primate

You posted a link to http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/ I guess you intended to refer to posts #27 & #29 in http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/world-review/452986-pakistan-nuclear-weapons-danger-falling-into-hands-taliban-2.html ..

As you know, I actually agree with you. Stars don’t emit light. That is, in reality separate stars don’t exist and individual photons (light) do not exist. These are just our (discontinuous) conscious perception of (continuous) reality (or God). However, in terms of the physical models we have that accurately describe some observed regularities in material nature, I would say that stars emit their own light. That is, stars are like the sun. One day it may even be feasible to send a robotic probe to Proxima Centauri (the second nearest star at a distance of 4.2 light-years from Earth) to prove it. Space is black, because the number of stars in the universe is finite (about 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) and the universe itself is finite, but very, very large (about 156 billion light-years in diameter). Furthermore, there are probably many more black holes in the universe than there are stars. And even light can’t escape from a black hole. Hence, space is predominantly black. Nevertheless, astronauts have to meticulously protect themselves from the deadly levels of radiation outside the Earth’s atmosphere..

Well, actually it is a picture made by the Hubble space telescope (http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/The-Hubble-Space-Telescopes-Finest-Photos.html) The twinkling effect results from the refraction of light by the optical lenses of the telescope. You get the same effect when you make a picture of a very bright light, with your ordinary (digital) camera.

Stars don’t illuminate the Earth at night, because they are too far away and because the Earth’s atmosphere absorbs most starlight. In fact, without the atmosphere, stars would indeed illuminate the Earth (at 'moonless' nights). However, without an atmosphere, there wouldn't be any life on Earth to appreciate it..

You are not God, you are an integral part of God. Huh..? God is you.. It’s like grass is green, but green is not grass; or people are living, but living is not people; or A is the son of B, but B is not the son of A. Such propositions are called asymmetrical. Likewise, the proposition 'God is me', is not equivalent to 'I am God'. Now, the proposition 'God is everything', is symmetrical, because the reverse proposition 'everything is God', is also true. However, you are not everything, therefore you are not God. But God logically remains you, because God is everything.. Next time, can you be a bit more specific please about what you do not understand?

"athato brahman jigyasa" Translation: One should inquire into the nature of Brahman, the Absolute Truth, or God. (Vedanta Sutra 1.1.1) "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." (A. Einstein)

God is total (continuous) consciousness. You are just a (discontinuous) fraction of total consciousness. So, you are not God, God is you..<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:" /><o:p></o:p>

Well, if we agree that God is everything, then you can’t be God, unless you yourself are everything; which I don’t believe because (for example) you are not me. God is both you and me. So, you are not God, but God is you (and me)..

Agreed..

Check out this thread: http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/spiritual-discussions/451613-astronomical-query-relating-gita.html ..

God is you, among some other things (that you cannot be)..

And what about Vishnu, Narayana..?

I guess so.. What's your point?

In reality, there are 3 space dimensions and 1 time dimension, which amounts to a total of 4 continuous dimensions. The material world is only a fraction of reality, and as such, it has a fractional (or fractal) dimensionality of, for example, 3.5 or 3.1.. In our material world, it's actually the time dimension that is incomplete (or fractional or discontinuous); we are only conscious 'every now and then'. Hence, we consciously perceive separate (or different) objects (or forms), and atoms (or material units or energy quanta). In reality, however, everything is simply One single continuous system (or whole or God)..

You are not God. God is you..

I think BG 8.9 is quite clear about this. God is "smaller than the smallest". Yet, He maintains (pervades) everything. So, God is the basis of everything, which includes atoms, protons, quarks, photons.. Thus, God Himself is the Quantum Domain. However, the quantum manifestation of God in this world (known in science as Quantum Mechanics) is only a tiny discontinuous fraction of the total continuous Quantum Domain..

In our material world, ultimately, only science can determine what is real and, consequently, who's ideology is real, and who is façade or fake, or even a religious terrorist..

Here's the link: www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vcnVV3NKgk&feature=related

Hello Empy, Jeffster and I just had a slightly 'off-topic' discussion about the relevance of science (physics) in the context of general spirituality and religion. We agreed that science actually can be a good thing, if it confirms - or even advances - our spiritual understanding of reality as it is. In fact, science is all about validating ideas..

No offense taken. Maybe we can agree on this revised version: Ego is based on the false personal idea that all consciously perceived separate objects in our causal (temporal) material world, comprise all of reality; and that we ourselves are distinctly individual - and autonomously acting - material beings.. So, Ego is real (everything is real); but Ego is false as a personal theory of the self. The Supreme Personality has no such False Ego, because He is total consciousness; He is everything. Nothing can be distinct or separate from everything.. Btw, don’t worry about my ego. It doesn’t exist as a personal theory..

Hmm..

Ego is based on the false idea that all consciously perceived separate objects in our causal (temporal) material world, comprise all of reality; and that we ourselves are distinctly individual - and autonomously acting - conscious material beings.. So, Ego is real (everything is real), but Ego is false (as a personal theory). And the Supreme Personality has no Ego, because He is total consciousness; He is everything. Nothing can be distinct or separate from everything..

Don't you believe me..?

Oneness means that everything is one. In a physical system, 'one' would be a formless singular point in an otherwise empty space. The point 'contains' everything that exists, and as such, it is the basis of everything. How can that be? Well, this point or singularity has infinite qualities, such as infinite speed, infinitesimal size and complete consciousness of its infinitely diverse (complex nonlinear or chaotic) trajectory in space. This total singular consciousness is reality (Brahman). Somehow, human consciousness is a mere fraction of total consciousness. We are only conscious of reality every now and then (Maya). As such, we are one with God, but different from God. And, consequently, we perceive a fragmented and temporal (material) world, in which separate temporary objects appear to exist. False ego (Ahankara) is based on the false idea that all the separate objects in our causal material world comprise all of reality; and that we ourselves are distinctly individual - and autonomously acting material beings..

Such a plan will not work..