internetwork site that drew a lot of healthy speculation and revealing
comments.
The subject in discussion was Randomness. My dear friend,though a
medico,has vast interest in a lot of other subjects of science,and he
had seemed to hit upon Randomness in an article from the domain of
mathematics.
The discussions were huge and varied.People from the fields of
mathematics and physics came forward with insights citing well-known
theories and mind-boggling equations.Mind-boggling for me,at least,as
I am a physician and have got pathetic knowledge in Mathematics or
Physics.
The debate spanned everything from Randomness, Chaos(as defined in
Physics) and states of Equilibrium.I proceeded to add my own thoughts
on what I think about Randomness and Equilibrium(which is dealt
extensively in the subject of Physiology,when we study Homeostasis).
Randomness is spread throughout the Universe.And it has been defined
by mathematics,theoretical physics to the best of man's ability.Man
looks at his surroundings,Nature and has got an inherent urge to
understand and explain previously unexplained occupances and
events.This urge has resulted in the evolution of scientific
knowledge,thus in the evolution of mankind itself.
It is a very debatable topic that how we look at things and explain
them is the Actual Truth or not.We have to make strong,drastic
assumptions right here in the beginning.Before man proceeds ahead to
delve into scientific subjects,he must assume one thing and follow it
wholeheartedly - that what man explains and understands through
theories and equations Is what happens actually.
We look at nature,the universe with perceptions that have developed
over thousands of years as man has advanced in his knowledge.These
perceptions have now become deep-rooted in our minds to the extent of
almost being Original Truths in our subconscious.We go ahead in
science and technology,naturally assuming to be Absolutely
True,certain aspects which our forefathers have invented or theorised.
If a modern day physicist wants to proceed,for example,in the subject
of Gravitation,he already takes into account the laws of gravitation
as theorised by Newton a few hundred ears back.The physicist does not
theorise on his own,the concepts of statics and dynamics,speed and
acceleration,actions and reactions.He proceeds assuming the facts
explained by Newton's laws to be true.
That is how man has developed scientific branches further. Equation A
has been formalised in the 18th.century,Equation B in the
19th.century,Equation C in the 20th.century.A 21st.century student of
science tries to understand a particular event through his knowledge
which comprises of all the Equations,A, B and C.He hits upon something
new which he theorises by Equation D.
At this point,Equations A,B and C are 'discarded' to make way for
Equation D.Scientific principle does not prove,however,that these
Equations were wrong. On the contrary,it acknowledges all three are
correct and that Equation D is an amalgamation of A,B and C. The new
equation D can explain a particular event much better than the
previous equations,so it is incorporated in the pages of advanced
knowledge,which no more contain the previous equations as they have
served their purpose and have become redundant now.The new student
goes ahead with Equation D as a base.He doesnt need to know A,B,C now
as it is assumed that if he has accepted Equation D,he has
automatically agreed with Equations A,B and C.This is how branches of
science become advanced and refined.
One aspect has been constant in this discussion all along.That what
Man sees and how he sees it and understand it in Nature is what
happens Actually.This means that this view-point is true regardless of
human existence.An event will always follow a specific path,whether
humankind is present to understand it or not.
An event takes place.Man studies it,analyses it and understands the
mechanism,putting forward a theory which tells us the event has taken
place in This mechanism or That. Does it have to be true?
Red is red.98% people see it as red.So Man assumes that the colour is
Really red. 2% people who are colour-blind do not see red as red.This
is because their chromo-receptors are defective in a Specific way.
What if the chromo-receptors of those 98% people with 'normal vision'
were aligned in that Specific way(which is the case in colour-blind
people)and the 2%colour-blind people had their chromo-receptors in the
alignment which is 'normal' as we actually look upon it?Then man
wouldn't seen perceived Red as red Actually is.It would have been some
other colour which the colour-blind people would only see as Red.
Nobody knows what Red actually is.We see it red because of a
specificity of our own structural anatomy.Do Nature and
Universe,existing from the beginning of Time long before man came to
exist Have to conform to specificities of man who actually occupies a
mere .00000000000001 % of schemes of things?Logic,evolved by man
himself,will say a loud NO to this question.Natural and Universal
events continue to happen completely independant of man's existence.
The basic concepts of SCIENCE are Relative,not Absolute.
Science is the way how We understand the scheme of things out there.It
is a necessity for us,not for the scheme of things.
Science itself pointed this out to Man when he entered the world of
quantum physics.In every step,man would face a contradiction which
classical physics would not conform to.The contradiction would cease
to exist in the quantum world which also follows its own
specifics.Millions of things happen predictably in the quantum
world,which classical physics cannot explain at all.Man has been
forced to accommodate both classical laws and quantum laws in applied
physics.The particle fits in as smugly in scientific knowledge as does
a wave.We have been forced to accept this Dualism of Nature.
Modern theoretical astrophysics has evolved on the basis of
dualism.And it has taken man to understand the grey zones of his
surroundings.But it wouldnt stand a chance if man stuck to the
principles of classical physics.
Man's acceptance of Dualism in the scheme of things has taken him into
the world of 'Possibilities' .If we can accept two contrasting
principles and possibilities as in dualism,we can accept an infinite
number of possibilities.There are infinite possibilities everywhere
and we proceed to choose one out of the infinite which can make us
understand and predict a specific event.We dont deny the other
possibilities.We just choose one of them to understand and comprehend.
The incorporation of Dualism and the Infinite in Science have taken
place recently,over the last century.But it has been always
there,since times infinite,in Spiritual Philosophy.Thousands of years
back,men of wisdom has dealt with and circumspected Dualism.The Vedas
and Upanishads of ancient India are prominent examples discussing the
co-existence of the Dwaita and the Adwaita,the Khanda and the
Akhanda,the Nitya and the Anitya,in man's attempt to understand the
Mind of Brahma,the Superconscious.
If one attempts to understand the principles of Life with the
knowledge of the ancient Vedas and the modern Quantum theories
together,there are startling revelations which tend to explain the
Absolute Truth rather than the Relative truths which
classical,pre-quantum science adhere to.That however will be the
subject of our next discussion.
No comments:
Post a Comment