That makes sense, thanks for sharing.

Your explanation makes sense.

Agree

@@humannature698 change the caption then

@@ayushanand6718 if I could edit the video, I'ld do it but, I'ld have to reupload again so Idk about it

You seem like a sour person

Exactly

His thumbnail sums it up. 😅

Dont watch it, one view less, you did your part on helping in stopping these videos. You chose your reality to some extent, you cannot change everything around you. Simply put, if you dont like it, dont watch it, it is that easy.

🤓🤓🤓🤓

Captions are always wrong in shorts.

now it makes sense thx

I heard the same

Captions always lie these days. It's a plague

Yes.

jung is saying einstein had no interest in jung's ideas because einstein had ideas of his own

@@jgunther3398 I bet Einstein tried to get into Jung’s mine just the same, with the same luck.

Thanks

your welcome @@SkizFizz

@@bencarr8809 pssss they are about carbon reduce us

😂

Yes, he's thinking something completely else

True if I listen to it without watching it, he clearly says concentrateted

@@alejandrohauser3165 like a detective...searching for truth by finding and taking complementary hints . Very clever 😊

@@alejandrohauser3165are u german ??

Lost how many brain cells trying to read this.

Jung and Einstein had their reasons. It was among the German-Swiss Faction. Real greaseball $hit. If you know, you know.

@@dreamingdreamerdreamshut up 304

@@dreamingdreamerdreamif you can’t accept the truth, then you’re not needed here.

@@childpeanut5095 Wow, scary

Ha ha. He’s just saying what he thinks about a contemporary of his.

Relax

I understood wht u said; not what he said. Maybe language issue.

Oh I see. Einstein would only take Jung seriously if he backed up his ideas with numbers, equations etc

So then Einstein was hard to assess bc of this ...

​@@edwarda5584 that's almost impossible in a psyche study, except in material/empirical stuff, where the variables aren't even clear and the laws don't seem to be very firm

​@@bezbezzebbyson788The big questions asked by classical psychologists have evolved into matters other scientists can address. Classical psychology was never able to pay off William James' wish that "...by treating Psychology like a natural science, to help her to become one."

Yes. He's calling Einstein arrogant, and he's correct. They're both geniuses, but Einstein lacked the wisdom to see other's intellectual value.

​@thesurvivorssanctuary6561 Einstein wasn't open to God. Just like when the Catholic Priest who developed the Big Bang theory pointed out Einstein was saying there is a high probability that God exists. Einstein went back and tried changing his work but saw there was no way to do it. Understand when I say God, I don't mean the superstitious sky daddy. I mean the Infinite Consciousness that everything flows from. As Jung said I KNOW God exists and the math is even starting to say it.

I think it's that Einstein was a man of reason, and Jung wasn't, so Einstein wasn't interested in discussing Jung's crackpot ideas, and Jung is trying to put it down to Einstein's lack of openness.

​@omp199 that's understandable. Some of jungs ideas are very out there.

​@@javiersoto5223 Like which ones are out there? I'm curious. 🙂

Jung was basically calling Einstein arrogant, and unable to listen to others. If true, then it's no wonder his wife was okay with his divorcing her. He sounds unbearable to a fellow intellectual who doesn't initially pique his curiosity.

It's neutral.

Jung’s conception of the unconscious is distinctly not Freudian. Freud's conception of the unconscious focuses on repressed personal experiences, desires, and traumatic memories, primarily driven by sexual and aggressive instincts. Jung, on the other hand, expands the unconscious to include both the personal unconscious and the collective unconscious, which contains universal archetypes and symbols shared across humanity. Freud's approach emphasizes resolving repressed conflicts through psychoanalysis, whereas Jung's approach emphasizes achieving individuation by integrating both personal and collective unconscious elements. Thus, Freud's view is more individually centered, while Jung's incorporates a broader, more universal perspective.

@@quentinkumba6746 Thank you for the correction (will edit my comment). My point was the general idea of the unconscious as a "thing" was derived from Freud I think.

@@learnnowspeaknow - yes, and my criticism was a bit overdone because Jung began with Freud’s ideas as a base from which to depart. Ultimately Jung takes a view of the unconscious and especially of archetypes as being structural principles of the universeitself. Jung worked with Wolfgang Pauli the quantum physicist to try and explain mathematics and physics in terms of archetypes. This leads him along long way away from Freud but he starts with Freud.

This applies to gambling. It's not logic, it's maths. It's odds.

lmfao

Well shieeet

Not quite. Jung is actually saying Einstein is incapable of listening to other's intellectual ideas. It fits Einstein's history, and REALLY shows off how unbearable a husband he must've been with his wife.

Or what

^

Do you have a better one?

@@kingcrimson3882 Yes dear. you need to have the capacity to absorb new information.

