Groups keyboard shortcuts have been updated
Dismiss
See shortcuts

[Sadhu Sanga] Refuting Darwinism and Schrodinger's Cat

78 views
Skip to first unread message

Stanley A. KLEIN

unread,
Jan 30, 2016, 12:43:21 PM1/30/16
to Online Sadhu Sanga, Søren Brier, Hameroff, Stuart R - (hameroff)
Dear Dr. Bhakti Niskama Shanta,    In your response to Soren you said: 

Penrose and Hameroff’s work is also trying to get past the mechanical atomistic worldview. 

A wonderful aspect of Penrose and Hameroff's work is that it is fully within regular science in that it makes concrete hypotheses that can be tested. An important aspect of their hypotheses is that it makes a prediction regarding Schrodinger's Cat that differs from that of mainstream physics (Standard Model plus general relativity).Have a look at http://www.jillneimark.com/cat.php  for details. 

Stan

On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 5:01 AM, Søren Brier <sb....@cbs.dk> wrote:

Dear Dr. Bhakti Niskama Shanta

 

It is well-known that the dominant form of science in the world today is established  in Europe and later in the US and therefore based on the tradition from the Greek philosophers, which are famous for starting their

Deliberation on the Cosmos first and the divine later. This was  developed further with the birth of the empirical science from the renaissance and on with Galilei and in the Enlightenment science released itself from the philosophical influence and political power of the Catholic  church. Modernity is characterized by a spilt between religion, science, art, money and politics. Thus we no longer have a center in our democratic society based on a divine Pharaoh, Kaiser, sultan, king og Rajah that has the religious, political, economic, juridical  and  violence power concentrated in one person as the center of like the Dalai Lama before he denounced his political power and encouraged democracy.  Niklas Luhmann truth, love, power, money for symbolic generalized media of communication that are autopoietic self-organized and therefore closed to each other but compete about who should have most influence on the cultural and social idea of rationality.

 

Democracy is not a part of the Vedic teaching at all. It is interesting to see how Dalai Lama and Maharishi Mahesh Yogi dealt with this. Both of them let the social organization to the political and economic forces in democracy and established the spiritual dimension in its own autocratic organization. They also let science develop in its own system. Even the catholic church has recognized evolution (and ecology)as the scientific view of the living world as well as the big bang cosmogony. Now we know that theories of science do not represent the only form of knowledge in society and certainly not the final and absolute truth, which  you seem to claim for your philosophical-religious system. The spiritual truth you speak about is something else than what true science seek. The deep problem is how we deal with these different types of knowledge because your idea of truth is not the scientific one.

 

Anyway the Vedic view of these things has to prove itself and the nation India built upon this philosophical-theological culture and being the biggest democracy on earth still needs to prove itself as having a superior knowledge that can produce a superior culture. But maybe you thing this is only possible by going back to the pre-democratic structure of culture? We see movement like that in Russia with the orthodox church with Putin as a king of new Czar and in Islamic State establishing the old sultan reign. The two attempt  appear very violent and not very productive and beneficial for the common man. So can we encompass spirituality, democracy and science in one culture, do you think?

 

Warmest

 

               Søren Brier

 

 

Fra: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com [mailto:Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com] På vegne af Dr. Bhakti Niskama Shanta
Sendt: 29. januar 2016 19:54
Til: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Emne: Re: SV: SV: [Sadhu Sanga] Paper Refuting Darwinism Published in Journal 'Communicative & Integrative Biology'

 

Dear Prof. Søren Brier (SB)

 

Thank you for your reply. Please find our response below.

 

 

SB: YES I AGREE Science journals also follow the same trend and do not allow any honest expression of truth (which is against materialism) that scientists realize from their own research works. HAVE BEEN TRUE IN MOST OF MY TIME AS SCIENTIST-PHILOSOPHER, BUT IT IS CHANGING THESE DAYS.

BNS: Till date the top science journals pre-decide ‘what results and conclusions they will publish’ and ‘what they will not’. The evidence in favor of theistic concept of reality is intentionally omitted in the scientific literature. Therefore, majority of scientific literature is deceptive in nature. We cannot make any significant progress in scientific understanding of reality in an environment where the truth is intentionally suppressed and tampered.

 

 

SB: Unfortunately, majority of scientific community do not even realize that they are mere puppets in the hands of their perceived masters (politicians and businessmen controlling funding for scientific projects). TOO MUCH I AM AFRAID, STILL.

BNS: All scientists must realize that they are mere puppets and they are monotonously repeating those assertions that please their perceived masters (politicians and businessmen controlling funding for scientific projects). It seems very difficult to change this unfortunate trend, because scientists are dependent on their masters to get their bread (salary), promotion, recognition and so on. Therefore, a pure scientific spirit to search for the truth is completely missing in modern scientific community.

 

 

SB: However, fortunately there is an encouraging trend that we find is prevailing in the 21st century, where there are some scientists who have taken up a brave attitude to carry out a ‘scientific critique of science’ to dismantle this unnecessary control of ignorance that is overpowering the true scientific progress.      TRUE, BUT BREAKTHROUGHS ARE HAPPENING LIKE THIS SPECIAL ISSUE OF Progress in biophysics and MOLECULAR BIOLOGY THAT ATTEMPTS TO INTEGRATE PHENOMENOLOGY IN BIOSCIENCE

, which is presently free for all to download.

BNS: An unbiased appreciation of truth is almost absent in scientific community and publications. We know from the history how even great scientists like Nobel Prize winner Barbara McClintock and others have faced non-welcoming attitude when they honestly tried to express the truth from their own experimental research works. McClintock said “They thought I was crazy, absolutely mad”.

 

 

SB: Penrose and Hameroff’s work is also trying to get past the mechanical atomistic worldview. So is the work of Basarab Nicolescu http://ciret-transdisciplinarity.org/index_en.php

BNS: The Quantum Mechanics (QM) approaches (like Penrose and Hameroff’s model) to consciousness simply presume the existence of consciousness and utilize it in the elucidation of quantum processes. One mystery (consciousness) cannot be solved by another (QM). These speculative suggestions possibly will explain the physical role that consciousness may play but most importantly all of these approaches are also suffering from the same limitation (why should these processes give rise to experience) that outmoded the old approaches (Crick and Koch’s neurobiological view for storage and binding of information, Jackendoff’s ‘intermediate level’ theory – computational approach and so on) for studying consciousness.

 

Philosophers have always understood these problems, which science is now being forced to acknowledge in different ways. The life principle cannot be understood properly without overcoming the subject-object duality. There cannot be any content-part (object of consciousness) without a subject-part (conscious self) and vice versa. We should not deny the conscious phenomenon (our mental lives) just because it is not possible to externally verify it. Subjective experiences cannot be observed directly by some experiments, but all of us experience them. Consciousness has to be taken as fundamental and it cannot be explained in terms of anything simpler. To accommodate the non-material aspect of conscious realm we have to include “soul hypothesis” within the scientific studies.

 

 

SB: Science means practical knowledge WELL ORIGINALLY IT WAS THE GREEK EPISTEME.

BNS: Perhaps you are not well aware of Vedic literature. Since antiquity Vedic literature has elaborately revealed three different levels of knowledge experiences: (1) jñāna (theoretical knowledge), (2) vijñāna (scientific or practical knowledge) and (3) prajñāna (prema miśra jñāna – realized knowledge of pure love of Godhead). In Vedic literature knowledge has also been classified under five headings (1) pratyaka (What we have experienced through our senses.), (2) paroka (Knowledge we have not experienced with our own senses, but have gathered from the experience of others. For example a common men get some knowledge from scientific invention and discoveries), (3) aparoka (A sort of hazy experience, which is indistinct, where the subject and material object come together, and the material object vanishes in the subject. Monists, proponent of impersonalism or followers of Sripad Adi Shankaracharya’s Kevala-Advaita/Māyāvādā-philosophy discuss the gradation of consciousness up to this point.), (4) adhokaja (Sripad Rāmānuja Āchārya and other Vaiṣṇava Āchāryas discussed about a fourth stage. The experience in this stage is beyond the reach of our gross or subtle sensual capabilities. This experience comes to our gross plane of understanding only by the sweet will of Absolute. This superior knowledge can force down all our knowledge of the experience of this mundane world.) and (5) aprākta (Śrīmad Bhāgavatam talks about this highest stage. Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and his followers discussed this stage of experience, which is very similar to this mundane world, yet is not mundane. Vedic literature explains that the mundane world or ‘illusory world’ is a perverted reflection of the world of absolute.)

 

 

SB: Anyone can practice it and attain the same result. Vedic knowledge is scientific because anyone can practice it in one’s own life and attain the same results that many have attained in past HOW CAN WE KNOW? following the same process.

BNS: If someone wants to experience the taste of Indian sweet “rasgulla” then he/she has to taste it by putting “rasgulla” inside the mouth. There is no other way! Similarly, one must properly follow in his/her life the scientific process that Vedic literature elaborates and thus he/she can also attain the goals of those practices.

 

 

SB: WELL THERE ARE MANY SYSTEMS THAT DOES NOT FUNCTION OR FUNTION SO SLOW THAT IT TAKES A MAN A WHOLE LIFE IN RECLUSION. THERE ARE NOT MANYU HOUSHOLDER TECHNIQUES PRESENT THAT ALLOWS YOU TO LEAD A SOMEWHAT NORMAL LIFE WHILE PRACTISING.  

