Hare Krishna!

In Srimad Bhagavatam it is said that,

"The total diameter of the universe is approximately 500,000,000 yojanas, or 4,000,000,000 miles. (SB 5.23.9 p.)"

But scientifically NASA has proved that the distance of Pluto is about 4 billion miles (exactly 3,670,044,979 miles on an average) from the Sun.

Source : Source from Nasa

Now as per Veda the universe is like Egg shaped placed horizontally where the lower half is filled with water and Gorbhodakshayee Vishu is lying there.
Now PLUTO is moving around the Sun.

My question is,

1. If Pluto is 4 billion miles away from the Sun and it is moving around it then how could the diameter of the universe be 4 billion miles, it should be at least near to 8 billion miles ?

2. Since the lower half of the universe is filled with water, then it is obvious that PLUTO moves through this water once in each of a complete movement around the Sun. How is this possible?

And it is not always true to believe that "Since it is described in Veda so we have to accept that.".

Any reply/comment from the devotees for this question is important and valuable for me.

I apologize for my way of inquiries. Iskcondesiretree helped me a lot to understand everything scientifically. I expect I will get a valid answer for this question also.

Hare Krishna!
......

Just Servant

#### Replies

• Volunteer

I thought about this question for a while, and as mentioned this world is shaped like an egg. What does an egg look like: It's wide at the base and it gets progressively narrower towards the top.

Further, the vedic cosmology is detailed vertically (z-axis if you will). So the diameter of universe, according to the vedic perspective has to be calculated in that vertical direction from top to bottom. From the covering of the universe to the bottom of the Garbodhaka Ocean.

VEDA - Vedas and Vedic Knowledge Online - Vedic Encyclopedia, Bhakti-yoga in vedas, Library
VEDA - Information resource for Vedas, Vedic knowledge and philosophy, culture and related topics. Vedic Encyclopedia, Bhakti-yoga in vedas, Library.
• Volunteer

In Vedic astronomy and astrology there is no such like planet as pluto.

But Rahu and Ketu.

And it says that they are not visible to us.

• Hare Krishna Mataji

Dandavat Pranam.

You are absolutely right. As their are 9(no longer) planets recognized by mundane scientists and we have mention of 9 grahas in our scriptures. So they thought planet = graha. But its not true. Planet is defined as an astronomical body in the solar system that moves around or orbits the Sun. But Graha is defined as an astronomical body in the sky “that moves”. It is only “the one that moves” in the sky. No reference to things like “around Sun”. What is so special about the movement of these Grahasin the entire cosmos? If we look at the sky, the position of stars is always the same, it is the position of Grahas that keeps changing because of their near vicinity to Earth. Not only planets, but even Sun and Moon keep changing their positions in the sky. Surya (Sun), Budha (Mercury), Shukra (Venus), Chandra (Moon), Mangala (Mars), Guru (Jupiter), Shani (Saturn) – they all are in constant motion in the sky, they all are hence Grahas.The other argument made  against Grahas is that, two of the grahas – Rahu and Keu, do not exist at all! Well yes, they cant be seen but they do very well exist. Rahu and Ketu are actually classified as Chaya Graha (meaning shadow grahas, not the real ones). So Rahu and Ketu are the shadows of Earth and Moon at the time of LUnar and Solar Eclipse. respectievly. Uranus and Neptune are not considered not only because  they were not visible to the naked eye in the night sky But Because as a deal of great distance their effect is so very feeble. It is just like infinite series of 1+0.5+0.25+ 0.125 +0.0625 ............ to get the complete answer which is 2 we must add all the infinite series of numbers so to give accurate astrological calculations we must consider the hole of cosmos keeping Earth as the reference point. But instead for practical purpose you can consider the first few which are very prominent 1+0.5+0.25+0.125+0.0625~=1.9 which is considerably accurate. So instead of whole cosmos consider the first Nine.

• Hare Krishna. While I'm no expert, this seemingly contrasting measurements are not in conflict with each other and only appear to be. For example take a torch, if we look straight at the light emanating from the globe we, see the that the actual size of the light beam is small. BUT if when we take the same touch into a dark room and switch it on we see that the that projection of the that same light beam is large, maybe thousands of times the actual size of the that actual light beam. both measurements are correct but one is actual true size and the other is the size of the projection that's all.
SO similarly we, from the vedic point of view, are looking at the universe from the source while scientists cannot recognize the source yet, so they are looking at the projection.
So also the size of the projection may increase or decrease depending on the distance the actual light beam is from the wall. So the scientists see this as the expansion and contraction of the universe.
• Yes.. Hare Krsna!

Science has a different thaought. They measured it with the layers of the universe.

So we conclude that this distance(i.e, 4 bil miles) is including the outer layers of the universe. But Science can never reach there since they have limited vision.

Thank you prabhuji..

• hare krishna ,