Scientists actually do know everything about the universe.

[Rick O'Shez]

Maybe you will get a clue as to why the Buddha discouraged such investigations, and instead pointed to what is inside of man.

Relevance to the OP, "Scientists actually do know everything about the universe"?

The Buddha did indeed advise against metaphysical speculation, but since YOU continually indulge in metaphysical speculation you are arguing against yourself here. Strange.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

This semblance of a 'debate' is now over.

You are not interested in debate, just in hijacking threads and filling them with Chopra-inspired babble and random emissions from your DIY religion.

Start a blog if you want to preach your strange ideas, stop derailing threads.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Answer my questions first, as I presented them before you posted your sources, who don't know what they're talking about, and running off at the mouth, just like you.

Your counter questions were prompted by the articles I posted. Those articles thoroughly debunked your quantum mysticism, exposing it for the flap-doodle religious psycho-babble that it really is.

Chopra is a flap-doodle dandy, get over it and stop filling up threads with his nonsense. Start a blog if you want to preach your strange ideas and do random quote-mining.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Having said that, the mystic, OTOH, sees no conflict between science and the mystical experience, but instead of attempting to make Reality fit into some conceptual scientific model, he interprets the findings of science within the greater context of Reality.

Utter nonsense and pretentious crap. I have had lots of "experiences" resulting from Buddhist practices, the difference is that I take them for what they are. Unlike you, I don't read a load of woo into them. I don't arrogantly assume that my subjective experiences correlate to anything "out there". Unlike you, I don't clutch at metaphysical straws, and I don't fill my head with a load of unsubstantiated beliefs. Unlike you, I don't make stuff up, I don't misrepresent authentic spiritual traditions, and I don't indulge in flap-doodle pseudo-science.

You have no idea what "reality" is, all you have is a head full of muddled beliefs. And a need to find your imaginary God-substitute, your Precious, "Cosmic Consciousness".

 

[Rick O'Shez]

All you 'know' is what the materialist paradigm has indoctrinated you with.

Utter nonsense. I have explored many paradigms over the years, and I am quite capable of considering new ideas. But I also have a well-developed BS detector, and your posts absolutely reek of it.

Meanwhile you have grown so deeply attached to your strange Choprish beliefs that you cannot even conceive of the POSSIBILITY that they are a load of flap-doodle. Your mind is firmly shut to anything which challenges your strange ideas.

 

[oldbadger]

..........................I also have a well-developed BS detector..................

Oh, b--------r, that's me scuppered!

I haven't read all the posts, but the thread title:-
'Scientists actually do know everything about the universe.'

........ is quite unbelievable.
The trouble is that the astronomers, physicists, mathematicians and various other professors are mostly in polite professional contention, which does suggest strongly that we know s-- all about the Universe for certain.

But having said that, we sure have found out enough to interest and excite me.
When I went to school back in the 50's one of our books, geography I think it was (!) suggested that the solar system had once been a Sun with a long tentacle standing straight out from itself, and this had broken up into the planets. It had pictures showing how this 'probably' happened!

Yeah, the last 60+ years have been just so exciting in terms of scientific revelation.

But we will be discovering more and more for yonks, I reckon. Hence, the thread is colleywobblers wrong!

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Oh, b--------r, that's me scuppered!

I haven't read all the posts, but the thread title:-
'Scientists actually do know everything about the universe.'

........ is quite unbelievable.
The trouble is that the astronomers, physicists, mathematicians and various other professors are mostly in polite professional contention, which does suggest strongly that we know s-- all about the Universe for certain.

But having said that, we sure have found out enough to interest and excite me.
When I went to school back in the 50's one of our books, geography I think it was (!) suggested that the solar system had once been a Sun with a long tentacle standing straight out from itself, and this had broken up into the planets. It had pictures showing how this 'probably' happened!

Yeah, the last 60+ years have been just so exciting in terms of scientific revelation.

But we will be discovering more and more for yonks, I reckon. Hence, the thread is colleywobblers wrong!

I agree, there is a lot of speculative theory, and still vast areas of unknown. I suspect we will never find all the "answers", some of it will forever remain beyond our comprehension and technology. I've done some amateur astronomy, which is fascinating, it gives you an understanding of how unimaginably vast and weird the cosmos is.
Same with the sub-atomic stuff, more is being discovered but there are still many unanswered questions.

 

[oldbadger]

I agree, there is a lot of speculative theory, and still vast areas of unknown. I suspect we will never find all the "answers", some of it will forever remain beyond our comprehension and technology. I've done some amateur astronomy, which is fascinating, it gives you an understanding of how unimaginably vast and weird the cosmos is.
Same with the sub-atomic stuff, more is being discovered but there are still many unanswered questions.

I know where my Plough is (for North Star), or my Orien's belt, but I haven't ever really studied astronomy. But I do love 'armchair' astronomy under the guidance of 'Sky-at-Night' or Professor Cox (remember Car Sagan?).

