Originally posted by KazetNagorraWhilst meditating at Kriya Tantra, the product of the non-conceptual focused awareness permits you to realize the nature of the existences at other levels of existence, which they all have different nature than the nature of yourself although they are all emanations of the same agent.
I think you misunderstand what he means by that. He's not saying electrons etc. don't exist, he's suggesting the wavefunction collapse could be simply the result of the evolution of the Schrödinger equation, and not something "outside" of it.
At this level of awareness the probabilities exist as dynamic potentialities although at the level of our physical world we remain aware of the severe differentiations (simply because of the collapse of the wavefunction). Of course, deep meditation reveals the fact that the differences occur once “your mind makes the decision to focus on, and thus pick, a specific probability” -in other words, they occur solely when you collapse the wavefunction.
In the past this well know product was easily transferred from mind to mind with quite simple ways.
Does the paper projects or backs up this Zennist idea, or am I totally stranded?
😵
Yes I am aware of that - in fact my analysis of the Everett many worlds original paper indicates that this must be the case. Everett's analysis suggests that the ILLUSION of classical reality emerges because of subjective aspect, in fact many subjective aspects 'moving' inside the 'objective' wavefunction. This means that there are no 'particles' independent in an external world outside of the wavefunction. From this point of view then the wavefunction is the 'ultimate' reality. But the wavefunction is clearly not comprised of matter - it is mere potentiality for experience. The question is what ontological status do we ascribe to the wavefunction of potential experience - mind or matter. It cannot be matter because that was what classical physics thought was the ultimate reality prior to discovering the wavefunction!
Black beetle - incredibly refreshing to have someone familiar and understanding of these important ideas. What you indicate is exactly indicated by analysis of the Everett's many worlds interpretation. I have to go out right now but will tell you more later.
Regards
Graham (Author of Dancing in Emptiness) - there are actully two guys under clear light at the moment. I am thinking of maybe moving this dicussion onto the quantum buddhism forum.
Originally posted by clearlightSince the most severe opposition to your ideas seems to evolve from the field of Science, whilst the corus Buddhist philosophical cornerstones they remain unchallenged, maybe the main debate has to take place at forums related to the Science and not to the differ Buddhist concepts (although the Buddhists are also human beings and they evaluate everything according to their personal understanding). But it sounds good to spread the word about your book by every means available;
Black beetle - incredibly refreshing to have someone familiar and understanding of these important ideas. What you indicate is exactly indicated by analysis of the Everett's many worlds interpretation. I have to go out right now but will tell you more later.
Regards
Graham (Author of Dancing in Emptiness) - there are actully two guys under clear l ...[text shortened]... t at the moment. I am thinking of maybe moving this dicussion onto the quantum buddhism forum.
However, if you feel perfectly versed at the scientific field but you have not a crystal clear view of your Buddhist philosophy in order to proceed accurately to the expected analogies, then in my opinion you have to expose the Buddhist aspects too of your book to the proper forums in order to have them criticised to the hilt and, maybe, reconsidered at some points. Because, the Kriya Tantra practicioner has a very very long way to go before reaching the non dualist Atiyoga at the Dharmakaya level.
Therefore, maybe the product of your scientific projects must be in accordance with a much more higher level of the Buddhist understanding😵
Originally posted by clearlightI think we've been miscommunicating quite a bit, what do you mean by "particle" and "matter"?
Yes I am aware of that - in fact my analysis of the Everett many worlds original paper indicates that this must be the case. Everett's analysis suggests that the ILLUSION of classical reality emerges because of subjective aspect, in fact many subjective aspects 'moving' inside the 'objective' wavefunction. This means that there are no 'particles' indepe ...[text shortened]... assical physics thought was the ultimate reality prior to discovering the wavefunction!
This is whay I kept asking for definitions!
A 'particle' is the illusory appearance within the dualistic realm of experience, which involves the intersubjective agreement of experimenters, of an independent material-like entity. Such appearances, however, depend on the observation of sentient beings, who are ultimately 'subjective' knots in the universal wavefunction. Thus, as Zeh says, they do not exist 'ultimately' (in fact neither 'particles' nor 'sentient beings' exist ultimately) - but 'particles' do appear to exist to (illusory) sentient beings - who are usually quantum experimenters. (Best example of this of course is quantum double slit experiment).
Matter is a term used by pre-quantum physicists who thought that there really were external and completely independed little 'balls' of matter out there in the world independent of their minds. We now know that such 'stuff' does not exist.
Originally posted by clearlightHmm. Well, some properties are dependant on the observer, such as velocity, time, momentum etc. But some are also not dependant on the observer, such as charge and rest mass. So abandoning the notion of particles altogether seems unnecessary to me.
This is whay I kept asking for definitions!
A 'particle' is the illusory appearance within the dualistic realm of experience, which involves the intersubjective agreement of experimenters, of an independent material-like entity. Such appearances, however, depend on the observation of sentient beings, who are ultimately 'subjective' knots in the univer world independent of their minds. We now know that such 'stuff' does not exist.
