TCA Swamin, a few more Clarifications

[Guest guest]

Sri:

Srimathe Ramanujaya Nama:

 

Dear Sri Parthasarathy Swamin,

 

adiyEn's praNams.

 

We have to be careful to understand that QT is trying to

describe the physical world and not the mental or

spiritual world. Therefore dissemination of the data

gathered in our minds is not something that QT is trying

to describe. When we say we interact with an event, we

are talking about the physical act of seeing, measuring,

etc.

 

Science is a definite product with laid out laws and

principles, but at the quantum level, QT allows for

probabilities. The probability of an event is not at

the experimental level, but at the actual physical

level. That is, if I try to pinpoint a particle's

location to a very specific point in time-space, I

cannot do that. I can only give you the best

probable location. By it's intrinsic wave nature,

the particle can be anywhere in infinite space-time.

At the macro level, we see the object where we see

it, because it is the highest probability location

(alomost equal to one); however, there is a definite

probaility that it could be somewhere else altogether.

That's why I said that the cat in the box could even

drop out of the box by sheer probability.

 

This infinite probability wave is what was being tied

to Buddhism in the book adiyEn mentioned. But I agree

with Smt Nappinnai. If you can, get the book from the

local library rather than buying it, as it deals mostly

with Zen Buddhism.

 

adiyEn madhurakavi dAsan

TCA Venkatesan

http://www.acharya.org

 

--- thirunarayanan parthasarathy iyengar

<shyamala45 wrote:

> SRIMATHE RAMANUJAYA NAMAHA

> APPAN THIRUVADIGALE SARANAM.

>

> Dear Sri. TCA Swamin, Accept my pranam,

> Thanks a lot for your clarifications.

>

> Adiyen do not want to prolong the subject. Still a few

> words are written here to get my understanding confirmed.

> In the first place a definition of “observer”.

> Definitely it should be independent of the events. It

> should have a mind or some such thing to understand, to

> store and utilize them later.

> The only one OBSERVSER’ who is a witness for all events

> for all times is the super power GOD, whom we call as

> Sriman Narayanan.

> The other obserbsers one or many more, as we call is

> Jeevathmas can be the

> 1.observer for the event or

> 2 can be a partner of the event or

> 3can have the knowledge of the event from some source

> when he has an opportunity to know it.

> He cannot compete with Emperuman

>

> “So, we have that events are influenced by the observer

> So, the key here is that there is no such thing as an

> unobserved happening.”

> The two conditions mentioned above will be satisfied in

> the case of Emperuman only.

> This is what you have confirmed.

>

> 2 “.Do guesses have a role to play in science?

> Absolutely,

> as long as it is called probability :-). Because of

> the wave-particle duality, there are an infinite number

> of situations that can happen “.

>

> Adiyen’s view of ‘science’ is the one of definite

> finished product. Experimental stages of probabilities

> are assumptions only, yet to be confirmed. Let us not

> worry about it.

>

> 3 “there is a book called Tao of Physics that you might

> be interested in”

>

> Adiyen will be thankful if you can intimate the source

> from which it can be had in India/Toronto (Canada).

>

> Once again, thanks a lot Swamin,

>

> Adiyen Ramanuja dasan, T.Parthasarathy..