قیصر احمد راجہ بھائی، ماشاءاللہ آپ جو تحقیقی کام کر رہے ہیں اس پر ہم آپ کو مبارک بھی دیتے ہیں اور اللہ کریم سے آپ کے لیے خصوصی دعا گو ہیں، کہ اللہ تعالی آپ کے علم میں، آپ کے عمل میں، آپ کے رزق میں، اپ کی صحت میں، خیر اور برکت عطا فرمائے، امین یا رب العالمین.
صرف دعائیں نہیں کرنی ہوتی۔ ہمارا مسئلہ ہی یہ ہے، کے جو بندہ علمی تحقیقی کام کرے ہم اس کی مدد کرنے بجائے پیچھے صوفی بن کے چوچے ہو کے بیٹھ جاتے ہیں کہ جی ہم فقیر آپ کے کیے دعائیں کر رہے ہیں باقی کام بس آپ ہی کریں۔ دنیا میں اگے بڑھیں سائنس سیکھیں اور عملی کام بھی کریں۔ کب تک مسجدوں میں بیٹھ کر صرف دعائیں ہی دینی ہے ہم نے؟ عملی کام بھی کرنا ہے یا نہیں؟
@@0MuhammadIbrahim0 آپ کو مسئلہ كیا ہے، جس کو یہ بھی نہیں پتہ کہ جس کے کمنٹس پر وہ کمنٹ کر رہا ہے، وہ اسے جانتا بھی ہے یا نہیں؟ یہ فلسفہ جھاڑنا ہے تو اپنا الگ سے میسج کر لو. کیا جانتے ہو میرے بارے میں، کہ میں کون ہوں، میری کیا تعلیم ہے. اتنا کم از کم پتہ ہونا چاہیے کہ جو چیز کوئی مسلمان دوسرے مسلمان کو فوری طور پر دے سکتا ہے اور جس کا کوئی نعم البدل نہیں ہے "وہ دعا ہے" جو کسی کے لیے دل سے نکلے. آپ سے تو وہ بھی نہیں ہو پایا، کہ آمین ہی کہہ دو.
@@0MuhammadIbrahim0 آپ کو مسئلہ كیا ہے، جس کو یہ بھی نہیں پتہ کہ جس کے کمنٹس پر وہ کمنٹ کر رہا ہے، وہ اسے جانتا بھی ہے یا نہیں؟ یہ فلسفہ جھاڑنا ہے تو اپنا الگ سے میسج کر لو. کیا جانتے ہو میرے بارے میں، کہ میں کون ہوں، میری کیا تعلیم ہے. اتنا کم از کم پتہ ہونا چاہیے کہ جو چیز کوئی مسلمان دوسرے مسلمان کو فوری طور پر دے سکتا ہے اور جس کا کوئی نعم البدل نہیں ہے "وہ دعا ہے" جو کسی کے لیے دل سے نکلے. آپ سے تو وہ بھی نہیں ہو پایا، کہ آمین ہی کہہ دو.
Weldone Qaiser sb, I really appreciate your work. May Allah SWT increase your knowledge 🙏. Keep exposing Qadyani & Atheists and secret Qadyani & secret Atheists.
Yess per kindly yey laughing emoji mat daalo and Don't laugh also, issay YEY image jaata hai k mazaaq urhaaya jaa raha hai and u know, mazaaq Nahi urhaa chahiyay:)😊👍✌✌@@ruhailkhan6081
@@Random_Human321 brother looks like you have no sense. My comment is an appreciation to Qaisar shbs efforts in exposing Dr Abdus Salam. If this is hurting you then I don't care. Move on.
4:08 as a science student, I am extremely disappointed that Dr Rehman mixed two models. This is misleading, unacademic and frankly unacceptable from a particle physicist.
Salute to you sir...... Masalllah ap sy ajj boht kuch seekhny ko milla Btw what do you think of current education system specially university level system of Pakistan? Are they upto mark?
Abdus Salam Qadiani nay apnay Nabi ki terha Zilli Buruzi research ki aur Metaphorically Electroweak model per equation ko prove kia. Qadianion ko metaphor buhat pasand hay.
Glashow advanced the idea that the electromagnetic and weak interactions may be unified in a gauge theory based on the group SU(2) × U(1). The problem of generating masses in a manner consistent with gauge invariance was solved later by Weinberg and Salam, using the idea of spontaneous symmetry breaking'.
اسے گلیشو۔ وائن برگ ۔ سلام تھیوری کا نام دیا جانا ثابت کر رہا ہے کہ ان تینوں کی کنٹریبیوشن اس میں شامل ہے۔ قیصر راجہ صاحب کی ساری ویڈیوز کا جائزہ لیا جائے تو صاف پتہ چل جاتا ہے کہ موصوف مذھبی تنگ نظری میں بری طرح مبتلا ھیں۔اس لئے ان کے خیالات اور آراء متوازن اور منصفانہ نہیں ھیں۔ اللہ ہی ھے جو انہیں ان کے کجرو خیالات کی دلدل سے نکال سکتا ھے،کوئی اور انہیں انکے نفس کے دھوکوں سے نکال نہیں سکتا۔
My concern is with the person Sheldon Glashow . He is now 91, when he was interviewed by AIP/APS he was 89, why did the erudite man wait for six decades ( 58 years to be precise) to spill the beans on A Salam . He waited for a simple reason that he intended to whistle blow post the deaths of both A Salam (1996) and S Weinberg ( 2021). viz when there was none of the three NL alive , barring Sheldon himself. Way to go. You conveniently latched on to the narrative because you have your own ax to grind. Please listen to Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy 2 hours program @ Black Hole in order to pries open your closed mind an apostate that you are!!
Qaiser Raja You arw doing a great job and I like to listen you more on this topic and Kindly extend your research on Hoodboye also.Tell us what Hoodboye has done in science except bashing Religion falsely.
Now I need so called *AQAL E KUL* ENGINEER SB response with details not just *molvio ka frontman gora ye gora WO....and I know I'm asking for too much😅
Mashaullah jitna waqt Abdus saalm marho ne nobel inaam hasil karne per lagaya tha hum musalamnon ka inshaullah us se hazaron guna zyada waqt usko ghalat aur plagiarist sabit karne mai lag jaye ga. Magar hum rasoolullah saw k namoos ki hifazat mai apna tan man dhan aur qeemati waqt sab qurban kar dain gai.
Sir, with due respect. If your arguments are actually valid, then you should report to the Nobel Prize committee. It's pretty convenient to create a RUclips video, and throw whatever arguments you want. The Nobel Prize in Science is no joke. It's one of the most competitive prizes in Science. Saying that it accepted a plagiarized work, and in so many years not a single distinguished Physics researcher reported this to the Nobel Prize Committee is pretty unbelievable. And honestly, I have gone through all your arguments, and also the rebuttals. In my opinion, you clearly don't understand science at all. How research happens in academia. Please never throw any information on to the audience if you don't have complete knowledge about it. You'll only spread mis conception among your audience. I used to listen to you and considered you a genuine person. But these couple of videos have shown me that you're a red flag for me for any Islamic Information. You might have done great work, but spreading such misconception will certainly zero your rewards in front of Allah.
