immortal

Yes, this is from Philosophy, especially from Religion. This is what Religion has to offer us and it can be testable. My argument is not from quantum consciousness, I know that's rubbish but my argument is from serious Religion. See how things change when seen from my perspective. I am going to reveal the crux of my argument. Crux - The crux of a problem or argument is the most important or difficult part of it which affects everything else. Atheistic Scientists no longer have any right to criticize the beliefs of theists as irrational any more when they themselves have no clue as to what the nature of reality actually is. What is Intelligence? Does Intelligence exist in platonic realms? Are strong Platonists like Roger Penrose correct in saying that strong AI is impossible? We all are aware of the metaphor of the Sun and the allegory of the cave of Plato in his dialectic work 'The Republic' where he espouses his theory of forms that the highest form of eternal knowledge exists in a different realm and that we can grasp these abstract forms which are eternal and unchanging to describe a world which is always changing. "Either mathematics is too big for the human mind or the human mind is more than a machine." – Kurt Gödel "Gödel's Theorem shows that human thought is more complex and less mechanical than anyone had ever believed" - Rudy Rucker Gödel through his Incompleteness theorems showed that there were Gödel statements for which we could know the truth value of these statements even though they were un-provable using the same axiomatic systems which those statements were derived from. This showed that mathematics can never be both complete as well as consistent. This basic fact which showed that human beings can solve problems or answer questions for which no algorithm exists to prove the truth value of such statements led to the conclusion that human thought was in no way identical to the mechanical computations carried on such computational machines like the Turing machines. Roger Penrose developed Gödel's ideas and put forward a more substantial argument to show that strong AI is impossible and asserted that there is an element ofnon-computability in human thought which the current physics cannot in any way explain. So what does the eastern traditional school of thought have to say about this? This is what is discussed in the next section. "See Yajnavalkya, first we take up Panchathma Sankramana and Avastatraya techniques. Before going to Avastatraya there is much to know about it. Liberated men can go from one state to another using divine knowledge. The knower of this knowledge should be an eye-witness to this process, for him different states like dream, sleep should be like entering and leaving different rooms. This is impossible without knowing that divine knowledge and as long as this cannot happen one cannot be a knower." Acharya continued, "During the ending of the state of awareness and in the beginning of the dream state this new state should be experienced. When the mind disentangles itself with the sense organs and when it is not yet entangled with the organs of the dream this should be seen. When the mind is entangled with the sense organs and with the casket of intelligence it will look like a stretched tied rope. If not, if the mind is disentangled with the sense organs and is only in entanglement with the casket of intelligence then it will be like a hanging untied rope and becomes non-functional even though it exists. In this new state which is not the dream, sleep or the aware state one will have revelation. When it happens it is not awareness; it is not dream; it is not deep sleep either. The one who has mastered the art of intuitive access to the numinous in this state will be a true philosopher knowing the thing in itself and not how it appears to us. Like this when both the awake and the sleep state does not seem to exist even though it exist then one can have the great revelations, did you understood Yajnavalkya. Yajnvalkya who was born for a divine purpose, influenced by the words of Acharya went into such a state of experience immediately, then Acharya said, "See, Yajnavalkya, see when you are in that state see who is holding you from falling down? See who is pulling you up?" Yajnvalkya saw, "The thing which is pulling me up is Sun's rays. I am not on earth or the sky, I am in outer space. A goddess is holding me from falling down with her arms stretched. If I ask she says "I am from the pantheon of Sun, know this much for now" and diverts my awareness and as my awareness is diverted the Sun's rays begin to disappear but the feeling of someone pulling me up and holding me from falling down has not gone". "What all you saw Yajnavalkya? What shall I say Acharya? I have no words to describe what I saw therefore if I say something wrong please forgive me. First some lucky object rolled over and fell from the Broomadhya(one of the places where Jiva resides) then the head was about to fall forward but someone becalmed it as it was dropping down and held it there. Someone took the object which was dropping inside and held it there. I felt like the place where I stood was not the earth, not the sky but soon I realized that it was outside space. There your speech was not like the way we speak with each other instead it was like actions stimulated by someone. On one side Aditya's rays on the other side a goddess belonging to the pantheon of Aditya. Both of them were holding a luminous system. I felt like I myself am that lustrous system. On beside me as you said a rope-like object was hanging down and that lustrous system was equipped with a casket. As though I am light itself there was light everywhere. "That casket is called Intelligence (Buddhi),yajnavalkya and that hanging rope-like object is the mind (Manas) and the goddess who held you from falling down is Ushadevi. Here she came, give your sacrifices to her with the Ushasukta of the Rig Veda." said Acharya. Both Acharya and his wife were standing there praying until Yajnavalkya's experience was completely over. After everything finished Acharya said, "Yajnavalkya, today you experienced the truth, from here you have earned the authority to study the philosophical scriptures, what happened now was a true revelation. If you clearly understand the philosophy behind it then it will become a Great Revelation." -Devudu (Mahadarshana) Devudu Narasimha Shastry. Mahadarshana in Kannada (English version not available).Bangalore: Devudu Press. Since the positivism of science has spread across all fields of our investigation there is not only confusion as to what is real and what is not but other eastern traditions having a different epistemology are rarely taught or taken seriously by anyone in the academic. The eastern traditions have non-positivist methods based on a different epistemology which give us the actual nature of the physical world and positively assert that these things do exist in a Platonic realm and the fundamental principle of the Aryans says that it is God who stimulates and direct our thoughts (Buddhi). Conclusion According to these esoteric religions it is very unlikely that God had used the Big Bang or the DNA to create the universe or the Humans in it and these religions enforce upon us to abandon such form of thinking at least when one is arguing based on these esoteric religions. It should be emphasized that there can be only one reality in the external physical world and if the objects of modern science like quarks, protons, electrons exist independent of the mind i.e. if scientific realism turns out to be true then the metaphysical world of the esotericists will be falsified. As one of the necessary postulates required for the existence of the metaphysical worlds of the above mentioned esoteric religions is that scientific realism must be false and such a test will guide us whether to abandon this form of esoteric thinking and move an alternative way forward or to move in the direction of our ancients. I am with Bernard D'Espagnat and Roger Penrose. This is the very soul of Religion and it is in all the religions of the world. Science cannot get beyond mere appearances of the phenomena, only Religion can and this is the need of Religion in this 21st century world. To give us a complete model of the cosmos which we are living in. It is because Bernard D'Epsagnat and many others who argue for a God hypothesis are Intellectually honest and I am with them. We have arrived at this conclusion by looking at the amazing available evidence in both Religion and Science. "The message would be that the purpose of life is not to eat and drink, watch television and so on. Consuming is not the aim of life. Earning as much money as one can is not the real purpose of life. There is a superior entity, a divinity, le divin as we say in French that is worth thinking about, as are our feelings of wholeness, respect and love, if we can. A society in which these feelings are widespread would be more reasonable than the society the West presently lives in." - Bernard D'Espagnat Its not going change the world in any way as Carl Jung says Good and Evil are rent in us, we have to bear it and get through it but this statement by Bernard D'espagnat that "There is a superior entity, a divinity, le divin as we say in French that is worth thinking about" is absolutely true.

How many religions do you think I have discussed in this very thread? There is Bhuddhism, Tibetian Vajraism, Hinduism, Christianity, Hellenic Philosophy, Judaism etc. I care for the common esoteric essence hidden in all the major recognized religions of the world. There is no disctinction between the east and the west, our roots come from a common single point where all the mutual opposites meet at a single point, the west called this the Pleroma and the east called it the Mandala. Defining Esotericism- Wiki Find a genuine Buddhist Necromancer or a genuine Tantric. That's rather the dark side of religion. Phowa - There is enough scientific literature available on this. But that's not the only evidence that I provided. The existence of life force is at the very heart of the Quantum Mind-Body problem.

