pRANAM COMPLETE RAPTURE, NOTHING AND VACCUM AMD CONSCIOUSNESS
1 In complete rapture we are not aware of anything; it is in Vedic concept of science is termed as TURIUM. Many simply write it as samadhi. It is said that when the chit is superimposed on the SAT (which is not vacuum but the consciousness) the arising BLISS is samadhi or Turium where the oneness had taken place. It means that the perfect yogi can enter and exit of that status in and out. 2 Now my question is DO WE REACH THE VACCUM IN SAMADHI? The science modern says that in vacuum there is no matter; also adds up that there is a gaseous state; also adds up that that state is lesser than the atmospheric state outside vacuum. That meant gas is not aa matter? This kind of confusion had arisen to all the dualities but not to an advaithic in Vedas. 3 Vacuum was/ is VOID or shunyata in Buddhism. Where definitely a vacuum would exist LIGHT CANNOT PASS THRO A MATTER THOUGH WEIGHTLESS AND TIMELESS AND CANNOT SAY SPACELESS. TRACHYON is said to be faster than light. Vedas say The manas can travel faster than light; Only because the MIND went into rapture faster than the light the awareness relativity stopped as time stopped; when one reads Puranas people did that for several years and rose up in the same age they went into trance, that meant ageing is a time-process and where the time goes negative , age reverses’ . In short, the one live lives longer where there is peace in mind. Siddars were always in trance with peace so that they crossed the barriers of time and space, which words are correct explanation for their existences even today. And where it is shunyata as Buddhism said, the void without any matter falls like nine pins, as there cannot be any space without any matter at all, as there will be no medium of the transport. And existence of such as void or vacuum as described here and by some or the BREAKPOINT FOR THE HUBBLE, THE MIND AND THE TRCHONS, PARTICLES AND LIGHT AND ALL-WHICH IS Really-NOTHING. 4 NOTHING is neither subjective nor the objective and on mindful. Therefore, Un Vedic, and Unscientific. Where there is a medium of the least weight, and it is vacuum NOTHING IS obliterated. Shunyata does not exist. Infinity means there is some thing more. AND THAT SOMETHING IS THE CONSCIOUSNESS in the existence as a darkness in yoga and the Jyothi the light, agni, heat hydrogen components science terms as – as mind can map it. 5 Also, THE LIGHT SPEED, BELOW THE LIGHT SPEED AND THE ABOVE THE LIGHT SPEED are all again relative, since the quantum entanglement, puts the two-status visibility, one for one and the other for the other, sending a SPOOKY image unexplained as well as inexplicable forever, however hard one may try. I am thinking to write so based on the Vedas. When the truth is one and all the rest are interchangeable, destroyable and intermediary @ MAYA (not because of the not all existing) and without the one nothing could have emanated; and if there were more than one and or many such alike, there must be an explanation for the oncoming of so many from again something; and as it is an unending stretch of questions; and physics is SOMETHING AND NOT NOTHING; AND IT IS ACCEPTED BY THE BRAIN AS WELL THE MIND OF THEISM AND ATHEISM THAT , some thing is there as cause only, and the effects can turn into cause again and be repetitive; and the science is explained as only the answers to the cause and then the effect; so too the VEDAS SAYS SO, (ya yevam veda) ; THE TRUTH IS NOTHING CAN TRAVEL OR REMAIN SATIONERY THAN THE PURUSHA AS A SPOOKY ENGANGLED ,APPEARING TO ONE AS ONE AND TO ANOTHER AS THE OTHER. 6 Time and space are NOT STOPPING which science may say in 3020AD. We are seeing the objects we do believe as time pass by in the passing space. And SOMEHTING OR SOMETHINGS ARE ALSO SEEING AS THE OBJECT US. It is interrelated. From earth the age of the space object is younger than the age here; but the vice versa is also true; then the time and space are also relative and to the subjective conditions. Space manifestations and the devouring back and the storage of the devoured as dark matter and energy are continuous process, 155-billion-year-old. Time of brahma and the other constituents vary by the distance and nothing stops with the zero velocity and becoming zero velocity is only a Maya, vision beyond, THE ANANDAM IS IN THE INDIVIDUAL MIND IRRESPECTIVE OF THE SPACE AND TIME AND THE REST 3 DIMENSIONAL APERTURES. We reap what we sow. 7 And what today the latest science says:” *Does Light Experience Time? And Other Riddles.* We don't understand the concept of time much at all. Everyone experiences time — literally every day — but rigorous and comprehensive understanding of the topic is … lacking. Then again, we do know some things, especially when we look at time through the lens of special <https://www.space.com/36273-theory-special-relativity.html> and general relativity <https://www.space.com/17661-theory-general-relativity.html>. Einstein's work taught us many things: that space and time are connected, that you can never travel faster than light, that our universe has a finite age and that different observers experience different lengths of time. All these revelations lead to some interesting questions. It's time (pun intended) for a roundup. *How old is the universe?