Right now, I am happy; but is happiness enough?
I am at peace right now; is peace enough?
I have enough to lead a good life and I am sure I will always have enough to lead a appreciably good life; but is this sense of enoughness enough?
What is it that a human really wants, searches for?
Is it a sense of having done something, that is much bigger than his/her existence?
Is it about a sense of achievement? What is achievement? How big is big enough?
Is it finding the so called 'love' and getting busy?
Is it knowing the truth of the universe?
Is it sensual pleasures?
Is it about having done something more meaningful and lasting than his/her mundane struggle to find his/her little space in the crowd?
Is it about the pleasure that comes from giving or more accurately by being the medium through which the giver gives?
The questions can be many. And right now I do not have any answers to offer.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Objective reality
If my observation is coloured by my experiences, then have I ever seen the truth? Can I ever be objective enough to see the truth, because unless I see the universe as it is, how am I supposed to do anything about it? Will I ever be able to see the truth? And is there a singular reality? Is there anything called 'the absolute truth'? Is not the reality that you see is as real as the one that I observe?
I was watching a video which resonated with the ideas expressed in Hindu Mysticism and the profound science of yoga and personal evolution and I tended to like it because of this resonance. Is not this itself a bias? Irrespective of how great and profound this science is, was not my experience coloured because I happened to take birth in a Hindu family, where I got this kind of conditioning, and external environment that I passed through subsequently? Or did I have it all planned and I will-fully took birth in such environment; because it suited my evolutionary needs so I chose the set of circumstances. How am I supposed to know this without doubt?
The mystics say that one has to understand one's experiences, and resolve the unresolved reactions/fruits of our actions to see the objective truth. It is as if things always existed for you to see, but you had turned too insensitive, too busy to observe. Reaching this state, they say, is the first step to be able to see and program the quantum space - the sub-nuclear, the "suxam" (in Sanskrit) realm.
I was watching a video which resonated with the ideas expressed in Hindu Mysticism and the profound science of yoga and personal evolution and I tended to like it because of this resonance. Is not this itself a bias? Irrespective of how great and profound this science is, was not my experience coloured because I happened to take birth in a Hindu family, where I got this kind of conditioning, and external environment that I passed through subsequently? Or did I have it all planned and I will-fully took birth in such environment; because it suited my evolutionary needs so I chose the set of circumstances. How am I supposed to know this without doubt?
The mystics say that one has to understand one's experiences, and resolve the unresolved reactions/fruits of our actions to see the objective truth. It is as if things always existed for you to see, but you had turned too insensitive, too busy to observe. Reaching this state, they say, is the first step to be able to see and program the quantum space - the sub-nuclear, the "suxam" (in Sanskrit) realm.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
David Foster Wallace on Life and Work
Those of you who like thinking about 'what and how to think' and how to get into a conscious habit of doing it will enjoy reading this article.
Though Mr David talks about only the emotional, moral and human aspects of 'thinking' here and not necessarily about problem solving and more action-oriented applications of this 'art', nonetheless it is worth reading and pondering over.
Though Mr David talks about only the emotional, moral and human aspects of 'thinking' here and not necessarily about problem solving and more action-oriented applications of this 'art', nonetheless it is worth reading and pondering over.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Rajat Gupta on India
One of the good podcasts I happened to listen to recently.
Enjoy listening to it here
Enjoy listening to it here
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Save me from folly, vanity and vice !
I was reading Benjamin Franklin's autobiography. It is amazing to see how the man rose from a life of obscurity (born as a son of a candle maker) to one with great accomplishments and influence of epic proportions in so many diverse fields. An experimentalist, a theoretician, an inventor, a scientist,a pulisher, a philosopher, a politician, a revolutionary. Though I am still into the first half of the book, but it is an amazing read. The way Franklin distances himself from his life and describes it is brilliant. Even more brilliant is the wisdom that is interwoven throughout. Among other things , it shows one how to see oneself in a proverbial mirror to have a unbiased view and how to succesfully work your way towards what you want to be. A story of determination, tragedies, heroism and ulimately victory. No doubt, he would have been great in any age, any time. It reinforces my belief that some truths are eternal and some laws will always operate in the universe beyond relativity.
