immortal

There is spam karma 2, I think you should activate it and there is another one called Akismet but the problem is it requires a API key to get it working which is not free, use it if you can afford it. As for the statistics, go to your dashboard and click the drop down menu and you should see 'Firestats' which will show you the recent hits to your blog. There are plugins which will add you a widget box for email-subscription from feedburner or other sites but its very annoying for a beginner like you and me because one has to upload that plugin using a filezilla client which requires you to have a ftp account .

May be we will know how we are made in the image of god, when the rapture takes place and once we get spiritual bodies.

I received this mail from my University, I thought it was worth sharing here, I have applied for most of the courses since we'll be free in jan.

Even I wish I was free, I have to prepare for my exams and will not be able to participate with much intensity. I found a few statements of Erwin Schrodinger which are worth mentioning,

Wow, I just can not believe you quoted Yajnavalkya here in this science forum, I'm very excited, I really appreciate it. Yajnavalkya Mahirshi is a person for whom I hold some great respect. It was by his means the world got to know about the Ishavashya Upanishad, one day his master asked him to give back all the knowledge that was taught to him due to some misunderstandings that arose between each other (which was a play of the gods) and by giving all his learned knowledge back to his master, he sat and worshipped the sun god and went on to write a new veda of his own with the grace of sun god, which is called as the krishna yajurveda. The Ishavashya Upanishad is a small upanishad consisting of only a 17 or odd sutras. Yajnavalkya was a true Sarvajna, it is thought that he got to know about the nature of the elements that is the thing-in-itself in just 15 days which is thought to require almost a year of practice and sacrifice. He wrote the Yajnavalkya Smriti which teaches about the conduct of human beings. I wish I knew atleast a tiny drop of knowledge from what he knew. Here is the full conversation between them it will help us to understand it better. Conversation of Yajnvalkya and Maithreyi on the Absolute Self (I have linked to the last conversations which is very much relevant here) I think the credit should go to Peter for pointing out us here. I somehow understand it better now. I had read about the biography of Yajnvalkya, it is a book called 'Mahadarshana' by Devudu Narasimha Shastry, there were many secrets of the upanishads and as well a narration of the story of Yajnavalkya, but unfortunately it is not available in the english version yet.

Oh!! Yeah there are experienced authors in those subjects whose books are worth reading. I was talking about the other ones's. Certainly, I will consider reading it, though I was not influenced by Buddhism. Yes it is well documented in the literature, we call those persons as 'Sarvagna' means one who knows everything, since you have asked for a proof, I have to give a modern example for it so Check this out. I don't completely understand what he is saying since he doesn't talk in technical terms but we do have a fair knowledge what's going on him from the similar behaviour of mystic people recorded in the past history. The brain has pre-programmed instincts which will help it to survive on its own and react to dangers, so the brain will fire a neuron when he sees a tree falling on you and move your body from there, one doesn't have to be aware of it, there is no need for it. Its also interesting how the senses work as described by that man, there is nothing in the brain or in the senses which helps us to identify the things which are surrounding us, it just K+ and Na+ potential differences, signals thats all, its the mind which connects the knowledge of the brain into the sense perception of the eye and help us to recognize the things and therefore a liberated man who is disassociated from the brain and the sense organs doesn't remember the connection of things in the phenomenal world, he sees something else and doesn't have any interests to know what it is. It is a normal phenomena and it is well documented in literatures. For the scientists it is the food which reduces entropy but for a mystic what keep it working is something else. There are monists, dualists and non-dualists and we have a whole detail of literature about them but what do we believe in, to believe in only one doctrine we have to disprove the others or falsify it but to do it you have to experience itself, there is no other way out, this is the point I was making. Interesting perspective but I doesn't like to go in depth about this, it sounds great when it comes from the mouth of Shaman or Buddha, we can only make an analysis of it which can not touch the heart of the matter that exists.

