Categories
General

Ritual Spells

Are spells rituals effective? In many websites, magazines, newspapers, etc., are offered free recipes of ritual magic to attract money, love and good luck in version do it YOURSELFERS. However a very important percentage of these rituals are failed in terms of its effectiveness. is it possible to attract money, love or good luck using ritual magic? The answer that I can reach them in my experience is definitely if possible. Then why many rituals does not work? There are several reasons why a ritual magic fails.Among them: not many times follow the procedures carefully. Materials that are not those listed are used. It is likely that the ritual is adulterated unfavorably or incomplete. But the main cause is a poor training on the part of the operator base. As with everything, do something successfully the operator set-up required at least basic in what he intends to do.

For example: If a person wants to translate a work of art on a canvas should at least have knowledge and practice basic about paint and color. If a person wants to install a lamp at home should be clear which are the electricity basic principles. If a person wants to be a seller should at least become a foundation in the art of negotiation in different circumstances, and for different types of person. And so.., the list would be endless.And this is also valid in the field of ritual magic, and even more it is essential. Because you should know that: the magic RITUAL is an art and science of details. In each of the acts, ingredients, and procedures must be meticulous. Want to know how to perform successful rituals? Do you want to learn principles must respect at the time of performing a ritual of money, love or any other purpose? Learn easily and simply step by step what you need to carry out effective ritual that results in positive changes. Get it freely without any cost to you. Only contact me by filling the form of my blog and solicitame the course of 5 lessons:: effective magic. Prof.

Categories
General

Alexander Friedmann

This last model proposes that before the explosion (unique), all the matter and the energy of the universe were contained in a singularity, in a small point that he was quiet in the space eternally until the moment previous to being detonated. This model proposes a paradox: The objects at rest – as the initial singularity – they are in the same state, to less than than they act under an external force; Then, since the starting point contained all the matter and the energy, and nothing (at least nothing natural) existed outside this singularity what could it have caused that explodes? The simplest resolution of the paradox is that something supernatural caused that the universe exists. The abierto model of the universe implies a supernatural creator – a God. The Theory of relativity In 1916 Albert Einstein spread its first rough draft on its general theory of relativity, and the scientific world was affected remarkably. It seemed that Einstein was developing the deepest secrets of the universe.

Their equations also caused to some problems – technical dilemmas, mathematical problems – but not the type of things that would interest to him to newspapers or the more popular scientific magazines. Two scientists noticed the errors. Later in 1917 Danish astronomer Willem de Sitter, reviewed the theory of relativity and he in detail responded to Einstein, stressing to him the problem to him and offering a radical solution to him: general relativity could only work if all the universe exploded, going in all directions, from a central point. Einstein never responded to the critic of Sitter. Later, in 1922, the Soviet mathematician Alexander Friedmann independently reached the conclusion of Sitter. If Einstein were right – Friedmann it predicted – the universe would have to be expanding in all directions of a high speed. Meanwhile, astronomer Vesto Slipher was witness of the explosive movement of the universe.

Categories
General

Polis

Only that the traditional channels for such expression are sealed and thus must resort to other means. Firstly, the uncertainty is now higher for the simple reason that complexity has grown. The collective participation puts on the table various options, multiplicity of criteria, almost endless variations. There is a meeting where the reliability comes and goes, where the theoretical and practical at times become adversaries and the management of communications becomes a defining element. In other words, mistakes can magnify and lead to the failure of an action. Disagreements are always healthy, something that is not understood in certain political situations of high pressure. Is what scientists, speaking of his own task, call post-normal science, that is, bet is so large that most importantly about the least important concept is not applicable, but that values become horizontal and you have to resort to evaluative commitments and on the uncertainty placed ethics. Skeptics argue that there is no collective response and that the multiplicity of criteria produces, on the other hand, immobility and lack of decision-making or, at least, the loss of its effectiveness.

Realists argue that the decisions are never neutral, that nothing is achieved if the collective is not involved and, finally, put on the table the argument of moral autonomy. That is, it is unacceptable that others make the decisions that affect our lives. Moreover, gains efficiency with the set deciding, just exercising rights learns to deal with the complexity of the problems and the only way to avoid that others decide for us is real us. If we participate in the decision making is minimizes any expression of social resistance to the purpose which is sought. If we want to say in more precise words, the world, well, to March towards a growing politicization. This is good news because the abandonment of the interest by the Polis has been the that is causing a huge amount of vices that have affected the democratic process.