Post has attachment

Is the anthropic principle a form of self-reference in the universe? Does this principle of self-reference require the coming of religious events?

The anthropic principle states that the laws of physics are fine tuned for the emergence of us humans who can reflect on the nature of reality. But there is no way to describe this anthropic principle in terms of math. It's just a coincidence that we are here and that the universe can be described by math.

However, for some axiomatic systems of logic, it is possible to make statements in that system refer to themselves. For example in English one can write, "This sentence is true." And there's no problem with that. However, you can also write, "This sentence is false", and we cannot decide whether this sentence is true or false. So some systems can be proved to be inconsistent or not complete enough to describe everything.

If the universe is governed by a system of logic, then perhaps it's possible for there to emerge entities in the universe that refer to themselves and to the logic that governs the universe. This may be the principle that determines that souls should emerge in the world that refer to themselves as they struggle to understand their own existence in it. It seems our minds are bent on learning how the universes works so we can use that knowledge to live in the world.

And if the principle of self-reference is strong enough that those entities of self-reference must refer to the axioms of that system themselves, then we should expect there to come in the world entities (souls) that represent the truth and falsity on which that system is build. In terms of religion the entity that represents the truth is called the Christ. And the entity that represents falsehood is called the Antichrist.

I have two websites, one about how logic will be expressed in religion and the other about how physics can be derived from logic.

If life and death represent true and false, then it is easy to see how the life of Christ represents truth. For with a true proposition we have p=~p->p. In words, this means that if a proposition is true, then even to assume it is false will lead to the fact that it is true. Or, if life represents truth, then it says that if he lives to represent truth, then even his death will result in his resurrection. For the Antichrist it means that he will gain great glory and renown only to end up in hell. More about this can be found at: thetruthisgod.com/logicofthebible.html

The other website shows the mathematical details of how the wave function of quantum mechanics can be derive from rather simple logic. It turns out that the wave function is a mathematical description of material implication. And I'm presently working on how to describe the rest of physics from this. More about this can be found at: logictophysics.com

So it seems that there may be a way to link science and religion through the principle of self-reference. It now becomes a question of whether the system of logic I've devised for physics is capable of self-reference. Those who are skilled in that art might wish to consider it.

Post has attachment
QST and fine tuning:

"By linking this value of ж to our axiomatic set we will be able to show that the con­stants of Nature are deriv­a­tives of its nat­ural geom­etry. The para­me­ters that encode that geom­etry ( lP, mP, tP, qP, TP , π, ж,) author the con­stants of Nature in the fol­lowing manner."
[See table in link]

Killing of Cows … (Excerpt from message of Shri Datta Swami)

The scripture says that the fisherman should not catch fish in the river Ganga. By this, the scripture controls the catching of fish in one place at least. The scripture further says that the fisherman should not catch the fish on the days of Divine festivals at least. By this, the scripture is controlling the killing of fish on some days at least. Finally, the scripture says that you should not kill the fish at any place on any day and such stage is called as ‘Mahavratam’, which is irrespective of place and time.
 
You should not mistake that the scripture encourages the killing of fish on other days and in other rivers. This is the wrong side of the conclusion and this is said to be the misunderstanding of the scripture. The correct side is that the scripture tries to control the sin gradually by restricting in one place and on some days at least. Allowing the sin on other days does not mean encouraging the sin. Control brings the reduction of sin and slowly the sin can be completely eradicated.
 
Bhavabhooti says in Uttararamacharitam that the cow is killed when the guest comes (Eshagowhmatamatayate…). This is the indication of reduction of sin, which means that you should not kill the cow for your sake on other days. This avoids killing the cow frequently for the sake of your food. The complete control of the sin can be found in the Veda that the person killing a cow should be shot dead (Goghnamseesenaviddhyamah…). Therefore, the scripture always tries to control the sin and never encourages the sin.
 
The sin comes only if you kill the living being directly or become responsible for its killing indirectly and you have to face the punishment of such a sin. You may find the Veda or the scriptures speaking about the non-vegetarian food and killing of a living being in sacrifice. By this, you should not think that the Veda or the scripture provokes you to kill the animal. In fact, the scripture controls you to kill the animal by suggesting the sacrifice to be done in a specified season like spring only (Vasante Vasantejyotishaayajeta…). The sacrifice called ‘Jyotishtoma’ should be performed only in spring season. By this, you control the killing of animal in other seasons. You cannot totally oppose the killing of animal in the beginning itself.
 
Instead of killing the animal every day or every week, you can allow the killing of animal once in a year only. This reduces the killing of the animal gradually and finally, you can avoid the killing forever. This is just like running along a running bull for some distance before you control it. We cannot control the running bull in the very first step itself. You have to run along with it for sometime before you control it. Such running of a person should not be misunderstood as encouragement of running. Even if the person does not run, the bull will run.
 
Even if the scripture does not advise the killing of animal in the sacrifice to be performed once in a year, the killing of the animal for the meat will not be stopped. In fact, the killing of the animal in the absence of such instruction will take place more frequently. Shankara had clarified this point in His commentary by saying that the defective nature of the human being (Pravrutti) is not encouraged by the Veda. Following the defective nature of the human being, the Veda suggests the sacrifice. This does not mean that the Veda initiates the defective nature in the human being. Shankara said, ‘Shastramjnapakamnatukarakam’. This means that the scripture gives the advice based on the naturally existing defective nature in the human being and that the scripture is not the initiator of the defective nature.
 
posted by: surya (disciple of swamiji)
www.universal-spirituality.org

Post has attachment
When consider all the evidence, there is always a creator.

It's remarkable. Einstein - probably one of the finest and most insightful intellects said he believed in God. Yet some lesser thinkers think his belief to be stupid or unintelligent. Why do otherwise seemingly rational people make their conclusions in black and white? Is it because it's easier than continuous introspection, self-examination, and challenging of ones own conclusions? Is arrogance easier than humility?

What is love?

If Science has affirmed evolution and that the universe will continue to expand forever thereby making human brains think better , then do you think it's probable that given enough time, brains would evolve to the point of exceeding mere physical limitations and become free of the physical and temporary, and thereby become "deity" and not restricted by space and time?
Then doesn't it also mean that it is probably that some sort of deities would exists given time or a God could be in existed since the universe has been here for billions of years

Post has attachment
This testimony is the reason Religion will not get you there.  It's fine to be Minister; however, don't let it destroy the success of others.
Wait while more posts are being loaded