What Is Science

What is Science?
Acharya Agnivrat Naishthik

Honorable Vice President of India M. Venkaiah Naidu inaugurating
Grantha “Ved Vigyan Alok” at Vice President house on
Jyeshth Shukla Ashtami Vikram Samvat 2075, Date 20, June 2018
Well known Astrophysicist Prof. A.K.Mitra and A.R.Rao inaugurating

the Anusandhan Bhavan (Research Hall) on 9, Oct. 2018
Editorial
T
oday's era is called the era of science and technology,
and in this field we are also making progress at a
rapid pace. To make our life happy, the scientists are
also developing new technologies day by day, but are we
happy? Considering the modern technologies, has science
given us such a technology, which has no adverse effect?
This means that we are doing mistake somewhere. A
mistake, which I found is that we have not understood the
physical science deeply. Technologies based on incomplete
physics can never give happiness. When a scientist invents a
technology, does he think about its adverse effects? His
vision remains always one-sided. This is the reason that
currently no technology is totally harmless. Modern science
is surrounded by many serious problems today. Regarding
theoretical physics, except for the experimental verification
of few principles, which were predicted about 50-100 years
ago, no major research work is done in the last 70-80 years.
We want to understand every process of creation

through mathematics, but seriously consider, is it possible?
Can we explain all the processes happening in the universe
through mathematics? Mathematics is merely a language to
explain our thoughts. If we can’t make understand any
theory through mathematics, it doesn’t mean that it is not
science. For example, we can’t explain the process of tree
formation through mathematics, then how can we think of
knowing such a complex universe through mathematics?
There is also a limit to such experiments and observations.
Which we can’t detect, it doesn’t mean that there is no
existence of that thing. If we want to know more about the
Universe, then we have to come out of the boundaries of
1 | What is Science?
mathematics and experimentation, otherwise our life will be
ended in solving some equations.
All well-known scientists have believed that there is a

power that has made the world, tied in the rules and
operating it, then why we hesitate in thinking about it? If a
person like Acharyaji wants to help us to get rid of these
problems, then we don’t take it seriously by saying
philosophy or egotism, is it fair? I think that this is not fair,
we should be ready to listen to every thought, which can be
helpful in making progress, which can protect our wealth,
time, hard work etc., by giving up our every kind of
prejudices, otherwise our life will end without making any
notable progress.
Acharyaji, through this booklet, has done the task of

showing a new path to science students and enlightened
people, by doing the correct definition of science. Along with
this, he has suggested to give answers to the serious
questions given in the end of this booklet in a conference in
near future through Vedic science. Hope you will read this
booklet and understand the meaning of 'What is science?'
With this hope

Vishal Arya (Agniyash Vedarthi), Reader
M.Sc. Theoretical Physics (University of Delhi)
Vaidic and Modern Physics Research Centre
What is Science? | 2
Modern Definition of science
T
oday, science is discussed everywhere in the world,
not only by the enlightened but also ordinary people.
Some noblemen keep scientific evidence in mind on
every step. Many modern scientists, ignore the hypothesis
about universe based on any other method other than their
science, saying it philosophy. I have been communicating
with many well-known scientists of India for the past 12-13
years, due to this it is my own experience. By considering
this whole subject, I would like to give a special message to
the world's top scientists and the young generation of
scientific talent, including India, so that they can be aware of
the reality of science.
At first, we consider the definition of science from the

present viewpoint. According to the Science Dictionary
edited by M.J. Clugston-
"The ongoing search for knowledge about the

universe" is called science. From this point of view, the
research in the world related to universe is called science.
This definition is very short. In detail, this is written in the
Chambers Dictionary:
“Knowledge ascertained by observation and

experiment, critically tested, systematized and brought
under general principles, esp. in relation to the physical
world, a department or a branch of such knowledge or
study.’’
On the other hand, according to the oxford advanced

learner’s dictionary’s Indian edition, the definition of science
is given as follows:
“Organized knowledge esp. when obtained by
observation and testing of facts, about the physical world,
natural laws.’’
From all these definitions it is clear that the

knowledge of the universe, which is well-researched and
organized by experiments, observations and various tests
is considered in the limits of modern science. It makes clear
that the more capable resources we have for testing, this
modern science can learn more about the substances of
creation by doing more testings. The science can’t accept any
matter existing outside the limits of its technical instruments,
regardless to its exactness. There was no known
gravitational force prior to Isaac Newton in Western
countries, before Galileo and Copernicus they had no
knowledge of the size and rotation of the earth, then for
them the gravitational force, the circular motion of the Earth
and the rotation around the Sun etc. were not in the field of
science, that is, all these ideas were only imagination for
them. At the time when Galileo and Copernicus were not
born in Europe, Indian astronomers such as Aryabhatta,
Bhaskaracharya and Varahamihira were doing researches
on the motions of planets, which were beyond imagination
for Europe but see the trend of modern science that Galileo
and Copernicus became scientists in their sight, but the
work of Indian scholars don’t come in the field of science.
Apart from accepting Indian astronomers such as
Aryabhatta etc. as scientist, many countries don’t even know
him. In this country even if a government places such Indian
scientists in the education curriculum, then what will a
foreigner say, the enlightened, media and so-called secular
of this country, start shouting on it saying it a
communalization of education. This is the tragic culmination
of intellectual slavery. If someone discusses the ancient
Maharishi Bhardwaj and Maharishi Kanad etc. except the
medieval Indian Acharyas, they become a laughing stock by
saying all this mythical story, or somewhere a fierce
opposition. This is the intellectual slavery in the name of
science.
Today, there is no one who can talk about the sciences

of Vedas, Darshans, Brahminical texts etc. If someone like
me does, then he is asked to take the certificate from the
modern scientists. I have no hesitation in accepting that
behind all this, the western slavery is responsible, along
with this, the people, who have only been making a web of
words in the name of the research of Vedas and Vaidic
scriptures or blindly follows the researches of modern
sciences, are more accountable. I'm different from both of
them.
Dear readers! First, I would like to examine the

modern science using its own definition and somewhere in
its own language.
Suspiciousness of experiments
and observations
I
n this topic, we first quote the ideas of the great modern
scientists on the doubtlessness of experimentation,
observation and mathematics.
The well-known British physicist Stephen Hawking's

statement is-
“Any physical theory is always provisional in the sense that

it is only a hypothesis, you can never prove it. No matter how
many times the result of experiments agrees with some theory. you
can never be sure that the next time a result will not contradict the
theory, on the other hand you can disprove a theory by finding
even a single observation that disagree with the predictions.” (A
Briefer History of Time- P.14)
The same thing is written by the well-known

physicist Sir Albert Einstein-
“No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a

single experiment can prove me wrong.” (Meeting the standards
in primary science- By Lynn D. Newton, p.21)
The writer of this book writes at page 21 quoting Karl