I also like the little prayers that he wrote down for himself. Especially the one --
"O powerful Goodness! bountiful Father! merciful Guide! increase in me that wisdom which discovers my truest interest. strengthen my resolutions to perform what that wisdom dictates. Accept my kind offices to thy other children as the only return in my power for thy continual favors to me."
The lines taken from Thomson's poems are also beautiful and elevating --
"Father of light and life, thou Good Supreme!
O teach me what is good; teach me Thyself!
Save me from folly, vanity, and vice,
From every low pursuit; and fill my soul
With knowledge, conscious peace, and virtue pure;
Sacred, substantial, never-fading bliss!"
I also like the little prayers that he wrote down for himself. Especially the one --
"O powerful Goodness! bountiful Father! merciful Guide! increase in me that wisdom which discovers my truest interest. strengthen my resolutions to perform what that wisdom dictates. Accept my kind offices to thy other children as the only return in my power for thy continual favors to me."
The lines taken from Thomson's poems are also beautiful and elevating --
"Father of light and life, thou Good Supreme!
O teach me what is good; teach me Thyself!
Save me from folly, vanity, and vice,
From every low pursuit; and fill my soul
With knowledge, conscious peace, and virtue pure;
Sacred, substantial, never-fading bliss!"
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Monday, August 13, 2007
Quantum entanglement & the dicey game
"Two entities can stay in instantaneous and sponatanous contact, even if they are largely separated in space and time.And an event with one affects the physical reality of the other in the same way even if they are light years away". Doesn't that sound like a very mystical statement.But what if you were to be told that there is scientific evidence for it (as my bretheren who are primarily driven by intellect love to call it)? This phenomenon is popularly known as Quantum Entanglement in the science community, who is in love or hate (we 'll come to it later) with quantum mechanics.
I studied quantum mechanics in school and college, but I knew it only in its present form, never got into or got the chance and time to get into much of its history.Recently happened to do that and reflect upon that.
In 1981, when a certain french youngman Mr Aspect decided, he wanted to perform experiments, which may prove Einstein wrong, it was met with questioning and ridiculing looks.A certain professor said in a very dark tone, "You are a very courageous graduate student,I have met".Before proceeding, let 's look back into the history.In very simple (layman) terms quantum theory says, "It is not possible to predict the state of a particle with certainty before the measurement is made." The measurement or observation is supposed to give it some kind of jolt and it collapses into a certain state.As the famous Heisenberg uncertainty principle said there 'll always be some uncertainty in the state measuremnt on which he put a lower limit, with his inequality.
Mr Einstein (one of the haters of the theory) was always uncomfortable with the uncertainty thing in quantum theory.He argued, the fact that quantum theory can't predict the outcome of a measurement didn't mean, there is inherent uncertainty in universe, it only meant that the theory was incomplete & there were extra variables. As he once famously said, "God does not play dice with the world." So , the physicist who believed in God, devised a thought experiment with two others, known as the EPR paradox (Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen) to dissaprove the theory.Consider a photon splits into two parts and they travel in opposite direction.Now a observation is made on the one particle, which defines its state.Now with newton laws, the state of the other can be ascertained without making any measurement, which contradicts the Quantum Theory(QT). There was a loophole though. What if the first particale signalled to the other, that a measurement is made? To which Einstein had another solid argument, that it can't happen for according to special theory of relativity, information can't travel faster than light.Since there was not much evidence in 1935, none of the parties could completely knock out the other.
Mr John Bell, (in 1960's) showed that for particles to obey these assumptions they should satisfy certain requirement known as Bell's inequality.
Mr Aspect, the french physicist, conducted the experiments suggested by EPR paradox and showed that the results violated Bell's inequalities, and the other photon came to know of the observation (event) on the first (it knew more than it was supposed to know), proving that quantum theory was valid, which was badly shaken after the EPR paradox.
So, that meant either one or both of the assumptions made by EPR were wrong.The certainty thing or the info can't travel faster than light one.But it was argued later that the inequality violation didn't necessarliy prove that info can be sent faster than light, & the other assumption was also saved referring to some loopholes in the experiment.
Well, all this has very interesting implications. In a way, it violates the concept of local realism i.e. the state of a system is not only decided by its interactions with its immediate surroundings but also by other particles it is entangled with.What if you had a soulmate, that you are entangled with , on this planet going through various circumstances; interesting??? Or even fancier and not a weak possibility, in some other part of the universe?
