Many times in physics, the equations accurately model certain aspects of reality, but the explanation is not compatible with philosophical truths. For example, in GTR, time is often believed to have begun with the universe and this violates reason: how did the universe begin without time? In the link shown below, I setup a framework in which logic is never violated, and the conclusions are compatible with STR, GTR, and QM. I would value your opinion on them. Thanks.
Article THE DERIVATION OF TIME, FREE-WILL, AND CONSCIOUSNESS USING F...
I asked an AI a similar question about the 3 time factors Raja Sattva and Tama in Raja creation appearance and Sattva maintenance and existance and Tama destruction and decay in yogapsychology since from Sattva we derive a peaceformula
I asked the artificial intelligence chatbot and Internet search engine Bing from Microsoft 5 short questions about yoga psychology and the natural, timeless-universal peace ethic. I thought I would test this so much discussed and debated artificial intelligence and this result is surprisingly good and easy to understand (after 1 second each, although the Questions became more and more difficult, at first there was only one question and then there were five. Everything written after “A.I. ”. now comes from a machine that is connected to the Internet and so has also been connected to my book guna.ch/yoga.pdf for a long time :-)
1. “How can I outsmart everyone?”
A.I.: To outsmart everyone, consider these strategies: -Prepare Ahead of Time: -Gather facts and knowledge related to the topics you care about. Be ready to back up your arguments with solid evidence. - Understand how to construct a compelling argument and avoid common fallacies. -Know Your Audience: -Tailor your approach based on who you’re dealing with. Adjust your argument style depending on the context. -For instance, avoid heated arguments in front of a large audience. Instead, engage in private discussions for better results. -Remain Calm: -Losing your temper weakens your position. Stay composed and listen carefully to the other person. Take deep breaths and consider your responses thoughtfully. -Ask Questions: Follow the Socratic method by asking questions. This keeps you in control of the conversation. -It also exposes weaknesses in your opponent’s argument. -Remember, outsmarting everyone isn’t about manipulation; it’s about effective communication and critical thinking. -For more insights, explore Stoic philosophy or stay ahead of industry trends to set yourself apart!
(Ok, I thought to myself at this point: Let's see if I can ask questions about today's monistic dictatorship of relativism can out-smart the technocratic singularity fascism of Big A.I., Big Data, Big Pharma and Big Brother? :-)
2. “What is yoga psychology?”
A.I.: Yoga psychology is a fascinating field that bridges ancient wisdom with modern-day understanding of the mind and human behavior. Let’s delve into it: -Origins and Purpose: Yoga Sutras: The foundational text for yoga philosophy is the Patanjali Yoga Sutras. These sutras, formulated over 2500 years ago, delve into various aspects of the mind, consciousness, and liberation. While many associate yoga with physical postures (asanas) and breath control (pranayama), the Yoga Sutras primarily focus on mental and spiritual practices. -Key Aspects of Yoga Psychology: -Mind Exploration: The sutras explore the mind, its limitations, and techniques to transcend them. -Meditation: They discuss different types of meditation, going beyond ordinary thought patterns. -States Beyond the Mind: Yoga psychology delves into experiences beyond the ordinary mind, aiming for emancipationor liberation. -Relevance Today: Although the original intent was liberation, the wisdom remains relevant for addressing modern-day issues. -Application and Benefits: -Stress and Anxiety: Yoga psychology provides tools to overcome stress, anxiety, and overthinking. -Health Issues: It’s not limited to mental health; it can aid in managing physical conditions like hypertension, diabetes, asthma, and migraines. -Relationships and Parenting: Practical applications extend to everyday life, including relationships and parenting. -Integration with Modern Psychology: -Eminent psychologists like Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung drew inspiration from the Yoga Sutras. -Yoga psychology presents ancient wisdom in a logical and accessiblemanner for today’s generation. In summary, yoga psychology offers a holistic approach to well-being, combining ancient insights with contemporary understanding.
(I thought this was a good conclusion. Did Bing copy everything from me? Let's go a little deeper :-)
3. “How do the Gunas relate to yoga psychology?”
