I wrote a response note to a comment on my post made by a.k satsangi, click HERE to view his comment.Incidentally I found that the same comment that was left HERE , and, not to be mistaken for Prof. P. S. Satsangi, Chairman,Advisory Committee on Education, Dayalbagh Educational Institutions, Agra and Founder President of the SSI and a pioneer in System Engineering and spiritual leader and Chief Mentor of Radhasoami Faith. My response comment just became too long and I thought I may as well post it for the benefit of readers.
Firstly, I would like to thank A.K.Satsangi for sharing with us, his thoughts. I have though, some thoughts of my own, that may not agree with him, but I think it's healthy that we can agree to disagree, and in doing so broaden our minds.
In regards to his comment; “Gravitation Force is the cause of manifestation of the creation.”, I appreciate the detailed explanation of the properties of gravity and so forth, but it would be good if one can answer to as how did gravitation came about in the first place? Who created gravity? As a matter of fact, no one, not even the scientists have managed to answer this, (and a lot more questions too, if I may add).
Newton also admitted that he did not have any proper idea about the cause of gravity-
"Hitherto, we have explained the phenomena of the heavens and of our sea by the power of gravity, but have not yet assigned the cause of this power. This is certain, that it must proceed from a cause that penetrates of its force; that operates not according to the quantity of the surfaces of the particles upon which it acts ( as mechanical cause used to do) but according to the quantity of the solid matter which they contain, and propagates its virtue on all sides to immense distances, decreasing always in the duplicate portion of the distances……Hitherto, I have not been able to discover the cause of those properties of gravity from the phenomena, and I frame no hypothesis"
Principia Mathemetica Book 3, Section 4 Reading 6
Then there's Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington, in The Nature of the Physical World, who said,
“ The law that entropy always increases – the second law of thermodynamics – holds, I think, the supreme position among the laws of Nature. If someone points out to you that your pet theory of the universe is in disagreement with Maxwell's equation – then so much the worse for Maxwell's equations. It is found to be contradicted by observation – well, these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes. But if your theory is found to be against the second law of thermodynamics, I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation".
So which one is more superior law of nature? Gravitational law or the second law of thermodynamics?
Again, in regards to your comment; “This is the only Truth which can be verified scientifically and can be termed as ‘higher theory for everything’.”
Scientists have at least agreed on one thing, that hitherto, the "Higher theory for everything" is not being able to be proven scientifically as the search for a unifying theory was interrupted by the discovery of the strong and weak nuclear forces, which could not be subsumed into either gravity or electromagnetism. A further hurdle was the acceptance that quantum mechanics had to be incorporated from the start, rather than emerging as a consequence of a deterministic unified theory, as Einstein had hoped.
Gravity and electromagnetism could always peacefully coexist as entries in a list of Newtonian forces, but for many years it seemed that gravity could not even be incorporated into the quantum framework, let alone unified with the other fundamental forces. For this reason, work on unification for much of the twentieth century, focused on understanding the three "quantum" forces: electromagnetism and the weak and strong forces.
Gödel’s theorem implies that pure mathematics is inexhaustible. No matter how many problems we solve, there will always be other problems that cannot be solved within the existing rules. Because of Gödel's theorem, physics is inexhaustible too. The laws of physics are a finite set of rules, and include the rules for doing mathematics, so that Gödel's theorem applies to them.
A number of scientists claim that Gödel's incompleteness theorem proves that any attempt to construct a TOE (Theory of Everything) is bound to fail. Gödel's theorem, informally stated, asserts that any sufficiently complex mathematical theory that has a finite description is either inconsistent or incomplete. In his 1966 book The Relevance of Physics, Stanley Jaki pointed out that, because any "theory of everything" will certainly be a consistent non-trivial mathematical theory, it must be incomplete. He claims that this dooms searches for a deterministic theory of everything.
Stephan Hawkings was originally a believer in the Theory of Everything but, after considering Gödel's Theorem, concluded that one was not obtainable.