Pooper, the philosopher of Austria-
.... you can never prove or verify a theory, you can only
ever disprove it. So, investigations and experiments serve the
purpose of testing the idea but not to prove it to be true.
Here also, it’s a question mark on the ambiguity of

modern science-
Roger Penrose, the colleague of Stephen Hawking has
also the same views, he writes-
“One might have thought that there is no real danger here

because if the direction is wrong the experiment would disprove it,
so that some new direction would be forced upon us. this is the
traditional picture of how science progresses- But I fear that this is
too stringent a criterion and definitely too idealistic a view of
science in this modern world of ‘Big Science’. (The Road to
Reality- P.1020)
See Sir Albert Einstein view again:
A theory can be proved by experiment, but no path

leads from experiment to the birth of a theory.
Review of mathematical criterion
A
fter the comments of these two modern scientists
about the experimental science, we also quote the
views of eminent American physicist Richard P.
Feynman about its mathematical base-
“But mathematical definitions can never work in the real

world. A mathematical definition will be good for mathematics, in
which all the logic can be followed out completely, but the physical
world is complex. (Lectures on Physics- P.148)
He told further then that-
“I love nature, and I hate mathematics.” and
“Some things that satisfy the rules of algebra can be

interesting to mathematics even though they don’t always
represent a real situation.”
On the other side, well-known physicist Sir Albert

Einstein states on this topic-
“As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality,

they are not certain, as far as they, they do not refer to
reality”.
He further says-
“I don’t believe in mathematics.”
Bernoulli says about the mathematics that-

“it would be better for true physics if there were no
mathematicians on earth.”
Readers should consider that they are great scientists,
who have used mathematics in abundant in their
experiments, and have given a great basis to science. When
they are not tied to the mathematics, then why is it
necessary for me to explain the Vedic science through
mathematical explanation? Do they consider these modern
scientists less knowledgeable than them?
Considering the opinion of these scientists, another
scientist James Clark Maxwell's statement is-
“The true logic of the world is in the calculus of

probabilities” (id. pg.64)
Feynman accepts it clearly-
“We do not yet know all basic laws. There is an expanding

frontier of ignorance. (id. pg. 01)
Let’s see a quaint trait of modern science-

Stephen Hawking writes at one place on his website
www.hawking.org.uk-
One can not ask whether the model represents reality, only
whether it works. A model is a good model if first it interprets a
wide range of observations, in terms of a simple and elegant
model. And second, if the model makes definite predictions that
can be tested and possibly falsified by observation.
Here Hawking himself is not only accepting the

hollow or falsity of modern science, but also declaring it a
trait or speciality of science to be falsified by observations.
How can such a false science be an evidence for any truth-
seeking man? Do we, Vedic scientists need to get the
certificate of authenticity from such science?
The Stubbornness of Scientists
I
have been discussing the problems of modern physics
with scientists of renowned scientific research institutes
and other institutions of India like Bhabha Atomic
Research Center (BARC) Mumbai and Tata Institute of
Fundamental Research (TIFR) Mumbai, for the last 12-13
years. I get modern physics with many unsolved problems
from this dialogue. Recently in August 2017, I went to the
Department of Science and Technology, Government of
India to discuss my Vedic Physics research. There is a wide
range of discussion with a top official, who is also a
physicist. He told me the universal discipline of modern
science and suggested me: "Swami ji! You should publish
your research paper in top level magazines. Articles should
be written in the style of modern physics, in English and
mathematics should also be abundant in that. If your articles
are published in them, then the scientists themselves will
start inviting you...... You should not write your articles like
eminent American scientist Einstein and Peter Higgs, which
took many decades to be proved. But instead you should
write such articles on which we can get results immediately
by experimenting those .... ''
Dear readers! Should I write the articles and get

tested those by modern physicists, who are involved in
many problems in their own field, and declare their many
results as false by introducing new results? If a person is
wandering himself, how can he show the way to others? The
Jury of the journals or the editor of the magazine, doesn’t
even invite the writer and discuss with him and unilaterally
rejects many articles by judging on their own level, I know it
very well.
There are many obstacles in publishing an article,
which is contrary to the flow of modern science; it should be
of any well-known scientist, I am well aware of it, it is not
appropriate to give such evidences here. In the publication
of papers based on the same genre and tradition of the
scientists, which is true in observation, experimentation or
mathematical concepts in their view, have to face diverse
conflicts and struggles, then the Vedic scientist like me
with his separate style and against the flow of modern
science, how can he get his articles published in their
journals? Although those scientists, who advised me to
publish the paper, accepted this process to be painful and
unfortunate.
There has never been any attention of any scientist

or Indian government in solving this misfortune.
Unfortunately, the slavery of universal science has been
embraced by putting off the wisdom. It is necessary to
write this article only to awaken the embarrassed scientists
and bureaucrats from such slavery.
Now I examine the experiment process of modern

