Quantum Physics came from the Vedas: Schrödinger, Einstein and Tesla were all Vedantists.

Discussion in 'Science and Nature' started by pickledpie, Nov 27, 2013.

  1. \tHow does quantum physics work, you may ask, what is it, and where does it come from?In this article we discuss a very brief and simplified history of Quantum Mechanics and will quote what the founding fathers of this branch of science had to say about Vedic influence on the development of their theories.
    We are not interested in new age mumbo-jumbo. We are interested in understanding what is real and what is false. This is why we, along with all other great minds, consult the Vedic texts. Please read on…
     
    [​IMG]
    The famous Danish physicist and Nobel Prize winner, Laureate Niels Bohr (1885-1962) (pictured above), was a follower of the Vedas. He said, “I go into the Upanishads to ask questions.” Both Bohr and Schrödinger, the founders of quantum physics, were avid readers of the Vedic texts and observed that their experiments in quantum physics were consistent with what they had read in the Vedas.
    Niels Bohr got the ball rolling around 1900 by explaining why atoms emit and absorb electromagnetic radiation only at certain frequencies.
    Then, in the 1920′s Erwin Schrödinger (1887-1961), an Austrian-Irish physicist (pictured below), who won the Nobel prize, came up with his famous wave equation that predicts how the Quantum Mechanical wave function changes with time. Wave functions are used in Quantum Mechanics to determine how particles move and interact with time.
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    In the 1920′s Werner Heisenberg (1901-1976) (pictured Left) formulated his famous uncertainty principal, which states when a physicist attempts to observe a subatomic particle, the experimental apparatus inevitably alters the subatomic particle's trajectory. This is because they are trying to observe something that is of the same scale as the photons they are using to observe it.
    To be more specific, to observe something that is subatomic in size one must use a device (apparatus) that projects photons at the particle being observed. This is because the reception of photons by our retina is what we call vision. Basically, to observe something, we must bounce photons off it. The problem is that the photons disturb the subatomic particles because they are of the same size. Thus, there is no way to observe subatomic particles without altering their trajectories.
    Bohr, Heisenberg and Schrödinger regularly read Vedic texts. Heisenberg stated, “Quantum theory will not look ridiculous to people who have read Vedanta.” Vedanta is the conclusion of Vedic thought.
     