I care for the whole Gnostic thought, not just the Gospel of Thomas, the whole Gnostic thought is based on "Pleroma". If you want to know more about as to what Pleroma is then read these links, Pleroma - Wikipedia, Seven Sermons to the Dead. You guys should really listen to this three part interview with Dr. Roger Woolger. Please see all the three parts of it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=kY-STjNnHRQ&NR=1 The Holy Grail of the Unconscious - The New York times. The family members of Carl Jung might have kept it secret for these many years from the outside public but the family members of Devudu Narasimha Shastry have published his works long time ago and only one of his works is translated into English and his other works are not yet translated into English yet. What I am showing and arguing here is that the Pleroma of the Gnostics is equivalent to the Agnisoma Mandala of the Vedic Aryan Religion. I don't think you will find these insights anywhere where the Pleroma of the Gnostics is identified with the Agnisoma Mandala of the Vedic Aryan Religion. I put forward a powerful argument showing that the Mediteranean religions of the Near east and the Eastern Religions of the far east were able to access the same ultimate reality and that this reality is currently out there right now to be accessed. This is a liberal thought and by studying the view points of different cultures one indeed becomes liberal rather than saying "You'll go to hell if you don't surrender to this A god or B god". The works of both Devudu Narasimha Shastry and Carl Jung are enough to show to this world that - “Gods are real. And these gods are everywhere, in all aspects of existence, all aspects of human life.” -James Hillman I think science and orthodox religions of the world will be reshaped and redefined by these recent perspectives and I think Esotericism will be more powerful than Science and orthodox religions. Its time we accept and appreciate this new perspectives from Quantum Mechanics, Molecular Biology, Works of Roger Penrose and Bernard D'Espagnat on the nature of the human mind and Reality, Experiments on Bell Inequality and Scientific Realism, the works of scholars on Gnosticism and the wealth of knowledge which already exists in this matter from the eastern religions. Its not the death of Gods, its the return of the Gods. Just because I am aware of all these recent works and findings I better accept this new perspective and this new consensus which is slowly emerging. As I said more and more scientists, psychologists, scholars and philosophers are leading us to an esoteric worldview. I think this knowledge belongs to the people of the world. As I have shown there is indeed an ultimate reality and the world will be no longer the same place again and I think we are seeing a revolution on how we see our world. All these evidences is enough to compel anyone to do research into the Pleroma of God and I will continue to do it. According to the psychologist David Fontana, Mandala's symbolic nature can help one "to access progressively deeper levels of the unconscious, ultimately assisting the meditator to experience a mystical sense of oneness with the ultimate unity from which the cosmos in all its manifold forms arises." Let's see who is deluded and who is not.

Will you and others ever try to learn what different cultures of the world are saying or now will you deny the histories too and the esoteric knowledge hidden in the scriptures.? Both the philosopher Plato and the philosophy of the Upanishads have been saying the same thing. Chariot Allegory - Plato Katha Upanishad Hinduism, Christianity, Islam, Judaism are not the only religions in this world. There is an another religion called as the Vedic Aryan religion. Which religion in this 21st century world provides a clear cut methodology to access the noumenon of the world? Esotercism is as valid a discipline as anything else. My link The Lucas-Penrose Argument about Gödel’s Theorem I don't think anyone can simulate human conscious thought ever, Science has found God, Our traditional scholars have been arguing for centuries that there is a metaphysical mind and that Intelligence exists in Platonic realms. Its time we take Plato's thoughts as he literally took it i.e his Platonic realism. Either come up with a machine capable of strong AI simulating human conscious thought or I will never give up unless you accept that this God hypothesis is a competing hypothesis from a different philosophical discipline along side other scientific hypotheses which gives a rational explanation for the origin of cosmos. Philosophy is not dead and neither is God. índra? várdhanto aptúra? k??vánto vísvam âryam apaghnánto árav?a? "[the Soma-drops], performing every noble work, active, augmenting Indra's strength, driving away the godless ones." (trans. Griffith) Or else I have to go with my old ways and drive away the godless ones from this earth and Aryas exists solely for this purpose. Its true that the Upanishads is filled with esoteric knowledge. C'mon you guys are intelligent and matured enough to understand this. Chāndogya Upaniṣad Why don't you consider this advice instead?

No I have maintained transparency through out this thread, I have not hidden anything, in fact I have even cared for the emotional concerns of Christians and told them that Yoga is highly religious and its really Blasphemy to their religion and to those Christians who practice it. I think they have been misled by many to practice that which is highly incompatible with their religious doctrine. I have clearly explained my position as to where I stand and the position of Scientists and their positivism. We know now who stands where and which religions say what. And also you accuse the John Templeton Foundation and that's again its your misconceptions. Concept of 'hypercosmic God' wins Templeton Prize Only you're finding this research offensive but its a hot topic of discussion carried out by scholars, scientists and philosophers worldwide and I really think that some of the religious discussions in this forum is outdated and they are not incorporating new perspectives. Its always the old debate of problem of evil, abiogenesis, Intelligent Design, creation out of nothing, God is the first cause of Big Bang, all this reasoning of combining religion with science is fundamentally flawed. The correct way to approach religion is as outlined in this very thread. You really need to start seeing things from a different perspective. I did not ignored Griffith's work. Griffith himself says that the belief that the external reality exists independent of the human mind is just a matter of faith and this is the positivist philosophy and I have shown that this positivism of science is flawed and it can be questioned and as Bernard D'Espagnat says its a welcome illumination. Even I cited from Nature, Sciencedirect etc and you were personally biased and made sweeping statements with no arguments that those researchers are wrong. What's ironic here is how you're denying a serious line of research, take all the research funding you want for your scientific research, build as large particle accelerators you want but what you're not understanding is that quantum entanglement is at the very heart of reconciling QM with gravity and you scientists still don't have a clear picture on that. Its true that Matt Leifer supports Bernard, Anton Zielinger's position and that paper no where a threat to this interpretation of QM. As I always said you're pushing science as an ideology, as a religion and more properly to say as an atheistic religion, science is unbiased towards the existence of God and your personal opinions don't matter. I don't need to attack science because science and religion are converging at one point. All those links and sources where posted to show that this is not a pseudo-religious claim. Its based on genuine religions and there are religions out there backing up these arguments and obviously you don't want to read those links and think in their perspective and you still haven't seen things from the perspective of a theist or from a religious scholar. As I said I am not the one to blame if people cannot figure out genuine religions from pseudo-religions and genuine Science from pseudo-science. Religion is concerned with the noumenon and obviously one needs to have non-positivist methods to access the noumenon and therefore it cannot be based on the scientific method. This is not science but that doesn't mean its all bogus and that we don't need to research it. All I want is that you acknowledge this line of research and at least allow us to make you aware that we exist and investigating the pleroma of God is an active research and it can be as fruitful as anything else. I obviously don't need any followers for this, just leave us alone but for god sake don't ridicule it because there are genuine scientific arguments backing up this research. Gospel of Thomas says, "The kingdom of heaven is spread out upon the earth, but men don't see it." Its true that men don't see it, wow, what an affirmative claim on the nature of reality and your attitude shows that you really doesn't want to see it but sorry I want to see it and I want to do research on it because I am a theist. I really don't care who wrote the Gospel of Thomas or who taught them to whom, its definitely sounds like Neoplatonic thought, the religion of the Greeks and what I find undeniable is the similarities between every single ontological statements made by Elaine Pagels on the heretical religion of the Greeks and the Smarthas view of religion of the South Indians and its undeniable. Is this coincidence or where they were able to access a reality which we have not yet made an effort to access to. I hold one of the most liberal thoughts between religion and science. I am definitely not a religious zealot. I guess just leave me alone.