science at my level, on which, views of many modern well-
known scientists have been written-
Examination of the Current
Research Process
S
cience accepts the facts only when they are tested by
available technology under the limits of science.
Suppose a scientist is standing near a wall, but he has
no means to measure the height of that wall. If any other
person, who is capable of measuring the height from his
own experience and tells the height, then the scientist will
never consider the height measured by that person as
scientific, even though depending on the resources, the
scientist is not able to tell its height. It is surprising that the
compulsion of technology, which is subordination for
science, is not ready to listen to any minute and far-reaching
intellectual. I would like to tell readers a story of my
experience here. Once I requested Prof. A.R. Rao, Astronomy
and Astrophysics professor at Tata Institute of Fundamental
Research (TIFR) Mumbai, that they keep ready the
measurement of radius of the Sun's nucleus, I am coming to
Mumbai. When I reached, their calculation is approx. 1 lakh
66 thousand km, meaning that his calculations were not
exact. Of course, the calculation of mathematics and many
observations have been taken in his calculations. These
calculations will be of his own, or of any other scientists, in
the sight of modern scientists, it comes in the limits of
science, even if it is told in approx. To say approx. 1,66,000
km. means that it is possible to exceed 400-500 km or less,
when Prof. Rao asked me, I said that on the basis of the
Aitreya Brahmin of Maharishi Aitreya Mahidas, the radius
of the Sun's nucleus, is 1,50,545 km. My calculation is not in
approx. There can’t be a difference of even 1 km, whereas in
the calculation of modern science, there is a possibility of a
gap of 400-500 km. On this count of my calculations, these
scientists will consider it as philosophical and Rao’s
calculation based on scientific facts, what kind of justice is
it, what kind of science is it? It is different from the fact
that I have compiled from which line of Maharishi Aitreya
Mahidas's book, it is rarely possible that any other famous
Sanskrit scholar of the world or Vaidic scholars can do it. I
have just given an example of the radius of the sun's
nucleus. There are hundreds of topics in my texts 'Ved
Vigyan-Alok', which will take decades to think over those
topics through the thinking process of modern science and
will spend billions of dollars, but with my text, they will
get all this, or can observe. Do scientists see this benefit
less?
Today, if I say that Dhananjay Vayu Rashmies travel

faster than light, then the modern physicist refuses to believe
by citing Einstein's theory of relativity, while they
themselves describe the speed of space inflation at 1028
km/sec, the speed, which is 1020 times greater than speed of
light. Where does the theory of relativity go? They don’t
know the structure of the space, however assume it to curve,
distort, expand and inflate. They become silent on how a
substance, which has no structure, can curve, distort or
expand? If we tell the entire structure of space, then they ask
us for experiment or mathematics. They don’t know
anything about Time, again they say it to be born at the time
of Big Bang, stop at the Black Hole and lapse or increase in
Relativity. Well, how do they make such claims about the
things about which they don’t have any knowledge? If we
start to explain the Time in a systematic and logical manner,
then they think it to be imagined. I am sure that they
consider it scientific to use the mathematical explanations to
make imaginary hypothesis in this universe, even if they are
utterly misleading and irrational? I ask what is the basis of
mathematics? Is mathematics not dependent on logic?
Then why avoid our logical arguments and intuition by
simply calling it philosophy.
Science and Philosophy
T
oday, the scientists, who try to ignore my “Vedic
Theory of the Universe” as philosophy, I give them
quotes of their own Max Born-
“I am now convinced that theoretical physics is actual
philosophy”.
Now tell me, why don’t you treat my theory as
theoretical physics? I call it Vedic theoretical physics.
I say this in such a way that theoretical physics is
always born from Philosophy (philosophical, logical and
systematic thinking) and when the limits of theoretical
physics ceases, then logical thinking means philosophy
only works, i.e. the end of the physics is in philosophy.
Yes, philosophy should be actual philosophy, whose basis is
firmly rooted in the true, logic and intense intuition, not just
the imagination as philosophy. In fact, in the name of
philosophy, there is a lot of such fantasies around the world,
that’s why the ignorance towards it has arisen among the
scientists. It is different from the fact that the scientists in
cosmology are also continuous giving birth to various
fantasies.
Variable Modern Science
A
merican astronomer Edwin Hubble concluded
from the observation of the red shift that the
universe is spreading at a rapid velocity. All
galaxies are running away from each other with quick
velocity. I wrote this in a letter to a renowned astronomer in
India in 2004, then he ridiculed, "Swami ji! You think that the
observations made by enlightened scientists for 70-80 years
are false and you are right, it is not fair ... ". Many scientists
in the world got Nobel prize on the research topic of
expansion of the universe, but I never accepted it. In my first
short book 'The Basic Material Cause of the Creation', I
have completely rejected the expansion of the universe by
rapid velocity, but science only accepts anything from
observation, mathematics, experimentation and testing, so
what is my value? Now in the last 2016, the modern
scientists realized half the truth that the universe has been
expanding, but not with acceleration. They also accepted
that giving Nobel Prize to that theory was wrong.
“Instead of finding evidence to support the accelerated

expansion of the Universe, Sarkar and his team say it looks like the
Universe is expanding at a constant rate. If that's truly the case, it
means we don't need dark energy to explain it…. Now, to be clear,
this is just one study, and it's a big, extremely controversial claim
that a Nobel Prize-winning discovery is fundamentally wrong.
(Because I don't have to tell you that Nobel Prizes aren't given out
lightly.)
(https://www.sciencealert.com/no-the-universe-is-not-expanding-at-an-
accelerated-rate-say-physicists)
I give another example - All the world's scientific

