Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home


Previous Contests

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discusswinners

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.
read/discusswinners

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

kidz byn: on 9/21/17 at 6:30am UTC, wrote xuất tinh sớm nguyên nhân gây xuất tinh sớm ở nam giới ...

kidz byn: on 9/9/17 at 4:20am UTC, wrote xuất tinh sớm ở nam giới luôn là vấn đề gây rất nhiều...

sridattadev kancharla: on 8/28/16 at 20:39pm UTC, wrote Please use this link Any Body Can Derive Everything From Geometry[link].

sridattadev kancharla: on 10/30/13 at 19:01pm UTC, wrote Dear All, Enjoy the following blog and videos in it. Any Body...

Paul Borrill: on 8/7/13 at 22:03pm UTC, wrote Dear Sridattadev, I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the...

Antony Ryan: on 8/7/13 at 21:45pm UTC, wrote Great thinking Sridattadev!

sridattadev kancharla: on 8/2/13 at 23:59pm UTC, wrote Dear Dipak, I will rate your essay as per your request and yes zero =...

sridattadev kancharla: on 8/2/13 at 0:31am UTC, wrote Dear Dipak, Yes indeed K = I = Singularity. I wish you all the best in...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Hanvi jobs: "Yes i am totally agreed with this article and i just want say that this..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

Robert McEachern: ""all experiments have pointed towards this and there is no way to avoid..." in Review of "Foundations of...

James Putnam: "Light bends because it is accelerating. It accelerates toward an object..." in Black Hole Photographed...

Robert McEachern: "Lorenzo, The nature of "information" is well understood outside of..." in Review of "Foundations of...

Georgina Woodward: "Steve, Lorraine is writing about a simpler "knowing " rather than the..." in The Nature of Time

Steve Agnew: "Knowing information necessarily means neural action potentials. Atom and..." in The Nature of Time


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.

Dissolving Quantum Paradoxes
The impossibility of building a perfect clock could help explain away microscale weirdness.


FQXi FORUM
May 22, 2019

CATEGORY: It From Bit or Bit From It? Essay Contest (2013) [back]
TOPIC: I_to the_bit_to the_it_to the bit_to the_I by sridattadev kancharla [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author sridattadev kancharla wrote on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 16:39 GMT
Essay Abstract

Purpose of this essay is to demonstrate the absolute role of the conscience in the relative reality we all live in. Consciousness is a sphere of universal Schwarzschild radius (ranging from zero to infinity) with a central cosmological constant of the conscience or the singularity or the soul or the absolute (i), Universe is an iSphere. This simple universal truth can also be mathematically expressed as, zero = i = infinity

Author Bio

I am your alter ego. We are one and the same i or the singularity or the conscience or the soul or the absolute or the god.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



basudeba mishra wrote on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 03:52 GMT
Dear Sir,

How can zero be equal to infinity? By definition, zero is associated with an object that is not present at here-now (it has to exist elsewhere, otherwise the concept of zero becomes meaningless), whereas infinity is associated with an object, which, like 1, has no similars, but unlike 1, whose dimensions are not fully perceptible. Thus, infinity exists everywhere – like time and space. These two can never be equated. Regarding cognition, please read our essay published here on May, 31, 2013.

You are effectively discussing cause and effect in your second para, but are discussing reality. For a proper definition of reality, please read our essay.

What you say time travel is really memory. It is only a store house of information like a CPU and has nothing to do with motion that is associated with time travel.

According to Yajur Veda (8/36), Brahman has three aspects (Trini jyotimshi): the background structure (Srishta Brahman), the operative part (Pravista Brahman) and the one beyond all these (Pravivikta Brahman). The first gets converted to 3 aspects of Iccha, Gyan and Kriya, (or Avyaya, Akshara and Kshara respectively) which, when limited, manifest as Raga, Vidya-Avidya and Kala on the Purusha side and Sattwa-Raja-Tama on the Prakriti side. The Second gets converted to 16 aspects (Shodashee) of Paratpara, 5 Pachajana, 5 Puranjana and 5 Pura, that leads to the creation event. The third cannot be known (neti neti). These can be compared with the so-called dark energy, dark matter and the totality beyond the Universe, respectively.

