Ramanisblog

Tag: Reality

  • You Are ,Live in An Illusion Videos

    Scientists ,after the advent and acceptance of the Quantum theory have come to the conclusion that we live in Illusion and the Reality is Illusion.

    Let us try to understand this.

    What is Reality as a common Man understands it without going into  even the simplest  Philosophical definition of it.

    For those interested ‘Substance is that which Exists by itself and which does not the  Conception of anything in order to be Conceived’ Spinoza.

    Substitute ‘Substance with Reality”

    On assumes Reality is some thing which is/exists in all the three states of Time.

    That which is permanent.

    The problem with this is that nothing is permanent as we know of things,including ourselves.

    Strictly speaking, when compared to rocks and Galaxies Human Life is not even a blink of the eye.

    Again Time is something we have not understood or defined till date.

    As things stand Time is some thing we have devised through and for the benefit of sorting out Stimuli in our brain to sort them out in an order.

    And we do not know the entire functions of the Brain for there are moments of memory left even after Brain Death.

    So what we call Reality can not be proved with our Faculties as we have of them.

    Reality and Illusion.
    Reality An Illusion

    Let us go in another track.

    We have Waking State,Dream State and Deep Sleep State.

    Indian Philosophy has one more to this Turiyam which is beyond these three states.

    Of these States which one are we to take as Real?

    While in Dream the vents are so Real that they are  convincingly true till we wake up.

    What if what we call as waking state happens to be a Dream and the Dream State Real?

    From the Empirical Sciences, we know that we have energy  which can not be destroyed.

    Then what happened to our thoughts which we had a few seconds earlier and the thought s of our  earlier days , which are Pure energy?

    Where are they?

    In Quantum Theory things , events operate at a different Plane , not necessarily following the Laws of our Physics.

    The Space Time Dimensions vary.

    In the final analysis, we can not prove or understand Reality but we Fee It Isl, which I think is Right as in Life, and can experience It.

    The Attribute of this  is  Being,Consciousness and Bliss-Sat, Chit, Anandam

    For more information; please read my blogs filed under Time,Astrophysics,Indian Philosophy

    Related articles

    http://ramanisblog.in/2012/10/26/measuring-consciousnesscoma-illusion/

  • ‘No Heaven..Some thing Out of Nothing’-Hawking Non-sense.

    True.

    But there are people who made the Computer.

    Reality is the Ultimate Cause.

    A Scientist should know that there has to be cause for Every thing.

    ( Indian Philosophy has a different approach on this point)

    Inability to distinguish between Religion and Metaphysics is a failing of Hawking,

    What the Ultimate Cause is, in the Realms of Philosophy.

    The very fact he is harping on Fear of death is an indication of his fear.

    By denying the unknown he is trying o overcome his fear.

    Let him have the luxury.

    For more details on the subject read the blog at the end of this story.

    Story:

    “I regard the brain as a computer which will stop working when its components fail. There is no heaven or afterlife for broken down computers; that is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark.”

    “I have lived with the prospect of an early death for the last 49 years. I’m not afraid of death, but I’m in no hurry to die. I have so much I want to do first,” he told the newspaper.

    http://current.com/1bocmkc

    Stephen hawking , in his forthcoming book the Grand Design makes interesting observations.While he , in his earlier book,Brief history of Time seemed to take  a philosophical position, which is unwarranted, as scientists normally  concern themselves to their discipline instead of trying to explain things from their discipline,in his latest book he has taken the position that God is not necessary for the creation of Universe.

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2010-09-03-hawking02_ST_N.htm?csp=34news&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+usatoday-NewsTopStories+%28News+-+Top+Stories%29

    The absurdity of this argument lies in the fact that he has taken or rather seems to take the concept of God according to Christianity.

    Creation , according to  The Bible, is to have begun at a fixed point of Time.

    This is not logically tenable.

    Can he define ‘Some thing’ and ‘Nothing’?

    Every effect has a cause, every Effect has more than one Cause ;a Cause may be a result of another Cause and an Effect may be a  Cause for another Effect.

    In the first case, we credit an Event/Effect with a specific Cause relatively for this case for this cause  may be a result of another cause.

    In the second case the reverse is true.Causes are classified into Immediate Cause, Concomitant Cause.Material Cause,Efficient Cause etc.No single entity is responsible for any Effect .Similar is the case with Effects.

    Law of causality in nothing but a tool of mind to find a pattern for our convenience of understanding and classification.Things happenirrrespective of the fact whether we recognise them , classify them or not.

    Things/Events happen-Period.

    Unified Theory is as good as Chaos Theory.Both are equally true , depending on our perception.

