Why Research?

Its long I have been hounded by this question by variety of people. The spectrum is wide - from graduates to Post Docs. The first type of questioners are my parents. Like every parents, they dreamt their son to earn in lakhs, marry a drop - dead gorgeous girl and support the family. Hence when I decided on a career of research, initially I found my father researching the options left before me and how I can fulfil his dreams. But unlike every parents, mine were different. No impositions, no arguments, but a hug from him - a silent but firm gesture - showed his faith on me. Whatever may be the outcome of this endeavour, it is a tribute to them, and their faith on an individual who loves to give them surprises, many times nasty and sometimes pleasant. The second type of questioners are my school friends. Few of them are married and almost all of them are employed. Their reaction to my this endeavour was a mixture of shock and disbelief. I was labelled as "insane", "maverick" and what not. Some sent me their wives' photographs wishing to poke my hormones and the "bright future that I happen to miss". Good luck to you guys ! The third category are the peer group I am in. However each of them ask that question to get my future career plans. It always happens that I get advised be many over various "options" before me. An answer follows a comment and ultimately ends in proving the superiority of certain departments and disciplines over others.

Today I thought seriously to clear the air why I am in research. This is not to answer the questioners, but to reaffirm my faith in myself. I view research as an act of evolvement with involvement. You get involved with yourself, discover the assumptions you normally take for granted and question the origin of those assumptions. Research according to me is an act of refinement of mind and through that the being. You present a slice of truth to the waiting mankind, who try to find soccur and solace in it for sometime. You are in the business of solving a puzzle - a puzzle to reconstruct the truth and you dont do it for money... for it cannot be done for money! Research is done for seer joy of doing it.

Research is not the act of proving but contributing. What can you find that does not exist ! What can you prove that is not proved ! You just throw light, you direct attention and offer a view point. The euphoria is in giving another alternative to mankind. Its like the universal spiritual principle of God being one and religions being the paths to the same. So the joy lies in exposing a buried phenomenon. It is a sort of intellectual excavation, where repeated reinforcements have solidified some ideas to permanency. Research loosens it up and makes you mobile. It makes you accept and respect the viewpoints of others. It makes you simple yet effective.

The product of 4-5 years in a research program is not a few papers or a thesis. It is you - a changed being who is impartial and unbiased. The process should make you approachable and one should be able to view things objectively. Hence all the arguments about disciplines and departments being superior should subside. For a true researcher appreciates every organ of the body, missing of any one however small makes the body look ugly. Imagine your hand without the little finger, you will know what I mean !

Let me conclude by stating that all our theories are nothing but generalizations of an observed phenomenon over a wide range of contexts. But somewhere the applicability of the same comes to an end. So why the fights and egos between researchers? Not proving others wrong but reaffirming ones' rightness is the goal. Let it not happen that your learning loses its value in the absence of an audience. Learn for yourself, for the aim is evolvement !

Note: Part of the above article was written by me and was published initially in http://fpm-iiml.blogspot.com/

Conceptualizing the idea of "Service"

Introduction

This piece of writing came out of a clash of thoughts in my head that occoured in a recently concluded management conference. The theme was "Dynamics of modern management - Is service centric strategy the solution?". Well whatever the solution that may have been discussed and debated, what struck me was that "service" is used as a management strategy in today's world to gain and retain customers.

On the other hand my background at the Sri Sathya Sai Institutions had given me a different idea about service. To put it in a nutshell - "Service is a way to God". Numerous discourses and various activities like "Gram seva" reinforced the fact that service is a noble action that pleases God and decreases the distance between Him (gender neutral) and us.

The clash of thoughts occoured for I failed to understand how can I use such a noble action for business profits? Moreover how can I integrate the noble idea of service given by Bhagwan Baba to get business profits?

Research Questions

Since "service" is a buzzword across disciplines and domains, I could not help but define two research question that will help me in conceptualizing "service" that can be used both by spiritual and commercial practitioners.

Question1: What is the basic framework of service that can be used for spiritual progress and business profits?

Question2: What is the definition of service?

Methodology

The methodology I used for arriving at the framework is "situation-analysis" or what we call in IIM lingo as the "case study". However I will like to add that I have taken only those cases that have occoured in front of Bhagwan Baba and am governed by the principle of bounded rationality. The objective I repeat is not to praise individuals but learn from a situation objectively and decode a variable that can help us in decoding service.

