5 Mind-Bending Ideas from a New Theory of Physics That Ancient Sages Understood 3,000 Years Ago

 J. Rogers, SE Ohio

Introduction: The Bedrock of Reality Isn't What You Think

We're taught to think of the universe as a grand machine governed by fixed, immutable laws and fundamental constants. The speed of light, the force of gravity, the Planck constant—these are the bedrock numbers of reality, hardwired into the fabric of spacetime.

But what if the most fundamental constants of nature aren't properties of the universe at all, but artifacts of how we choose to measure it? A new framework demonstrates exactly that, unifying the cutting-edge language of modern mathematical physics with the profound insights of ancient Vedantic philosophy. This work reveals that for millennia, sages were describing the literal structure of physical law, but we lacked the mathematical tools to translate their work.

This article explores the five most surprising and impactful takeaways from this radical new perspective on reality—a perspective that recasts the very nature of law, measurement, and the observer.

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

1. "Fundamental Constants" Are Not Fundamental at All

In conventional physics, constants like c (the speed of light), G (the gravitational constant), and h (Planck's constant) are considered untouchable. They are fundamental properties of our universe, and if they were even slightly different, reality as we know it would not exist.

This new framework demonstrates the opposite: these numbers are not properties of nature, but "cocycle data" or "connection coefficients." They are translation keys—mathematical glue required to make our human-invented systems of measurement (meters, seconds, kilograms) remain consistent with each other. The constants emerge from our choice of coordinates, not from the universe itself.

This idea reframes the entire science of metrology. It's no longer a supporting discipline that helps us find the "true" values of nature's numbers. Instead, metrology becomes the very foundation that structures physical law. The act of measuring doesn't just reveal reality; it shapes the form in which reality can appear.

Constants are artifacts of the measurement bundle—not properties of nature, but glue for projection coherence.

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

2. All Physical Laws Are Just Simple Rotations in Disguise

We look at complex formulas like those for black hole temperature and see deep, intricate relationships. But what if that complexity is an illusion created by our own skewed perspective?

This framework posits that at the most fundamental level—a "dimensionless substrate"—all physical relationships are simple proportionalities. The complexity arises from a process called "basis rotation." When a simple, coordinate-free proportionality (like Temperature being inversely proportional to Mass, T ~ 1/M) is projected onto our "misaligned" system of human units, it appears complicated.

It's like trying to describe a perfect circle using only the squares on a sheet of graph paper. Your resulting formula would be a complex approximation involving π. The complexity isn't in the circle itself; it's an artifact of your chosen (and misaligned) measurement system.

For example, the simple relationship T ~ 1/M becomes the famous Hawking temperature formula: T = c³h/(GM k_B). The constants are not revealing a deep physical complexity. They are merely the "Jacobian bookkeeping" required to translate a simple rotation between the measurement axis of Mass and the measurement axis of Temperature within our chosen coordinates. The complexity of the coordinate expression reflects only a basis misalignment.

We mistake coordinate artifacts for deep laws. A formula like T = c³h/(GM k_B) seems profound—but the actual relation T ~ 1/M is trivial in the substrate.

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

3. The Ancient Sanskrit Word for "Illusion" Actually Meant "Measurement"

The Sanskrit term maya (माया) is almost always translated as "illusion" or the grand cosmic trick that makes us see a world of separate things. This new analysis reveals this to be a profound mistranslation.

The paper presents a decisive etymological argument: maya derives from the Sanskrit root mā (माति), which means "to measure, to mark out, to delimit." This is not a matter of interpretation. "ya" is the Sanskrit word for process.  Sanskrit lexicons are unambiguous: the root mā concerns the act of measurement, demarcation, and the establishment of boundaries. Therefore, maya is not illusion; it is the process of measurement. The ancient Vedantic philosophers were not mystics describing a dream world; they were technicians describing how the act of measurement creates the appearance of a multifaceted world from an underlying, unified reality, where, as the Chandogya Upanishad states, "Modification is merely verbal designation, a name."