    Furthermore, Fritjof Capra, when interviewed by Renee Weber in the book The Holographic Paradigm(page 217–218), stated that Schrödinger, in speaking about Heisenberg, has said:
    “I had several discussions with Heisenberg. I lived in England then [circa 1972], and I visited him several times in Munich and showed him the whole manuscript chapter by chapter. He was very interested and very open, and he told me something that I think is not known publicly because he never published it. He said that he was well aware of these parallels. While he was working on quantum theory he went to India to lecture and was a guest of Tagore. He talked a lot with Tagore about Indian philosophy. Heisenberg told me that these talks had helped him a lot with his work in physics, because they showed him that all these new ideas in quantum physics were in fact not all that crazy. He realized there was, in fact, a whole culture that subscribed to very similar ideas. Heisenberg said that this was a great help for him. Niels Bohr had a similar experience when he went to China.”
    Consequently, Bohr adopted the Yin-Yang symbol as part of his family coat-of-arms when he was knighted in 1947.
    Schrodinger wrote in his book Meine Weltansicht:
    [​IMG]“This life of yours which you are living is not merely a piece of this entire existence, but in a certain sense the whole; only this whole is not so constituted that it can be surveyed in one single glance. This, as we know, is what the Brahmins [wise men or priests in the Vedic tradition] express in that sacred, mystic formula which is yet really so simple and so clear; tat tvam asi, this is you. Or, again, in such words as “I am in the east and the west, I am above and below, I am this entire world.”
    ब्रह्मैवेदममृतं पुरस्तात् ब्रह्म पश्चात् ब्रह्म उत्तरतो दक्षिणतश्चोत्तरेण ।
    अधश्चोर्ध्वं च प्रसृतं ब्रह्मैवेदं विश्वमिदं वरिष्ठम् ॥ 2.2.11
    This is a reference to the Mundaka Upanishad mantra (above) in which the Vedic understanding of the connectivity of living entities is put forward to help the Bhakta (practitioner of yoga) to understand the difference between the body and the living entity. How the real nature of the living entity is realized only in union with the source, the supreme being (Brahman/Krishna) through a platform of transcendental divine loving service.
    Schrödinger, in speaking of a universe in which particles are represented by wave functions, said, “The unity and continuity of Vedanta are reflected in the unity and continuity of wave mechanics.  This is entirely consistent with the Vedanta concept of All in One.”
    [​IMG]         [​IMG]
    “The multiplicity is only apparent. This is the doctrine of the Upanishads. And not of the Upanishads only. The mystical experience of the union with God regularly leads to this view, unless strong prejudices stand in the West.” (Erwin Schrödinger, What is Life?, p. 129, Cambridge University Press)
    “There is no kind of framework within which we can find consciousness in the plural; this is simply something we construct because of the temporal plurality of individuals, but it is a false construction… The only solution to this conflict insofar as any is available to us at all lies in the ancient wisdom of the Upanishad.” (Mein Leben, Meine Weltansicht [My Life, My World View] (1961), Chapter 4)
    In his biography on Schrödinger, Moore wrote: “His system – or that of the Upanishads – is delightful and consistent: the self and the world are one and they are all… He rejected traditional western religious beliefs (Jewish, Christian, and Islamic) not on the basis of any reasoned argument, nor even with an expression of emotional antipathy, for he loved to use religious expressions and metaphors, but simply by saying that they are naive.
    Vedanta and gnosticism are beliefs likely to appeal to a mathematical physicist, a brilliant only child, tempted on occasion by intellectual pride. Such factors may help to explain why Schrödinger became a believer in Vedanta, but they do not detract from the importance of his belief as a foundation for his life and work. It would be simplistic to suggest that there is a direct causal link between his religious beliefs and his discoveries in theoretical physics, yet the unity and continuity of Vedanta are reflected in the unity and continuity of wave mechanics. In 1925, the world view of physics was a model of the universe as a great machine composed of separable interacting material particles, During the next few years, Schrödinger and Heisenberg and their followers created a universe based on superimposed inseparable waves of probability amplitudes. This new view would be entirely consistent with the vedantic concept of the All in One.” (Schrödinger: Life and Thought (Meine Weltansicht), p. 173)
    In Schrödinger's famous essay on determinism and free will, he expressed very clearly the sense that consciousness is a unity, arguing that this “insight is not new…From the early great Upanishads the recognition Atman = Brahman (the personal self equals the omnipresent, all-comprehending eternal self) was in Indian thought considered, far from being blasphemous, to represent, the quintessence of deepest insight into the happenings of the world. The striving of all the scholars of Vedanta was, after having learnt to pronounce with their lips, really to assimilate in their minds this grandest of all thoughts.”
    \nRead more at: http://www.krishnapath.org/quantum-physics-came-from-the-vedas-schrodinger-einstein-and-tesla-were-all-vedantists/

     
  2. :hello:  :hello:  :hello:  :hello: :hippie:  awesome post bro! im going into the sciences as a major, very intrigued by these principals
     
  3. #3 Boats And Hoes, Jan 12, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 12, 2014
    God has no image.
                        - Yajur Veda
    He is the sole sovereign
    Of the universe.

                        - Rig Veda
    He is one, unparalleled
    Through His wondrous, mighty
    And formidable laws and deeds.

                        - Rig Veda
    He is One Brahma
    The Creator of the cosmos
    Who pervades and protects
    And enlightens aft beings
    He is One Supreme Entity
    Whom sages call by various names
    Such as Indra, the glorious
    Mitra, the benign friend
    Varuna, the greatest, the noblest
    Agni, the resplendent, the bright
    Yama, the dispenser of justice
    Matarishwa, the almighty.