market is hot regarding the black hole theory. I have seen
the rejection of the concept of the presently known Black
Hole by Indian astronomer and my friend Prof. A.K. Mitra
since August 2004. On 29th August 2013, I also sent 12
questions on modern physics to many famous scientific
institutions and scientists of many countries, including
Stephen Hawking. One of these questions was about the
Black Hole. Nobody answered. Prof. Mitra said in a
discussion that some of these questions cannot be answered
even in 100 years. Stephen Hawking's technical assistant
answered with a simple email. After that on January 24,
2014, Stephen Hawking issued a statement in the “Nature”
journal and said that just like we believe there is no black
hole in the universe. Now think, that their observation,
testing and mathematics all were confirming Black Hole and
that was confirmed scientific truth but now their own
observations, tests and mathematics have falsified their
scientific truth. But Indian astronomer Prof. Mitra was not
given the importance by Indian media, while Stephen
Hawking, who turned down his own facts, became the
headlines of the media. What type of this intellectual
slavery is? The modern science proudly calls itself dynamic
for repeatedly changing its own facts. This alleged dynamic
science invents technology based on half-truth considering
them scientific truth. There is also somewhere in the ego of
its dynamics, somewhere in professionalism and by
tempting people to enjoy the means of pleasure, invents
such technology, which shows fatal results after some years.
First, there is a huge amount of time and wealth spent in
the research of harmful technology, and then the
expenditure of money and time is done in the research of
its adverse effects. After that, the same expenditure in the
research of another technology again, similar expenditure
in finding the adverse effects. It has been running for
centuries and at present, the fatal-technologies based on
the incomplete science are creating such environmental
crisis, due to which living on this earth will be impossible
for all beings in the next 100-200 years. What the dynamics
of science is this? What the power of science is this? In fact,
the modern science is acting like a child who runs without
hearing anything, but just before reaching the goal, it comes
to attention that why I have been sent here, I have not heard
it. Due to this, the child runs back to the sender. It can also
be understood from other examples in this way that the
modern science is like a miserable person searching for a
way out of the forest, who doesn’t consider the way right
suggested by an experienced person, who is capable of
guessing the path only by an intuition through his mind.
He himself searches the path on the strength of his means.
Many times, he wanders through the wrong path,
sometimes he finds the path, even so, he considers this
wandering and improving itself as its intelligence.
Modern Science and Logic
A
ctually, the modern science considers all the logic,
thinking, intuition and meditation to be imaginary.
He neglects saying it philosophical. I would like to
ask scientist friends that, in the absence of logic, thinking
and intuition, can experiments, observations ever inaugurate
the truth? The same facts of modern science are false, which
are not widely examined through logic, intuition, meditation
etc., whereas those facts remain true, in which they are
thought logically and carefully. Modern cosmology is a
repository of many irrepressible observations, fictional
mathematical concepts and experiments. Results of similar
observations or experiments done with logic and deep
consideration can be different, whereas ignorance of logic
can lead to same conclusion. This is the reason that seeing
the cosmic background radiation and red shift, the entire
scientific world concluded such a Big Bang, whose root itself
is problematic. Many questions on this are still unanswered,
most scientists are not ready to renounce the persistence of
the Big Bang. If a scientist proposes other reasons for cosmic
background radiation, red shift and calls Big Bang a
misconception, then it is neglected, what kind of science is
it? Sometimes it looks like a ‘mirage like’ fictitious fantasy of
modern science, which immediately concludes when there is
a visible sight. For this reason, the science is constantly
changing, that is, continuously do mistakes and correct it,
but not to accept any other’s views, this has become the
destiny of modern science. It is practical, completely
ignores the estimation and Word evidences (other credible
evidence). That’s why it is generating new crisis, not only for
people but for the whole world with imperfect and flawed
findings. This is our views on modern science.
Consideration of Vaidic Science
N
ow we consider the definition of the term 'science'
according to Vaidic ideology-
This word is made from ^fo* iwoZd ^Kk vocks/kus*

verbs of Sanskrit language, which means “a wide variety of
comprehensive and systematic knowledge” is called science.
Maharishi Dayanand writes in a chapter titled ^osnfo”k;* in
Rigvedadi Bhashya Bhoomika-
"Practice deeds, deep meditation or yogsadhana and

knowledge, use them exclusively, realization of things from
the God to the very micro elements of the nature and use
them in the same way." is called science.
In its Sanskrit part, the sentence ^^i`fFkohr`.kekjH;

izd`fri¸;ZUrkuka inkFkkZuka Kkusu ;Fkkonqidkjxzg.ke~** which means "the
real knowledge of macro elements of the universe to the
very micro elements of the nature and use these things for
himself and for other people’s well-being is called science”.
On the other hand, in the booklet Aryoddeshyaratnamala, he
gives the definition of Vidya, which is another name of
science, writes-
“From which the true knowledge from the God to the

earthly elements is known and get benefitted from them as
possible, is called Vidya.”
In these definitions, the knowledge of material

substances as well as the lively substance of entire creation
has also been included in the field of science.
Science and God
H
ere, we would like to say about the subject of
animate substances that the modern science will
always be problematic without including them.
Which is told the fictional philosophical substance by the
modern science, is the root cause of every force, action and
energy of this universe. When the root cause will not be
concerned, then the conclusions of thinking on the
branches will definitely be incomplete. I know that by
talking about animate, the modern scientist will start
craving. For this reason, I am also quoting some well-known
scientists here for your satisfaction about the topic of God-
"The more I study science, the more I believe in God."
"I want to know how God created this world. I am not

interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of
this or that element. I want to know his thoughts."
(Albert Einstein)
“Those who say that the study of science makes a man an

atheist must be rather silly.”
(Max Born)
“If you study science deep enough and long enough, it will
force you to believe in God.”
(Lord William Kelvin)
“In the absence of any other proof, the thumb alone would
convince me of God’s existence.”
(Sir Isaac Newton)
“Both religion and science require a belief in God. For
believers, God is in the beginning, and for physicists He is at
the end of all considerations.”
(Max Planck)
“I have concluded that we are in a world made by rules

created by an intelligence. Believe me, everything that we
call chance today won’t make sense anymore. To me it is
clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that
were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by
chance.”
(Michio Kaku)
“Little science takes you away from God but more of it

takes you to Him.”
(Louis Pasteur)
“If we need an atheist for a debate, we go to the philosophy

department. The physics department isn’t much use.”
(Robert Griffiths)
“An equation for me has no meaning unless it expresses a

thought of God.”
(Srinivasa Ramanujam)
[Source of all - Web]
I think that, after all these evidences, it will take

decades to accept it with wisdom. For this reason, I also limit
my article to the material substances here. However, I will
advise to read my book 'Ved Vigyan-Alok' for this. Albert
Einstein was eager to understand the functioning of God,
if he were today, I would explain the mechanism of God in
a scientific way. If a scientist wishes to understand this
subject like Einstein, then I am ready for it.
Method of Vaidic Science
H
ere, Maharishi Dayanand explains three means of
true knowledge (science). Which are-
(1) karma, (2) knowledge, (3) deep meditation or