BNS: Due to a lack of proper knowledge about Vedic system, many have developed a misconception that to follow Vedic system one has to give up everything (tyāga – renunciation) and has to go to forest. One must first study carefully Śrīmad Bhagavad-gīta to get an introduction into the Vedic system. We know that Arjuna (who was a householder) also wanted to follow the path of renunciation (tyāga – he wanted to leave everything and wanted to go to forest) when he was in extremely distressed condition during the great Mahābhārata war. Bhagavān Sri Krishna in Śrīmad Bhagavad-gīta informs us through Arjuna that there is much higher level of consciousness – dedicating consciousness (bhakti) and to attain bhakti one does not have to renounce but one has to learn under an expert guide to use his/her everything (mind, intelligence, body, family members, possessions, knowledge (like modern scientific knowledge that we have gained) and everything) in the loving services of Supreme Absolute. We do not obtain a Ph.D. degree immediately after joining a kindergarten school. We followed a long process to obtain our Ph.D. degree. Similarly, attaining highest consciousness – pure bhakti, we should not concoct a shortcut method or a cheap mechanical process. One has to patiently follow the prescribed process properly under an expert Spiritual Guide to carefully cultivate the heart (by removing all unwanted polluted consciousness from heart: exploitation – bhoga and renunciation – tyāga) to develop a consciousness of pure love for Supreme Absolute.

 

 

SB: Even scientists try to think deeply (some type of apparent meditation) about certain problem that they want to solve. At certain point of time they get some sort of knowledge to solve that problem. What is the source from which we are getting this knowledge? Till date scientists could not find answer for this question. TRUE. PEIRCE AND POPPER WERE THE ONES REALIZING THAT THIS IS THE BIGGEST MYSTERY  However, in Vedic science it is well known that all forms of knowledge (correct or incorrect depending on our attitude) comes from Paramātma (super soul). A chick coming from a hatching machine does not do a scientific research to know that it should eat food grains and not sand grains. If Paramātma (super soul) does not provide this knowledge and sustenance then life cannot survive by its own. THAT IS WHY EVOLUTIONARY EPISTEMOLOGY HAS BEEN DEVELOPED.  

BNS: People may use words like “evolutionary epistemology” to deceive gullible public but any sensible person can easily know the imprudence of all such propositions. In evolutionary epistemology scientists speculate an irrational view that knowledge itself evolves by natural selection. All such thoughtless speculators should first understand that even a simple bacterium cell follows an extremely complex process and bacterium itself does not have knowledge about that process. Yet, those complex cellular processes are going on. What is guiding such complex processes?

 

 

SB: Therefore, all life forms including human beings and demigods are dependent beings and Supreme Absolute is supremely independent being – reality is by itself and for itself. PERSONALLY I AGREE ON THIS. BUT HOW DO WE FIND OUT WHO HAS ACCES TO THE ABSOLUTE AND CAN BE TRUSTED? THERE ARE SO MANY CALLING THEMSELVES MASTERS ??  

BNS: Those who claim themselves as masters are actually mere imitators and what to talk about saving others, they even cannot save themselves from the illusory plane – māyā. We have also no power to find out by our own ability (as we are witnessing the limits of our knowing abilities within modern science) the confidential devotee of the Supreme Absolute. It is explained in Vedic literature that one, who is sincere, such a soul will never be cheated. On the other hand, who is not sincere he/she will always be cheated. This world is full of cheaters and cheated because we have no systematic means in modern educational system that can help an individual to cultivate good qualities like sincerity. According to our inclinations we get the rewards from Paramātma (super soul). Paramātma is also known as caitya-guru (spiritual master guiding within the heart of the living entities) and when one sincerely shows the eagerness to get the guidance to progress in the path of one’s real constitutional position the same caitya-guru (Paramātma) comes to that sincere soul as mahānta-guru (external manifestation of Sri Guru or ācārya – who teaches by his own example). We have to always remember that we are not the masters. Therefore, we should not think that whatever we want (even we may desire to become a pure devotee of Supreme Absolute) that will be accomplished. Our desire is not all in all. We have to get the higher sanction to get our desires fulfilled. We can only try to develop the sincere hankering (prayerful mood) for higher guidance and should patiently wait for higher mercy to descend to us.

 

 

SB: IF WE LOOK AT INDIA FROM EUROPE AND US WE ARE NOT IMPRESSED WITH THE SPIRITUAL DEVELOPMENT AND HARMONY IN THE CONTRY. LOTS OF BRIBERY, LACK OF MUTUAL RESPECT BETWEEN RELIGIONS, NOT TO SPEAK OF THE LACK OF RESPECT FOR WOMEN AS EQUAL HUMAN BEINGS.  

BNS: You are superficially seeing the image that is being created by Britishers (who practiced a divide and rule policy), who ruled Indian for approximately 200 years. Modern educational system and different adapted polices are a mere outcome of attempts to superficially imitate western culture. Women are highly respected in Vedic tradition. In recent time most of the people in India are not well versed with Vedic literature and the present problems that are witnessed in India are due to a superficial imitation of western culture. Many prominent western thinkers (for example, Schrödinger) have a complete opposite view than what you have mentioned because they have spent some quality time to understand deeply certain aspect of real wealth of east – Vedāntic wisdom.

 

 

SB: One has to accept the authority of Veda Vyas to know what the highest stage of spiritual advancement is. BUT EVEN THOSE WHO DOES, IS NOT ALWAYS ABLE TO THE RIGHT INTERPRETATION AND TO GIVE THE RIGHT TECHNIQUES – LIKE THE HARE KRISHNA MOVEMENT I THINK BUT HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING. I HAVE FOLLOWED THE BIG DISCUSSION ABOUT TRANSCENDENTAL MEDITATIONS TEACHER TRAINING OF ORDINARY PEOPLE IN ORDER TO MASS PRODUCE MEDITATORS AND THE DISCUSSION OF THE SIMPLIFICATION MADE OF THE CRITERIA USED for ASSIGNING MANTRAS (MANILY GENDER AND AGE) ALSO TO BE ABLE TO MASS PRODUCE TEACHERS. BUT I LACK TOLLS AND METHODS TO GIVE A PRODUCTIVE CRITICAL JUDGEMENT. Forman, R.K.C. (2011). Enlightenment Ain't What It's Cracked Up To Be  CERTAINLY GAVE ME A NEW UNDERSTANDING of what enlightenment means. BUT IS IT CORRECT? AND IF YOU SAY NO. ARE YOU THEN CORRECT?  

BNS: We must not follow anyone and everyone to advance in Vedic wisdom. In Śrīmad Bhagavad-gīta it is explained “eva paramparā-prāptam ima rājarayo vidu sa kāleneha mahatā yogo naṣṭa paran-tapa – This supreme science was thus received through the chain of disciplic succession, and the saintly kings understood it in that way. But in course of time the succession was broken, and therefore the science as it is appears to be lost.” In the Padma Purāa also it is said, “sampradāya-vihīnā ye mantrās te niphalā matā: If one does not follow the recognized disciplic successions (in the age of Kali there are four authentic sampradāya: Śrī sampradāya, Brahma sampradāya, Rudra sampradāya and Kumāra sampradāya), his mantra or path is useless.”

 

 

SB: If we simply ignore our subjective activities and merely give emphasis on our objective knowledge gaining habit then we cannot do any real good to our true inner self and thus cannot help others in any true sense. I HAVE EXPERIENCED A LOT OF MOOD MAKING AROUND THESE THINGS.IT IS DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE TO BE COMPLETELY HONEST ABOUT THEIR EXPERIENCES AND TO KNOW HOW TO CLASSIFY THEM. IT IS LIKE TELLING A CHILD ABOUT FALLING IN LOVE.WHEN IT HAPPENS THE FIRST TIME AS TEENAGER THEY ARE NOT SURE IF ITS LOVE OR A STOMACH ACKE.  

BNS: Instead of asking others “what they are experiencing” we have to inquire “what we want to experience” and thus should try to find out the proper means to attain that.

 

 

SB: AMONG RESEARCHE IN THE PHENOMENOLOGY OF RELIGION THERE IS A GREAT DISCUSSION GOING ON IF THERE IS SUCH A PERENNIAL PHILOSOPHY OF PURE SPIRITUALITY OR PURE MYSTICISM. I THINK SO PERSONALLY– AND I KNOW IT IS ESSENSIAL TO THE VEDANTIC VIEW BE IT ADVAITA OR BHAKTI – BUT THERE IS NO AGREEMENT ON THIS UNIVERSALLY.

BNS: Variety is the spice of life and according to Vedic system there are 400,000 human species. This classification is based on consciousness. The monistic outlook in physical sciences and the generalized laws of materialism do not bother about individuality in the inanimate world, but, such a consideration is a must in the biological realm. We cannot expect all human species should have the same level of understanding. Therefore, there are different processes/practices (authentic religious systems) that guide different individuals from one lower stage of consciousness to another higher stage of consciousness.

 

 

SB: Unless we come out of close walls that we have created in modern science how can we test and experience something higher and more substantial? I DO AGREE -  AND WE ARE MANY IN SEARCH OF A NEW FOUNDATION, HENCE MY REFERENCES TO MODERN BIOSEMIOTICS AND CYBERSEMIOTICS BASED ON PEIRCE’S SHELLING INSPIRED PRAGMATICIST VIEW OF EMPIRICAL SCIENCE. HOW DO WE BALLANCE AND INTEGRATE SCIENTIFIC AND SPIRITUAL KNOWING? IT IS A UNIVERSAL AS WELL AS A PERSONAL QUESTION FOR ME. SEE cybersemiotics.com .