Regards,

basudeba

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jun. 16, 2013 @ 14:33 GMT
Dear basudeba,

As always, the purpose of my essays is not to discuss the mechanisms of relativity in detail, but point us to the absolute truth. Only equality exists at the absolute, which includes both the relative extremes(nothing or zero and everything or infinity). Singularity is absolute equality.

I "is" the Paramatman, Parabrahman, Paramanandan.

This is the essence and purpose of all Vedas to make a human being realize who i really "is".

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share


basudeba mishra replied on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 00:43 GMT
Dear Sir,

The purpose of this contest is to analyze reality with special focus on information. In our essay published on May, 31, we had just done that. We are not discussing relativity unless the context so demands. Generally, we do not use relativity, but point out the fallacies in others presentations with alternative explanations.

Singularity is a derivative of relativity (unless you are referring to Adwait, which is total unification, which again is different from absolute equality). Hence you are talking about relativity.

Atman refers to the "Attaa" - one who enjoys. Brahman refers to "Brimhan", which refers to that which expands and the greatest of all. Aanandam refers to "Swaatantrya" - absolute freedom. They are three distinct aspects not in equilibrium. They do not belong to the same class. Since you are referring to three distinct, but different aspects, you are not talking about Adwait either.

The Vedas also declare "Ko dadarsha prathamam jaayamaanam, asthanwantam yad anasthaa bibhartim" - which refers to the primordial transformation from "Anna-annaada" to "rayi-praana" to "sthitisiddha-bhaatisiddha" objects that constitute the present Universe. This aspect of the Vedas is necessary for this forum. Mixing up issues gives our ancient heritage a bad name. In case you want

to discuss philosophy, you are free to do so, but please do not call it physics. This is a forum for physics.

Regards,

basudeba

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 12:51 GMT
dear basudeba,

Who is physics (matter and energy) for if not for the I or the soul?

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share



Peter Jackson wrote on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 12:21 GMT
Sridattadev.

It's always a pleasure to read your essays. Shame it's so short, but the power of the thoughts is infinite.

One of the jobs I do is creation. I'm trained as an Architect, so even before a house exists in any way on plans I create it and it exists, in 3D, with all it's components, spaces and aesthetics in my mind. Does that not mean it has an 'existence'?

To me what the builder constructs is but a copy, an approximation of the creation in my mind. The physical house may be 'it' and the information given to the tradesmen the 'bits' but the original true pure conception, including the emotions of those who see and use it, is first and always in my consciousness.

Yet I am the most real of all realists, as however good a theoretician and thinker I have to ensure the house is actually buildable, built and physically works to engender the emotions desired. I can't afford flights of fancy that don't relate to reality.

I believe this approach has enabled a realist resolution of the EPR paradox in my essay. It seems very few recognise the beauty of the architecture. I hope you study it to see if you can. As it's pure in my mind I'm happy, but it would also be nice to help advance understanding.

Now there's a task!

Very best wishes

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jun. 16, 2013 @ 14:41 GMT
Dear Peter,

I hope you enjoyed the sweetness of the essay being short though, as it is called, short and sweet. Once we know our absolute self we can better architect the relative reality we consciously construct continuously. I am only trying to make us all wake up to the truth of our self or singularity.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share



Joe Fisher wrote on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 17:12 GMT
Sridattadev,

Brevity is the soul of wit. It does not necessarily follow that brevity would be the soul of “it.” Nice try though.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jun. 16, 2013 @ 14:47 GMT
Dear Joe,

I "is" the entirety, it all begins and ends with I.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share