A.I.: Yoga psychologyencompasses a rich understanding of the mind, emotions, and consciousness. One essential aspect within this framework is the concept of the three gunas. Let’s explore how they relate to yoga psychology: Yoga psychologyencompasses a rich understanding of the mind, emotions, and consciousness. One essential aspect within this framework is the concept of the three gunas. Let’s explore how they relate to yoga psychology: -What Are the Three Gunas? -The gunas are three fundamental qualities or attributes present in all things within the universe. -They emerge from the ethereal Prakriti(the fundamental substrate) and form the essential aspects of nature: energy, matter, and consciousness. -The three gunas are: -Tamas: Associated with darkness, inertia, and materiality. It arises from ignorance and deludes beings from their spiritual truths. Tamasic qualities include laziness, attachment, depression, and confusion. -Rajas: Represents energy, action, and change. It binds us to the fruits of our work. Rajasic qualities include anger, anxiety, restlessness, and determination. Sattva: Signifies harmony, balance, and intelligence. Yogis aspire toward sattva because it reduces rajas and tamas, making liberation possible. Sattvic qualities include joy, peace, love, and self-control. -Application in Yoga Psychology: -Self-Trans-formation: Understanding the gunas allows us to navigate our inner world effectively. -Moods, Emotions: Every mood or emotion contains a predominant guna, along with smaller doses of the other two. For instance: -Anger (rajas) contains some sattva, allowing transformation into compassion. -Courage (sattva) can manifest positively or negatively based on the underlying intention. -Balancing the Gunas: -We can consciously alter the levels of the gunas in our bodies and minds. -Lifestyle practices, thoughts, and external influences impact the gunas. -Cultivating sattva helps reduce stress, increase inner peace, and move toward enlightenment. -Remember, the gunas provide a lens through which we understand ourselves and the world. By working with them, we can harmonize our inner landscape and align with universal truth.
*(Note from me: “Balancing the Gunas” is wrong and is based on a monisti- concept or was accidentally adopted from (e.g.) Ayurveda, where the three “doshas” correctly describe the body and elements, errors to be balanced. On the contrary by the Gunas it's not about balancing the gunas, but in this universal and timeless scale of ethics, i.e. to transcend Raja and Tamas with the NityaSatt-HeilstrOm. In order to heal the samsara suffering of the reincarnations in this spiritual pole of NityaSattva eternal state of being, the Sanathan Dharma. see part 2, p. 43 and the chapter of the two Guna thought transmitters, p. 65 ff :-)
4. “What is the difference between NityaSattva and SattvaGuna?” A.I.
Certainly! Let’s explore the difference between nityasattvaand sattvaguna: -Sattvaguna is one of the three gunas(modes of existence) in Hindu philosophy, specifically within the Samkhyaschool. -It represents qualities of goodness, purity, positivity, truth, serenity, balance, and virtuousness. -Sattva is drawn toward Dharma(righteousness) and jñāna(knowledge). -Yogis aspire to cultivate sattva because it reduces the influence of the other two gunas (rajas and tamas) and makes liberationpossible. In summary, sattvaguna embodies harmony, intelligence, and a positive attitude. -Nityasattvarefers to eternal purityor permanent goodness. -It transcends the fluctuations of the gunas and represents an unwavering state of purity. -Unlike the other gunas, which are subject to change and interplay, nityasattva remains constant. -It signifies the pure essence beyond the material world, untouched by ignorance or delusion. -Nityasattva is often associated with spiritual realization and enlightenment. In summary, while sattvagunarepresents the quality of goodness and balance within the interplay of the gunas, nityasattvagoes beyond these fluctuations, representing eternal purity and unwavering goodness.
5. “Considering the 3 Gunas and NityaSattva, is there the existence of a universal and timeless scale of ethics?”
A.I.: Certainly! Let us delve into the interaction of the three Gunas – Tamas, Rajas and Sattva – and their relevance to the concept of a universal and timeless scale of ethics: Universal ethics is necessary and possible. They apply to everyone People regardless of places, cultures, religions, world views and times of life. -Natural law: Universal ethics can be based on the Based on natural law that goes beyond religious and secular perspectives. -Human dignity: Alternatively, universal ethics can be applied based on a single supreme principle: human dignity. A minimalist code of essential, self-evident universal ethical principles and standards can guide our actions. -In summary, it can be said that the Gunas influence our behavior However, understanding them can lead to a more balanced, peaceful and harmonious life. The pursuit According to universal ethics, the recognition of our interconnectedness and the striving for a common moral foundation location that transcends cultural boundaries and stands the test of time.