                        - Rig Veda
     
  4. #4 MelT, Jan 12, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 12, 2014
    Einstein was a Pantheist:
     
    On 24 April 1929, Einstein cabled Rabbi Herbert S. Goldstein in German: "I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and the doings of mankind."
    Personal God and the afterlife
     
    Einstein expressed his skepticism regarding an anthropomorphic deity, often describing it as "naïve" and "childlike". He stated, "It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I feel also not able to imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. My views are near those of Spinoza: admiration for the beauty of and belief in the logical simplicity of the order which we can grasp humbly and only imperfectly. I believe that we have to content ourselves with our imperfect knowledge and understanding and treat values and moral obligations as a purely human problem-the most important of all human problems."<sup>[7]</sup>
     
    On 22 March 1954 Einstein received a letter from Joseph Dispentiere, an Italian immigrant who had worked as an experimental machinist in New Jersey. Dispentiere had declared himself an atheist and was disappointed by a news report which had cast Einstein as conventionally religious. Einstein replied on 24 March 1954:
     

    It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.<sup>[8]</sup>
     
     We must also note that whatever minds have proposed god and the spiritual as an existent, they have not succeeded in providing evidence for either, and in fact have proven only science and a natural world without both.
     
    MelT
     
    I knew of Schroedingers quasi-religious views, but didn't know the following:
     
    He rejected traditional religious beliefs (Jewish, Christian, and Islamic) not on the basis of any reasoned argument, nor even with an expression of emotional antipathy, for he loved to use religious expressions and metaphors, but simply by saying that they are naive.
     
    Interesting.
     
  5. #5 Boats And Hoes, Jan 12, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 12, 2014
     
    Einstein was a SPINOZIST! And was heavy into Schopenhaurian monism (and philosophy); strangely enough, Schopenhauer said the Upanishads were the sole solace in the philosopher's life.
     
    Now, Einstein didn't believe in a personal Deity because it bothered him, personally; meaning, it was a personal dislike or distaste he had - a PREJUDICE (as many in raised in the West are this way). There's a reason Einstein at first denied a beginning to the universe, and fudged the equations to his theory of relativity, i.e., he introduced his "cosmological constant", just so that he could keep afloat his PHILOSOPHICAL prejudices! A beginning of the universe, of the present order, didn't sit well with Einstein, precisely because of the theological and philosophical implications (both SPINOZA AND SCHOPENHAUER believed the universe to be eternal and mechancially determined)... IN THE BEGINNING.
     
  6. #6 MelT, Jan 12, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 12, 2014
    And yet another troll from Boats.
     
    Boats, please learn what these terms mean. The two are the same:
     
    He said he believed in the "pantheistic" God of Baruch Spinoza
     
    MODS!
     
    MelT
     
  7. #7 Boats And Hoes, Jan 12, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 12, 2014
     
    What I wrote, word for word, is truth... (it's really sad how you always yell troll, you pathetic man).
     
    Socrates was condemned by people such as your-self...
     
    P.S.
    Einstein's poem for Spinoza,
    "How much do I love that noble man
    More than I could tell with words
    I fear though he'll remain alone
    With a holy halo of his own."

     
    Einstein on Schopenhauer,
    “I do not at all believe in free will in the philosophical sense. Everybody acts not only under external compulsion but also in accordance with inner necessity. Schopenhauer's saying a man can do as he wills, but not will as he wills, has been a real inspiration to me since my youth; it has been a continual consolation in the face of life's hardships, my own and others and an unfailing wellspring of tolerance.”
     
  8. MelT QUOTE: Einstein expressed his skepticism regarding an anthropomorphic deity, often describing it as "naïve" and "childlike". He stated, "It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I feel also not able to imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. My views are near those of Spinoza:
     
    We must also note that whatever minds have proposed god and the spiritual as an existent, they have not succeeded in providing evidence for either, and in fact have proven only science and a natural world without both.'
     
    MelT
     
  9. #9 Boats And Hoes, Jan 12, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 12, 2014
     
    Einstein was a philosophical dunce! A lackey... only in the rigidly determined necessity of math could this man shine; hence, his love for Spinoza's mathematical determinisim, and Schopnehauer's idea of pre-determined Will.
     
