Quantum mechanics, Reality, Vedanta and the nature of 'scientific method'
#25
(28-Dec-2011, 08:00 PM)ramesh Wrote: @Kanad,

Re: Why are you not ready to refer to the links that are posted. Why do you want it "directly put it here explicitly"? Are you too lazy to click? Anyways as usual you did your cherry picking. Arvind had given a link to explain how big bang doesn't violate conservation of energy principle. Again posting the link.But of course you are too lazy to read it here is a copy paste of the final paragraphs for you

Kanad, will you ever understand what I write? I repeat: I am not ignoring those but definitely you are missing what I am asking.

It means that I read the link in detail and found it irrelevant. Now that you have quoted let me clear it how. You quoted: “What happened at the Big Bang was that there was a simultaneous emergence of the gravitational interaction. ……….etc

Now, Why it was irrelevant?

Has this quote anything to do with what I asked “Definitely you all are purposely neglecting my question on how this could match the ‘reality’ perception of human beings with ‘net zero energy”. I began this thread by asking “Quantum fluctuations states that the sum total of energy in this universe is zero. What we see is simply a feedback mechanism that results in this variation". If it is so what we feel as 'real' is no more a real thing! It's simply a 'mechanism' which gives the sense of 'reality' and there isn't anything as 'real' in the universe. In the light of this what is the significance of 'scientific method' that you expect 'Vedanta' to follow? Isn't that 'scientific method' a non-reality? Vedanta says exactly the same that 'Jaganmithya' i.e. World is 'Mithya' i.e. appears to be real but not exactly so and never contradicts the science.”.

How is that this comment of mine has not considered what has been stated in your quote? In fact my comment begins only after having considered your quote. And you say I am too lazy. Had had said so I would have received 20% or more warning or would have been banned like in a debate corner (sorry! But that has been my experience)

Further Wadhwan says in his comment “Apparently, there is another, unknown , form of matter that is a full 90% of all matter, as indicated indirectly by the gravitational effects. It is called dark matter” and “This is what made me make the (admittedly speculative and simplistic) statement you have focused on- //Such ever-increasing distances mean a build-up of negative energy, which gets compensated by the creation of an equivalent amount of matter.//”.

So I request you kindly to understand what I am asking for. Here is different version. What is that which caused this ‘big bang’? Will this cause and effect sequence would ever end? Isn’t this ‘infinite regression’?

So my friend admit clearly that science is yet to know the ‘reality’, unknown dark matter/energy etc and that it is admittedly speculative in words of the very Wadhwan to whom you are quoting and that realm of Vedanta deals with what science is yet to know and therefore asking for ‘scientific method’ is irrelevant for Vedanta.

Essence: Be patient enough to understand what I mean.

I am restricting this comment only for 1st para of yours for effectiveness of the debate. After having settled this I would move to your next para of comment.

I am giving a last effort to this. Post that I am done with this thread.

You are clearly shifting goal posts. In your previous post you had asked for how can Science reconcile "something from nothing" with 1st law of thermodynamics. For that I directed to you that post. Now you are asking what caused Big Bang. What next? What caused "the thing that caused Big Bang?".By the way there are a lot of competing theories proposed in Science for what caused Big Bang. And apparently you are not lazy, so search the net to find out which ones.

Basically now you are giving the most typical theistic arguments.

Are there any unsolved problems in Science? Yes.
Does that mean Science can never answer them. No.
Just because we don't know something yet doesn't mean it is "out of the purview of Science" as you keep repeating.

And for the umpteenth time, Scientific Method is NOT DEPENDENT on whether you know something or not. You clearly can't grasp this basic concept.

Now let me come to your stupid argument about "reality". Every now and then you keep falling back to that without either understanding or making it clear what you mean by that. But anyways.
I will give you a logical example how something can come from nothing.
There was 0. Then -1 + 1. Then -2 + -1 + 1 + 2. And suddenly 2 asks, how come 1 exists, clearly there had to exist something for 1 to have created.
I am culprit for trivializing Physics this way, but had no other way to explain it in simpler words.
Reply
#26
(28-Dec-2011, 05:06 PM)ramesh Wrote: I would have been grateful to you had you stated me what absurd conclusions can be arrived at when I justify Vedanta. I still pray you state me at least one such conclusion which is absurd and arrived at by Vedanta.

