PDA

View Full Version : Advaita and Complex Numbers



Rajalakshmi
19 January 2008, 04:07 AM
Hello All,
Hari Om

Many people find it very hard to understand why Advaita says that this world is just an illusion isn't it? Or how the One undivided Brahman manifests as many. This is a modern attempt at explaining that.


Let us take an important number in mathematics known as j. (also denoted by 'i' and is the square root of -1). This number is purely imaginary and a mental concept exisiting only in the human mind and has no existance in the pratyaxa world. Is this number sat, asat or mithyA? Since it has no real existance, the number j is asat, while a number of the form 6 + 3j which has both real and imaginary parts is ideally called mithya. Since j is asat, does it mean it has no use or totally non existant? It is a well known fact that complex numbers and its theory have enormous applications even in real life. It is my view that the whole world is only mithya from the POV of Brahman just like complex numbers are mithya from our POV. jagat being mithya, advitIya Brahman is purely preserved. This number j is like the anirvacanIyam mAyA of advaita, and is immune to self contradictions and can violate laws of pratyaxa at will. An example will help.

Just consider the line y=jx. Can anyone tell me what is the angle this line makes with another line y=mx? Simple mathematical analysis shows that y=ix makes the same angle with every line of the form y=mx, which is arctan(j), an imaginary angle and a constant independent of m. Does pratyaxa reveal any examples of a line making identical angles with every other line?? If an imaginary line can behave like this, and blatantly contradicts pratyaxa under the influence of mAyA j - should we be surpised that the One Reality appears as many? Theory of mAyA is absolutely immune to all self contradictions by its very unique nature, and all objections to it are just based on delusion. Anyone just needs to play with complex numbers to have a glimpse of the mystery of mAyA and its power of delusion.

I request advaitin members to deeply ponder over complex numbers, and their significance in explaining the mithyatva of jagat. There is only Brahman who is Sat, and jagat that is mithya like the complex numbers, exisiting only in the mind.

Any attempts at offering an alternate explanation based on complex numbers( or abstract math such as Hilbert spaces) may be presented in this thread by others.


Hari Om
~RL

sarabhanga
19 January 2008, 05:26 AM
Namaste RL,

If matter is spontaneously created from nothing, it must involve an opposite pair.


0 = (+1) + (–1) = 0

But perhaps the root creation is more like:


(√ +1) + (√ –1) = 1 + i

where nara (brahma or shiva) is the satya of 1, and nArAyaNa (brahmA or viSNu) is the mAyA of i.

Rajalakshmi
19 January 2008, 07:12 AM
Yes:

Existance is like E= x + iy

mAyA is the imaginary part of it,iy. Brahman is the real part x.

World itself is a function of mAya f(z). When we understand all the components of f(z) [ all the koshas] , mAyA is known. When mAyA is known, truth shines by itself. ( truth could never be known directly, and knowledge of untruth automatically reveals the truth).

It is an irony that truth must be known by progressively knowing what is untrue and casting them aside with 'neti neti'. Where mAyA is unknown, Sat remains unknown.

devotee
19 January 2008, 10:12 AM
Namaste Rajlakshmi,



Existance is like E= x + iy

mAyA is the imaginary part of it,iy. Brahman is the real part x.


If E = x +iy,

then E != x.

i) As, iy cannot be a member of real number (the Brahman), it says that there is something which is different from Brahman.
ii) It also says that Existence is something more (or less) than Brahman.

Isn't it in non-conformity with Non-duality of Brahman ?

Regards.

Rajalakshmi
19 January 2008, 10:39 AM
Namaste Rajlakshmi,



If E = x +iy,

then E != x.

i) As, iy cannot be a member of real number (the Brahman), it says that there is something which is different from Brahman.
ii) It also says that Existence is something more (or less) than Brahman.

Isn't it in non-conformity with Non-duality of Brahman ?

Regards.

But you did not realize that i is imaginary( mAyA)?

So E= x is pAramArtika
and E = x +iy is vyavahArika

Knowing the world as iy is ajnAna and dvaitavAda.
Knowing the world as x + iy is advaitavAda.

devotee
19 January 2008, 09:36 PM
Namaste Rajlakshmi,


But you did not realize that i is imaginary( mAyA)?