* Our universe is 13.77 billion years old, according to our current best estimates, which are very good, thank you very much. But when special relativity is invoked, we also understand that everyone measures time differently, depending on their speed. We, on Earth, whizzing around the sun, with the sun spinning around the Milky Way, and the Milky Way blasting through the intergalactic vacuum, should have a different perspective on the flow of time than someone else on a different planet around a different sun in a different galaxy. That said, how can we possibly pin down a "real" age of the universe? Here's the trick. Yes, according to special relativity, different observers have different measures of time. But our whole entire universe is not fully described by special relativity. The tools that we use to understand matters cosmological are provided by its bigger brother, general relativity. And when we look at the history of the universe from general relativity's viewpoint, we find that the cosmos … well, has a history. Our universe expands with time <https://www.space.com/52-the-expanding-universe-from-the-big-bang-to-today.html>. It was smaller in the past, and it will be bigger in the future. There's a direct connection between a particular moment in time and a particular size of the universe. This allows us to construct what amounts to a universal clock, a timepiece that has been ticking away for over 13 billion years. Yes, the motion of Earth through the universe changes that clock slightly, but with the tools of general relativity, we can essentially subtract that out and work out the "real" age of the universe … and so can any other observer in the cosmos (assuming that they've also cracked general relativity, but that's on them) *Does light experience time?* Moving clocks run slow. The faster you move in space, the slower you move in time. This is one of the most amazing results from Einstein's special relativity theory, and it's one way of visualizing the unique relationship between time and space. This "time dilation <https://www.space.com/42641-einstein-gravitational-time-dilation-galileo-probes.html>" effect is totally unnoticeable at speeds you'll typically encounter (hopefully) in everyday life. It's only once you get up close to the speed of light that time seems to go a little wonky. So, if time slows down for you the faster you get to the speed of light, what about light itself? It's moving at the maximum posted speed limit of the universe. Does light … not experience time at all? Kind of, but also not quite. Our knowledge of the relationship between time and space rests in what's wrapped up in special relativity. And while the theory produces all sorts of crazy results, it's grounded in some very simple ideas, the most important of which is the concept of the universality of physical laws: What goes for one observer, at a fundamental level, goes for all. And one thing we know in physics, via Maxwell's equations, is that the speed of light is constant. Every observer, no matter their speed, will measure the exact same speed for light. So, if we want to apply our knowledge of special relativity to movement at the speed of light <https://www.space.com/37244-why-is-the-speed-of-light-so-slow.html>, we run into a little sticking point. In order to ask the question, "How does light experience time?" you have to put yourself in a frame of reference that rides along with a beam of light. But in that frame of reference, light would appear to be stationary to you. That's not allowed by our laws of physics. So there is no such frame of reference that rides along with light. And with no frame of reference, special relativity breaks down. And with no special relativity, you have no way of gauging the relationship between space and time. The end result of all this twisting? It's not so much that light doesn't experience time. It's that our very concept of time doesn't even apply to light. *Light doesn't even know what time is.* *8 PLAY SOUND* *Which twin is right?* One twin jets off close to the speed of light. The other stays at home. The faster of the pair blasts around the galaxy, having a ball, before returning to the boring ball of Earth. The other … does laundry. According to the rocket twin, maybe a few weeks or months elapsed on ship time. A long trip, for sure, but nothing serious. But the ground-bound twin suffered years, even decades, of agonizing solitude. This part's not surprising. Moving clocks run slow and all that. According to the twin left on Earth, the rocket twin moved close to the speed of light — and thus had a slower clock. But wait. The twin on the rocket could rightly claim that *they* were the stationary one, and the whole universe, including the Earth twin, were the ones to move. Relativity is relativity, after all. Nobody's perspective is especially special. So according to *that* twin, the one on Earth should've barely aged at all. Who wins the age argument? The lonely, unadventurous, Earth-bound twin does, and they do because they* didn't turn around*. As long as the rocket-loving twin stayed moving in a single direction, their perspectives were exactly symmetric, with each having their own unique perspective that they could rightly call correct. But once that rocket slowed, stopped and reversed, the symmetry broke. Their perspectives were no longer mirrors. The twin on the rocket would see the horrible reality catch up to him in a blink: The Earthbound twin had aged, too much, and there was nothing they could do about it. Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 9 *Quantum physics: our study suggests objective reality doesn’t exist* Professor of Quantum Physics, Heriot-Watt University *We believe in the free flow of information* Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under Creative Commons licence. Alternative facts are spreading like a virus <https://theconversation.com/donald-trumps-war-on-facts-is-the-latest-play-in-a-long-established-tradition-to-create-a-post-truth-reality-125755> across society. Now it seems they have even infected science – at least the quantum realm. This may seem counter intuitive. The scientific method is after all founded on the reliable notions of observation, measurement and repeatability. A fact, as established by a measurement, should be objective, such that all observers can agree with it. But in a paper recently published in Science Advances <https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/9/eaaw9832>, we show that, in the micro-world of atoms and particles that is governed by the strange rules of quantum mechanics, two different observers are entitled to their own facts. In other words, according to our best theory of the building blocks of nature itself, facts can actually be subjective. Observers are powerful players in the quantum world. According to the theory, particles can be in several places or states at once – this is called a superposition. But oddly, this is only the case when they aren’t observed. The second you observe a quantum system, it picks a specific location or state – breaking the superposition. The fact that nature behaves this way has been proven multiple times in the lab – for example, in the famous double slit experiment <https://plus.maths.org/content/physics-minute-double-slit-experiment-0>. In 1961, physicist Eugene Wigner <https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1963/wigner/biographical/> proposed a provocative thought experiment. He questioned what would happen when applying quantum mechanics to an observer that is themselves being observed. Imagine that a friend of Wigner tosses a quantum coin – which is in a superposition of both heads and tails – inside a closed laboratory. Every time the friend tosses the coin, they observe a definite outcome. We can say that Wigner’s friend establishes a fact: the result of the coin toss is definitely head or tail. Wigner doesn’t have access to this fact from the outside, and according to quantum mechanics, must describe the friend and the coin to be in a superposition of all possible outcomes of the experiment. That’s because they are “entangled” – spookily connected <https://theconversation.com/physicists-prove-quantum-spookiness-and-start-chasing-schrodingers-cat-48190> so that if you manipulate one you also manipulate the other. Wigner can now in principle verify this superposition using a so-called “interference experiment <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment>” – a type of quantum measurement that allows you to unravel the superposition of an entire system, confirming that two objects are entangled. When Wigner and the friend compare notes later on, the friend will insist they saw definite outcomes for each coin toss. Wigner, however, will disagree whenever he observed friend and coin in a superposition. This presents a conundrum. The reality perceived by the friend cannot be reconciled with the reality on the outside. Wigner originally didn’t consider this much of a paradox, he argued it would be absurd to describe a *conscious observer as a quantum object*. However, he later departed from this view <https://arxiv.org/abs/1404.2635>, and according to formal textbooks on quantum mechanics, the description is perfectly valid <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wigner%27s_friend>. *The experiment* The scenario has long remained an interesting thought experiment. But does it reflect reality? Scientifically, there has been little progress on this until very recently, when Časlav Brukner <https://www.iqoqi-vienna.at/people/brukner-group/caslav-brukner/> at the University of Vienna showed that, under certain assumptions, Wigner’s idea can be used to formally prove <https://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/20/5/350> that measurements in quantum mechanics are subjective to observers. Brukner proposed a way of testing this notion by translating the Wigner’s friend scenario into a framework first established <https://physicsworld.com/a/john-bell-profound-discovery-science/> by the physicist John Bell in 1964. Brukner considered two pairs of Wigners and friends, in two separate boxes, conducting measurements on a shared state – inside and outside their respective box. The results can be summed up to ultimately be used to evaluate a so called “Bell inequality” <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_theorem>. If this inequality is violated, observers could have alternative facts. We have now for the first time performed this test experimentally at Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh on a small-scale quantum computer made up of three pairs of entangled photons. The first photon pair represents the coins, and the other two are used to perform the coin toss – measuring the polarisation of the photons – inside their respective box. Outside the two boxes, two photons remain on each side that can also be measured. Researchers with experiment. Author provided Despite using state-of-the-art quantum technology, it took weeks to collect sufficient data from just six photons to generate enough statistics. But eventually, we succeeded in showing that quantum mechanics might indeed be incompatible with the assumption of objective facts – we violated the inequality. The theory, however, is based on a few assumptions. These include that the measurement outcomes are not