The Case Study

This is an oft-repeated story in Prasanthinilayam. It was in 1991 that the Super-speciality hospital was to be built and numerous people were contributing in lakhs. One fine evening Swami walks into the portico with a small envelope. He tears it open to find a letter and a 100 ruppees note. He reads the letter which was written by a primary school child explaining Him that he had saved the money after washing his own clothes without giving to dhobi and decreasing his other kiddish expenditure only to contribute something in His noble mission. Bhagwan lovingly accepted the little act of service and the hospital today is a reality (many doubted its feasibility!).

Conceptualizing Service

1- The first variable that can be instantly decoded is action. Many students would have been sitting there that day appreciating Bhagwan's mission. Among them a few would be thinking of how to contribute in the same. But only one little boy(there may be many but this one came to limelight) thought of doing something, however insignificant it may appear.

2- The next variable that can be decoded is spontaneity. Bhagwan never asks anything nor is Rs. 100 a significant addition in building that huge edifice. Yet what moved and caught Bhagwan's attention (who is the customer in this case!) is the spontaneous reaction of the little boy. Make the customer feel that you are with him / her in thick and thin and will try your level best in meeting his / her expectation. For that spontaneous reaction one needs to tune oneself to the customers' wavelength. Watch out for the need and be quick to respond however insignificant it may appear. Remember many customers watch the process in the service and not the final product. If the process satisfies them, they are yours for lifetime.

3- The last variable that I can decode from the case study is transformation. This I will analyse in both the spiritual and commercial utility. Spiritually transformation means transformation of attitude. Swami says that in the end, you are not serving anyone but yourself and one has to realize that. So the feeling of "give-take" has to be replaced by feeling of "brotherhood". From transaction one has to move to union. From a commercial perspective, it takes a beautiful meaning. It gives the enterprise a chance to analyse the gap between the customer's actual satisfaction and desired satisfaction. Transformation is closing of the gap, and service is the process of closing the same. Moreover, transformation also leads to next step in service where the existing customers become part of the enterprise and helpin increasing the client base (again from transaction it leads to union!).

Definition of service

Having conceptualized service, I now make an attempt to give an operational definition of the same. Before that I want to extend the above dimensions I decoded a step higher.

Action, I argue is a product of head and hand. Similarly spontaneity is an outcome of a sensitive heart. Hence I define service as "An effective coordination of head, heart and hand for the ultimate goal of mutual transformation".

Conclusion

Here I made a small attempt to scientifically and rationally decode the dimensions of service out of a real life example. This was made to operationalize the concept of service in order to facilitate the usage of the same by managers and spiritulists in their endeavour to please their "customers".

The Religion of Future - Atheism+Advaitism !

I love the Atheists. They are a breed who dare to challenge any funny stories about dependence on God. They are individuals who dare to stand on their own feet rejecting all hearsay about supernatural powers controlling their future. They design their destiny and hold themselves responsible for success and failure unlike most of the theists. They are intellectuals, who believed that anything and everything is within oneself and one has to continuously challenge oneself and evolve. The arguments between theists and atheists is legendary. Much nonsense had been said about these atheists. Theists call them "infiedels" while many label them as "Satan's children" while unsure about the existence and morphology of Satan ! Recently I had been reading some literature on Advaita Vedanta and it suddenly struck me out of the blue that Atheists are actually Advaita Vedantins in action! Read on if you are struck with this argument...

Atheism

To have an insight about what is atheism, one needs to tackle the question of origin of God. The theists may not like it, but the concept of God never evolved as a unifying force of love, but as a unifying force of fear. God was a mental construct of a personality who is always on a judge's seat deciding the rightness and the wrongness of activities and giving the relevant rewards and punishments. The worse part is no one can see HIM !! So one never knows from where does the reward and punishment comes from. Hence it forces man to be submissive to a unknown power without knowing the origin and the implications. This ignorance was highly abused by the priestly class who made bucks, turned their own lucks by playing with the fortunes of millions in the name of God. As a reaction to these painful incidents, a group of individuals refused to believe in this "Godly" concept anymore and thus rose the school of atheists. These people aptly beleived that "God was a fanciful imagination who is a product of human cognition and the perfection it can achieve". Just view at the definition critically and let the Dashavataras of Vishnu dance through your mind ! You will find it to be so true! First there was a fish - an aquatic animal, then the tortoise - an amphibian, followed by the boar - a mammal, then Balarama - symbolising that strength is power, then Rama - an ideal man who behaves according to prescribed law, Krishna - who uses his brain to create laws, Buddha - who goes beyond laws and at last Kalki - who symbolises elimination of evil anyway is the path. Well you see that as man develops and matures in his faculties his Gods change! The old one becomes irrelevant and the new one takes His place depending upon the existing cognitive maturity and the perfection wanted. God is thus a dynamic concept and is thus a product to match, a frame of reference for personal evaluation and not a person to be scared. This also explains why different societies have different Gods, for their maturity level was different. So while the Jews proclaimed Jehova as unforgiving and ruthless, Jesus proclaimed Him as loving and a Father. It basically differentiated the maturity level of Jesus with respect to the Jews. Thus atheism volumnously propagates the growth and expansion of human mind to achieve its highest power of comprehending anything and everything.