yogsadhana
Of these, the use of observation, test, experiment etc.
by modern science, can be considered under the Karma- first
mean told by Maharishi. These works of the modern science
are fair, but incompatibility with this method is that there is
no place for knowledge and deep meditation or yogsadhana.
Here we can take the meaning of knowledge from logic,
intuition and Word evidences (other credible evidence).
Maharishi Yask called the logic as Rishi and the intuition
as Brahma. Neglecting this, experiments, observations etc.
can never result in undoubted results. Nobody can become
a scientist without it. We, Vedic philosopher or scientist
believe direct, estimate and Word evidences (other credible
evidence), these three evidences as the basis of truth. If any
scientist ridicules it, I would like to tell them that your
experiment and observation are forms of direct evidence.
You experiment in one place and estimates about the whole
universe. No scientist can observe the entire universe and
can’t experiment everywhere but apply the same
conclusions everywhere. This is called the estimate
(Anuman) evidence in the philosophical language. You saw
the redshift and CMB, it was direct but assumed the reason
that space is expanding, and the Big Band had happened. It
was your estimate evidence not direct evidence. Then how
can you be considered as positivist? No research is possible
without the estimate evidence, yes you must have missed
something in the estimate evidence that you estimated the
space expansion and Big Bang. If you had used the
appropriate logic, intuition and meditation, then the
conclusions were different. Real logic and intuition are the
forms of this evidence. This evidence is the most
comprehensive and important. Without it, it is not possible
to survive for philosophy and modern physics.
Mathematical interpretations are also forms of estimate
evidence. Where the experiment and observation are not
possible, the estimate evidence becomes the basis of
knowledge. Yes, it is remarkable that the insights of Siddha
Yogis (Rishis) represent both the direct and the estimated
areas. Modern scientists analyze the mysteries of the
universe based on the information of different waves
derived from the scientific experiments. They can analyze
the molecules, particles or waves through those waves,
which are macro than those waves. But when they want to
analyze waves subtler than that observed wave, at this
place the modern physics becomes helpless. This is the
reason why the modern physics doesn’t know anything
about the structure of photons, quarks, gravitons, space etc.
The Vaidic evidence is also very important in Vaidic

view. Why anyone would accept God-inspired Vedas and
the great Maharishis as evidence if he has no faith in them?
For this reason, it is necessary to proceed in this subject
gradually. There is also need of intuition, logic, meditation
or yogsadhana etc. Nobody can become a scientist in their
absence. As far as Word evidences (other credible evidence)
is concerned, the modern scientists often use established
scientific beliefs as a Word evidences (other credible
evidence). Just as the Planck constants, the Heisenberg's
uncertainty principle, Einstein's theory of relativity etc. are
presented as evidence, then to tell the evidence of the
ancient sages and Vedas to be fictitious, is not the identity
of foreign intellectual slavery? It is reasonable to be
spontaneously not considered anything as an evidence, but
it is not fair to deny a standard principle without any reason
or logic. Now, discuss the final mean - deep meditation or
yogsadhana. The point of deep meditation or yogsadhana to
the modern scientists is superstitious or imaginary, but
when they discuss the scientific existence and nature of God
with us, they would seem to have lost their illusions. When
all the paths of true science are closed, or they are proven
inadequate, then through God’s meditation and yoga
practice (upasana), Rishis or yogis used to get true
scientific knowledge by applying their Manh (eu%)
Rashmies to the microscopic waves up to very huge
galaxies. This science was often doubtless. An error is
possible in these physical instruments, but the science of
Rishis often doubtless but it is necessary that the person is a
yogi, and not in the present name, he is going to act in the
name of yoga. Unfortunately, in the present age, no yogi is
being seen or heard in this world. It is important to note
that the scientific truth, which is experimented and observed
through the available technical limits with the help of vaidic
science’s logic, intuition is full evident.
Thus, it is clear that the definition of science given by

Maharishi Dayanand is very broad and systematic than the
modern definition. The modern scientists should consider
this, not to be restricted to the boundaries of their definitions
and experiments, observations, tests and mathematics, and
to urge others to be tied to this method. If we cannot adopt
any other method, then we should not urge the researcher of
another method to follow our method. I would like to end it
by giving an example-
One Goal, Many Ways
C
urrently the Allopathy system of medicine is the most
comprehensive in the world. While Ayurveda was
the universal method in ancient time. The
fundamental principle, the medical process and the
methodology also differ substantially in both the methods.
Even so, both the methods make the patient healthy.
Ayurveda, not Allopathy is successful in many incurable
and chronic diseases. I have seen many Allopathic doctors
wandering for Ayurvedic and Naturopathy doctors for their
treatment. In such a case, if the Allopathy doctor examines
the Ayurvedic doctor's method with his own way, will it not
be wrong?
In addition to these two, homeopathy, which is also

slightly different from Ayurveda and Naturopathy, is able to
remove the disease without any medicines. There is no link
of these with the Allopathy. Even in such a situation, all
these methods are prevalent in the world and are providing
health to the human from their level and the Govt. is
supporting all these methods. Then why the condition of
getting the certificate of authenticity from modern scientists,
writing articles in the style of modern physics, who is also
suffering from many problems, is proposed to the
researchers of different genres, Vedic researchers? Why
cannot the examination of Vedic science be done by serious
communication with us and knowing the logicality of our
thoughts and views regarding the solution of the serious
problems of modern physics? Otherwise, can the Indian
government not operate a separate department like
Ayurveda for research on our Vedic science? Although the
method may be many, but the body is one for everyone,
that’s why all the methods are being used successfully.
Similarly, the methods are separate, but the universe is
same for both of us. If the results are logical from both the
modern physics and the Vedic physics, then why should
not the nation and the world get more pure and
comprehensive science and the harmless technical science
through mutual cooperation and dialogue?
Form of Vaidic Science
T
hose who ask for the evidences of experiments, tests
and mathematics from me, then they should first
prove the above quoted scientists unscientific, if they
can’t, then I present the views of well-known scientist
Richard Feynman-
‘‘There are theoretical physicists who imagine, deduce and

