Dear Sir,

We are not "free to choose on how we want to perceive the world". We must see through our eyes and hear through our ears. We must see white as white and red as red, otherwise, there is some defect in the functioning of our eyes. In essence, the self observes or witnesses reality "as it is", and not "as we want to perceive". If we want to perceive ourselves like a donkey, we may emulate like a donkey, but our self will not become a donkey, because it is immutable.

Self being immutable, its realization also cannot be shared, it has to be experienced. Sharing means dividing something into parts. This is impossible for self or its realization. You may see something and tell others to see it, but you cannot make them see it. They have to see for themselves. As the Mundaka Upanishad says: "naayamaatmaa ...." etc., which means, self cannot be realized through discourse, intellect, or reading and listening to others. Only if one relentlessly pursue it, the self reveals itself to him. So, you even do not see it. It reveals itself to you when it blesses you. Then how can you share it with others?

The same Upanishad also says: The fools think that they know everything and declare themselves as knowledgeable. But it is like one blind man offering other blind men to show the way. When you are trying to link shastras to science without understanding it, and showing off your "knowledge" to others, you are doing just that. As you can see, none of what you see is correct. This way you are demeaning shastras that hurts us. Hence please talk either about shastras if you have studied it properly (the answer is obviously no) or talk only about the science you have read without linking it to shastras.

Regards,

basudeba

Dear basudeba,

You are absolutely right about self being immutable, there is only one absolute self or singularity in the universe. We are all just different manifestations of the same self. What I meant was to share the "joy" of self realization and that is the purpose of human being to enjoy the self.

I know nothing but thy self and that knowing is absolutely blissful.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Dear Sir,

Once again you have made wrong statements.

If you know or realized self, you would not be writing here. There is no need for you to. Because everything we do is need based. If you realize self, you will have no need. Hence you will not get involved in these transitory mundane affairs. But since you are trying to show off your knowledge of the Shastras, it shows that you have not realized self nor know anything about it.

Realization of self leads to "Anand". Once you reach that state, you will not want to do anything, because that will change your state from "Anand" to misery. Hence you cannot share the joys of self-realization. Please stop this showmanship and concentrate on the self, so that someday you may be blessed.

Regards.

basudeba

Dear Sridattadev,

I will rate your essay soon.

Wishing you all the best in the contest.

Sincerely,

Sreenath.

Dear basudeba,

Thank you for your best wishes and you are right about the "Anand". Yes I am still in the transitory state and still trying to attain that absolute Anandam and I will stop writing when I do and that could be what is expected of this body and mind to convey this message till then, that we should all strive for that absolute Anand. Even the pursuit of attaining the absolute is also Anand.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Dear Sridattadev,

I have a book on Vedic mathematics and I can give it to you if you like.

For that give me your e- mail address. Mine is, bnsreenath@yahoo.co.in

love,

sreenath

    Dear Kancherla

    Thank you for presenting your nice essay. I saw the abstract and will post my comments soon. Singularity is not GOD, it is mathematical problem, if we solve it will be solved......

    I am requesting you to go through my essay also. And I take this opportunity to say, to come to reality and base your arguments on experimental results.

    I failed mainly because I worked against the main stream. The main stream community people want magic from science instead of realty especially in the subject of cosmology. We all know well that cosmology is a subject where speculations rule.

    Hope to get your comments even directly to my mail ID also. . . .

    Best

    =snp

    snp.gupta@gmail.com

    http://vaksdynamicuniversemodel.blogspot.com/

    Pdf download:

    http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/essay-download/1607/__details/Gupta_Vak_FQXi_TABLE_REF_Fi.pdf

    Part of abstract:

    - -Material objects are more fundamental- - is being proposed in this paper; It is well known that there is no mental experiment, which produced material. . . Similarly creation of matter from empty space as required in Steady State theory or in Bigbang is another such problem in the Cosmological counterpart. . . . In this paper we will see about CMB, how it is generated from stars and Galaxies around us. And here we show that NO Microwave background radiation was detected till now after excluding radiation from Stars and Galaxies. . . .

    Some complements from FQXi community. . . . .

    A

    Anton Lorenz Vrba wrote on May. 4, 2013 @ 13:43 GMT

    ....... I do love your last two sentences - that is why I am coming back.

    Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on May. 6, 2013 @ 09:24 GMT

    . . . . We should use our minds to down to earth realistic thinking. There is no point in wasting our brains in total imagination which are never realities. It is something like showing, mixing of cartoon characters with normal people in movies or people entering into Game-space in virtual reality games or Firing antimatter into a black hole!!!. It is sheer a madness of such concepts going on in many fields like science, mathematics, computer IT etc. . . .

    B.

    Francis V wrote on May. 11, 2013 @ 02:05 GMT

    Well-presented argument about the absence of any explosion for a relic frequency to occur and the detail on collection of temperature data......

