All my life, I pursued knowledge of the foundation of existence. Physics (which I totally love and respect) does the same, but I looked to Vedic Knowledge for a fuller and deeper understanding. I see physics and Vedic Knowledge ultimately, as seamlessly merged, but with very different approaches. We could say that physics is a subset of Veda. To even begin to understand Vedic Knowledge, it is essential to understand cognition. It is quite natural to identify with one paradigm (for example, physics) or another. However in a larger sense, I view Vedic Knowledge as the vessel that holds all paradigms, yet is dedicated (or lost) to none. Nature (the Tao) is not lost to any paradigm, but lies beyond the reach of them all. Its foundation is transcendental, Ishwara.
I share your deep interest in the foundations of existence, but Vedism (Vedanta) differs from Taoism in its human origins and fundamental assumptions and suggested practices. Your post makes it look like Taoism is a part of “Vedic Knowledge.” This seems likely to be confusing to readers.