So E= x is pAramArtika
and E = x +iy is vyavahArika

Knowing the world as iy is ajnAna and dvaitavAda.
Knowing the world as x + iy is advaitavAda.

What is imaginary ? Does it mean that it doesn't exist or is equal to zero ? IMO, that doesn't fit into mathematical logic. iy is called imaginary part of the complex number but it has its value & it exists. It is called imaginary number because it doesn't conform to the concept of a real Number.

You say,
E = x ..... (i)
E= x +iy ..... (ii)

If the above is true, then the following also be true :

E = x - iy ---- (iii)

So, E^2 = x^2 + y^2 ...... (iv) ( Multiplying equations (ii) & (iii) )

Which makes E a function of two real numbers x & y .... which in turn gives the equation as,

E > x which is an impossibilty !

Please take that as mathematical fun & nothing else. I understand what you say, but I just wanted to show the flaw in this mathematical concept Vs the Brahaman & the World.

-------------------------------
IMHO,

x can be considered a set which contains a subset E (existence) & also NE (Non-existence). x, however, is neither E, nor NE. E & NE are mental concepts which are seen within x but x is beyond both.

Regards.

Rajalakshmi
20 January 2008, 12:59 AM
Namaste Rajlakshmi,



What is imaginary ? Does it mean that it doesn't exist or is equal to zero ? IMO, that doesn't fit into mathematical logic. iy is called imaginary part of the complex number but it has its value & it exists. It is called imaginary number because it doesn't conform to the concept of a real Number.


Imaginary numbers means they exist only in your mind and nowhere in reality. Can you give me 'i' number of apples? Or draw a circle with radius 'i'? Similarly, the world exists ( as we see it) only as long as the mind exists. You think 'i' exists and play with it, just like the mind this the world exists and plays with it.

Rajalakshmi
20 January 2008, 01:15 AM
You say,
E = x ..... (i)
E= x +iy ..... (ii)

If the above is true, then the following also be true :

E = x - iy ---- (iii)

So, E^2 = x^2 + y^2 ...... (iv) ( Multiplying equations (ii) & (iii) )

Which makes E a function of two real numbers x & y .... which in turn gives the equation as,

E > x which is an impossibilty !

Please take that as mathematical fun & nothing else. I understand what you say, but I just wanted to show the flaw in this mathematical concept Vs the Brahaman & the World.

-------------------------------
IMHO,

x can be considered a set which contains a subset E (existence) & also NE (Non-existence). x, however, is neither E, nor NE. E & NE are mental concepts which are seen within x but x is beyond both.

Regards.

The example was given only as an example for jagan-mithyava. You are free to use any operations within iy, i.e mAyA - but Existance itself never changes so please leave out any operations on E or x.

The idea is only this:

Brahman:World::Human-mind:complex-number

sarabhanga
20 January 2008, 02:04 AM
E = x + iy

And the solution of this mysterious equation comes nearer with the knowledge that x = 1.

E = 1 + iy

But the original value of E remains uncertain, with bauddha suggesting zero, sAMkhya suggesting two, and vedAnta suggesting one.

If E = 0, then iy is –1.
If E = 2, then iy is +1.
If E =1, then iy is 0.

advaita vedAnta knows that any enumeration of iy is only mAyA.

Rajalakshmi
20 January 2008, 02:58 AM
Another way to view mAyA would be:

Absolute Truth = 1

Relative Truth = 1, omega,square of omega ( the three cube roots of unity).

The number 1, has one real root and two imaginary roots.

1, ( - 1 + sqrt(3) i) /2 and ( - 1 - sqrt(3) i) /2

Thus the one undivided reality appears as three.(the enjoyer, the enjoyed, and their connector)

yajvan
20 January 2008, 05:31 PM
Thus the one undivided reality appears as three.(the enjoyer, the enjoyed, and their connector)

Namamste Rajalakshmi,

yes,
the knower, the process of knowing ( some call perception), and the object to be known.

Jijvishet satam samah - may you live 100 years
1 + 0 + 0
1: the fulless, Bhuma, of satyam (truth) +
0: the fullness of the Absolute +
0: the fullness of the Relative field of life


pranams