BNS: First we have to acknowledge that we have completely ignored the study of “self” (science does not study scientist), because such a study is beyond the limited approach of modern scientific analysis. If we want to end the endless trial and errors process (where continually one opinion is replaced by another), then we have to scientifically realize that we cannot know anything concrete and substantial by our own limited abilities. We have to take up a very different approach (as prescribed in revealed scriptures) to advance in the field of “science of the soul” and “science of God”.

 

 

SB: I DO AGREE THAT THE FEW EXPEIENCES I HAVE HAD OF HIGHER STATES OF CONSCIOUSNESS – IF THAT WERE WHAT THEY WERE? – IS WHAT DRIVES ME (IN COMBINATION WITH MY SCIENTIFIC AND PHILOSOPHICAL TRAINING) TO SEARCH FOR TRUE KNOWLEDGE. BUT IT ALSO PLACES ME IN THE OUTSKIRTS OF MANY TRADITIONS (THAT DO NOT RESPECT EACH OTHER)  AND WHERE THEIR KNOWLEDGE OVERLAP

BNS: Until we overcome our false ego (ahańkāra: the identification of the self with the body and the bodily identities like nation, cast, color, creed and so on), we cannot properly respect each other and harmonize things. Only when one comes to the plane of absolute by overcoming all relative perspective then only he/she can realize the real harmony and thus respects all living entities (because he/she realizes that all souls are constitutionally servants of the same Supreme Absolute).

 

 

SB: There is a Super Subject and everything else (including us) is the object for His enjoyment. However, the living entities who are ignorant about their true constitutional position (eternal servants of Supreme Absolute), I –FOR ONE – AM NOT SURE IT IS A SUBJECT, WHICH IN MY VOCABULARY IS A LIMITING CONCEPT FOR A SUPREME BEING NOT LIMITED BY TIME, ENERGY AND SPACE

BNS: Modern science wants to know everything under an impersonal view of reality. In Vedāntic view we know that conditioned living entities (living entities with material consciousness/conception) try to understand and dominate matter by sensual means – pañca-tanmâtra. Here the word mâtra (matter) is coming from the same root word māyā (the limiting (within the limits of time, energy and space) or measuring potency). We should not be under a false imagination that Supreme Absolute is also under such limitations that we are experiencing under the influence of mahā-māyā (the external potency of Supreme Absolute).

 

 

SB: I DO BELIEVE THAT WE ALL NEED TO STRIVE FOR FULLFILLMENT SPIRITUALLY. THE PROBLEM IS HOW? NOT IN A FUNDAMENTALISTIC AND UNCRITICAL WAY. THAT LEADS TO WAR. I HAVE DONE A LOT MEDITATION IN MY LIFE SO FAR AND DO NOT FEEL ESPECIALLY ENLIGHTENED. WHO HAS THE RIGHT TO CLAIM TO BE ENLIGHTENED? DO WE HAVE OBJECTIVE CRITERIA? TO PERFORM THE YOGA SUSTRAS - OF WHICH LEVITATION IS ONE - FOR INSTANCE? TRANSCENDENTAL MEDITATION TRIES, BUT HAVE NOT SUCCEEDED - OR ARE CERTAIN BRAIN WAVE PATTERNS SUFFICIENT ? OR IS THE FEELING OF HAPPINESS AND ENLIGHTENMENT ENOUGH? OR IS THERE A CRITERIA FOR SOCIAL WELL FUNCTIONING LIKE COLLECTIVE HAPPINESS. THERE IS A LOT OF WORK ON HAPPINESS MEASUREMENT THESE DAYS.

 

THERE IS ALSO A LOT OF EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH ON MEDITATION AND PRAYER THESE DAYS AND WE HAVE A NEW POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY MOVEMENT.

 

I align myself with Rumi ’s view not pretending to be anything near what he was

 

Not Christian or Jew or

Muslim, not Hindu,

Buddhist, Sufi, or Zen.

Not any religion

or cultural system. I am

not from the east

or the west, ….

BNS: According to Vedāntic philosophy pain (dukha) and pleasure (sukha) are transient nature of dual plane that we experience in the material conception of life. The transient nature of ‘hedonic’ perspective of subjective well-being is also well recognized in modern psychology. Thus, Vedānta explains that in material conception of life we cannot attain lasting happiness and fulfillment. Our true self (real ego) or the soul proper (ātman) is much beyond the mundane mind (manasā) and intelligence (buddhi). According to Vedānta, the soul (ātman) possesses the qualities of sat, cit and ānanda. According to Vedānta, we obtain our individual conscious substance (or being) from Ultimate Reality Bhagavān Sri Krishna, Who is the personification of these three feature existence (sat), knowledge (cit) and fulfillment (ānanda – ecstasy). The first verse of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam elaborates the commentary of the second aphorism of Vedānta-sūtra (janmādy yato ńvayād itarataś cārthesv abhijñah svarāt). “Janmādy asya yatah” – the origin of everything is “abhijñah svarāt” – the unitary Supreme Cognizant Being. The verse 5.1 in Sri Brahma Samhita also explains:

 

īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sach-chid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ

anādir ādir govindaḥ sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam

 

Translation: The personification of spiritual existence, consciousness and ecstasy, Sri Krishna, who is known as Govinda, is the Supreme Lord of all Lords. He has no origin, He is the origin of all and He is the cause of all causes.

 

In the healthy body of a multicellular organism, every individual cell, despite having its own individuality, is meant to work for the welfare of the whole body. Similarly, Vedānta advocates that we are living in an ‘Organic Whole’ and every individual unit of this whole is meant to dedicate itself for the satisfaction of the Center – the ādi-purua or primeval personal Absolute. Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (Śrī Caitanya-caritāmta Madhya-līlā 20.108-109) also gave the same teaching:

 

jīvera ‘svarūpa’ haya — kṛṣṇera ‘nitya-dāsa’

kṛṣṇera ‘taṭasthā-śakti’ ‘bhedābheda-prakāśa’

sūryāṁśa-kiraṇa, yaiche agni-jvālā-caya

svābhāvika kṛṣṇera tina-prakāra ‘śakti’ haya

 

Translation: It is the living entity’s constitutional position to be an eternal servant of Krishna because he is the marginal energy of Krishna and a manifestation simultaneously one with and different from the Lord, like a molecular particle of sunshine or fire. Krishna has three varieties of energy.

 

Therefore, we can attain real fulfillment only when we can establish ourselves in our true constitutional position as eternal servants of primeval personal Absolute. However, the living entities who are ignorant about their true constitutional position, exercise their freedom to choose a position against their real nature. Ignoring their true position as eternal servants of Sri Krishna these living entities can develop the moods of either active (exploitation) or passive (renunciation) hostilities towards the Supreme Absolute Sri Krishna and proceed along the paths of karma or jñāna/yoga respectively. In that mood of hostility towards Supreme Absolute these living entities even cannot attain peace and obviously fulfillment is much beyond their reach. Therefore, both salvationists (those who call themselves vaidāntika and aspire for liberation, mukti or moka) and elevationists (those who aspire to improve religion (dharma or duty), economic development (artha) and sense gratification (kāma)) are considered exploiters. Elevationists try to exploit in a gross plane and salvationists do the same on a subtle plane. Therefore, karmīs, jñānīs and yogīs cannot provide us highest good. We can only learn and attain our real good by receiving the pure message of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam from pure devotees (Vaiṣṇavas). This was also instructed by Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu to Srila Rupa Gosvami (Śrī Caitanya-caritāmta Madhya-līlā 19.149):

 

kṛṣṇa-bhakta — nikāma, ataeva ‘śānta’

bhukti-mukti-siddhi-kāmī — sakali ‘aśānta’

 

Translation: Because a devotee of Lord Krishna is desire less, he is peaceful. Fruitive workers (karmis) desire material enjoyment, jñānīs desire liberation, and yogīs desire material opulence; therefore they are all lusty and cannot be peaceful.            

