What some Scientists say...

[yajvan]

Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste,


Arno Penzias- Nobel prize in physics
Astronomy leads us to a unique event, a universe which was created out of nothing*, one with the very delicate balance* needed to provide exactly the conditions required to permit life*, and one which has an underlying (one might say 'supernatural') plan*

My asterisks:
* nothing - fist Aksara (Absolute) then akasa ( pure space )
* balance - of the 3 gunas
* life - prana
* plan - the expansion of happiness; some say the fulfillment of karma


Vera Kistiakowsky -MIT physicist
The exquisite order* displayed by our scientific understanding of the physical world calls for the divine

*Brahman is also considered pure Inteligence, pure order


Stephen Hawking British astrophysicist
Then we shall� be able to take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason - for then we would know the mind of God.


Arthur L. Schawlow Professor of Physics at Stanford University, 1981 Nobel Prize in physics
It seems to me that when confronted with the marvels of life and the universe, one must ask why and not just how. The only possible answers are religious. . . . I find a need for God in the universe and in my own life.


Robert Jastrow -self-proclaimed agnostic
For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians* who have been sitting there for centuries.

* The rishis and munis that live in Satyam



Ekam Sad Viprah Bahudha Vadanti; Truth is One, sages call it variously - risi durgatamas

[saidevo]

Namaste Yajvan.

All the observations you have quoted, ironically, were not obtained by the scientists through hard empirical and observational experiments but by hard thinking using their as yet unknown (to science) faculty of mind!

And in most cases, the scientist is merely satisfied by giving new names or terms for the already existing ones in Sanatana Dharma, as your asterisks indicate, without even acknowledging it! Yet all the quotes have the air/ego of the so-called scientific authority behind them.

It is an irony bordering on ignorance and hypocrisy that the scientists who rely so much on physical senses and mechanical sensors, do not want to probe hard and sincerely into the real 'sensor' of it all: their own mind and intellect. As the scientist Eddington has opined, further researches in Physics ("all science is either physics or stamp collecting" said Ernest Rutherford!) is possible only if they research the structure, nature and behaviour of the mind (as quoted by Swami Chinmayananda in his book on Isavasya Upanishad).

Here are more such interesting quotes:

Sir Arthur Eddington:

Not only is the universe stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine.

Something unknown is doing we don't know what.

It is impossible to trap modern physics into predicting anything with perfect determinism because it deals with probabilities from the outset.

I ask you to look both ways. For the road to a knowledge of the stars leads through the atom; and important knowledge of the atom has been reached through the stars.

We used to think that if we knew one, we knew two, because one and one are two. We are finding that we must learn a great deal more about 'and'.

The stuff of the world is mind-stuff. This mind-stuff is not spread out in time and space; on the contrary, it is time and space that are spun out of it.

To put the conclusion crudely -- the stuff of the world is mind-stuff... and the substratum of everything is of mental character... Consciousness is not sharply defined, but fades into subconsciousness; and beyond that we must postulate something indefinite but yet continuous with our mental nature. This I take to be the world-stuff.

James Jeans:

...the rigid dualisms: mind-matter, soul-body, God and man-ontological dualisms: typical of the analytical mind of the West-have become outdated.

Albert Einstein

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

The ideals which have lighted my way, and time after time have given me new courage to face life cheerfully, have been Kindness, Beauty, and Truth. The trite subjects of human efforts, possessions, outward success, luxury have always seemed to me contemptible.

Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.

Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the Gods.

At any rate, I am convinced that He [God] does not play dice.

Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish.


Other Interesting Quotes

This only is denied to God: the power to undo the past.
-- Agathon (448 BC - 400 BC), from Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics

They say that God is everywhere, and yet we always think of Him as somewhat of a recluse.
-- Emily Dickinson (1830-1886)

What can you say about a society that says that God is dead and Elvis is alive?
-- Irv Kupcinet

God must become an activity in our consciousness.
-- Joel S. Goldsmith

God made everything out of nothing, but the nothingness shows through.
-- Paul Valery (1871-1945)

Live among men as if God beheld you; speak to God as if men were listening.
-- Seneca (5 BC-65 AD), Epistles

Sources:
http://www.quotationspage.com/
http://www.hinduismtoday.com/archive...84-10-02.shtml

[vcindiana]

All I can say is when knowledge runs out faith comes in.