Another implication can be the mystical notion that all the particles of the universe are instantaneously interconnected and can exchange information. Telepathy can be a possibility.
A few more aplications are quanatum computing( which can be dramatically faster than the existing one) and teleportation.In fact, some quantum teleportation experiments on quantum particles are already performed.
And the very interesting one, "Does God play dice with the world?" I don't have any answer. Truth is very slippery & elusive. Just when you think, you have got hold it, it 'll slip out.On a very quasi-objectve basis, I feel, sometime he does, sometimes doesn't.
Einstein, till his last days was trying to find one unifying theory, that doesn't violate relativity and doesn't imply 'God playing dice'. His befuddlement is really understandable.So, is there a theory that can explain all the mystical, intellectual, quantum & classical phenomena and off course the dice game?
Does He or doesn't He?
;-)
I studied quantum mechanics in school and college, but I knew it only in its present form, never got into or got the chance and time to get into much of its history.Recently happened to do that and reflect upon that.
In 1981, when a certain french youngman Mr Aspect decided, he wanted to perform experiments, which may prove Einstein wrong, it was met with questioning and ridiculing looks.A certain professor said in a very dark tone, "You are a very courageous graduate student,I have met".Before proceeding, let 's look back into the history.In very simple (layman) terms quantum theory says, "It is not possible to predict the state of a particle with certainty before the measurement is made." The measurement or observation is supposed to give it some kind of jolt and it collapses into a certain state.As the famous Heisenberg uncertainty principle said there 'll always be some uncertainty in the state measuremnt on which he put a lower limit, with his inequality.
Mr Einstein (one of the haters of the theory) was always uncomfortable with the uncertainty thing in quantum theory.He argued, the fact that quantum theory can't predict the outcome of a measurement didn't mean, there is inherent uncertainty in universe, it only meant that the theory was incomplete & there were extra variables. As he once famously said, "God does not play dice with the world." So , the physicist who believed in God, devised a thought experiment with two others, known as the EPR paradox (Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen) to dissaprove the theory.Consider a photon splits into two parts and they travel in opposite direction.Now a observation is made on the one particle, which defines its state.Now with newton laws, the state of the other can be ascertained without making any measurement, which contradicts the Quantum Theory(QT). There was a loophole though. What if the first particale signalled to the other, that a measurement is made? To which Einstein had another solid argument, that it can't happen for according to special theory of relativity, information can't travel faster than light.Since there was not much evidence in 1935, none of the parties could completely knock out the other.
Mr John Bell, (in 1960's) showed that for particles to obey these assumptions they should satisfy certain requirement known as Bell's inequality.
Mr Aspect, the french physicist, conducted the experiments suggested by EPR paradox and showed that the results violated Bell's inequalities, and the other photon came to know of the observation (event) on the first (it knew more than it was supposed to know), proving that quantum theory was valid, which was badly shaken after the EPR paradox.
So, that meant either one or both of the assumptions made by EPR were wrong.The certainty thing or the info can't travel faster than light one.But it was argued later that the inequality violation didn't necessarliy prove that info can be sent faster than light, & the other assumption was also saved referring to some loopholes in the experiment.
Well, all this has very interesting implications. In a way, it violates the concept of local realism i.e. the state of a system is not only decided by its interactions with its immediate surroundings but also by other particles it is entangled with.What if you had a soulmate, that you are entangled with , on this planet going through various circumstances; interesting??? Or even fancier and not a weak possibility, in some other part of the universe?
Another implication can be the mystical notion that all the particles of the universe are instantaneously interconnected and can exchange information. Telepathy can be a possibility.
A few more aplications are quanatum computing( which can be dramatically faster than the existing one) and teleportation.In fact, some quantum teleportation experiments on quantum particles are already performed.
And the very interesting one, "Does God play dice with the world?" I don't have any answer. Truth is very slippery & elusive. Just when you think, you have got hold it, it 'll slip out.On a very quasi-objectve basis, I feel, sometime he does, sometimes doesn't.
Einstein, till his last days was trying to find one unifying theory, that doesn't violate relativity and doesn't imply 'God playing dice'. His befuddlement is really understandable.So, is there a theory that can explain all the mystical, intellectual, quantum & classical phenomena and off course the dice game?
Does He or doesn't He?
;-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
