It is better for peace in the world if this is widely read.

Its a privilege to be the first – on Amazon –  to review this book of extraordinary significance.

Andrew Brown has written a masterpiece about the life and times of Joseph Rotblat, a nuclear scientist par excellence, whose excellence was demonstrated even more in making the scientists of his time to understand their ethical responsibility and leading them on to  play  a vital role in launching an ethical revolution. Joseph Rotblat dedicated his life for furtherance of peace among nations, and above all the prevention of nuclear wars. He was the main driving force behind the Pug wash movement – the conferences – which bring together from around the world, influential scientists, scholars and public figures concerned with the danger of armed conflicts,  to seek solutions for global problems.  The stimulus for these conferences was provided by a Manifesto issued by Einstein and Bertrand Russell in 1955.

The book is a historical review of events of the twentieth century .. not necessarily described in a sequential way. But all the essential information is there. The author has placed all the  cards  on the table with regard to what happened in the past.  How many times in the past has the emblematic clock moved closer to midnight just minutes before the pressing of the nuclear buttons ? How were the probabilities created to prevent the pressing of those buttons ?

Books like this should be in the private libraries of leaders of nations … no harm will be done if these leaders partake in the Pugwash movement … but not as members  of this or that nation, religion, or creed, but as human beings, whose continued existence is in doubt. As Einstein/Russell stated in their manifesto, they should consider themselves as members of a biological species which has had a remarkable history, and whose disappearance none of us can desire.

There is no doubt we are currently passing through a  dangerous time zone –  getting even more alarming as the population rises and resources crumble –  where we have about one hundred thousand nuclear warheads located at several locations on the planet Earth, and not all of them are in possession of `Safe Hands`. The probabilities must be created to come out safely from this time zone.

I reiterate once again that the significance of this book must not be underestimated.

It is better for peace in the world if it is widely read.

This is my fifth review.

S.K.SAGAR

                                                              Reviewed by S.K.SAGAR

“`This is another outstanding `Five Star` book. I have never reviewed any ..other than `Five Star`.

It is expensive … so I kept renewing from the British Library number of times..till I finished reading and had made enough notes on the parts I liked, and there are many.

I am quite used to Andrew Whitaker`s unique style of writing. I have read  one of his other  books “Einstein Bohr and the Quantum Dillemma“ which is there on my shelf. He goes into enormous detail, cutting open all the theories to near quantum levels, appreciating  the theories he likes and understanding and explaining  the others , without being critical of their authors, and giving  all the Scientists involved, due respect. His ultimate aim  – after an analytical review of all the viewpoints of the various Scientists – is to develop an understanding of the subject that makes the best sense.

His elaborate coverage of the Einstein Bohr debate in `EBATQD` as well as in this book,  is spellbinding. In the end if I am asked the question..“Who won the debate ?, my answer would be `Neither Einstein nor Bohr lost the debate` “.

My review of `The New Quantum age` like my review of another book viz “Information and the nature of reality“ edited by Paul Davies and Gregerson,  is I am afraid somewhat self centred as  I  try to correlate it with my philosophical views as expressed in my first book` Six Words`  and in my next book `Intelligent Field`. The common denominators are that …“It is the Information in the field which is responsible for the phenomena“ … that “Our universe is a quantum computer, that keeps computing its own behaviour“ .. and that “things are getting more and more complex all the time“.

Having said that I now focus on the part of the book which is in support of my viewpoints expressed above. So I go to Part III of the book “An introduction to Quantum Information Theory“…Chapter 15 ..“Knowledge, Information, and ( a little about) Quantum Information“.

As  the Scientist Lee Smolin  (page 291 of the book) said  :  “There are only four prolbems which the Scientists have not been able to solve so far. These are:

1) How to combine quantum theory and general relativity to produce a single theory ( of quantum gravity) that can claim to be a complete theory of matter.

2) How to combine all the particles and forces in today`s physics to give a theory as manifestations of a fundamental unity.

3) To explain how the values of the free constants in the standard model of particle physics  ( the masses and life times of the various elementary particles ) are chosen in nature.

4) To explain the existence and properties of dark matter and dark energy. “

Smolin feels that the above four problems will not be solved in isolation, and that the solution of these great problems will come together. A possible way forward  — also suggested by Smolin – is to give up the attempt to apply quantum theory to the universe as a whole and to regard quantum theory as the record of quantum information that one sub system may have about another sub system as a result of their mutual interaction. In this way ideas from the study of quantum information may demonstrate how elementary particles may emerge from quantum space –time.

In other words the universe — as suggested by the Scientist Seth LLyod – can be considered as a quantum computer. One may ask the question ..`But what does the Universe compute ?.`. Seth Llyod gives the answer : “ It computes its own behaviour. At first the patterns it produces are simple, but as it processes more and more information, it produces more intricate and complex patterns – on the physical side giving rise to galaxies, stars, and planets, while on the human side, producing life, language, human beings, society and culture.“

In subsequent chapters, it is explained that a classical computer cannot simulate a quantum mechanical system, so the Universe being quantum mechanical , cannot be considered a classical computer, and can only be a quantum computer.

My own idea is that all this happens in a field, and when sufficient information is accumulated in the field, it becomes an  `Intelligent Field`, where the Intelligence in the field keeps increasing all the time, and this intelligence like that of an `Infinite Mind` is focussed on creating biochemistries suitable for creating awarenesses and consciousnesses etc to understand itself. Hence that portion of the computation which the universe does, which is attributed to the intelligence of the Intelligent Field is not completely in the domain of `quantum computation` … to some extent it could even be called `classical computation`.

