Logic of Axiomatic Action Potentials ("Guna's") in Philosophy and Physics
Why are the "guna's" originally indistinguishable?

Sarkar once described the spiritual path as a "supreme subjective synthesis". In that respect, science and spirituality may not be very different, only the initial motivation is. In terms of axiomatic guna logic, the two viewpoints are reflected in how the "guna's" (axiomatic action potentials) are distinguished after the onset of auto-genesis.

Sentient- vs. static self-reference ("svabhava") in spiritual philosophy ("Cycle of Creation through the nucleus")
resp. physics ("atom" = "Cycle of Creation around the nucleus")

After the auto-genesis, philosophically speaking, the Trigunatmika or Causal Matrix is perceived as the Creator, and thus as a sentient state or Entity. Therefore in the emerging play of forces, the Trigunatmika re-appears as it's own "sentient" principle, whereas the material world is "static". Quite to the contrary, physically, the Causal Matrix functions as the operative principle of the atomic nucleus, where almost all matter is concentrated, and thus obviously re-appears as it's own static principle, whereas the waves encircling the nucleus are sentient.

These seemingly antithetic viewpoints regarding the identification of the guna's, philosophically resp. physically, are reconciled through the axiomatic theorem that the guna's, rather than being ambivalent, are fundamentally indistinguishable. This primordial phase is called homeomorphic evolution. In other words, the reason why in the primordial phase the guna's are said to be indistinguishable, is that after the auto-genesis, when the guna's cán be distinguished, their distinction depends on the point of view.

This idea transcends the dichotomy between spirituality and physics, merging both in the state of homeomorphic evolution, and this is indeed a "supreme subjective synthesis". It means that the qualifications "sentient" and "static" have no absolute meaning, and this itself lies at the heart of svabhava, the flow of self-reference. Because, after the auto-genesis, the Trigunatmika or Causal Matrix as a whole recurs as either one of it's own guna's, or vice versa for that matter.

An alternative approach to axiomatic guna logic is to investigate the "edge of equilibrium", right on the brink of auto-genesis. It is a "new line of thinking", blending, rather than transcending, the purely philosophical and the physical. This is Sarkar's "Four Chamber" theory (microvita cosmology) "on the boundary of matter and abstract".

In microvita theory, one could say that the "svabhava" or flow of self-reference (Causal Matrix recurrence) is fully implied, that is, built-in the very concept of microvita. In this case, the term "guna's" is not utilized by Sarkar at all.

Either way, the reality of opposing spiritual and physical perceptions is far from trivial. It is probably what triggers the two-edged sword of semantics - the routine of attributing meaning to an ever-changing universe. This condition is known as "Maya" or "illusion".