PeterJ, You have missed my point, In the earlier post I had said that we have conditional access to reality, we can not know the fundamental reality but it is not impossible, we don't have a free access to it, we have to earn it. To know the fundamental reality one has to start interacting with the world without using the sense organs and turn the mind inwards, it is this part of the process which is the most difficult and there's not quite a lot of people who can show you your mind and we don't have much knowledge of how this can be done so that the sciences can predict it, it is in this context which I meant that we can not know of the fundamental reality, I didn't said it was impossible to know it or never will. Yes ofcourse we can know about everything that there is and as for the authority of it is concerned I'm trying to find an universal way of how this can be done, till then I know no one would believe it and its not right on me either to expect everyone to believe in it, as I have said in my posts I made those statements based on persons who have observed the mind and how it is associated with the platonic intelligence and I'm quite crystal sure about the authority of those persons. But this is not enough to make the scientific community believe in it. I apologize if I was not modest here.

Yes, I thought that you said it in a context where you believed that having just theoretical knowledge was sufficient enough to understand what the mystics meant and claimed that you could make those statements. There is a difference between what we know and what the Shaman knows and I have been thinking on the same lines and after reading many books I have realized that reading about them with out any revealation is like reading in a dark room with all lights switched off, it will take you no where and I have stopped reading books about them. They all say it is this or it is that but neither the author nor the one who is reading it really knows what it is. For example when he says that we were never really here in the first place doesn't deny the fact that I'm struggling to survive each day subjected to the constraints of space and time and taking the pleasures and pains of life. I don't get this. The body is a machine it can survive on its own it doesn't require any awareness as an add on property to carry on its workings and so it begs the question why do we have to be aware of all this, persons who are liberated will not have any awareness about their bodies, infact they don't even remember their names or the address of where they live, its only when they interact with the phenomenal world they have to worry about all that. It is only when you get liberated you know whether you had those characteristics priorly in you or will you transform into something different which is not you, as you can see one can not make a consenus on whether monism is right or dualism.

According to mystics the brain and the mind are two different things, they are dualists. Yes the synaptic plasticity of the brain will help us to learn things and manipulate the stuff of nature as you have mentioned in the OP which is very much real but mystics claim that seeing through the eyes is not the only way to know things there is an another way which is as real as the former one is by seeing without the sense organs. There has to be a reality which is fundamental and which we can not know of, this might interest you as you want to understand what we know of and how we know what. They view the mind as a tightly held rope with the five senses attached to one end and the intelligence attached at the other end. They don't see intelligence as something associated with the brain instead they see it as physical entities existing in their own realm like platonic values. This model is based upon the individual experiences of persons who have observed the mind. Note that there is nothing associated with the brain or any other signals, it doesn't come into the picture at all. If one has to have mystical experiences then they have to detach the connection between the mind and the sense organs. Now the mind appears as a fallen rope and only then we can experience the noumenal world otherwise we'll be seeing the phenomenal world as we see through our eyes. This is the reason why such people abstain themselves from worldly pleasures. It is normally believed that the more pleasure you give to your sense organs more is the strength of the connection between the mind and the sense organs so in order to gain knowledge about the noumenal world through experiences one has to refrain himself from desiring worldly pleasures. Nothing is what it seems, if the movie star can appear in many places at once then he can obviously go out with as many people as he could. It is these things like quantum teleportation, looking into the future and many other things which begs the question is there something more fundamental than what we can see through our eyes. I hope by now you can understand what I meant when I said that we'll be pushed from the door to reality, this isn't the only reality that exists.

The theory of general relativity has been tested with very high precision and saying that the whole theory is completely wrong seems to me a rather outrageous statement. Earth dragging space and time as it rotates. A better statement is to say that it fails to account for the observations produced in a particular case. Both Newtonian mechanics and General relativity tries to explain the behaviourof matter and light in large gravitational fields and its not that one is better and the other is bad. The Newtonian mechanics was re-constructed at the speeds of light, general relativity didn't completely overthrew it The paper says, Real scientific progress comes by fine tuning the little wrong assumptions in the theory or the existing models and fixing it not by completely overthrowing existing models. Both general relativity and quantum mechanics has with stood the test of the times and both are one of the most intellectual theories of mankindand it is not that one is right or the other is wrong its just that few assumptions of the model might be redefined or reconstructed and I don't think physicists choose religious attachment over scientific attitude to come to conclusions.

May be I might have misunderstood you, there's not much to argue against. I didn't get you here, need some clarification.

