niels bohrs

We can admittedly find nothing in physics or chemistry that has even a remote bearing on consciousness. Yet all of us know that there is such a thing as consciousness, simply because we have it ourselves. Hence consciousness must be part of nature, or, more generally, of reality, which means that, quite apart from the laws of physics and chemistry, as laid down in quantum theory, we must also consider laws of quite a different kind. ~ Niels Bohr

The Sealand Skull, according to individuals who have examined it say it could have belonged to an extraterrestrial being. The skull does not match any known species on planet Earth. It is one of the most controversial artifacts discovered in recent years. The Sealand Skull has raised numerous questions that science cannot find an answer to.

The Sealand skull was discovered in 2007 in Olstykke, Denmark by workers who were replacing sewer pipes. Until recently, nobody seemed interested in this finding. It was in 2010 that the skull was first examined at the College of Veterinary Medicine in Denmark. The researchers concluded that they were not able to solve the mystery nor provide anything that would explain to what species it belonged to. The skull was later sent to the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen. Carbon dating revealed that this mysterious being lived between 1200 and 1280 BC.

When compared to a normal human skull, the Sealand skull has several differences. For example, the eye sockets of the skull of Sealand are not only quite large but are also much deeper and more rounded. The eyes sockets of the Sealand skull seem to extend further to the sides. Examinations of this scull indicate that this being was most likely adapted to colder weather, the relative eye size also suggest it was a nocturnal creature, conditions that are found in space.

The images are really interesting and prove just how unusual the skull of Sealand really is. Even though the skull is similar to that of a human, there are still several differences that make it unique. More researches are leading towards the possibility that the Sealand skull belonged to an extraterrestrial being that lived on Earth. Other researchers suggest that it belonged to a lost and forgotten species of ancient humans, who were very different when compared to modern humans

INFJ Thinkers Say Things

sometimes you just need the dorky but sweet philosophers…

“As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being." 

- Carl Jung (can we call him daddy, or does that just feed Freud?)

"At last - a paradox! Now we are getting somewhere.”

- Niels Bohr (I just want to hug the little guy)

“Dogs are wise. They crawl away into a quiet corner and lick their wounds and do not rejoin the world until they are whole once more.”

- Agatha Christie (on how INFJ’s do while existential crisis-ing)

“I have labored carefully, not to mock or lament but to understand human actions.”

- Spinoza (Bertrand Russell literally called him adorable)

“I am a strange compound of weakness and resolution!”

- Mary Wollstonecraft (I have nothing snarky to say, I just love her)

Asked to select his choice of the greatest modern and future wonders, the electrical wizard refused to accept the popular notion of what is wonderful. His reply led to an onslaught on scientists and the popular science community.

“To the popular mind, any manifestation resulting from any cause will appear wonderful if there is no perceptible connection between cause and effect. For instance, through the means of wireless telephone speech is carried to opposite points of the globe. To the vast majority this must appear miraculous. To the expert who is familiar with the apparatus and sees it in his mind’s eye the result is obvious. It is exactly as though visible means existed to which the impetus is transmitted.

As I revolve in my mind the thoughts in answer to your question I find the most wonderful thing is the utter aberration of the scientific mind during the last twenty five years. In that time the relativity theory(Albert Einstein), the electron theory(H. A. Lorentz), the quantum theory(Max Planck/Niels Bohr), the theory of radioactivity(Marie Curie) and others have been worked out and developed to an amazing degree. And yet probably not less than 90 per cent of what is thought today to be demonstrable scientific truth is nothing but unrealizable dreams.

What is ‘thought’ in relativity, for example, is not science, but some kind of metaphysics based on abstract mathematical principles and conceptions which will be forever incomprehensible to beings like ourselves whose whole knowledge is derived from a three-dimensional world.

The idea of the atom being formed of electrons and protons which go whirling round each other like a miniature sun and planets is an invention of the imagination, and has no relation to the real nature of matter.

Virtually all progress has been achieved by physicists, discoverers and inventors; in short, devotees of the science which Newton and his disciples have been and are propounding.

Personally, it is only efforts in this direction which have claimed my energies. Similar remarks might be made with respect to other modern developments of thought. Take, for example, the electron theory. Perhaps no other has given rise to so many erroneous ideas and chimerical hopes. Everybody speaks of electrons as something entirely definite and real. Still, the fact is that nobody has isolated it and nobody has measured its charge. Nor does anybody know what it really is.

In order to explain the observed phenomena, atomic structures have been imagined, none of which can possibly exist. But the worst illusion to which modern thought has led is the idea of ‘indeterminacy.’ To make this clear, I may remark that heretofore we have in positive science assumed that every effect is the result of a preceding cause.

As far as I am concerned, I can say that after years of concentrated thought and investigation there is no truth in nature of which I would be more fully convinced. But the new theories of ‘ ’indeterminacy’ state this is not true, that an effect cannot be predicted in advance.

If two planets collide at certain time and certain place, this is to the student of positive science an inevitable result of preceding interactions between the bodies; and if our knowledge would be adequate, we would be able to foretell the event accurately.

But in the spirit of the new theories this would simply be an accident. ‘Indeterminacy’ introduces into the world of inert matter a principle which might virtually be compared with the universal illusion of free will.

Of course, there is no such thing. In years of experimenting I have found that every thought I conceive, every act I perform, is the result of external impressions on my senses.

It is only because the vast majority of human being are not observant sufficiently that they live in the illusion of perfect choice and freedom in their thoughts and actions. And if this holds true even in the most complex and involved manifestations of human life, it holds true with the same force in all the world of matter.”

Nikola Tesla

(“Great Scientific Discovery Impends.” The Sunday Star. Washington D.C., May 17, 1931.)

Hocam okulda bilekliğime takıcağınız kadar derste anlamadığımız yere takılsaydınız hepimiz geleceğin Albert Einstein nı  Isaac Newton nu  falan olabilirdik

Einstein, Dirac, Pauli, Marie Curie, Bohr, Schrodinger and many more of the scientific greats. All in one epic picture.

The Solvay Conference,1927.

Back row: Auguste Piccard, Émile Henriot, Paul Ehrenfest, Édouard Herzen, Théophile de Donder, Erwin Schrödinger, Jules-Émile Verschaffelt, Wolfgang Pauli, Werner Heisenberg, Ralph Howard Fowler, Léon Brillouin. Middle: Peter Debye, Martin Knudsen, William Lawrence Bragg, Hendrik Anthony Kramers, Paul Dirac, Arthur Compton, Louis de Broglie, Max Born, Niels Bohr. Front: Irving Langmuir, Max Planck, Marie Sklodowska Curie, Hendrik Lorentz, Albert Einstein, Paul Langevin, Charles-Eugène Guye, Charles Thomson Rees Wilson, Owen Willans Richardson.

Equation #11: Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle

Anyone who is not shocked by Quantum Mechanics has not quite understood it”-Niels Bohr

I agree Mr. Bohr, QM does blow your mind. The uncertainty principle is one of those things that prove that our perception of the world is limited. Anything in the universe can be both wave and particle at the same time and that puts a limit to how accurate our measurements can be.
What that means in our context is that, if you try to measure the velocity(or momentum) of a particle as well as its position at the same instant, you cannot have exact values of both. If you measure position accurately, the value of velocity will have some uncertainty associated with it and vice a versa. 

The reason we don’t observe this phenomenon in everyday life is is that the uncertainty values are very, very tiny. A person moving with a velocity of say, 5 km/hr (+or - 0.05 km/hr) and weighing 60 kg will have the uncertainty in position = 1.8 * 10^-35 meters! That’s smaller than the radius of an atomic nucleus. However, when you go into the realm of lightweight, superfast entities(like subatomic particles), the uncertainties get larger and can have a significant effect on the macroscopic properties of an object. 

The uncertainty principle applies to a number of pair of observables other than momentum and position. Most common example is that of energy-time which explains the working of Strong force, according to some theories.

It is important to understand that this fundamental limit is not due to experimental errors, rather a phenomenon of nature itself.

You cannot predict, even theoretically, the exact values of two so called “incompatible” quantities simultaneously.

For uncertainty principle in action, see

For more clarification, see