Energy from Buddhist perspective

[DarwidHalim]

Is there a statement from Buddhist tantra text or cosmology that suggest the energy of a closed system is constant?

[catmoon]

If you really want to streeeeeeetch an interpretation, the emptiness of things implies the net energy of the universe is constant and equal to zero. It's a big stretch though.

[Astus]

Two questions:

1. What is energy in Buddhism?
2. How could there be anything constant when all is impermanent?

[DarwidHalim]

It make me remember of what I have read in one of Dalai Lama book.

He mentioned like this:

If we burn a stick, the stick will become ash.

However, the stick doesn't vanish to zero in the sense that it is completely disappear.

The stick itself is a physical manifestation of a particular energy. The ash itself is also another manifestation of certain energy. So, the energy change due to causes and condition.

If we accept the notion that the stick is vanish, we also have to accept that te energy is also completely vanish.

In this case, if that is true, the consequence is the ash just come out from no where. It can suddenly appear without connection with previous stick. Another consequence because the ash can come out from completely zero, it can come anytime and anywhere randomly.

This is definitely not true.

In his own words, he mentioned that
"So how exactly can we understand the karmic continuum? To give an example, when a stick is burn, although the wood has disappeared, it remains in the form of energy; it has not disappeared completely. The prasangika madyamika school adopts a similar notion of cessation (shik pa). This view maintains that although th physical reality of phenomena ceases, it remains as a type of energy or potential. Other Buddhist philosophical schools accept this cessation to be merely a mental construct or an abstract entity. In contrast, Prasangika Madyamika consider this as a type of potential, having the capacity to become a future cause within that continuum. I feel that the scientific idea of conservation of energy is in some ways similar to this notion of cessation."

It is proven as well in the lab that in closed system, the energy or potential of that system is constant. It make me remember: the weight of a candle is equivalent to the weight of the ash + the weight of the smoke. This is completely undeniable.

Outside a closed system, definitely the energy is without limit, because this universe is without limit.

Nagarjuna mentioned in dependent arising, no coming, and no going. Although what he meant is because there is no identity, we cannot say there is a self who is coming or the self who is going. When there is no self, how can there is verb, such as coming and going.

However, what Nagarjuna mentioned is also valid for the energy or potential. If there is a self and that self disappear, it means after that self disappear, your closed system will not balance. If we thing the candle has a self, when we burn the candle, the self of the candle has to disappear. You system will lost self that make the system unbalance due to losing something. It doesn't happen in the lab. So, the notion of no self actualy also proven in the lab.

So, dependent arising actually tell us that continuity cannot end due to this potential or energy or any other fancy name. It always changes and can never completely disappear. Continuity from beginningless time until endless time in the future can only occur if things have no self or no identity.

It is proven in the lab that in a closed system, the energy or the potential cannot add or decrease. That potential is always constant, in the sense that constant without having identity.

The problem is do you think according to Buddhism, the lab test is not absolutely true, in the sense that the energy or potential in a closed system can increase or decrease?

[Astus]

A "closed system" is only a hypothetical thing. It does not exist in reality. It'd mean an independent realm, a substance, a self.

[DarwidHalim]

Within that illusion 'closed system', does the illusion-like energy inside that illusion-like system constant?

According to experiment by scientist, it is constant.

How about Buddhist perspective? Also same or not?

[catmoon]

Two questions:

1. What is energy in Buddhism?
2. How could there be anything constant when all is impermanent?

1. I'm using the definition of energy as one-half mass times velocity squared, and it's various equivalents.

2. The energy content of the universe is constant, but note carefully that the energy content of the universe is dependent on the existence of a universe. I think the universe itself is impermanent.

[Beatzen]

Two questions:

1. What is energy in Buddhism?
2. How could there be anything constant when all is impermanent?

1. I'm using the definition of energy as one-half mass times velocity squared, and it's various equivalents.

2. The energy content of the universe is constant, but note carefully that the energy content of the universe is dependent on the existence of a universe. I think the universe itself is impermanent.

How does the karmic continuum Hhdl was talking about above relate to the death of an imperiously universe. Also, if the universe is a karmic continuum of infinite causes and effects, can the universe ever exhaust it's own karma?

[Astus]

1. I'm using the definition of energy as one-half mass times velocity squared, and it's various equivalents.

My question was: "What is energy in Buddhism?" and not in modern physics, or anything else. I think that if this turns out to be a discussion on natural science, well, it's irrelevant to Buddhism.

[catmoon]

Two questions:

1. What is energy in Buddhism?
2. How could there be anything constant when all is impermanent?

1. I'm using the definition of energy as one-half mass times velocity squared, and it's various equivalents.

2. The energy content of the universe is constant, but note carefully that the energy content of the universe is dependent on the existence of a universe. I think the universe itself is impermanent.