It could also be that the Intelligent Field is  itself a product of simulation which then simulates the universe?.  and it goes on and on …step by step…trillions and trillions of intermediate steps, through trillions of years and countless eons of the universe. And with each simulation the complexities increase. It must have been very very very simple in the very very very beginning. A universe from nothing at all. It could be that we the human beings are an `Intermediate step`.

This viewpoint also encapsulates the Anthropic Principle and explains what happens when a new eon of the universe is created…. “All the information is available in the field…. all the constants of nature are already known to the Intelligence in the Field , its just the `switching on` that is needed. “

Whether to call  it as  `Intelligent Field` ..or an `Infinite Mind` … or `God` is of course just a matter of taste. The Theists can call it `God`, and the Atheists should be happy to call it as `IF` or `IM`whatever. The dispute should end.

John C Bell  who is the hero of the book, is also my hero. I have written extensively about  him  and about his `Inequality idea` in my book `Six Words`. To have come out with an idea that it is possible to design an experiment to show that an `Inequality` which is a direct consequence of the assumption of local realism is violated, is nothing short of ingenious. The book can be taken more or less as  Bell`s biography.  I  like (very much)  the chapter on “Bell`s last thoughts“ ( chapter 14) where he discusses the “Six possible worlds of quantum Mechanics“. These are actually three worlds relating to three different aspects of quantum mechanics, and each world is divided into two parts viz an “Unromantic world“ which corresponds to his favourite interpretation on that aspect, and a “Romantic world“ corresponding to his bugbear. This is very interesting and amusing, but I am not going to reveal these here – let the reader find out on his own – except to say that in one of them I find the `Romantic world` part makes more sense.

The best line of the book for me is where Bell admits, in fact that he is convinced that “Mind has a central place in the ultimate nature of reality“

The “Infinite mind` of the “Intelligent Field“  I guess

I am thrilled.

All in all  … An excellent book

This is my fourth review. “`

By S.K.SAGAR

(Author of `Six Words … Seminar Held in a Parallel Universe`)

( Reviewed by S.K.SAGAR  … on Amazon)

Its the `Information` in matter … that matters.

I borrowed this book from British Library, and kept renewing for several weeks till I realized there was no choice other than to buy the book. Now, It is here on my shelf with about 60 other books on the subject of my choice… `Science and Philosophy`.

It   answers some pertinent questions on quantum physics and cosmology, to the extent the questions can be answered without violating the established principles of science, to the extent these established truths are understood in our time.

It places quantum theory on a pedestal, regarding it as a description of all information.

After reading the book I am inclined to say :

“Its the information in the field that is responsible for the phenomena….“

In my first book `SIX WORDS` as well as my next “INTELLIGENT FIELD“, I talk of an all pervading `Intelligent Field` ..like an omnipresent `Infinite Mind`..Omnipresent in time as well as space.. that sometimes controls nature.. but has no control over Randomness.

And so it can be said:

“Its the information in the `Intelligent Field` that is responsible for all the phenomena. Scientists seem to know what that information was in case of many things that happened since the big bang. But no one knows what information was responsible for the Big bang.“

I have a lot to say in praise of this book, but where to begin, and what to highlight is the problem. It needs time… a lot of time. What if I select some passages from the chapters… and then talk about them. I think that will be a good idea.

So here we go :

1)  “The content that constitutes mind is not in the brain, nor is it embodied in neuronal processes in bodies interacting with the outside world.“…Terrence W Deacon (from the chapter on `What is missing from theories of information`)

My response : What is implied –  and I am in agreement with  – is  that the `I` which is identified with my brain does not include a `mind` of its own. That mind is not the exclusive property of the `I` of the brain. That `mind` is available to all the `I`s of all the brains, and is common to all. It is always on the lookout for an appropriate biochemistry to give itself consciousness, and life. “We all have the same mind“ ( the six words of my book )… Its just that our consciousness is always in the singular.

2) “The very first information processing revolution, from which all other revolutions stem, began with the beginning of the universe itself. The big bang at the beginning of time consisted of huge number of elementary particles, colliding at temperatures of billions of degrees. Each of these particles carried with it bits of information, and every time two particles bounced off each other, those bits were transformed and processed. The big bang was a bit bang“ … Seth Llyod  ( from the chapter on ..`The computational universe`)

My view : Yes indeed… this universe of ours is a simulated universe.

With regard to the Big Bang… one of  these explanations must hold good:   Either it was an `Act of God` or an `Act of Simulation`. Perhaps both are true… provided we assume that the `God` in question is not an Anthromorphic `physical function` God. In what form can the God be, such that it is acceptable to one and all…to believers as well as atheists … and does not violate the established principles of Science ? The best bet I think is an all pervading `Intelligent Field`… or the omnipresent `Infinite Mind` …omnipresent in space as well as time.

3) “ I could draw you a map of all the tens of thousands of components in a single celled organism and put all the proper arrows connecting them (and even then) I or anybody else would look at that map and have absolutely no ability whatsoever to predict anything“  ….    ….    By Jesper Hoffmeyer ( from the chapter on `Semiotic Freedom: An Emerging Force)

My view and a question: But when we consider the cell as a whole…such as a single celled paramecium.. as it swims toward food we can very well predict that there is a very good probability that enroute it will retreat from danger, negotiate obstacles, and achieve its goal.  But of course our ability to make these predictions is based on the information  available with us which is in turn based on observations of the past.