What I'm trying to point out is that, science is an ever changing subject, unlike mathematics. Today's theories, hypothesis, and perhaps even Laws, may be what they are one day, and become rubbish the next. But this should not stop us from seeking the truth. Because failure comes from sitting around not doing anything at all.
Hawkings may be right, or maybe wrong, but one thing he said stands true,
“We run around in circles and suppose, when the truth sits in the middle and knows”.
So what is the truth then? The truth lies in God's words....
Surah An Nur Ayat 35
24:35 "God is the Light of the heavens and the earth. The example of His light is like a concave mirror within a lamp, the lamp is within a glass, the glass is like a radiant planet, which is lit from a blessed olive tree that is neither of the east nor of the west, its oil nearly radiates light even if not touched by fire. Light upon light. God guides to His light those whom He pleases. God sets forth parables for mankind; God is aware of all things."
Footnote: This example highlights some of the main characteristics of the Quran. God is the source of enlightenment (light). The Quran radiates God's message (lamp). Though it is protected with a mathematical code, it has a transparent language (glass), reflecting a small portion of divine knowledge (radiant planet). Its message is universal; not limited to any language, race, or geography (neither of the east nor of the west). Those with open eyes may get its message even without showing much effort (gives off light even if not touched by fire). It has meaning inside meaning, message inside message (light upon light). Receiving its message is a blessing and its teacher is God Himself (God guides whomever/whoever wish(es) to His light). The word nur (light), in the normative case, occurs 33 times and is never used in plural from in the Quran, while its antonym is always used in its plural form, zulumat (darknesses), in 23 occurrences, and never in singular form. This implies singularity of the source of truth, which is God, and diversity of the sources of falsehood, which could be Satan, polytheist clergymen, ignorance, peer pressure, wrong choices, acquired weaknesses and addictions, etc. According to the Bible, God created the light first (Genesis 1:3). Light is also used as a metaphor for divine enlightenment or instruction (Psalms 119:105; Isaiah 8:20; Matthew 4:16; Matthew 5:16; John 5:35). God is described as "the Father of lights" (James 1:17). The Bible and its appendices use the light metaphor for many creatures too, such as John the Baptist (John 5:35), Jesus (Luke 2:32; John 1:7- 9), his disciples, (Matthew 5:14), and angels (2 Corinthians 11:14).
and in Baqarah;
[2:255]"Allah! There is no god but He, the Living, the Self-subsisting, Eternal. No slumber can seize Him nor sleep. His are all things in the heavens and on earth. Who is there can intercede in His presence except as He permitteth? He knoweth what (appeareth to His creatures as) Before or After or Behind them. Nor shall they compass aught of His knowledge except as He willeth. His Throne doth extend over the heavens and the earth, and He feeleth no fatigue in guarding and preserving them for He is the Most High, the Supreme (in glory). "
Who or what is God? That is like asking an ant how an elephant looks like.............
Last but not least, I can't help but wonder regarding his statement; “Gravitation Force is the Ultimate Creator, “, did he meant Ultimate Creator, as in God, or the tool God used to create? If it is the former, than I have problems understanding the presence of God in “Zero Gravity” or "when there is less gravitation" (since 'zero gravity' itself is non existent) . Does it mean less presence of God?
...Click here to find out how deep the rabbit hole goes.....
- ► 2007 (44)
- ► 2008 (74)
- The Vitruvian Man
- Perak oh Perak
- Finale : SCIENTIFIC QURAN; How could we have miss...
- Long live Comedy!!!
- To Cover or Not to Cover, was it ever a question?
- What Valentine's Day means to Singletons
- "Honor" Killings.
- 10 ways to loose weight or exercise without exerci...
- In response to a comment
- Don't give A-Head.....give more of it.....
- Victim of phone scam.....and you thought it'll nev...
- It was Garfield who got it right.....Diet is "Die"...
- ▼ February (12)
- ► 2010 (53)
- ► 2011 (25)
- ► 2012 (18)