user11541: Science is not part of Buddhas teachings but the teachings of Buddha can be adapted into science.
For example : sabbe sanskara annica can be adopted by science (physics especially)
This will translate as : No experiment can be repeated forever. No system can function smoothly forever.
How do you think my small attempt to bring Buddha and science together.  holds ?
Can I adapt Buddha’s teaching into science ?

user11278: Buddhist teachings talk about the physics of the mind, and mind's interpretation of matter. So, its natural to draw parallels between branches of physics and Buddhism. But, there is a significant difference between scientific approach and Buddhism. Buddhist teachings are eternal, and non changing, and can be applied to all times (akaliko). However, scientific findings are evolving and changing over time. So, drawing parallels between a changing science and constant Buddhist teachings will leave you confused.
Maybe, when the scientists have concluded their findings where there is nothing more to find or clarify, both science and Buddhism could be looking at similar results.
Broadly, you can look at it this way; science is still a journey, where Buddhism is already at the destination.

user254: Can I adapt Buddha’s teaching into science ?
I had quite a lot of education in physics, at school, and I think that perhaps you should not.
I think that the Buddha's teaching has almost nothing to say about the speed of light, about electro-magnetism, aero-dynamics, materials science, microelectronics, or anything else that's the usual kind of subject of modern physics.
I fear that claiming that Buddha’s teaching anticipates modern physics might be a discreditable claim, and therefore even risks inviting discredit on the teaching itself (as well as being not very good as physics).
I think that the subject and purpose of the teaching is other than physics.
How do you think my small attempt to bring Buddha and science together holds ?
Well ... science does consider it important whether "an experiment is repeatable", so your attempt sounds relevant.
I'm not sure anyone claims that an experiment is "repeatable forever", I think that physics predicts that the whole universe (or at least every discernable "thing" in it) will end eventually (one way or another).

11541: <p>Science is not part of Buddhas teachings but the teachings of Buddha can be adapted into science.</p>
<p>For example : sabbe sanskara annica can be adopted by science (physics especially)
This will translate as : No experiment can be repeated forever. No system can function smoothly forever.</p>
<p>How do you think my small attempt to bring Buddha and science together.  holds ?</p>
<p>Can I adapt Buddha’s teaching into science ?</p>
 11278: <p>Buddhist teachings talk about the physics of the mind, and mind's interpretation of matter. So, its natural to draw parallels between branches of physics and Buddhism. But, there is a significant difference between scientific approach and Buddhism. Buddhist teachings are eternal, and non changing, and can be applied to all times (akaliko). However, scientific findings are evolving and changing over time. So, drawing parallels between a changing science and constant Buddhist teachings will leave you confused.</p>
<p>Maybe, when the scientists have concluded their findings where there is nothing more to find or clarify, both science and Buddhism could be looking at similar results.</p>
<p>Broadly, you can look at it this way; science is still a journey, where Buddhism is already at the destination.</p>
 254: <p><strong>Can I adapt Buddha’s teaching into science ?</strong></p>
<p>I had quite a lot of education in physics, at school, and I think that perhaps you should not.</p>
<p>I think that the Buddha's teaching has almost nothing to say about the speed of light, about electro-magnetism, aero-dynamics, materials science, microelectronics, or anything else that's the usual kind of subject of modern physics.</p>
<p>I fear that claiming that Buddha’s teaching anticipates modern physics might be a discreditable claim, and therefore even risks inviting discredit on the teaching itself (as well as being <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong#History_of_the_expression" rel="nofollow noreferrer">not very good as physics</a>).</p>
<p>I think that the subject and purpose of the teaching is other than physics.</p>
<p><strong>How do you think my small attempt to bring Buddha and science together holds ?</strong></p>
<p>Well ... science does consider it important whether &quot;an experiment is repeatable&quot;, so your attempt sounds relevant.</p>
<p>I'm not sure anyone claims that an experiment is &quot;repeatable forever&quot;, I think that physics predicts that the whole universe (or at least every discernable &quot;thing&quot; in it) will end eventually (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_death_of_the_universe#Current_status" rel="nofollow noreferrer">one way or another</a>).</p>
