect (which is also the case in destiny, but no predetermined).
Fate is like luck, it doesn't exist, but it makes people feel better about certain things. Like if you drink and drive and have an accident and kill your friend yet you survive, you could console or destroy yourself by saying it was fate, some deity or powerful entity controls events and this was supposed to happen, and from that you can either pick yourself up and redeem yourself or go into self destructive behaviour, but either way you're subject to fate if that is what you believe, no matter if it exists or not. But you would never say it was destiny in order to feel better, you may say that because you drink and drive and know that eventually this was going to happen, so you were destined to get in an accident. You create your destiny, fate is something that is only meaningful to those who believe in such things.
Another example is Prince William, he is destined to become King due to his bloodline and because he's young and second in line, but this may not happen, and if it doesn't due to some tragedy, many people may say "it was fate" for obvious reasons.
In simple terms, fate is a belief system that we're puppets to a grand plan and design and have no free will, and destiny is a personal or group journey, and is changed to suite whatever purpose whenever it needs to be.
Most religions have both free will and fate intertwined in their sacred texts, but the paradox is fine, even the universe itself has this paradox. As an astrophysicist, it is still an incredible thing that this paradox is very real, everything that happens is due to very specific variables and is predetermined, but at the same time even the most tiny of particles can escape this rule via quantum events, let alone conscious life forms like ourselves (we are also subject to quantum effects, however small and un-noticed), so we live in both an universe of fate and free will, and they are indeed the same thing (however this is not a religious concept, but rather a scientific one, so perhaps a better term than "fate" is needed)
How does Prince William make himself king- the only qualification he needs is to be alive when the previous monarch dies and he has control over neither.
Sorry if you misunderstood and took my message to mean that destiny is made, not at all, it is just one part of it, destiny is not written in stone, that is all that I meant, it is either something that you set for yourself and call it that and work hard for it, and if achievement happens, you call it destiny. For example, look at tennis/hockey players vs football/basketball players (not all of course, just a higher percentage in each).
The former, like Gretzky or Djokovic may say they were destined to become the greatest because of their parents, practice, genes, hard work, the times, the people around them etc. Novak's father may have said to him "You're fated to be the greatest" due to his strong religious conviction but Novak would be quick to correct and say "I was destined to be the greatest", as it was easy to see he had incredible talent, and it would only take practice and the right people to make it so from the very early age. Same could be said of Gretzky who thanks everyone for his destiny, but not any deity (even if he does believe in any)
The latter usually use fate, God did it all for them, there was no chance for anyone else, no choice in the matter, they are the greatest because fate deemed it so, God decided it was to be. Boxers are usually like this as well, training and coaches and constant sweating didn't do it, it was God's will.
That is the basic difference between the two. Why an athlete would thank a deity before coaches, friends, family, hard work etc. is beyond me, sometimes omitting everything but the deities, I find it repulsive, but I don't judge, they were DESTINED to be like that due to their upbringing, always told that every success is due to a deities pleasure and failure due to a punishment. When instilled with some ideas at a young age, and also being impressionable at the same time, it is almost impossible for an average person to overcome this.
That is also why atheists don't have a problem with the word "destiny", whereas they would never use "fate".
I know what human destiny is, what our future destiny is, what posterity will experience, but that doesn't mean it will happen. Forty years ago nobody would doubt this destiny, at least not those who understand our place in the universe and also understand that we're both incredibly tiny/insignificant and splendid/unique/incredible at the same time, as individuals more-so than as a species, which could account for the stall in our advancement. Since the 60s we haven't invented anything, only improved on things and made them smaller, everything that we have today is from the 50s and 60s, albeit small and efficient etc. But new? Like the transistor was new, or laser, or plasma, or LCD, or MRI, etc. etc., all very old inventions improved. I challenge you to give me a real invention after, say, 1975, and a new fruit juicer doesn't count, lol.
However, today hardly anyone would agree with it, this destiny, as they see what is happening in the world and how it has changed, how it's degenerating into a two class global society with no republican principals (don't mistake this with the U.S. party of the same name, I mean the "republic" as a means of government), but corporatism (aka fascism) principles instead, with government and huge corporations coming together and ruling the masses. Eventually this will be overthrown, but since scientific advancement has stalled, will it be overthrown before it's too late? Will it take thousands of years in which time a supervulcano or meteor could wipe us out because we did not invest our energy and resources in science?
This is an example, but also a topic in itself.
The destiny I'm speaking of is similar to that of all freethinkers, scientists, intellectuals and pretty much any knowledgeable person (not judging, if your knowledge is limited, how can you form such an opinion, it's just a fact). First space and the solar system, then going to the stars, surviving Earth's periodic cataclysmic events and evolving, on different outposts/worlds, each posterity different, eventually biologically and technologically to the point that humanity will split into several different species altogether, this is inevitable to the point of "fate" if our destiny comes to fruition. The first of these already started, but was stalled completely, and now stopped, we have not even gone past our atmosphere since the 70s, and robots have gone only as far as a few million km. If we continued at the pace of the 60s, we would survive a meteor strike today already, and be able to rebuild, but we can no longer do that now.
If not, well, we've only been on Earth for a blink of an eye, most species in the past survived longer but did not survive indefinitely, and this will happen to us if we do not pursue this destiny. Dinosaurs ruled 100x longer than we have been around, if you count when we were still proto-human, barely resembling our current selves, a million and a half years before we were even cavemen. If you count the way we are now, than dinosaurs were here 1000x longer, and they were all gone in a blink of an eye. We have a chance to realize this destiny, the only destiny that makes any sense, the actual purpose of life besides eating, sleeping and reproducing, in other words, surviving ad infinitum, and the only way that can happen is via controlling our environment first, and spreading out second (don't worry, even if you think we're a plague on the Earth, our spread can hardly be counted as anything but a drop of water in the Pacific, even after thousands or millions of years we would hardly encounter or settle even 0.00000000000001% of the available resources in our galaxy alone, let alone the universe, lol).
Sorry, I'm an astrophysicist, and it's also a passion, that is why I used this example, but history and politics and current affairs and the new world order are also passions of mine, in other words, knowledge is a passion of mine, so don't alarm yourself, I know nobody will read this anyway, people don't have the attention span to get to this last sentence.
With your idea that we are slowing down from the sixties, that is one way of looking at it, but there are other ways- one of the greatest generators, if not the greatest, of economic growth in developing countries has been the mobile phone, which has enabled rural areas in developing countries to tap into new technologies. This may not be as sexy as flying to the moon, but is of great importance.
PS, please go easy on the political elements, as we don't allow political discussions as they often end up in rows. Thanks.
Yes, that is exactly my point. We have made the old technology so useful and mobile that we're slaves to it, cell phones are based on the same technology from the 60s, even the brand new screens are from that era, just now they are mass produced and affordable. Yes, they have changed the world, but I'm talking invention. Where is the replacement for the transistor? Like perhaps a organically (carbon) based chip. Where are self replicating nano robots with their own intellect for medicine? Even that is based on 60s tech but at least it would be a worthy invention. Why do you think the single core speed of chips was replaced by multi-core? Because no matter what, you cannot get a Terahertz out of a single core, but you can via multithreading and 200 5GHz cores. SSD? Again, even older than plasma. Ask people how old they think plasma tv tech is, most will say 10 years, yet it's over 50 years old, and was even used for the same purpose, albeit only as prototypes. Liquid Crystals? 60s. Lasers? same. Remote controls IR and RF, same. Wireless anything, same. They even had wireless power like I will explain via Tesla patents, but of course they burried that, the oil industry must thrive, the military industrial complex is more important, fighting over resources is more important than having enough resources for everyone. It's not enough to have everything, you must have more than the other guy, that is the philosophy today.
Most people think the last 50 years was the greatest leap forward, but in fact there is no leap at all. If I had to use a 100 year period which represents the greatest leap, I would say 1870-1970, everything that happened, happened in that 100 years, you could start earlier then 1870, but after 1970? DNA perhaps, but that was only due to lack of a poweful enough microscope which was already 50 years old then, and they already knew about it through theory.
There is a perfectly good explanation for this however. The transistor of course. To this day there is no proof of how exactly it was "discovered". When it was released, they said they've worked on it for years, but no data was given. When asked about the inventor, he could not explain how it works, what makes it so incredible, only what it does. What did Einstein say about it? He said the transistor is a leap like going from bows and arrows to fully automatic machine guns in one day, he called it technology that should theoretically be at least 100 years in the future (from then). We went from all mechanical, tubes etc, to the transistor in a heart-beat, and ever since then, all has been based on this. So perhaps we really aren't capable of it's replacement, since we're still figuring out all it's uses. Bell Labs says they created it, but will not release how, they won't release who, have no paperwork, there was no word about it until it was unveiled, and when it was, they didn't have a clue yet what it could be used for, they just said it was going to change the world, but they are still figuring it out. So they invent something they don't know the purpose of? Hmm.
What good is miniaturization if it's only used to continue the status quo, to keep people in check. I mean people have far less free time today, far more stress, yet this technology was supposed to free us from the cycle of sleep,eat,reproduce and make us free to pursue our passions. But even great minds cannot do this, as they are too busy lobbying or worried about their next pay, so they work on putting more transistors on a die, rather than working on new research.
I mean, think about it, we still cut people open for simple operations in hospitals, people still die due to simple complications.
Watch any science documentary from the 50s or 60s and hear the opinions of great minds. What were they expecting by the year 2000? Yes, they may be amazed at video calling and the capabilities of smart phones, but what they would notice most is that nothing changed except that people work more, have no time for any happiness, family, have constant stress, are drugged as a daily helper by various prescription drugs, and the best of the best work for the military or are clamped down. I read scientific journals, there are ideas about controlled fusion, there are ideas about ion drives and long range space exploration, there are plenty of ideas to make the world not only a better place, but an easy place to live, a happy place. The great minds of the 60s, the dreamers and scientists and philosophers, they would be disgusted. Don't even mention Orwel, he would marvel how wrong he got it, the situation is far worse than he ever imagined in his book 1984. His greatest prediction was about friends and enemies and the public reaction to each. An enemy yesterday is deemed a friend today, and the public is told "They were always our friend" and they forget. A friend yesterday deemed an enemy today, similarily, has "always" been an enemy, history is changed to suit the needs of big brother.
Ask yourself why out of the over 800 patents that Nicola Tesla (one of the top 5 minds of all time) has, only 20% are public and the rest locked in some vault under some mountain, perhaps not even worked on? Explain how it is that he showed us how to use either the Earth or the atmosphere (energy is everywhere, each cubic centimeter in the atmosphere itself has enough energy to power everything in your home) as an unlimited power source, but we still burn coal and oil polluting our air.
Explain why we have forgotten about real environmental issues like pollution, waste, toxicity, and why the powerful have hijacked the environmental movement to worry about an issue which, even if true (which it isn't), we couldn't do anything about anyway? I cannot call myself an environmentalist today because people will misunderstand and think I'm talking about global warming or CO2. So real environmentalists either have to take the word back, or create a new one. The purpose of the hijack was not only money to be made from various greenhouse taxes, eventually a tax on breathing, but also to take peoples mind off real issues like I mentioned above. Ah, forget about that oil spill, its global warming we have to worry about, who cares if an entire eco-system was destroyed, the company tried it's best. Ah, forget that 40,000 people die in NY state alone yearly due to air pollution, from sulphurs and mercury in food products, babies aborted due to the same, it's global warming that's the problem (when in fact it's the solution to all humanities problems, I hope with all my heart the globe warms considerably, the alternative is too terrible to contiplate at all)
Einstein, Tesla, Faraday, Maxwell, these people would shutter at the thought that money rules all, their work meant more to them than anything, and as long as they had backing and enough for research, they were happy. So, ask yourself, are there no more people like this? Of course there are, but why are they working for cell phone companies and google? It's not the money, genius usually doesn't care much about that, work is far more important, so ask yourself what could make them drop their dreams and work in a dead-end great-paying job making smaller chips for a faster cell phone? What is stopping them from making Tesla's free energy available now?
Why are people like Ed Witten not in the paper every day? Why does nobody know this person, a mind so great that he makes Einstein look like a highschool mathematician. Why are people more interested in the latest gossip than great achievements? Is it coincidence? We're the same people that only 50 years ago read the paper daily with great awe for any new scientific news, now there isn't even a science section in any local or national newspaper anywhere. Coincidence again?
More in next message, it won't let me post..
Did you watch tv on the morning of 9/11/2012? This is the answer to the above. People with knowledge and understanding are so few that they can be drowned out. I knew as I was watching what was happening, a great American action production (albeit with major flaws, they should have gotten a Hollywood pro), all with heroes and villains and explosions and panic and a great music score and the president and mayor to the rescue, one coordinating, the other on the ground with the civilians, interviews with perfect answers (I'll never forget the guy on Fox being interviewed saying what happened and saying he was at ground zero, and while you see people running behind him all covered in dust, he is clean like he just climbed out of the shower, dressed in suit and tie, and forgetting to take his media badge off, turns out he worked for Fox). He had all the answers, even the "they hate us for our freedom", he knew it was a terror attack but the CIA did not, lol. A guy on the street. This person was never seen again for any interview, he denies all invitations (he needs to answer how is it that he told us the hypothesis of the collapse hours before it was told to us by "experts", even though no building in history has ever collapsed in any fashion, let alone in its own footprint, due to fire, even though he apparently knew the buildings were built to withstand 20 Jumbojets crashing into it at the same time, even though only a few weeks before a huge highrise burned for weeks in Brazil, the whole thing, not just a few floors, an inferno so insane that they gave up all attempts to put it out, and it's still standing today. That building was full of chemicals and offices with all combustibles, explaining why it burned completely, but it never even came close to any sort of a collapse, and on the news that night the person explained that high-rises cannot collapse due to fire, ever, simply because no fire short of carefully prepared ultra-hot fire using exotic chemicals can weaken re-enforced steel/concrete to such an extent that collapse would happen, but even that takes a long time and the collapse is completely uneven. Not to mention us being told about the fuel and how hot it was, even though we all saw the explosion and the fireball that went outside the building, never coming near the centre columns. Nevermind that as we were told about the incredible heat, we were watching people waving from the burned impact, with black smoke. How is that, were those super humans? Supermen maybe, a lot of them, and they flew too! We got to see that too, and at least that was in real time, not slow motion.
And he even Whatever happened to Hurricane Erin? For three days the news was all about how NYers should prepare for a disaster due to Hurricane Erin coming up the coast, but no mention of it on the morning of 9/11, and most people forgot all about it. But like I said, an educated thinking person could have seen some truth right away just by watching the broadcasts, and come to a simple conclusion just a few hours later, either with the incredible speed with which the 18 evildoers showed up on our screens (on the same day), or just by taking the 5 live feeds (5 channels broadcasted that day) and compare them to each other. But how many people bothered? Why would they, since nothing seemed wrong to them while watching the "live" feed on one of the channels and listening to repeated words over and over and over.
Why am I writing this? Only to show the purpose behind the stall of our destiny, the change of it from what people dreamed about in the 20th century, full of hope and excitement and exploration, to what people do today, just get information and process it, not filtering it at all, not getting any knowledge, no understanding, just useless information and reports carefully prepared for them. Destiny of humanity is on its way to being changed, but lets not let it.