One conclusion that is incompatible with ongoing neuroscientific findings and patently absurd in this sense, is that conscious functions survive the destruction of their biological substrate i.e. the brain. Here's a quick explanation of why it is absurd, and why there is no real common ground between Science and Religion, though religion does make truth claims and has been largely unsuccesful.

(28-Dec-2011, 05:06 PM)ramesh Wrote: Let us suppose there is no consciousness. Will there be any thinking? Simply silence or what Vedas call ‘neti, neti’.

The thought experiment of "Does a tree falling in a forest with nobody in it, make a sound?" has been a perennial staple of philosophy; and the stances of Idealism and Realism propose radically different answers to this. Vedanta has little to add to this discourse, except as an Oriental variant of Idealism or as an obfuscating conflation of Idealism and Realism with its chimerical concept of vyAvahArika satyam. Science, founded on Logical Positivism and Evidential Foundationalism therefore has no common ground with these essentially Idealist philosophies.

(28-Dec-2011, 05:06 PM)ramesh Wrote: Had it been easier to put all the truth (perfect logic and reason) precisely in words everybody would have been equally happy and prosperous just by reading it. Things are not so! Science can’t be for the sake of ‘science’ alone. It has to be for ‘Human beings’ to whom ‘happiness, stability of mind’ etc does matter!

Human well-being and the realization of human potential is certainly not something we are indifferent to over here, and we strive for the pursuit of human well-being via naturalistic ethics free of any supernatural assumptions like a non-material Consciousness of the sort Vedanta and other such schools insist on.

(28-Dec-2011, 05:06 PM)ramesh Wrote: Actual reason was that they failed miserably to understand my simple questions and what I mean by them despite of my efforts. Yes it is hard. Are not you witnessing that my original/first question stands as it is and you say and still say I neglected all your links/references which explain the same and accuse me out of reason and logic?

By the same token, why don't you first consider answering this very simple question posed to you in an earlier post? In other words, why don't you give silence a chance when your own scriptures suggest that no realization will occur in the deluded unless they are 'subject to Grace'? How about being a truly spiritual in silence rather than faking scientific interest in a mutual waste of time?

Quote:All you apologists who rue your lack of expression and rue your interlocutor's lack of understanding, but continue ad nauseam with the same admittedly faulty expression, why don't you consider following your own scriptures' counsel for silence and surrender to a higher will?

On second thoughts, there is no need of answering that question. Silence will do just fine.



[+] 1 user Likes arvindiyer's post
Reply
#27
@Kanad,

Re: You are clearly shifting goal posts. In your previous post you had asked for how can Science reconcile "something from nothing" with 1st law of thermodynamics. For that I directed to you that post. Now you are asking what caused Big Bang. What next? What caused "the thing that caused Big Bang?"

Here are few versions of my questions put up on various places:

1. What is the secret of the universe?----On Lije’s blog,

2. What are mass, time, space, quantum,….. etc ultimately? -------On Debate corner. (They directed me to the school definitions!!)

3. Quantum fluctuations states that the sum total of energy in this universe is zero. What we see is simply a feedback mechanism that results in this variation". If it is so what we feel as 'real' is no more a real thing! It's simply a 'mechanism' which gives the sense of 'reality' and there isn't anything as 'real' in the universe. In the light of this what is the significance of 'scientific method' that you expect 'Vedanta' to follow? Isn't that 'scientific method' a non-reality?
-------on Nirmukta forum.

4. How the science reconciles the 1st law of thermodyanamics with the net zero energy Quantum theory? And if it were indeed zero energy how the ‘universe’ is real?-----Nirmukta Forum

5. Until and unless the 90% of the unknown dark matter is known fully what legitimacy can be accorded to all the theories like big bang etc?-----reference to Wadhavan Blog.

6. What is that which caused this ‘big bang’? Will this cause and effect sequence would ever end? Isn’t this ‘infinite regression’?-----Nirmukta Forum

7. Whether science gets answers to all above like questions are not I believe that one day science would be in a position to create a ‘Human being’ in the laboratory from basic elements of the periodic table! At this stage what goal is science going to allot him to perform in his life? Such a Human being would be devoid of all the miseries which a present day human being suffers. Such a Human Beings will cease to be a ‘Human being’ for obvious reasons. Will the science be for the sake of science?---------This question is yet in its very crude from and I am yet to ask this question openly and please do not refer to this question even by mistake and cause unnecessary/undesirable debate till I myself ask about it since it is just imaginary at the present and I mention it to just to show that answer to this question would also be the same as to above questions according to me strictly.