Advaita Vedanta

This is by far one of the greatest contributions of Hindu philosophy to mankind. Advaita Vedanta basically says that the entire world is just a mental construction of the individual. If you recognise the existence of a sky, it exists for you but if you do not recognise, well it does not exist. So if you realise that you are God, well you become so and thats what Shankara means when he says that realization can be got right here and right now ! So all of us belong to that Supreme Atman if we recognise ourselves to be. And after recognition, we realise that we are indeed BIG individuals who cannot be limited in this fleshy cover. We are indeed FREE beings who control rather than being controlled. We are PERFECT to the core. So as you think so you are - dust you think, dust you are; God you think, God you are!

Just analyze both the thoughts processes of Atheism and Advaita Vedanta. You will see that both of them are literally speaking the same tongue. Both emphasize that the individual is supreme and can be what it wants to be. The individual is the master and makes his/her own destiny. In the end, it is the conquest of human mind - master the mind to be a mastermind! Both force you to think hard on your follies and direct you towards perfection. Atheism is indeed Advaita Vadanta in practice.

The Synthesis

But there is a problem here. Though atheism speaks of perfection, yet where does it derive its frame of reference for perfection from? What is the motivating force for atheists to change and perfect themselves? With what do they compare themselves with to improvise themselves? Usually in these circumstances the atheists take one of the "successful" persons in the society as the benchmark, but how to evaluate that "success"? These are some questions that atheists need to tackle and then they will find that however they may define God, but He is more complete a benchmark where all of us aspire and can be. So I say Atheism is nothing but fragmented Advaita Vedanta.

In the end, I would like to say that we have actually reached a point where we can integrate the two so called conflicting schools of thoughts to evolve a religion that can be practiced to achieve perfection. God is nothing but an ideal man. He is a benchmark each one of us should evalute oneself and try to reach. He is a milestone to be crossed and atheism provides the fastest way to reach the milestone. For it realizes that every power to cross the milestone is within oneself and hence it forces individuals to continuously challenge oneself to be the best and march towards perfection.

Love Story...

"Love" had always been viewed in varied dimensions. It is interesting to know that the most common "feeling" in young age is often least understood. It is a pleasant and interesting sight to watch young guys and girls roaming hand in hand and crooning that they are in love in Saharaganj and other malls in Lucknow. The word "committed" has become a status symbol. The faster you are hooked and booked, you attain the coveted status of a much-in-demand product. Love has turned into an industry with movies portraying a love story irrespective of its fit in the context of the plot. Valentine's day budget of some "just-in-love" (like "just-married") couples run to thousands. A love curve can be traced (x axis representing the "time" and y axis "intensity") - it starts with the "initial phase", proceeds to the "mature phase" and at last ends either in a " commitment phase" or "decay phase", what people normally describe as "breaking off". Its fun to watch all these as an objective onlooker and I do that often i.e. objectively analyse the various parameters that go to make this slope steep ! Steeper the slope, the higher the rate of love. !

After all the above points, I do not know whether I am right in describing love as a "feeling'. And whether I am right in assuming that love is just a phenomenon in young age. So to get my theory to acceptable limits I will specify the assumptions.

1- I limit my theory to the mutual attraction between young members of opposite sex towards each other.

2- By "young" I mean form the onset of puberty to the age of 35. After that one is middle-aged.

3- There is nothing like a hate. Love is a continuum and it extends from "absence of love" to "complete love". Absence of love is not equal to hate.