The point is evolution by Natural selection is blind, it has no purpose and a species lost is lost forever and how do we know whether Natural selection along with our actions is taking us to the extinction of life on this planet earth or the thriving of life on this planet? Preserving Biodiversity is more important than fulfilling the hunger of 7 billion people in this world.

All it shows is that you're not taking the arguments from the theists side in good faith and going on believing in your falsified beliefs. Have anyone arguing in this thread ever seen things from the perspective of a theist? I have to go the Daniel Dennett's way and be rude with scientists just as he was rude with evolution by Natural selection deniers. “To put it bluntly but fairly, anyone today who doubts that the variety of life on this planet was produced by a process of evolution is simply ignorant—inexcusably ignorant, in a world where three out of four people have learned to read and write.” - Daniel Dennett "To put it bluntly but fairly, anyone today who doubts that empirical reality is only a state of mind is simply ignorant-inexcusably ignorant, in a world where three out of four people have learned to read and write." Evolution by Natural Selection is an empirical fact and what we call empirical reality is only a state of mind is also a fact. The Scientific consensus is indeed changing, I hope you can read basic English. When atheists like me and others have changed their minds and become theists implies that there must be a strong reason for it, that we have experimented with ourselves and that we are not talking BS here.

The charge of Intellectual dishonesty on scientists is well intended and they deserve it, every literature in quantum mechanics from Ballentine up to Zeilinger, Aspelmeyer et al papers is incomplete without the discussion of solipsism and it has been rubbished away as extremely unlikely but what scientists are missing is that there is an alternative rational explanation possible which implies that the human mind is the product of a divine God, I am definitely not a solipsist, I am a realist and I believe God can give an objective account of reality. All it shows is the personal incredulity of scientists still underestimating God and Religion. This time Religion will indeed correct science and its real and its happening. Just because it contradicts their values, their culture and their beliefs scientists simply hold on to realism and simply discard a theistic view of our existence as extremely unlikely, scientists might find it unlikely but theists definitely don't and scientists might escape and run away from the philosophical implications of recent findings but true philosophers will criticize that the current consensus among scientists is wrong and it should be critcized. For true philosophers the prize, the fame, the person, profession, caste, creed, the profound implications is not important, only the truth is important and nothing else matters. The Scientific consensus is definitely wrong and scientists must withdrew the objectivist language that they use while describing their scientific models. Kant argued that this was even true of space and time. To us, the reality of space and time seems undeniable. They appear to be fundamental dimensions of the physical world, entirely independent of my or your consciousness. This, said Kant, is because we cannot see the world in any other way. The human mind is so constituted that it is forced to construct its experience within the framework of space and time. Space and time are not, however, fundamental dimensions of the underlying reality. They are fundamental dimensions of consciousness. It was an astonishing claim at the time–and probably still seems astonishing to many of us today–but contemporary physics now lends weight to this extraordinary idea. Converging Paradigms The worldviews of science and spirit have not always been as far apart as they are today. Five hundred years ago, there was little difference between them. What science there was existed within the established worldview of the Christian church. Following Copernicus, Descartes and Newton, Western science broke away from the doctrines of monotheistic religion, establishing its own atheistic worldview, which today is now very different indeed from that of traditional religion. But the two can, and I believe eventually will, be reunited. And their meeting point is consciousness. When science sees consciousness to be a fundamental quality of reality, and when religion takes God to be the light of consciousness shining within us all, the two worldviews start to converge. Nothing is lost in this convergence. Mathematics remains the same; so do physics, biology, chemistry. The shift may throw new light on some of the paradoxes of relativity and quantum theory, but the theories themselves do not change. This is a common pattern in paradigm shifts; the new model of reality includes the old as a special case. Einstein’s paradigm shift makes no difference to observers traveling at everyday speeds; as far as we are concerned Newton’s laws of motion still apply. In a parallel way, making consciousness fundamental does not change our understanding of the physical world. It does, however, bring a deeper appreciation of ourselves. The same applies on the spiritual side. Much of the wisdom accumulated over the ages remains unchanged. Forgiveness, kindness, and love are as important as they ever were. Many of the qualities traditionally ascribed to God remain, they being equally applicable to the faculty of consciousness. The difference is that spiritual teachings and scientific knowledge now share a common ground. This too often happens in paradigm shifts. Newton brought terrestrial and celestial mechanics under the same laws. Maxwell integrated electricity, magnetism and light in a single set of equations. With the shift to a consciousness metaparadigm–the paradigm behind the paradigms–the integration goes much further. It is the two halves of humanity’s search for truth that are now brought under the same roof. This meeting of science and spirit is crucial, not just for a more comprehensive understanding of the cosmos, but also for the future of our species. Today, more than ever, we need a worldview that validates spiritual inquiry, for it is the spiritual aridity of our current times that lies behind so many of our crises. - Peter Russell From Science to God: A Physicist's Journey into the Mystery of Consciousness. These men know only know half the story and what they don't know about is the pleroma of God. kÓrvanneveha karmÀÍi jijÈviØecchataÌ samÀÕ, evaÌ tvayi nÀnyatheto'sti na karma lipyate nare (Isha Upanishad, verse 2) 2. Doing verily works in this world one should wish to live a hundred years. Thus it is in thee and not otherwise than this; action cleaves not to a man. Just because the empirical reality doesn't exist independent of the human mind the message is definitely not to renounce everything, the message is to work. "Christ has each within him, whether human being or angel or mystery" (Gospel of Philip 56:14-15). "Those who say they will die first and then rise are in error. If they do not first receive the resurrection while they live, when they die they will receive nothing." (Gospel of Philip) "People cannot see anything in the real realm unless they become it...if you have seen the spirit, you have become the spirit; if you have seen Christ, you have become Christ; if you have seen the Father, you will become the Father" (Gospel of Philip 61:20-32 cf. 67:26-27) And obviously do research into the pleroma of God. Enough calling the Abrahamic God an evil smuck and ridiculing religion, try arguing with us.

