Chapter 1 (almost a summary of the whole book)

THE FIRST FLUSH

The spirits come, but when and where,
No one beforehand can declare...
---Book of Poetry

When a new and deep idea is discovered for the first time,
it may well appear in cumbersome language...
---John D. Barrow



The fact that I am neither a mystic nor a philosopher neither a scientist nor hitherto even a writer, unknown to the learned and the unlearned world alike, fills my mind with a number of apprehensions before I begin this book.

There is a story or rather a joke in our part of the world in which a theft has taken place in a house and the people of the area have gathered there to find out the culprit. While the schemes to identify and apprehend the culprit are being discussed by the elders in all their seriousness, suddenly everybody hears a boy shout: ‘I know who has done this foul deed’. All the eyes turn towards him and for a moment there is pin-drop silence. ‘It must be the work of a thief,’ said the boy in total simplicity, sincerity and seriousness.

Now as there are only four fundamental forces in Nature, it could be only from them that ultimately anybody could be seeking freedom, liberation, nirvana. So by proffering here my intuition revealing this, I wonder if I am not playing the role of that boy now.


No doubt I have had certain experiences if those can be called the experiences of mysticism. No doubt I have had the habit of taking certain books into my bathroom and some of them - especially for the last some years - turned out to be the books on science and related philosophy. No doubt that for the past few years I have been trying my hand at writing. Yet I fear, aware as I am that my grasp of all these systems of knowledge and expression is arbitrary and untested, for the boy-like innocence and obviousness of some of my ideas and for the unsystematic way of putting them across.

Not only do I fear for the innocence and obviousness of some of my ideas but even more so, on the other hand, for their iconoclastic content. They come in conflict at one point or the other with almost all the pre-existing and well-established theories hitherto put forward to explain the phenomenon of life in general and of evolution in particular (barring, of course, some of the ancients - Greeks or others - with whose ideas they show some sort of compatibility).

Through them, for example, I relegate the role of chance and natural selection in the ultimate scheme of things only to a superficial level. I limit the applicability of the notion of ‘increasing complexity-consciousness’ - that evolution produces increasingly complex species/systems - to a certain range and not beyond. I impose purpose and predictability on evolution at all levels - till now considered non-existent and impossible respectively. I show the notions of holism - that only the study of a system as a whole can give us true knowledge about it - and reductionism - that only the study of a system’s parts individually can do so - to be equally applicable in explaining the things in contrast to giving over-importance to the former at the cost of the later as at present. I make self-disorganization a necessary component of self-organization everywhere rather than over-emphasize the sole role of self-organization etc. (Mercifully they are in line with Stephen Jay Gould's theory of Punctuated Equilibrium, though go far beyond it).

But then, every new theory must have some iconoclastic content otherwise it would forfeit the very justification of its existence. Here I recall the words of Einstein by which, after having shaken the very foundations of the Newtonian world of absolute space and time by his theory of relativity, he asked forgiveness of Newton. Wrote he:

Forgive me, Newton; you found the only way open in your time to a man of the highest scientific capability and strength of thought. The concepts created by you are still the leading ones in our physical thinking, though we know now that if we aspire to a deeper understanding of the interrelationships in nature, we shall need to replace these concepts with others farther from the sphere of our immediate experience.

And mine is an aspiration, as is obvious from the Oneness of the dialogue from where I begin my story, at understanding the interrelationships in Nature at the deepest possible level. Hope my predecessor thinkers/cosmologists/evolutionists would also forgive me likewise.

Apologies over, now I would first give a first flush account of my ideas. That is to say, wherein ideas came to me in sort of a torrent at my first attempt at writing post-dialogue. Even though wayward, this inspired account, and in fact any inspired account for that matter, to me is the soul of any book that is subsequently to be woven around it and so should not be sacrificed at the subsequent ‘others-driven’ conscious-handling of the book. And I request the reader that even if some portions of it are not clear to him at first he need not rack his brains over them. For, in the chapters to follow when I would be developing them further I would provide the necessary explanations.

And this inspired account is invariably the account of my timeless formula for the origin and evolution of the universe, and, given due allowance for local adjustments to be explained later on, in fact of every system within it as follows:

That first and foremost there is an all-inclusive, self-sufficient and ultimately indescribable state or situation of Oneness in the form of what we would call Matter of spiritual category or simply Mosc*. (The religious people may even call that a state or situation of omnipresence, omnipotence and omniscience, to be explained later.)

That this state or situation of Oneness is broken when Mosc explodes off from itself (through big bang) to what we would call Matter of virtual** category or Movc, and gets in the process progressively entangled or wound up into a topsy-turvy – obviously also virtual - network of four basic forces, that is to say in the order of entanglement, into a virtual network of weak, strong, electromagnetic and finally gravitational forces.

That the whole edifice of evolution, the whole flow of evolution as it were, then comprises the efforts on the part of Mosc to regain that original state of Oneness. But which is now possible only if this primeval, omnipotent force of Mosc disentangles itself - or gets itself unwound - from those four forces completely.

That, this in turn is now possible in the ‘outwards’ or ‘actualwards’ direction only so as to say : that this in turn is now possible only if Mosc actualizes its virtual entanglement into those four forces by converting the virtual entanglement into the actual and experiencing it: that this in turn is now possible only if, like we create or rather throw our dream world ‘out into the open’ to experience our virtual (latent) desires so as finally to get rid of them, Mosc creates or rather throws our ordinary world ‘out into the open,’ step-by-step or force-by-force or species-by-species to experience its virtual entanglement into those four forces so as finally to get rid of them.

That, this would naturally require that a continuous, creative and corresponding dialogue goes on between that topsy-turvy, virtual world and our ordinary ‘straight’ world during the process such that when finally complete correspondence between them is reached, both the worlds annihilate themselves – supersymmetrize themselves to death, to borrow the words from Paul Davies - and Mosc is once again set free. Or, Mosc in ‘seeing’ through everything, through both the worlds, see only itself and thus regains its original state of Oneness, of infinite, supersymmetric attributes.

In a nutshell, Mosc gets entangled into a self-produced, topsy-turvy network of four basic forces of an ever-increasing strength and in an ever-inflating spiral, beginning from the most inward depths up to the speed-of-light-barrier - up to which in my view the domain of virtual world extends - and then in working itself out gives us our ordinary, ‘straight’ or actual world on the other side of this barrier.

Now this is my timeless, my key formula in short. This applies equally to all systems. Only the strength or effectiveness of the entangling forces varies depending upon the evolutionary status of the system under question, that is to say, how far down the line from big bang the system has presently come. While Mosc would be there for all in the form of what the scientists would call a ‘hierarchy of supersymmetries.’ Or in the form of the portion of the original supersymmetry-breaking superforce which has now come to be the lot of this present system.

To be continued....


*Already explained in endnote under ** in the post Preface. It can only be known through self-experience. **Movc or Matter of virtual category includes what is known as anti-matter but we would call the whole as Movc to keep things simple, more so as this will not effect our main story.