       

Sincerely,

Bhakti Niskama Shanta, Ph.D.                     Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute

 +91-(9748906907)

 Donate

 #8, Gopalakrishnan Mansion, Konappana Agrahara, Electronic City, Bangalore, Karnataka, India

 

 

On Tuesday, 26 January 2016 12:33 AM, Søren Brier <sb....@cbs.dk> wrote:

 

Dear Bhakti Niskama Shanta

 

Thank you for your answers and deliberations. I answer in the text with capitals:

 

Fra: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com [mailto:Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com] På vegne af Dr. Bhakti Niskama Shanta
Sendt: 25. januar 2016 17:38
Til: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Emne: Re: SV: [Sadhu Sanga] Paper Refuting Darwinism Published in Journal 'Communicative & Integrative Biology'

 

Dear Prof. Søren Brier

 

Not only your good self but also any reasonable and honest person unaffected by politics and dictum of funding policies of corporate arms will certainly conclude that the method that we have adopted in modern science is imperfect. Under a wrong influence (politics and funding agencies) majority of scientific community take for granted that the real goal of science is to defend/establish materialism and thus the entire scientific research is centered around wrong presumptions like abiogenesis, insentient view about lower species (like animals, plants, bacteria and so on), bodily evolution theories (macroevolution), genetic determinism, AI (sentient robots, creativity of mechanical systems like computers and so on) and so on.  YES I AGREE Science journals also follow the same trend and do not allow any honest expression of truth (which is against materialism) that scientists realize from their own research works. HAVE BEEN TRUE IN MOST OF MY TIME AS SCIENTIST-PHILOSOPHER, BUT IT IS CHANGING THESE DAYS.  Unfortunately, majority of scientific community do not even realize that they are mere puppets in the hands of their perceived masters (politicians and businessmen controlling funding for scientific projects). TOO MUCH I AM AFRAID, STILL.  In such a circumstance the scientific research works are forced to highlight the tampered version of the truth. This monotonous obeying of wrong source at the expense of truth and true scientific spirit is the cause of degradation of the real image of true science. Also such type of control is the root cause of the major problems that our civilization is facing in the form of dangerous global environmental problems, increasingly distressed life style, highly degraded food quality, and so on. However, fortunately there is an encouraging trend that we find is prevailing in the 21st century, where there are some scientists who have taken up a brave attitude to carry out a ‘scientific critique of science’ to dismantle this unnecessary control of ignorance that is overpowering the true scientific progress.      TRUE, BUT BREAKTHROUGHS ARE HAPPENING LIKE THIS SPECIAL ISSUE OF Progress in biophysics and MOLECULAR BIOLOGY THAT ATTEMPTS TO INTEGRATE PHENOMENOLOGY IN BIOSCIENCE

, which is presently free for all to download. Penrose and Hameroff’s work is also trying to get past the mechanical atomistic worldview. So is the work of Basarab Nicolescu http://ciret-transdisciplinarity.org/index_en.php .

 

Science means practical knowledge WELL ORIGINALLY IT WAS THE GREEK EPISTEME. Anyone can practice it and attain the same result. Vedic knowledge is scientific because anyone can practice it in one’s own life and attain the same results that many have attained in past HOW CAN WE KNOW? following the same process. By one’s own ability (using the puppy brain) it is impossible to grasp the infinite reality. WELL THERE ARE MANY SYSTEMS THAT DOES NOT FUNCTION OR FUNTION SO SLOW THAT IT TAKES A MAN A WHOLE LIFE IN RECLUSION. THERE ARE NOT MANYU HOUSHOLDER TECHNIQUES PRESENT THAT ALLOWS YOU TO LEAD A SOMEWHAT NORMAL LIFE WHILE PRACTISING. Practicing an arrogant attitude we may claim that we can know the truth by our own but that wrong attitude will only lead to a process where endlessly one opinion is replaced by another. To know the truth we have to depend on higher authorized source (like to know our date of birth we depend on those who have witnessed our birth). TRUE, BUT MOTHER ALONE IS NOT RELIABLE ENOUGH, SO WE ASK THE MIDWIFE AND NURSES TO AGREE ON A TIME.

 

You have told “How do we know the meditative techniques works?” Even to have some knowledge from sensory plane we need some attention from mind. If we are not mindful of the sense objects, then even though something is moving in front of our eyes we cannot see it. Even scientists try to think deeply (some type of apparent meditation) about certain problem that they want to solve. At certain point of time they get some sort of knowledge to solve that problem. What is the source from which we are getting this knowledge? Till date scientists could not find answer for this question. TRUE. PEIRCE AND POPPER WERE THE ONES REALIZING THAT THIS IS THE BIGGEST MYSTERY  However, in Vedic science it is well known that all forms of knowledge (correct or incorrect depending on our attitude) comes from Paramātma (super soul). A chick coming from a hatching machine does not do a scientific research to know that it should eat food grains and not sand grains. If Paramātma (super soul) does not provide this knowledge and sustenance then life cannot survive by its own. THAT IS WHY EVOLUTIONARY EPISTEMOLOGY HAS BEEN DEVELOPED. Therefore, all life forms including human beings and demigods are dependent beings and Supreme Absolute is supremely independent being – reality is by itself and for itself. PERSONALLY I AGREE ON THIS. BUT HOW DO WE FIND OUT WHO HAS ACCES TO THE ABSOLUTE AND CAN BE TRUSTED? THERE ARE SO MANY CALLING THEMSELVES MASTERS ?? To attain the prefect knowledge beyond the illusory plane and to attain the real goal of life we have to cultivate proper attitude (submissiveness to the absolute plane) under a proper spiritual guide and thus can find the real objective on which we should be doing our meditation. IF WE LOOK AT INDIA FROM EUROPE AND US WE ARE NOT IMPRESSED WITH THE SPIRITUAL DEVELOPMENT AND HARMONY IN THE CONTRY. LOTS OF BRIBERY, LACK OF MUTUAL RESPECT BETWEEN RELIGIONS, NOT TO SPEAK OF THE LACK OF RESPECT FOR WOMEN AS EQUAL HUMAN BEINGS.

 

You have also told “There are thousands of religious and mystics-meditative associations based on the Vedas and they do not agree on interpretation or on meditation techniques or if there is a personal God to worship or several demigods, which demands sacrifices of different sorts. How are we to know who is right, who holds the basic truth ?” In Vedic tradition Krishna Daipayan Veda Vyas is accepted as an authority by all because Veda Vyas is the literary incarnation of Supreme Absolute, who gave all the Vedic literature in the literal form. Different Vedic literature is meant for elevating different individuals from certain lower stage of consciousness to higher stage of consciousness. One has to accept the authority of Veda Vyas to know what the highest stage of spiritual advancement is. BUT EVEN THOSE WHO DOES, IS NOT ALWAYS ABLE TO THE RIGHT INTERPRETATION AND TO GIVE THE RIGHT TECHNIQUES – LIKE THE HARE KRISHNA MOVEMENT I THINK BUT HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING. I HAVE FOLLOWED THE BIG DISCUSSION ABOUT TRANSCENDENTAL MEDITATIONS TEACHER TRAINING OF ORDINARY PEOPLE IN ORDER TO MASS PRODUCE MEDITATORS AND THE DISCUSSION OF THE SIMPLIFICATION MADE OF THE CRITERIA USED for ASSIGNING MANTRAS (MANILY GENDER AND AGE) ALSO TO BE ABLE TO MASS PRODUCE TEACHERS. BUT I LACK TOLLS AND METHODS TO GIVE A PRODUCTIVE CRITICAL JUDGEMENT. Forman, R.K.C. (2011). Enlightenment Ain't What It's Cracked Up To Be  CERTAINLY GAVE ME A NEW UNDERSTANDING of what enlightenment means. BUT IS IT CORRECT? AND IF YOU SAY NO. ARE YOU THEN CORRECT?

 

You have mentioned “The all claim deep experiential knowledge, but it is a knowledge other people cannot access. There is no fruitful discussion advancing knowledge towards a common synthesis.” In modern objective science we do not have a science of fulfillment because, being private to one’s own self scientists completely ignore the scientific analysis of the subjective activities: thinking, feeling and willing. However, like sensual experiences, anyone can objectively experience his/her own thinking, feeling and willing. Therefore, anyone can do a scientific study of this inner non-sensuous nature by self analysis or introspection. If we simply ignore our subjective activities and merely give emphasis on our objective knowledge gaining habit then we cannot do any real good to our true inner self and thus cannot help others in any true sense. I HAVE EXPERIENCED A LOT OF MOOD MAKING AROUND THESE THINGS.IT IS DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE TO BE COMPLETELY HONEST ABOUT THEIR EXPERIENCES AND TO KNOW HOW TO CLASSIFY THEM. IT IS LIKE TELLING A CHILD ABOUT FALLING IN LOVE.WHEN IT HAPPENS THE FIRST TIME AS TEENAGER THEY ARE NOT SURE IF ITS LOVE OR A STOMACH ACKE.

 

You have told “The world view is foreign to most other cultures, still it claims to be a universal one.” Vedic view is universal because it presents a detailed analysis of different relative aspects of reality and thus includes all the different practices as of an organic whole different gradational development of consciousness towards the higher and higher realization of the absolute plane – ‘subjective evolution of consciousness.’ AMONG RESEARCHE IN THE PHENOMENOLOGY OF RELIGION THERE IS A GREAT DISCUSSION GOING ON IF THERE IS SUCH A PERENNIAL PHILOSOPHY OF PURE SPIRITUALITY OR PURE MYSTICISM. I THINK SO PERSONALLY– AND I KNOW IT IS ESSENSIAL TO THE VEDANTIC VIEW BE IT ADVAITA OR BHAKTI – BUT THERE IS NO AGREEMENT ON THIS UNIVERSALLY.