guess at new laws, but do not experiment, and there is
experimental physicist who experiment, imagine, deduce and
guess.’’
I am giving you such a theory that explains the
creation in a completely logical and orderly manner, as all
of your experiments, observation and mathematics can’t
do. I am telling you the path of research for a century,
which will continue to show the path to theoretical
physics, then you, all the experimental physicist and
mathematicians in the world, try to develop the
appropriate mathematics for my theory, and start a series
of experiments and tests, I'll be with you.
When you can experiment the imagination of Higgs
Boson by Peter Higgs and the Einstein's Gravitational waves
for decades with patience and faith, then why no one is
willing to do anything or consider the great science of the
ancient sages. I will give you far more or hundreds of
logical ideas than Peter Higgs or Einstein, which can
rejuvenate your theoretical physics. Yes, if you don’t find
our Vedic science logical, then give up, but it will also be
examined only when you and we sit together and start
communicating mutually.
Here the blind devotees of the modern science who
says to me as orthodox, “what the people of Vedas have
done?” First do something and then comment on the
modern science. "I would like to say to all those that I don’t
want to talk about the whole world. When we talk about our
country, modern scientists get all the resources from the
taxes of citizens, who is helping the Vedic scholars? Then
they expect us to do all this, is not fair. Let me clarify that
what direction the scientist can get after the expenditure of
billions-trillion dollars in the CERN, the world's largest
laboratory, my text 'Ved Vigyan-Alok' is able to give more
than that. If someone doesn’t believe, then read, and if he
doesn’t understand, then discuss with us. What more can I
say? Just they should tell that what special achievement did
CERN received in the last 50 years?
Problems of Modern Science
and Solutions
F
riends! You are unaware that the modern theoretical
physics is going through a serious crisis today. This
can be seen on the CERN website itself-
…without new discoveries it’s hard to keep a younger generation

interested: “If both the LHC and the upcoming cosmological
surveys find no new physics, it will be difficult to motivate new
theorists. If you don't know where to go or what to look for, it's
hard to see in which direction your research should go and which
ideas you should explore.” …
(In Theory: Is theoretical physics in crisis? Posted by Harriet Kim Jarlett on 18 May
2016.)
Other scientists sadly write about this-

"All of the theoretical work that's been done since the
1970s has not produced a single successful prediction," says Neil
Turok, Director of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical
Physics in Waterloo, Canada
Hossenfelder argues that many physicists working
today have been led astray by mathematics — seduced by
equations that might be "beautiful" or "elegant”, but which
lack obvious connection to the real world.
"I can't believe what this once-venerable profession has

become," she writes. "Theoretical physicists used to explain what
was observed. Now they try to explain why they can't explain
what was not observed. And they're not even good at that."
(https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/why-some-scientists-say-physics-
has-gone-rails-ncna879346)
It is clear through all these examples that scientists
themselves accepts that there is a huge crisis before them.
They are not finding anything new. All the paths seem
blocked. Now think that in such a situation if we give a
logical and systematic Vedic theory to move you from this
crisis, should you refute it by referring to the difference in
the systems? Or with our help, you should try to overcome
problems of modern physics. Just think, if a patient is not
getting healthy from Allopathy then will you stop him
from taking the medicine of Ayurveda and Naturopathy,
because you have differences with these methods. You can
accept the death of the patient, but not the treatment by
different method, that is, the problems of the universe
remain unsolved, but the aid of Vedic Theory is not
accepted. Various fictional theories based on the
mathematics and experiments are scientific, but our strong
logical theory is not accepted. If we ask questions on
modern physics, then you can’t answer, and don’t listen to
our Vedic theories, then how will you ask the question on
that? This is what I give the name of orthodoxy. This
orthodoxy was once adopted by the Pope towards scientists
such as the Galileo and Bruno, then those scientists had told
the Pope: "Today, whether you accept our words or not, but
your future generation will not believe in the Bible and will
accept our science." This thing is proving true today.
My scientist friends! I am also advising you that you
should not become a Pope of the scientific world today.
Whether you believe today or not, your generation will be
forced to come towards our Vedic science, yes, by then you
will have spent trillions of dollars of the world. And based
on incomplete physics, you will have destructed the
environment and soil by technology that staying here will
be very painful or impossible. For this reason, my advice is
that as soon as you accept my words, it will be better for
the humanity. I would say to you that you should aware me
about the problems of theoretical physics that you can’t
solve, explain them to me what problems they are? Then I
will take some time to try to give solutions to those problems
through my theory, but you should not expect me to have
mathematics and experiments in that solution. I will only try
to give solution in a pure logical and systematic manner.
You should try to do the work of mathematics and
experiments and then we and you will try to solve the
problems of modern physics. For example, you say that the
gravity is not really any force but due to mass, space curves
and gives way to any particle or quanta. Now I will ask
why mass or charge curve the space? What is its
mechanism? Then you can’t answer it, then ask me, I will
explain your general relativity through Vaidic method.
Where there will also be gravitation force, space curvature,
also systematic and logical structure of space and the proper
mechanism of curvature of space by mass and charge. Along
with this, there will also be a scientific explanation of
Graviton, Mass and Charge, also the structure of Graviton.
Now tell me what I have taken from you, while I am ready
to give you so many information that you could hardly get
in next 50 years. For this reason, I will request not only the
scientists of the world, but all the responsible persons, that
they should think over these ideas with absolute neutrality,
this will be beneficial for whole humanity. I want to tell you
for your concern that when the Nobel prize was announced
to the 3 American scientists for the discovery of gravitational
waves on 3 October 2017, then I asked 9 questions on this
research to the Chairman, Nobel Foundation, the three-
winner scientist, NASA, CERN's Physics Department, top 40
universities of 27 countries of the world, all Physics Research
Centers in India, all Central Universities and Physics
Departments of IITs. I also promised to give the answers to
those questions through Vaidic physics, but often there is a
neglect in everyone. Nobel prize winner Kip Thorne written
me-
“Unfortunately, I am so overwhelmed that I am unable

to answer questions at this time - and most likely not until
2018.”
NASA wrote a letter but avoided answering my

questions. Some Indian professors also responded with same
avoiding nature, but from nowhere such a curiosity has seen
that what does Vaidic science answer to those unanswered
questions? In fact, this is just an arrogance of modern
scientists on their scientific nature and its method. They
should avoid this arrogance, then they will be able to give
something new to the world by taking modern physics out
form the crisis. I have recently sent 100 questions to all these
scientific institutions, but they are often all silent.
Yes, it is satisfying that some young researchers and