John C Maguire wrote on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 00:48 GMT
Good, albeit short, read. Well done getting to the heart of the issue. While in my essay I emphasize bit and don't venture into the 3rd category of 'I' as you have, certainly some kind of 'thought' precedes action, but there is always the issue of matter/substance as a necessary carrier of Information/I, so can one element truly precede the other? Perhaps their identities are equally codependent (even 'I')?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 12:49 GMT
Dear John,

You are absolutely right, the point that I am trying to make is that there is only one I, which loops back on to itself via the bits and its. Its a continuous process and hence no distinction can be made absolutely. Energy (bits or information) and matter (it) are just that relative medium that I uses to communicate with itself accross the space-time which came forth out of I. It's all just a game that I plays.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share



Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 04:32 GMT
Dear sridattadev

Wishing you always happiness with absolute belief in the soul.

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1802

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Hoang cao Hai replied on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 04:35 GMT
I always judged by the high score for that belief.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Hoang cao Hai replied on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 04:36 GMT
Glad to see you here.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jun. 19, 2013 @ 15:02 GMT
Dear Hai,

Thank you and from your essay I know that you are a believer in the absolute as well and I wish you the absolute joy in your journey.

To the question you posed at the end of your essay, Is God absolute?

We have to first find God to confirm if God is absolute and the best place to find GOD is with in your self. You are the God that you are looking for, once you realize this truth, you will find that you are the absolute as well.

So the answer is, I in all of us is the absolute GOD.

Love

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share



Sreenath B N wrote on Jun. 22, 2013 @ 18:34 GMT
Dear Sridattadev,

Thanks for presenting your essay and pleased to see you here. I have down loaded your essay and make comments on it after reading it. Meanwhile you too, please, go through my essay and send your comments.

As usual, I wish you best of luck in the competition.

Love,

Sreenath.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jun. 23, 2013 @ 00:00 GMT
Dear Sreenath,

I wish you all the best in sharing your perspective of the reality with the rest of us all.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share


Sreenath B N replied on Jun. 23, 2013 @ 09:06 GMT
Dear Sridattadev,

I read your enchanting essay. In my essay, if the word 'mind' is replaced by 'Atman' in your essay then we are on the same plane travelling to reach our preordained destination, The Absolute or The 'Brahman'. And I know that you are yearning for that.

warmest regards,

sreenath.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jun. 24, 2013 @ 14:55 GMT
Dear Sreenath,

Yes indeed and I want all of our kind to yearn for and enjoy this divine equilibrium or singularity with in the self.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share



Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jun. 27, 2013 @ 04:39 GMT
Send to all of you

THE ADDITIONAL ARTICLES AND A SMALL TEST FOR MUTUAL BENEFIT

To change the atmosphere "abstract" of the competition and to demonstrate for the real preeminent possibility of the Absolute theory as well as to clarify the issues I mentioned in the essay and to avoid duplicate questions after receiving the opinion of you , I will add a reply to you :

1 . THE...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Sreenath B N wrote on Jun. 28, 2013 @ 08:14 GMT
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

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jun. 30, 2013 @ 14:13 GMT
Dear Sreenath,

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

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share



Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jun. 29, 2013 @ 11:08 GMT
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...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jun. 30, 2013 @ 14:34 GMT
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.

Bookmark and Share


Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 19:00 GMT
Resp Sridattadev

Thank you for the SAMA TATVA vishleshana..

It is a real good philosophical thought...

I believe in God, No problem. God is not space time. God is not any mathematical singularity undefined.

About a chair or table or any thing we form a picture in our mind. This picture is information in our mind. It will die with the person at his death. We communicate this picture with each other. We can not just create matter from this information itself.

Please discuss with me further...