Dangers of Yoga It is a fact that more and more people are getting hurt while performing Hatha yoga and pranyama, people are falling unconscious and getting hurt unable to bear the intense power of prana and experiencing spontaneous involuntary movements. Surprisingly the medical and the scientific community are absolutely silent about it. Why is that people are not getting hurt, falling unconscious and experiencing spontaneous involuntary movements while running or trekking or while doing other tasks but only when one is doing yoga while reciting the magic spells attributed to the Sun God? Its not a random phenomena at all. Who owns the Yoga and from where does its original teachings come from? The Original Teachings of Yoga: From Patanjali Back To Hiranyagarbha All the teachings of Yoga can be traced back to Hiranyagarbha, an another name for the Sun God and all this knowledge belongs to him. Its an important philosophical aspect of Indian philosophy. The ontology of Hiranyagarbha is different from other Gods and everything including all other gods reside in him and form his body. Each individual lustre of Hiranyagarbha represent an individual god. "Brahma generated the gods, Brahma (generated) this entire world. Within him are all these worlds. Within him is this entire universe. It is Brahma who is the greatest of beings. Who can vie with him? In Brahma, the thirty-three gods; in Brahma, Indra and Prajapati; in Brahma all things are contained as in a ship." The ritualist and the Vedic scholar Devudu Narasimha Shastry is absolutely right in saying that "Every living being in this world is verily a Sun worshipper. Some know it, but a large number of beings are unaware of it" Yoga poses dangers to genuine Christian faith: Theologian The Subtle Body — Should Christians Practice Yoga? Only stupid people who don't know the original roots of Hinduism and Yoga say that one can separate the Vedic cosmology and anyone can practice yoga but its very untrue, the Vedic Cosmology and the practice of Yoga is inseparable. All those who are practicsing yoga are directly or indirectly worshipping the Sun God. The existence of the Sun God and his pantheon are an important aspect of the Vedic cosmoslogy and we take it very very seriously and this cosmology is in direct conflict with the orthodox christian theology and its definitely a threat to orthodox christian cosmology and a threat to every other theology on this planet. The very practice of yoga is performed to be one with Hiranyagarbha and its a highly philosophical and religious practice and its not just about health benefits. The orthodox religions of the world like Hinduism, Christianity, Islam etc who are obssessed and take the stories of Krishna, Rama, Jesus etc literally must die and I think there is no truth in these orthodox religions of the world. The orthodox Christian theology seem to be fundamentally flawed and something is wrong with it. "The christian religion is a parody on the worship of the Sun, in which they put a man whom they call Christ, in the place of the Sun, and pay him the same adoration which was originally paid to the Sun." - Thomas Paine I really don't know what your problem is here and how much every you shout and make personal attacks on me the facts are not going to change. "Most working scientists hold fast to the concept of 'realism' - a viewpoint according to which an external reality exists independent of observation. But quantum physics has shattered some of our cornerstone beliefs." My claim is not so extraordinary as you are thinking.

We need it now because as Alain Aspect says much of the recent findings have nothing to do with science at all, it falls in the realm of philosophy. Enough to make sense and publish it in a peer-reviewed journal. “QUANTUMPHYSICS AND VEDANTA”: A PERSPECTIVE FROM BERNARD D'ESPAGNAT'SSCIENTIFICREALISM -Jonathon Duquette. I am not the only one out there, I just showed the consequences of this way of thinking and I was outspoken to state things as they are, try stopping them if you can. No one is attacking science, the scientific method is not all there is and scientists can go on believing that the things which they deal with really exists out there independent of the human mind when all evidence contradicts that belief. Mysticism is not what you do sitting in air conditioner rooms and its not subjective as many of them think, it deals with the real physical world and there is an objective world of God out there, the cosmos is very different than you think. With all your Phds, can you raise the dead from the grave? Of Corpses and Gold: Materials for the Study of the Vet la and the Ro langs: Michael Walter "All these processes are based on a manipulation of prana, which is concentrated and directed by recitation of mantra, service to spiritual beings, etc.22" They don't view their world as made of quarks, protons, electrons etc. Their world-view is different and there is lot to learn from them. Ro-langs This is mysticism, mysticism is not something which happens only in our heads, it deals with the noumenon, the world existing independent of the human minds. Why should I enforce myself to think about this world based on a narrow mind and think in only one way? I am not going to go by your rules, there is a lot to learn from different cultures who have more knowledge about the cosmos than anyone else.

Well when they come explaining what mind is, what intelligence is, solving many of the puzzles of science, you say we don't want that knowledge and say science itself will fill those gaps and by all means you can fill those gaps with your science, let me see how you're going to do that without the ontology of God but now you ask what answers they have provided to scientific questions. Wow, what double standards! Ah, nah, it has shown the very contrary to what you're saying. Quantum weirdness: What we call 'reality' is just a state of mind The correlations doesn't allow the attributes of an object like spin, position, momentum etc to be pre-existent with determined values. Those things are correct only from an empirical perspective, no one denied that. Yeah, what to do, evidence keep showing again and again that we are made truly in the image of God. There is no danger for religious practice because its a reasonable justified belief, if there is any danger then it is for the beliefs of working scientists.

The above two posts shows how Institutional orthodox religions can blind persons from seeing the truth. "Of all the systems of religion that ever were invented, there is none more derogatory to the Almighty, more unedifying to man, more repugnant to reason, and more contradictory in itself, than this thing called Christianity. Too absurd for belief, too impossible to convince, and too inconsistent for practice, it renders the heart torpid, or produces only atheists and fanatics." - Thomas Paine The same is with the current Hindu religion who give too much emphasis on stories and myths taking it too literally without actually focusing on the esoteric knowledge hidden in all the major religious scriptures of the world and instead produces fundamentalists, terrorists and atheists. The same is the problem with every orthodox institutional religions who take their myths so literally without seeing the esoteric essence of all religions. The Esotericists are people who have realized that the truths of religion are given in parables and that one needs special knowledge and intuition which is passed down orally from generation to generation. For esotericists religion is very practical and they rely on both the methods of oral traditions and as well on religious scriptures. The oral traditions of Rabbinic Judaism who follow Midrash, Talmud, Zohar, Mishnah etc are as important as the Torah. The oral traditions are as important as the holy books of every religions. The Brahmins of South India are called as Smartha Brahmins and they never squabble with other Hindus because they are wise and know that the seers of Vedas worshipped their polythiestic gods in a holistic form as Savitur in whom all gods reside which is called as the Samasthi form of Vedic worship and hold that all Hindu sects are One. Indraṃ mitraṃ varuṇamaghnimāhuratho divyaḥ sa suparṇo gharutmān,ekaṃ sad viprā bahudhā vadantyaghniṃ yamaṃ mātariśvānamāhuḥ"They call him Indra, Mitra, Varuṇa, Agni, and he is heavenly nobly-winged Garutmān.To what is One, sages give many a title they call it Agni, Yama, Mātariśvan."(trans. Griffith) The well known philosopher Shankara was from South India and the Kannada Brahmins, a state which I hail from has preserved the purest form of Vedic Aryan Religion. And the scholar Devudu Narasimha Shastry belonged to this particular school of Brahmins, therefore think twice before questioning the authority of the works of this scholar and obviously this purest form of Vedic religion is going to correct science. This time its esoteric religion which is going to correct science. Only the unwise ones with no wisdom and with no insights see the differences between other religions and also the differences between the sects with in their own religion and move away from religion. Take this for example - The Myths will say that the Sun-God rides in a chariot carried by Horses. Anyone outside the tradition who lack wisdom who take this statement literally will obviously find it ridiculous and childish and there is no excuse for believing in that view in this 21'st century world. But how would a religious scholar, someone who is part of that tradition interpret this myth? Exactly he interprets it with an esoteric meaning and doesn't find it ridiculous like atheists tend to see. Same is with the the works of Elaine Pagels, the Gnostic scholar and she shows how the Valentinians interpreted the Pauline epistles with an esoteric meaning which is given in parables generally and this is what she concludes. The Gnostic Paul No one is saying that the literal stories and myths which was only a way of expressing the wisdom hidden in these religions is true and should be taken seriously. What is becoming more and more clear is that the works of religious scholars who have knowledge of the oral traditions which guides them to interpret the verses in the religious scriptures with an esoteric meaning is very common and ontologically similar. How can anyone deny the works of these religious scholars and philosophers? The City of God by Saint Augustine, The Meditations by Marcus Aurelius, The Red Book by Carl Jung, the works of Shankara, the works of Elaine Pagels, The works of Devudu Narasimha Shastry, works of Jonathon Duqette and the many works by various religious scholars. One cannot deny these new insights coming from religious scholars who show us how to interpret the religious scriptures and further research on following the methods shows that these insights are indeed true of the reality existing out there independent of the human mind which is also confirmed by new insights from science. I don't know whether others have preserved the methods to investigate the pleroma of God or not. The east has indeed preserved the methods to investigate the pleroma of God and it is for this reason that people who practice these methods have showed that the effects of Prana, the vital force (i.e spontaneous involuntary movements) is as common a phenomena as solar eclipse or lunar eclipse which occurs once in a while and it should be accepted as a well established fact showing the presence of the numinous. No one is asking to accept anything on faith alone, so I am not preaching around here, it is a testable claim. Try your delusional arguments of comparing God with the Flying Spaghetti Monster for other arguments like ID and Creationism, I am not moved even by an inch. Do you both really think that well educated theists are dumb that they cannot see what the evidence is saying? Do you both really think that the Guests of SFN are dumb? Thanks for replying to this thread so that I can show why Bernard's claim that spirituality can know the noumenon which science cannot know is absolutely true. Atheists are so delusional that they think that if we can somehow ridicule a theist's claim start assuming that they have won the argument instead of researching the numerous evidences cited and demonstrated. Science and orthodox religions can squabble with each other in any way they want. The wise ones know what to do.

Simply put you have no evidence to refute Bernard D'Espagnat's claim and this thread is alive because I have so much evidence to back up Bernard's claim. According to Max Muller, the proto Indo-Iranian religion started off as sun worship. It is a fact that our seers worshipped the Sun God, it is a fact that Hinduism is basically a Sun-God worshipping religion and we will continue to do so to achieve self-righteousness. Who is the master of the Vedas? Who is the master of the Agnisoma Mandala? Who? It's the Sun God, the God of the gods and none beside him. Hiranyagarbha This is something scholars outside the tradition don't see and miss very often. This is no ones intellectual property, this knowledge belongs to the people of the world and it belongs to God. Our seers were not so dumb that they could not differentiate between the manifested outer sun which is a star of the Milky Way galaxy and the Sun-God which resides in everyone. Yajnavalkya is one of the important rishi of Hinduism and whom did he worship? He worshipped the Sun-God and from whom he got all his knowledge from? It is from the Sun-God. White Yajur Veda: Book I The Rishi of White Yajurveda is Yajnavalkya and in whose name the glory of that Veda is recited, of course its God Savitur, who is Savitur, he is the Sun God. What is the basic tenet of Hinduism? It's the Gayatri Mantra and to whom it is addressed to, yes, it is addressed to Savitur, the Sun-God. This is Hinduism,this is the main message of Hinduism to the world. Souram Who is the deity explicitly spoken in the Upanishads, of course its Hiranyagarbha - The Sun-God. Toward a Unified MetaphysicalUnderstanding: Hiranyagarbha Adityahridayam - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia "Oh Rama, mighty-armed Rama, listen to this eternal secret, which will help you destroy all your enemies in battle." "Then knowing that the destruction of the lord of prowlers at night(Ravana) was near, Aditya, who was at the center of the assembly of theGods, looked at Rama and exclaimed 'Hurry up' with great delight. PurifyingHimself by sipping water thrice, He took up His bow with His mighty arms.Seeing Ravana coming to fight, He put forth all his effort with a determinationto destroy Ravana." Who is at the center of the assembly of the Gods, of course its Aditya, the Sun-God. All gods reside in him. He is the master of the Agnisoma Mandala. The kingdom of God is in you. This was just a small presentation of the evidence from the scriptures. You want scientific evidence? Then see - Quantum physics says goodbye toreality - physicsworld.com Many of the quantum researchers who have won Noble prizes like Anton Zeilingerand others have already renounced realism, the reality given by science isconstructed, neither quarks, protons, electrons, brain exists out there in theexternal physical world, it's all a creation of the mind. The conclusion by these quantum researchers is absolutely correct and the science reporter is also right in saying that "Quantum physics says good bye to reality" Alain Aspect and Anton Zeilinger on Unreality "Narada Muni continued: What I referred to as the chariot was in actuality the body. The senses are the horses that pull that chariot. As time passes, year after year, these horses run without obstruction, but in fact they make no progress. Pious and impious activities are the two wheels of the chariot. The three modes of material nature are thechariot's flags. The five types of life air constitute the living entity'sbondage, and the mind is considered to be the rope. Intelligence is the chariotdriver. The heart is the sitting place in the chariot, and the dualities oflife, such as pleasure and pain, are the knotting place. The seven elements arethe coverings of the chariot, and the working senses are the five external processes. The eleven senses are the soldiers. Being engrossed in sense enjoyment, the living entity, seated on the chariot, hankers after fulfilment of his false desires and runs after sense enjoyment life after life. (SB4.29.18-20)" Srimad Bhagvatham dates back to around 3000 BC according to the verses from the Bhagvatham itself. 1. It is a fact that our seers knew that mind is separate and different from the brain or the body. 2. It is a fact that our seers knew that intelligence exists in platonic realms. Mathematical physicists like Roger Penrose are strong Platonists. "Either mathematics is too big for the human mind or the human mind is more than a machine." – Kurt Gödel "Gödel's Theorem shows that human thought is more complex and less mechanical than anyone had ever believed" - Rudy Rucker 3. It is a fact that our seers knew about the life force Prana which identifies the Self with the body. 4. It is a fact that our seers knew who the Supreme Godhead is who controls this cosmos. Scientific realism is dead and also atheism too is dead. It's not theists who are delusional, broken and intellectually dishonest, its atheists who are delusional, broken and intellectually dishonest. This is the reason why neuroscientists like Sam Harris who is a proponent of New atheism himself recognizes the wisdom in the eastern traditions. Of course respect is earned not demanded. As someone in the Guardian said "Kant? Schopenhauer? Try Buddha, Lao Tse. The West is very late to this party." The West is indeed very late to this party because any lay person or a common man or even a kid who practices pranayama and Hatha yoga would have experienced spontaneous involuntary movements called as Kriyas while performing intense yogic exercises and they already know the existence of the vital or the life force in their body as it urges out and cleanse all the nadis of the spiritual body which proves beyond any doubt that reality is not been given to us as it is but only it appears to us as something different like a mirage when viewed through the metaphysical sense organs andthe metaphysical mind. The existence of the life force Prana should be accepted as a well-established fact. The living body is alive not because it reduces entropy;the living being is kept alive because of the vital force of Prana. It is something which can be tested by the means of yoga. "When the living entity is in deep sleep, when he faints, when there is some great shock on account of severe loss, at the time of death, or when the body temperature is very high, the movement of the life air is arrested. At that time the living entity loses knowledge of identifying the body with the self."(SB 4.29.71) Science will never be able to understand the Mind-body problem and some scientists say that they don't need to investigate god and say that gaps in science will be filled by science itself which is so untrue because of the above facts. The CERN scientists think that the world is made of particles but it's true only from their own perspective and they make a consensus without considering eastern religions and other phenomena which I think shows their personal incredulity because more and more number of people are getting hurt while performing Hatha yoga and pranayama who experience the intense energy of prana hidden in them and a common man who is knowledgeable in yoga from the east knows that the empirical reality is a mind-dependent reality, you don't need a scientist to say that. Scientists are indeed very late to this party if we consider all these evidences. India is a country which is known for its wisdom and it has once again proved that our traditions have withstood the test of times and we have so much knowledge and wisdom in the Vedas and the Upanishads that it has become the guiding light to this world which I think is in deep darkness. Niels Bohr, Erwin Schrodinger, Werner Heisenberg, Robert A. Oppenheimer etc. were all interested in it and Arthur Schopenhauer said, "The Upanishads has been the solace of my life, it will be the solace of my death!" Unfortunately they were not aware of as to what they are venturing into and didn't see the common esoteric essence of all religions. Noting all these evidences there is no excuse for still holding on to realism and any further debate is pointless and we know what to do, i.e go and do research into the pleroma of God and the ones who understand God will be the true philosophers or the true physicists for they know things as it exists and not as it appears to us which science cannot know because only God gives an objective account of reality.

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1201.6554v1.pdf - The quantum state can be interpreted statistically - Peter G. Lewis,1, David Jennings,1 Jonathan Barrett, 2 and Terry Rudolph 1 The same authors Jonathan Barrett and Terry Rudolph who claimed that the quantum state cannot be interpreted statistically wrote a paper saying that The quantum state can be interpreted statistically. Why do you prove yourself again and again that you're intellectually dishonest, that you embrace crack-pottery and personally biased and dogmatic with your views on QM? Your dislikes, beliefs have no bearing in reality when performed experiments have already contradicted your beliefs. That's your misconceptions with the Pagan religions. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOdvE9yvs9M&feature=player_embedded Paganism A basic introduction to Paganism "Proselytising is the conversion of another, usually into one's own religious group. Pagans find this intrusive and offensive. It is believed that anyone who becomes a Pagan should do so under their own steam." Polytheistic myth as psychology If there is anyone who share same interests with the Nazi Germany are the one's who deny the existence of Gods for they diminish the well being of humanity.

The paper actually belongs in Esotercism and the soundness of my arguments lies in knowing both the technical and philosophical arguments of the Bohr-Einstein debates and experiments performed based on it along with the arguments of Bernard D'Espagnat and also in knowing the deepest truths of religion especially of the eastern traditions, the knowledge of these scriptures and also having knowledge of the methods of these traditions. I can back up all this with verses from scriptures showing evidence that our ancients actually viewed their world from this perspective. The people of orthodox religions do not understand this because they have got themselves too much involved in idolatry and they say we don't have enough time to learn what science says and the scientific community cannot study this because its outside the scientific method and some of them prima facie conclude that its nonsense and those few who are actually aware of these kind of works by traditional scholars are not aware of the works of quantum physicists. So without showing any contempt or derision I might go and meet some scholars who actually are aware of this traditional scholar's work and inform them about this and also get some inputs from them. I know that they will understand at least the religious side of my arguments. This has very less to do with science and deals more with the pleroma of God. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Pavagada-Prakash-Rao/168848436504267?v=info Look I am neither a philosopher nor a scientist, I am an engineer and I was taught to code programs and develop software products, the IT industry is very vast and there is lot to learn so I don't like to waste my time convincing others about this despite citing numerous evidences and much of the papers on esoteric studies are really bad and they follow pseudo-science and therefore I really don't like to place this paper with one of theirs. I don't like proselytising either and as Richard H. Jones says many eastern thinkers place western standards as a pedestal for their studies and they have too much faith in the claims of physicists and that's the reason why dogmatic thinking is really dangerous in science and I plead physicists to be more responsible while making claims about reality because there are those who see science as god and don't realize that even science has some limitations and its assumptions, methods and foundations can be questioned. Bernard D'Espagnat said that quantum mechanics is a pointer to an independent reality that exists independent of the human mind and every quantum researcher knows this and I have shown where it is pointing to and its left to people whether they want to research the pleroma of God or not and like I said I don't like to proselytise people. Accepting that the empirical reality is only a state of mind implies accepting, “Gods are real. And these gods are everywhere, in all aspects of existence, all aspects of human life.” -James Hillman Misrepresentation of someone's views does annoy very much. For example: "You're doing disservice to humanity" and "You like to see only what you want to see" which is very untrue. If you can't differentiate between a fact claim and a claim made based merely on speculation then its not my problem, I am least bothered to convince you and you are free to go against and believe in what ever you want despite available evidence contradicting it but don't misrepresent someone's else views.

Where did you find the links to those three blogs which discuss this paper? You found it from the link which I gave you, I had read all those three blogs before you did therefore I gave you that link to enlighten you about the mistakes of that paper. Now you accuse the one who actually made you aware of the controversy surrounding that paper. The fact that you raised three more blogs is not surprising at all but its the way you did it, you started saying that I am hiding something, very funny, isn't it. I had read those blogs before you did and that's a fact and I gave you that link to make you aware why the conclusions of that paper is actually very bad. Yes there are papers which strongly criticize the claims of the physicists which you cited and it has been refuted by experts in the field. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1112.2446v2.pdf [3] By dogmatic, I do not mean to imply that the authors are narrow minded - merely that their beliefs are not based on accessible evidence. Nevertheless, I feel I should point out the similarity to strongly held religious beliefs and the attached doctrines. The danger of dogmatism in science may be greater than physicists would like to think. The above statement was not made by me, it was made by Holger Hofmann himself, the author of this paper. If there is no difference between scientists and religious fundamentalists then what is the fate of science, some don't realize the dangers of dogmatic thinking in any culture. Education is the key and I have very well outlined as to what is the current state of consensus on this subject from the scientific community and I have also established the relationship of science and religion. Scientific realism is dead and many quantum physicists have already renounced scientific realism and I am convinced that scientific realism is false and slowly the whole humanity will realize that the universe only exists when one is looking at it. Dogmatic thinking destroys humanity, it makes people crazy and the only way to stop it is to educate people and I have not lost my sanity. You must be in some kind of wonderland, the evidence for Bernard D'Espagnat's claim was given many times in this very thread by different quantum physicists including David Mermin and others and its an experimental fact, go and check it out. You have got a very good authority behind you, all the best to you. The mistakes in that paper are corrected and next time if you want to refute Bernard's claim come up with something more substantial and yes please don't waste my time and also your time. The onus is on you as much as it is on me.