What I want to achieve out of here is to analyse the various types of relationships young people have and do understand the dynamics of it. Moreover I want to give in my own way a method to sustain relationships.

A random quiz of the so called "committed" people in the campus and outside provided me various clues of how to look at love. It was not always a pleasant experience to quiz; some asking me to "f*** off !" while some asking me to "mind my limits and respect their privacy". Sometimes I wondered whether love is so limited and why are people confusing possesiveness as love. By and large it was a pleasant experience with many forthcoming to challenge my intellectual processing of so called "emotional" feeling.

Some expressed love as to what extent they feel "one" with their other person. "By "one' it means how similar they think, to what extent their likes and dislikes matched and of course the comaptibility factor i.e. how comfortable they are with each other. Another group expressed it as how they respect and "look up" to someone as a frame of reference for judging oneself and also as someone to emulate. Hence from the above discussion we get two dimensions of defining love.

Accordingly we define "love" as the degree of oneness that a person feels with another person in emotive, congnitive and behavioral level. In short we can label this as "degree of relation". The second definition of love goes as the process of idealising and idolising another person and making concious attempts to emulate his/her thinking and behavior. This can also be labelled as "degree of adoration".

Now that we have two dimensions, why not cross them to form a matrix? Having done that, we arrive at the following formutions.

1- high "degree of relation" + high "degree of adoration" = "union"

When a person shares a close bond with his / her lover physically and at the same time adores him / her, it boils down to "duplicates". Such lovers you find going around always jovial and have the same taste, same habits and some even wear the same type of dress with same colors ! Should we conclude this as a happy relationship? May be...but it has a tendency to get boring. So the creative of the two partners should take up to himself/herself to create something new to keep the interest in the relationship alive.

2- high "degree of relation" + low "degree of adoration" = "animosity"

Well this is the classic pre-divorce scenario. "Divorce" is defined here as the moving or parting away of two persons irrespective of marital status. Although the persons are together, they do not have any shared emotions between them. They are emotionally distant and are together just to 'save face' in the society. It is a state of perpetual tension and it can be released by two ways - increase the degree of adoration or breaking apart from relation. The former is very very unlikely and a counsellor is required to facilitate the process while the later is common in a formal breaking apart ceremony that takes place in the courts.

3- low "degree of relation" + high "degree of adoration" = "selflessness" or "longing"

This type of love occurs when there is no actual relationship between individuals but one adores another and try to live up to the other's ideals. There is a shedding up of individuality on the part of the former and a concious attempt to identify with the other. Because there is no actual relationship, the former is always on a state of 'longing' for the later but it may be noted that the love survives because of this longing. If a relationship is established between the two, then there is a chance that this love may die. This type of love usually gets manifested in two ways - 1) Idol - worshipper type where one partner is put on a pedestal and adored by the other. Every aspect of the 'idol" is acceptable to the 'worshipper'. This actually results in spoiling up of the "idol" for the worshipper become attached emotionally and becomes blind to the fault of the idol. 2) The second type is Distancer-pursuer type. It means one individual is always on the run and the other pursues him being attached emotionally. Again the distance is the catalyst that keeps the love alive. Such people may be classified "selfless" too for they are prepared to sacrifice anything to bridge the gap and establish a formal relationship with the person/object of their love.

4- low "degree of relation" + low "degree of adoration" = "indifference"

Last but no the least, we have "indifference" which basically is the state when we meet many people. We are least bothered about all the persons we see in our daily lives, on the road walking by, in train, trams and so on.. We do not feel anything for them. It is as if they do not exist for us. We ignore them. At this stage, we are always on a look out for an attraction that will arrest our mind. This is the first stage of love. And what can attract? It is either those that have already left a past impression in our minds through values norms and beliefs or those that have a shared interest with us. Sometimes it may be persons who have completely contrasting interests and this happens due to hightened level of curiosity in an individual.

So to trace the path to love - from indifference, one finds the object of attraction and becomes selfless to attract the other partner. This leads to union. If all other variables stay put and the individuals are emotionally adpative to them without building up of tension then the story ends in union or else if individuals cannot adapt emotionally, then the story moves forward to 'animosity' which may lead to divorce or an unhappy existence.

After all these exercise, it is better to remember that love is a necessity and not a luxury. Morever it can be independent of relationship which can be extrapolated to divine love. Hence this should primarily address the narrow minded individuals who limit love to a circle of acquaintances. What we need today is a path from indifference to selflessness and finally to union where we have a relation with every man/woman. That alone will fulfill the biblical pronouncement - 'Fatherhood of God, Brotherhood of man'. Can we do it?