I think we need more than that, we need new physics, I'm on the side of Penrose, Einstein and others. I was very conscious when I made that statement since I have some serious doubts as to whether science can really model the objective world in the first place with its current scientific attitude. The more we have dwelled in comprehending the working of the nature the more is the evidence that the things what ever out there is very much different from the things what we imagine in our models or the things taught in our schools. With Bell's inequality disproving the objectivity of the world that the properties of an object always exist irrespective of an observer we hardly have a picture of what the hell is happening. We have to learn from the positivist approach of Quantum Physics which is very strict on what the theory claims to explain and what the theory predicts. A quote from Niels Bohr. I don't think Einstein was kidding when he said that all events are always happening and our notion of past, present and future is a mere illusion. He would have never took back that statement easily. But the picture given by quantum physics is something else it forces us to model ourselves (i.e the state of the observer) in order to model the objective world. We need a way to predict the next firing in the neuron of the brain or the next choice of the observer, we're an integral part of the system and to model the universe from the begining till the end we need to model ourselves. Now if science claims to give an objective account of reality it has to model the observer as indicated by QM who is beyond science itself. The positivist approach might have helped in explaining various phenomena like superconductivity, superfluidity, bose-einstein condensates etc but it doesn't satisfy people like Einstein and Penrose. The distinction made by Immanuel Kant between the phenomenon and the noumenon was itself a big paradigm and I have repeatedly posted about this and the attitude of the physicists in here and in my blog, I don't like to name it since it is against the rules of this site to advertise one's posts. Yes without the kantian philosophy my whole view will be baseless. Kant completely overthrew metaphysics stating that a synthetic a priori statement was not possible in metaphysics since it required to go beyond the senses, that's the only point where I disagree with him. But he was absolutely right in pointing out that one needed both experience as well as reason to model the reality. Yes its not far from his views. I was saying it from the context of science where a model which can not be testified under basic axioms of science was considered to be metaphysical. Ofcourse one could disprove it with other metaphysical arguments. I don't like to drag this too much in this thread but to have the ability to know the reality would mean to be able to manipulate it and one can go on to create a parallel world if you would like to, when you have reached that state you are no longer interested in knowing anything or doing anything because you know everything that's the beauty of it, infact they can look into the future but they are not interested in it and so it has to be ensured that a knowledge like that should not go into wrong hands and therefore one has to have a pure mind and body in order to know the reality. We all have conditional access to reality one has to prepare one's mind and body to know the reality, one should earn it. If not people like you and me will be pushed out from the door to reality.

If you agree then you shouldn't make a speculation about the nature of the 'one' as you have done in the OP. I would never do that. The sages never discussed or argued about it instead they used to share their experiences with each other and based on those experiences they would come to a conclusion and that's how they validated the experiences by carefully examining the experience of the experiencer. So a discussion without actually experiencing it will lead you no where and any conclusion you make about the nature of the 'one' will be baseless and hence one should never try to describe it. I mean to conclude just monism is right or dualism is right or saying ''here unity would not mean one'' has no credibility.

The problem runs like this, To know the exact nature of the entities like space, time and matter one has to go beyond the senses to know them, thereof an experiment or a testable model to know their exact nature is not universal since everyone will not have the ability to see without using the sense organs. The mistakes where some people make is when they completely rubbish it as metaphysics, a hypothesis is regarded as metaphysics if it can neither be proved nor disproved. In this case we have a testable model but it is just not universal. Science takes mathematical models more seriously than any other models and it is not the only branch of philosophy or the only road we have, to know the reality. We have to shift our thoughts and consider other branches more seriously and this can be a new paradigm in human history. I think a unified theory of everything will not come from scientists, it will come from real philosophers, who just don't think but actually experience and have a method to know the exact nature of all things as they are. I have to disagree with Kant, humans do have the epistemological knowledge to know the things as they are.

We can not understand the 'ONE' with reason, rationalism or with speech and discussion. It has to be known only through experience. Its similar to tasting a sugar and saying it was sweet but when asked about what is sweetness, the mind goes ??????. Saint Augustine had the same view, from his excerpt City of God.