8. ……..etc.


So, Kanad I never felt these questions to be different from each other as goal shifting. Here is simple example from science to help you understand.

1. what is the time taken by the particle to reach the ground from a distance of ‘d’ from the ground? Ans. Say ‘t’

2. What distance will a particle traverse to till it reaches the ground in ‘t’ seconds from above the ground? Say d

3. What would be the velocity of the particle as it reaches the ground from a distance ‘d’? say v

4. etc.

So you will argue that since the answers to all these are different and hence the questions and SO THE GOAL POST!
But you are wrong. When these above questions are put up what is expected is the knowledge of application of the equation: "d=ut+0.5gt2". Over!. The different answers will simply confirm that you have the RIGHT KNOWLEDGE which ALONE is sought for. And even though without the use of the equation you answer them rightly it would be just the chance and will never be duplicated nor will be appreciated.

So are my questions. Here I am seeking the answer like ‘d= d=ut+0.5gt2 and I will be getting answers to all automatically. You just need to answer any of these and over. I never shifted the goal posts. But it is lack of depth and sincerity to understand what I ask for. Long before I have acknowledged my poor English communication but have made all the efforts to put the right thing before you and never trolled.

Yes Vedanta (I never talk on behalf of God of Christen, Islam or others and regretfully most of you peoples references Y Tube etc belong to their version) has answered all these quite effectively. And has never contradicted the science.
So let me see whether you acknowledge the sufficient lack of reason and logic on your side just to understand the goal post (which has caused waste of time and energy for both of us) OR OTHERWISE and then I may proceed to further clarify your rest parts of comments.

N.B. Re: And for the umpteenth time, Scientific Method is NOT DEPENDENT on whether you know something or not.

I differ strongly here. This is your confirmation bias and you will say vice versa. Test: Vedanta claims to have known everything and that science never. Yardstick to check the correctness is always used is that of known i.e. confirmation is defined from the side of ‘real’ and ‘real’ is that about which everything is known and no secret remains (and science admits its weakness). So confirmation bias on your side stands confirmed as per the Vedanta. OR debate in this regard won’t end and your prescribing ‘scientific methods’ to Vedanta would be just one sided.
Reply
#28
@arvindiyer (and Lije),

You find that concept of ‘rebirth/after death life etc’ is absurd. The first mistake was that your reference was alien to the Vedenta. What notion Christens or Islamic people have about all these things I am not aware of and neither interested at present. I do not talk either on behalf of so called Vedantis or Hindus who are just believers as well. I always talk on behalf of ‘Vedanta’ as put up either by Maharshi Ved Vyasa or Shankaracharya or the true Hinduism as is being represented in Ramayana, Mahabharata, Puranas, Vedas etc.

So let it be clear that for Vedanta ‘Brahman’ alone is truth (absolute reality) and rest which comes under the universe as ‘Mithya’ (subjective reality). And these two aspects never contradict each other but always compliment each other. I call this as ‘The ultimate Principle’.

Vedanta concludes that all which comes under the ‘Mithya’ (subjective reality) or what the present science calls as just ‘reality’ is like mirage or snake in a rope etc and will never suffice the quest of Human curiosity (Jidnasa) and thus will always be cause of his sufferings. All the comforts available in the nature or as developed by the applications of modern science will never quench his thirst (Aasha, Bhog or his materialistic curiosity etc). And that ORDINARY man will never understand similar things and will so always suffer in this mundane life.

Therefore, exactly for the CONVENIENE/UTILITY/SOLACE of this man that Vedanta develops and builds up the ‘Dvaita’ world (just as science builds up the technology for convenience and usefulness). This Dvaita world is nothing but all that comes up under the universe. Birth, Rebirth, Death after life, Gods, Heaven, Hell, Vedas, Shastras and all that called as Supernatural. Since all this is subjective reality or Maya there is no rule which governs or explains their origin or accounts for them suitably like in modern science. It is simply Mithya (like the snake appearing in the rope). Just as in modern science there are newtons laws, maxwells equations etc so are these in the Dvaita World. Just as science is prone to corrections so are the concepts is this Mayic world of birth and rebirth.