Bhai dr Rehman khud ke credibility ko karap kar rahe hai baseless reasoning de ker. Ye science hai aur koi bhi galat ho sakta hai. Zabardasti miss information ke saat kisiko defend karne ki jarurat kya paad gayi!!!
@@UniqueTalesofficials baat sachi hai. Is netherlands k tootay ko kabhi nobel nahi mil sakta. Yahan video bananay ki bijayey yea pakistan physical association ko letter q nahi likhta. Q k is ko pata hai k is ki baaton mai koi dum nahi. Yea zia ki baqiyat hai. Ya yea nobel association ko letter likhay k aap sae ghalti hogaye. Is ka kaam video bana kar paisay kamana hai. Sub paisay ka chakkar hai babu bhaiya
@@11114striker meri jaan phir frustration... Mujhe kisi k noble prize se Lena dena bhi...bat ye hai k Jo usne sawal uthae hain AGR bilkul ghair janibdaar ho kr dekho to uska jawab koi bhi de SK raha..frustration nikal rahe hain sb
long story short. lets ask ChatGPT the following three questions 1. can you provide a summary of salam paper on electroweak theory of 1958, glashow paper 1961, salam paper 1964 and weinberg paper 1967 2. what if we remove the work of salam 1964 3. was the salam paper 1964 is copy of glashow paper 1961?
@@UniqueTalesofficials can you provide a summary of salam paper on electroweak theory of 1958, glashow paper 1961, salam paper 1964 and weinberg paper 1967? ChatGPT Sure, let's break down the key points of each paper: Abdus Salam's 1958 Paper on Electroweak Theory: Salam's 1958 paper laid the groundwork for the electroweak theory, unifying the electromagnetic and weak nuclear forces. He proposed a theory that described both forces as different aspects of a single unified force. Salam introduced the concept of spontaneously broken symmetry, which became a central idea in the electroweak theory. Sheldon Glashow's 1961 Paper: Glashow's 1961 paper built upon Salam's work, further developing the electroweak theory. He introduced the idea of a unified electroweak force that combined electromagnetism with the weak nuclear force. Glashow's paper also incorporated the Higgs mechanism, which gives particles mass through interactions with a field known as the Higgs field. Abdus Salam's 1964 Paper: Salam's 1964 paper, along with contributions from Steven Weinberg, further refined the electroweak theory. They proposed a gauge theory of the weak and electromagnetic interactions, based on the SU(2) × U(1) symmetry group. This paper provided the mathematical framework for the electroweak theory and predicted the existence of the W and Z bosons, which were later discovered experimentally. Steven Weinberg's 1967 Paper: Weinberg's 1967 paper, often referred to as the "Weinberg-Salam model," completed the electroweak theory. He, along with Salam, showed how the electromagnetic and weak forces could be unified within a single theory. Weinberg's paper provided a unified explanation for the weak nuclear force and electromagnetism, successfully predicting the masses of the W and Z bosons and the existence of the Higgs boson. These papers collectively formed the basis of the electroweak theory, which is now an essential component of the Standard Model of particle physics. They laid the groundwork for understanding the fundamental forces of nature at the subatomic level. You: what if we remove the work of salam 1964? ChatGPT: Removing Salam's 1964 paper would have significant implications for the development of the electroweak theory: Delayed Unification: Without Salam's paper, the unification of the weak nuclear force with electromagnetism might have been delayed. His work provided the mathematical framework necessary for understanding the electroweak theory. Missing Predictions: Salam's paper predicted the existence of the W and Z bosons, which were later discovered experimentally. Without this prediction, experimentalists might have faced challenges in identifying these particles, potentially delaying their discovery. Incomplete Theory: The absence of Salam's contributions would leave a gap in the understanding of the electroweak interaction. His paper, along with Weinberg's, provided a comprehensive theoretical framework for the unification of forces. Impact on Standard Model: The Standard Model of particle physics, which incorporates the electroweak theory, would likely have been significantly different or delayed in its development without Salam's contributions. Overall, removing Salam's 1964 paper would have slowed down the progress in understanding the unification of fundamental forces, particularly electromagnetism and the weak nuclear force. It would have hindered the development of the Standard Model and our understanding of particle physics. You: what if we remove the work of salam 1964 ChatGPT: If Salam's 1964 paper were removed from the timeline of particle physics development, several significant consequences would arise: Delay in Electroweak Unification: Salam's paper was pivotal in unifying the weak nuclear force with electromagnetism. Without it, the timeline for achieving this unification would have been delayed, potentially by several years or even decades. Missing Predictions and Experimental Guidance: Salam's paper predicted the existence of the W and Z bosons, essential carriers of the weak force, which were later experimentally confirmed. Without these predictions, experimental physicists might have faced challenges in understanding and identifying these particles. Incomplete Theoretical Framework: Salam's work provided a crucial mathematical framework for understanding the electroweak theory. Without his contributions, physicists would have had to rely on alternative, possibly less elegant or less accurate, approaches to describe the weak force and its interactions with electromagnetism. Altered Collaborations and Discoveries: The collaboration between Salam and Weinberg was instrumental in refining the electroweak theory. Without Salam's paper, the dynamics of this collaboration might have been different, potentially impacting the subsequent discoveries and developments in particle physics. Shift in Research Focus: The absence of Salam's 1964 paper could have led to shifts in research priorities within the field of particle physics. Physicists might have focused on alternative theories or approaches to understanding the weak force, potentially leading to different experimental outcomes and theoretical developments. Overall, removing Salam's 1964 paper would have slowed down the progress of particle physics, delayed the unification of fundamental forces, and potentially altered the trajectory of research in the field. You: was the salam paper 1964 is copy of glashow paper 1961? ChatGPT: No, Salam's 1964 paper was not a copy of Glashow's 1961 paper. While both papers contributed to the development of the electroweak theory, they approached the subject from different angles and made distinct contributions. Glashow's 1961 Paper: Glashow's paper introduced the idea of a unified electroweak force combining electromagnetism with the weak nuclear force. He incorporated the concept of a unified gauge theory, which laid the groundwork for later developments in the field. Salam's 1964 Paper: Salam's paper, along with contributions from Weinberg, further refined the electroweak theory. They proposed a specific gauge theory of the weak and electromagnetic interactions, based on the SU(2) × U(1) symmetry group. Salam's paper also predicted the existence of the W and Z bosons, which were later experimentally confirmed. While both Glashow and Salam contributed to the development of the electroweak theory, their papers were distinct in terms of their theoretical frameworks, mathematical formalism, and specific predictions.