 

You have also rightly told “I agree that science is a very imperfect tool for the search of knowledge and it most often lacks a spiritual aspect, though many of us attempts to break its almost scientistic boarder. But as far as I know we have not found anything better. At least it is based on public experiences that  most people can check.” Modern education and scientific research are under complete dictum of the oldest philosophical tradition in Western civilization – “materialism”, which began by pre-Socratic Greek philosophers and it attained its conventional shape in the atomism of Democritus and Epicurus. Thus all scientific enterprise is based on the ideology that ultimate reality consists of undividable purposelessly moving matter. Quantum Mechanics and many research works in biology show the clear limits of this naive approach that is dominant in modern science. Unless we come out of close walls that we have created in modern science how can we test and experience something higher and more substantial? I DO AGREE -  AND WE ARE MANY IN SEARCH OF A NEW FOUNDATION, HENCE MY REFERENCES TO MODERN BIOSEMIOTICS AND CYBERSEMIOTICS BASED ON PEIRCE’S SHELLING INSPIRED PRAGMATICIST VIEW OF EMPIRICAL SCIENCE. HOW DO WE BALLANCE AND INTEGRATE SCIENTIFIC AND SPIRITUAL KNOWING? IT IS A UNIVERSAL AS WELL AS A PERSONAL QUESTION FOR ME. SEE Cybersemiotics.com .

 

Finally you have mentioned “We have a lot of discussion with the science between different groups and it could be more constructive, but they are trying to find common views, that seem not to be the case in the religious world and not even in the spiritual. How are we going to solve this in a fruitful way?  We do not seem to be making any substantial progress in these discussions.” Reality cannot be grasped by some common agreements. We have to realize our insignificant position and meager ability to know things by our own (including a collective intellectual ability of many brilliant scholars). We have to realize that we are finite beings. By adding our finite abilities we cannot grasp the real infinite – the supreme absolute. Until we overcome the misconception that we are the subjects and reality is our object of dominance we cannot make any substantial progress towards our real goal of life. I DO AGREE THAT THE FEW EXPEIENCES I HAVE HAD OF HIGHER STATES OF CONSCIOUSNESS – IF THAT WERE WHAT THEY WERE? – IS WHAT DRIVES ME (IN COMBINATION WITH MY SCIENTIFIC AND PHILOSOPHICAL TRAINING) TO SEARCH FOR TRUE KNOWLEDGE. BUT IT ALSO PLACES ME IN THE OUTSKIRTS OF MANY TRADITIONS (THAT DO NOT RESPECT EACH OTHER)  AND WHERE THEIR KNOWLEDGE OVERLAP -  here is a Super Subject and everything else (including us) is the object for His enjoyment. However, the living entities who are ignorant about their true constitutional position (eternal servants of Supreme Absolute), I –FOR ONE – AM NOT SURE IT IS A SUBJECT, WHICH IN MY VOCABULARY IS A LIMITING CONCEPT FOR A SUPREME BEING NOT LIMITED BY TIME, ENERGY AND SPACE   exercise their freedom to choose a position against their real nature. Ignoring their true position as eternal servants of Supreme Absolute these living entities can develop the moods of either active (exploitation) or passive (renunciation) hostilities towards the Supreme Absolute and proceed along the paths of karma or jñāna/yoga respectively. In that mood of hostility towards Supreme Absolute these living entities even cannot attain peace and obviously real inner fulfillment of life is much beyond their reach.     I DO BELIEVE THAT WE ALL NEED TO STRIVE FOR FULLFILLMENT SPIRITUALLY. THE PROBLEM IS HOW? NOT IN A FUNDAMENTALISTIC AND UNCRITICAL WAY. THAT LEADS TO WAR. I HAVE DONE A LOT MEDITATION IN MY LIFE SO FAR AND DO NOT FEEL ESPECIALLY ENLIGHTENED. WHO HAS THE RIGHT TO CLAIM TO BE ENLIGHTENED? DO WE HAVE OBJECTIVE CRITERIA? TO PERFORM THE YOGA SUSTRAS - OF WHICH LEVITATION IS ONE - FOR INSTANCE? TRANSCENDENTAL MEDITATION TRIES, BUT HAVE NOT SUCCEEDED - OR ARE CERTAIN BRAIN WAVE PATTERNS SUFFICIENT ? OR IS THE FEELING OF HAPPINESS AND ENLIGHTENMENT ENOUGH? OR IS THERE A CRITERIA FOR SOCIAL WELL FUNCTIONING LIKE COLLECTIVE HAPPINESS. THERE IS A LOT OF WORK ON HAPPINESS MEASUREMENT THESE DAYS.

 

THERE IS ALSO A LOT OF EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH ON MEDITATION AND PRAYER THESE DAYS AND WE HAVE A NEW POSITIVE PSYCHOLOGY MOVEMENT.

 

I align myself with Rumi ’s view not pretending to be anything near what he was

 

Not Christian or Jew or
Muslim, not Hindu,
Buddhist, Sufi, or Zen.
Not any religion

or cultural system. I am
not from the east
or the west, ….

 

Sincerely,

 

                Søren Brier  

 

Bhakti Niskama Shanta, Ph.D.                     Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute

 +91-(9748906907)

 Donate

 #8, Gopalakrishnan Mansion, Konappana Agrahara, Electronic City, Bangalore, Karnataka, India

 

 

On Monday, 18 January 2016 2:04 AM, Søren Brier <sb....@cbs.dk> wrote:

 

 

Dear Dr. Bhakti Niskama Shanta,

 

You have again and again doubted scientific knowledge as imperfect – and in many ways it is. But you then refer to a basis in Vedic knowledge – sometimes even calling it Vedic science. How can we know that it is true knowledge? How do we know the meditative techniques works? There are thousands  of  religious and mystics-meditative associations based on the Vedas and they do not agree on interpretation or on meditation techniques or if there is a personal God to worship or several demigods, which demands sacrifices of different sorts. How are we to know who is right, who holds the basic truth ? The all claim deep experiential knowledge, but it is a knowledge other people cannot access. There is no fruitful discussion advancing knowledge towards a common synthesis. The world view is foreign to most other cultures, still it claims to be a universal one.

 

I agree that science is a very imperfect tool for the search of knowledge and it most often lacks a spiritual aspect, though many of us attempts to break its almost scientistic boarder. But as far as I know we have not found anything better. At least it is based on public experiences that  most people can check. We have a lot of discussion with the science between different groups and it could be more constructive, but they are trying to find common views, that seem not to be the case in the religious world and not even in the spiritual. How are we going to solve this in a fruitful way?  We do not seem to be making any substantial progress in these discussions.

 

  Sincerely

 

                             Søren Brier

 

 

--
----------------------------
Bhakti Niskama Shanta (2015) Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view, Communicative & Integrative Biology, 8:5, e1085138; DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
'Science and Scientist' Annual Conference Series
http://scsiscs.org/conference
 
Support & Participate in the
Scientific Sankirtan Seva: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
 
Download Newsletter
The Harmonizer
http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Join Online Classes: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga/about/#instructions
 
Sadhu-Sanga MP3s: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
----------------------------
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

 

--
----------------------------
Bhakti Niskama Shanta (2015) Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view, Communicative & Integrative Biology, 8:5, e1085138; DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
'Science and Scientist' Annual Conference Series
http://scsiscs.org/conference
 
Support & Participate in the
Scientific Sankirtan Seva: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
 
Download Newsletter
The Harmonizer
http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Join Online Classes: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga/about/#instructions
 
Sadhu-Sanga MP3s: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
----------------------------
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
----------------------------
Bhakti Niskama Shanta (2015) Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view, Communicative & Integrative Biology, 8:5, e1085138; DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
'Science and Scientist' Annual Conference Series
http://scsiscs.org/conference
 
Support & Participate in the
Scientific Sankirtan Seva: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
 
Download Newsletter
The Harmonizer
http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Join Online Classes: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga/about/#instructions
 
Sadhu-Sanga MP3s: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
----------------------------
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

 

--
----------------------------
Bhakti Niskama Shanta (2015) Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view, Communicative & Integrative Biology, 8:5, e1085138; DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
'Science and Scientist' Annual Conference Series
http://scsiscs.org/conference
 
Support & Participate in the
Scientific Sankirtan Seva: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
 
Download Newsletter
The Harmonizer
http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Join Online Classes: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga/about/#instructions
 
Sadhu-Sanga MP3s: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
----------------------------
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
----------------------------
Bhakti Niskama Shanta (2015) Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view, Communicative & Integrative Biology, 8:5, e1085138; DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
 
'Science and Scientist' Annual Conference Series
http://scsiscs.org/conference
 
Support & Participate in the
Scientific Sankirtan Seva: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
 
Download Newsletter
The Harmonizer
http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
Join Online Classes: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga/about/#instructions
 
Sadhu-Sanga MP3s: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
 
Contact Us: http://scsiscs.org/contact
----------------------------
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Dr. Bhakti Niskama Shanta

unread,
Jan 30, 2016, 1:50:23 PM1/30/16
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Prof. Stanley A. Klein

Some how you have taken Prof. Søren Brier's statement "Penrose and Hameroff’s work is also trying to get past the mechanical atomistic worldview." as our statement. Following is our comment to Prof. Søren Brier's statement: 

The Quantum Mechanics (QM) approaches (like Penrose and Hameroff’s model) to consciousness simply presume the existence of consciousness and utilize it in the elucidation of quantum processes. One mystery (consciousness) cannot be solved by another (QM). These speculative suggestions possibly will explain the physical role that consciousness may play but most importantly all of these approaches are also suffering from the same limitation (why should these processes give rise to experience) that outmoded the old approaches (Crick and Koch’s neurobiological view for storage and binding of information, Jackendoff’s ‘intermediate level’ theory – computational approach and so on) for studying consciousness.