I think I'm suffering from this syndrome, I have most of the symptoms metioned in here -->wiki. I was doing an intense traditional practice for almost one year without taking advice from a spiritual master, it was an intense physical exercise which also requires one to have breathing exercises at the same time and one day all of a sudden I fell forward in the morning and backward in the evening (not my words, it was put nicely by my friend), when I was doing it in the morning that day I lost my consciousness and after I was awake I was lying on my mat with my whole body jerking with involuntary movements, it was a rush of energy which I felt. Since I had no guidance I unfortunately continued to do it in the evening too which is a traditional practice and this time I fell backwards and my head smashed on to the floor and I was on my mom's lap when I woke up. She said that my body was very cold. I didn't visited a physician since I thought it was not the kind of problem a medical proffesional could diagnose it and I stopped doing it out of fear and continued or tried to live a normal life, and I would consider myself being normal but the stresses are showing on my body and my emotions, I got meddled with someone's personal space and it has made it a lot worse. Symptoms like disinterest, disassociation, cries, uncontrollable emotions, fantasy prone can be highlighted. Since we don't find too many people who can remove those stresses from the body I might have to bear this spiritual emergency by leading a normal healthy life as described in that article. I was astonished to read that information on wiki, it seems mutants are on the rise. I wonder what's the take of transpersonal psychology on this.

I don't know how feasible this is, but is it possible to provide some space for saved posts before they can be posted into the forum, I mean a button like 'drafts saved' which automatically saves the content of our posts while we are writing it, since members like me who don't have a power back up for my pc, its really annoying sometimes when I'll be writing some lengthy posts and suddenly the power goes off and there is no way of getting it back again and I have to re-group my thoughts to post it again, so a feature like that will be really helpful.

The first one is correct there are no problems with that but I have some doubts for the second one. If I'm not wrong doesn't 14CD:3C point to the location having the byte 00, and so by a dword that would mean 00 00 00 01 and yes ofcourse you need to put 'H' next to them since they are in hexadecimal. I apologize if my answers make you lose some homework points but this is what I think.

Well, then hear the other side of the argument. 1. How did life originate? How did the DNA code originate? Even though this is irrelevant to what Evolution by Natural Selection intend to explain I'm responding to it, since they have included chemical evolution in their definition and requested for a natural process on how the DNA and its code can originate through evolutionary mechanisms. Towards understanding of the origin of genetic languages. 2. How could mutations? How could such errors create 3 billion letters of DNA information to change a microbe into a microbiologist? how can scrambling existing DNA information create a new biochemical pathway? Evolution doesn't work by random mutations, it works by random muttations followed by non-random selection, it works by cumulative selection i.e. accumulation of good design. The following paper shows how Evolution by NS can lead to increase in information. Explaining gene duplication. 3. How do ‘living fossils’ remain unchanged over supposed hundreds of millions of years? There are three kinds of natural selection mainly positive selection, normalizing selection and sexual selection. If an organism hasn't changed over the years it means they were subjected to normalizing selection and according to the mathematical models by Kauffman And also the rate of evolution depends on the rate at which the mutations are fixed in the population. 4. How did multi-cellular life originate? Metabolic cooperation through inter cellular interactions and their molecular biology has been studied extensively, experiments show that cells in direct contact communicate by exchanging large metabolites and in a growing cell having high energy requirement it would be a better strategy for the cell to share large metabolites with the other cell rather than battling alone in the battle for life. So those mutations which helped the cells to better communicate with each other got selected and passed on and there is no need for any teleological assistence for them to originate. 5. How did sex originate? Having traits which attract other individuals of the same population is an advantage since it passes on the traits to the next generation, but these attractive traits can also attract some predators but if the risk is less compared to the selective advantage then those alleles will be fixed. evolution of sex chromosomes. 6. How did blind chemistry create mind/ intelligence, meaning, altruism and morality? Even though humans exhibit extraordinary behaviours of intelligence, altruism and morality we're more or less animals in the first place, and most of the evolutionary psychology is based on this dogma. According to models of game theory applied to evolutionary biology by John Maynard Smith, the brains of the animals including humans are always developing survival strategies whether its in the wild for animals or in the gambling of humans, they exhibit innate instincts to make a choice which gives them the best possible outcome i.e. they make a selfish choice. Evolutionary psychology just explains the behaviours of living things when subjected to different environmental conditions. They just claim to explain one perspective of humans based on the dogma of seeing them as evolutionary by products. They don't claim to explain the origin of mind, intelligence and other higher morals, if some group of people are so annoyed if we say that humans think along the same lines as evolutionary psychological patterns its not the theories fault. They just say the truth. Its for us to realize that we are living in a civilized and a moral world and infact evolutionary psychology will go on to say that any ruthless act of misbehaviour in a socialized world will inturn lead to the isolation of those individuals and there by hindering their genes to be passed on, we're all animals(machines) first and then human beings. 7. Where are the scientific breakthroughs due to evolution? Evolution has helped us to better understand the complexities of the living organisms and how selections acts at various levels from genes to individuals to organisms and to populations. Our ability to make a distinction and divide a population into two different species even if they are so morphological identical between each other is only a great success we have had. This can lead to prediction on how the ecosystem can change over the years in the near future helps us to take actions to preserve the diversity of life that we on earth. 8. Why is a fundamentally religious idea, a dogmatic belief system that fails to explain the evidence, taught in science classes? Why is evolutionary ‘just-so’ story-telling tolerated? Living things look like they were designed, so how do evolutionists know that they were not designed? Ofcourse living organisms exhibit some amazing design solutions which is intriguing to our observation and Evolution by Natural selection is the only model which explains all the bio-diversity in the world, Yes there are some loop holes in the model which will be present in any model of physical sciences which will be later updated by new synthesis. If these proponents of Intelligent design give us a model which explains about the diversity of life on earth which can be testified based on their claim of a teleological hand behind the design of novel forms then we will be very much be happy to be included in the school curriculum but right now its not even a science and I guess it will never be a field of science and so we can just keep it far from science. We don't popularize pseudoscience in our classrooms. 9. Why is natural selection not a creative process? Here is a paper which shows how smal mutations in a gene can lead to macro-evolution. How animal body shapes changed in early evolution

