An example of scientific speculation gone wrong.

Originally posted by RJHinds
It would do no good for me to reply to such ignorance since you are of
the opinion that you are so much wiser than me. Being four years older
does not necessarily make you wiser even if you have more knowledge.
You have to know how to evaluate that knowledge my dear sir.

You need to study science and astronomy and genetics and the physics of carbon dating and the logic that leads scientists to say what stars are and how old fossils are before you can make sweeping statements about wiseness. I don't now, never have and never will make any claims to wisdom. In fact I notice in myself I am not even close to being wise and that is at 70 and will be at 80 I think and 90 or 100 if I am one of the very few that makes it to the century mark. I know full well age alone does not = wisdom. Very Very few people of any age can claim that distinction and I for one am 100 percent sure I am not in that category. I get really teed off when I spy stupidity, which is not you BTW, I know you are intelligent, just deluded by your mythology which you cling to unto death. I know that, I know there is now way you will ever be convinced otherwise.

Originally posted by RJHinds
This is like the argument that a rose by any other name would smell as
aweet.

Yes, but you apparently don't get it. You are so stuck on the concept that objects have True Names™ that you forget that there are thousands of languages in this world and a word is nothing more than a way to communicate.
You have shown this error:
1. Here, regarding the sun.
2. When you constantly insist on having your own definition for the word 'evolution'.
3. When you claimed that we don't know the True Name™ of Neanderthals and thus do not know much about them.

The Srimad Bhagavatam is eternal and the knowledge presented within goes back to the time of the cosmic manifestation itself.........hence when the universe first was manifested from the body Of the Lord Vishnu it was 2 billion miles and after expansion has settled into its current size.

Modern science informs us the universe is expanding.

At the perimeter of each egg shaped universe there are 8 consecutive coverings of earth, water, fire, air, ether, ego, mahatattva and pradhana and these must be used in calculating sizes and dimensions.

When the Vedas where discovered by the British and the Germans their was an attempt to destroy them due to their envious nature and we only have 6% of the original Vedic literature.

The original astronomical tables are partly lost and any calculation performed in recent times by the Indians using incomplete Surya Siddhanta may be questionable.

*The current size of the universe has been given below and of course it is *much larger but as I have said any information given using incomplete Vedic tables must be approached with caution.........one must take into account who is using the tables and how they are using them.

The perfect and *complete Surya Siddhanta when used by qualified persons will give us all .... the necessary information we require.

The Srimad Bhagavatam (proper) does not give detailed astronomical data but only generalizations.....and for astronomical information one has to consult cosmological literature.

Persons who are envious of the Supreme Personality of Godhead will endeavour to discredit the Veda but alas! they shall remain outside the realm of spiritual understanding due to their envious position.

--------------------------------

In his Anubhäshya commentary on this verse of Chaitanya-caritämrita, Shrila Bhaktisiddhänta Sarasvati quotes from Sürya-siddhänta 12.90, "The circumference of the sphere of the Brahmändee in which the sun's rays spread is 18,712,080,864,000,000 yojanas" (SS, p. 87). Then he quotes Siddhänta-shiromani, Golädhyäya Bhuvana-kosha: "Some astronomers have asserted the circumference of the circle of heaven to be 18,712,069,200,000,000 yojanas in length. Some say that this is the length of the zone binding the two hemispheres of the Brahmända. Some Pauränikas say that this is the length of the circumference of the Lokäloka Parvata [adrishya-drishyaka-girim] (SSB1, p. 126).

Here the circumference of 18,712,069,200,000,000 yojanas corresponds to a diameter of 5,956,200,000,000,000 yojanas. This number is much larger than the 500,000,000-yojana diameter given in the Bhägavatam, and we might ask how it relates to it. According to the Bhägavatam (5.20.37),

By the supreme will of Krishna, the mountain known as Lokäloka has been installed as the outer border of the three worlds-Bhürloka, Bhuvarloka and Svarloka-to control the rays of the sun throughout the universe. All the luminaries, from the sun up to Dhruvaloka, distribute their rays throughout the three worlds, but only within the boundary formed by this mountain.

This verse reconciles the statement that the 18-quadrillion-yojana circumference is the limit of distribution of the sun's rays with the statement that it is the circumference of Lokäloka Mountain. We also note that in SB 5.20.38 the diameter of Lokäloka Mountain is stated to be half the diameter of the universe. This is consistent with the statement in Shrila Prabhupäda's purport that "according to some, this is only half the circumference." We are thus left with a picture of the universe in which the rays of the sun and other luminaries spread to a radial distance of 2,978,100,000,000,000 yojanas, and are there blocked in all directions by an enormous mountain. This mountain lies halfway between the sun and the beginning of the outer coverings of the universe. This means that the distance from the sun to the coverings of the universe is some 5,077 light-years, where a light-year is the distance traveled in one year by a beam of light moving at 186,000 miles per second and we use the Sürya-siddhänta's 5-mile yojanas.