This is the second time you have made sweeping statements about me without reading or understanding what is being discussed here. I gave a link to that blog not to defend the claims of that physicist blogger but to enlighten you that, that paper is surrounded with controversies and I very well know that a personal rant on a blog cannot be evidence of anything, earlier you misunderstood me and claimed that I am doing disservice to humanity and I showed you how some crazy thinkers try to epistemologically connect mysticism with QM which leads all sorts of pseudo-scientific approaches and nonsense, now again you've misunderstood my posts. I very well knew about this paper even before you posted about this and so I gave that particular link to make you aware of the confusions dealing with that paper and I am not trying to hide anything here and as you can see your three more bloggers too interpret the paper in their own ways and make conclusions about that paper and even you're using that paper in your own way to justify your claims. All this confusion is because the auhors have merged a lot of separate interpretations into one and have used bad terminologies and its obscure as to what the assumptions of their theorem is and what its conclusions are. This is theoretical physics so I advice you take this to a separate thread and clear up the misconceptions and then perform experiments based on that theorem and try to post it as a refutation to Bernard D'Espagnat's claims and let us see if your paper refutes Bernard's claims or not. As I said I don't trust anyone of those bloggers. If you can't differentiate between a fact claim and a claim which is mere speculation then its not my problem, you're either ignorant or misinformed or you're posting your biased beliefs as facts. One of those bloggers namely Matt leifer makes conclusions about that paper in support of Bernard's claim and I could have easily used that as supporting Bernard's claims but I am not going to do that because it has not been experimentally established as fact and a blog post cannot be termed as scientific evidence for something. I very well said in the beginning itself let's not go there. If its anything that is very clear is that those papers shows that the conceptual difficulties of Quantum mechanics has not been resolved yet and as I said there is no accepted consensus on this matter among the physics community and some here argue calling fundamental concepts as myths when we very well know that there is no accepted consensus from the physics community. Why there is no accepted consensus? Its because the implications of Bell experiments falls beyond science and it belongs to philosophy and it is philosophy which keeps as eye on the foundations and assumptions of a particular discipline and as you know majority of the physicists don't want to do philosophy and you'll never see them participating in discussions like this and considering this one should have enough knowledge to differentiate between facts and sweeping assumptions without no evidence. Bernard's claim is based on Bell theorem and experiments associated with it and its a fact claim. The observed correlations in Bell experiments and also the experiments based on Leggett's formula excludes local realistic theories as well as a set of non-local realistic theories and it is an experimental fact, a scientific fact. What are the implications of this? "To quote Einstein, the necessity of completing quantum mechanics in a local–realist way could be escaped “only by either assuming that the measurement of S1 (telepathically) changes the real situation of S2 or by denying independent real situations to things which are spatially separated from each other. Both alternatives appear to me entirely unacceptable.” - Alain Aspect Holding on to "elements of reality" or hidden variables independent of measurements like those physicists which you have cited means accepting non-locality of nature which is highly unacceptable, some think that we can keep one and exclude other but as Einstein specifically states both locality and realism are very important and any violation of even one of them is highly unacceptable and casts fundamental doubts on scientific realism. Look where Bernard D'Espagnat, a senior most physicist stands and look where you and those physicists which you cited stand and you're claiming that the papers you have cited refutes Bernard's claims. You like being ridiculed? Bernard's claim that "What we call reality is only a state of mind" stands undisturbed.

Oops let's not go there, that paper is surrounded with controversies and its a crap paper, those physicists don't even know that the Kochen-specker theorem seriously states that any hidden variable theory consisting of "elements of reality" is excluded by quantum mechanics, there is enough proofs for that, someone who is not a physicist like me I myself can figure out that it is a very bad paper and they don't even conclude the paper very well. Nature hypes anti-QM crackpot paper by Pusey et al. I really doesn't want to discuss about that paper in this thread. Meditations don't produce any physical effects which are interesting for the empirical science, there are other methods which can generate indirect effects on the empirical world for example St. Theresa of Avila almost shattered the whole room so much that the nuns came running to see what happened to her. We all are gods, sons of the Most high - Psalms. Each one has enough power hidden in us. As Einstein states some physicists don't know with what they are playing with and this very well applies to those above physicists.

Stephen Hawking has an habit of changing his mind and I don't know what he is going to say after 10 years. Stephen Hawking - Gödel and The End of Physics Stephen Hawking himself is a strong proponent of the positivism of science and positivism is a branch of philosophy. Physicists will never be able to know what time, space etc actually is and without knowing that physicists will be mere empiricists caught up in the cave and its true philosophers who are going to investigate the pleroma of God who might have control over nature. All evidence shows that one cannot make a distinction between what is objective and what is subjective. When there is absence of evidence from both science as well as religion then they both are equivalent. Both have not accurately explained the origin of the cosmos. No, creation scientists and the proponents of Intelligent Design call their ideas as scientific and want to introduce this in schools but I have explicitly stated that this is not science and I don't want this to be introduced in schools. You can accept those traditions once irrefutable evidence exists for them. My point is that science is not all what there is and research into God can be has fruitful has doing science and that neither science nor religion currently have enough evidence to conclude the nature of reality. You did not specifically said that but that's what this statement by you implies "P.S.: What says an author whose main award is a prize given by an critiziced pseudo-religious foundation" why are you so obsessed with prize and making personal attacks on Bernard? Unfortunately those traditions have not described a Flying Spaghetti Monster has their supreme deity in their works. This time it will be religion which is going to correct the scientific consensus. No, I cited his works to explain how quantum information theorists view the world and that they actually claim that the "universe is made of information" I cited his works to show that for particle physicists the world is made of particles and for field theorists the world is made of fields and for information theorists the world is made of information. So each one says different thing as to what the universe is made of from their own perspective proving that the empirical reality is quite fuzzy. The New Scientist article by Michael Brooks who himself holds a PhD in quantum physics is based on the works of these researchers. Simon Groblacher,1, 2 Tomasz Paterek,3, 4 Rainer Kaltenbaek,1 Caslav Brukner,1, 2 Marek Z_ ukowski,1, 3 Markus Aspelmeyer,1, 2, and Anton Zeilinger1, 2, y 1 Faculty of Physics, University of Vienna, Boltzmanngasse 5, A-1090 Vienna, Austria 2 Institute for Quantum Optics and Quantum Information (IQOQI), Austrian Academy of Sciences, Boltzmanngasse 3, A-1090 Vienna, Austria 3 Institute of Theoretical Physics and Astrophysics, University of Gdansk, ul. Wita Stwosza 57, PL-08-952 Gdansk, Poland 4 The Erwin Schrodinger International Institute for Mathematical Physics (ESI), Boltzmanngasse 9, A-1090 Vienna, Austria You're claiming that all these quantum researchers are wrong? The conclusion of these researchers is that "Therefore it is reasonable to consider the violation of local realism a well established fact." Realism - that the outcome of a measurement on a physical system is determined by physical properties of the system prior to and independent of the measurement. Local - independent of the measurement (realism), and that the outcome cannot depend on any actions in space-like separated regions (Einstein locality). Einstein's mathematical realism is fundamentally flawed, there is no element of physical reality corresponding to a physical quantity. Which part of this that you don't understand? Griffith's textbook is outdated and those researchers seriously contradict his claims. Even I find it very ironic that you argue with a stubborn mind even after providing much evidence which contradicts your world-view and you don't even want to acknowledge that there is a problem that's why I think that yours is an intellectually dishonest position. The nature agrees with you? hmm? http://henry.pha.jhu.edu/aspect.html Our traditional scholars especially Devudu Narasimha Shastry, a traditional scholar based on his knowledge of the mandalas of the Vedas very well knew what mind is and the evidence for his works was cited earlier. It inevitably leads to an esoteric world-view. God is not dead yet and neither is philosophy. "Man here, god there. Weakness and nothingness here, there eternally creative power. Here nothing but darkness and chilling moisture. There wholly sun." - Carl Jung, Seven Sermons to the Dead. Actual experiments confirming John Wheeler's delayed choice experiment John Wheeler's participatory universe is probably right and with all this evidence you really think that your statement that quarks, protons, photons etc etc existed prior to Humans is a scientific fact? I think otherwise and I have serious doubts about the nature of reality which we are living in.