But what can be the explanation for this ?

Now consider the `information` carried by DNA molecules.

4) “The code does provide a program for constructing an organism, but no person has constructed it and no consciousness needs to understand and apply the program. It has originated by ordinary evolutionary processes, and like a computer programme, it operates without the need for conscious interpretation“ …  …  By Keith Ward  (from the chapter on `God As The ultimate Informational Principle`).
My view : One can of course argue that consciousness is just a random by product of the evolutionary process. But where does the `Intelligence` come from that determines the code that provides a program for constructing that organism?. What can be the explanation for this ?
Indeed we need a cosmic holistic explanation, in which the development of the parts is explained by their contribution to the existence of an integrated totality.
From the same chapter :

5) “ Taken together these considerations suggest the idea of a primordial consciousness that is ontologically prior to all physical realities, that contain the coded information for constructing any possible Universe, and that can apprehend and appreciate any physical universe that exists. It would certainly be a strong reason for creating a universe that might contain finite consciousness, that could share in appreciating, and even in creating some of the distinctive values potential in the basic structure of the universe. Whether or not one calls such a primordial consciousness `GOD` is partly a matter of taste.“

My view and a question :  But of course …an Anthromorphic God … made up of atoms and molecules is too primitive and sentimental to be of any use.  No harm will be done to our psyche …or our ego… if we call this `primordial consciousness` as an `Intelligent Field` or may be an `Infinite mind`. And this Intelligent field evolved over the years and is still evolving. The question may be asked : Is this `Intelligent Field` or `The information contained in it`  itself a product of simulation which then simulates the universe?.

I would say:

`Yes,  It is simulated … and then it simulates …is  simulated … and then it simulates … and it goes on and on … step by step … trillions and trillions of intermediate steps, through trillions of years and countless eons of the universe. It could be that we the human beings are an intermediate step. And with each simulation the complexities increase.  It must have been very very very simple in the very very very beginning.`

Could it be that the very first simulation was just a `thought`.

6) “the recent developments in physics (non locality in particular) briefly summarized here provide a powerful empirical refutation of a materialistic world view.“  It looks like… “Reality is more energy –like than matter-like.“

Even so …“The conundrums are not resolved by turning one`s back on the mysterious nature of objects and particles in physics. Idealists who abandon the scientific study of the physical world in favour of mentalism and spiritualism `solve` the dilemma by ignoring the very fields in which it can be most fruitfully studied.“ … “what is necessary, I suggest is that we pursue this path of natural science as far as it can take us. Neither over- quick leaps into metaphysics, nor refusing to acknowledge the complex philosophical issues raised by today`s science will help“…Philip Clayton (from the chapter on `Unsolved Dilemmas..the concept of matter in the history of philosophy and contemporary physics)

My view : This is the subject most discussed in the various chapters of the book. I couldn`t agree more with Philip Clayton  and others who have written on it. Scientist, philosophers, and theologians must be partners and should have a common ground in understanding and formulating an adequate post- materialistic theory of the natural world.

In my view, `Matter and energy` ( MAE) and `Mind and Consciousness` (MAC)  are the primary  components of reality  and they are of importance in equal measure.

But who is the controlling authority?

Is MAE the primary player that  is responsible for the occasional appearance of MAC at various locations and times, whenever – and wherever – it has `randomly` created a certain biochemistry for MAC to arrive?

I doubt very much if this can be true. Randomness will be paramount in this kind of universe. And millions and millions of universes will be required so that at least one universe has absolutely the precise mathematical constants of nature so that life and consciousness will appear and then understand the universe. Not at all a cost effective design.  Also in this alternative, the universe in the deep future – with the kind help of dark energy ( a major part of MAE) – will proceed towards perpetual nothingness…and that’s it.  No more universes – in that universe – , no more MAE, let alone MAC.There will be no information available in the `Field` to create a phase transition or to reduce entropy from near maximum to near zero, to usher in a new big bang

If a choice is given to me …I would not like to come back to such a universe….after I am gone.

I would rather go with the second alternative, Where MAC is the primary player and has full control over MAE. Information in the field is continuously building up, the degree of consciousness is increasing all the time. Reaching a state of ultimate superconsciousness is inevitable with the kind help of  the rising information content in the field , which in this case is an `INTELLIGENT FIELD`. The universe as on date is still in its infancy, even the Stelliferous era – where stars are shining and life and consciousness is flourishing –  will last for trillions of years, and there is ample time to reach that superconsciousness stage where it can prepare the programme and then switch on the computer and usher in the next eon of the universe.

7) “Quantum Mechanics then demolished the concept of an external state of reality in which all meaningful physical variables could be assigned well defined values at all times. So a subtle shift occurred, at least among theoretical physicists, in which the ground of reality first became transferred to the laws of physics themselves, and then to their mathematical surrogates, such as Lagrangians, Hilbert spaces etc. The logical conclusion of going down that path is to treat the physical universe as if it simply ` is ` mathematics.“…

“The traditional relationship, between mathemetics, physics, and information, may be expressed symbolically as follows:

MATHEMETICS à  PHYSICS à  INFORMATION “

….Paul Davies ( from the chapter on `Universe from bit`)

My views : Given below is an extract from my book “Six Words“. If you read this you will realize how absolutely delighted I was to read  the Paul Davies` lines given above. Indeed `Mathematics` is the President and the company is called `The Universe`
And  there are many such laws where Mathemetics is giving Orders on how to proceed …and they were well crafted with nicely designed `constants` to create good enough probabilities for lives and consciousnesses to evolve at millions of locations and theoretical physicists to arrive and then understand these laws.