The parallel between the Vedantic framework and the new physical framework is not an analogy; it is a structural identity.

Vedantic Concept	Modern Physics Concept	Mathematical Structure
Brahman (The One)	The dimensionless substrate	Dimensionless relational manifold
Maya (The act of measuring)	The projection process	Fibration π : 𝓔 → 𝓑
Nama-rupa (Name and form)	Coordinate systems (units)	Coordinate charts (SI, Planck)
Jagat (The manifest world)	The world of measured quantities	Objects in the total category 𝓔

This is not metaphor. This is not mysticism. This is technical description of how measurement structures observation.

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

4. "Ignorance" Is Simply Mistaking the Map for the Territory

In Vedanta, Avidya (अविद्या) is often translated as "ignorance," implying a spiritual failing. The source, however, provides a precise, technical definition: Avidya is the act of "mistaking the coordinate-dependent for the coordinate-free."

This is exactly what happens in standard physics education. Students are taught that Mass, Length, and Time are fundamentally different kinds of things, or that the speed of light c is an intrinsic property of the universe rather than a conversion factor for our specific spacetime coordinates. This is Avidya. It is mistaking the map (our measurement system) for the territory (the underlying substrate).

The opposite is Vidya (विद्या), or true knowledge. In this context, Vidya is the recognition that our measurements are projections and that constants are merely artifacts of our chosen coordinates. It is the ability to see the simple, coordinate-free reality behind our complex, coordinate-dependent formulas. It is "coordinate liberation."

This leads to the ultimate goal in both frameworks: Moksha (मोक्ष), or liberation. This is not a mystical escape from the world, but a precise cognitive state: direct knowledge of the substrate without the mediation of measurement coordinates. It means understanding that while we must use coordinates to function, they are conventional tools, not ontological truths. As the source states, "The liberated state is coordinate-awareness, not coordinate-elimination."

The "ignorance" is not moral failing—it's mistaking coordinate artifacts for ontological reality.

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

5. The Observer Doesn't Just See Reality—They Structure Its Form

Quantum mechanics introduced the "observer effect," but this framework takes the observer's role to its logical conclusion. The observer is not a passive witness who disturbs reality by looking; they are an active participant who constructs the visible form of physical laws.

An observer does this by selecting a "fibered view" of reality. This involves choosing:

1. A conceptual decomposition (the measurement axes).
2. A unit scheme (the coordinate chart, like SI units or Planck units).

This act collapses the simple, unified substrate into the complex world of physical laws we perceive. This mirrors the Vedantic concept of the jiva (the individual observer), which is the unified substrate (Brahman) viewing itself through a unique set of self-imposed measurement constraints (maya).

The ancient Vedantic sages provided a concrete example of this conceptual decomposition through the three gunas: Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas. Far from being mystical qualities, these can be understood as the fundamental basis vectors of measurement space. Sattva represents the axis of information and order; Rajas represents the axis of energy and transformation; and Tamas represents the axis of mass and inertia. Every measured object is a position in this measurement space, a projection onto these observer-chosen axes.

This framework recasts "the observer not as a nuisance, but as the constructor of law’s visible form."

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

Conclusion: A New Way to Ask Questions

This synthesis of mathematical physics and ancient philosophy reveals a staggering truth: our entire experience of a complex, multifaceted reality emerges from the simple act of measuring a unified, dimensionless substrate. It is the questions we ask with our rulers, clocks, and scales that give reality the form of its answers.

The most powerful conclusion is not that these systems are similar, but that they are the same. Vedantic philosophy solved foundational problems in physics millennia ago, articulating with technical precision the mechanism of reality-construction. We are only now, with tools like category theory, developing the mathematical language to translate their work. They were not speaking in metaphors; they were doing physics.

The ancients were right. Not metaphorically. Literally.

If the world we perceive is a reflection of the questions we ask and the measurements we take, what new realities might we discover if we learn to measure differently?