But he alone who possesses unending curiosity (with total/perfect logic and critical reasoning ability) and who seeks the unending ‘infinite regression’ alone is qualified to break and modify this Mayic World and is called ‘Jnani’ or ‘Mukta’ or ‘Liberated person’. For such a person there is no such a God, no soul, no rebirth, nothing else. No rules, no laws of Hinduism or Vedanta applies. Whatever he says becomes the Vedatna and he interprets accordingly.

Therefore, Arvindeyer please be confirmed that there is no truth called ‘rebirth’ or concept of material (brain) born ‘consciousness’ in Vedanta/Hinduism as ‘absolute reality’. However so long as the ‘ordinary’ man lacks the capacity to question till the end (eligible Shishya) is made to follow the rules of Dvaita like ‘rebirth’ and is MADE to believe in the ‘almighty’ JUST for bringing the proper order in him and the society which comprises likes of him so that ethical, contained and peaceful life is enjoyed . No more purpose the ‘God, heaven, hell, rebirth and other host of karmkands in Vedas’ serve at all.

Thus the modern science is a subset of the Vedantic thought process. Hinduism acknowledges the Christen, Islam, Scientology, Atheism, Agnosticism and whatever that would come under the universe, …. etc as part (branches) of the Hinduism just like Buddhism. So consciousness (whose nature is as that of ‘sacchidanand’) as dealt in Vedanta is that of ‘Brahman’ and has never been at all in conflict with ‘brain born’ ‘consciousness’ of the modern science and agrees with whatever science has to say about the same.

In short Vedic consciousness is that which supports the ‘brain’ and not the ‘consciousness’ which is as an effect of the brain (such a Vedic consciousness would be expressed once the answers to questions which I have posed in the earlier comment are made known by the modern science). Please understand.

So the problem is with the understanding of the concept and excuse of lack of ‘common ground’ is badly misplaced.

Let me know if you could understand what I stated above. Then it would be proper to move to your next para of comment.

Apologies for any apparent bluntness committed by me.
Reply
#29
Sorry for jump the gun, but I couldn't resist to reply this post.

"The Ultimate priniciple" is nothing but the silver bullet to kill any kind of thought process. In "Mithya" world every theory is a subset of Vedanta. This is "convinience principle". Age old theory of including everything if you can't oppose them. There are no questions left after this. "Origin of All" is wicked idea to escape critisism.
The Lords, gods, godesses, this nature is all part of mitya world which is subjective reality. So what if I say that everything, everyone of us is just a computer game, played in some REAL computer.

The true Nature of "brahman", can't be explained in the "mitya" universe. This is nothing but the escape route avoid analysis. As "bhraman" can't be sensed, so to find what exactly the "brahman" is beyond the capacity of any creature of this universe. Ditto with science, as it is just a sub-class of "mithya" world. Everything included, its convinient. :-) But nobody exactly explain here is "how such knowledge comes to vedanta"?

Now as we are in the "mithya" universe, so it invalidates all claims from vedanta itself. As vedanta itself is in mithya uni. How can a scripture, specifically written in sanskrit is the only absolute truth in the "subjective reality".
Hence the school of vedanta, then itself is destroyer of its own contents.

Now again, as everything is mithya and we absoluty don't know the truth, having said so, I putforth some logical arguments from a naive person like me.
- Why there is need of creation of "subjective reality" or mithya world?
- Why the need of creation of "all organism" and such complex architecture of them along with all these stars and galaxies?
- Why only human beings are bestoved with this knowledge of absolute truth?
- Why particularly "vedanta" being told in India, why not in china?
- Why this much obfuscation of "realising the absolute truth"?
- what is the difference between western god ( all inclusive) and brahman ( all inclusive) ?
- How can the unexplained (brahman) can only explain(mithya)?

The argument to explain something must have atleast these qualities.
- It must be testable and must pass the test
- Consistency of explaination
- Explaination should support wide variety of data

It is better if you explain it to us, the true nature of Bhraman?