junior professors are interested in our work and are eager to
work with us. It is also good that in the rule of Modi Govt.,
some work is being done in the field of Sanskrit language,
ancient Vaidic literature and Sanskrit literature in some of
the Indian universities and IIT’s. In other countries like
America, England, Germany etc. attempts are being made in
the research of Vaidic literature, ancient Indian Sanskrit
language. But I find that this entire work is confined to
technical knowledge only. Some noblemen think science as
only technical knowledge, and theoretical field is ignored,
while it is the root of whole science. That’s why the focus
of the world is not towards the research and study of
whole Vedas, Brahmanical texts etc. I would also like to
state that the study of these are not possible on the basis of
Sanskrit language and grammar. As long as noblemen
having scientific intellect don’t understand the manner and
meaning of these great texts with the meditation and grace
of God, it will be difficult to understand these texts in the
same way as only being a scholar of English language a
person can’t become a scientist by reading books, unless he
has focus on the tradition and manners of science. Because of
this, the persons working in this field should be especially
careful.
Those noblemen, who considers that I am talking only

imaginary things, because unfortunately almost all the
Sadhus do meaningless things, then I am citing those 100
questions here-
1. What is the initial state of universe?
String Theory
2. What are strings?
3. Are they eternal entities?
4. If not, then from which are they made?
5. Are they have mass?
6. If the strings are the vibrating entities, then in which
medium they vibrate?
7. What is the source of their energy?
8. What are the Branes?
9. What is their structure?
10. Are they eternal?
11. If not, then how are they made?
Ekypyrotic Universe
12. What is the mechanism of Branes collision?
13. Which field is responsible for attraction and repulsion of
Branes?
14. This is a cyclic process, then will there not be any
depletion of energy in this process? If yes, then this cycle
will end in future and it must had started in past.
15. Then, what is the reason of that beginning? If there were
mass and charge already in them, then why universe not
be created by itself? Why the collision is needed?
Big Bounce
16. When universe collapsed completely due to gravity, then
which force is responsible for Big bang or Big bounce?
How did this force originate?
17. Did time cease to zero at Big Bounce?
18. If yes, how did it start again?
19. What was the form of matter at that time?
Cyclic Universe
20. What is the cause of very first Big Bang?
21. How will compression start after the completion of
expansion, when gravitational force is not predominant?
22. How the kinetic energy is continuously increasing in
successive evolution of the universe? Was kinetic energy
zero in the beginning?
Bubble Universe
23. What is the difference between negative and positive
energy?
24. What is the mechanism of formation of negative and
positive energy from nothing?
25. How does the Laws of Physics originate?
Big Bang Theory

26. What was the form of matter before Big bang? How did
that matter form?
27. Which force infinitely condensed that material? What
was the source of that force?
28. How is it possible to have any type of exchange process
in zero volume?
29. Modern science considers the exchange of certain
mediator particles for the cause of all the fundamental
forces, then which particles were exchanged in that
infinitely dense material?
30. Which energy or force is responsible to do that great
explosion, even in the presence of such a most strong
force?
31. What are causes the inflation?
32. If inflation is due to anti-gravity, then what causes
gravity to act as anti-gravity?
33. When and how inflation field created and what is its
source?
34. How does symmetry break and what is its cause?
35. Is there any other force in universe responsible for
symmetry breaking?
36. What is the mechanism of separation of four
fundamental forces?
37. How did they originate?
38. In which form, energy was present before 10-43 second?
39. If it was in the form of photons, then electromagnetic
force must be present
at that time, but no one accept this, why?
40. Gravitational force is produced firstly from unified force,
while Einstein proposed that gravitational force is not a
force but only curvature of space-time, then what
exactly is gravitational force?
Time
41. What is time?
42. How does time originate?
43. How does it begin at the time of Big Bang?
44. Is the time an illusion or some real entity?
45. What is its role in the universe?
46. What we mean by negative and zero time?
47. Unless we know its true nature, how can we say that it
will be negative or zero?
Space
48. What is space?
49. What is its role in the universe?
50. Scientists consider and show space like a sheet or net, but
nobody knows what really its structure is?
51. What is the mechanism of its formation?
52. Is space a real thing, which bends by a massive object, in
which ripples are produced and which expands and
distorts?
53. What are its contents?
54. Why does space interact with massive and charged
objects?
55. What is the relation between space and mass/charge?
56. Is there availability of mass and charge in space?
57. We talk of space-time singularity but what is relation
between space and time and why?
58. If space is an imaginary thing, then its expansion,
distortion, bending and singularity also should be
imaginary, then how can we understand the real world
by imaginary things?
Red Shift and CMB

59. Are the EM waves are attached with space?
60. If yes then wave will not have its own speed, but it will
travel with the speed of space, which will be Hubble
speed in present time.
61. At the time of Big Bang, all energy will travel with space
(10 28 m/s). Then, how can energy be condensed to
form the celestial bodies?
62. Are all celestial bodies and particles also attached with
space? If yes, then they will never combine with one
another and they will travel with speed of space only.
63. If EM wave isn't attached with space, then what is the
cause of redshift?
64. Expansion of space can only affect waves not molecules,
atoms etc., why?
65. Why expansion of space can only affect galaxies and not
the stars, planets & satellites?
66. CMB radiation, which was released before 13 Billion
years, then how can it be received by us now, while
universe is expanding with an accelerated rate?
67. If this radiation is continuously received by us, then its
temperature cannot be same everywhere in the universe.
Elementary Particles
68. How do Graviton or other mediator particles form?
69. How do Photons and elementary particles form in the
primary stage of the universe?
70. What is their structure?
71. Why Gravitation force is weakest force?
Mass
72. What exactly the Mass is?
73. How does property of Mass originate?
74. If answer is Higgs field, then what is the cause of mass of
its’ quanta (Higgs Boson ~125 GeV/c 2)?
75. If we say that this mass is created from energy at the time
of Big Bang, then question arises that if a very massive
particle (Higgs boson) can be produced by that energy,
then why an electron of exceedingly small mass can’t be
produced from that energy?
Charge
76. What is the fundamental cause of showing property of
charge by matter?
77. If it is created from energy (pair production), then does it
not mean that photon has same content as of electron
and positron?
78. What are those fundamental entities, from which
property of charge originates?
79. What is the link between energy and charge?
80. If Peter Higgs imagined Higgs field for fundamental
property like mass, then why I should not imagine
another field for fundamental property like electric
charge?
81. Also, for different types of charge (color charge…), there
should be different types of field. Will you accept it?
82. What is the difference between the contents of opposite
charged particles?
83. Why do virtual photons exchange between the charges,
when these are massless and have no electric charge?
84. Why these photons cannot be seen or detected?
85. Why they exist for a short time?
86. Which force is responsible for this exchange?
87. What does an electric field consist of?
88. How charged particle creates an electric field?
89. What is the form of vacuum energy and how does it
originate?
90. What is the mechanism of origin of field particle from
vacuum energy?
91. What is the mechanism of attraction of two opposite
charged particles through the exchange of field
particles?
Energy and Dark Energy