Laws such as the `Uncertainty Principle` where `Mathemetics` has played such a trick that it does not allow the quanta to get created out of nothing except for the shortest possible – and thus irrelevant – period of time.

Laws such as `Quantum entanglement` where `Mathemetics`has played such a trick that it permits entanglement but does not permit information to be sent faster than at speed of light.

And both these tricks have been played out by the Mathematician by incorporating a certain randomness in the nature of reality… In the former case ..the vacuum randomly fluctuates between being and nothingness…and in the latter case the Mathematician keeps shuffling the deck of nature in such a way that the randomness remains intact .

I should go as far as to say that `Randomeness` is the Vice President.

And then at the center of everything … there is this thing called `EQUIVALENCE` ..The cleverest of all the laws …it goes without saying that this law is out and out Mathematics and Physics is just dancing to its tune.

Paul Davies is one of my heroes… I have read his books…. and have written about him in `Six Words`.

8) “Decoherence effects are the basis both of the mechanism whereby our thoughts can affect our actions, and of the reconciliation of quantum theory with our basic intuitions“ …“The quantum state of the brain is reduced to a collection of `parallel potentialities, each of which is `essentially` a classically conceivable possible state of the brain“ … “your physically described brain is an evolving cloud of essentially classically conceivable potentialities“…Henry Stapp ( from the chapter on Minds and values in the quantum universe )

My response : If only one word allowed : WOW

These lines are of far reaching significance, they remind of the Penrose lines :

“Probabilities do not arise at the minute quantum level of particles, atoms, or molecules – these evolve deterministically – but seemingly, via some mysterious larger-scale action connected with the emergence of a classical world that we can consciously perceive“….Roger Penrose (from `Emperor`s new mind`)

Here too I link it with the `Intelligent Field` which I consider as  the guiding force that links the `quantum` with the `classical`. I elaborated on this with a lengthy example in my review of the Roger Penrose book `The road to reality`. The reader may please refer to my review on `TRTR` on Amazon.

9) “The resurrected Jesus Christ is not the resuscitated pre-Easter Jesus of Nazareth.“… “the entirety of Jesus` life, his charisma and his power, is presence and efficacious in the resurrected and exulted one.“…The complete fullness of his person and his life is now present `in Spirit and faith`, but this is hard to comprehend to naturalistic and scientistic thought“…Michael Welker ( from the chapter on `What is the spiritual body` )

My response : The subject needs to be viewed in the context of the `Information theory`. People order their lives based on their beliefs which in turn are based on the information accessible to them which in turn is based on the past interactions of the rest of the world on them which has made them what they are. There is no doubt  that the presence of such `information` in the field that gives solace and peace of mind in prayer and in the knowledge of Jesus` presence ( in whatever form one can imagine) is very much helpful to mankind. But when it is a question of `talking science` and discussing the subject in the context of its correlation with the `information theory`, we must ask the question : Is resurrection a possibility ? and then why is it assumed that the answer provided to this question by a `naturalist` or a `scientist` will be different from that provided by a theologian, particularly in the light of the fact that the information – the data that constitutes the input to perform their analysis – available to all of them is the same in all respects , not to mention that all three of them are made up of the same atoms and molecules.

Indeed, we must follow the teachings of the great religious leaders of the past.. but there should be no reason to believe the `rising from the dead`, `the walking on water`, or `the carrying of a mountain on a finger`.

On the other hand, it is to be realized that  the presence of `Information` on religions of the world, including that on mythology and religious philosophy, which leads people to go to the churches, temples and masjids etc, or  to perform rituals that provide solemnity ( even romance) to occasions such as marriages, festivals etc,   has over the years given immense happiness, solace and peace of mind to the people of the world, and there is no reason to believe why they should not continue to do so. However it is also to be realized that the presence of certain `information` in the religious doctrines that permit intolerance and Jihad against other religions, is full of self-endangerment and destructive potentials,  has over the years caused religious extremism, conflicts and wars, and there is no reason to believe why these doctrines should not be reformed.

All in all, when we talk science, the nature of reality is just  `Information` …the information in the `Intelligent Field` or the `Infinite Mind`. We may call this `IF` or `IM` as our `God` ..but this God is just a computer. No doubt it is intelligent… it gives us everlasting consciousness (everlasting in the sense that we are unconscious of our `unconscious tenures` so they pass quickly ), it designs our bodies and their capacities to grow, and above all it designs the laws of the universe with precisely calculated mathematical constants… etc, but this intelligence in the field is limited to the sum total of information acquired and processed through time. The quantum of intelligence is of course powerful enough to sustain the universe, which is impressive  of course, but whether we can call  it `divine` is a matter of taste. We must take into consideration the fact that many times life can only live at the expense of other life…That most living creatures kill each other in everlasting strife.

But of course …the time spent `living` is always several million times longer than the time spent `dying`.

As for my taste, I  can  call it `divine` as the `information` stored in my mind tells me that I am  forever conscious …

There was never a time when I could ask the question: `Where is the universe?`

In conclusion I give below a Paul Davies quote (not from this book) :

“Whatever their difference of opinion about the nature of God, I know of no religion that does not teach that God is a mind“…( from `God and the new physics` …Paul Davies)

This fits very well with the `Intelligent field`, or the `Infinite mind`, and the `Six Words`.

All in all…an Outstanding work … 5 stars of course.

This is my third review.

By … SURENDRA KUMAR SAGAR … Author of `SIX WORDS`

REVIEW OF ` THE CRITIQUE OF PURE REASON`…By Immanuel Kant

Translated by J.M.D. Mieklejohn

(Reviewed by S.K.SAGAR)

When I get still older, and the time comes when I am completely bed ridden, I will still be enjoying life and still hope to continue living, with books like the above at my bedside.

How did I find this book ?

It was a Sunday…  October 2012…We ( with wife and son ) were strolling at Lincoln Square in Chicago, we entered a book store..  `Raven`s woods` ( it was`nt planned ). There were  all kinds of books, an awesome variety of books. It was`nt a big shop,  but the concentration of books per square metre of the floor area was the highest I had seen so far.
The owner asked me..`Was I looking for something in particular ?`… I was`nt actually… so I asked him (thinking there was less than 1% percent chance that he would have it) :
Do you have `The Critique of Pure Reason….by Immanuel Kant` ?
I was astonished when he said : `Yes I have it, you won`t find it, I`ll help you`.
Even he took about seven minutes to locate it….It was hardcover and in good condition….printed in 1955…contains  the prefaces of the first and second  editions..written in 1781 and 1787 respectively price $8.00.. I tell you…It was a steal

I recall a conversation with a blogger `Dave Astor` on Huffingtonpost in response to his blog… “Some ‘Difficult’ Books Aren’t as Difficult as We Think“, where I commented:

I don`t know about fiction, but in Nonfiction (other then technical books in specialized subjects), the most difficult book I have come across so far is “The critique of pure reason“ ….by Immanuel Kant.  I have little doubt that most ..if not all …of those who are in possession of this book will agree with me.
It is possible that no one has read the book in completion…or maybe it is a single digit number. It is learnt that someone  who read about half the book, and understood it well, presumably after ten or more readings once said :

` Whosoever has not read the book is still a child`
When asked why he did not complete the book, he promptly replied : `I would have surely become insane if I had done so` “

Here is a typical paragraph from the book..A somewhat simpler one:

“ Now, since the notions of good and evil, as consequences of the a priori
determination of the will, imply also a pure practical principle, and therefore a causality of pure reason; hence they do not originally refer to objects ( so as to be, for instance, special modes of the synthetic unity of manifold of given intuitions of one consciousness ) like the pure concepts of the understanding or categories of reason in its theoretic employment ; on the contrary they presuppose that objects are given; but they are all modes (modi) of a single category, namely that of causality, the determining principle of which consists in the rational conception of a law which as a law of freedom, reason gives to itself, thereby a priori proving itself practical. However, as the actions on the one side come under a law, which is not a physical law, but a law of freedom, and consequently belong to the conduct of beings in the world of intelligence, yet on the other side as events in the world of sense they belong to phenomena; hence the determinations of a practical reason are only possible in reference to the latter, and, therefore in accordance with the categories of the understanding ; not indeed with a view to any theoretic employment of it, i.e, so as to bring the manifold of (sensible) intuition under one consciousness a priori…But only to subject the manifold of desires to the unity of consciousness of a practical reason, giving it commands in the moral law, ie , to a pure will a priori“

I read the para over and over again one evening, and after about ten readings – Believe it or not – I was beginning to understand it, and believe it or not …it was nothing short of `Spellbinding`.

This is what I think, the gist of what it says in that paragraph

“Before we make our judgment of whether something is `good` or `evil`, we must ask ourselves under which law we are making the judgement… whether it is the law of freedom (of will)…or it is a physical law ( law of Physics). The former from considerations of `Pure Practical Reason` corresponds to the conduct of beings in the `world of intelligence`, and the latter from considerations of Pure Reason ( Theoretical) would mean that any act performed is in the world of sense..ie just a phenomena ie. merely the motion of atoms and molecules in accordance with the laws of causation.`

I do not know if I got it right..but I do know that I enjoyed the evening immensely.

And to think …there are about 1800 such paras in the book … and you will understand why I will be looking forward to that certain phase of life, when I might be confined to a single room… with nothing to do except chat with my wife and family… listen to music …  and read `The Critique of Pure Reason“.
All in all, a spellbinding `Five Star` book.

This is my second review.

By

SURENDRA KUMAR SAGAR…Author of `SIX WORDS`

Here`s my review:

Its a comprehensive explication, as comprehensive as it gets, on every aspect of reality and the universe. It goes about as deep into each topic as is required to go in order to establish a level of understanding which is at par with just about the maximum extent to which that subject can be understood without requiring an `Act of God` to explain the phenomena. And for this he has to use extraordinarily complex mathematics. In fact this is unavoidable, for in no way is it possible to understand these difficult subjects with off the shelf mathematics.  However there is enough explicatory prose in the book to enable a reasonable level of understanding of these hugely interesting topics that he has chosen to discuss. Even so, it is recommended that one should read this book in conjunction with some of his other books.

It is said that the two hemispheres of the brain each specialize in different functions of cognition – the left dedicating itself to logical and analytical thinking, seat of verbal thought; the right to intuition and holistic understanding of patterns, with an ability to grasp directly the relationship between parts of the whole. One operates linguistically with rational sequences of deductions and inductions; the other intuitively juxtaposes images and symbols, integrates and synthesizes rather than analysis. Roger Penrose is one example of a Scientist who has used the whole of consciousness. He has  effectively used both hemispheres of his brain to cut open the various theories about the `Universe and Reality` that he has discussed, and then given his views after an in-depth scrutiny and analysis. And mind you he has a wide open mind and has never failed to give due credit and good enough appreciation to the theories (and the authors) he liked.