Philosophers have always understood these problems, which science is now being forced to acknowledge in different ways. The life principle cannot be understood properly without overcoming the subject-object duality. There cannot be any content-part (object of consciousness) without a subject-part (conscious self) and vice versa. We should not deny the conscious phenomenon (our mental lives) just because it is not possible to externally verify it. Subjective experiences cannot be observed directly by some experiments, but all of us experience them. Consciousness has to be taken as fundamental and it cannot be explained in terms of anything simpler. To accommodate the non-material aspect of conscious realm we have to include “soul hypothesis” within the scientific studies.

Sincerely,
Bhakti Niskama Shanta, Ph.D.                     Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute
 +91-(9748906907)
 #8, Gopalakrishnan Mansion, Konappana Agrahara, Electronic City, Bangalore, Karnataka, India

Bernardo Kastrup

unread,
Apr 1, 2017, 10:01:16 AM4/1/17
to Deepak Chopra, Stanley A. KLEIN, Edwards, Jonathan, Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, b...@scsiscs.org, Stuart Hameroff, BT APJ, Lee Spector, Henry Stapp, Christopher Cochran, Menas Kafatos
An old thread, but I thought this might be relevant for it:
Cheers, Bernardo.

On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com> wrote:
How about space time energy matter being emergent experiences in consciousness modulating itself as qualia ? 
Perhaps Bernardo and Menas would like to comment . 

On Jan 31, 2016, at 3:32 AM, Stanley A. KLEIN <skl...@berkeley.edu> wrote:

Jo, I fully agree with you that multiple points of view are super important for understanding our universe. It is for precisely that reason that I've been driving around with the DUALITY license plate since 1976 (40 years).  I find that most people are stuck with just one point of view. But the multiple threads need to be compatible. 

At this point Jo and I have too many separate threads so I'd like to combine this thread with the other one on emergence. 

Scientists use emergence language probably at least as much as philosophers. For example I strongly suggest googling "Sperry emergence of consciousness".  The course I took from Nobelist Roger Sperry many, many years ago may have contributed to my switch from physics to neuroscience. 

Chalmers is indeed open to the possibility that qualia come in at the bottom but he is equally comfortable at this point that qualia are strongly emergent from the Standard Model.  We have a big problem of definitions. Chalmers is quite clear that at this point only qualia are strongly emergent.   The following is a really good source  http://consc.net/papers/emergence.pdf  for definitions. 
I think that what some are calling strong emergence is what Chalmers has been calling "intermediate emergence".

​Jo, let me get back to your posting about multiple points of view. That is an important thing to remember, especially since in many of our postings each posting is typically from one point ​of view. I'm guilty of that as well as most others. So maybe we should ask whether there are people on this list who would like to argue for a position that there may be just one point of view regarding reality that is the proper point of view. We could then explore the validity of that single viewpoint claim.   

It may be helpful to take a quick peek at the wiki site on multiple points of view of QM.. That is always a reminder that entirely difference ontologies may all be correct since they all (other than the Penrose/GRW row of the table) supposedly give identical predictions for all possible future experiments. That may be a nifty demonstration of the compatibility of the four understandings of qualia I posted earlier.
1) Before big bang
2) With big bang
3) emergent after big bang
4) Not needed

Stan. 

On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 1:45 AM, Edwards, Jonathan <jo.ed...@ucl.ac.uk> wrote:
I sympathise with Stan's cautions about getting terminology clear but I also think we should not be hidebound to the limits of metaphysical perspective that a lot of physicists suffer from.

I agree that reality is one. However, all experience of it is from a point of view and points of view are many. I have a thought that life is in fact a way of benefiting from more than one point of view. It thereby rises from the brute perception of a monadic unit (particle, mode of excitation, whatever) floating randomly in a primordial soup to states of knowledge that are still very finite and constrained but goes some tiny way towards a total omniscience. Life benefits from several points of view by using a complex ordered structure to 'capture' information from those several points of view and collate it for presentation to certain specialised points of view that thereby have 'knowledge'. 

In most life forms the contributing points of view are in sense organs. Thus, visual and tactile information can be collated. However, higher animals also start to infer points of view for other individuals. And now, with the use of tools, science allows us to infer the points of view of monadic units quite separate from our bodies even down to individual quarks. What gets glossed over in all of this is that even a point of view with rich knowledge only ever experiences qualia from its point of view. When we infer points of view in other people we tend to ascribe to them qualia using ours vicariously, but when we infer points of view for quarks we do not think of ascribing qualia because our knowledge comes in highly abstracted mathematical accounts in purely operational rather than experiential terms. But we are still expanding our knowledge by inferring 'how the universe is from other points of view'. That has the great advantage that we can build laptops and such - knowing how each part will be from the point of view of the other parts. 

What we are stuck with is the problem of laying side by side the qualia account and the operational account. With due respect to Deepak, I think it may be confusing to say quarks are qualia. When we think about quarks the qualia we get are generated, presumably, by relations between monadic modes with points of view in our brains and the fields of potentials they operate in. Even the CERN physicist looking at the photo of the quark track gets her qualia from relations inside. The same for the astronomer whose retina responds to a single photon from a star. All the qualia will be generated in fields of potentials in cortex.

There is also a problem lurking that physicists are very coy about. Even within our heads qualia may be determined by movements of ions, maybe calcium ions, but the qualia are not the ions. An ion is a complex monadic history that includes all the relations to all the places it ever diffused through. What determines a quale must be a contour in a continuous field of potentials - the real universal field of potentials that, as Deepak says, is one. From any one monadic point of view there are no 'other individuals'. There is just that same old whole universe from that point of view. The physicists are cheating on the metaphysics by suggesting there are separate 'things'. There are only different points of view. When monad A views the world it does not view monad quark B as quale B. It views only the contribution that B makes to the whole from A's point of view.

An important practical consideration here is that in brain physics nothing will 'sense calcium ions' because calcium ions influence the field of EM potentials the same way as sodium ions or ruthenium ions. All that can be sensed is the shift in potential. So we are not going to be looking for correspondences between particular chemicals and quale but rather field patterns. Even our taste receptors that pick up molecules pay no attention to the chemistry of the flavour - they just respond to the shift in potentials - at least if they work like other receptors on cells.

Sorry for going on rather long. But I rather like the thought that life is all about making use of multiple points of view - begged borrowed or stolen, to achieve knowledge.

Regards

Jo






On 31 Jan 2016, at 05:42, Stanley A. KLEIN wrote:

Thanks Deepak,
As often happens many confusions are simply because of different definitions of words. The physicists think of quarks and other elementary particles as being independent of experience. If we are to build communication bridges between science and metaphysics we should probably not tamper with definitions. The words invented by physicists should probably be left with their original definition or else communications will be quite difficult. A good place to go for reasonable definitions of the particles (like quarks) is a site like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elementary_particle

One can see at that site that quarks are characterized by just a few numbers like mass, spin and charge. Charge is a bit tricky since that word means the strength which which it interacts with some of the bosons. That is, the particles of the Standard model (that's what that wiki site is about) have very, very simple properties and thus are quite different from qualia (subjective states) that have complex properties. 
Stan

On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 9:18 PM, Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com> wrote:

Stan -qualia is any quality of experience

Quark is a name bestowed by physicists to a particular quality of experience in human awareness. 

There can be no experience outside of consciousness

The mind body and universe are fluctuating qualia in consciousness

Positing an objective world outside of awareness/ consciousness is a metaphysical assumption

It is also based on an artificial subject/ object split 

Reality is one 






From: Stanley A. KLEIN <skl...@berkeley.edu>
Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2016 10:52 PM
To: Deepak Chopra
Cc: Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal; Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com; b...@scsiscs.org; Stuart Hameroff; BT APJ; Jonathan Edwards; Lee Spector; Henry Stapp; Christopher Cochran

Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] Refuting Darwinism and Schrodinger's Cat
 
Deepak, so you are going with the 2nd of the four options for qualia (qualia come with the quarks, not before or after). I had actually thought that your view was that mind (that I associate with the origin of qualia) came before quarks. One problem with these discussions is that we aren't being concrete about what we're talking about. Like how does one validate that qualia come with quarks. I'd like to suggest a specific type of qualia to try to pin down the issues. .

Let's consider how does one account for the distinct colors of a spinning Benham top that only has black stripes on a white background. And the colors are reversed when one spins the top in the opposite direction. I'll try to remember to bring a Benham top to the Tucson consciousness meeting since a number of you will be there. One nifty thing about Benham's top is that Feynman found it sufficiently interesting that he included it in his Freshman lectures. In searching for those lectures on the web I discovered that ALL the Feynman lectures are now available for free on the internet. I hadn't known that. So Deepak or Stuart or others: how does one explain that for my 3-ring version of the top I see red, yellow, blue in the inner, middle and outer ring and when I spin it in the opposite direction the colors reverse. How do quarks account for that sort of qualia?

 My guess is that within the next 50 years color vision neuroscientists will come up with an elegant answer of the neural circuits that do the job of explaining things like why the color qualia flip when spinning in the opposite direction.  Do others have different explanations for the origin of the color qualia?

Stan

On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com> wrote:

Quarks are qualia--any cognitive or perceptual experience is !