Later on, if you think it is necessary then please explain why the moral and ethical behaviour is necessary in this "mihtya world"?
Indians today are governed by two different ideologies. Their political ideal set in the preamble of the Constitution affirms a life of liberty, equality and fraternity. Their social ideal embodied in their religion denies them. - Ambedkar
Reply
#30
(30-Dec-2011, 02:16 PM)ramesh Wrote: Thus the modern science is a subset of the Vedantic thought process. Hinduism acknowledges the Christen, Islam, Scientology, Atheism, Agnosticism and whatever that would come under the universe, …. etc as part (branches) of the Hinduism just like Buddhism. So consciousness (whose nature is as that of ‘sacchidanand’) as dealt in Vedanta is that of ‘Brahman’ and has never been at all in conflict with ‘brain born’ ‘consciousness’ of the modern science and agrees with whatever science has to say about the same.

You say science (and everything else) is part of Vedanta. A naturalistic worldview shows that Vedanta is just nonsense. However since that is also part of Vedanta (by definition), it is not a contradiction and is a logically valid inference.

Conclusion: Vedanta is nonsense.

I think that concludes this discussion.
Reply
#31
Thanks Lije,

However let me correct your logically valid inference which appears to be bit erroneous just to respect the reason and logic.

By definition subset cannot contradict the super set as there are many other things in the same which a subset can be ill aware of. Therefore not only naturalism but also other branches say Buddhism, Jainism, Christen, Islam, Science etc also consider the Vedanta to be nonsense. Branches saying so cannot make the superset Vedanta a nonsense by definition of subset since there would be other branches which would be with sense. Anyway Vedanta doesn't call these branches to be nonsense but just says that 'curiosity is yet to be refined and logic and reason yet to be sharpened' and that 'scientific method' and so the 'burden of proof on Vedanta' are irrelevant to it. Therefore Vedanta appeal all the rest that you be whatever you want (athiest, agnositc islam etc) but criticizer not its products like Vedas, Ramayana, Mahabharat, Puranas made for the 'ordinary human who cannot understand the logic of science till the end' etc unless and until you are challenged and if you want to criticize it take it on head and face the questions as is being asked here and there OR you ask and we would answer. But no one way criticism. That would be injustice to the reason and logic so dear to science itself. So the appeal and request.

Thank you very much for getting me a sort of experience here and discussion stands concluded with you.

However I would be glad to know if I am permitted to answer to the questions of others who have put the questions and may put the questions on this thread. It should not happen that you having concluded the discussion may ban me just like in Debate Corner or warn me unnecessarily for my further answers to the rests who may be interesting in continuing the same.

I am eager to know whether I am permitted to comment henceforth or not, Please!

I am waiting for your answer, Dear Lije.......
Reply
#32
Once you make contradictory premises valid in your argument, you can form any conclusion that pleases you. So you can go on in that fashion. Some of us will ignore this discussion.

However, what will get you banned permanently is anymore whining about moderation. There is a thread for that. Post there.
Reply
#33
(30-Dec-2011, 07:49 PM)ramesh Wrote: By definition subset cannot contradict the super set as there are many other things in the same which a subset can be ill aware of. Therefore not only naturalism but also other branches say Buddhism, Jainism, Christen, Islam, Science etc also consider the Vedanta to be nonsense. Branches saying so cannot make the superset Vedanta a nonsense by definition of subset since there would be other branches which would be with sense. Anyway Vedanta doesn't call these branches to be nonsense but just says that 'curiosity is yet to be refined and logic and reason yet to be sharpened' and that 'scientific method' and so the 'burden of proof on Vedanta' are irrelevant to it. Therefore Vedanta appeal all the rest that you be whatever you want (athiest, agnositc islam etc) but criticizer not its products like Vedas, Ramayana, Mahabharat, Puranas made for the 'ordinary human who cannot understand the logic of science till the end' etc unless and until you are challenged and if you want to criticize it take it on head and face the questions as is being asked here and there OR you ask and we would answer. But no one way criticism. That would be injustice to the reason and logic so dear to science itself. So the appeal and request.

Really, this is what you want to discuss. Don't criticise "Ramayan, Mahabharat or veda"?
I guess, you always laugh out loud when you type such non-sense. Don't you?
Anyways thanks for entertaining us.