[yajvan]

Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste Yajvan.

All the observations you have quoted, ironically, were not obtained by the scientists through hard empirical and observational experiments but by hard thinking using their as yet unknown (to science) faculty of mind!

Namste saidevo,
thank you for your additions....
I think the greatest tool is intuition. When fully matured there is nothing one cannot know.

From a muni I Have great respect for:
There is nothing in the cosmos, either in the material plane or in the spiritual plane which cannot be directly cognized. [The] Veda's provide a direct method of direct cognition of material existence in this unlimited cosmos and also they provide a direct technique to cognize that which is evenly permeating, evenly pervading the entire physical structure of the cosmos; That all pervading reality, Almightily God.

pranams,

[Eastern Mind]

Saidevo: Thank you for the humour.. (Einstein in particular) A sense of humour is certainly a gift from God. My take is that science only confirms what seers already knew. Simple as that. Aum Namashivaya

[saidevo]

Namaste EM.

Saidevo: Thank you for the humour.. (Einstein in particular) A sense of humour is certainly a gift from God. My take is that science only confirms what seers already knew. Simple as that. Aum Namashivaya

Yes, the activities of science is many ways humourous! My point is that science does NOT confirm what the seers already know: only we the faithful say that what science says is in confirmation with what we already know. And science touts the new concepts and discoveries as its own findings because religion and spirituality are anathema to science. This is what I take exception to. If I as a scientist find out something which is already known to other disciplines of knowledge, should I not have the courtesy to acknowledge it? Should I not have the courage to go beyond the norms and notions of my scientific community, because my aim after all is Truth?

This is the hypocrisy of science and scientists: if they find quarks that have been postulated over 40 years back by leading Theosophists and named as triads, the scientists never acknowledge the efforts in 'non-scientific' fields and the name 'quark' has stuck in this case, touted as a new discovery of the scientists!

It takes a rare and courageous scientist like Einstein or Eddington to call a spade a spade. Only they are the seekers of the Truth; the others are more like business tycoons craving for exclusivity of fame and name, either for them or for their own field of pursuit.

[yajvan]

Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste EM.
Yes, the activities of science is many ways humourous! My point is that science does NOT confirm what the seers already know: only we the faithful say that what science says is in confirmation with what we already know. And science touts the new concepts and discoveries as its own findings because religion and spirituality are anathema to science. This is what I take exception to. If I as a scientist find out something which is already known to other disciplines of knowledge, should I not have the courtesy to acknowledge it? Should I not have the courage to go beyond the norms and notions of my scientific community, because my aim after all is Truth?

This is the hypocrisy of science and scientists: if they find quarks that have been postulated over 40 years back by leading Theosophists and named as triads, the scientists never acknowledge the efforts in 'non-scientific' fields and the name 'quark' has stuck in this case, touted as a new discovery of the scientists!

It takes a rare and courageous scientist like Einstein or Eddington to call a spade a spade. Only they are the seekers of the Truth; the others are more like business tycoons craving for exclusivity of fame and name, either for them or for their own field of pursuit.

Namaste saidevo , EM (et.al)
Somewhere along the line they have forgotten the notion of Science i.e. from scientia, knowledge. Even when one thinks of systematic knowledge and that of a system of acquiring aquiring knowledge, Consciousness must be at its root.

Pure knowledge = pure consciousness. And as we have talked about in the past, the seer , the object being seen, and the mechanics of seeing (perception) are all one thing.