On Ram Sethu

The atmosphere in the country is already heated up and this is in addition to the global warming phenomenon. The reason this time is more religious. An affidavit had been filed by the government in the court that the entire concept of Ram Sethu and Ram is just a fiction and a mental imagination and there is no grain of truth in the existence of a character known as Ram. Of course the govt. did it to make way for the speedy completion of Sethusamudram Project. But this is India! You cannot just fiddle with the religious sentiments of people and move ahead however nonsensical that may appear or sound. History is witness to this. The Mughal empire's fate was sealed with the imposition of Jajia tax by Aurangzeb. The British tasted the Indain "heat" in 1857, when they used fat of cow and pig to make bullets. So are we hearing the warning bells for this Govt.? Time will say...lets wait and watch !

IIM campus with all the bright intellects is also not free from this debate on Ram. Well I got badly rebuked by a faculty when I challenged the truth about Ram sethu. This actually made me research more and discuss more with one of my seniors. Can you imagine two youngsters debating on Ramayan at 2AM in the night? Well this may sound crazy but true! After all that, the desire in me was too much to resist and here I pen down my viewpoints on the entire issue.

Just see my title once more - Its On Ram Sethu. I am not taking any sides and my attempt here is to put down objectively of what I feel. I belong to no camps and if you belong to one...please quit reading this blog.

My question is simple and direct to all those who are crying hoarse for the Sethu. If there had been a Ram Sethu, why did it sink? Was Rama's power limited to that of Treta age? Please do not hoodwink people by saying it is leela of the Lord! Many of us are actually ignorant about the concept called God. Ninety percent of the believers have their first taste of God when their parents or relatives point at a cold decorated and adorned statue and say 'Look that is God...and this is the way you should worship!" Half of us do not even know whether we have some relationship with God and if there is, how to define that. And how many of us have really seen the Ram sethu in reality? None of us literally! It is better the VHP people start thinking and answering these questions than create a Hindu Al Qaida. My second question is simplest. Well assuming that the Ram Sethu really does exist, so what difference does it make to an average Indian? Just what difference does it makes to Surya or for that matter anyone?The VHP people are well fed and have good political connections that look after their needs - biological and commercial. But the average Hindu who sleeps in the street, how does a mythological half-submerged stone bridge affect Him? With a spirit crushed by hunger and pain, he or she will never be able to appreciate life, leave alone religion and history of India. And to the people of India, why are we behaving as psychos? Why can't we be logical in our approach? We go around spreading violence in the name of Ram, burning buses and trucks, attacking households, well if this is what Rambhakti is, I reject Ram and his ideology. It is better to be an athiest than a hot headed irrational fanatic with a fixed mindset and a blind obsession.

My last question is why do we always think God as separate being? Read the original Ramayan and the Bhagwad Puran properly. God is NOT a fanciful being with additional hands and heads and with superhuman powers. God is always an ideal human being, the perfection which every man has the ability and the right to achieve. God always wanted to be human, why are we making Him superhuman nay supernatural and creating a barrier? God always wanted to be with us, why are we trying to put Him on a pedestal and create a wall? Why do we always have to attribute God's actions as something which has to be against natural laws? Realize that the defect lies in us. We are lazy people when it comes to becoming good and working on our wrong habits. We want to be treated and respected as God, yet we do not want too become one for it is too tough! And to hide this inferiority we have created the distinction between God and Man and made fanciful stories that differentiated well both the beings all the time fooling ourselves saying, "Well He is God, all this is possible for Him for He has powers..how can a mere being like me do this?". When will we stop thinking all this? We are Gods..each one of us, realize that!

Rama represented a being with flawless character. Rama vigrahobhan dharmaha- That is the entire summary of Ramayana. The purpose is to learn the basis of being good and not to argue whether He made stones float or not. All the incidents in Ramayana are symbolic and it just represent one single truth - a flawless character can achieve anything. It can tame monkeys, the creature having the most fickle of minds, it can make friends with enemies like Vibhishana and at the same time it can win hearts of the simplest of beings like the boatman. So the take away from the Ramayan is how to be good and become flawless in this flawed world of temptations. For that matter it is the take away of both the epics. The truth about their existence does not change the basic truth that "A good and flawless character is actual Power".