Back to the topic "Quantum mechanics, Reality, Vedanta and nature of "scientific method",
you had asked for the "scientific method" to prove the religions like "vedanta", and in above post you say that 'burden of proof on Vedanta' are irrelevant to it.". It means in any case, you don't seem to be serious on discussion of scientific method, as "burden of proof on vedanta" is irrelevent.

This is not at all the topic to continue with. You are not interested in "scientific methods" to prove the vedanta. At one hand you wanted Vedanta to be proved by scientific method and on other hand you negate the wisdom of scientific knowledge to be errornous sub-set of the super-set ought to be proved.

The playground should be same for all. You can't call that you have scored points in two stage building, where you are putting ball in basket on 2nd floor and others are playing on 1st floor. It will just give you illusion that you are scoring, but the actual count is still scored on 1st floor.

You are stating that every view is yours or you knew about it. Anyways as vedanta contains explaination of everything, I suppose we shall give you a task for it. Could you please find out the cure for AIDS before it could be found by "scientific method" which is so called sub-set of vedanta?
Not a difficult task for you, I suppose. May be it has been missed to be mentioned in some of these text? Printing mistake? Face Palm

You can put your views, all of them, may be in some blog, so that we all be on the common ground, and then discuss what exactly you want. If you really know about theory and conclusion, make them straight to the point. Remember, most best explainations are simplest one. Stick to it. Cool
Indians today are governed by two different ideologies. Their political ideal set in the preamble of the Constitution affirms a life of liberty, equality and fraternity. Their social ideal embodied in their religion denies them. - Ambedkar
Reply
#34
@nispat,

Re:you had asked for the "scientific method" to prove the religions like "vedanta", and in above post you say that 'burden of proof on Vedanta' are irrelevant to it.". It means in any case, you don't seem to be serious on discussion of scientific method, as "burden of proof on vedanta" is irrelevent.

Obviously you are in a haste. Please check my posts since the beginning. I never asked for the 'scientific methods' to prove the religions like Vedanta. Instead since the beginning I have been stating that the same are irrelevant. Please cite me references which you noticed contrary. Hence your further jumbling irrelevant.

Let you confirm first.

As for the answers to your previous questions, I request you to re read the 4th para which reads like "Since all this is subjective reality or Maya there is no rule which governs or explains their origin or accounts for them suitably like in modern science. It is simply Mithya (like the snake appearing in the rope). Just as in modern science there are newtons laws, maxwells equations etc so are these in the Dvaita World. Just as science is prone to corrections so are the concepts is this Mayic world of birth and rebirth."

This should suffice all of your questions. If you are not satisfied let me know why and some more reasons and I will explain one by one once again.



Reply
#35
@nispat,

....continued.

As for the solution to the AIDS, this originally came under Ayurveda branch of Vedanta. With the development of materialistic science, branch of broader science Vedanta, it is presently being studied under this branch of Vedanta. You may refer it for further queries. Vedanta knows everything should also mean that knowledge of modern science also belongs to it!! why confused?
Reply
#36
(30-Dec-2011, 09:59 PM)ramesh Wrote: @nispat,

....continued.

As for the solution to the AIDS, this originally came under Ayurveda branch of Vedanta. With the development of materialistic science, branch of broader science Vedanta, it is presently being studied under this branch of Vedanta. You may refer it for further queries. Vedanta knows everything should also mean that knowledge of modern science also belongs to it!! why confused?

If you can understand the request I am specifically asking for the cure. I am not asking for what is going to be studied. As you are stating the knowledge is always there with vedanta and "ayurved" is branch of vedanta, the knowledge must be present. So share this knowledge of the world. Nothing less or more, and no question of confusion. Please don't obfuscate, if you know the answers then spit them out. We are still listening.

Indians today are governed by two different ideologies. Their political ideal set in the preamble of the Constitution affirms a life of liberty, equality and fraternity. Their social ideal embodied in their religion denies them. - Ambedkar
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Does religion (vedanta) have a ground to stand on Captain Mandrake 8 5,558 30-May-2013, 08:12 PM
Last Post: Captain Mandrake
Wink What is scientific proof? madpurple 14 7,915 10-Dec-2011, 12:35 AM
Last Post: Ajita Kamal



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)