NMT (No-Me Teaching) new series 52

NMT (No-Me Teaching) new series 52:

Prior to excerpting the other Ramana Maharshi disciple in the text below we continue the series: Fine-Tuned Universe , the premise that a small change in several of the dimensionless fundamental physical constants would make the Universe incapable of Life.

Fine-Tuned Universe 32:

[In the unreal reflection called the “Universe”, a product of an unreal Mind, even there, Infinite Intelligence is evident and inspiring.]

Dt(φ)/V(φ) << 1 & Dx(φ)/ V(φ) << 1, where V(φ) represents the potential energy of the Inflaton field, & Dt(φ), Dx(φ) represent its Time & Space partial derivatives.

To intuitively see why Paul Davies’s is correct about Fine-Tuning odds, consider an analogy of a very large scrabble-board.  If we were to shake the scrabble board at random, we would be much more likely to get an ordered, meaningful arrangement of letters in one small region, with the arrangement on the rest of the board essentially chaotic, than for all the letters on the entire board to form meaningful patterns.  Or, as another analogy, consider a hundred coins lined up in a row, which are then shaken at random.  Define a local island of order to be any consecutive sequence of five coins which all are on the same side – that is, either all heads or all tails.  It is much more likely for the sequence of a hundred coin tosses to contain one or more subsequences of five consecutive heads or tails than for it to be all heads or all tails.  Indeed, it is likely that such a sequence of coins will have at least one such island of five consecutive heads or tails; the probability of the coins coming up all heads or all tails, however, is around one in 1030, or one in a thousand, billion, billion, billion.

The same argument applies to the mass-energy configurations of our visible universe, with the argument being grounded in probability calculations based on the standard probability measure of statistical mechanics over phase space.  These calculations show that among all possible configurations, it is enormously more likely (by a factor of around 1 in 10x, where x = 10123) for local islands of low entropy to form than the whole visible universe to be in a low-entropy state. Indeed, if we consider the set of all configurations of mass-energy that would result in an observer – e.g., an organized structure with the same relevant order as our brain – the subset of such configurations that are dominated by BB [(Ludwig) Boltzmann Brain] observers would be far, far larger than those configurations that are dominated by non-BB observers.

Boltzmann proposed that the state of our observed low-entropy Universe (which includes our existence) is a random fluctuation in a higher-entropy Universe. Even in a near-equilibrium state, there will be stochastic fluctuations in state of the system. The most common fluctuations will be relatively small, resulting in only small amounts of organization, while larger fluctuations and their resulting greater levels of organization will be comparatively more rare. Large fluctuations would be almost inconceivably rare, but inevitably occur if a universe lasts infinitely long. Even if the universe does not have an infinitely long past, modern cosmological theories of the Big Bang do suppose that the latter occurred via stochastic fluctuations in a larger meta-universe; the paradox is retained by incorporating our brief-but-finite past into the random fluctuation.

Furthermore, there is a “selection bias”: we observe our very unlikely universe because those unlikely conditions are necessary for us to be here. This is an expression of the Anthropic Principle.

If our current level of organization, having many self-aware entities, is a result of a random fluctuation, it is much less likely than a level of organization which only creates stand-alone self-aware entities. The number of self-aware brains that spontaneously and randomly form out of the chaos, complete with memories of a life like ours, should vastly outnumber the brains evolved from an inconceivably rare local fluctuation the size of the observable Universe.

“The idea that the thermodynamic arrow of time arose from a gigantic fluctuation leads to an amusing form of solipsism. From the standpoint of entropy, I, sitting at my keyboard typing these lines, am a pretty big fluctuation. A tree that I remember seeing is also a big fluctuation. It would be a smaller fluctuation, entropy-wise (recalling that entropy is extensive), not to have the tree, but to change my brain slightly and create the memory of that tree. Therefore, in terms of likely or unlikely fluctuations (and that’s what entropy measures) it would be far more likely that the tree doesn’t exist. You, reading this, should similarly doubt the existence of the writer.”  – Lawrence S. Schulman

The Boltzmann brain paradox is that any observers (self-aware brains with memories like we have, which includes our brains) are therefore far more likely to be Boltzmann brains than evolved brains. This suggest a problem either with current cosmological theories or the anthropic principle.

One class of solutions to the question makes use of differing approaches to the measure problem in cosmology: in infinite multiverse theories, the ratio of normal observers to Boltzmann-brain observers depends on how infinite limits are taken. Measures might be chosen to avoid appreciable fractions of Boltzmann brains.

A major question for a chaotic inflationary Multi-Verse model is whether it can circumvent the BB problem that plagues the random fluctuation model. If not, such a model will encounter the same disconfirmation as RF, thus giving us strong reasons to reject it. The inflationary model can avoid the BB problem, and this is its key advantage.