Lastly I want to give my viewpoints on the Ram sethu. It is true but am not sure whether the Adam's Bridge is Ram Sethu. I do not even think it is. It is one lakh years old according to C-60 testing. But it never existed the irrational way we percieve it to exist (floating stone theory I mean !). Read the Ramayana again. The monkeys carried hills to build the bridge. They dumped the mountains into the ocean. Of course hills will not sink completely! And Ram with his monkey brigade walked on top of the hills to reach Lanka. Over years, the oceanic erosion has reduced the hills and hence you can explain the relative shallowness of the region around Dhanushkoti. The occean is only 3 ft to 30 ft deep. Here I have one more question to the fanatics. How can you explain a mass of stone floating together on a turbulent ocean and all these people oing on top of that to reach Lanka? Even if the stones are sticking together, they will never ever be stable. And even if you say the bridge dismantled after the work for the "Lord" is over, somewhere people would have found a floating piece of stone! Moreover why did not Ram fly to Lanka if He is God? Why would God want his wife to suffer more? When did he become so cruel and unscientific? What answer can you give me?

Sprituality is the greatest of science, the science of self-discovery. Lets not make it a philosophical and fanatical mess. Lets take things for what they are made for and not create hooligans out of them creating havoc. Rama was the greatest of patriots - he returned to India even after winning Lanka - a golden country that time. Lets learn these subtle concepts. But here we go on a rampage making the lives of common folks insecure. We stop a project that will get plenty of revenues making India command the Indian Ocean sea route Which God will be happy?

Lets think...is such Rambhakti worth practicing? Does such a God has any positive relevance?

The Thermodynamics of Human Bond !

It was another such fine day and I was suffering from "chemistry-sickness" just like "home-sickness". I am still not sure whether to describe the feeling as "chemistry sicknes" or "sickness of management". Suddenly this idea hit upon my head whether Thermodynamics can really help us in understanding "Bonding" between human beings as in chemical molecules. A structured analysis, if at all, will go a long way in re framing our lives for a healthy relationship.

Free Energy

A + B-------> AB

Well the above are two persons A and B who come together and bond with themselves just like two atoms come together to form a molecule.For starters, plz be informed that in thermodynamics there is a comcept called Free Energy denoted by G. Higher the free energy of an atom, the more restless it is. So it tends to form a bond and stabilize itself. Similarly if a molecule is having high free energy, either it makes a bond with another atom, or breaks apart. So is the human relationship. If we have lot of accumulated energy within us, we do two things------ hook ourself up with someone and try to get the energy out by showering our emotions on the person, or break away from an existing relationship, to beat the stress. Make or break !

Activation Energy

Secondly there is a concept called activation energy. A molecule just does not form with two atoms coming together. They have to be excited to an energy level, i.e. raise the free energy so that they can react or bond. So is the human being. One has to be soft and sensitive for once energy level to be raised. One has to feel for people and here the concept of good parenting comes. Cold human beings, like cold atoms are given special treatment by circumstances to break their coldness and increse their energy. Too much stability is bad for it makes a dynamic process a static waste. For that reason Swami has said, "Open your heart to me, or I will break it open"! Now that is his way of asking us to raise our activation energy!

Here again there is a catch.

Time taken to make a bond = Time taken to break a bond ! [Newton's 3rd law modified !]. So if you take more time to make a bond, lest be assured it is going to be stable one. Hence love marraiges are supposed to be stable. [at least theoritically]People tend to know each other over time, understand likes and dislikes before bonding for life.

Entropy

But love marraiges are more fanciful in outside appearance. Statistically they give a gloomy picture. You may ask what variable am I using to define success or faluire of love marraige. I am using only one---divorce. Statistically 45% of love marraiges in India are going for a divorce. Less than 50% you may say..but very bad for a country like India with its values and traditions. New Delhi is leading the pack [TOI]. And the growth rate is alarmingly rising at 10% per annum. Well we wont go into that..we will talk of only the thermodynamics part of it. Why do love marraiges break or in general why do friendships break?The answer lies in Entropy.

What is that now? It is the measure of disorderliness in a system. In lay mans language, systems always tends to go for disorderliness. In a way better, for disorder thinking leads to serendipitous inventions and discoveries . When we enter into relationships, we tend to become a bit structured in our approach. We tend to skip doing a number of things, for we do not want to hurt our friend or partner. Lot of such sacrifices, go against the law of entropy. it reduces our freedom and so our disorderliness. Stress builds up and one fine day we break all these showing our disorderly behaviour at its premium ! Something called volcano effect. So what is the solution? "Be yourself"--thats all. if the other person loves you or likes you, he or she must accept you as you are.Even spirituality advocates freedom ! In spirituality the degree of freedom is highest, no boundaries and no bonds. You are disorderly at your premium. So you dont care for body, nor your existence. That is true renunciation..to be disorder at the highest level !

Enthalpy

Discusssion wont be complete without talking on Enthalpy or heat released by the system. For getting something, you need to sacrifice something, right? Enthalpy is the heat realeased by the system when two atoms bond. When two human beings come together, some heat has to be released by warmth, love and mutual affection and care for each other. Or else the relationlishp wont last.

So to sum up

1- For friendship you require free energy and not a cold person.

2- Free energy is influenced by activation energy.

3- Activation energy is dependant on childhood. Parents plz make your child sensitive. But dont over do it, for then he reacts to everything and a reactive compound is dangerous. Apart from losing its identity it harms others.

4- Get into a relationship but dont become a lot structured. Dont let your freedom be affected.

5- Show some genuine love for your partner. Strike a perfect trade-off between entropy and enthalpy

Who said Science and Spirituality are poles apart..Rather Science is a way to understand the Spirit behind the process and things ! Wishing all a happy relationship......!!

Is Atom God?

Well I was feeling bored cramming up for the Strategic Management Exam and then out of the blue this thought strikes me. Is Atom God? All that we read and hear about God, have we already discovered Him and not able to recognize? Is He always there with us and we are taking Him for granted? By the way is God 'Him', 'Her' or 'It'? I decided to throw the books away for sometime and put my thought in a logical manner.

What is God?
Proceeding in a scientific manner, I thought of doing a little literature review about how God has been defined and what are His attributes. I crashed into number of attributes and some pretty unique ones. Many mentioned about the 16 attributes like "Sri Krsna" of ISKON. So to keep the discussion homogeneous and relevant across literature, I decided to take only common attributes. the following attributes on God has been found common and agreed to by all the authors:
1 - Omniscience - God knows all
2 - Omnipotence - God can do anything and everything

3 - Omniprescence - God is everywhere
4 - Divine simplicity - God is simple and requires nothing for He is full by Himself, perfection personified
5 - Eternal and necessary existence - He is everywhere yet he can manifest at a particular place depending on the requirement
I also considered the definition given by Bhagwan Sri Sathya Sai Baba:

GOD means "Generation, Organization and Destruction"

What is Atom?
Having described God's attributes from literature and Baba's point of view, I decided to examine the modern atomic theory to have a basic conceptualization of what an atom is and what it consists of.

Well it was a fascinating journey to read up on the evolution of the concept of atom. As usual I fell in love with the most wonderful asset of human beings - mind. Anyway the only point worth mentioning here I feel is that the earliest known theory on atom was Indian in origin. It dates back to 6th century BC and was developed by Kanada, a Hindu philosopher. It left me wondering that what a great land we are and we were, yet all Nobel prizes go to the white-skinned people ! The Indian mind, when will it get its due?

Anyways the other thing that I think worth mentioning here is the universal concept that atom consists of proton, neutron and electrons, a pretty simple structure compared to the complexities we deal with daily. And the recent development of quantum mechanics that says that atom is somewhat in between a wave and a particle. Its both...sounds weird I know, but then it has theoritcal and experimental support. For the layman its enough to know that atom can behave both as a wave and particle depending on conditions.

Is Atom God?
What I intended to do is to compare atom and see whether it explains the attributes that are used to define God. So I take it up atrribute by attribute.

