Quantum Physics, Hinduism and Buddhism

[Dyothelite]

I just finished another book which is a comparative study of Quantum Physics (for dummies), Vedantic Hinduism and Buddhism. I did it mainly because it is said too often that somehow Eastern Religions and Quantum Physics are identical. I clearly show where Vedanta and Buddhism have connections and contradictions to Quantum Physics. This isn't another attempt to equate science and religion, it is more an attempt to clarify the relationships. I was hoping to open up dialogue on this topic.

Here's my basic points:

 

Dvaita Vedanta (dualistic conclusions to the Vedas) is similar to classical physics in that it claims the universe is composed of separate distinct pieces, and therefore is incompatible with the Wave/Particle theory.

 

Advaita Vedanta (non-dualistic conclusions to the Vedas) claims the universe is merely one whole and therefore particles do not exist they are merely illusion. This is also incompatible with Quantum Physics because QP does not claim particles don't exist, QP merely claims that it is an illusion to see them as separate from the waves and fields they emerge from. The Bell Tests even showed that two different particles are connected over long distances in space as well.

 

Vishishtadvaita Vedanta (qualitative non-dualistic conclusions to the Vedas, or non-dualism with qualities) is directly compatible with QP because it claims that everything in the universe is intertwined but unlike pure non-dualism it claims that different things exist as different qualities and therefore exist qualitatively. In other words particles behave with the qualities of a particle, a rock has the qualities of a rock, but all these things exist intertwined with all other things. It's like a compromise between wave (non-duality) and particle (duality) where particles emerge as a qualitatively measurable occurences but remain intimately interconnected with the universe. However, it is also incompatible with QP because VV declares a God and QP makes no attempt to define a God.

 

Buddhism is a little trickier. Early Buddhism is like Advaita Vedanta in that it claims that the universe is empty (sunyata) of separate forms. The universal interconnectedness is taken more literally to mean ultimate truth is in the elimination of the idea of "things". However, later Buddhism like Tibetan Buddhism is a little more flexible when speaking of things, and therefore it can be said that later Buddhism allows for the discussion of particles as long as they are seen as intertwined with the universe. Plus because Buddhism does not try to prove a God it is even more compatible. It ends up being how you understand sunyata and anatman (no-self), if you take it literally that there are no particles then it is incompatible with QP, but if you allow fr qualitative existence that remains intertwined in the whole then it is compatible with QP.

 

I wanted to do this to address the common notion that Eastern Religions are somehow proven through QP and the fact is only certain kinds of Buddhism are directly compatible with QP.

[Buffy]

To me that sounds so vague as to be pretty much meaningless. Using the same method, one could draw parallels between any two topics.

 

This discussion so abstracts and so selectively chooses what is compared that any similar aspects are almost by definition without any significance.

 

I like to follow the money: what's the *point* here in showing "similarities"? Is it to make religion and science "equivalent"? Is it to show differences between Eastern and Western religions or cultures? Who benefits from these "parallels?"

 

Spiritual payback,

Buffy

[jackson33]

from a layman's perspective; the Hindu religion probably pre-existed the need for a creator of all things. i do not recall the *Chant* title, but its said to go back 3-4k years and has been added to through out the period or to todays events. Sandisk or the native language to India are is said to mirror physics in some change manner. this given the ease speakers of Sandisk excel in Medicine and some science. i know very little of the Buddhist, however history to me shows a intellect superiority of their ancestry. i have generally accepted this as a trait, picked up from the current Indian area as population migrated. unlike China, India has been fought over, invaded many times and in such cases, history gets shifted to comply with the current societies.

 

however, i have problems with any religious origins being used to influence science. if science and religion cross it should be by accident or w/o the intend to justify some belief. handed down chants, Hindu or current religion is based on knowledge of there times, all subject to interpretations and adjustments to societies they exist through.

 

one little point on perspective of things. until life on earth, developed eye/brain connections nothing could be seen. these visual images of energies reflections could have varied. personally i am convinced, about 6-8 thousand years ago something happened in the evolution of human perception. this is pure speculation and my opinion only, but these changes could be the reasons for a number of things including what became writings to our understanding. any attempt before this period, would not be recognized by our understanding of what should have been....

[Boerseun]

...i am convinced, about 6-8 thousand years ago something happened in the evolution of human perception.

Yes, indeed! We invented writing, somewhere in ancient Persia, where the modern Iraq is located. The ability of keeping records and passing on learning to our remote descendants, accellerated human learning exponentially. We didn't have to 're-invent the wheel', for every passing generation anymore.

 

But coming back to the topic at hand, I have to agree with Buffy. The fact that certain belief systems are 'compatible' with certain sets of physics, is merely coincidental. It's not the main aim (or even an aim, at all) of physics or any other branch of science, to disprove belief systems. Besides, what use is it to know that Bhuddism, for instance, is not disproved by QM? What predictive qualities, then, would Bhuddism have? What experiments can we conduct using Bhuddism as our point of departure?

 

Trigonometry, for instance, doesn't disprove the Old Testament. Does it then prove it? Does it mean that for as long as trigonometry stays intact, we should stone prostitutes and homosexuals to death, stop shaving our beards and stop eating shellfish and pork?

 

I fail to see the point, here. :)

[jackson33]

as i said, in my hypothetical opinion, something other than given explanations, which are fine with me, to begin writings at a point in history could be results of conceptions or visual images to the brain.