Best

=snp

snp.gupta@gmail.com

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jul. 24, 2013 @ 14:35 GMT
Dear Satya,

Information is also a form of energy. We as human sentient beings might be incapable of harnessing that energy and manifesting it into material reality at will, but that does not mean it cannot be done. Nature does this seamlessly using the information coded in the DNA and converting energy from the sun in to matter through photosynthesis. That is why I put plants at a higher conscious less than the average human being, for being conscious of knowing how to convert energy (information) to matter. GOD is Generator Organizer Destroyer of all that there is.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share



Georgina Woodward wrote on Jul. 2, 2013 @ 04:01 GMT
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

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jul. 2, 2013 @ 13:10 GMT
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.

Bookmark and Share



James Lee Hoover wrote on Jul. 3, 2013 @ 19:27 GMT
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

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Antony Ryan wrote on Jul. 19, 2013 @ 10:05 GMT
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

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jul. 21, 2013 @ 15:04 GMT
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.

Bookmark and Share


Antony Ryan replied on Jul. 21, 2013 @ 16:23 GMT
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

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jul. 22, 2013 @ 02:56 GMT
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...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share



Author sridattadev kancharla wrote on Jul. 22, 2013 @ 15:30 GMT
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.

Bookmark and Share


Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jul. 22, 2013 @ 15:32 GMT
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.

Bookmark and Share


Antony Ryan replied on Jul. 22, 2013 @ 16:30 GMT
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

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jul. 22, 2013 @ 17:19 GMT
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.

Bookmark and Share



Sreenath B N wrote on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 01:44 GMT
Dear sridattadev,

Glad to see your posting in my thread. Your work on Fibonacci series is enlightening to those who work on QG. In my previous essay contest in fqxi (2012) in my article on QG, you will find reference to Fibonacci series.

Thanks for reminding me that and also for your innovative revelation on that.

Looking forward to here more from you in future.

Best regards,

Sreenath

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

basudeba mishra replied on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 14:48 GMT
Dear Sir,

We have refuted your equating zero with infinity in our first post. We avoided replying to that telling that you do not want to discuss relativity. Then why are you continuing with such weird ideas?

In your Author bio-data, you have said "I am your alter ego. We are one and the same i or the singularity or the conscience or the soul or the absolute or the god." I is discrete (consciousness is not) and alter ego suggests duality. Then how can both be same?

What is the rationale of your writing or post to the topic at hand? It is beyond us! You are advocating 'pravritti' path, which only tempts the sense organs to go more for it (material enjoyment) and away from salvation. Of course it is your choice.

Regards,

basudeba

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jul. 24, 2013 @ 14:26 GMT
Dear basudeba,

Thank you.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share



Author sridattadev kancharla wrote on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 11:52 GMT
Dear All,

Enjoy the absolute truth of the self. Thou art that.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share



Don Limuti wrote on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 20:16 GMT
Dear Sridattadev,

Enjoyed your essay.

It is easy the swap the real and the unreal :)

Good to be reminded about the real.

Yours in divinity,

Don L.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jul. 24, 2013 @ 14:23 GMT
Dear Don L,

Thank you, yours in divinity too.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share



Jonathan J. Dickau wrote on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 21:18 GMT
I always enjoy reading your essays, Sridattadev.

While it is not strictly speaking about Physics, and while you do stretch the concepts somewhat, I find a lot to agree with in your work. I'd like to point out that, in the way you frame things "It from Bit" is a lot like "I think therefore I am!" Working from the Latin "Cogito Ergo Sum" can also be translated "Thinking therefore Being," which makes it much the same as "It from Bit."

I find wonderment in the knowledge that I IS. Most people never get to that realization, as it requires the awareness of Spirit. I actually talk a little on this in my essay this year.

My observation is that one can speak of three stages in the awareness of I.

I Am - is the personal experience of existence

I Is - acknowledges the presence of Spirit, as an agent of manifestation or change.

I Be - refers to the nature of identity being found in the Divine itself.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Jonathan J. Dickau replied on Jul. 23, 2013 @ 21:20 GMT
Of course;

As I forgot to say.

I Is implies the existence of a quality of identity that is pervasive.

Have Fun!

