How obscurity of astronomy can help understand concepts
As I had indicated in my previous blog “Why we should not be eager to become a space faring species?“, we should let the obscurity in the knowledge of the objects external to our earth remain obscure. As I had indicated, the tools that we have currently to detect and understand the various observable parameters present are limited to the material properties of the observables. Do we really just want to discover more heavier elements and components or more light/wave component variations? Would that lead us in anyway to expand our understanding to something totally new in this universe around us? Will it help us delve deeper into the depths of the concepts that come together to form this reality around us? Or are we just forming more and more of the same permutations and combinations of the basic concepts we understand limiting our understanding to just the dimensions that we are able to perceive?
To go a little more further on how we can use the obscurity of the observable parameters to our advantage. As I have indicated in all my books and a number of blogs, we always need to start at that base un-manifested expanse of truth to understand something different. We should not assume anything is present or not present. It is important to understand and know that everything we discover then should be contained within that un-manifested expanse without exception, because we have removed all assumptions and have just said “there is this un-manifested that I do not know and I want to know”. Thus, this becomes the all-encompassing and there can be nothing beyond it. Even if we contemplate “time” as we understand it, the whole of time has to be “contained within that same un-manifested expanse of truth”. Further it is very important to understand is that “It is un-manifested to me because I have not yet become aware of and given that something a classification!”
With this in mind, if I start thinking about what appears to me as spacetime, I find that as I plot the state of various space points around me, the farther from me the point is that I have plotted, the state of the space point is farther and farther behind to the current time I am present in. Hence, what we see as space around us is only the projected state of the farther behind point as if it is present in the same time as me. So, the space appears to me as below (a representative 2D projection, can be translated to 3D and imagined.)
Again, it should be noted that this appears so because I have observed these based on light/radio/microwave waves. In such an observation, given that waves are travelling longer distance, it is a radially distributing pattern. It is quite possible if I observe based on some other property, the appearance is different. But, it follows the same principle, except the variance of distribution need not be radial. Now, that we have realised that we have projected the objects at various points of time dimension into the same projected frame, I can now change this appropriately to include the time dimension . Note, while I have said time dimension for easy use of term, in fact it is series of changes. But, for ease I will still refer as time. Introducing time into the above diagram, we find that what I am perceiving needs to be viewed as below (a cone of space/time with the tip as me, the observable):
At any point in time, if I am able to determine certain key observables, then I can position myself in the tip of this space/time cone and based on these object positions create this BOVE space/time cone. If I continuously observe the variation in positions of these key observables, then I can plot the continuous movement of space/time cone itself using these changes. These changes are a combination of my movement in the huge un-manifested and the movement of each of these various observableS in the same huge un-manifested that we had.
Now, how can I use this information to understand my movement in the un-manifested? Let us look at this from the perspective of the change that I would detect as the distance increases. As I had described in the book Surya Siddanta: Emergence of empirical reality, the measurement system used is based on the change that can be detected and stored by every “being”. All measurements for a given “being” are a function of that smallest viNADi of change that is recognisable. Thus, the measurement system rather than being a relative measurement system becomes self-contained, meaning a viNADi for one existence need not being the same in terms of quantity of measurement, but is same in terms of the abstract concept. Thus the viNADi or the smallest change detected and recognised distorts as the distance of the observed objects increases from the observable. Hence, if we check the comparative change between an observed object nearer to that of a change of an observed farther away object, we will find that farther the observed object, higher the quantity of viNADI. Thus, these objects tend to be a pseudo-static reference since the changes take a longer time to be observed by the observable. Thus, these far away stars, galaxies etc that are farther away from our locations tend to become pseudo-static references that can be used to analyse the distance and direction of change of the current observable. This concept is reverse to what we tend to do in modern science, where we take the observed light and compute the position of the farther object. Here, we take the distance and direction and have applied intelligence that they tend to remain static, hence movement is my movement that has caused the change. Something similar to the below:
The path of the observable above then is both an extension in time and expansion in space. If we are able to get a consistent set of points for the current observable, then, this path can be extrapolated backward to find the point of origin of the path of this observable and extrapolated forward to understand the possible path in the future giving us a way to start predicting what possibly could happen. While this is a highly simplified version for a non-transformed appearance, we need to then pick these paths and apply understood transformations to understand how this path translates to events in the current reality.
When such a principle is applied to objects such as the stars and planets nearer us rather than a living being, we still are dealing with the un-transformed objects and hence simplifies what we are studying. Applying it to multiple objects allows us to understand if there is a standardisation of paths followed by various objects in reality, so that it can be abstracted and applied to other objects. Thus we find that by obscuring the specific details of the object such as materials found, its path around the sun and so on, just using the distance and direction w.r.t us, we can use the information to understand the in-depth workings of reality. This can be taken further when we take all these origin points and understand what used to exist and study the expanse at the origin.