I hope we hear more about the galaxies that have been observed to be moving 'out-of-sync' with their expected trajectories within the Universe, obviously suggesting that they are attracted or acted upon by outside influences. The 'discovery' that we are in a Multiverse would really chuck the text-books into the fire, and excite Deists somewhat!

 

[godnotgod]

We currently know nothing about "prior" to the big bang, it is all speculation. We don't even know whether cause and effect existed "before" that event, since causality is a feature of space-time.

Here are your own words from Post #160:

"Dark energy and dark matter are just two of the mysteries to grapple with. It's quite possible we will never know what "caused" the big bang."

You assume that the BB was a result of causation. That assumption is what I challenged. It can only have been caused if it occurred in Time and Space, and is materially real, another assumption. Today, Quantum Physics is telling us about the non-materiality of the phenomenal world.

Space-Time is only a conceptual model, and if Causation is but a feature of it, then it, too, is a conceptual in nature.

The OP is about factual knowledge within the conceptual contexts of Time, Space, and Causation. Remove these overlays, and we then have the Universe as it actually is. That is the observation of the mystic, Vivekenanda:

"The Universe is The Absolute, as seen through the glass of Time, Space, and Causation"

This is an intuitive insight, accessible only when the rational mind is transcended, such as when the Buddha transcended the ordinary, conditioned mind to realize his own Enlightenment. No, this is not woo, but simply seeing things as they actually are, instead of how the conceptual mind says they are. Campeche?

Perhaps your problem in your confusion about the nature of things is that you continue to 'grapple' with them, which is the cause of your muddled mentality. Stop your grappling and let go. That is the Buddhist way.

 

[godnotgod]

Relevance to the OP, "Scientists actually do know everything about the universe"?

I guess you were going through another one of your Hindu "phases", though it is difficult to keep up with all your personas. I suppose Chopra's charlatan babble sort of resembles Hinduism, but with a load of flap-doodle pseudo-science mixed in.

I see you continue to tenaciously cling to your ignorance and yes, now, even stupidity and recalcitrance. So, for your benefit, I post once again, a very informative video with Mr. Chopra in consultation with a renowned mathematical physicist, which directly challenges your silly insistence that Chopra is pushing some sort of 'pseudo-science': Watch:

 

[godnotgod]

Utter nonsense. I have explored many paradigms over the years, and I am quite capable of considering new ideas. But I also have a well-developed BS detector, and your posts absolutely reek of it.

Meanwhile you have grown so deeply attached to your strange Choprish beliefs that you cannot even conceive of the POSSIBILITY that they are a load of flap-doodle. Your mind is firmly shut to anything which challenges your strange ideas.

These ideas are far from 'strange', as they are rooted in traditions over 4000 years old.

The only paradigm I see you espousing (and protecting) is the materialist paradigm. You even use Buddhism to lend authenticity to it, which, in itself, is utterly ridiculous, as the Buddhistic experience is that of transcendence of the phenomenal world, as in (hint) 'Sunyata'?

Basically, your mindset is old and in the way, rooted as it is in that 'stagnant backwater' of Hinayana Buddhism. But yours goes even further in that it is a black and white Legalistic view of Reality. Nice and safe...and false.

 

[YmirGF]

Having just viewed that exceptionally boring discussion, which was about as interesting as watching paint peel in slow-mo, I can't say I really disagree much with it BECAUSE he qualifies what he says with "may" "might" "could" "I believe" etc... He is not outright saying it is such and such like you are prone to doing. The language used is so vague as to make the content of the discussion moot. The idea of an awareness behind the Quantum field is just something both men seem to believe. The other fellow even said, "I believe it is." In other words, that is what he thinks. He has no real proof, but he is at least honest in how he qualifies what he believes. For the record, adding the qualifiers to the discussion makes all the difference in the world.

 

[godnotgod]

Having just viewed that exceptionally boring discussion, which was about as interesting as watching paint peel in slow-mo, I can't say I really disagree much with it BECAUSE he qualifies what he says with "may" "might" "could" "I believe" etc... He is not outright saying it is such and such like you are prone to doing. The language used is so vague as to make the content of the discussion moot. The idea of an awareness behind the Quantum field is just something both men seem to believe. The other fellow even said, "I believe it is." In other words, that is what he thinks. He has no real proof, but he is at least honest in how he qualifies what he believes. For the record, adding the qualifiers to the discussion makes all the difference in the world.

The Quantum Field, as part of the greater Unified Field, IS Consciousness itself, appearing AS The Universe. There are not two realities, but only one. You do not have The Universe over here and Consciousness over there.

The physicist is not a mystic, but in other interviews, has indeed made statements to the effect that the Universe is conscious, and that 'our' consciousness is non-local.

Chopra, OTOH, IS a mystic, and is a realized individual, and so has had the spiritual experience of oneness with the Universe, what is referred to as Cosmic, or Universal Consciousness, which is the same experience of Supreme Enlightenment that the Buddha realized.

Here. Perhaps this will clear up any confusion you may be having as to what Menas Kafatos is actually saying:

Are you sure it is not YOU that is the complete bore? After all, mouse, what can possibly be more compelling than an intelligent Universe? YOU? Puh-leaze!