 

as to the thread, i agree with both you and Buffy....

[maikeru]

from a layman's perspective; the Hindu religion probably pre-existed the need for a creator of all things. i do not recall the *Chant* title, but its said to go back 3-4k years and has been added to through out the period or to todays events. Sandisk or the native language to India are is said to mirror physics in some change manner. this given the ease speakers of Sandisk excel in Medicine and some science. i know very little of the Buddhist, however history to me shows a intellect superiority of their ancestry. i have generally accepted this as a trait, picked up from the current Indian area as population migrated. unlike China, India has been fought over, invaded many times and in such cases, history gets shifted to comply with the current societies.

 

I believe you're referring to the Rigveda (Rg Veda), the oldest of the Vedas, and dates, according to Wikipedia, to about 1700 BC at the earliest. That would be about 3,700 years old. Sanskrit, the classic language of ancient India, is related to other Indo-European languages like Latin, Greek, or English for that matter. Languages like Hindi are later developments and variants of Sanskrit that became languages in their own right, much as Italian is a descendant of Latin. Any excellence in medicine (at least with the terminology) that Sanskrit speakers might have wouldn't be so different from that of Greek or Latin (or Latinate language) speakers, because of the Greek-Latin vocabulary that medicine and the sciences use.

 

I also wanted to mention that China, like India or other parts of the world, has been invaded and conquered numerous times. E.g., the Yuan dynasty (Mongolians) and Qing dynasty (Jurchen or Manchurians) for later and more relatively recent examples.

 

History of China - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Usually it's been steppe nomads who've caused the Chinese great historical grief.

 

however, i have problems with any religious origins being used to influence science. if science and religion cross it should be by accident or w/o the intend to justify some belief. handed down chants, Hindu or current religion is based on knowledge of there times, all subject to interpretations and adjustments to societies they exist through.

 

This is something serious to worry about, because if certain politicians and creation scientists (who are anything but scientists), then American science will have less to worry about exploring the universe and its phenomena and more to explain how God created the world in six days and Noah and his animals weren't poached when the subterranean sea exploded underneath them (as some in the Earth Science forum have tried to argue).

 

one little point on perspective of things. until life on earth, developed eye/brain connections nothing could be seen. these visual images of energies reflections could have varied. personally i am convinced, about 6-8 thousand years ago something happened in the evolution of human perception. this is pure speculation and my opinion only, but these changes could be the reasons for a number of things including what became writings to our understanding. any attempt before this period, would not be recognized by our understanding of what should have been....

 

Bacteria and protozoans have light sensors. Flatworms have eyespots and a rudimentary bilateral nervous system that can help them process sensory input such as light. Trust me, before eyes and brains showed up on the scene, something could be seen, or at least detected, in a certain sense by some life.

 

An important development in distant human history seems to have happened around 40-50,000 years ago, when notable advancement in arts, technology, spirituality/religion, etc. were achieved by many cultures or groups, indicating a change or that something happened with the perception and intellectual ability of modern humans. Another "leap" may have happened about 5,000-6,000 years ago, with the rise of many civilizations, writing, and agriculture. I have a hunch that these may have been related to genes controlling brain structure, size, and intelligence, with examples such as microcephalin 1 and ASPM, which were more strongly selected for and passed on. MCPH1 suggests a change about 37,000 years ago for positive selection. ASPM about 5,800 years ago, according to Wiki. I think there are probably more genes and factors involved. These two dates do correlate rather well with the archaeological and anthropological evidence. But I want to caution that correlation does not imply causation.

 

Human evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Microcephalin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ASPM - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Sorry, this does not have much to do with the extraordinary compatibility or incompatibility between Asian religions and quantum mechanics, but wanted to clarify/discuss some things. Like Buffy and Boersun mentioned, I don't get much insight from Dyothelite's initial post. To me, the connection between quantum mechanics and Eastern religions is just one of imagination.

[jackson33]

Maikeryu; very interesting post. also for correction on Sandisk (a stock i own) and Sanskrit the correct word. as this was offered to me as a *Chant* my mind will remember it as such. what was interesting at the time was by measurements (Brahma life spans, i think) it gave a 13 or so billion years to the age of the universe.

 

with regards to India vs. China with referance to outside influence, i would maintain China, or the culture with stood a continuity which is not obvious to any other aged society. my concerns were also relating more to the past 2000 years and in India's case the Muslim and English influences.

 

American scientist are subject to public approval and educated to meet this end. my problem is the resistance to anything that counters these ideas. you can get a good picture of long term effects on the simple issue of Global Warming as a man made event. Fox News just took a pole, now claiming 87%, of the population feels GW is a serious problem. what they fail to understand is we also have a 25 year educational system, which all but makes it gospel to the average person.

 

yes, i understand the lack of an eye/brain for sight did not interrupt life forming on the planet. just pointed out to show light was not existent to that life, nor is it to most of life today. plant life and micro organisms, even some complex life will do just fine in there dark world. your actually making my point however, in that perception of events was not necessarily what we have today. that was my only point. likewise i would agree the genetic improvements were instrumental but to exclude this in that eye/brain would be wrong. i am NOT saying humans or animals didn't see 10 or 100k years ago, or animals since complex life has been but what was seen could have been much different.