• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Yin Yang and Einstein

Umm there is no 'matter' in the concept of yin and yang. So what is the M in the equation if we use Chinese philosophical concepts
 
MG1962 said:
Umm there is no 'matter' in the concept of yin and yang. So what is the M in the equation if we use Chinese philosophical concepts
Click to expand...

The concept of yin and yang, as I see it, is more general than the theories of relativity. If everything is in a balance, then everything is relative. Literally. Whether its matter or thoughts in our head.

The theories Einstein made, just helped show how true it really is. That is my thoughts about it. I would like to know if anyone disagree or agrees though, and their reasons for doing so.
 
kblood said:
How many here believe in and see relations in between Einsteins theories of relativity, both the general and E=Mc2 and with the concept of Yin/Yang?

How about the phrase, everything is relative? Is everything relative? Does Yin/Yang suggest everything is relative?
Click to expand...

I don't think that there's a similarity because Yin/Yang is about balance between two different things, while relativity is about the lack of an absolute frame of reference and the relationships between time, space, energy and matter.
 
Twiler said:
I don't think that there's a similarity because Yin/Yang is about balance between two different things, while relativity is about the lack of an absolute frame of reference and the relationships between time, space, energy and matter.
Click to expand...

I'd tend to agree with this as far closer to the truth, given that the OP seemed to simply be confusing and conflating similar concepts.

I'd disagree that there's no similarity, as you seem to say, Twiler, but I do agree that the similarity is far from strong enough to reach kblood's posted conclusions without invoking a false analogy.
 
kblood said:
Yin = Yang the same way E = Mc2

Because they are a balance of each other.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what definition of balance you're using that makes having the speed of light squared energy in mass "balanced".
 
Those of us who are old enough to recall the 70s nonsense recall that the Hindus knew all about quantum mechanics and cosmology.....

At least according to Fritjof Capra.
 
Last edited:
kblood said:
How many here believe in and see relations in between Einsteins theories of relativity, both the general and E=Mc2 and with the concept of Yin/Yang?

How about the phrase, everything is relative? Is everything relative? Does Yin/Yang suggest everything is relative?
Click to expand...

You are incorrect in both theories due to some partial understanding and mainly gross misunderstanding.

the theory or yin/yang does not say that all things are relative, the in/yang portion of the symbol does contain a small area of the other. What you fail to understand is the portion, yes light/dark contain small amounts of the other. That is not relative. If you are going to explore some concepts you need to actually study them from the 中国 sources, not western glosses of them. the female has small aspects of the male, it is not relative, it is female and one very small area is male, so on and so on.

The essence is in the balance, not within objects but between objects.

And relativity is totally out of your understanding. The speed of light is constant in all frames of reference, how is that relative, that is constant.
 
kblood said:
The concept of yin and yang, as I see it, is more general than the theories of relativity. If everything is in a balance, then everything is relative. Literally. Whether its matter or thoughts in our head.
Click to expand...
Which just goes to show, you don't get the concept in application at all. I suggest you start with Dao de Jing and the Ye Jing and read them. If you do you will soon come to realize that the systems, especially the one of Kongzi, you will see that there is little balance in nature, things rise and fall, sometimes totally out of balance withing themselves. The wise person strives to live in balance. There is no innate balance.
The theories Einstein made, just helped show how true it really is.
Click to expand...
No, you haven't shown that at all
That is my thoughts about it. I would like to know if anyone disagree or agrees though, and their reasons for doing so.
Click to expand...
 
kblood said:
Yin = Yang the same way E = Mc2
Click to expand...
Nope, where does it say that you can transform yin into yang, where exactly in a chinese sourse does it say that?
Because they are a balance of each other.

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.23...id=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=21101159128541

I would claim Putnam tried making a similar claim as I am.
Click to expand...

I am not sure you really understand Putnam, or at least in the interpretations you are pretending they made, objects are what they are, the concepts we apply to them are concepts but to say that because concepts are relative the things we observe about objects are relative is a huge mistake. Newtonian momentum is accurate until you approach the speed of light, then you add other concepts from Einstein to the concept. This does not mean anything about the Newton definitions except you add to them, it is obvious that concepts change and are not constant through time.

Now that makes sense as does the contextual parameters of the way humans use language. However realism is not metaphysical realism, object within the world appear to behave consistently and behave consistently, the mass of the electron does not vary unless it approaches the speed of light and it does so consistently.

Now the fact that two people may may disagree upon the labels used to describe reality does not mean that the world is not real, it appears to be until you can show otherwise. Any statement about the 'truth' of some statement are dependent upon the assumptions and idiomatic usage of the individuals in discussion.

However the mass of an electron is accurately described by the Newtonian mechanics plus Einstein's. It is trivial and obvious that the way we describe things in concepts and language matters in teh accuracy of statement.

Where you err Kblood and I don't think you understand is this, teh variation in semsnatic descriptions does not mean that reality doesn't exist and that it is someehow a fuid concept subject to change, it means that our words and concepts change.

You can not defy gravity, you can not violate the laws of physics, as long as you understand that the 'laws of physics' are an ad hoc semantics description of the behavior of objects in reality. the fact that the use of the word gravity changes and has contextual parameters does not mean that is you step off a high cliff with no means of saving yoursllf that you will nopt smassh into teh surface below you.

Even if you call gravity bob, your momentum george and the surface sally, the force of bob will increase your george and when your body contacts sally your body will smash into it propotional to george and likely harm you.

Now that does not mean that all concepts have some validity
 
Last edited:
Wait, yin and yang are opposites of each other, not the same thing at all (=), or even close to it. The opposites must balance, but one cannot be converted to the other.

Unlike mass and energy....
 
kblood said:
Yin = Yang the same way E = Mc2

Because they are a balance of each other.

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.23...id=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=21101159128541

I would claim Putnam tried making a similar claim as I am.
Click to expand...

...Right. Because I feel like citing someone who already started answering this,

Mashuna said:
Any equation with an equals sign is "in balance". That's what the equals part means.
Click to expand...

The problem here is that Yin =/= Yang. Not even remotely. What you're actually claiming here is that 1 = -1. If you can't figure out any problems with that equation, we can certainly try to start teaching you basic math.
 
Last edited:
kblood said:
The concept of yin and yang, as I see it, is more general than the theories of relativity. If everything is in a balance, then everything is relative. Literally. Whether its matter or thoughts in our head.

The theories Einstein made, just helped show how true it really is. That is my thoughts about it. I would like to know if anyone disagree or agrees though, and their reasons for doing so.
Click to expand...

Einstein didn't come up with the general concept of relativity, either in philosophy or physics. He just extended it to show what happens at extreme velocities.

(It also happens at less extreme velocities, but it's not noticeable.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom