Finding order in randomness. Finding randomness in order.

One of my favorite verses from the Bhagavad Gita (and also one of the most popular ones) goes- यदा यदा हि धर्मस्य ग्लानिर्भवति भारत । अभ्युत्थानमधर्मस्य तदात्मानं सृजाम्यहम् ॥४-७॥ परित्राणाय साधूनां विनाशाय च दुष्कृताम् । धर्मसंस्थापनार्थाय सम्भवामि युगे युगे ॥४-८॥ Yada yada hi dharmasya glanirbhavati bharata Abhythanamadharmasya tadatmanam srijamyaham Paritranaya sadhunang vinashay cha dushkritam Dharmasangsthapanarthay sambhabami yuge yuge   Here Krishna is telling Arjuna that whenever  there is decay of "dharma" (a concept that is not easily translated in English in fact, but more commonly translated as "one's duty" or "righteousness") in the world he will be born again to restore righteousness and destroy  evil. Some people take this literally i.e. through reincarnation Krishna will be born again in a human form and take these actions. However, I think that is not what this means. Krishna is not a person here but he is knowledge, ideas. What he is ...

There are some people who directly or indirectly worship evolution/nature as one would a God or a religion. But they are wrong in doing so. Evolution or Nature (which is a broader term to define the concept) is indeed a knowledge creation process but that doesn't mean that is is "right" or "moral". Just the fact that we are born out of Nature (through the process of evolution) does not make Nature itself some grand, god-like thing which is not to be questioned. In fact I am arguing to the contrary - I think a lot of Nature is in fact immoral.  Morality is a field of philosophy as it applies to conscious beings, which includes us. It is a question of "what to do next". We do not have very good theories of morality yet (e.g. we do no have a theory of morality that is as good as quantum theory is for physics). Morality is distinct from the sciences and hence it is distinct from Nature/evolution. Nature does not, by default,  have the "right" mor...

The only requirement any system, to be effective, must have is that of error correction. As long as error correction is built into the system, and it works effectively, we can say we have a "good" system. On the contrary if a system does not have error correction built into it, no matter how well the system seems to work in the present, it will eventually fail.  This applies to all domains where knowledge is involved - politics, relationships, computer programs, mechanical systems etc. In fact I can't think of a system where it doesn't apply. Let's take a few examples -  1. Politics In politics the best form of government that we have (and which has produced the most prosperity) is that of a liberal democracy. As Popper pointed out, an effective system of electing rulers is not in which the "best" rulers are elected to power. This cannot be so since this assumes we know apriori what "best" is and such beliefs usually lead to coercion (and viole...

A pub song - Edgar and his car In the village down the valley Lived a man called Edgar With his lovely wife Sally  And a rusty old car  Edgar loved his barely-a-car  And driving it around town But it never went too far Without breaking down  Sally would always complain  “This rusty good for nothing” Especially when it would rain  “I’m in the car but I’m drenching” One day Sally had had enough  “It’s me or the car, who do you want to lose?” Edgar flinched, but tried to be tough  “I love you Sally but don't make me choose” So Sally packed and went afar Edgar lost his wife and then he realized she took his car! Edgar cursed his life

  On a stroll around the hood  With light steps and a cheery mood  I noticed things more than the usual  A new eatery, posh but casual   La Bottega - took note of the name  Reminded me of a place called the same  A thought - Italian cuisine is great for a date  Or for just an evening with a mate  This poem is pointless perhaps  But here is the place on google maps 

 One of my favorite things to do is to sit on a beach with a book. I am a slow reader, painfully slow at times unless the book really captivates me. Only a few books have done that for me, the earliest I can remember is Treasure Island when I was like 10 or 11. Since then there have been a couple - Freedom at Midnight, Into thin air.  Coming back to the beach - I remember almost 10 years ago I was sitting on a beach reading Jack London’s Road. Those kind of books (into the wild being another one) really appealed to me back then. Something about giving everything up, with minimal possessions and ultimate freedom. It’s almost like in that state I can finally do what I really want to do. Instead of worrying about mundane things and responsibilities, many of which are of my own making. Even now sometimes I find myself fantasizing about what it would be like if I really had nothing - no possessions, no job, no responsibilities. Just pure freedom. It feels appealing, it feels like i...

  Consciousness arises in the physical brain but is not a physical process. It is a “program” that runs in the brain. And this program is not linked with the brain/body in any fundamental way apart from the fact that it runs on a particular brain situated in a particular body. This may sound something simple, but the implications are profound. And that explains a lot of the struggles of us conscious beings. Consciousness is not so much a biological evolutionary process – it does not degrade with age as the brain/body does (the degradation that happens in old age is again due to degradation of the hardware). It is an abstract thing – not physical – so there is no such thing as degradation. Prime numbers do not degrade over time, music does not degrade over time – the physical instantiations surely do, but the abstractions do not. So, consciousness, as an abstraction, does not have “degradation” built into it. But the brain/body does. And therefore death i.e., death of the physic...

I believe a lot of psychological misery in this world is due to coercion. Coercion by society, culture, gender, evolutionary forces and the most dangerous of them all - self-coercion (which is needed anyway for the other coercive forces to have their effect). There is also one, perhaps bigger, sense in which coercion is wrong - it is authoritarian and stops the growth of knowledge. But let's focus on misery for now. Coercion happens when people pick an idea, and write it in stone. All ideas it is in conflict with are just ignored. And then they want this idea to materialize. And they attach their wellbeing to it materializing. The reasons for this could be any number of things - from "it is the right thing to do i.e. morality", to "it will make me happy" to "it will make my life meaningful" etc. The idea is so strongly entrenched (it's written in stone after all), that feedback (from things like one own state of mind) is typically closed off. The i...

  When life seems rough You smoothen the groove When the going gets tough You help me crunch through When stuck in myriad ruts You say - here, go a bit nuts Rain or shine..our bond is such Oh peanut butter, I love you so much

  I believe Fundamental research i.e. research into fundamental fields WITHOUT a prior agenda (of solving a specific pre-determined problem) is one of the, if not the, most important field we as mankind should be investing in. It is only this kind of research that has the best chance to produce solutions for problems that we currently face, and more importantly for new problems we will face in the future.  We currently face several existential threats- climate change being one of them. However, to think these will be the last existential threats or that we know of all possible future existential threats would be naïve . Our best defense  against future unknown existential risks is again - fundamental research - which helps us understand the nature of reality and in the process come up with solutions for problems. Iterative research or research with a specific goal in mind has its place and is essential too. It is required to take a particular solution ahead and better...