I understand how science works better than you do. The fact that you don't acknowledge that science falls under Philosophy shows that you want to push science as a dogma. I did not pushed this God hypothesis as a scientific hypothesis and I very well know that the scientific method is not suited to test a God hypothesis. This is more of a battle between two different philosophical disciplines(Science and Religions) who are competing to explain the same natural phenomena and competing to give answers to the same questions which science asks such as, 1. What is the world made of? 2. Where do we come from? 3. Can we understand the underlying principles on how this universe works? 4. How did this cosmos originated? Scientists have no right to call a different philosophical doctrine as nonsense when there is considerable doubt with in the scientific community has to what constitute as objective and what is subjective. I am not forcing you to accept those traditions as true but instead I want you to accept the work of Richard H. Jones where he concludes that, "After a long and well-informed discussion, he concludes that "neither science nor mysticism [alone] provides self-evident insights into the actual nature of reality" [213] The ones who understand this cosmos control this cosmos and there is considerable doubt as to who controls this universe. Scientific research is as equivalent as research into God and Religion and they are on same footing. Its a consensus which scientists haven't won yet. Don't be cheap, for true philosophers the truth is far more important than any Prize, the more you're going to call those traditions as nonsense the more is that people are going to laugh at you. Earlier you made scornful statements about Bernard saying "for a man to whom only prize is important" and here is what Bernard says, "The message would be that the purpose of life is not to eat and drink, watch television and so on. Consuming is not the aim of life. Earning as much money as one can is not the real purpose of life. There is a superior entity, a divinity, le divin as we say in French that is worth thinking about, as are our feelings of wholeness, respect and love, if we can. A society in which these feelings are widespread would be more reasonable than the society the West presently lives in." - Bernard D'Espagnat Yajnavalkya, one of the important philosophers of those traditions had won thousand cows with gold on the horns of each cow and he gave all his wealth to his wife and went to know something which was worth knowing. He is the one who developed the 95 year cycle to synchronize the motions of sun and the moon around 1800 B.C and it differs by just 6 minutes from modern calculations. Those people knew that the cosmos is differentiated into a microcosm and a macrocosm, what are suns, planets, stars in the macrocosm of this empirical reality they are gods in the reality of microcosm which exists in every living being and Yajnavalkya got all this knowledge from the gods. Its you who don't understand religious values and religious principles and as I told the more you're going to call those traditions as nonsense the more is that people are going to laugh at you because all evidence is in favour of these religious traditions. Try this with someone else not with me, his claim that "Rather than passively observing it, we in fact create reality" is irrelevant to what he wrote in his book. The magazine is not important, what is important is the content and the arguments and evidence is what is important. Griffith didn't give an objective explanation for the observed correlations in Bell Experiments and it demands explanations. Did you understand? You don't decide what makes sense and what doesn't. It is nature which does. It is evidence which decides what is nonsense and what's not.

People should laugh at you. When there is a problem honestly acknowledge there is a problem, don't try to evade it. Philosophers and physicists have considered Bernard D'Espagnat's work because he is the leading authority in this subject and his work is rock solid. You're not the only one who have studied quantum mechanics, there are many out there who are far more experienced and also those who apply quantum mechanics in the empirical world and the consensus should be made considering both theoretical physicists and experimental physicists who actually develop quantum applications. Don't single out Bernard D'espagnat and make scornful statements about him. Vladko Vedral - "Rather than passively observing it, we in fact create reality" It is you who are deliberately adding misinformation into this thread and evading fact claims established from experiments. There are many quantum physicists out there who disagree with you and experiments have concluded that they are right. Its you who is wrong not Bernard. This is from the same New Scientist article which was cited earlier. All these researchers contradict your claims and you did not made any arguments to refute it but only repeated statements from an outdated textbook. That's not a scientific attitude at all, prior to any investigation assuming that they are wrong. You did not gave any evidence to my challenges and all evidence shows that realism sinks in the bottomless ocean.

Lies! You know what love really means? http://www.myspace.c...72368911&ac=now J.J Heller - We are truly made in the image of God. Zombies!! The paper was also cited from arXiv. You did not refuted his arguments. What you're doing here is an appeal to authority. How do you decide someone else has more authority on this subject than Bernard D'Espagnat? The uses of these traditions in solving ontological, philosophical and scientific problems were explicitly stated through out the thread.

How do you know what I have read and what I haven't? I love science more than you do. Take back the things that you've charged on me. Cell and Molecular Biology, E.D.P De Robertis and E.M.F De Robertis - The last chapter of this book deals with Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology. There is nothing in the chemistry of Brain which can explain the processing of qualia like sweetness and redness. Just because I didn't go into detailed arguments in this thread doesn't mean that you ask questions like Do you even know this? and Do you even know that? A Beginner's guide to Quantum Mechanics, Alastair I.M Rae, 2007. Why is that only your biased textbooks are valid and mine aren't? This is what happens when scientists start doing philosophy rather than science. The interpretation of quantum mechanics is a philosophical topic and it clearly shows that physicists don't have a complete common consensus on the nature of reality and the nature of this physical universe. This book is latest compared to that text book of yours. I never said quantum mechanics supports those traditions. Those traditions stands on its own and it doesn't need any justification from science. I said Bernard d'Espagnat's work support those traditions and Bernard was not afraid to state the obvious which many physicists hesitated to say it. Yes I have exposed the mistakes that some scientists have made while making the consensus on the nature of physical reality. Saying that Bell experiments confirms the predictions of Quantum mechanics is same as saying local realism is violated and also non-local realism (considering the experiments on Anthony Leggett's theorem which extends Bell theorem to test for non-local realism), which part of this that you don't understand?

No one said Science sucks. Philosophy keeps an eye on both Science and Religion and that's why there is a philosophy of Religion and a philosophy of Science. The day you said that Science is not a branch of philosophy you lost your intellectual honesty and you started pushing science as a dogma. The assumptions of Science can be questioned and it will be questioned. I never said Quantum mechanics implies that scientific realism has to be abandoned, I said the observed correlations in Bell experiments, a natural phenomena questions scientific realism and should be abandoned. Either give an objective explanation to those correlations or accept that science is positivism and physicists are mere empiricists with no real knowledge of the nature of the Universe. The day you scientists accepted the existence of this empirical reality independent of the human mind as a matter of faith at that point Science and Religion were on equal footing and philosophy has to come in to keep an eye on both. Scientific Realism is indeed in trouble. Scientists might just shut up and calculate equations with out questioning these basic assumptions but philosophers will question it. The Quantum Theory and Reality - Bernard d'Espagnat "As far as the issue of “reality” in philosophy of physics is concerned, emphasis is laid on the views of the French theoretical physicist and philosopher of science Bernard d’Espagnat. D’Espagnat is widely recognized as a leading authority in the field of interpretation of quantum physics and particularly renown for his works on realism in physics. His recent book On Physics and Philosophy was described by the physicist Roland Omn`es as “surely the most complete book to have been written on this subject [philosophy of quantum physics] and one likely to last a long time. . . ”23 - Jonathon Duqette

Jung was not anti-semitic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Jung In an interview with Carol Baumann in 1948, Jung denied rumors regarding any sympathy for the Nazi movement, saying: It must be clear to anyone who has read any of my books that I have never been a Nazi sympathizer and I never have been anti-Semitic, and no amount of misquotation, mistranslation, or rearrangement of what I have written can alter the record of my true point of view. Nearly every one of these passages has been tampered with, either by malice or by ignorance. Furthermore, my friendly relations with a large group of Jewish colleagues and patients over a period of many years in itself disproves the charge of anti-Semitism. Spirituality Jung's work on himself and his patients convinced him that life has a spiritual purpose beyond material goals. Our main task, he believed, is to discover and fulfill our deep innate potential. Based on his study of Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Gnosticism, Taoism, and other traditions, Jung believed that this journey of transformation, which he called individuation, is at the mystical heart of all religions. It is a journey to meet the self and at the same time to meet the Divine. Unlike Sigmund Freud, Jung thought spiritual experience was essential to our well-being.[35] Jung's works can be backed up by verses from the scriptures of all religions. One need to differentiate pseudoscience from Science and pseudo-religion from Religion. Jung's work should be taken seriously because that's how our ancients viewed the world and scriptures are evidence of it.