"What does not change is Brahman - we all happily agree. But, the problem of "Advaitam" or Advaita is not about what is that does not change - it is about how that "does not change" brought an universe of ordained affairs and whether this creation has any reality rationally or not! The hard and pinching truth is, the world exists and the philosophical and scientific apparatus to "deny" this as non existence ( not even as temporary) or not real ( again not as an positive entity) is not available in the school of advaita is the subject matter of discussion."

The whole issue is that you are again stating that "Advaita" claims the world to be non existent, Advaita does not claim the world to be non existent. The world is Brahman it has no existence apart from Brahman that is what "Advaita" is saying.

"This entire discussion happens in a world that does not exist for a Brahman, who we are promised as just us - or the one consciousness with out any breaks of parts. Its totally business of Brahman and just Brahman itself - why this hard struggle if everyone automatically loose their identity and individuality once the dream is over? ( Even time has to be part of the dream - so will the dream get over). Which dream objects will have the consciousness to loose itself or release itself from the dream? That is over stretching of an imagination and illogical, unscientific and also deny the very power and unchangeable state and status of the brahman itself. If the dream object's consciousnesses or will takes over the "dreamer" desire, or will such situation puts down the power of Brahman and His will and here no dreamer is wanting or willing the dream objects to disappear on their super heroic effort. As long as i dream, no dream objects can overrule my own conciseness and what my subtle impressions and senses dictate."

As already stated before the logic of the waking state cannot be applied to Brahman, you are assuming the logic of the waking state to be true and then applying the same to Brahman. This is already divided into Vyavaharika Satta and Paramarthika Satta. You are saying that this conversation is happening in a world that does not exist for Brahman, I am saying the conversation is happening in Brahman. Now only a question remain can a world exist along with Brahman, the answer is a definite yes. The world exists but at the same time it's existence is not apart from Brahman. Now coming to the dream, it is not that once the dream gets over everyone the person realises Brahman, this means you do not have any understanding of Advaita itself. The Brahman is the dream as well as the dreamer. When seen from the stand point of the Brahman the dream has no existence apart from the Brahman. Your objection is that if Brahman is homogeneous in nature why do we see this world around us ? This answer is given with the concept of Mithya. Mind you mithya does not mean illusion. If you think it is illusion you are mistaken. This is the reason I am saying that you do not even know basics of Advaita itself.

"For questions regarding lokas etc, to be true or irrational even giving up on them does not change the philosophical tenets as unscientific or irrational. Interestingly, existence of layered universe is not totally wrong idea as per NASA observations."

So you say Vaikunta and Goloka exist, believing something which is not within your experience is the 1st sign of conflict, whether they exist or not is another argument but the bottom line is that they are not within your experience. You are believing something which is not within your experience. This approach is not rational in any way. Therefore a mere belief system nothing more than that. There is no process of investigation or verification done here.