Does anyone dream anymore? The only hope I have now is the rest of the world, Russia and China and India specifically. The west is lost, we're doomed unless we take back the republic, but unfortunately I fear revolution is the only way, who knows how much of the army will fire on their own civilians. If they refuse, we win, if they do it, we're truly lost. We should have impeached Obama after 1 year, Bush after 1 year. Bush was the worst president ever, and I couldn't imagine anything that could come close, until Obama came along, man, this guy makes Bush look almost good, both morally and presidentially. Obama is insane, it's that simple, and I mean that in medical terms, he is truly insane and a true sociopath, to draw a parallel, he's not quite Caligula, but he's Nero to a tea, and may even style himself after Nero. You could see the unease in Bush as 9/11 was happening. Foreknowledge or not, he was not happy with the situation, but presidents are puppets as we all know, and he had his part to play, but if it was Obama in his shoes, I can almost see a smirk on his face, like he loves it, wants more of it, insane. The point of course is the destruction of America, the last beacon of liberty in the world (albeit very little remains, but as long as we do not let them destroy the constitution, there is hope). Bush and the neo-cons plan was to distabalize the middle east and take over, but the people behind Obama are the other elite group, the one that wants to start a war between Russia and China, through Israel, a nuclear war. Bush and his team, his handlers, his puppet masters, never had that in mind. Mr Zbigniew Brzezinski, the puppet master of Obama, has only total destruction of all nation states in mind, and Obama is the perfect man to make it go into full new world order and globalization, one world government mode. He peddles to all sides, makes promises, and agitates enemies and friends of America all the same. To build something new, you must first destroy it, especially the powerful nation states such as America, Russia, China, Japan, Germany and India. None of these countries can be destroyed even if the whole world went against them, but if you pit them against each other, well... The USA is Obamas number one enemy, he hates this country with a passion, but the rest I listed are not far behind.
The world can be easily fixed, in a heart beat. All that needs to be done is simply two things. One, return to the American Credit System as far as currency is concerned, in other words, real economy, not a fake one like we have today where money is created through debt, and private banks can give you money out of thin air and then demand interest, lol, what a great ploy. The rest of the world would quickly follow and abandon the British Empire Monetary System which rules 99% of the world today (any country who has tried the American system has prospered immediately, but just as immediately was deemed a terror state and destroyed, ie. Iraq. Iran is a holdout still, but how long, I hope for ever). Two, return to the founding fathers libertarian way of governing, respecting the constitution to it's fullest, and implement laissez faire capitalism as defined in the constitution. And perhaps three, immediately revoke the right of a corporation to be a person. This is another way we were fooled. People wanted to sue, but a corporations couldn't be sued and too many people were present, so who to sue if you were burned or whatever in a chain restaurant. Corporations have been trying at that point to get personhood status for ever, and this was perfect. The fought against it, pretended it was horrible, it would destroy them if they were deemed a person, so of course it happened. Sometimes I really think people get what they deserve, and if slavery is what they want, they deserve it. So, now that a corporation is a person, all kinds of doors opened. Before, if you wanted a loan, you went to the bank and said you want it for something in your company, and you put your assets etc as collateral, one person. Now, the whole corporation, everything it ownes, all people in it, is one entity, legally a person, meaning there is absolutely no limit to it's power. No loan rejected, no proposal rejected, they got what they wanted. This is the exact opposite of capitalism, it is corporatism, or fascism, whichever term you prefer, and it is the system which we live under, and we must overthrow it. The elite pulled the same trick many times, making hemp illegal, or more importantly, the Federal Reserve Act, again they acted as if it's going to destroy them, fought against it publicly, all the while they are the ones who wrote it, in its entirety. Naturally, it was also accepted as the people thought if the bankers don't like it, it must be good. Oh the sheeple, when will you awaken. America the great has to return (and I'm a Canadian!). Where is the America that kids from other countries dreamed about just 30 years ago? Yes, it was already completely corrupt then, but at least not in the open, it was all under cover, now the power behind the curtain is so confident it doesn't even care what the public knows, they know the public has no attention span.
Again, I overextended myself, sorry about that.
Look up the definition of conspiracy if you don't know or if you think it has negative connotations. Conspiracy is simply more than one person conspiring to make something happen, it doesn't even have to be bad, or untrue. So, think of a conspiracy theorist not like the media does, but simply as a truth seeker, a person who wants to get to the bottom of something using facts rather than believing the media simply because it's reported. I think you know why I included this paragraph at the end.
What's wrong with this site, I had part one posted, under 10000 characters, and now it's gone, part 2 is not going to make sense without part one, part one was all about your post.. Oh well, I give up.
Basically, I talked about technology, how people changed over time, by design, it had nothing to do with politics or economics, the second part was meant as a sort of fix-it and explanation. Argh. WTF!