Everything is unique

We tend to agree with the statement that "everyone is unique". However, we tend to think that things or inanimate materials could be clones of each other, or that "Everything is not unique". For example if I go to the store to buy a television I just need the model number; All TVs of the same model number are identical right?

This thinking extends to our experience, for example if I push a table then it will move in the direction of my push. If I pull it it will move with the pull. It cannot happen that if I push the table away from me it decides that it would rather move sideways.

This predictability of inanimate matter is the basis of physics. Its beginnings are based upon the predictability of the motion of big space objects such as planets, and eventually to the predictability of everyday objects.

This predictability is a surprising property if we were to ponder it more deeply. If we know the current position of a planet, we can predict where it is going to be in an hour, accurate to within meters. The said planet has existed for billions of years. All of its past history does not matter, while making this future prediction. There is a certain forgetfulness which is the basis of this prediction.

Consider a living being such as a cat for example. If I were to push a cat, the results could be quite unpredictable. Depending on the mood the cat is it in it could struggle it could run away, or it could bite and scratch. Even for living beings which are clones of each other (say identical twin cats), the same experimental setup will yield different results.

One can argue that well even for the cat if we were to be given its whole history, its behavior would be as predictable as that of the planet. However any such predictor that uses the whole history to output its estimate of the future is not useful because everything has a unique history. The least history the predictor uses the more useful it is.

When I first learnt that mathematics can be used with great effect to predict behavior of objects, I was very intrigued. I had always thought that mathematics was divorced from reality, maybe useful for money  and constructing shapes. That physical bodies follow rules which can be written in the language of mathematics was a revelation.

It was a revelation to physicists as well, earlier they may have been surprised at the effectiveness of mathematics in relation to physical systems. Over time however they became more confident in their predictive powers. In fact Laplace conceived of a demon (i.e. a powerful being), who could predict all that is about to come in the future based upon knowledge of the past.

Such hopes were to be dashed when physicists examined smaller and smaller bodies. When they reached the level of atoms, they were surprised to find that these tended to believe more like cats than other inanimate material. Thus if you push an electron it could happen that if moved forward, stayed put, or even move sideways or backwards.

In quantum physics which is about the behavior of these subatomic particles, it was found that one cannot say with certainty the result of a given experiment, one can only give odds for the electron doing this or that.

Fortunately mathematics had another tool in its arsenal in the form of probability theory, to describe this wayward behavior of electrones and photons, in terms of averages.  Thus while say ten percent of the electrons are recalcitrant and may like to push you back when you give them a push, ninety percent of them would simply comply with your request.

As you aggregate more and more of them as in large physical bodies we see around us, predictability returns back, because lets say 90% of electrons like to comply and 10% push against you, then by applying 100 units force you will see a net movement of 80 units, this will become more and more accurate as the number of small particles increases, just as if you toss a coin a large number of times and calculate the average of heads or tails, it will be closer and closer to 50%, the more tosses you perform.

What quantum mechanics shows us is that nature is at its heart more wayward than predictable. However there is some order to its chaos in terms of averages.

It can be said that it is not quantum mechanic which is weird, its willful particles are much like us. Rather it is the predictability of large inanimate matter using mathematical formulas which is a bit spooky.

Vipassana

In Buddhism, much emphasis is placed on the practice of Vipassana.

Vipassana is a form of meditation, but unlike meditation that involves visualization or chanting or sitting in a certain posture, this one simply entails observing oneself. Thus, it can be done at any time. While standing and waiting in the queue observe yourself, what are the thoughts that come at that time? What are the sensation and feelings you experience while stuck in a jam? How is your breath, when your boss is scolding you?

It is found that by taking this approach, one finds that many thoughts and feelings that one thought to be theirs are autonomic in nature, or in other words they arise spontaneously when the conditions that created them appear.
This also ties in with the concept of habits. Man is nothing but a creature of habit. If he continues being this way he is simply a puppet of circumstances. Certain circumstances call forth different attitudes, thoughts and moods. Thus a rainy day can invoke depression and dread while a sunny day brings forth exuberance and hope.
Even on our thoughts and feelings which we believe to be most intimately ours we have little control. While outwardly this may seem like an incredible statement, the practice of Vipsaana makes this fact abundantly clear.
What is the goal of all this continuous observation? As as with all pursuits in life the practitioner strives for happiness. However the ambitions are far more grandiose, the aim is nothing than the ultimate eradication of unhappiness, by extinguishing all negative states of mind. To gain a permanent bliss is the goal of Buddhism.
There is yet another purpose to this practice. With the aid of observation one gains knowledge about oneself. It is said that the knowledge of the self is the greatest knowledge, there is, for everything is in relation to the self.

While unlimited happiness seems like a lofty goal, at least there does not seem any egregious suspension of disbelief required to accept this Buddhist view of bliss, (as compared with a religion such as Christianity). No wonder it entices many in our modern world. Further, the Buddhist paradise is here and now (as opposed to a belief based religion). On top of it Buddhism deemphasizes belief, but encourages the follower to try with a skeptical nature and not believe, much like science. Consider the following quote from Buddha:

"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it."