“Inflation is best thought of as the “dominant channel” from random chaos into a big bang-like state. The exponentially large volume of the Big Bang-like regions produced via inflation appear to completely swamp any other regions that might have fluctuated into a Big Bang-like state via some other route.  So, if you went looking around in the universe looking for a region like the one we see, it would be exponentially more likely to have arrived at that state via inflation, than some other way, and is thus strongly predicted to have the whole package of inflationary predictions.”    Andreas Albrecht

The idea here is that inflation takes small, low entropy regions and expands them into enormously large regions with enough order so that they will be dominated by non-BB observers (if they have observers).  The assumption is that the regions that undergo inflation are so small that they are much more likely to occur than regions that generate observers by random fluctuations; further, because of inflation, these initial small regions become so large that they dominate over those regions that produce observers by means of random fluctuations. Albrecht admits, however, that his argument that inflation would be the dominant channel “rests on very heuristic arguments” and that “the program of putting this sort of argument on firmer foundations is in its infancy”.

Several articles have been written in recent years arguing that inflation will generate universes in which BBs enormously dominate among observers in the far future. These arguments, however, present a problem only if one adopts a block universe view, according to which future events have the same ontological status as present and past events.  Although advocates of inflation typically assume such a view, they need not. If one adopts a metaphysical view in which the future is not yet real, these arguments will not themselves show that inflation leads to a present dominance of BB universes. Further,  the same dominance of BBs occurs for long-lived single universes; further, the evidence at present strongly suggests that our universe will continue existing for an enormously long time, if not forever, if there is no supernatural intervention.   In any case, I shall next present a powerful reason for thinking that Albrecht’s argument is flawed and that without assuming highly special initial conditions, inflationary cosmology leads to a dominance of BBs for any period of time in which observers exist.

Some more selected verses from the Ramana Maharshi disciple Master Nome:

The Mind & its modifications, in the form of thoughts, modes, & states, are limited.  The Self, unlike any of the Minds, is not of limited knowledge, for Supreme Knowledge is the Self’s true nature.  That  Supreme Knowledge is unmodified Consciousness itself, which is the Self itself.  The Self has no Ignorance, just as light has no darkness.  The Self is also without change, without impurity, ever beyond conception, forever beyond the Senses, & never of a material nature.

The Self is, by analogy, said by the Wise, to be like sunlight, while the Mind is like a crystal. And the various Experiences are like the colors seen in the crystal. The significance of this analogy is that all objects are seen in the Mind only by the light of the Self.  Objects of knowledge, sensed or mental, appear only in the Waking & Dream states. When these Waking & Dream states are not present, no such sensed or mental objects are experienced. Yet the Knower (the Self) is always the Knower, never ceasing, unlike all that is unreal. For the Knower is formless Consciousness. Duality appears only in those Waking & Dream states & is thus likewise unreal. For what is Real must be Real always. By relinquishing the superimposition of the known on the Knower, one then abides as the Non-Dual Knower, unceasing Consciousness, always.

Prior to the discrimination of the Self & the non-Self, one may think that the Absolute does not exist. One may doubt that the Self alone exists. After such discriminating Self-Inquiry, what was thought of as an Individual self is known to be only Brahman. There is no Individual self, or Mind, which would have done such thinking. Upon such Self-Inquiry, the experiential Knowledge is that only the Self. Brahman is, & the Individual & Mind are only Brahman & nothing else.

For the Self, which is of the nature of pure Consciousness, the connection to any objective experience, mental or sensed, is a product of delusion.  The “I” is truly free of all attributes, & is not associated with any quality or entity, & is ever nonobjective.  The Ignorance that imagines otherwise is purposeless.  That Ignorance merely creates Bondage among the ever-free, Suffering in the midst of Bliss. This is like drowning in a mirage whose “waters” serve no purpose. If the delusive attempts, to connect the Self with what is not the Self, are given up, the Mind rests in Brahman, the Absolute Self, “as if free from Bondage”, say the Sages.  In Reality, that Self was never bound.  The Self is ever Unborn & ever free of Duality.

The above themes & 1600 pages more are freely available as perused or downloaded PDF’s, the sole occupants of a Public Microsoft Skydrive “Public Folder” accessible through:  



or with Caps-sensitive:


Duplicates (but with graphics) have been available on:

http://www.blogger.com     as  “Being-as-Consciousness, Non-Duality – new & final version” with link:


[But from now on, they will be different & still usually daily.]

There is no Creation, no Destruction, no Bondage, no longing to be freed from Bondage, no striving for Liberation, nor anyone who has attained Liberation. Know that this to be Ultimate Truth.”   the “no creation” school of Gaudapada, Shankara, Ramana, Nome Ajata Vada

for very succinct summary of the teaching & practice, see:  www.ajatavada.com/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.