    As Immanuel Kant has observed Space and Time are the two spectacles through which we perceive.Take away the these twin concepts(in fact they are one), you can perceive or conceptualize nothing.

    Therefore the causality is a myth.

    Again Law of causality depends on two factors,Law of uniformity of nature and Law of Causation.

    We know, or rather we think we know that the the law of of Uniformity of Nature will be there tomorrow as in Sun appearing to morrow.At best we may say it has happened till date and MAY be so to morrow.That is all.

    We have already seen that law of Causality is a myth and only a convenient tool as science is .

    Therefore the argument for First cause is not tenable(God).

    Then how do we explain the Universe and Mind?

    As said earlier things happen, happened ,and shall happen.

    We are in the flow ,as Henri Bergson called it,elan vital-Stream of Consciousness.

    We can not pin point a point of Time when this originated

    Please refer my Blog on Time-a non linear theory for details.

    Hence Hawking is right in so far as the concept of God as Christianity sees it.

    Not philosophically correct.

    Spinoza explains the Reality( God) thus.

    “Substance is that which exists independently of any thing else and which does not need the conception  of any thing in order to be conceived”

    Hinduism states that reality is without Cause,it is the First cause.It has no attribute.It is immanent.beyond human intellect.It is indescribable,It can not be known.it can only be experienced.It can not be defined but can be described by negating-not this, not this.

    Hinduism states that things were, are and shall be.(The Bhagavad Gita).

    Universe evolved both matter and Mind by the Sparsa( loosely trnslated means touching,grazing) of inanimate matter Prakriti or nature( not Nature) or qualities and dynamic or Flowing Energy Purusha.

    They graze due to lila or playfully(loose translation) with out any specific purpose or purposeless may be a purpose.

    Out these are formed the seeming first cause, mahat and 24 principles are evolved for the Creation.It does not Time reference.

    “Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing,” the excerpt says. “Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to … set the Universe going.”-Hawking in his latest Book.

    Exactly.This what Hinduism is about.

    The dichotomy between western and oriental thought is due to the basic difference in the basic concept of Knowledge.

    In the west knowledge is to be gained.A positive concept.-philosophically speaking.

    In the east it is the removal of ignorance.

    West follows the dictum Nihilo nihil Fit'( out of nothing comes).

    East”This is full,That is Full; having taken Full out of Full, Full remains Full”

    Hawking is right on the denial of God as conceptualized by Christianity ;wrong from the Indian and philosophical standpoint.

  • What happens to your Head in a particle Accelerator?

    Astonishing.

    But those who should have died by Physical Laws do not;those who ought not, Die.

    That’s Reality,Call it God,Nature.

    Here’s the fascinating story of Anatoli Petrovich Bugorski, the only person to have stuck his head into a particle accelerator. His head accidentally strayed into the path of the proton beam at the Institute for High Energy Physics in Protvino in 1978, and the beam bored a hole through his brain and out his nose. The radiation absorbed by his head was in the region of 1000 gray. 5 gray worth of X-rays is generally considered fatal, but Bugorski survived and went on to complete his PhD (a proton beam moving near the speed of light has different characteristics from an X-ray!). The side of his face that was burned by the beam’s exit has not visibly aged in the years since the accident.

    I attended the Clarion science fiction writing workshop at Michigan State University in 1992, and we were privileged to tour the university’s Cyclotron. Of course, the first thing we asked was, “How do you kill someone with one of these?” (we’d been working on plotting). The scientist’s answer was very disappointing — he insisted that it was all very safe, with too many checks and balances to be a useful murder weapon. As I recall, he suggested that you could pry loose a brick from the wall and hit someone in the head with it.

    As you can see from the picture, the beam entered the back of Bugorski’s head and came out around his nose. Shortly after this happened, Bugorski’s left half of his face swelled up beyond recognition. He was taken to the hospital and studied as this was something that had never been seen before and so they closely monitored him thereafter, fully expecting him to die within a few days at most.

    Although the skin on the part of his face and back of his head where the beam hit eventually peeled off over the next few days, Bugorski did not die as they thought he would. The beam also burned through his skull and brain tissue along with the afore mentioned skin. However, ultimately he came through it all surprisingly well.

    Despite the beam going through his brain, his intellectual capacity remained the same as before. The few negative health drawbacks he did experience were not life threatening either. He lost the hearing in his left ear and experienced a constant unpleasant noise in that ear from then on. The left half of his face slowly became paralyzed over the course of the next two years. He also gets significantly more fatigued with mental work, though he did go on to get his PhD after this incident. The remaining side effects were occasional absence seizures and later tonic-clonic seizures, though these didn’t show up right away.

    http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/2Dl3Rz/www.boingboing.net/2011/02/22/what-happens-when-yo-6.html

  • Most Scientific Theories false?

    http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTJtQRgXCg_vb4UEa9LAOEuK8V5LAuawrJDdamXUt3hY8gtL5ZPIQ
    There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact. –Mark Twain

    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go away.”
    – Phillip K. Dick

    Substance is that which exists in itself and which does not need the conception of any thing else in order to be conceived-Spinoza.