@@ekulda to me it is enough that luke never liked it

@@ekulda no joke Can point me to a video or explain the main reason why it’s flawed

@@tizoc4999 foundations are flawed. for any research question, we seek to frst understand by defining. So Define water - A substance in 3 states, sorry now 4 states... etc and so on and so forth. 1. Definition. A definition is arrived at only after the theory is understood. Define Gravity? Current definition is flawed. Define relativity? That is flawed. Define Time? So when you take flawed definitions for research, the conclusion and foundations are all wrong. The outcomes will be wrong :/. Carl Jung would have added a perspective. Sadly einstein lost the opportunity to learn, his ego got the better of him. Study INDIA's ancient texts you will get some perspective. The indigenous - after years of observation got astronomy and what not. Stay humble to learn. or like einstein... Oy Vey ! is all we have for him. Dark matter is Ether that keeps all orbital mass and trajectory in its set destination. But who will listen. ether controls what happens. the Divine void or Divine Darkness' hands are Ether is. Divine design, discover it. Its not relative. Its the same static all over the multiverse, omni verses. It does not change. Slow and fast you may say vary. But for the observer only, Subjectively. Not objectively. All is flawed because the people who set the alphabet on science wanted us to be in the dark (No Knowlegde) But knowledge is truth and that always surfaces. Universal truths. rest i leave to your discovery. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/l7ukl6-XydTUqqc.html BBC did an article. But its vague too :) Let those who seek, find. All the best. Its not going to change your life's trajectory. Still, Discover.

relativity isn't a law, it's a compilation of descriptions of reality. It's not the same thing. Thermodynamics? Those are laws. In a closed system, energy cannot be destroyed or created, only transformed. This can apply to other fields such as economics or sociology, because it's a universal law, but relativity isn't like thermodynamics.

Agent 488. Let me know what you find

I think that depends on what you mean by metaphysics. Considering he objected to quantum non-locality based on the "reality" principle, I'd think that would count on some definitions.

@@ericm9495Einstein was primarily a theoretical physicist and areas like psychology/study of consciouness (especially the Jungian) and spirituality, in general, cross over deeply to what can be termed as metaphysics. That's why he argued to the bitter end agains quantum physics because he thought "God doesn't play dice with the universe." In his mind, probably, anything that cannot be explained /reduced to some neat mathematical equation cannot be true science.

​@@socialjunkster But the term "Metaphysics" doesn't just mean "study of the supernatural/spiritual". It's used in philosophy to mean, among other things, the study of reality as it really is, independent of our perceptions. So my point is that by that definition, his objections to QM were on metaphyiscal grounds. As are his objections to QM that he based on his commitment to determinism. There are people, like the logical positivists, who scoff at metaphysics as "the study of reality independent of perceptions" just as there are people who scoff at "the study of the supernatural". So I just thought your original comment needed clarification. I'm also not sure where your last sentence fits in, since QM is highly mathematical and scientific.

Yeah, metaphysics just means the object of study isnt physical. Like, the study of ideas are already metaphysical.

Not true. Einstein read Shopenhauer

Jung was no lightweight in his field.

We could state the same about Jung. There’s no such thing as Einstein or Jung in their fields, to this day.

Einstein and Freud would’ve probably had a better relationship overall, due to their innate stubbornness.

The level of a sold clown . He was lying about relativity and he knew it perfectly well .

@@cristig243 how so?

Easiest way to spot a moron is if they use this term.

Well some people are very smart in one area while clueless in another this apply also to Einstein as well as to Jung. And the clip here showcase that fact very well.

And many more. We just happens to put scientific intelligence as the superior kind.

There's no smartmest man. Since you cant be the best at everything. They were good at their fields.

​@@nehamotwani6477it has been the best tool to solving the world's problem.

@@andrewfrancis1424 only in one way though.

Just a rusty wannabe old man who found himself in the perfect times to solve ideeas that others wrote.. Many people before him wrote about the relativity theory but the technology of that time couldn't let them get further. They would have solved the ecuation long before pampers einstein 😂

@@emilunuyy9818 who understood relativity before einstein and what technology did Einstein have they didn’t ??

@@spiralmoment The Lorentz transformation is a full mathematical statement of special relativity. Einstein’s main contribution was the derivation of the Lorentz transformation without the concept of aether, i.e. without a preferred frame of reference, solely from the postulate that the speed of light is the same no matter how it is measured. Minkowski, one of Einstein’s teachers, was the one who introduced the concept of four-dimensional space-time. He thus introduced tensors, developed by Ricci-Curbastro, into relativity. That involved full knowledge of Riemann geometry. These concepts are the backbone of general relativity. Thus, fairly likely, Minkowski would have discovered general relativity before Einstein, if he had not died soon after that work.

Zherka? 🤔