@@UniqueTalesofficials can you provide a summary of salam paper on electroweak theory of 1958, glashow paper 1961, salam paper 1964 and weinberg paper 1967 ChatGPT ChatGPT Sure, let's break down the key points of each paper: Abdus Salam's 1958 Paper on Electroweak Theory: Salam's 1958 paper laid the groundwork for the electroweak theory, unifying the electromagnetic and weak nuclear forces. He proposed a theory that described both forces as different aspects of a single unified force. Salam introduced the concept of spontaneously broken symmetry, which became a central idea in the electroweak theory. Sheldon Glashow's 1961 Paper: Glashow's 1961 paper built upon Salam's work, further developing the electroweak theory. He introduced the idea of a unified electroweak force that combined electromagnetism with the weak nuclear force. Glashow's paper also incorporated the Higgs mechanism, which gives particles mass through interactions with a field known as the Higgs field. Abdus Salam's 1964 Paper: Salam's 1964 paper, along with contributions from Steven Weinberg, further refined the electroweak theory. They proposed a gauge theory of the weak and electromagnetic interactions, based on the SU(2) × U(1) symmetry group. This paper provided the mathematical framework for the electroweak theory and predicted the existence of the W and Z bosons, which were later discovered experimentally. Steven Weinberg's 1967 Paper: Weinberg's 1967 paper, often referred to as the "Weinberg-Salam model," completed the electroweak theory. He, along with Salam, showed how the electromagnetic and weak forces could be unified within a single theory. Weinberg's paper provided a unified explanation for the weak nuclear force and electromagnetism, successfully predicting the masses of the W and Z bosons and the existence of the Higgs boson. These papers collectively formed the basis of the electroweak theory, which is now an essential component of the Standard Model of particle physics. They laid the groundwork for understanding the fundamental forces of nature at the subatomic level. You what if we remove the work of salam 1964 ChatGPT ChatGPT Removing Salam's 1964 paper would have significant implications for the development of the electroweak theory: Delayed Unification: Without Salam's paper, the unification of the weak nuclear force with electromagnetism might have been delayed. His work provided the mathematical framework necessary for understanding the electroweak theory. Missing Predictions: Salam's paper predicted the existence of the W and Z bosons, which were later discovered experimentally. Without this prediction, experimentalists might have faced challenges in identifying these particles, potentially delaying their discovery. Incomplete Theory: The absence of Salam's contributions would leave a gap in the understanding of the electroweak interaction. His paper, along with Weinberg's, provided a comprehensive theoretical framework for the unification of forces. Impact on Standard Model: The Standard Model of particle physics, which incorporates the electroweak theory, would likely have been significantly different or delayed in its development without Salam's contributions. Overall, removing Salam's 1964 paper would have slowed down the progress in understanding the unification of fundamental forces, particularly electromagnetism and the weak nuclear force. It would have hindered the development of the Standard Model and our understanding of particle physics. You what if we remove the work of salam 1964 ChatGPT ChatGPT If Salam's 1964 paper were removed from the timeline of particle physics development, several significant consequences would arise: Delay in Electroweak Unification: Salam's paper was pivotal in unifying the weak nuclear force with electromagnetism. Without it, the timeline for achieving this unification would have been delayed, potentially by several years or even decades. Missing Predictions and Experimental Guidance: Salam's paper predicted the existence of the W and Z bosons, essential carriers of the weak force, which were later experimentally confirmed. Without these predictions, experimental physicists might have faced challenges in understanding and identifying these particles. Incomplete Theoretical Framework: Salam's work provided a crucial mathematical framework for understanding the electroweak theory. Without his contributions, physicists would have had to rely on alternative, possibly less elegant or less accurate, approaches to describe the weak force and its interactions with electromagnetism. Altered Collaborations and Discoveries: The collaboration between Salam and Weinberg was instrumental in refining the electroweak theory. Without Salam's paper, the dynamics of this collaboration might have been different, potentially impacting the subsequent discoveries and developments in particle physics. Shift in Research Focus: The absence of Salam's 1964 paper could have led to shifts in research priorities within the field of particle physics. Physicists might have focused on alternative theories or approaches to understanding the weak force, potentially leading to different experimental outcomes and theoretical developments. Overall, removing Salam's 1964 paper would have slowed down the progress of particle physics, delayed the unification of fundamental forces, and potentially altered the trajectory of research in the field. You was the salam paper 1964 is copy of glashow paper 1961 ChatGPT ChatGPT No, Salam's 1964 paper was not a copy of Glashow's 1961 paper. While both papers contributed to the development of the electroweak theory, they approached the subject from different angles and made distinct contributions. Glashow's 1961 Paper: Glashow's paper introduced the idea of a unified electroweak force combining electromagnetism with the weak nuclear force. He incorporated the concept of a unified gauge theory, which laid the groundwork for later developments in the field. Salam's 1964 Paper: Salam's paper, along with contributions from Weinberg, further refined the electroweak theory. They proposed a specific gauge theory of the weak and electromagnetic interactions, based on the SU(2) × U(1) symmetry group. Salam's paper also predicted the existence of the W and Z bosons, which were later experimentally confirmed. While both Glashow and Salam contributed to the development of the electroweak theory, their papers were distinct in terms of their theoretical frameworks, mathematical formalism, and specific predictions.
@@UniqueTalesofficials the reply is long and can not be pasted here. you can try it urself. the overall conclusion is that salams 1964 work was genuine and plays a major role in construction of whole model
To chat gpt kia Farishty control krty han? Jo forces Nobel da skti han wo information ko b control kr skti han or kai bat hua ha k chat gpt na ghalat informauton di ha ma an khud ye dakha ha
Koi bataye ga k Ali bhai kahan hain is mamlay main unho nay q chup saadi hoi . He is the perfect man to respond to that issue. Kahen amany dehriyay viewers guwanay ka khatra to nahi ha unhain
Engineer Sab already responded but WO logical baat nhi kr sake...WO QAR ko molvio ka agent kehte hain PR logical jawab nhi dete. Engineer Sab sirf molvio k aage sher hain
I wish these two thinkers were discussing the idea of grand unification theory, instead of who did what in the past... Nevertheless... A fresh departure from the stagnant discussions we are in currently...
Science is not thinking Its more as observation and documentation And disparity between writer of those observation or theories that attempt this so and yes it's important now the facts and truth are out the window because you don't like it or even want it to be challanged is he abbus salam a idol of Greece Thinking is different it's far simpler and far more important
paul dirac nai 1956 mein 3 spin 1 fields sai unification karny ki koshih ki thi py paper likha tha....Morever,In 1964 paper triplet structure was also introduced in 1953 by gell mann's eightfold way which also used triplet structure for su3 symmetry...so salam only integrated it into electroweak unifictaion...so his work was only extension of group theory and triplet structure except this all were so called independently propsed ideas of salam that can be subjected to plagiarism....also he integrated newly formed higgs mechnism (1964)....with few changes he tried to prove he reached conclusion independently
Social media influencers are now preaching about particle physics. What a strange time we're living in. Your video is a pathetic excuse of a response. Beating about the bush, instead of accepting that you have been humbled on all accounts.
Actually this is psychology: instead of answering questions, dirty the questioner, so people think these questions don't worth any thing. This also shows your superiority complex.vERY SCIENTIFIC SIIIR.
Dr. Rehman ka bary ho k Abdul Salam banny ka irada he. I am just curious if he is a qadiyani or not -- because, I won't personally come in defense of a person who is Against my prophet saw. I mean, how can I even possibly let this idea come closer to me to "defend" a person who is a "direct attack" on my prophet?
Off course Dr Rehman is a qadiyani. Paul Dirac was also a qadiyani. Weignberg was also a qadiyani. The entire noble committee which awarded Salam, Glasgow and Weignberg with the award was also qadiyani.
@@ammarhasan5203 but you are! tu do taky ka insan kya hi jany us hasti ki shan or kesy pehchany as ki azmat ko? tery liye noble prize Nobel he magar dunya ki azeem tareen hasti k liye atni izat nhi k to usy Nobel jan sky. tery jesy khabasat garo sy hi dunya ka aj ye naqsha he.
Qaisar sb in topic pr foran video bna lete hain But when it came to condemning Larkana incident, i see no video. Only a measly tweet, that too a response when he was called out Yet you were perfectly fine defending another molvi case which popped up before the larkana case. Perhaps the larkana case had such an irrefutable evidence that there was no room to diverge the criticisms I hate saying this, i actually use to like this guy but it does feel like you are a representative of a certain class of molvis
You cannot expect me to believe that this entire debate isn't an attempt to malign Dr. Salam for being Qadiyani. We must learn to accept people's accomplishments regardless of their faith. That DOES NOT MAKE US BAD MUSLIMS! AND YES I DO BELIEVE QADIYANIS ARE NOT MUSLIMS
WESE PAKISTAN KO AB FUNDED TOURS DILANE CHAHYEN HEC KA TAMAM FUNDING ISI PER HO. MAI YAQEEN SE KEH SAKTA HUN AGLE SO SAALON MAI HAMARE DO SO NOBEL LAUREATES BAN HI JAYEN GAI... Great Idea
Hazur glashow n starting point diya tha jbke salam sahb n usko mathematical frame work diya or complete kiya (U1 ) gage ke madad se .... kindly bonge mt maree
@@asadahmed4993 expose hahha. Due to his religion, I see jealousy and hate. Every proof is there. The guy just want attention nothing other than that. There no evidence just talk as usual.
قیصر احمد راجہ بھائی، ماشاءاللہ آپ جو تحقیقی کام کر رہے ہیں اس پر ہم آپ کو مبارک بھی دیتے ہیں اور اللہ کریم سے آپ کے لیے خصوصی دعا گو ہیں، کہ اللہ تعالی آپ کے علم میں، آپ کے عمل میں، آپ کے رزق میں، اپ کی صحت میں، خیر اور برکت عطا فرمائے، امین یا رب العالمین.
آمین یارب العالمین
اللھم آمین
صرف دعائیں نہیں کرنی ہوتی۔
ہمارا مسئلہ ہی یہ ہے، کے جو بندہ علمی تحقیقی کام کرے ہم اس کی مدد کرنے بجائے پیچھے صوفی بن کے چوچے ہو کے بیٹھ جاتے ہیں کہ جی ہم فقیر آپ کے کیے دعائیں کر رہے ہیں باقی کام بس آپ ہی کریں۔
دنیا میں اگے بڑھیں سائنس سیکھیں اور عملی کام بھی کریں۔ کب تک مسجدوں میں بیٹھ کر صرف دعائیں ہی دینی ہے ہم نے؟ عملی کام بھی کرنا ہے یا نہیں؟
@@0MuhammadIbrahim0 آپ کو مسئلہ كیا ہے، جس کو یہ بھی نہیں پتہ کہ جس کے کمنٹس پر وہ کمنٹ کر رہا ہے، وہ اسے جانتا بھی ہے یا نہیں؟ یہ فلسفہ جھاڑنا ہے تو اپنا الگ سے میسج کر لو.
کیا جانتے ہو میرے بارے میں، کہ میں کون ہوں، میری کیا تعلیم ہے.
اتنا کم از کم پتہ ہونا چاہیے کہ جو چیز کوئی مسلمان دوسرے مسلمان کو فوری طور پر دے سکتا ہے اور جس کا کوئی نعم البدل نہیں ہے "وہ دعا ہے" جو کسی کے لیے دل سے نکلے. آپ سے تو وہ بھی نہیں ہو پایا، کہ آمین ہی کہہ دو.
@@0MuhammadIbrahim0 آپ کو مسئلہ كیا ہے، جس کو یہ بھی نہیں پتہ کہ جس کے کمنٹس پر وہ کمنٹ کر رہا ہے، وہ اسے جانتا بھی ہے یا نہیں؟ یہ فلسفہ جھاڑنا ہے تو اپنا الگ سے میسج کر لو.
کیا جانتے ہو میرے بارے میں، کہ میں کون ہوں، میری کیا تعلیم ہے.
اتنا کم از کم پتہ ہونا چاہیے کہ جو چیز کوئی مسلمان دوسرے مسلمان کو فوری طور پر دے سکتا ہے اور جس کا کوئی نعم البدل نہیں ہے "وہ دعا ہے" جو کسی کے لیے دل سے نکلے. آپ سے تو وہ بھی نہیں ہو پایا، کہ آمین ہی کہہ دو.
Qaiser bhai ko dil se salam MAshallah 💌💌💌
قیصر بھائی اللہ آپ کا حامی و ناصر ہو۔ اللہ آپ کو صحت ایمان عطاء فرمائے
MashaAllah ❤️❤️❤️
Allah Pak Lambi Umar Ata Farmaye ❣️❣️❣️
Allah Pak Ahl e Sunnat Ko Salamat Rakhy ❤️❤️❤️
ALHAMDULILLAHH, WE ARE SUNNI HANFI BRELVI 💕💕💕
Bhai qaiser Bhai lagay raho, is daur Kay musalmaan app Kay Saath hain
Is daur k nahi stone age ka musalman he is orthodox cancer ko support karega
Qaisar Ahmed the great Raja❤❤❤❤🎉🎉🎉🎉
جزاک اللّٰہ خیر قیصر بھائی ♥️
It is impressive to listen these kind of technical research, plz continue these type of things...
Allah pak apki hr trh hifazat fermay ❤Ameen
Facts always wins against ad hominem keep it up QAR ❤🇵🇰💯
Raja saab,yaqeen krein this series is getting better and BETTER!❤
Great!