The chapter I like best is  “The speculative theories of the early universe“. I am in total agreement with him when he questions the validity of the various motivations on the `cosmological inflation` theory. Just because the theory explains the homogeneity, the smootheness, and the flatness issues nicely, can we take them as enough motivation to support the theory?. What about …How it happens (Inflation)?, how is it caused ?…Do we reconcile or resign ourselves to it being some kind of `Act of God`?… And what about its conflict with the second law of thermodynamics?

I am not reading this book in a `start to finish` way. Instead I read the chapters which interest me more and which I can understand better and then I read them in conjunction with `Emperor`s New Mind`, alongwith another masterpiece of Penrose viz   “The large and the small and the human mind“. And in this way I could get frequent flashes of deep understanding. It was quite exhilarating whenever that happened.

Some of the passages are quite  overwhelming and on reading them one can gauge the profound philosophical implications of the subject whether it is relating to quantum physics or cosmology.

One such para is this one  (this however is from ENM) :

“Probabilities do not arise at the minute quantum level of particles, atoms, or molecules – these evolve deterministically – but seemingly, via some mysterious larger-scale action connected with the emergence of a classical world that we can consciously perceive“.

It shows that there is a certain guiding force that links Quantum Physics with Classical Physics.

I  explain this  with an example:

“Consider that  I am walking along a road and need to turn left at the next turning to go to my destination….Now the quantum entities inside my body keep moving here and there  `at random` with complete disregard to the phenomena of cause and effect, but they will in their trillions be at the right places at the right times to ensure that I am turning left and not going straight or turning right. And in case something happens to me before I turn left, such as I get hit by a car or something, the classical world (of the car hitting me) informs the quantum world of the changes in probabilities, and the quantum particles inside me will be at the right places at the right times to make sure that I fall down, provided of course, that the impact of the car was sufficient for the purpose.“

It looks like there is some sort of an all pervading “INTELLIGENT FIELD` that controls nature. I am currently writing a book on the subject of this Intelligent Field . The title of the book is simply `IF`. You might think I am just replacing `Acts of God` with this `I.F.` But that is not the case. I believe the I.F. has evolved over the years and still evolving. The question may be asked, is I.F. itself a product of simulation which then simulates the universe?. I would say:  “Yes it is. It is simulated..and then it simulates…is simulated..and then it simulates..and it goes on and on …step by step…trillions and trillions of intermediate steps, through trillions of years and countless eons of the universe. And with each simulation the complexities increase. It must have been very very very simple in the very very very beginning. A universe from nothing at all. It could be that we the human beings are an `Intermediate step`.

Now, why I wrote these few lines about this I.F. business, has a purpose. I ask the question: Will Roger Penrose in one of his future books consider the existence of this Intelligent Field as a possible concept worth cutting open and investigating ?

Near the end of `TRTR`, after writing about 1025 pages of his analytical studies, he comes out with these lines:

“ I do not believe that we have yet found the true `Road to Reality`, despite the extraordinary progress that has been made over two and one half millennia, particularly in the last few centuries“… and then he goes on to say that “Some fundamentally new insights are certainly needed“

Its wishful thinking on my part… but will Roger Penrose consider the `Intelligent Field` concept as one of the new insights worth talking about ?

And then there is this `ENTROPY FIELD` whereby the disorder and chaos in the world is increasing all the time and the survival of human civilization from self destruction is in question.  We do not need to solve complex differential equations to understand and realize how far the `Intelligent field` is trailing behind the `Entropy field`. Will the former be able to overtake the latter before it reaches its winning post of destruction?. …No Act of God of any kind will come to our rescue. Its entirely left to us human beings to create probabilities to escape from `SD`.

Will the great minds of the Planet Earth … and Roger Penrose … is very much there…even if it is a short list of just five.. … get philosophical for  a while  …and effectively use both hemispheres of their brains and come out with a model of philosophy `about the road to reality`  which can fuse Science with religion, is  acceptable to all religions, and which can pave the way towards a road to our continued existence ?

For what use is Quantum Physics and Relativity, and what use is this discussion on the Road to Reality if we are not going to be alive beyond a few centuries ?

All in all, an outstanding  `Five Star` book.

This is my first review.

By

SURENDRA KUMAR SAGAR…Author of `SIX WORDS`

The proton is made up of three quarks – two `up quarks` and one `down quark`- and nothing but the three quarks, but the sum of the masses of the three quarks adds up to just about one percent of the mass of the proton, where does the remaining 99 % mass comes from?

Now consider Einstein`s equation `e = m*c*c`

It’s the equivalenc­e of Mass and energy via Einstein’s above equation, and the enormous energy contained in the Proton which keeps it in one piece, and so gives it the mass.

Its true it all happened in the first billionth of a second after the big bang. There were about 30 million quarks and the same number (minus one) of anti quarks in each neighbourhood who annihilated each other in no time at all. But one anti quark was short, so one quark out of 30 million failed to find its counterpart anti quark and thus avoided annihilation. And it is this surplus set of quarks that constitute all the matter in the universe (including you and me). However this large scale annihilation of matter/antimatter resulted in a stupendous burst of energy in accordance with the same equation E = m*c*c*  and this is what brought about all the radiation. The freedom of each single quark was quite short lived, in less than a micro second two other quarks joined that quark and together as a trio of quarks it got bigger and became a proton or may be a neutron with the former (2 up and 1 down) having an 80 % probability and the latter (1 up and 2 down) about 20 %.