How does the karmic continuum Hhdl was talking about above relate to the death of an imperiously universe. Also, if the universe is a karmic continuum of infinite causes and effects, can the universe ever exhaust it's own karma?

Here I think science and Buddhism come into harmony. The "truth" is equally well expressed in both contexts. What is the cause of a universe? A previously existing universe. Not all scientists are on board here, but few would dismiss the possibility, which seems to be gaining ground in scientific circles.

Now if one universe can be the cause of another, both forms of cause and effect, the scientific and the karmic, bridge the transition from one universe to another. However, from the POV of sentient beings, their karma is exhaustable, in the sense that one day all sentient being may become Buddhas. Which leads to a pretty intriguing question: would a universe continue to exist if everybody left? Would materialistic cause and effect continue in their courses, independent of watchers?

[catmoon]

1. I'm using the definition of energy as one-half mass times velocity squared, and it's various equivalents.

My question was: "What is energy in Buddhism?" and not in modern physics, or anything else. I think that if this turns out to be a discussion on natural science, well, it's irrelevant to Buddhism.

Sorry, energy is a scientific concept but it has been borrowed into the vernacular in some very peculiar ways. So it will never be irrelevant, it can't be, it is an idea born of science. One might as well ask "What is a pi meson in Buddhism?"

To be fair, one could look at how the term is currently being used among various writers in Buddhism, but it will always be derivative from the scientific original. For instance, some use it in sense of a certain vivacity, a joie de vivre. Some monastics exhibit a phenomenal capacity for work, and this is sometimes termed "energy" although "wattage" or "power" might technically be more accurate. Whether or not this is significant in Buddhism I cannot tell; in the business world one also encounters such individuals, and elsewhere as well.

I don't hold out much hope of finding an interpretation of a modern scientific term in scriptures laid down millennia prior to the invention of the term.

[Beatzen]

I want to study the ways of the force so I can be a Jedi like my father.

[Quiet Heart]

True....unless there is a better and mutually agreed upon definition of such terms as "Energy" and "from a Buddist perspective".
Without such agreed upon definitions the whole debate is...I may be wrong here but I believe a poster on another topic once used this term....the equivalent of "mental masturbation".
From my background in communications I myself would describe the problem is "narrow bandwidth"...or the equivalent of trying to transfer high bit speed data through a limited narrow bandwidth transmisson system ...some information gets lost in that process and can't be recovered no matter what processing you do on the incoming data to recover it.
Words and concepts expressed in words are "narrow banwidth".
"Concepts" like images are inherently "wide bandwidth"...like pictures do they contain a lot of information in a small area.
That is the basic problem of trying to use words to answer questions like the one originally asked.
Mere words are just not up to the challange of transferring such wide bandwidth data...because words are a narrow bandwidth medium.
(As I am quickly understanding here as I strugggle to make my meaning clear).

[catmoon]

I want to study the ways of the force so I can be a Jedi like my father.

I am your Father, Luke. Well I was. Don't believe me? Go ask Buddha.

[robaire]

Is there a statement from Buddhist tantra text or cosmology that suggest the energy of a closed system is constant?

you posed a question.

what closed system are you referring to?

a human form?

__________________

if this 'closed system' is a human form, then ...

you might observe many things going on.

you could even sit and dwell on this a bit ...

[DarwidHalim]

Closed form means we control the boundary.

If I burn the wood inside the closed box, I will get the ash and the smoke.

The wood then change to ash + smoke.

The weight of the box before I burn the wood and after it becomes ash and smoke are exactly same.

This is called closed system.

We can see here that scientist prove that nothing can actually truly vanish. It just changes.

Same with karma. Although we experience good karma, actually that karma cannot be exhausted or vanish. It just changes.

[catmoon]

I once attempted to burn wood in a closed box. Well almost closed, it had to have a vent to release pressure.

As the (metal) box was heated, there was a brief puff of smoke, then the oxygen in the box was exhausted. After a while a steady stream of steam issued forth, followed by a stream of highly flammable gas. I assume the gases were things like toluene, xylene and the other normal components of turpentine.Then everything calmed down to a steady state, no jets of gas, nothing, just a hot box sitting there. I let it cook a while and then let it cool down. Upon opening the box, the contents were found to be not ash, but beautiful jet black charcoal sticks, suitable for artwork.


Had the box been truly closed, the result would surely have been a violent explosion and fireball. Or a high temperature steam explosion at the least.

It seems Mother Nature never quite does what she is expected to.

[Malcolm]

Same with karma. Although we experience good karma, actually that karma cannot be exhausted or vanish. It just changes.

This is a completely baseless statement.You really do need to study abidharma.

[robaire]

if you placed your energy into the Dharma ... and really started applying energy to it ... and finding out what parts of you seem to fit in with it, and what parts of you seem to be generated better, in a somewhat lovely way by applying this energy, what parts of you become better because you applied this energy.

then you would become more familiar to this amazing treasure. a treasure beyond valuation.