Love you, Qaiser bhai!
Qaiser bhai ko dil se salam MAshallah
29:52 amazing reply🥰 to 29:14
Weldone Qaiser sb, I really appreciate your work. May Allah SWT increase your knowledge 🙏. Keep exposing Qadyani & Atheists and secret Qadyani & secret Atheists.
I have seen such comments somewhere else😂😂😂
Brilliant response
Qaisar shb too good 👌👌👌. Amazing work Qaisar shb. Please continue with this effort. Liberals and non Muslim qadianis are getting upset 😂😂
Brother pehlay video to POORI dekh leeya krro, annaywah comments na keeya krro pehlay poori BAAT sunna krro.
Haha.....Video to dekh lo😂
Yess per kindly yey laughing emoji mat daalo and Don't laugh also, issay YEY image jaata hai k mazaaq urhaaya jaa raha hai and u know, mazaaq Nahi urhaa chahiyay:)😊👍✌✌@@ruhailkhan6081
@@awaisasif1 mazaaq mat urhaao bro humain yey suit NAHI krna. Yehi baat aap BAGHAIR mazaaq urhayey kahaa krro:)
@@Random_Human321 brother looks like you have no sense. My comment is an appreciation to Qaisar shbs efforts in exposing Dr Abdus Salam. If this is hurting you then I don't care. Move on.
you are great sir, very detailed answer. i think they will not make another video.
Mashallah jazakallah sir
Allah o akbar ❤
Aj mehsoos ho rha hy k
Allah pak ny Raja sb ki soorat mn
Pakistan mn Apni ek Nishaaani bheji hy ... ❤😢
جزاک اللّٰہ قیصر بھائی۔ آپ کا کام اور سچائی سامنے لانا پاکستان اور مسلمانوں کے لیے بُہت اہم ہے اور پاکستان کو آپ جیسے مخلص لوگوں کی شدید ضرورت ہے ♥️
4:08 as a science student, I am extremely disappointed that Dr Rehman mixed two models. This is misleading, unacademic and frankly unacceptable from a particle physicist.
So he was talking about something else
Man these scientist
Makes the nuclear bomb then the seculars support them
😂
Science student ho ke is channel par qaisar raja ki bastian sun rahe ho jo science ko hi galat kehta hai .
Afsos.
@@ReciteQuran397
You are just misguiding.
@@ReciteQuran397
You are just misguiding.
Excellent Qaiser Ahmed Bhai
Mashaallah bohot acha response qaiser bhai ki taraf hy
Incredible sir. May allah help you in your cause ❤
Masha-ALLAH Qaisar sahab ❤
great Qaiser Ahmad raja
ماشاء الله
Salute to you sir...... Masalllah ap sy ajj boht kuch seekhny ko milla
Btw what do you think of current education system specially university level system of Pakistan?
Are they upto mark?
Behtreen ho gya Qaiser bhai ❤
Qaiser bhai , ❤❤❤❤❤❤
The only outstanding thing I learn from your videos is , how to stay calm and compose the logic to give cold befitting rebuttal .........
Nice
Great 👍
Great ❤
شکریہ جناب۔
اس ویڈیو میں آواز کافی بہتر تھی 👍
Keep it up Qaiser sahab! ❤
QAR !!! May ALLAH KAREEM opens more doors of knowledge on you.
راجہ دی گریٹ
Very nice response
Qaiser Ahmad raja zindabad
sir I am always fascinated by the level pf your researching please explain how you resewrch on different topics
Qaiser Bhai Apne Jo Mic Liya Hai Woh Kiss Company Ka Hai. Mujhe Bhi Mic Lena Hai Kindly Please Bata Dein
Mera Mic bhi Kiss Company ka hai. Aapko free main istemaal karna ko de dunga.
Excellent sir
❤آپ پر سلامتی ہو
Abdus Salam Qadiani nay apnay Nabi ki terha Zilli Buruzi research ki aur Metaphorically Electroweak model per equation ko prove kia. Qadianion ko metaphor buhat pasand hay.
Bhai agar kar bhi le do kya muslim country mei qadiani ko kyu rights mile
Huh baat khatam
Aisa waisa kaafir nahi yeh log
They are pretending to be
👍
Qaiser "Great" Raja!
❤
Love you so much sir ❤️❤️❤️
Good debate.
O weak ago i listened your name now IAM listening to you
Very well Qaiser Bhai
Mashallah
Glashow advanced the idea that the electromagnetic and weak interactions may be unified in a gauge theory based on the group SU(2) × U(1). The problem of generating masses in a manner consistent with gauge invariance was solved later by Weinberg and Salam, using the idea of spontaneous symmetry breaking'.
Iska use batao kya use hai uska
Matlab kis cheez ke kaam aata hai aur has it been unproven or modified
اسے گلیشو۔ وائن برگ ۔ سلام تھیوری کا نام دیا جانا ثابت کر رہا ہے کہ ان تینوں کی کنٹریبیوشن اس میں شامل ہے۔
قیصر راجہ صاحب کی ساری ویڈیوز کا جائزہ لیا جائے تو صاف پتہ چل جاتا ہے کہ موصوف مذھبی تنگ نظری میں بری طرح مبتلا ھیں۔اس لئے ان کے خیالات اور آراء متوازن اور منصفانہ نہیں ھیں۔ اللہ ہی ھے جو انہیں ان کے کجرو خیالات کی دلدل سے نکال سکتا ھے،کوئی اور انہیں انکے نفس کے دھوکوں سے نکال نہیں سکتا۔
Great analysis sir ❤❤❤
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
وَعَلَيْكُم السَّلَام وَرَحْمَةُ اَللهِ وَبَرَكاتُهُ
اسلام علیکم qaisar Ahmad sahab please make video on Pakistani dramas thy target Islam i
Aur aj kal ke dino Mein yai baut zyada barh gya hai
Jani mujy pata b nhi k tv py dramy aty b hn ya nhi . Dakhty q ho ager wo ghalt kr rahy h
Best Responded❤
My concern is with the person Sheldon Glashow . He is now 91, when he was interviewed by AIP/APS he was 89, why did the erudite man wait for six decades ( 58 years to be precise) to spill the beans on A Salam . He waited for a simple reason that he intended to whistle blow post the deaths of both A Salam (1996) and S Weinberg ( 2021). viz when there was none of the three NL alive , barring Sheldon himself. Way to go. You conveniently latched on to the narrative because you have your own ax to grind. Please listen to Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy 2 hours program @ Black Hole in order to pries open your closed mind an apostate that you are!!
You're telling the truth to a clump of gullible fanatics.
They will never understand or come near reasoning.
Qaiser Raja You arw doing a great job and I like to listen you more on this topic and Kindly extend your research on Hoodboye also.Tell us what Hoodboye has done in science except bashing Religion falsely.
