4.3. Modern Cosmology

‘The popular scientist Fred Hoyle, giving an expansive meaning of the universe, expresses, "The Universe is everything, both living and lifeless things, the two particles and cosmic systems and if the otherworldly exists just as the material, of profound things likewise; and if there is a Heaven and a Hell, of Heaven and Hell as well; for by its very nature the Universe is the totality of all things.’^[1]

Isn’t this description wonderful!

‘Some present hypotheses, similar to the String hypothesis, propose that the universe may have 11 measurements, ten of room and one of time, rather than four dimensional space-time universe. It is conceivable that the state of the lokakasha does not speak to the real geometry or structure of the universe yet emblematically speaks to some different highlights of the universe. We note that it has 11 arms, as marked. This sketch can be comprehended as speaking to 11 measurements of the universe as conceived in the String hypothesis. It is referenced in the sacred texts that Trasanadi fills in as a super-quick channel through which a soul can move from one part of the universe to the next, state from manushya loka to siddhashila or devaloka momentarily and immediately. In this way Trasanadi (set apart by T) can be viewed as a wormhole, associating various pieces of the universe as visualized in the General Theory of Relativity (GTR).’^[2]

‘Cosmology perceives matter (energy and matter being inter-convertible) and space-time as components comprising the physical universe and three sorts of forces, viz. gravitation, electroweak (which incorporates power, magnetism and frail atomic powers), and solid atomic powers together with their related fields, which work all over the place.’^[3]

They all seem to be refining of the same truth again as it is beautifully said that all things, in the world, have been discovered before!

‘The physical universe, as we see presently, is made of six parts: space, time, matter (and energy), and three powers (and their related fields). In examination, Jainism expresses that the material universe is made out of five segments: space, time, matter, dharmastikaya, and adharmastikaya. Subsequently there is understanding among cosmology and Jainism on three constituents of the universe, i.e. matter, space and time. As indicated by the examinations led by Michelson and Morley, in late nineteenth century, the idea of mode of movement (hypothesized as the all-plaguing, stationary, luminiferous ether, generally viewed as proportionate to dharmastikaya) has been invalidated. We don't have much thought of what adharmastikaya (translated as mode of rest) is as far as present day material science or cosmology, albeit a few applicants have been discussed. The two constituents of the universe, dharmastikaya and adharmastikaya, remain a subject of further examination.’^[4]

The good thing about modern science is that it is always open to explore newer dimensions, that may tally with the Jain science one day.

‘Quantum mechanics puts stringent imperatives on the dimension of conviction of our insight. One of the recommendations is that the universe does not exist on the off chance that you don't watch it. This infers the universe and the onlooker exist together as a couple and neither can exist without the other. The other idea is that a molecule carries on diversely at various occasions.’^[5]

The beauty lies in curiosity, one may wonder if everything would have been found and if all would have been satisfied with what has been found, in what kind of a dilemma our world would have been!

‘Unexpectedly, supersymmetry has never been found in nature. So far it exists just in idea, yet it is so delightful and convincing a hypothetical device that most physicists assume that supersymmetry will in the end be found.’^[6]

However when one studies the karma theory and recognises one’s place in the bigger picture of the cosmos, everything starts looking symmetrical. And if we go even farther into the puzzle of karma, soul, rebirth, super symmetry will surely be found.

When we analyse the mind-boggling hugeness of the universe it seems humans are like ants searching for the secrets of the universe with their minimal resources, which they think are superb.

‘It may appear to be scary that we people can speak so garrulously about temperatures and occasions so disastrous that they would tear separated our earth (even our galaxy). In fact, physicist Steven Weinberg, expounding on the introduction of the universe, conceded honestly, “I cannot deny the feeling of unreality in writing about the first three minutes as if we really know what we are talking about.’^[7]

Whatever we imagine, can only be possible, from its existence somewhere in the universe. Be it a dream, a thought or a realisation. An artist’s creation, or an author’s pen, can take them to which real plane of the universe through their imaginations.

As ‘even our imaginations are too conservative.’^[8]

‘We can see the universe from apure scientific point of view, where we centre around the association of material powers, or from the profound viewpoint, wherein we look past the material for concealed implications, associations and examples. Progressively, the two perspectives are uniting. They express parts of reality, as opposed to reality all in all. It is much as a light can show the properties of either particles or waves, contingent upon the manner by which it is considered, yet it is something more than both of these: it is light!’^[9]

Just like the consciousness’ quest to know and return to itself, mankind’s biggest quest is to get all knowledgeable and through that, be happier.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

As cited in The Enigma of The Universe (TETU). Prof. Muni Mahendra Kumar. Jain Vishva Bharati University. Ladnun. 2010. pp. 9

[2]:

JEUPE. pp. 139,140

[3]:

JEUPE. pp. 97

[4]:

JEUPE. pp. 97-98

[5]:

JEUPE. Pp. 101

[6]:

BE. pp. 120

[7]:

As cited in BE. pp. 133 (Heinz Pagels, Perfect Symmetry (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1986), 209

[8]:

BE. pp. 200

[9]:

LJ. pp. 81