    Again, Einstein denied God because of his prejudices, and NOT because of his understanding.
     
  10. #10 MelT, Jan 12, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 12, 2014
     
     
     I see you don't know what a troll is. It isn't about truth, but posting off topic with the aim of creating contentious threads. Sells for god, posted at every opportunity, which contain continual references to philosophy are off-topic, and your posts here are simply to attract attention.
     
    And you wonder why I have no respect for you.
     
    MelT
     
    Edit: I see that you and PeePee don't agree on this one? He sees Einstein as science 'believing in' religion. But you say that he was: Einstein was a philosophical dunce! A lackey... only in the rigidly determined necessity of math could this man shine; hence, his love for Spinoza's mathematical determinisim, and Schopnehauer's idea of pre-determined Will.
     
    So, you don't agree with the OP?
     
  11. #11 Boats And Hoes, Jan 12, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 12, 2014
     
    The truth isn't for sale... it's earned; thus, I don't need the vain and empty respect you sell...
     
    P.S.
     
    Are you aware of Spinoza's 'God'? Are you aware of Spinoza's metaphysical substance that is infinite in modes, attributes, accidents?
     
  12. Excellent, as you will never have it.
     
     Remember, trolling means continual off-topic posting, and NOT simply responding to an off-topic poster.
     
    MelT
     
  13. #13 Boats And Hoes, Jan 12, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 13, 2014
     
    Einstein believed in the Vedas so long as those verses of the VEDAS I quoted above weren't accepted by his contemporary brahmins (by priests or shepherds of 'Hinduism'). In other words, just as Einstein yearned for external consensus regarding scientifical matters, and so he also yearned for external consensus on religious/existential matters; which is, ironically enough, actually going directly against the main lesson of the Vedas -- stating, adamantly, reality is not subsisting outside of you, in the external, it's felt inside of you (but Einstein just loved his external consensus).
     
    "These truly sublime ideas cannot fail to convince us that the Vedas recognise only one God, who is Almighty, Infinite, Eternal, Self-existent, the Light and Lord of the Universe."
     
    <i>"The ancient Hindu religion as found in the Hindu scriptures (the Vedas) recognises but one God.</i>"
     
    <i><i>"The Almighty, Infinite, Eternal, Incomprehensible, Self-existent Being, He who sees everything though never seen is Brahm, the one unknown, True Being, the Creator, the Preserver and Destroyer of the Universe.  Under such and innumerable other definitions is the Deity acknowledged in the Vedas."</i></i>
     
    <i><i><i>"After gradual research, I have come to the conclusion that long before all heavenly books like the Quran, the Old Testament and the New Testament etc., God had revealed to the Hindus through the Rishis of Yore, of whom BRAHAM was the chief, His four books of knowledge, the Rigveda, the Yajurveda, the, Samveda, and the AtharvaVeda.</i></i></i>"
     
  14. I wonder what sports team they followed, could we get a thread on that?
     
  15. I don't see anything much off topic here except the random accusations of troll. Except maybe
    . This thread is devoted to what produced the inclination in these wonderful scientists to devote such efforts to the field and what their own beliefs were.

    From where these men drew their inspiration and on what philosophy were their views founded. These two lines of inquiry are of highest import to the realm of science.
     
  16. Interesting thing to note that it was Abraham who was the progenitor of the western religions. This means without braham.
     
  17. #17 Boats And Hoes, Jan 12, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 12, 2014
     
    Abraham of the West... Braham of the East. :smoke:
     
  18.  
    Also, I didn't say anything about my own beliefs in regards to this. In fact, this has nothing to do with religion.
     
  19. Why would knowing those things be important to science? A persons beliefs don't change their contributions to their respective fields positively or negatively.

    It can be fun to think about how we think their minds worked no doubt. But at the end of the day its not like all your thoughts are somehow connected to your religious views.
     
  20.  
    If we can comprehend the state of mind and beliefs it took to come up with these ideas, then perhaps we would be better able to expand on them. There is extreme importance in this, and to say there isn't is exceptionally ignorant.
     

Share This Page