In Chapters 3 and 4 we will say more about the possible relation between this very large universal radius and the much smaller figure given in the Bhägavatam. At present we will consider what the jyotisha shästras have to say about the radius of the universe. It turns out that the Siddhänta-shiromani, the Sürya-siddhänta, and many other jyotisha shästras give a simple rule for computing this number.

The Sürya-siddhänta gives the following rule: "Multiply the number of ... revolutions of the moon in a kalpa by the moon's orbit...: the product is equal to the orbit of heaven (or the circumference of the middle of the brahmända): to this orbit the sun's rays reach" (SS, p. 86). If we perform this calculation, we find that the circumference of the brahmända, or universe, is:57,753,336 X 1,000 X 324,000 = 18,712,080,864,000,000 yojanas

(reference source withheld)

Originally posted by Dasa
The Srimad Bhagavatam is eternal and the knowledge presented within goes back to the time of the cosmic manifestation itself.........hence when the universe first was manifested from the body Of the Lord Vishnu it was 2 billion miles and after expansion has settled into its current size.

Modern science informs us the universe is expanding.

At the perimete ...[text shortened]... 6 X 1,000 X 324,000 = 18,712,080,864,000,000 yojanas

(reference source withheld)

No need to withhold references Dasa. We have Google -

http://nitaaiveda.com/NITAAI_Yoga_Forums/Ask_Spiritual_Question(s)/Universal_size.htm

Originally posted by Proper Knob
No need to withhold references Dasa. We have Google -

http://nitaaiveda.com/NITAAI_Yoga_Forums/Ask_Spiritual_Question(s)/Universal_size.htm

This is boring to me.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
No need to withhold references Dasa. We have Google -

http://nitaaiveda.com/NITAAI_Yoga_Forums/Ask_Spiritual_Question(s)/Universal_size.htm

Wow. Now the Milky way is bigger than the universe. What a load of BS! So the whole universe is now 16,000 odd light years! The center to our galaxy is about twice that...

Originally posted by sonhouse
Wow. Now the Milky way is bigger than the universe. What a load of BS! So the whole universe is now 16,000 odd light years! The center to our galaxy is about twice that...

Science cannot know the size of the universe because they do not have a reference point to constitute what would be considered the edge of the universe.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Give Dasa the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps the Vedas were written
before the universe had expanded into the empty space as far as it
has today.

I see that your cosmology knowledge is as extensive as your knowledge of evolution.

Which is to say, not much.

The universe did NOT expand into "empty space". Space itself expanded after the big bang, and the size of the universe with it.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Stars provide starlight, but our sun provides sunlight.

Profound stuff indeed.

Care to take a punt at what sort of light the moon gives us?

What do you think is the difference between starlight and sunlight?

Originally posted by Dasa
Science cannot know the size of the universe because they do not have a reference point to constitute what would be considered the edge of the universe.

And the Vedas claim this reference point to be a mountain? Am I getting this right or are you pulling a massive joke over on us?

Also, did I understand correctly that the Vedas considers Earth to be the center of the universe?

Neither of these is correct, therefore... well, you know as well as I do what this means.

Originally posted by Suzianne
And the Vedas claim this reference point to be a mountain? Am I getting this right or are you pulling a massive joke over on us?

Also, did I understand correctly that the Vedas considers Earth to be the center of the universe?

Neither of these is correct, therefore... well, you know as well as I do what this means.

O. M. G. Are you thinking what I am thinking? Could it be? Dasa spouting nonsense?

NAH! He knows knowledge from universes trillions of years older than our little dot of a universe on the big canvas......

It's all in the translation.

Originally posted by RJHinds
This is boring to me.

christian drivel spouted at me ad nauseum is boring

At least you guys could get a bit more creative and take some peotic license,(for the right reasons), and "ham up" you verbal offerings, (thats the nice way to say it), maybe you might get some more bites that way. 🙂

Originally posted by Suzianne
And the Vedas claim this reference point to be a mountain? Am I getting this right or are you pulling a massive joke over on us?

Also, did I understand correctly that the Vedas considers Earth to be the center of the universe?

Neither of these is correct, therefore... well, you know as well as I do what this means.

The Vedas (proper) do not say the earth is the centre of the universe - unless they are referring to some different context and referencing than that of the norm.

I can show you in more that one place where the Vedas clearly describe the sun as almost being the centre of the universe.

Googling Vedic information can be troublesome and there are many areas that just don't present the correct understanding allowing for interpretation.

Everything labelled Veda is often not Veda.

Originally posted by Suzianne
And the Vedas claim this reference point to be a mountain? Am I getting this right or are you pulling a massive joke over on us?

Also, did I understand correctly that the Vedas considers Earth to be the center of the universe?

Neither of these is correct, therefore... well, you know as well as I do what this means.

There are things out there in space that are not visible to us tiny creatures with our imperfect instruments..

Originally posted by Dasa
Everything labelled Veda is often not Veda.

Never trust labels vishvahetu.