92. What is energy?
93. How does it originate?
94. How does mass originate from energy?
95. What is its’ mechanism?
96. What is the mechanism of transformation of one form of
energy to another?
97. What is the dark matter and how & from which is it
made?
98. What is the dark energy and how does it create?
99. What is the relation between dark matter and dark
energy?
100. What is the mechanism of holding the stars in any
galaxy by their galactic center?
Readers are requested to think over these questions

sufficiently. Ask your scientist friends in India or abroad, if
you find answers then inform me. I will be grateful to you
and them for this. If answers are not found then I will eager
to answer these questions, which are very difficult but not
related to any misconception of modern science, in any
conference.
Hope that the reader and the people responsible for
the country and the world will think logically in this
direction and work together in the real welfare of the
country and the world.
-Acharya Agnivrat Naishthik
Polite Request
Dear readers! we hope that you have understood the

research and the importance of Acharyaji. If your heart and
mind are excited for this unique research of the Vedas and
you want to help us, then you can become a partner in our
yagya as follows:
1. By donating minimum of Rs. 12,000/- per annum or

minimum one lakh rupees one time and you can become
Associate patrons of our trust. You will be invited as
special guest in trust's annual meeting, which often
happens on the occasion of the annual summit.
2. By donating a minimum of Rs 6,000/- per annum or at

least Rs 50,000/- one time and you can become Specially
invited member. You will also be invited as special guest
on the occasion of the annual meeting.
3. By donating a minimum of Rs. 1,000/- per annum or one

hundred per month continuously and you can be an
Associate member.
Note- All above mentioned members will be sent an annual

audit report of the trust by C.A. Those noblemen, who can
not donate themselves, they can join at least 8 other
members etc. by motivating others and become free
members of the same category or Associate Patrons.
4. Old intellectual scholars, sannyasis, sages, great scientist,

other noblemen can give their blessings and intellectual
support.
5. Students, farmers, workers, traders etc. can cooperate in
accordance with their sacred devotion and strength.
Special Request
This is Very Holy work, so according to the emotions of

Acharyaji we are not able to accept the donations from the
people whose live is related to any of this profession like-
Smuggling, Violence, theft, sexuality enhancer products,
selling of intoxication products, Betrayal, Exploitation etc.
Yes, anyone who want to join us by leaving these
professions, then we will welcome them.
Please draw your Check/Draft/Money Order etc. in the

name of Pramukh, Shri Vaidic Swasti Pantha Nyas, PAN
No. AAATV7229A.
OR
You can donate us in these bank accounts but after
that you must inform us as soon as possible, so that we can
send you a receipt of the donation made by you.
Note- Donations made to the trust is non-taxable under the

Indian Income Tax Act, section 80G
Donations now accepted through BHIM/UPI also
UPI Address shrivspnyas@upi
Recent Development on Cosmology, BHU 2018
Modern Physics appears to be incomplete,
helpless and entangled in many conflicts.
It's my aim to support that helpless,
incomplete modern Physics.
-Acharya Agnivrat Naishthik
/vaidicphysics www.vaidicphysics.org

What Is Science

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What Is Science

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

What Is Science

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is Science?

Acharya Agnivrat Naishthik

Well known Astrophysicist Prof. A.K.Mitra and A.R.Rao inaugurating

We want to understand every process of creation

All well-known scientists have believed that there is a

Acharyaji, through this booklet, has done the task of

With this hope

At first, we consider the definition of science from the

"The ongoing search for knowledge about the

“Knowledge ascertained by observation and

On the other hand, according to the oxford advanced

From all these definitions it is clear that the

Today, there is no one who can talk about the sciences

Dear readers! First, I would like to examine the

The well-known British physicist Stephen Hawking's

“Any physical theory is always provisional in the sense that

The same thing is written by the well-known

“No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a

The writer of this book writes at page 21 quoting Karl

Here also, it’s a question mark on the ambiguity of

“One might have thought that there is no real danger here

See Sir Albert Einstein view again:

A theory can be proved by experiment, but no path

“But mathematical definitions can never work in the real

He told further then that-

“I love nature, and I hate mathematics.” and

“Some things that satisfy the rules of algebra can be

On the other side, well-known physicist Sir Albert

“As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality,

“I don’t believe in mathematics.”

Bernoulli says about the mathematics that-

“The true logic of the world is in the calculus of

Feynman accepts it clearly-

“We do not yet know all basic laws. There is an expanding

Let’s see a quaint trait of modern science-

Here Hawking himself is not only accepting the

Dear readers! Should I write the articles and get

There has never been any attention of any scientist

Now I examine the experiment process of modern

Today, if I say that Dhananjay Vayu Rashmies travel

“Instead of finding evidence to support the accelerated

I give another example - All the world's scientific

This word is made from ^fo* iwoZd ^Kk vocks/kus*

"Practice deeds, deep meditation or yogsadhana and

In its Sanskrit part, the sentence ^^i`fFkohr`.kekjH;

“From which the true knowledge from the God to the

In these definitions, the knowledge of material

"The more I study science, the more I believe in God."

"I want to know how God created this world. I am not

“Those who say that the study of science makes a man an

“I have concluded that we are in a world made by rules

“Little science takes you away from God but more of it

“If we need an atheist for a debate, we go to the philosophy

“An equation for me has no meaning unless it expresses a

[Source of all - Web]

I think that, after all these evidences, it will take

(1) karma, (2) knowledge, (3) deep meditation or

The Vaidic evidence is also very important in Vaidic

Thus, it is clear that the definition of science given by