❤ ❤ ❤ ❤ ❤ ❤ ❤ ❤ ❤ ❤
Now I need so called *AQAL E KUL* ENGINEER SB response with details not just *molvio ka frontman gora ye gora WO....and I know I'm asking for too much😅
I'm wondering... How much it's takes to get to that level
Usually first page of research paper has only abstract of research. I think Dr tainoor haven't written any research paper yet.
Mashaullah jitna waqt Abdus saalm marho ne nobel inaam hasil karne per lagaya tha hum musalamnon ka inshaullah us se hazaron guna zyada waqt usko ghalat aur plagiarist sabit karne mai lag jaye ga. Magar hum rasoolullah saw k namoos ki hifazat mai apna tan man dhan aur qeemati waqt sab qurban kar dain gai.
🥰😍
mashAllah keep it up
❤❤❤
Sir, with due respect. If your arguments are actually valid, then you should report to the Nobel Prize committee. It's pretty convenient to create a RUclips video, and throw whatever arguments you want.
The Nobel Prize in Science is no joke. It's one of the most competitive prizes in Science. Saying that it accepted a plagiarized work, and in so many years not a single distinguished Physics researcher reported this to the Nobel Prize Committee is pretty unbelievable.
And honestly, I have gone through all your arguments, and also the rebuttals. In my opinion, you clearly don't understand science at all. How research happens in academia. Please never throw any information on to the audience if you don't have complete knowledge about it. You'll only spread mis conception among your audience.
I used to listen to you and considered you a genuine person. But these couple of videos have shown me that you're a red flag for me for any Islamic Information.
You might have done great work, but spreading such misconception will certainly zero your rewards in front of Allah.
Bughaz aur science Aik dimagh Aik saath nai reh saktay
send this video to engineer someone pleazz and open his eyes cuz he lives in the world of firqa and baba
Check out the video (part 2) by @Dr.RehmanAmir on this topic to build a rational view.
Bhai dr Rehman khud ke credibility ko karap kar rahe hai baseless reasoning de ker. Ye science hai aur koi bhi galat ho sakta hai. Zabardasti miss information ke saat kisiko defend karne ki jarurat kya paad gayi!!!
A next nobel prize to Raja Sahb 🎉🎉🎉
Raja apni G ka b zoor laga lay tub b nobel nahi mil sakta usay
@@11114strikerAap ki language se pta chal raha hai frustration ka
@@UniqueTalesofficials baat sachi hai. Is netherlands k tootay ko kabhi nobel nahi mil sakta. Yahan video bananay ki bijayey yea pakistan physical association ko letter q nahi likhta. Q k is ko pata hai k is ki baaton mai koi dum nahi. Yea zia ki baqiyat hai. Ya yea nobel association ko letter likhay k aap sae ghalti hogaye. Is ka kaam video bana kar paisay kamana hai. Sub paisay ka chakkar hai babu bhaiya
@@11114striker meri jaan phir frustration... Mujhe kisi k noble prize se Lena dena bhi...bat ye hai k Jo usne sawal uthae hain AGR bilkul ghair janibdaar ho kr dekho to uska jawab koi bhi de SK raha..frustration nikal rahe hain sb
Or noble prize wapis bhi hota even k ghalat bhi ho
QAiser BHAIII❤❤❤❤
long story short. lets ask ChatGPT the following three questions
1. can you provide a summary of salam paper on electroweak theory of 1958, glashow paper 1961, salam paper 1964 and weinberg paper 1967
2. what if we remove the work of salam 1964
3. was the salam paper 1964 is copy of glashow paper 1961?
What is chat gpt answer
@@UniqueTalesofficials
can you provide a summary of salam paper on electroweak theory of 1958, glashow paper 1961, salam paper 1964 and weinberg paper 1967?
ChatGPT
Sure, let's break down the key points of each paper:
Abdus Salam's 1958 Paper on Electroweak Theory:
Salam's 1958 paper laid the groundwork for the electroweak theory, unifying the electromagnetic and weak nuclear forces.
He proposed a theory that described both forces as different aspects of a single unified force.
Salam introduced the concept of spontaneously broken symmetry, which became a central idea in the electroweak theory.
Sheldon Glashow's 1961 Paper:
Glashow's 1961 paper built upon Salam's work, further developing the electroweak theory.
He introduced the idea of a unified electroweak force that combined electromagnetism with the weak nuclear force.
Glashow's paper also incorporated the Higgs mechanism, which gives particles mass through interactions with a field known as the Higgs field.
Abdus Salam's 1964 Paper:
Salam's 1964 paper, along with contributions from Steven Weinberg, further refined the electroweak theory.
They proposed a gauge theory of the weak and electromagnetic interactions, based on the SU(2) × U(1) symmetry group.
This paper provided the mathematical framework for the electroweak theory and predicted the existence of the W and Z bosons, which were later discovered experimentally.
Steven Weinberg's 1967 Paper:
Weinberg's 1967 paper, often referred to as the "Weinberg-Salam model," completed the electroweak theory.
He, along with Salam, showed how the electromagnetic and weak forces could be unified within a single theory.
Weinberg's paper provided a unified explanation for the weak nuclear force and electromagnetism, successfully predicting the masses of the W and Z bosons and the existence of the Higgs boson.
These papers collectively formed the basis of the electroweak theory, which is now an essential component of the Standard Model of particle physics. They laid the groundwork for understanding the fundamental forces of nature at the subatomic level.
You:
what if we remove the work of salam 1964?
ChatGPT:
Removing Salam's 1964 paper would have significant implications for the development of the electroweak theory:
Delayed Unification: Without Salam's paper, the unification of the weak nuclear force with electromagnetism might have been delayed. His work provided the mathematical framework necessary for understanding the electroweak theory.
Missing Predictions: Salam's paper predicted the existence of the W and Z bosons, which were later discovered experimentally. Without this prediction, experimentalists might have faced challenges in identifying these particles, potentially delaying their discovery.
Incomplete Theory: The absence of Salam's contributions would leave a gap in the understanding of the electroweak interaction. His paper, along with Weinberg's, provided a comprehensive theoretical framework for the unification of forces.
Impact on Standard Model: The Standard Model of particle physics, which incorporates the electroweak theory, would likely have been significantly different or delayed in its development without Salam's contributions.
Overall, removing Salam's 1964 paper would have slowed down the progress in understanding the unification of fundamental forces, particularly electromagnetism and the weak nuclear force. It would have hindered the development of the Standard Model and our understanding of particle physics.
You:
what if we remove the work of salam 1964
ChatGPT:
If Salam's 1964 paper were removed from the timeline of particle physics development, several significant consequences would arise:
Delay in Electroweak Unification: Salam's paper was pivotal in unifying the weak nuclear force with electromagnetism. Without it, the timeline for achieving this unification would have been delayed, potentially by several years or even decades.