    C

    Robert Bennett wrote on May. 14, 2013 @ 18:26 GMT

    "Material objects are more fundamental"..... in other words "IT from Bit" is true.

    Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on May. 14, 2013 @ 22:53 GMT

    1. It is well known that there is no mental experiment, which produced material.

    2. John Wheeler did not produce material from information.

    3. Information describes material properties. But a mere description of material properties does not produce material.

    4. There are Gods, Wizards, and Magicians, allegedly produced material from nowhere. But will that be a scientific experiment?

    D

    Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 16, 2013 @ 16:22 GMT

    It from bit - where are bit come from?

    Author Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 06:10 GMT

    ....And your question is like asking, -- which is first? Egg or Hen?-- in other words Matter is first or Information is first? Is that so? In reality there is no way that Matter comes from information.

    Matter is another form of Energy. Matter cannot be created from nothing. Any type of vacuum cannot produce matter. Matter is another form of energy. Energy is having many forms: Mechanical, Electrical, Heat, Magnetic and so on..

    E

    Antony Ryan wrote on Jun. 23, 2013 @ 22:08 GMT

    .....Either way your abstract argument based empirical evidence is strong given that "a mere description of material properties does not produce material". While of course materials do give information.

    I think you deserve a place in the final based on this alone. Concise - simple - but undeniable.

      Dear Sreenath,

      Sure, if you felt like sharing it with me i will take it, my email address is sridattadev@gmail.com.

      Love,

      Sridattadev.

      Dear Satya,

      Truth is there is only i or absolute conscience in the universe. Energy (information or bits) or matter (it) are just mere manifestation of the absolute.

      It seems that absolute is non existent in the relative world and hence it seems to be zero. To the one who realizes there is nothing but the absolute and is infinite and everywhere. The perception of this absolute is the only difference between different beings in existence. Singularity is not just relative infinity as the scientific community perceives, it is the absolute equality. Singularity is not just some where in space-time, it is the space-time itself. In that sense singularity does not exist at all or it is the singularity that only exists.

      So you can either believe in God and that it is everything or do not believe in God at all and it is nothing. If you absolutely believe only material reality, that is absolutely fine. That becomes your reality. I does not see any difference between energy, matter, space and time. They all arise from one and the same source or i or singularity or conscience or god.

      Love,

      Sridattadev.

      Dear Sridattadev,

      I enjoyed your essay more than I thought I would. You have explained your views very clearly and beautifully. I liked the story of the turtles. Kind regards, Georgina

        Dear Georgina,

        I am glad that you enjoyed the story and the essay. We are all made for and of that absolute enjoyment.

        Love,

        Sridattadev.

        Sridattadev,

        If given the time and the wits to evaluate over 120 more entries, I have a month to try. My seemingly whimsical title, "It's good to be the king," is serious about our subject.

        Jim

        16 days later

        Dear Sridattadev,

        I always enjoy approaches that involve consciousness, as I noted the importance of observation in my essay, which hopefully you find time to read. I'd be honoured if you could.

        I think your essay is both relevant and interesting and deserves a high score, so hopefully my rating has helped.

        Best wishes,

        Antony

          Dear Antony,

          I have ready your essay and liked the way you have interpreted Fibonacci series application on the "relative" reality. I would like to convey a simple truth that singularity is not only a relative infinity or zero, but absolute equality of everything. Absolute truth is that there is only singularity everywhere and all the relativity is an illusion. This is the absolute mathematical truth of zero = I = infinity. There is only I or singularity in the universe. I creates (Generates), sustains (Orders) and Destroys (Dismantles) everything. I is GOD.

          Love,

          Sridattadev.

          Dear Sridattadev,

          I have also found that 0 can display infinite characteristics. I agree that zero/singularity such as that we envisage at the start of time, is still mathematically conserved.

          Good points and thanks for reading and commenting on my essay too,

          Antony

          Dear Antony,

          I was playing with Fibonacci series this evening while sitting in my backyard and came across two other series of numbers. I will put down how I arrived at them.

          I wrote the Fibonacci series on a paper up to 12th degree on either side of 0 as follows

          -144 89 -55 34 -21 13 -8 5 -3 2 -1 1 0 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 144

          I virtually folded the paper in my mind at 0 so that the numbers on either side overlapped and added them to each other where they aligned.

          I got a new series

          0 2 0 4 0 10 0 26 0 68 0 178 0 466 0 1220 0 3194

          ignoring the 0's it read as 0 2 4 10 26 68 178 466 ....

          Soon I realized that this can be defined by an equation

          Sn = 2 * Sn-1 sigma (I=2 to n) Sn-i

          with the seeds of

          S0 = 0

          S1 = 2

          S2 = 2 * S1 S0 = 2 * 2 0 = 4

          S3 = 2 * S2 S1 S0 = 2* 4 2 0 = 10

          S4 = 2 * S3 S2 S1 S0 = 2 * 10 4 2 0 = 26

          I also found that division of the two successive numbers soon converges on 2.618 which happens to be the square of golden ratio 1.618.