We don't know a millionth of 1% about anything.... Thomas A. Edison


pranams

[Eastern Mind]

Namaste all: Saideo: Yes I agree that there is no acknowledgment: This is not just in the field of science. The pharmaceuticals don't acknowledge the herbalists (from which many useful drugs come) the western yoga and new ager practitioners don't acknowledge Hinduism, Devotees don't acknowledge that they are just regurgitating their gurus words. It is the ego deception thing, like breaking copyright laws when there is no copyright. I once read that about 1% of 1% of thought is original, yet clearly there is original thought. I had my Grade 6 students making mobiles, fish, colorful, wonderful fish, to be hung in our classroom to liven things up. I said" You are like the creator, you get to create a fish species, yours will be one of a kind in the universe, hanging here and only here in this classroom." The creative ones got it. Soon we had an Elvis fish, somewhat resembling Elvis, and logo fish with logos on them (partial regurgitation) and lots of other originals. But then there were the kids that waited. They wanted to see what Shawn (a particularly gifted artist for age 11) was doing before starting. In other words steal his ideas, or use his ideas to spurn themselves onward. So I don't get too riled about the lack of acknowledgement. It's all part of Siva's dance.
Scientists by and large are an egotistical bunch, to be sure. But sometimes ego allows things to move too. Aum Namashivaya

[yajvan]

Hari Om
~~~~~~

Namaste all: Saideo: Yes I agree that there is no acknowledgment: This is not just in the field of science. The pharmaceuticals don't acknowledge the herbalists (from which many useful drugs come) the western yoga and new ager practitioners don't acknowledge Hinduism, Devotees don't acknowledge that they are just regurgitating their gurus words. It is the ego deception thing, like breaking copyright laws when there is no copyright. I once read that about 1% of 1% of thought is original, yet clearly there is original thought. I had my Grade 6 students making mobiles, fish, colorful, wonderful fish, to be hung in our classroom to liven things up. I said" You are like the creator, you get to create a fish species, yours will be one of a kind in the universe, hanging here and only here in this classroom." The creative ones got it. Soon we had an Elvis fish, somewhat resembling Elvis, and logo fish with logos on them (partial regurgitation) and lots of other originals. But then there were the kids that waited. They wanted to see what Shawn (a particularly gifted artist for age 11) was doing before starting. In other words steal his ideas, or use his ideas to spurn themselves onward. So I don't get too riled about the lack of acknowledgement. It's all part of Siva's dance.
Scientists by and large are an egotistical bunch, to be sure. But sometimes ego allows things to move too. Aum Namashivaya

Namaste EM (et.al),

It is good to know they did not throw you out of school for using the word creator.

And I see your point too... In this world there are leaders and followers and that is ok. Yet if the followers are exploiters then that does not seem ok.

And many have said for years, there is nothing new under the sun. What we say here on HDF most has been said before. I have always said I know little to nothing [I am ok with that too]; that is to keep the ego in check. And when one passes along knowledge it is good to remember the tradition masters... if that is from Narayana or Newton it is good to know that the wise have walked this earth before us.

I just hoped there would be more creative ideas offered in the "Different Kind Of Universe' post, offered in the Philosophy file folder. Why so? Its not so much to come up with an obtuse universe as this one is perfect, its to jolt a few neurons to think and connect differently. That is what brings a different view, a new perspective.

This is also a fundamental offering of Sama Ved. Those melodious sounds that connect new synapse for the sadhu or the casual listener. Your students did it without a hitch. Why is that? Because they have not learned of boundaries and what one can and cannot do. As one grows a bit and those synaptic paths are now locked tight, it takes a bit more effort to think differently.

We see this in science all the time... someone comes up with a new theory and the 'establishment' grumbles - 'Oh how can that be... that is too outragious, the math will never support a view like that'. And then they view the phenomon in space, or in the lab, etc. and all the old timers jump on board.


If you think you can or you can't, you are right... Henry Ford ( I think said this)

[Eastern Mind]

Yajvan: Subramuniyaswami referred to it as 'the gridded intellect'. Well at least you're not. Aum Namashivaya