Some of his quotes on enlightenment are also worth pondering:

"There are two mistakes one can make along the road to truth...not going all the way, and not starting."

"It is better to conquer yourself than to win a thousand battles. Then the victory is yours. It cannot be taken from you, not by angels or by demons, heaven or hell."

Creators vs Consumers

Most people are consumers be it in media, technology or even retail. Only a few among us are creators. These two categories of humanity inhabit completely separate realms.

Consumers are the followers, creators are leaders. The creators dictate terms, what the masses get to consume. In today's times there is a plethora of consumers. Modern work environment does not engage the worker, and leads to dissatisfaction and a sense of energy being misdirected and wasted. This all in the end goes to the creators, who channel the masses dissatisfaction and being few in number get outsized rewards for their efforts. They also derive greater satisfaction from life, since they are working on creating things for which are highly recognized and rewarded, while the consumers are just spending money and time and in turn being subject to the whims of the creator.


This is supported by examples all around us, for example consider the case of  Apple. It is they (or Steve Jobs) who gets to decide what choices we have for our technology equipment and we have to suffer the ignominy of standing in lines overnight, overpaying, and then learning to live with the arbitrary limitations they dictatorially imposes on the device. Consider Coke or Pepsi who get to decide what kind of junk sugar water can we poison our system with, and how much markup we have to pay them for this privilege. Or consider movie producers who keep churning out clichéd unintelligent movies day in day out and the masses keep spending money on these limited consumption choices. These two are further propped up by other creators such as the news media which tells the consumers to buy this and see that. Being a creator is what gives satisfaction. However, the existing creators incentivize being a consumer (by working for them, or spending spare time pursuing their creations) to such an extent that most of us remain in that mold.
Creativity is risky, but in the end it is something which allows one to live on ones own terms and not in slavery to the creators, both in work as well as leisure. It is not only the monetary benefit, the satisfaction of being a creator makes his/her work far more interesting than the leisure of a consumer.

Mathematics as a Game

Mathematics can be considered analogous to a board game such as chess.

To make the analogy clearer first consider a branch of mathematics such as algebra: any such branch starts out with definitions or axioms, these axioms are akin to the board layout and initial setting of the pieces on the chessboard.

Next we have the idea of proof and theorems in mathematics. A theorem is simply something which can be derived by applying logical rules to the axioms. In our chessboard example a true theorem is any configuration of the chess board that is possible with valid moves. The valid moves are analogous to a the logical rules.

Next is the concept of interesting theorems, in our chessboard example only few configurations are interesting, for example those which lead the rival to checkmate. similarly in mathematics infinite theorems can be proven but few are interesting and insightful.

It is said that grandmasters can view positions that are 20 moves ahead. A mathematician builds upon existing theorems and aims to prove new ones. A gifted mathematician can view moves that are far ahead thus being able to collapse several steps of logic into one, which allows him to explore more in a short time. Some of this collapsing is taught to students as well.

This analogy is clearly evident while reading a book on mathematics. A book of mathematics is typically full of proofs. If you try to read them as fast as a novel you are bound to be frustrated by the lack of understanding. Rather one has to read it as if reading an endgame position in chess and understand the gameplay step by step. Further one must retain some of the tricks used in this game for future reference.

Civilization and Poverty

"Civilization is the cause of poverty"

At first glance it seems like a strange statement: the organization and security provided by civilization has facilitated many advances in technology, which in turn has allowed erstwhile luxuries to be within reach of the common man and even those economically disadvantaged.

The phrase makes sense if poverty is understood as a relative and not absolute term. Look at the natural world of animals. In this world there is no accumulation of wealth and thus no rich or poor. By the standards of modern society they are all uniformly poor. However in their world economic egalitarianism prevails.

Relative wealth is probably the correct way to gauge poverty anyhow for the riches of a human do not entice the Lion. His reference set is his own brethren.

The specialization and division of labor coupled with the fact that many tasks are unpleasent and dangerous mean that the poor will always be amongst us if for nothing else but to incentivize them to pursue those tasks. For example look at some of the middle eastern countries where each citizen is guaranteed an uper middle class existence by virtue of being born there. in such societies thr poor had to be imported from elsewhere such as south asia to keep the wheels of society spinning.

With technological advances abject poverty may be eradicated. However relative poverty cannot be ended since it is a byproduct of civilization itself, and it must be created if it does not exist in a sufficient amount for the necessary impetus for
unpleasent jobs.

Spinning the wheel

What does the phrase mean?

Spinning the wheel is an eastern philosophical idea. The essence of it is also captured by the phrase: "Going fast nowhere".

What is the meaning of this? It is simply this that the world around us is cyclical in nature, whilst life is a continuous struggle. While the struggle seems to be towards an eventual aim it is all an illusion.

People believe that their struggle is towards an end, to achieve something lasting. However nothing could be lasting in nature, where the same struggle has been repeated ad infinitum by myraid beings in the past and will be so in the future.

The idea brings home this fact that the furious effort being made by living beings are leading to no eventual triumph. Their struggles just spin the wheels of nature.