          Now I went back to the original Fibonacci series and virtually folded it at 0 in my mind again and this time I subtracted the numbers where they aligned and I got another series as

          0 2 0 6 0 16 0 42 0 110 0 288

          Ignoring the 0's this read as 0 2 6 16 42 110 288 and I realized that this can be defined as an equation as well

          Sn = 3 * Sn-1 - Sn-2

          with S0 = 0 and S1 = 2 as the seeds

          S2 = 3 * S1 - S0 = 3 * 2 - 0 = 6

          S3 = 3 * S2 - S1 = 3 * 6 - 2 = 16

          S4 = 3 * S3 - S2 = 3 * 16 - 6 = 42

          S5 = 3 * S4 - S3 = 3 * 42 - 16 = 110

          I also found that division of the two successive numbers in this series also soon converges on 2.618 which happens to be the square of golden ratio 1.618.

          Finally I did another interesting thing, merged these two series and got another one which read as

          First series --->0 2 0 4 0 10 0 26 0 68 0 178 0 466

          Second Series ---> 0 2 0 6 0 16 0 42 0 110 0 288 0

          Merged series -->0 2 2 4 6 10 16 26 42 68 110 178 288 466

          I realized that the merged series is a new Fibonacci type series with a different second seed of 2 instead of 1. Even this series successive number division yields the golden ratio of 1.618.

          Now I asked my self if we can have 2 as a second seed and produce another series which yields the same golden ratio why not 3 and soon found that

          0 3 3 6 9 15 24 39 63 102 .... is also a series that also converges on the golden ratio 1.618.

          0 4 4 8 12 20 32 52 84 136...... is also a series that also converges on the golden ratio 1.618

          So any Fibonacci type series with 0 as the first seed and I ( from 1 to infinity) as the second seed will have the successive numbers ration in them converging on the golden ratio of 1.618. This again proves the point that I, the singularity, is equally the same everywhere. Mathematics is pointing to the absoluteness of I in Fibonacci too.

          Love,

          Sridattadev.

          0 2 2 4 6 10 16 26

          Dear All,

          I give you all a cosmological iSeries which spans the entire numerical spectrum from -infinity through 0 to +infinity and the simple principle underlying it is sum of any two consecutive numbers is the next number in the series. 0 is the base seed and i can be any seed between 0 and infinity.

          iSeries always yields two sub semi series, each of which has 0 as a base seed and 2i as the first seed.

          One of the sub series is always defined by the equation

          Sn = 2 * Sn-1 + Sigma (i=2 to n) Sn-i

          where S0 = 0 and S1 = 2 * i

          the second sub series is always defined by the equation

          Sn = 3 * Sn-1 -Sn-2

          where S0 = 0 and S1 = 2 * i

          Division of consecutive numbers in each of these subseries always eventually converges on 2.168 which is the Square of 1.618.

          Union of these series always yields another series which is just a new iSeries of a 2i first seed and can be defined by the universal equation

          Sn = Sn-1 + Sn-2

          where S0 = 0 and S1 = 2*i

          Division of consecutive numbers in the merged series always eventually converges on 1.618 which happens to be the golden ratio "Phi".

          Fibonacci series is just a subset of the iSeries where the first seed or S1 =1.

          Examples

          starting iSeries governed by Sn = Sn-1 + Sn-2

          where i = 0.5, S0 = 0 and S1 = 0.5

          -27.5 17 -10.5 6.5 -4 2.5 -1.5 1 -.5 .5 0 .5 .5 1 1.5 2.5 4 6.5 10.5 17 27.5

          Sub series governed by Sn = 2 * Sn-1 + Sigma (i=2 to n) Sn-i

          where S0 = 0 and S1 = 2i = 1

          0 1 2 5 13 34 ...

          Sub series governed by Sn = 3 * Sn-1 - Sn-2

          where S0 = 0 and S1 = 2i = 1

          0 1 3 8 21 55 ...

          Merged series governed by Sn = Sn-1 + Sn-2 where S0 = 0 and S1 = 2i = 1

          0 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 ...... (Fibonacci series is a subset of iSeries)

          The above equations hold true for any value of i, again confirming the singularity of i.

          Love,

          Sridattadev.

            There was a typo in the above, the ratio of the sub series always converges on 2.618 which is square of 1.618.

            Love,

            Sridattadev.

            Hello Sridattadev,

            Very good display of how these numbers can be used and appear throughout nature! I like that they work from zero towards infinity, this seems to hint at a natural system that works at the small and large scale, perhaps even one day explaining the differences between Quantum Mechanics and general Relativity. I think a Quantum Gravity theory could come out of it!

            Nice work!

            Antony

            Dear Antony,

            Thank you for your kind support, hope these findings will help humanity as you have said to understand ourselves and the universe we live in.

            Love,

            Sridattadev.