(and that is exactly what NityaSattva is, the Nitya = eternal / Sattva = Goodness of the actual eternal self, under all the samsara karmic onion layers.
more on that on guna.ch/yoga.pdf
Hi Russell Smith "time is often believed to have begun with the universe and this violates reason: how did the universe begin without time?"
Does not violate reason. If the universe is time and space and all they contain (and rules) then in fact time must start when the universe does.
Further, if time existed already (and thus "before"), where would it be?
Further if we recognize time as being the time of a given universe (of possibly many), then time as a possibility exists singularly, but as an actuality is a feature of a universe.
Karl Sipfle If the universe were produced from nothing, then it violates logic. If the universe was not produced from nothing then it has fundamentally always existed in some form: Since a change has occurred, change has always been possible which is logically equivalent to eternal time. Thus, no matter how you look at this, eternal time is guaranteed, thus time did not begin with the universe. The problem with spacetime is that doesn't fit within this logical structure and thus a new model, one that produces the same predictions yet fits within this logic is required (it is called the proper light speed theory).
So we are guaranteed eternal time. Therefore, if the universe were produced naturally then we should observe remnants of other universes within ours which we do not observe. It follows that the universe was not natural produced. In order to match logic with observation, the only way is intelligent design. Science will continue to dream up ridiculous things until it accepts this.
“…If the universe was not produced from nothing then it has fundamentally always existed in some form: Since a change has occurred, change has always been possible which is logically equivalent to eternal time. Thus, no matter how you look at this, eternal time is guaranteed, thus time did not begin with the universe. …..”
- yeah, that is quite correct – as that the unique really Great Philosopher in ontology of “time” Frantisek Shkvor 100 years ago said “….it was, as it was - after all, somehow it was! It’s never been so that nohow was!”.
However from that
“…In the link shown below, I setup a framework in which logic is never violated, and the conclusions are compatible with STR, GTR…”
- it follows that the framework is rather questionable, since STR and GTR are really rather questionable theories.
Recent SS posts in
https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_really_human_being_perceives_the_Time/2 , pages 1,2
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do_events_invoke_time_in_space pages 1,2
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Why_is_space_3-dimensional
https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_do_we_know_consciousness_is_intimately_tied_to_learning/2 pages 1, 2
- are relevant to this thread question.
Cheers
Hi Russell Smith
Karl Sipfle If the universe were produced from nothing, then it violates logic.
== No, that is a prejudice form living in our world. A thing and its negative could be produced from nothing for example.
If the universe was not produced from nothing then it has fundamentally always existed in some form: Since a change has occurred, change has always been possible which is logically equivalent to eternal time.
=== We get time from a sequence of events in an actual universe, can't produce it from hypothecations. Things happen or they don't and the ones that happen are then known possible but there is no always to be possible in.
Thus, no matter how you look at this, eternal time is guaranteed, thus time did not begin with the universe.
=== Then what is the universe in? With nothing distinugishable before, there can be no time.
The problem with spacetime is that doesn't fit within this logical structure and thus a new model, one that produces the same predictions yet fits within this logic is required (it is called the proper light speed theory).
So we are guaranteed eternal time.
=== To think this you have to be standing outside the universe in space and/or time. Where/when are you standing? Before the Beginning nothing is happening; what is passing, what is flowing? At most you have a mathematical model but not a representation.
Therefore, if the universe were produced naturally then we should observe remnants of other universes within ours which we do not observe.
=== In ours? Not necessarily; they would not be completely other universes.
It follows that the universe was not natural produced. In order to match logic with observation, the only way is intelligent design. Science will continue to dream up ridiculous things until it accepts this.
=== That is a giant multileap where you wish an out of band magical item into existence to explain all the rest, which creates more illogic in quantity not less.
If the universe appeared all by itself, that is natural. If something made it happen, then that thing is also natural unless something else not natural made it. I think you're running out of turtles.
Karl Sipfle You haven't presented any form of an argument here. I mean in all mathematics, you cannot produce something from nothing. If you logical think about collecting even an infinite amount of nothing and hoping to end up with something you would have to be crazy. So it seems odd that you are fighting against common sense.... Keep struggling indefinitely coming up with things if you want to...
Russell Smith The prevailing theory presently imagines the universe to have emerged from nothing as a quantum fluctuation consistent with the math. But also math is not reality, it is our modeling of reality as best we understand it.