    This is not restricted to psychiatry alone.It permeates other fields as well(pl.read my blog on Autism drug,a fraud filed under Health).

    Experiments are conducted repeatedly under similar conditions and not identical ones for we do not know exactly what these conditions are.For instance ,when we form water, we combine 2 atoms of Hydrogen with 1 atom of Oxygen with a catalyst in similar proportions and we await the result, water.We do not know the exact properties which induces them to combine the way they do;we assume that the property to combine in a particular way shall remain permanent.

    This brings us to the fundamental axiom (which is not to be questioned(?)),that Nature will behave uniformly,Law of Universality of Nature.

    This we believe(?) to be true as this can never be proven as we have not explored all the options available to us to confirm this axiom.

    With Quantum Mechanics and Time study, we are just about touching the periphery of some other Laws of Nature.

    We do not know what lies ahead.

    Science is at best pragmatic ,not Absolute.

    Nature reveals what it wants to in its own time ,in its own way.

    Story:

    On September 18, 2007, a few dozen neuroscientists, psychiatrists, and drug-company executives gathered in a hotel conference room in Brussels to hear some startling news. It had to do with a class of drugs known as atypical or second-generation antipsychotics, which came on the market in the early nineties. The drugs, sold under brand names such as Abilify, Seroquel, and Zyprexa, had been tested on schizophrenics in several large clinical trials, all of which had demonstrated a dramatic decrease in the subjects’ psychiatric symptoms. As a result, second-generation antipsychotics had become one of the fastest-growing and most profitable pharmaceutical classes. By 2001, Eli Lilly’s Zyprexa was generating more revenue than Prozac. It remains the company’s top-selling drug………

    But the data presented at the Brussels meeting made it clear that something strange was happening: the therapeutic power of the drugs appeared to be steadily waning. A recent study showed an effect that was less than half of that documented in the first trials, in the early nineteen-nineties. Many researchers began to argue that the expensive pharmaceuticals weren’t any better than first-generation antipsychotics, which have been in use since the fifties. “In fact, sometimes they now look even worse,” John Davis, a professor of psychiatry at the University of Illinois at Chicago, told me.

    But the data presented at the Brussels meeting made it clear that something strange was happening: the therapeutic power of the drugs appeared to be steadily waning. A recent study showed an effect that was less than half of that documented in the first trials, in the early nineteen-nineties. Many researchers began to argue that the expensive pharmaceuticals weren’t any better than first-generation antipsychotics, which have been in use since the fifties. “In fact, sometimes they now look even worse,” John Davis, a professor of psychiatry at the University of Illinois at Chicago, told me……

    Before the effectiveness of a drug can be confirmed, it must be tested and tested again. Different scientists in different labs need to repeat the protocols and publish their results. The test of replicability, as it’s known, is the foundation of modern research. Replicability is how the community enforces itself. It’s a safeguard for the creep of subjectivity. Most of the time, scientists know what results they want, and that can influence the results they get. The premise of replicability is that the scientific community can correct for these flaws.

    But now all sorts of well-established, multiply confirmed findings have started to look increasingly uncertain. It’s as if our facts were losing their truth: claims that have been enshrined in textbooks are suddenly unprovable. This phenomenon doesn’t yet have an official name, but it’s occurring across a wide range of fields, from psychology to ecology. In the field of medicine, the phenomenon seems extremely widespread, affecting not only antipsychotics but also therapies ranging from cardiac stents to Vitamin E and antidepressants: Davis has a forthcoming analysis demonstrating that the efficacy of antidepressants has gone down as much as threefold in recent decades………..

    Before the effectiveness of a drug can be confirmed, it must be tested and tested again. Different scientists in different labs need to repeat the protocols and publish their results. The test of replicability, as it’s known, is the foundation of modern research. Replicability is how the community enforces itself. It’s a safeguard for the creep of subjectivity. Most of the time, scientists know what results they want, and that can influence the results they get. The premise of replicability is that the scientific community can correct for these flaws.

    But now all sorts of well-established, multiply confirmed findings have started to look increasingly uncertain. It’s as if our facts were losing their truth: claims that have been enshrined in textbooks are suddenly unprovable. This phenomenon doesn’t yet have an official name, but it’s occurring across a wide range of fields, from psychology to ecology. In the field of medicine, the phenomenon seems extremely widespread, affecting not only antipsychotics but also therapies ranging from cardiac stents to Vitamin E and antidepressants: Davis has a forthcoming analysis demonstrating that the efficacy of antidepressants has gone down as much as threefold in recent decades.