You might call it a Field, a  `Higgs Field` that did the trick…its your choice of nomenclature. But there is no such thing as a `Higgs Particle`that provided that 99% mass to the proton, nor can we say it is God, for God is supposed to be `omnipresent`, not just in 99 % of things.

But where did the quarks come from?… Phase transition of course, which means we cannot call the big bang as the beginning of time. It was a transition from something that already existed..Perhaps in the previous eon of the universe, which means the law of causation applies to the big bang too.

With all this, the unanswered question remains… what was that `something` that experienced that transition?… `something` that was converted to `something else`. The truth is that our present level of knowledge is too scanty to answer these questions. We can only speculate.

May be if this Phase transition happened once, it can happen again, it could even be a cyclic phenomena. So in order to guess what happened in the past, it might be a good approach to analyze – with our limited knowledge – what might happen in deep future…trillions and trillions of years deep… when dark energy has driven the universe towards perpetual `nothingness`…and photons are doing nothing else except getting bored…when entropy has reached its maximum limit…and then something happens – caused by a different law of physics, which we do not understand now – when the universal vacuum gets suddenly energized and brings about the cosmological inflation and the big bang once again…or may be there is all that information  acquired through trillions and trillions of years, including all the mathematical constants etc available to the cosmic consciousness of the time, with the help of the all pervading `Intelligent Field`, which then prepares a computer programme and then switches on the big bang …What do I know..

But the `Intelligent Field` knows.

So I follow an approach where there is a conversation between two people such as for example between a professor of cosmology ( lets call him `Pat Boone` ) and a student ( lets call her `Bernadine` ) .

THE CONVERSATION :

Bernardine : What exactly happened in that first billionth of a second after the big bang … the so called `Time zero` of this universe?

Pat Boone : Inflation…I guess.

B : And what is inflation?

P : Something rising or increasing fast such as Rising prices…I guess. They say in January 1923, a loaf of bread in Germany cost 250 Marks….And then the price of bread started increasing …and continued to increase and reached the 200 billion Mark by November 1923.

B : That works out as… an average rate of increase in price by about 8000 Marks per second. Wasn`t that rather high?

P : Unbelievably high….I guess …but nowhere near as high as during the cosmological inflation.

B : When did that start ?

P : It all started at about 10^ – 36 second after the big bang, and during the period between 10 ^ -36 second and 10^ – 35 second, the universe increased from near zero size to as much as a full cm across.

B : Was that considered high ?

P : Unbelievably high considering that even light which travels at 300000 km per second could not have travelled more than 3*10^ – 25 millimetres in such a short time.

B : For how long did the inflation last?

P : They say it lasted for a very very short time, till the universe was just about 10^ – 32 seconds old. Some Scientists say it was even shorter. Opinions differ widely on this .

B: And how big did it get during that time ?

P : I believe It kept doubling itself every 10^ – 35 th fraction of a second, which means it doubled itself nearly a thousand times…assumming that was the correct duration of the inflationary epoch ?

B : But why is inflation considered necessary ?

Pat Boone : This indeed is an important question you have asked. Scientists look at it this way : What exactly is happening in the universe …and what exactly happened in the beginning of the universe which can adequately explain what is happening now.

What is happening in the universe now is there for all to see. The universe is expanding and the universe is homogenious and smooth, . these are established truths. Scientists think that `Inflation `happening in a certain precise way can explain the expansion as well as homogeneity of the Universe, and thats why they are motivated in favour of the `inflation` possibility.

B : How does inflation explain these two things ?

“P : Good Question Bernardine..Just look at that painting ( showing an inverted cone ) over there …and imagine what happened during that brief period of inflation…As you can see, It all began in a very small region which inflated in almost no time at all to cover the entire observable universe , and in the process it ironed out all the deformities that came in its way… In short it wiped the slate absolutely clean, and created all that space for the quarks to arrive on the scene. And they did arrive in large numbers.. Perhaps about 10^ 82 of them … and these were the lucky ones who managed to escape annihilation by the antiquarks.

B : What time was it ?

P : I think it was 10^ (-32) seconds after Time zero….of this part of the universe.

B: What do you mean this part of the universe…were there any other parts ?

P: Just look at that painting over there…Isn`t that clear from the painting? …We`re all within that enclosed space…its clean and beautiful, nicely ironed out… smooth and uniform…and we are currently near the top …and all the galaxies with all the stars ( including Hollywood ones) are in that flat region of the universe…and its expanding nicely….and as you can see from the painting it all started from a small region of space.

B: Whats happening in the other parts ?… Is inflation happening elsewhere too.?

P: Who knows…it could be happening somewhere far off… but light hasn`t had time to reach us from any other part…so we have no idea whats happening over there. Maybe the `Intelligent field` was concentrating in our limited region.

B: So what exactly happened in our region ?

P : A stupendous explosion -but mind you there was no sound – …Let’s call it….`THE BIG BANG`….There was radiation all around. It was extremely hot… Temperature about 100 billion degrees Kelvin…..you entered the universe as a `Quark`… you had but one chance in 30 million to survive. There were about 30 million quarks and the same number (minus one) of anti quarks in your neighbourhood who annihilated each other in no time at all. But one anti quark was short and you failed to find your counterpart anti quark and thus avoided annihilation….And so you arrived Congrats .The duration of inflation, depending upon all the initial conditions, was worked out precisely, to enable the precise number of quarks to arrive on the scene, to obtain the precise density of matter per cubic meter of space per unit time elapsed since the beginning, to obtain the precise rate at which the Universe is expanding now, when it is about 13.7 billion years old.