Jonathan

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jul. 24, 2013 @ 14:22 GMT
Dear Jonathan,

Thank you and enjoy.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share



Author sridattadev kancharla wrote on Jul. 24, 2013 @ 13:25 GMT
Dear All,

I am attaching the iSeries that I have envisioned and how it shows the DNA structure in its sequence.

Its interesting to see the singularity is in the base seed of zero and how it is all pervasive all through out the structure. I have been telling that I is that nothing which dwells in everything and this DNA structure seems to prove that notion. Singularity is right with in the duality. Absolute is right with in the relativity. This proves that both of these states are interconnected and are the source of life.

Love,

Sridattadev.

attachments: iDNASeries.bmp

Bookmark and Share



Wilhelmus de Wilde de Wilde wrote on Jul. 24, 2013 @ 14:44 GMT
Dear Sridattadev,

It is again a pleasure to meet you again in this contest.

You are the only one (beside myself) that is proposing the role of consciousness in the creation of reality.(my "Crealities")

I wonder what you think of my participation "THE QUEST FOR THE PRIMAL SEQUENCE".

In my perception DNA is one way of knowledge sharing in the infinities of the Eternal Now.

I rated your "thoughts" high and hope that if you meet "alter ego" thoughts you will comment and rate mine also.

respectfully

Wilhelmus

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jul. 24, 2013 @ 15:35 GMT
My Dear Wilhelmus,

I do.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share



Michel Planat wrote on Jul. 24, 2013 @ 16:10 GMT
Dear Sridattadev,

Interesting short essay.

You write

"Imagine being as an intelligent turtle on the beach and observing a kid building a sand castle on the beach, playing with it for some time and breaking it down and walking away. Process or plan of building can be referred to the bits, castle can be referred to the it and the kid is i."

I also have childs in my essay

http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1789

or better, I have the 'child's drawings'.

Have a look.

May be the I has to do with the \infty of the "child's drawing" model, there the Belyi map of Sec. 2 (step 3) has poles.

Best wishes,

Michel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jul. 24, 2013 @ 17:57 GMT
Dear Michel,

Thank you for reading the essay, I will post my findings in your essay.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share



Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jul. 24, 2013 @ 23:52 GMT
Resp Sridattadev,

Thank you for your post on my thread, I replied it there. For your information I am reproducing it here.....

Thank you very much for such fast reply. I hope I did not get you mad at me with my arguments. My ratings reduced suddenly! Here I am giving a reply point to point after your words quoted with - - - - -. I hope to have a live discussion with you.

- -...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jul. 25, 2013 @ 00:59 GMT
Dear Satya,

I am replying to your queries one by one as well

As you have said that information as energy is not proved yet but again it is not proved that it is not either so what I said holds until proven wrong or right.

What is life but a struggle to be or not to be in a particular state of matter and energy. Consciousness is this awareness of the self and the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share


Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta replied on Jul. 25, 2013 @ 04:38 GMT
Dear Sridattadev,

There are many unproven hypothesises. We should not break our head on them. For the last 80 years scientific people are spending energy and time in vain to find Blackholes which are nothing but mathematical singularities.

Our Scientific quest should take its firm support on EXPERIMENTS and their results. Please see my essay, which is based only on experimental...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jul. 25, 2013 @ 13:01 GMT
Dear Satya,

You are absolutely right in saying "Every time we take a measurement we are doing an experiment demonstrating that material objects and information exist in unison." This is the essence of my philosophy too that we cannot tell apart one from another and hence the title I_to_the_bit_to_the_ it_to_the_bit_to_the_I, i used underscores to connect everything in the title for a purpose, to highlight the unison. I am using the word singularity to define the unison. Even if the black holes (death in human terms) exist they just lead us to the unison or the absolute not the relative unknown mathematical singularity. There is only I in the universe, it is the human perception of of this absolute unison or singularity or i with senses that differs and causes all the confusion or illusion. I is everything and everywhere and every time. I is the one that is taking the measurement if you will in the experiments. With out I there is absolutely nothing. If you have noticed there is I in both the b"i"t and "i"t of the topic we are trying to discuss, with out the i both the bit and it loose their literal meaning, I am pointing to that subtleness and yet the importance of i or conscience in all of us, thats all.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share