influenced by signals travelling above light speed and that observers are free to choose what measurements to make. That may or may not be the case. Another important question is whether single photons can be considered to be observers. In Brukner’s theory proposal, observers do not need to be conscious, they must merely be able to establish facts in the form of a measurement outcome. An inanimate detector would therefore be a valid observer. And textbook quantum mechanics gives us no reason to believe that a detector, which can be made as small as a few atoms, should not be described as a quantum object just like a photon. It may also be possible that standard quantum mechanics does not apply at large length scales, but testing that is a separate problem. There may be many worlds out there. Nikk/Flickr, CC BY-SA <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/> This experiment therefore shows that, at least for local models of quantum mechanics, we need to rethink our notion of objectivity. The facts we experience in our macroscopic world appear to remain safe, but a major question arises over how existing interpretations of quantum mechanics can accommodate subjective facts. Some physicists see these new developments as bolstering interpretations that allow more than one outcome to occur for an observation, for example the existence of parallel universes <https://theconversation.com/the-theory-of-parallel-universes-is-not-just-maths-it-is-science-that-can-be-tested-46497> in which each outcome happens. Others see it as compelling evidence for intrinsically observer-dependent theories such as Quantum Bayesianism <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Bayesianism>, in which an agent’s actions and experiences are central concerns of the theory. But yet others take this as a strong pointer that perhaps quantum mechanics will break down above certain complexity scales. *Clearly these are all deeply philosophical questions about the fundamental nature of reality. Whatever the answer, an interesting future awaits.** SO WE ARE TOWARDS THE Indian Vedas only. Kr irs 15321* On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 at 07:29, Markendeya Yeddanapudi < [email protected]> wrote: > > > -- > *Mar*The Pursuit For Rapture > > We always remember and try to relive every pleasant experience. We dig > them out of our memory and feel happy. We also want and try, to forget > everything unpleasant. We want to erase from our memory every unpleasant > experience. We try for new happy experiences. > > In complete rapture we will not be aware of anything. Awareness of events, > awareness of time, the awareness of the place, the awareness of the > surroundings..., all stop. We reach the vacuum, the situation of reaching > the speed of light. > > When a body achieves the speed of light, it loses its volume completely > and becomes part of the infinity, ‘the Grand Nothing’. In Nothing there can > be no events or interactions, because interactions need things that > interact. So the question of when the interaction happened (time) or where > that interaction (Space) happened do not arise, it is time-less, space-less > or to be exact, space-time-less, as in the case of the ultimate rapture. > > The ‘Grand Nothing’ is the infinite arena of rapture, the major part of > the Universe, drawing everything towards it. The proportion of Nothing to > Something in the Universe, I have read is 35,00,000:1,or for every > 35,00,000 of Nothing one finds, one Galaxy, the something where, the games > of consciousness of Space-time happen, in the struggle to reach the Grand > Nothing. Everything or every something is trying to achieve the speed of > light to join the ‘Grand Nothing’. > > And we treasure the memory of the momentary experience of the ‘Grand > Nothing’, the happy experience or the rapturous experience, and struggle to > re-live that experience. > > According to Quantum Physics, in the Nothing or Space in super position, > something happens creating an island where the phenomenon of less than the > speed of light happens. The struggle to return to the speed of light-- > Nothing, starts.We call that struggle Consciousness, the consciousness > about the Space-time, the core subject matter of Quantum Physics. All > events and actions basically are part of the struggle to achieve the speed > of light and reach the rapture of timeless and space less Nothing. > > The core subject matter of Quantum Physics, Consciousness, is blasphemy, > for the orthodoxy of the Science clergy. So they have been trying to evade > the Core subject, in the attempts at various TOEs—the Strings Theory, it’s > of shoots the Various M Theories, The Loop Quantum Gravity Theory, and the > Concept of the Universe as a Hologram. > > Now every Quantum Physicist has two lives, in the private and personal > life, he is a Spiritualist, but in the public life he is an orthodox > Newtionist. > > The Scientists of the ISRO seek the blessings of Lord Venkateswara before > they launch a new rocket, much to chagrin of our friends in the Jana > Vignana Vedika. > > YM > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "iyer123" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/iyer123/CACDCHCKmpV4PQvkNtBGf6HOdroWs%3DKEnQHVaURmTwDb%2ByVGgmQ%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/iyer123/CACDCHCKmpV4PQvkNtBGf6HOdroWs%3DKEnQHVaURmTwDb%2ByVGgmQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Thatha_Patty" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZor_CHXHmX60MhiqpCKZvAMDf6GVr8Z6h2sR0JkvgVuUCg%40mail.gmail.com.