God is omniscience i.e. He knows all. It logically implies that He has a database and a programming system that stores the past data and depending on the situtaions he manipulates the data and plans the reaction which we term "future" and this is again stored. Well atom too is omniscience. Remember DNA? Well all of the DNA consists primarily of carbon and hydrogen atoms. The nucliec acids too gives it a nitrogen. But then overall it is same. Yet, a person can be uniquely identified by his DNA. All our fingerprinting, sex test depend on DNA. Even a DNA bank is going to be opened up in Lucknow shortly. This logically means that DNA has all the information about the person. This also means that this unique information should be reflected in the way the molecule is formed by the atoms. So this means that all these carbon, nitrogen and hydrogen atoms have been programmed to combine in a unique way to give that uniqueness to the molecule and hence to the person. So just by studying the DNA we can predict a person's behavior and tendencies more or less. For that matter any substance can be explained by knowing its atomic structure. That is the purpose of the periodic table ! It has segregated the atoms and grouped them into Alkali metals, Alkaline earth metals, Transition compounds etc. for predicting the properties. Well atom is omniscience

God is omnipotent i.e. He can do anything and everything. When I say anything and everything three types of activities of God comes to my mind, given by Bhagwan Sri Sathya Sai Baba - Generation, Organization and Destruction. Can atoms generate? Well yes ! That is the entire physical and biological science about. Atoms combine and form molecules and aggregation of molecules gives us visible matter. Have you seen earthworms reproduce asexually? Or by the way a lizard growing its tail when it gets cut off? Well such things are not possible if atoms cannot multiply and generate their own clones. Can they organize? Well yes again ! That is the entire funda of isomers ! They have the same atoms and they are the same molecules, well the only difference is that arrangement of atoms in two isomers are different, resulting in many different type of properties. Glucose - D is different from Glucose -L. All these colours we see in the external world are due to specific organization of atoms at the micro level. And lastly atoms can destroy too ! That is the entire concept of Einstein's theory of relativity. Matter can transform to energy. All the radioactive decay that we see around is basically atoms destrying themselves.

God is omnipresent that is He is everywhere. Atoms too are. All matter visible and invisible are made up funadamental particles called atoms. It is found even in the boiling sun and at the coldness of Pluto. So atoms are spread everywhere.

God is divinely simple i.e. He is full by himself. Atoms too are for all of them consists of same proton, neutron and electron. Only the number of electron differs and this is necessary to give it various unique attributes. This can again be compared with the numerous powers God is said to manifest.

Last but not the least, like God, atom is eternal but can manifest itself depending on the need and time. This is verily explained by quantum physics; which says that atom can both be a wave and particle. Numerous experiments have proved it.

So is Atom God? I think so after all these reasonings.

Possible Flaws
Like all good scientists, I calmed down after the initial euphoria and began to think the possible flaws of my reasoning. We basically do to save our skin from any arguments. To my dismay I found too many flaws in my reasoning. I have noted down here a few important and not so obvious once.

1- Throughout my reasoning I used "molecules" to defend my arguments and not 'atoms' per se. It is more of an implicit assumption that the differences in the molecular level will be reflected in the atomic level. Well sometimes it is true, sometimes it is false. Even the molecular theory says that the properties of the molecules may be fundamentally unique from that of the atoms it is made of.

2 - There are so many atoms. The periodic table has 118 elements. But God is one right ? So are there are 118 Gods? well the only way I thought of countering this is that we have so many Gods like Krishna, Rama, Vinayaka and so on, each representing a different functionality of the same power. So all these atoms are representative of different functionality. But here again numerous questions come. They are representating "whose" functionality? So is there still a common source? From where do the electrons and protons come? What makes them join a nucleus in a particular number and is there a common sink for the electrons, protons and neutrons?

3 - Regarding the omnipresence of atoms, well how can we be sure of that we are encountering the same atom and not the similar one. Logically speaking the probabilty is very low.

4 - Particles smaller than the atom has been found. Quarks are supposed to be building blocks of atoms. but then this counters that God is creato and not the created ! So is quark God? Then this entire reasoning is flawed.

5 - I said that atoms are found wherever we have visible and invisible matter. But then what about space? There no matter is present? So is that place "godless"? Is God's omniprescence challenged there?

Social Implications
Flawed or not, my theory has lot of social implications. For the first time I can prove God is one ! Through electron microscope one can observe atoms and find that basically they are same types having the three basic components. There is nothing like a Ram atom or Rahim atom. So nothing will be left to imagination and debate whether they are same. People can see and feel God as something tangible. Its work and beauty can be appreciated. And respect for it too develops. with respect, a sense of fear comes and hence the powers of the atom can be utilised and not misused. So laws become simpler with CTBT, and NPT coming to an end. And most importantly religion becomes practical giving no scope for hooligans to play with innocent emotions in name of God ! Fatherhood of God and brotherhood of man will become the order of the day and not something to be delivered from a podium. And in reality we can start the day with god, spend the day with god and end the day with god.

So what say, is atom God?