Author sridattadev kancharla wrote on Jul. 26, 2013 @ 02:39 GMT
Dear All,



Seems like I found something interesting in the DNA structure related to Fibonacci series as I was seeking it



Please see this video DNA-RNA



2 prime

3 prime

5 prime



2,3,5 are the numbers of Fibonacci series.



DNA is not just limited to life on this planet, its all over the universe and other planets can hold larger primes of the sequence in them, why not?



Human life is like a hide and seek game that I play with the self.

As I said we will find what we seek, all we got to do is keep an open mind and seek with sincerity.



Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share


Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jul. 28, 2013 @ 12:24 GMT
Dear All,

One more important correlation that I found in the iDNASeries image is in the template strand (Fibonacci strand) and the non template strand (zero or base strand) as depicted in this video. You will find this around 3 minutes into the below video.



Fibonacci sequence in DNA

I am learning how this iSeries really applies to DNA, besides my intuition or inner knowledge. Its all with in us, we just have to know how to access it.



Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share


Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jul. 28, 2013 @ 12:35 GMT
Dear All,

Here is the iDNASeries image that I envisioned that is related to the above two findings.

Love,

Sridattadev

attachments: 12_iDNASeries.bmp

Bookmark and Share


Sridattadev Kancharla replied on Jul. 28, 2013 @ 13:01 GMT
Dear FQXi Organizers,

I request you to kindly consider these findings of iSeries which is the universal mathematical sequence and super set of Fibonacci sequence and that Fibonacci sequence is a dual sequence comprising of two semi series governed by universally applicable mathematical equations of their own and the application of iSeries to the DNA structure, for publication in a scientific journal after a thorough review. I am very thankful to the fellow contestants and FQXi community for being the catalysts in my quest for and arrival at the universal truth.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Than Tin wrote on Jul. 26, 2013 @ 04:01 GMT
Hello Sridattadev

Richard Feynman in his Nobel Acceptance Speech

(http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/19
65/feynman-lecture.html)

said: “It always seems odd to me that the fundamental laws of physics, when discovered, can appear in so many different forms that are not apparently identical at first, but with a little mathematical fiddling you can show...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jul. 28, 2013 @ 12:14 GMT
Dear Than Tin,

Thank you for your wonderful analysis and yes it makes perfect sense. I concur with you on this and you can include "Singularity-Duality" in your list.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share



Wilhelmus de Wilde de Wilde wrote on Jul. 26, 2013 @ 09:10 GMT
Dear Sridattadev :

"I is nothing that dwells in Everything"

beautiful said.

I answered you on my thread but will repeat it here :

You are saying there what I mean when I say :

"Our non-causal consciousness is part of "Total Simultaneity" (TS), TS is a "dimension" (not the right word, but how do you explain GOD ?) that could be compared with a singularity (NO causal dimensions) The EVERYTHING we can se as singularity. The non causal part of our consciousness can be compared to the "Unmoved Mover" from Plato, so is the origin of causality in our three dimensional + time universe, where our causal consciousness is like a prisoner in its time line.

You lose me with the formula's you use but surely they will explain your thinking, personally I admire Leonard de Pise (Fibonacci), everywhere around you in nature you see the beauty of this mathematical series, I think this is one of the ways that math can explain beauty. But then again there is like Pi Phi both numbers with an infinity behind the comma.

