NDE's can be explained through string theory?

[Avinash]

 

The difference between God and Santa Clause is that their natures are very different. Santa Clause is a good samaritan, a generous giver. God is considered the unseen force behind all things, the creator of all and the destroyer of all. The origin of everything, and the destination of everything. Santa Clause is no such thing. ...

 

I do not think that in his post to me, Shvu was really considering God and Santa Claus as equal. I had argued that scientists should keep an open mind for God even if they have not got proof. His response was that, as per this argument, scientists should keep an open mind for Santa Claus also even if there is no proof for the existence of Santa Claus.

[Avinash]

I wrote this in another thread but I cannot find that thread. Therefore, I am writing again.

 

Heisenberg uncertainty principle allows enery within any region to be increased even if no energy is added to it and to be decreased even if no energy is taken out of it. But the energy should go back to the original value even before the change can be measured. This is called as quantum fluctuation.

 

Energy because of mass is positive. But gravitational potential has negative energy. So, it is possible for total energy of our universe is zero. If so, then it is possible for our universe to come out of zero initial energy. Since there is no change in energy (initially zero and now also zero), therefore the universe can exist for any amount of time without violating any laws of Physics.

 

But, quantum fluctuation requires the pre existence of something into which fluctuation could take place. So, even quantum fluctuation says that there must have been something before our universe came into existence.

 

Quantum fluctuation allows multiple universes to be created. Take any point in our universe. Because of quantum fluctuation a new universe can spawn at that point. So, one universe can give rise to many universes. Those universes can, in turn, give rise to many universes and so forth.

[Guest Erika reif]

If god is the originator. And everythIng rests on him. Just as pearls on a string. Then how could science come to any conclusion other than god? To dismiss science is to dismiss gods creation

[ameyAtmA]

Certainly God is sarvakāraṇakāraṇam, the Cause of All Causes. The thing is, God is Param (highest) Ādi (most original) Purusha (Conscious Being or Existence, sat) and not Prakṛtī (His Nature), (Prakṛtī = not just material nature, all aspects of His nature).

 

Therefore, despite my utmost awe and reverence for the physicists/scientists and their hard work, no matter how many Higgs Bosons, quarks and strings and fundamental particles, theoretical physicists discover, it is PHYSICs of the PHYSICAL, i.e. within the realm of Prakṛtī .

We can say they have come very close to understanding the avyakta prakṛtī (unmanifest nature) OF Adi Purusha, but not Adi Purusha Himself.

Adi Purusha is Pure Original Consciousness? Perhaps too simple a word, but it is beyond the Boson or string or any supposed original sources of energy.

 

Science has shown that matter is really energy transformed -- this gives support to "world is His māyā" becs this māyā energy of His, is ever-dancing, transforming, twisting and twirling, and changing form -- so what is seen as matter is really a kshaṇabhangur (momentary) transformation of energy -- which goes back to being energy, which is Prakṛtī - no matter how subtle and unmanifest. Our scriptures describe this as pṛthvī (earth-solid) goes into aap (water-liquid), aap into tej (fire-heat), tej into vāyū (air-gas), vāyū back into ākāsh(space) and ākāsh further into avakāsh(substratum of vacuum?) and then Bramhan'.

 

In any case I agree with Avinashji here that the scientific curiosity is a gift from that Adi Purusha and may it continue with an open mind for existence of Govinda   - at least for the sake of those within Prakṛtī, even if they never get hold of that natkhat Govinda. Scientists are also humble and do not make wild guesses, but use honest methods of deduction and inference, based on evidence.

 

I say, why can't they be both - devotees with faith, as well as scientists? There are some like that, and they will or should give credit to God and our Vedic scriptures for what they use from it as axioms [yet to be proved].

 

dīpārchireva hi dashāntaram abhyupetya

dīpāyate vivṛta hetu samāna dharmā

yastāgra eva hi cha vishṇu tayā vibhātā

Govindam Ādi Purusham tam aham bhajāmī

--- Shri Shri Bramhan' Saṃhītā