B:What do you mean `per unit time elapsed` ?

P: As the universe expands, the matter density reduces. As a rough guide we use the rule of thumb that the average density of matter in the universe is inversely proportional to the square of its age.

B : And what is the current average density of matter in the universe ?

P: About 0.2 atoms per cubic metre of space.

B : Does that match well with the current expansion rate ?

P : It doesn`t look like that, if matter was as scarce as that, the expansion would have been much faster.

B : With the current rate of expansion what is the matching matter content ?

P : It looks more like 4 atoms per cub.m of space.

B: But you said the current available/visible/accountable matter in the universe is only about 0.2 atoms per cubm of space. What is the explanation ?

P : I guess there must be something hidden from us that accounts for the remaining 3.8 atoms… Something dark and hidden…Chances are (remember Johnny Mathis ? ) it is `Dark Matter`

B: What is that `Dark matter` ?

P : We don`t know yet. Shall we ask Tom Jones ?

B: He is busy conversing with Delilah. And they are talking about what`s happening now on the planet Earth . But tell me what caused the inflation ? Can someone explain this ?

P: There is no one who can explain this. This is a theoretical Physicist`s nightmare. But we cannot avoid the issue and just say… `it happened on its own – by magic – by an Act of God – or something and be done with it. We need a scientific explanation.I believe there was `Something` that did all the calculations, provided all the constants in the laws of science.. such as what should be the starting time, and the precise duration of the `inflation` based on the prevailing initial conditions, how many of the quarks should fail to find their antiquarks and escape from annihilation and thus arrive in the universe, and account for all the matter in the universe including you and me. As many as two hundred – or even more – such mathematical constants were required to be fixed and incorporated in the programme by that `Something` to ensure that life and consciousness should emerge sometime and understand the universe. Surely the Universe would not perform such a stunning show as the `Big Bang` to empty stalls.

We are the `Audience` that `Something` contemplated. But I don`t believe that `Something` was `Someone`. I call it the `INTELLIGENT FIELD`.

B: But the action taken was `physical`, and it required programming as well as execution, such as `switching on` or something. So it could not have been done by something such as a field, however intelligent that might be…. so there must have been `Someone` in addition to `Something`.

P: Yes, a gigantic `Superconsciousness` created by that `Something` in interaction with an appropriate bio chemistry, might have been that `Someone` that prepared the programme and then switched on the button/s.

B: Thats too far fetched, and impossible to believe. A superconsciousness however large it may be cannot control nature to such an extent.

P: Yes… its far fetched… but not as far fetched or as difficult to believe as if it was an `act of God`. Consider that a human being on this planet Earth can prepare a programme and then press a button (a nuclear one ) and cause a catastrophic explosion and destroy the Earth. Thats enough control of nature exercise by a creature as infinitesimal as a human being. Then why not a Super consciousness can do the same thing on a universal scale. Its just a question of scale.

B: Destruction is not the same as creation.

P: It all depends on the calculations.

B So you are implying that this was a simulation and that the simulation was a mechanism controlled by designers.The problem is that you need some computational substrate for this kind of simulation to exist in, and you need to have a system that can simulate it. To me it seems unlikely that such a simulation can be created, except on a limited scale.

P: Yes.. but it did happen on a limited scale, and in a small region of the universe as you can see from the painting.Perhaps it happened in a laboratory, a gigantic one.

B :But the information required was huge, and there are fundamental limitations to the amount of information that can exist in a volume of space, however large it may be, also there are thermodynamic considerations, not to mention the economic impracticality of such an endeavour.

P : Perhaps the required quantum of simulation was not that high… It is not that each and every activity of the future would be a consequence of that simulation…Perhaps it was some what of a notional simulation.. Only a computer programme was prepared in consonance with the already known laws of science including the already known mathematical constants, already known to the super consciousness via the Intelligent field having trillions of years experience through innumerable eons of the universe. But the programmers had no control over `Randomness` `probability` and the `laws of causation`…The designers could not say when and where life would emerge and then understand the universe…

B: But the already known laws of Science included Einstein`s special theory of relativity and the limiting speed was that of the speed of light. How could the programmers know that they could violate that and how did they have the nerve to perform that experiment?

P: This is an extraordinary difficult question to answer…specially with the limited knowledge at our disposal. But we`ll get there. In one hundred thousand years we have become men from apes. Who knows in another hundred thousand years we will become super minds and we will have all the answers.

B: Any wild guesses?

P: I am thinking…speculating…Perhaps the theoretical physicists of the previous eon were able to get at the magic formula that could unite `Quantum theory` and `Einstein`s general relativity`.

B: Bravo…but this is too much… I`m moving on ( remember Hank Snow?).

P: Wait a minute…we haven`t discussed the second alternative.

B: And what is that?

P: That there was no such thing as the cosmological inflation.

B: Is that possible ?

P: Not just possible…even probable…rather quite likely “

So many possibilities

“Phase Transition“, “Crunch and Bounce“, “The infinite `Cosmic Mind` omnipresent in time and space“, and “ Universe as a Pure Thought“
And they all represent…. `No Inflation` …!