In the material causal universe there are no infinities and no singularities is my opinion, they only exist in our minds and in the singularity in Total Simultaneity.

regards and also Love

Wilhelmus

PS if you value also my thinking , I should be obliged if you would rate on my birthday, my essay like I did yours. Thanks

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jul. 27, 2013 @ 13:28 GMT
Dear Wilhelmus,

Happy birthday, and you should celebrate every moment of it as we believe is Total Simultaneity.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share


Wilhelmus de Wilde de Wilde replied on Jul. 27, 2013 @ 15:30 GMT
Thanks Sridattadev

love

Wilhelmus

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Akinbo Ojo wrote on Jul. 26, 2013 @ 12:27 GMT
Hello Sridattadev,

That was a lovely essay. But I was confused where you said 0 = infinity. Perhaps you may read my essay also and rate.

Best regards,

Akinbo

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jul. 27, 2013 @ 13:26 GMT
Dear Akinbo,

Thanks for reading the essay. I have posted my comments in your essay as well.

Please see mathematical proof of zero = I = infinity .

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share



eAmazigh M. HANNOU wrote on Jul. 26, 2013 @ 17:16 GMT
Dear Sridattadev,

A very short article but many relevant issues.

I have a simple but difficult question, I think: what is reality?

Is there one or more ?

Thank you and good luck.

Please visit My essay.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jul. 27, 2013 @ 13:11 GMT
Dear Amazigh,



what is reality? I is the reality and zero = I = infinity.

Is there one or more ? Its up to I to choose what I want it to be.

I have posted my comments in your essay as well.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share


eAmazigh M. HANNOU replied on Jul. 27, 2013 @ 21:21 GMT
Dear Sridattadev,

Thank you for appreciating my essay.

Interesting video with prime numbers in DNA.

Numbers and eDuality are in all things.

I rated your essay accordingly to my appreciation.

Respectfully, and good luck.

Please visit My essay.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Michel Planat wrote on Jul. 28, 2013 @ 19:15 GMT
Dear Sridattadev,

Again me. Your fundamental equation is

zero = i = infinity

(but i can be 1, any number, you say).

just because your maths are not sophisticated enogh.

I use Grotendieck's formalism of "dessins d'enfants" (child's drawings) where 0, 1 and infy are the only singular points on a Riemann surface (genus 0 -> the Riemann sphere). I suspect you need to look at this work to better establish your deep feelings.

http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1789

Best regards,

Michel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Jul. 28, 2013 @ 22:31 GMT
Dear Michel,

Please see below statements and their implication in mathematics



If 0 x 0 = 0 is true, then 0 / 0 = 0 is also true

If 0 x 1 = 0 is true, then 0 / 0 = 1 is also true

If 0 x 2 = 0 is true, then 0 / 0 = 2 is also true

If 0 x i = 0 is true, then 0 / 0 = i is also true

If 0 x ~ = 0 is true, then 0 / 0 = ~ is also true

It seems that mathematics, the universal language, is also pointing to the absolute truth that 0 = 1 = 2 = i = ~, where "i" can be any number from zero to infinity. Any number on its own means absolutely nothing (zero) or itself (infinite or undefined). Only when compared to numbers before it or after it does it have a relative meaning. Theory of everything is that there is absolutely nothing but the self or i.

I have also explained that the universe is an iSphere and we humans are capable of interpreting it as a 4 dimensional 3Sphere manifold.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share



Dipak Kumar Bhunia wrote on Jul. 30, 2013 @ 03:02 GMT
Dear Sridattadev,

Thanks for a precise but a very short essay. I think your "I" somehow linked with the VEDANTA's concepts of ANTMA and PARAMATMA, where at fundamental level that "I" may consider as "0", "infinity" or anyother numbers, that does not make any difference.

But in digital-sphere of present process of scientific understanding, which has huge obligations to pass through the regular experimental tests, that kind of VEDANTIC concepts of "0" & "infinity" seems to be far from any of such experimentation, even if that is true in reality. That is why a kind of 'digital limitations' in our current scientific observations come into play. But who can say now that will be not be possible in future? Science rolls itself simply with experiments with the ages.