Well, welcome Vinil, you've introduced yourself in the wrong thread, we have a thread called the 'The official introduce yourself thread' which is pinned at the top of this forum, you seem like you want to stand aside from the crowd anyways this is not my job, nice to meet you.

You have to start the count from 0 at the line 14CD:50 then you'll get the right answer. And also remember they are asking the value of the word(16 bits) and the double word(32 bits) but you've chosen only 8bits or 1 byte.

Use a client software like Bitlord 1.1, you can search for the torrent files from the bitlordsearch.com, the application software itself will search and download the torrent file for you and then you can use the torrent file to download your desired file. This seems more reliable.

This is done by tracing the program line by line. c:\MASM>MASM FILENAME.ASM ---> for compilation. c:\MASM>LINK FILENAME.OBJ ----> for linking the object file. c:\MASM>DEBUG FILENAME.EXE -----> for debugging or execution of the file. then if you give -G ---> the program will be executed. -T ----> the program will be traced line by line untill one of the registers become zero. There are other commands like that which I have forgot, I hope this helps even I'm not sure about it I learnt about it long back and now I have forgot.

Doesn't the Vedas also say that it should only be taught to worthy and deserving people. Let God turn his Rajo gunas into satwa guna (characteristic qualities) then it would have been the right time to remove his misconceptions.

According to Endosymbiont theory, organisms can undergo secondary endosymbiosis, i.e for example - a protist can engulf a whole algae which itself is in symbiosis with a cyanobacteria or some other symbiont organism. Some organisms depend on other organisms for glucose as long as they are independent but once they have engulfed an autotroph they lose their scavenging charactersistics and start acting as an autotroph by moving towards light. These organisms become so completely dependent on its symbiont that they no longer can exist individually, so as energy requirements of the host increased it required more glucose molecules and it had to come from the symbiont since the host was completely dependent on it. So it is this kind of environment of immense selection pressure led to the development of complex photosynthetic components and cycles. Remember generation of glucose is not a spontaneous process, it requires free energy. Read the article on Endosymbiont theory in wikipedia for further reference. Yes research indicates that both Eukaryotes and mitochondria had to evolve simultaneously and since it has been known that eukaryotes might have existed prior or at the time of origin of oxygenated photosyntesis I have gone with mitochondria evolving first before the choloroplasts.