Missing Predictions and Experimental Guidance: Salam's paper predicted the existence of the W and Z bosons, essential carriers of the weak force, which were later experimentally confirmed. Without these predictions, experimental physicists might have faced challenges in understanding and identifying these particles.
Incomplete Theoretical Framework: Salam's work provided a crucial mathematical framework for understanding the electroweak theory. Without his contributions, physicists would have had to rely on alternative, possibly less elegant or less accurate, approaches to describe the weak force and its interactions with electromagnetism.
Altered Collaborations and Discoveries: The collaboration between Salam and Weinberg was instrumental in refining the electroweak theory. Without Salam's paper, the dynamics of this collaboration might have been different, potentially impacting the subsequent discoveries and developments in particle physics.
Shift in Research Focus: The absence of Salam's 1964 paper could have led to shifts in research priorities within the field of particle physics. Physicists might have focused on alternative theories or approaches to understanding the weak force, potentially leading to different experimental outcomes and theoretical developments.
Overall, removing Salam's 1964 paper would have slowed down the progress of particle physics, delayed the unification of fundamental forces, and potentially altered the trajectory of research in the field.
You:
was the salam paper 1964 is copy of glashow paper 1961?
ChatGPT:
No, Salam's 1964 paper was not a copy of Glashow's 1961 paper. While both papers contributed to the development of the electroweak theory, they approached the subject from different angles and made distinct contributions.
Glashow's 1961 Paper: Glashow's paper introduced the idea of a unified electroweak force combining electromagnetism with the weak nuclear force. He incorporated the concept of a unified gauge theory, which laid the groundwork for later developments in the field.
Salam's 1964 Paper: Salam's paper, along with contributions from Weinberg, further refined the electroweak theory. They proposed a specific gauge theory of the weak and electromagnetic interactions, based on the SU(2) × U(1) symmetry group. Salam's paper also predicted the existence of the W and Z bosons, which were later experimentally confirmed.
While both Glashow and Salam contributed to the development of the electroweak theory, their papers were distinct in terms of their theoretical frameworks, mathematical formalism, and specific predictions.
@@UniqueTalesofficials
can you provide a summary of salam paper on electroweak theory of 1958, glashow paper 1961, salam paper 1964 and weinberg paper 1967
ChatGPT
ChatGPT
Sure, let's break down the key points of each paper:
Abdus Salam's 1958 Paper on Electroweak Theory:
Salam's 1958 paper laid the groundwork for the electroweak theory, unifying the electromagnetic and weak nuclear forces.
He proposed a theory that described both forces as different aspects of a single unified force.
Salam introduced the concept of spontaneously broken symmetry, which became a central idea in the electroweak theory.
Sheldon Glashow's 1961 Paper:
Glashow's 1961 paper built upon Salam's work, further developing the electroweak theory.
He introduced the idea of a unified electroweak force that combined electromagnetism with the weak nuclear force.
Glashow's paper also incorporated the Higgs mechanism, which gives particles mass through interactions with a field known as the Higgs field.
Abdus Salam's 1964 Paper:
Salam's 1964 paper, along with contributions from Steven Weinberg, further refined the electroweak theory.
They proposed a gauge theory of the weak and electromagnetic interactions, based on the SU(2) × U(1) symmetry group.
This paper provided the mathematical framework for the electroweak theory and predicted the existence of the W and Z bosons, which were later discovered experimentally.
Steven Weinberg's 1967 Paper:
Weinberg's 1967 paper, often referred to as the "Weinberg-Salam model," completed the electroweak theory.
He, along with Salam, showed how the electromagnetic and weak forces could be unified within a single theory.
Weinberg's paper provided a unified explanation for the weak nuclear force and electromagnetism, successfully predicting the masses of the W and Z bosons and the existence of the Higgs boson.
These papers collectively formed the basis of the electroweak theory, which is now an essential component of the Standard Model of particle physics. They laid the groundwork for understanding the fundamental forces of nature at the subatomic level.
You
what if we remove the work of salam 1964
ChatGPT
ChatGPT
Removing Salam's 1964 paper would have significant implications for the development of the electroweak theory:
Delayed Unification: Without Salam's paper, the unification of the weak nuclear force with electromagnetism might have been delayed. His work provided the mathematical framework necessary for understanding the electroweak theory.
Missing Predictions: Salam's paper predicted the existence of the W and Z bosons, which were later discovered experimentally. Without this prediction, experimentalists might have faced challenges in identifying these particles, potentially delaying their discovery.
Incomplete Theory: The absence of Salam's contributions would leave a gap in the understanding of the electroweak interaction. His paper, along with Weinberg's, provided a comprehensive theoretical framework for the unification of forces.
Impact on Standard Model: The Standard Model of particle physics, which incorporates the electroweak theory, would likely have been significantly different or delayed in its development without Salam's contributions.
Overall, removing Salam's 1964 paper would have slowed down the progress in understanding the unification of fundamental forces, particularly electromagnetism and the weak nuclear force. It would have hindered the development of the Standard Model and our understanding of particle physics.
You
what if we remove the work of salam 1964
ChatGPT
ChatGPT
If Salam's 1964 paper were removed from the timeline of particle physics development, several significant consequences would arise:
Delay in Electroweak Unification: Salam's paper was pivotal in unifying the weak nuclear force with electromagnetism. Without it, the timeline for achieving this unification would have been delayed, potentially by several years or even decades.
Missing Predictions and Experimental Guidance: Salam's paper predicted the existence of the W and Z bosons, essential carriers of the weak force, which were later experimentally confirmed. Without these predictions, experimental physicists might have faced challenges in understanding and identifying these particles.
Incomplete Theoretical Framework: Salam's work provided a crucial mathematical framework for understanding the electroweak theory. Without his contributions, physicists would have had to rely on alternative, possibly less elegant or less accurate, approaches to describe the weak force and its interactions with electromagnetism.
Altered Collaborations and Discoveries: The collaboration between Salam and Weinberg was instrumental in refining the electroweak theory. Without Salam's paper, the dynamics of this collaboration might have been different, potentially impacting the subsequent discoveries and developments in particle physics.
Shift in Research Focus: The absence of Salam's 1964 paper could have led to shifts in research priorities within the field of particle physics. Physicists might have focused on alternative theories or approaches to understanding the weak force, potentially leading to different experimental outcomes and theoretical developments.
Overall, removing Salam's 1964 paper would have slowed down the progress of particle physics, delayed the unification of fundamental forces, and potentially altered the trajectory of research in the field.
You
was the salam paper 1964 is copy of glashow paper 1961
ChatGPT
ChatGPT
No, Salam's 1964 paper was not a copy of Glashow's 1961 paper. While both papers contributed to the development of the electroweak theory, they approached the subject from different angles and made distinct contributions.
Glashow's 1961 Paper: Glashow's paper introduced the idea of a unified electroweak force combining electromagnetism with the weak nuclear force. He incorporated the concept of a unified gauge theory, which laid the groundwork for later developments in the field.