From: Stanley A. KLEIN <skl...@berkeley.edu>
Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2016 7:17 PM
To: Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
Cc: Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com; b...@scsiscs.org; Stuart Hameroff; BT APJ; Jonathan Edwards; Lee Spector; Deepak Chopra
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] Refuting Darwinism and Schrodinger's Cat
 
Ram, yes your view: "
We implicitly assume that subjective experiences (SEs) potentially pre-exist in Nature"
is one of the four main approaches to SEs.  I'll call SE as effect of monads (or psychons)
1) monad (qualia) pre-exist before quarks. 
2)  monads (qualia) come with quarks (standard model)
3)  qualia are emergent from standard model
4)  qualia are meaningless concept (Dennett's position I believe).

Ram, you say it is an assumption. So are you open to the three alternative assumptions being possible? 

On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 12:53 PM, Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal <rlpv...@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
Dear Stan,
 
I think that Dr. Shanta has correctly understood.
 
We implicitly assume that
subjective experiences (SEs) potentially pre-exist in Nature.
 
H-P assumes that SEs potentially reside in space-time geometry. A specific SE is realized via OR-Orch using quantum collapse as in Copenhagen interpretation of QM. 
(Stuart, please correct me if I have misunderstood).
 
In the eDAM, I assume that potential (all possible) SEs are superposed in the mental aspect of a state of an entity; I call them proto-experiences (PEs) that are pre-cursors of real SEs. A specific SE is realized by the matching and selection mechanisms of eDAM as elaborated in (Vimal, 2010c). I have included H-P OR Orch as one of the 5 mechanisms for realizing a specific SE as in(Vimal, 2010c) and mentioned in one of my previous emails .
 
Self is SE of subject, so this SE also potentially pre-exist in Nature.
 
Since we do not have scientific evidence of the existence of soul after death, the eDAM (Dvi-paksa Advaita Vedanta) has atheist/scientific version. Here, during death, the realized and embedded SEs in neural-networks (as memory traces during development) also die. This can be considered as these SEs return back to their potential form (PEs) and we merged in God/Brahman right there (place) and that moment (time) we die. Here, we assume that we skipped all rebirth cycles because there is no scientific authentic evidence for rebirth hypothesis and none of our dead relatives directly or indirectly visited us (at least not my dead relatives).
 
The atheist/scientific version of the eDAM may not be acceptable to Dr. Shanta’s group because of genetic/environmentally acquired disposition as a brute fact (because that is the way their brains are wired). However, this makes sense to scientists/atheists because their brains are wired different way. Thus, evolutionists and creationists may not agree with each other. In other words, theist/atheist phenomenon is based on genetics/acquired traits. This is detailed in Section 5.2 of (Vimal, 2012c): “Here, it is assumed that the theist-atheist phenomenon is a subject-specific because scientists seem to have speculated about the existence of ‘God gene’, which when expressed entails subjects to be theist (it may also be acquired); otherwise subject is atheist.” Furthermore, “a possible neural mechanism may be that inhibiting circuits perhaps in frontal-temporal-parietal system get damaged and there is nothing to inhibit, and hence entailing being a theist (normal default seems to be for atheists)”.[i]
 
Theist version of the eDAM is similar to Vedantic view specifically Visista advaita Vedanta; here a state of soul after death has high degree of manifestation of mental aspect and its physical aspect is latent.
 
All the best.
 
Regards,
Ram
1/30/16


[i] Theism vs. atheism is interesting topic. Materialistic philosopher Dennett in an interview (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgr3B0PxYbc&feature=related) addresses some of this issue. One could argue that the theist-atheist phenomenon is because of the genetic disposition and/or acquired attributes as some scientist found ‘God gene’, which when expressed in some people entails him/her being a theist. It can be acquired as well, such as due to accidents, near death experience, space travel, and so on. A testable hypothesis: a possible neural mechanism may be that inhibiting circuits perhaps in frontal-temporal-parietal system get damaged and there is nothing to inhibit, and hence entailing being a theist (normal default seems to be for atheists); see also (McNamara, 2006b). However, further research is needed to test this hypothesis. In any case, the eDAM framework (Dvi-Paka Advaita) is for both theists (who can consider Brahman as God) and atheists (who can consider Brahman as a dual-aspect entity) because theist-atheist phenomenon appears subject specific.
As per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_gene, “The God gene hypothesis proposes that human beings inherit a set of genes that predisposes them towards spiritual or mystic experiences. […] The God gene hypothesis is based on a combination of behavioral genetic, neurobiological and psychological studies. The major arguments of the theory are: (1) spirituality can be quantified by psychometric measurements; (2) the underlying tendency to spirituality is partially heritable; (3) part of this heritability can be attributed to the gene VMAT2 [vesicular monoamine transporter 2] [(Hamer, 2005)]; (4) this gene acts by altering monoamine levels; and (5) spirituality arises in a population because spiritual individuals are favored by natural selection. […] According to this hypothesis, the God gene (VMAT2) is a physiological arrangement that produces the sensations associated, by some, with mystic experiences, including the presence of God or others, or more specifically spirituality as a state of mind (i.e. it does not encode or cause belief in God itself in spite of the ‘God gene’ moniker). […] VMAT2 codes for a vesicular monoamine transporter that plays a key role in regulating the levels of the brain chemicals serotonin, dopamine and norepinephrine. These monoamine transmitters are in turn postulated to play an important role in regulating the brain activities associated with mystic beliefs. […] Hamer has hypothesized that self-transcendence makes people more optimistic, which makes them healthier and likely to have more children. […] Although it is always difficult to determine the many interacting functions of a gene, VMAT2 appears to be involved in the transport of monoamine neurotransmitters across the synapses of the brain.”
          
 
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, M.S., Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmai Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Neuroscience & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA






--

William Bushell

unread,
Apr 1, 2017, 3:39:27 PM4/1/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, Deepak Chopra, Stanley A. KLEIN, Edwards, Jonathan, Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal, b...@scsiscs.org, Stuart Hameroff, BT APJ, Lee Spector, Henry Stapp, Christopher Cochran, Menas Kafatos, Neil Theise
Nice, and see Maureen Seaberg's Struck By Genius account of an average guy who became mathematically inclined and gifted, and possibly capable of seeing fractal and holographic properties in nature and the world around him after a closed head injury (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/maureen-seaberg/struck-by-genius-the-jaso_b_5186969.html); and my essay from FOM 2016, in which I discuss how certain forms of advanced Indo-Tibetan observational meditation practices appear to deliberately induce temporary autistic savant-like states in order to provide the practitioner with access to autistic savant-like perceptual properties of highly detailed, veridical perception on at times a microscopic scale (https://cosmosandhistory.org/index.php/journal/article/view/571; file:///C:/Users/W/Downloads/571-2467-1-PB.pdf;)....  

--
----------------------------
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Science and Scientist - 2016
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2016
 
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
 
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138

 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.

Deepak Chopra

unread,
Apr 1, 2017, 3:39:27 PM4/1/17
to le, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, Stanley A. KLEIN, Edwards, Jonathan, Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal, b...@scsiscs.org, Stuart Hameroff, BT APJ, Lee Spector, Henry Stapp, Christopher Cochran, Menas Kafatos
Nirvikalpa Samadhi could be likened to zero point - Akashic field 
Of course they are all metaphors 



Deepak Chopra MD


On Apr 1, 2017, at 9:38 AM, le <leis...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Please take me off this conversation.  I do not know how I became included in this as I never signed for this.  At the very least, have an unsubscribe
link. Thank you.
--
----------------------------
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Science and Scientist - 2016
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2016
 
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
 
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138

 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 

Deepak Chopra

unread,
Apr 1, 2017, 3:39:27 PM4/1/17
to Stanley A. KLEIN, Menas Kafatos, Anirudh Satsangi, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, Edwards, Jonathan, Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal, b...@scsiscs.org, Stuart Hameroff, BT APJ, Lee Spector, Henry Stapp, Christopher Cochran
My take presently is as follows 

I have started saying that dark energy and dark matter are mathematical constructs and placeholders to satisfy the equations of the standard model . The equations exist in mathematical imagination , an activity in human consciousness .
I have also veered away from the idea of a conscious universe . I don't think it's accurate. I'm currently saying that the universe we experience is a human construct . It does not exist as such . It's the interpretation of experiences in awareness. Awareness is the source of perception thought and volition . 
Mind Body and Universe are human concepts to explain modes of knowing and experience in awareness. The modes of knowing and experience are modificationsi of awareness . 
There is only awareness/ consciousness . 
This would be the only satisfactory NonDual view - I think. 
I'm expanding on this in my daily videos on Facebook and YouTube which are then posted on the YATU site   
Anything that can be named or described from gluons quarks bosons space time gravity galaxies stars body or mind is a human construct for a mode of knowing and experience in human consciousness 


Deepak Chopra MD




 

 






On Apr 1, 2017, at 9:28 AM, Menas Kafatos <mkaf...@gmail.com> wrote:

As I have been saying! Move away in your talks from this dark energy stuff. Or at least temper the % of matter. Never observed directly or indirectly. And of course what they say is correct. Most of space is voids.

Now the next, dark matter. Also rests on (less shaky) assumptions. 

Do you want we write a SF Chronicle article? It actually strengthens YATU. 


Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:



Simulation suggests 68 percent of the universe may not actually exist

 Michael Irving  March 30, 2017

<image001.jpg>

New computer simulations have questioned the existence of dark energy, a so-far theoretical force that is said to be driving the expansion of the universe (Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech)

 

According to the Lambda Cold Dark Matter (Lambda-CDM) model, which is the current accepted standard for how the universe began and evolved, the ordinary matter we encounter every day only makes up around five percent of the universe's density, with dark matter comprising 27 percent, and the remaining 68 percent made up of dark energy, a so-far theoretical force driving the expansion of the universe. But a new study has questioned whether dark energy exists at all, citing computer simulations that found that by accounting for the changing structure of the cosmos, the gap in the theory, which dark energy was proposed to fill, vanishes.