 

[YmirGF]

The Quantum Field, as part of the greater Unified Field, IS Consciousness itself, appearing AS The Universe. There are not two realities, but only one. You do not have The Universe over here and Consciousness over there.

The physicist is not a mystic, but in other interviews, has indeed made statements to the effect that the Universe is conscious, and that 'our' consciousness is non-local.

Chopra, OTOH, IS a mystic, and is a realized individual, and so has had the spiritual experience of oneness with the Universe, what is referred to as Cosmic, or Universal Consciousness, which is the same experience of Supreme Enlightenment that the Buddha realized.

Here. Perhaps this will clear up any confusion you may be having as to what Menas Kafatos is actually saying:

Are you sure it is not YOU that is the complete bore? After all, mouse, what can possibly be more compelling than an intelligent Universe? YOU? Puh-leaze!

All that is very well, but his thinking represents a distinct minority (to the point of insignificance) in the scientific community.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

The only paradigm I see you espousing (and protecting) is the materialist paradigm. You even use Buddhism to lend authenticity to it, which, in itself, is utterly ridiculous, as the Buddhistic experience is that of transcendence of the phenomenal world, as in (hint) 'Sunyata'?

You are clueless about Buddhism, and clueless about paradigms. All you know about is making up DIY religions and preaching Chopra-inspired mystical flap-doodle.

None of your nonsense is actually relevant to the OP, so yet again you have hijacked a thread to preach.

If you want to preach your claim that the big bang was an "event in consciousness" then this thread would be a better place to do it: http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/big-bang.190766/

Or maybe you should start a thread called "My proof that the big bang was an event in consciousness", though it would be a short OP. Or perhaps a thread about "Cosmic Consciousness" called "Where is my Precious?"

 

[Rick O'Shez]

The OP is about factual knowledge...

Yes, the thread is about what SCIENTISTS know, which means all your mystical flap-doodle is off-topic, and you have hijacked yet another thread.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

...Chopra is pushing some sort of 'pseudo-science':

I honestly don't understand how you can be so gullible as to take Chopra's smoke and mirrors flap-doodle seriously. I assume it must be due to your need to find your Precious, "Cosmic Consciousness".

 

[Rick O'Shez]

All that is very well, but his thinking represents a distinct minority (to the point of insignificance) in the scientific community.

Basically Chopra is selling Quantum Mysticism. The Wiki article does a nice job of debunking it.

"Quantum mysticism is considered by most scientists and philosophers to be pseudoscience[7][8][9] or "quackery""

"... today quantum mysticism typically refers to its New Age incarnation that combines ancient mysticism with quantum mechanics. Called a pseudoscience and a "hijacking" of quantum physics, it draws upon "coincidental similarities of language rather than genuine connections" to quantum mechanics.[8] Physicist Murray Gell-Mann coined the phrase "quantum flap-doodle" to refer to the misuse and misapplication of quantum physics to other topics.[18]"

"An example of such misuse is New Age guru Deepak Chopra's "quantum theory" that aging is caused by the mind, expounded in his books Quantum Healing (1989) and Ageless Body, Timeless Mind (1993).[18] In 1998 Chopra was awarded the parody Ig Nobel Prize in the physics category...."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mysticism

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Chopra...is a realized individual

No, he is a con-man, the religious equivalent of a dodgy used-car salesman. Your hero is a flap-doodle fraud, get over it.

 

[godnotgod]

Having just viewed that exceptionally boring discussion, which was about as interesting as watching paint peel in slow-mo, I can't say I really disagree much with it BECAUSE he qualifies what he says with "may" "might" "could" "I believe" etc... He is not outright saying it is such and such like you are prone to doing. The language used is so vague as to make the content of the discussion moot. The idea of an awareness behind the Quantum field is just something both men seem to believe. The other fellow even said, "I believe it is." In other words, that is what he thinks. He has no real proof, but he is at least honest in how he qualifies what he believes. For the record, adding the qualifiers to the discussion makes all the difference in the world.

The Quantum Field, as part of the greater Unified Field, IS Consciousness itself, appearing AS The Universe. There are not two realities, but only one. You do not have The Universe over here and Consciousness over there.

The physicist is not a mystic, but in other interviews, has indeed made statements to the effect that the Universe is conscious, and that 'our' consciousness is non-local.

Chopra, OTOH, IS a mystic, and is a realized individual, and so has had the spiritual experience of oneness with the Universe.

Here. Perhaps this will clear up any confusion you may be having as to what Menas Kafatos is actually saying:

All that is very well, but his thinking represents a distinct minority (to the point of insignificance) in the scientific community.

Those who have realized their Enlightenment on this planet are few indeed! The rest follow a path they only think is correct, and the current state of affairs on this planet are a testament to that.

But that is besides the point, which is that Kafatos is not making statements of belief or conjecture. When you know, you know. That's all. Some see it; some don't. Once seen, there is no doubt.