I invite you kindly to read my submitted essay in contest. I think in spite of some disagreements what you have said in your essay you must see lot of agreements. It all covers your concepts of "time", quantize concepts of absolute (but relative)"observers" and so many; you may even deduce there your concepts of "0" and "infinity" from Eqs.(23)and other Eqs. as well. You can also consider K as your "I".

Again my thanks for presenting such a deep thinking.

How ever can we mutually rate our essays?

Regards

Dipak

http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic
/1855

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Aug. 2, 2013 @ 00:31 GMT
Dear Dipak,

Yes indeed K = I = Singularity. I wish you all the best in your efforts to explain relative reality scientifically.



I will provide my ratings as per your request.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share


Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Aug. 2, 2013 @ 23:59 GMT
Dear Dipak,

I will rate your essay as per your request and yes zero = k = i = infinity.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share



KoGuan Leo wrote on Aug. 1, 2013 @ 06:48 GMT
Dear Sridattadev,

I believe we say the same thing in different languages. Please look at Child of Qbit in time. The Qbit is the mother and the Qbit is the child, because KQID believes that Qbit is all things and all things are Qbit. The Qbits creates and distributes itself through KQID Ouroboros Equations of Existence.

The math is like yours but differed in expression that 00 = 1 =...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author sridattadev kancharla wrote on Aug. 2, 2013 @ 00:19 GMT
My Dear Lover Leo KoGuan,

We are all one and the same Qbit or I or singularity. I am filled with absolute joy to see my own reflection in you in this relative reality or duality through your work.

Qbit = I = Singularity

KQID Ouroboros = I_Bit_It_Bit_I Ouroboros

I purposefully connected the I_Bit_It_Bit_I in the heading it represents an Ouroborus, I is both the head and the tail, beginning and the end. Everything emerges from I and merges back with I.

Please see Theory of everything is that there is absolutely nothing but I

I will rate your essay as per your request but these numbers mean nothing to I or Qbit as they are all absolutely equal.

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share



Paul Borrill wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 22:03 GMT
Dear Sridattadev,

I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the contest and appreciate your contribution to this competition.

I have been thoroughly impressed at the breadth, depth and quality of the ideas represented in this contest. In true academic spirit, if you have not yet reviewed my essay, I invite you to do so and leave your comments.

You can find the latest version of my essay here:

http://fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/Borrill-TimeOne-
V1.1a.pdf

(sorry if the fqxi web site splits this url up, I haven’t figured out a way to not make it do that).

May the best essays win!

Kind regards,

Paul Borrill

paul at borrill dot com

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author sridattadev kancharla wrote on Oct. 30, 2013 @ 19:01 GMT
Dear All,



Enjoy the following blog and videos in it.

Any Body Can Derive - Everything From Geometry

Love,

Sridattadev.

Bookmark and Share


Author sridattadev kancharla replied on Aug. 28, 2016 @ 20:39 GMT
Please use this link Any Body Can Derive Everything From Geometry[link].




kidz byn wrote on Sep. 9, 2017 @ 04:20 GMT
xuất tinh sớm ở nam giới luôn là vấn đề gây rất nhiều khó khăn cho các quý ông. Đâu là nguyên nhân gây xuất tinh sớm ở nam giới, các cách chữa bệnh xuất tinh sớm. Tìm hiểu thêm về biện pháp phòng tránh và khắc phục xuất tinh sớmNgoài ra một vấn đề các quý ông cũng cần phải quan tâm đó chính là những tác hại của xuất tinh sớm

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


kidz byn wrote on Sep. 21, 2017 @ 06:30 GMT
xuất tinh sớm

nguyên nhân gây xuất tinh sớm ở nam giới

các cách chữa bệnh xuất tinh sớm

sau sinh nen an gi

nên ăn gì khi mang thai

các xét nghiệm khi mang thai

tiêm phòng trước khi mang thai

khám thai định kỳ

chuẩn bị trước khi mang thai

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.