    For many scientists, the effect is especially troubling because of what it exposes about the scientific process. If replication is what separates the rigor of science from the squishiness of pseudoscience, where do we put all these rigorously validated findings that can no longer be proved? Which results should we believe? Francis Bacon, the early-modern philosopher and pioneer of the scientific method, once declared that experiments were essential, because they allowed us to “put nature to the question.” But it appears that nature often gives us different answers.

    http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/12/13/101213fa_fact_lehrer#ixzz1AjOZ33DO

  • Something out of Nothing?God is not required?

    Stephen hawking , in his forthcoming book the Grand Design makes interesting observations.While he , in his earlier book,Brief history of Time seemed to take  a philosophical position, which is unwarranted, as scientists normally  concern themselves to their discipline instead of trying to explain things from their discipline,in his latest book he has taken the position that God is not necessary for the creation of Universe.

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2010-09-03-hawking02_ST_N.htm?csp=34news&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+usatoday-NewsTopStories+%28News+-+Top+Stories%29

    The absurdity of this argument lies in the fact that he has taken or rather seems to take the concept of God according to Christianity.

    Creation , according to  The Bible, is to have begun at a fixed point of Time.

    This is not logically tenable.

    Can he define ‘Some thing’ and ‘Nothing’?

    Every effect has a cause, every Effect has more than one Cause ;a Cause may be a result of another Cause and an Effect may be a  Cause for another Effect.

    In the first case, we credit an Event/Effect with a specific Cause relatively for this case for this cause  may be a result of another cause.

    In the second case the reverse is true.Causes are classified into Immediate Cause, Concomitant Cause.Material Cause,Efficient Cause etc.No single entity is responsible for any Effect .Similar is the case with Effects.

    law of causality in nothing but a tool of mind to find a pattern for our convenience of understanding and classification.Things happenirrrespective of the fact whether we recognise them , classify them or not.

    Things/Events happen-Period.

    Unified Theory is as good as Chaos Theory.Both are equally true , depending on our perception.

    As Immanuel Kant has observed Space and Time are the two spectacles through which we perceive.Take away the these twin concepts(in fact they are one), you can perceive or conceptualize nothing.

    Therefore the causality is a myth.

    Again Law of causality depends on two factors,Law of uniformity of nature and Law of Causation.

    We know, or rather we think we know that the the law of of Uniformity of Nature will be there tomorrow as in Sun appearing to morrow.At best we may say it has happened till date and MAY be so to morrow.That is all.

    We have already seen that law of Causality is a myth and only a convenient tool as science is .

    Therefore the argument for First cause is not tenable(God).

    Then how do we explain the Universe and Mind?

    As said earlier things happen, happened ,and shall happen.

    We are in the flow ,as Henri Bergson called it,elan vital-Stream of Consciousness.

    We can not pin point a point of Time when this originated

    Please refer my Blog on Time-a non linear theory for details.

    Hence hawking is right in so far as the concept of God as Christianity sees it.

    Not philosophically correct.

    Spinoza explains the Reality( God) thus.

    “Substance is that which exists independently of any thing else and which does not need the concept  of any thing in order to be conceived”

    Hinduism states that reality is without Cause,it is the First cause.It has no attribute.It is immanent.beyond human intellect.It is indescribable,It can not be known.it can only be experienced.It can not be defined but can be described by negating-not this, not this.

    Hinduism states that things were, are and shall be.(The Bhagavad Gita).

    Universe evolved both matter and Mind by the Sparsa( loosely trnslated means touching,grazing) of inanimate matter Prakriti or nature( not Nature) or qualities and dynamic or Flowing Energy Purusha.

    They graze due to lila or playfully(loose translation) with out any specific purpose or purposeless may be a purpose.

    Out these are formed the seeming first cause, mahat and 24 principles are evolved for the Creation.It does not Time reference.

    “Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing,” the excerpt says. “Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to … set the Universe going.”-Hawking in his latest Book.

    Exactly.This what Hinduism is about.

    The dichotomy between western and oriental thought is due to the basic difference in the basic concept of Knowledge.

    In the west knowledge is to be gained.A positive concept.-philosophically speaking.

    In the east it is the removal of ignorance.

    West follows the dictum’Ex Nihilo nihil Fit'( out of nothing comes).

    East”This is full,That is Full; having taken Full out of Full, Full remains Full”

    Hawking is right on the denial of God as conceptualized by Christianity ;wrong from the indian and philosophical standpoint.