Matter is a term used by pre-quantum physicists who thought that there really were external and completely independed little 'balls' of matter out there in the world independent of their minds. We now know that such 'stuff' does not exist.
We know the 'stuff' is different in nature than thought previously, but why does that necessitate abandoning the notion of matter? Matter is simply the stuff that's in spacetime. If you wish, the wavefunction of the universe. I still don't understand what minds have to do with all this, however. In fact, the way I interpret Zeh's paper, he's saying observers and minds are not necessary in quantum physics.
Originally posted by KazetNagorraclearlight appears to quote the following:
Hmm. Well, some properties are dependant on the observer, such as velocity, time, momentum etc. But some are also not dependant on the observer, such as charge and rest mass. So abandoning the notion of particles altogether seems unnecessary to me.
[b]Matter is a term used by pre-quantum physicists who thought that there really were external and comp ...[text shortened]... ret Zeh's paper, he's saying observers and minds are not necessary in quantum physics.
Our opinions/ knowledge derive through our senses. We have 6 senses, and the sixth is Mind.
Due to the nature of our very existence, which it is just the nature of our mind, we “understand” everything through:
1. Rupa/ Shape
2. Vendana/ mental operations regarding the process of differ theories, ideas etc
3. Sanghia/ evaluation/ mental operations at the cognitive level in order to accept or reject the product of Vendana
4. Samskara/ dualist approach/ mental operations whilst the Human distinguishes “Good” and “Evil”, “Same” and “Different” etc, and
5. Vigniana/ the final product that is caused by means of all these previous so called decision making tools (“know what you know and what you ignore&rdquo😉
Well, the advanced practitioner of meditation is aware of the illusory nature of the above and his aim is to surpass this state of pseudo-understanding.
In the Zen/ Dzog-chen philosophy everything is considered merely a product of the mind, because this sense is the buffer who simultaneously deciphers every piece of information you are becoming aware of; these pieces of info/ strings of thoughts they all have to be evaluated (collapsing the wavefunction) according to your personal level of Understanding. No mind, no nothing. And the nature of the Mind is the void.
Whatever you are talking over here with clearlight is just an approach of Sunyata -Tathagata has countless forms🙂. And this is the case in both macrocosmos and microcosmos.
The above are transferred directly from mind to mind simply and as following:
“When your mind inside you stays calm (today we understand this condition as a “no peaks concept”, ie as the concept of the point singularity), the Universe appears not.
When you understand, the reality depends on you.
When you do not understand, you are depending on the reality.
When the reality depends on you, the unreal becomes real.
When you are depending on the reality, everything is not real.
When the reality depends on you, everything is real.”
However I don’t know if all this is somehow related to the quantum double slit experiment and to the differ scientific finds and evidence of your field 😵
black beetle - thankyou for your excellent observation. At this very moment I am about to finish a paper I am writing called 'The Quantum Mind-Only Universe'. This paper, which will be sent to some of the foremost quantum physicists and buddhist philosophers around today, actully covers the issues raised in you post, as well as a lot more. When I have finished I will post a summary on to the site. I might consider making some of it available - but the other clearlight (my editor) wants me not to divulge the full details because some of the work is at the forefront of quantum buddhist philosophy, so until I have a publsiher I must be careful. You are definitely along the right lines - but the implications for our understanig of the way the universe functions are amazing. I will write more later (probably tomorrow).
I will say this - the buddhist descriptions of sense organs - i.e. their shape etc are probably descriptions of quantum structures - the process of the dissolution of the winds is definitely a deconstruction of the quantum structures of consciousness which sustain the physical body!
Originally posted by clearlightI will definately buy your book once you have it published, for I want to see how you connect the basic micro-macrocosmic multileveled concept of the Void/ Trikaya at every status of the non-conceptual focused awareness with the nature of the Universe by means of quantum physics finds and evidence, thus providing an holistic synthesis accepted in full by both the Buddhist and the Scientific communities😵
black beetle - thankyou for your excellent observation. At this very moment I am about to finish a paper I am writing called 'The Quantum Mind-Only Universe'. This paper, which will be sent to some of the foremost quantum physicists and buddhist philosophers around today, actully covers the issues raised in you post, as well as a lot more. When I have ...[text shortened]... y a deconstruction of the quantum structures of consciousness which sustain the physical body!
Originally posted by clearlightTell us please. Do you understand any of the mathematical formulations of quantum theory? If so which?
Nadia,
Have you made the assumption there is no connection having read just the title of this thread or do you see no connection having read all the posts in this thread?
Originally posted by clearlightClearlight,since you claim that Buddhism and quantum theory are one and the same I am interested to learn what you know about quantum theory and should therefore appreciate an answer to my quetion concerning your understanding of its mathematical formulations.
Nadia,
Have you made the assumption there is no connection having read just the title of this thread or do you see no connection having read all the posts in this thread?