Published in 1915, Einstein's general theory of relativity forms the basis for the accepted origin story of the universe, which says that the Big Bang kicked off the expansion of the universe about 13.8 billion years ago. The problem is, the equations at work are incredibly complicated, so physicists tend to simplify parts of them so they're a bit more practical to work with. When models are then built up from these simplified versions, small holes can snowball into huge discrepancies.

"Einstein's equations of general relativity that describe the expansion of the universe are so complex mathematically, that for a hundred years no solutions accounting for the effect of cosmic structures have been found," says Dr László Dobos, co-author of the new paper. "We know from very precise supernova observations that the universe is accelerating, but at the same time we rely on coarse approximations to Einstein's equations which may introduce serious side effects, such as the need for dark energy, in the models designed to fit the observational data."

Dark energy has never been directly observed, and can only be studied through its effects on other objects. Its properties and existence are still purely theoretical, making it a placeholder plug for holes in current models.

The mysterious force was first put forward as a driver of the universe's accelerated expansion in the 1990s, based on the observation of Type Ia supernovae. Sometimes called "standard candles," these bright spots are known to shine at a consistent peak brightness, and by measuring the brightness of that light by the time it reaches Earth, astronomers are able to figure out just how far away the object is.

This research was instrumental in spreading acceptance of the idea that dark energy is accelerating the expansion of the universe, and it earned the scientists involved the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2011. But other studies have questioned the validity of that conclusion, and some researchers are trying to develop a more accurate picture of the cosmos with software that can better handle all the wrinkles of the general theory of relativity.

<image002.jpg>

 

A comparison of three models of universal expansion: top left, in red, is the Lambda-CDM model, including dark energy; middle, in blue, is the new Avera model, which accounts for the structure and doesn't require dark energy; and right, in green, is the original Einstein-de Sitter model, which also doesn't include dark energy (Credit: István Csabai et al)

 

According to the new study from Eötvös Loránd University in Hungary and the University of Hawaii, the discrepancy that dark energy was "invented" to fill might have arisen from the parts of the theory that were glossed over for the sake of simplicity. The researchers set up a computer simulation of how the universe formed, based on its large-scale structure. That structure apparently takes the form of "foam," where galaxies are found on the thin walls of each bubble, but large pockets in the middle are mostly devoid of both normal and dark matter.

The team simulated how gravity would affect matter in this structure and found that, rather than the universe expanding in a smooth, uniform manner, different parts of it would expand at different rates. Importantly, though, the overall average rate of expansion is still consistent with observations, and points to accelerated expansion. The end result is what the team calls the Avera model.

"The theory of general relativity is fundamental in understanding the way the universe evolves," says Dobos. "We do not question its validity; we question the validity of the approximate solutions. Our findings rely on a mathematical conjecture which permits the differential expansion of space, consistent with general relativity, and they show how the formation of complex structures of matter affects the expansion. These issues were previously swept under the rug but taking them into account can explain the acceleration without the need for dark energy."

If the research stands up to scrutiny, it could change the direction of the study of physics away from chasing the ghost of dark energy.

The research was published in the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, and an animation below compares the different models.

Source: Royal Astronomical Society 

http://newatlas.com/dark-energy-existence-questioned/48708/

 




Deepak Chopra MD




 

 






On Apr 1, 2017, at 11:32 AM, Stanley A. KLEIN <skl...@berkeley.edu> wrote:

Thanks Bernardo for restarting this thread from January 2016. There are folks who we haven't heard from in quite a while. One question I have is whether anyone will be going to the TSC (Tucson) consciousness meeting in Shanghai (of course other than Deepak who will be speaking on June 8) or the ASSC meeting the following week in Beijing. I'll definitely be going to the latter one and maybe for a day or two to the TSC one to see friends. 

My response to this thread is that I think the really tricky part about qualia (subjectivity) is how does it hook up with the NCC (the neural correlates of the qualia)  The NCC seems to be more and more wonderfully connected with neuroscience and biology and all the QED equations regarding atoms. So what are the equations that connect all that NCC stuff to the qualia aspect. Is anyone on this list interested in that aspect. 

One of the really nifty possible ways to make that NCC/qualia connection is to make use of psychic phenomena (a topic on which I'm somewhat skeptical, but if it works it would be fantasic). Later this week I'll send out a posting on that topic. If anyone is especially interested you can contact me privately since the Sadhu Sanga list reaches an uncountable number of people and I sure don't want to clog up the airways with stuff of minimal interest to most folks.
Stan

On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 11:10 AM, Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com> wrote:
Yes 
V relevant 
I tweeted the article 



Deepak Chopra MD




 

 






On Apr 1, 2017, at 9:32 AM, Menas Kafatos <mkaf...@gmail.com> wrote:

Absolute zero? This is very specific physics concepts. Has nothing to do with turya state or any samadhi.

Nevertheless it is all qualia.

With respect,

Menas


Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 1, 2017, at 8:40 AM, Anirudh Satsangi <anirud...@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Dr. Deepak Chopra

If we are able to describe scientifically the Unmuni State, Sunya Samadhi we will be able to resolve space, time, matter and energy controversy.  The CREATOR was in the beginning in the State of Unmuni and Sunya Samadhi.  Can this state be compare with Absolute Zero? Can we also achieve the State of Absolute Zero during meditation?

Warm regards and best wishes

Anirudh Kumar Satsangi
6, Dayalkunj, Dayalbagh

--
----------------------------
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Science and Scientist - 2016
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2016
 
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
 
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138

 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.

Anirudh Satsangi

unread,
Apr 1, 2017, 3:39:27 PM4/1/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, Deepak Chopra, Stanley A. KLEIN, Edwards, Jonathan, Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal, b...@scsiscs.org, Stuart Hameroff, BT APJ, Lee Spector, Henry Stapp, Christopher Cochran, Menas Kafatos
Dear Dr. Deepak Chopra

If we are able to describe scientifically the Unmuni State, Sunya Samadhi we will be able to resolve space, time, matter and energy controversy.  The CREATOR was in the beginning in the State of Unmuni and Sunya Samadhi.  Can this state be compare with Absolute Zero? Can we also achieve the State of Absolute Zero during meditation?

Warm regards and best wishes

Anirudh Kumar Satsangi
6, Dayalkunj, Dayalbagh
On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 7:06 PM, Bernardo Kastrup <bern...@bernardokastrup.com> wrote:
--
----------------------------
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
 
Science and Scientist - 2016
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2016
 
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
 
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
 
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
 
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138

 
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
 
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
 
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
 
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
 
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.

Stanley A. KLEIN

unread,
Apr 1, 2017, 3:39:27 PM4/1/17
to Deepak Chopra, Menas Kafatos, Anirudh Satsangi, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, Edwards, Jonathan, Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal, b...@scsiscs.org, Stuart Hameroff, BT APJ, Lee Spector, Henry Stapp, Christopher Cochran
Thanks Bernardo for restarting this thread from January 2016. There are folks who we haven't heard from in quite a while. One question I have is whether anyone will be going to the TSC (Tucson) consciousness meeting in Shanghai (of course other than Deepak who will be speaking on June 8) or the ASSC meeting the following week in Beijing. I'll definitely be going to the latter one and maybe for a day or two to the TSC one to see friends. 

My response to this thread is that I think the really tricky part about qualia (subjectivity) is how does it hook up with the NCC (the neural correlates of the qualia)  The NCC seems to be more and more wonderfully connected with neuroscience and biology and all the QED equations regarding atoms. So what are the equations that connect all that NCC stuff to the qualia aspect. Is anyone on this list interested in that aspect. 

One of the really nifty possible ways to make that NCC/qualia connection is to make use of psychic phenomena (a topic on which I'm somewhat skeptical, but if it works it would be fantasic). Later this week I'll send out a posting on that topic. If anyone is especially interested you can contact me privately since the Sadhu Sanga list reaches an uncountable number of people and I sure don't want to clog up the airways with stuff of minimal interest to most folks.
Stan
On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 11:10 AM, Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com> wrote:
Yes 
V relevant 
I tweeted the article 



On Apr 1, 2017, at 9:32 AM, Menas Kafatos <mkaf...@gmail.com> wrote:

Absolute zero? This is very specific physics concepts. Has nothing to do with turya state or any samadhi.

Nevertheless it is all qualia.

With respect,

Menas


Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 1, 2017, at 8:40 AM, Anirudh Satsangi <anirud...@gmail.com> wrote:

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

Deepak Chopra

unread,
Apr 1, 2017, 3:39:27 PM4/1/17
to Anirudh Satsangi, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, Stanley A. KLEIN, Edwards, Jonathan, Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal, b...@scsiscs.org, Stuart Hameroff, BT APJ, Lee Spector, Henry Stapp, Christopher Cochran, Menas Kafatos
Dear Satsanghi ji 
I agree ! 



Deepak Chopra MD


On Apr 1, 2017, at 8:40 AM, Anirudh Satsangi <anirud...@gmail.com> wrote:

Menas Kafatos

unread,
Apr 1, 2017, 3:58:34 PM4/1/17