Selected quotes from Sadaputa Prabhu’s upcoming book “Maya: The World As Virtual Reality”
“The problem here is that anything that we can fully describe in words is something of which we are aware, and thus it is not awareness itself. But if awareness is not fully describable by words, then is it anything at all? One person will say, “Of course it is something; I am aware of being aware all the time.” But someone else may say, “If you can’t define it, then what is it? It doesn’t exist in the domain of rational discourse.”
“This is ironic, since the very feature of consciousness that disqualifies it for many modern philosophers is the starting point for meditative disciplines that try to realize the self by discriminating it from nonself.”
“Whether we use quantum theory or classical Newtonian physics, it is clear that no known computer or process of computation will enable us to predict what billions and billions of molecules will do. Physicists have taken it as a matter of faith that all of the molecules in nature move according to their equations, and in this sense, physics can be viewed as a branch of theology.”
“The phenomena studied by parapsychologists seem to radically violate the known laws of physics. If they are real, then physics will have to undergo fundamental modifications, and this is a daunting prospect for many scientists. Nonetheless, the laws of physics have been modified in unexpected ways many times in the past, and it will not be surprising if this also happens many times in the future.”
“I should also observe that although the virtual reality model does describe the physical world as illusion, it does not dismiss that illusion as a mere nothing, as the term maya may sometimes be thought to imply. As both magicians and computer artists know, it takes hard work to make a good illusion.”
“Physicists in recent years have sometimes lamented that they are approaching the end of fundamental discoveries in physics, but it appears that this worry is unnecessary.”
“The laws of physics are based on mathematical concepts that can be fully expounded in a few textbooks. But, in principle, these laws could be formidably complex. They could easily require hundreds or millions of textbooks to define. They might even be an indigestible morass of special cases and exceptions that could not be reduced to a rational system. There are many more ways to be complex than there are to be simple. The fact that the laws of physics are so simple and mathematically elegant has led many prominent scientists to conclude that God must be a mathematician.”
“Carbon nuclei are made in stars by a special nuclear reaction involving the simultaneous collision of three helium nuclei. The astrophysicist Fred Hoyle noticed that this reaction depends on a certain quantum mechanical effect (called a “resonance”) that occurs at the energy level of helium nuclei in large stars. Without this effect, carbon would be a very rare element in the universe. After a detailed study, Hoyle found several other “coincidences” that were necessary for the production and preservation of carbon within stars. Observations such as these led Hoyle to finally adopt a theistic position, and he remarked that, ‘A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question’ (Hoyle, 1982).”
“To account for one universe with life, this [multiverse] scheme requires us to posit a vast number of universes without life, as well as an underlying process that endlessly spawns universes. One could ask which theory carries more metaphysical baggage, this one, or the traditional idea of a cosmic designer.”
“Today, of course, scientists explain the succession of life forms in the fossil record by the neo-Darwinian theory of evolution. In this theory, evolutionary developments are attributed to random variation sifted by natural selection. This theory can create plausible explanations of many observed features of the biological world, and it is reasonable to suppose that the Darwinian mechanism of evolution does function in nature. However, it is far from clear that this mechanism is the last word. Organs of high perfection and complexity, such as the eagle’s eye or the human speech center, are notoriously difficult to explain by mutation and natural selection. In addition, many features of the fossil record can be placed in the Darwinian framework only by an act of faith.”
“By seeing the meaninglessness of material nature, we can be freed from attachment to it, and this opens the gateway to a realization of our true nature.”
Comments