Common sense is of limited power in quantum physics.
Karl Sipfle There isn't any math in which something can come from nothing so I am not clear on what math you are talking about. Additionally, nothing cannot produce a quantum fluctuation because nothing doesn't exist. What you are referring to is something not nothing... You have to interpret things in such a way as to make sense.... Right now I have a guy telling me that time exists, and space is an emergent property. Essentially that means that time exists but it doesn't exist anywhere... I don't get why people are willing to throw logic out just because the problem at hand is hard...
Russell Smith See https://bigthink.com/13-8/universe-quantum-fluctuation/
Karl Sipfle Something cannot come from nothing because nothing doesn't exist... These hypothesis are formed from desperation not logic. If you read the article section titles "The derivation of time using formal logic" you should see why all of these hypothesis violate basic logic. Additionally, you will see a mathematical framework in which QM, GTR, STR, ME's, time, consciousness, free-will, and everything else work together without violation of formal logic.
Research THE FRAMEWORK FOR A UNIFIED THEORY OF EVERYTHING
“…There isn't any math in which something can come from nothing so I am not clear on what math you are talking about. Additionally, nothing cannot produce a quantum fluctuation because nothing doesn't exist. What you are referring to is something not nothing... You have to interpret things in such a way as to make sense...”
- yeah, that is quite correct, and so that https://bigthink.com/13-8/universe-quantum-fluctuation/ indeed is nothing else than some senseless mystics.
However that
“... Right now I have a guy telling me that time exists, and space is an emergent property. Essentially that means that time exists but it doesn't exist anywhere... I don't get why people are willing to throw logic out just because the problem at hand is hard.….”
- is a typical example of some also transcendent claim of someone, who has only some transcendent imagination – as that is in all mainstream philosophy and sciences, including physics, though - about what are really fundamental phenomena/notions first of all in this case “Matter”, “Space”, “Time”, “Consciousness”, “Energy”, “Information”.
The scientific definitions of these phenomena/notions can be, and are, given only in the Shevchenko-Tokarevsky’s philosophical 2007 “The Information as Absolute” conception, recent version of the basic paper see
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/363645560_The_Information_as_Absolute_-_2022_ed
First of all in the conception it is rigorously proven that absolutely for sure there exist nothing else than some informational patterns/systems of the patterns that are elements of the absolutely fundamental and absolutely infinite “Information” Set, whereas . the Set exists absolutely objectively, because of it fundamentally – logically - cannot be non-existent; and so exists in “ absolutely long time interval”, i.e. fundamentally having no Beginning and no End.
Including in the Set everything [i.e. absolutely infinite “number” of Its elements, including elements “Matter” and every human] existed, has happened, exists and is happening, always, i.e. in unique universal for all elements absolutely infinite time dimension,
- where all/every concrete changing elements, including Matter and humans, constantly move at every change of anything in them, including are created in concrete time dimension points that relatively to other elements can be earlier, simultaneous, and after other elements in given concrete state time dimension points;
- and all/every elements exist and change simultaneously/in parallel in their concrete spaces, which always existed/exist as parts of the whole Set’s space that is composed by at least “simply infinite number” of all concrete elements space dimensions.
More see the link above, and, again – the SS posts at least February 17 and March 12 in https://www.researchgate.net/post/Do_events_invoke_time_in_space/1 pages 1,2,
and in https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_really_human_being_perceives_the_Time/2 , pages 1,2.
Though yeah, in this case – and in the conception – the absolutely necessary for anything real creation phenomenon/notion “Energy” remains be fundamentally mystic, and only some limited points in its understanding are possible and are given in the conception, again more see the paper linked above..
Cheers
Recent SS posts in
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_a_human_brain_both_hardware_and_software#view=66159e89539f61c9940e6247/5/5/5/4/6/3/4/5/4/5/6
https://www.researchgate.net/post/WHAT_IS_THE_MYSTERIOUS_STUFF_OF_INFORMATION_A_Short_but_Clear_Definition/244 , pages 243, 244,
- and in https://www.researchgate.net/post/What-criteria-do-you-have-in-mind-while-characterizing-a-scientific-theory/30 , pages 29, 30, 31 though; that always is necessary to have in mind at considering ant scientific – or non-scientific, if that isn’t in accordance with the criteria – texts,
- are relevant to this thread question.
Cheers