Salam's 1964 Paper: Salam's paper, along with contributions from Weinberg, further refined the electroweak theory. They proposed a specific gauge theory of the weak and electromagnetic interactions, based on the SU(2) × U(1) symmetry group. Salam's paper also predicted the existence of the W and Z bosons, which were later experimentally confirmed.
While both Glashow and Salam contributed to the development of the electroweak theory, their papers were distinct in terms of their theoretical frameworks, mathematical formalism, and specific predictions.
@@UniqueTalesofficials the reply is long and can not be pasted here. you can try it urself. the overall conclusion is that salams 1964 work was genuine and plays a major role in construction of whole model
To chat gpt kia Farishty control krty han? Jo forces Nobel da skti han wo information ko b control kr skti han or kai bat hua ha k chat gpt na ghalat informauton di ha ma an khud ye dakha ha
🔴
Sahab standard model incorporates electro weak theory...its a bigger picture...please logo ko misguide na karo yr qaiser ...khuda ka khoof kr yr
Koi bataye ga k Ali bhai kahan hain is mamlay main unho nay q chup saadi hoi . He is the perfect man to respond to that issue. Kahen amany dehriyay viewers guwanay ka khatra to nahi ha unhain
Engineer Sab already responded but WO logical baat nhi kr sake...WO QAR ko molvio ka agent kehte hain PR logical jawab nhi dete. Engineer Sab sirf molvio k aage sher hain
I wish these two thinkers were discussing the idea of grand unification theory, instead of who did what in the past... Nevertheless... A fresh departure from the stagnant discussions we are in currently...
Science is not thinking
Its more as observation and documentation
And disparity between writer of those observation or theories that attempt this so and yes it's important now the facts and truth are out the window because you don't like it or even want it to be challanged is he abbus salam a idol of Greece
Thinking is different it's far simpler and far more important
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
paul dirac nai 1956 mein 3 spin 1 fields sai unification karny ki koshih ki thi py paper likha tha....Morever,In 1964 paper triplet structure was also introduced in 1953 by gell mann's eightfold way which also used triplet structure for su3 symmetry...so salam only integrated it into electroweak unifictaion...so his work was only extension of group theory and triplet structure except this all were so called independently propsed ideas of salam that can be subjected to plagiarism....also he integrated newly formed higgs mechnism (1964)....with few changes he tried to prove he reached conclusion independently
Bahteen
Atleast pak government should take back awards
29:14 epic reply raja sb 🔥
Next year sy Nobel Prize ka announcement Raja saab Kiya krain gain 😂
Someone please answer me who was the person(child) blocked by Dr.Taimur Lal😅
Social media influencers are now preaching about particle physics. What a strange time we're living in. Your video is a pathetic excuse of a response. Beating about the bush, instead of accepting that you have been humbled on all accounts.
Bhai koi logical jawab do...frustration na dikhao
@@UniqueTalesofficials bahi tum librandus sy logical baat ki umeed rakhty ho? ye to apki apni ghalti hy
What is your qualification to understand a physics paper? Do you know to even derive Newtons equations of motion? Kamal hai look at the audacity
Ok that's a nonsensical comment. Move on now.
what does newton's laws of motion is to do here, grow up sir
Frank close ki qualification h jisne Salam ko expose Kiya apni book me
Actually this is psychology: instead of answering questions, dirty the questioner, so people think these questions don't worth any thing. This also shows your superiority complex.vERY SCIENTIFIC SIIIR.
Do you know who gave newton's first law before him? And when? Google it before replying.
Dr. Rehman ka bary ho k Abdul Salam banny ka irada he. I am just curious if he is a qadiyani or not -- because, I won't personally come in defense of a person who is Against my prophet saw. I mean, how can I even possibly let this idea come closer to me to "defend" a person who is a "direct attack" on my prophet?
Everyone is not an extremist like you who disown a scientist for a pedophile imposter.
Off course Dr Rehman is a qadiyani. Paul Dirac was also a qadiyani. Weignberg was also a qadiyani. The entire noble committee which awarded Salam, Glasgow and Weignberg with the award was also qadiyani.
@@ammarhasan5203 but you are!
tu do taky ka insan kya hi jany us hasti ki shan or kesy pehchany as ki azmat ko?
tery liye noble prize Nobel he magar dunya ki azeem tareen hasti k liye atni izat nhi k to usy Nobel jan sky.
tery jesy khabasat garo sy hi dunya ka aj ye naqsha he.
Qadiani hai bhi to kya fark partha hai? Insan ki qabliat uske religion se related nahi hoti.
بہتر یہ ہوگا کہ لوگ خود تحقیق کریں۔سوچنے کی بات ہے کہ جو باتیں سائنس سے متعلقہ لوگوں کو تو سمجھ نہیں لیکن ایک Motivational speaker کو سمجھ آ گئیں۔
تو آپ سارے سائنسدانوں کی باتیں مانیں محض چند سائنسدانوں کو درست اور چند کو غلط کیوں مان رہے ہیں.
Lakh di lanat tere pe
راجہ صاحب سائنس کا گہرا علم رکھتے ہیں ... صرف موٹیویشنل نہیں ہیں ــــ
Qaisar sb in topic pr foran video bna lete hain
But when it came to condemning Larkana incident, i see no video. Only a measly tweet, that too a response when he was called out
Yet you were perfectly fine defending another molvi case which popped up before the larkana case. Perhaps the larkana case had such an irrefutable evidence that there was no room to diverge the criticisms
I hate saying this, i actually use to like this guy but it does feel like you are a representative of a certain class of molvis
You cannot expect me to believe that this entire debate isn't an attempt to malign Dr. Salam for being Qadiyani.
We must learn to accept people's accomplishments regardless of their faith. That DOES NOT MAKE US BAD MUSLIMS!
AND YES I DO BELIEVE QADIYANIS ARE NOT MUSLIMS
9/11 wala joke was great😂
Free palestine allah ho akbar
WESE PAKISTAN KO AB FUNDED TOURS DILANE CHAHYEN HEC KA TAMAM FUNDING ISI PER HO. MAI YAQEEN SE KEH SAKTA HUN AGLE SO SAALON MAI HAMARE DO SO NOBEL LAUREATES BAN HI JAYEN GAI... Great Idea
QAR 💎
Hazur glashow n starting point diya tha jbke salam sahb n usko mathematical frame work diya or complete kiya (U1 ) gage ke madad se .... kindly bonge mt maree
Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people.
Legends expose lies and brings out truth
@@asadahmed4993 expose hahha. Due to his religion, I see jealousy and hate. Every proof is there. The guy just want attention nothing other than that. There no evidence just talk as usual.
@@naveershain han bol diya he sub larkon se keh apki gand ddiscuss na kare.
@@memester6496 💯
@@asadahmed4993 Legend?