INSPIRATION

Rahul Kothari May 23, 2012

This article argues out that inspiration plays an important role in ground breaking research in any eld of intellectual endeavour, be it Mathematics, Biology or Physics. Inablity of modern scientic theories to explain is also argued out and in the end an alternative Vedic model has been suggested. This article has a close resemblence with that of Ref[9].

Introduction
Learned cirlces have positively concluded...that purpose of advancement of knowledge, namely austerities, study of Vedas...culminates in the...descriptions of the Lord who is dened in choice poetry.

Srla Prabhup da writes in the purport of SB 1.5.22 that: a

Oxford dictionary [1] denes knowledge as facts, information, and skills acquired through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject . Man is a rational animal whose mind is always full of questions about the nature of existence of himself and things around him, he want to understand the meaning of things around him. For example man always had a curiosity as to from what all matter is made of. Greek philosopher Democritus argued that we cant divide the things (for example stone) indenitely, nally well be left with indivisible atoms[4]. From time to time on the basis of advancement in terms of technology and thoughts, scientists gave atoms, quarks as answers to the above question of ultimate objects. But now scientists believe that at the most fundamental level everything is made of strings [5], and they say what is called as String Theory or M-Theory as the Theory of Everything. Whether it describes the physical reality is a different thing (whose answer we may be able to get from the multimillion dollar LHC (Large Hadron Collider) experiments) but rst of all it is what we call as hypothesis which are put forth in order to explain the observed phenomenon. So in this article our main aim is to explain the formation of these hypotheses in science and mathematics. It will be argued that phenomenon known as inspiration plays an essential role in their formulation. Moreover we shall see that this phenomenon of inspiration cant be explained by mechanistic models1 of the present day theories. An alternative Vedic model that will be proposed here will provide a direct explanation of the phenomenon of inspiration together with many other unexplained observations.

Origin of Hypothesis

If we accept the doctrine that observed phenomenon is the impulse for a man to formulate theories in order to know the reason behind based on some principles which everyone accepts to be true. Thus after observing the nature some hypothesis are given, that are assumed to explain the observed phenomenon2 . For example according to a story Newton saw an apple
go to section 4 to know the meaning of this word. it may not always be the case. One of the doctrine of philosophy of science says that actually the reverse happens, it is the theory (here it can be approximated by hypothesis) that decides what we can observe. [7] There might be some other phenomenon which will remain hidden unless a theory predicts them.
2 Although 1 Kindly

falling while he was sitting in a garden and based on that observation3 he formulated what is called as the Universal Theory of Gravitation (please note the word universal4 ). Gm1 m2 r2 Thus once we have a hypothesis and observed phenomenon we can test how well it explains the observed phenomenon based upon some even simpler principles which everyone will accept5 to hold, which we call call as postulates. But the important question to ask is from where these hypothesis themselves come? It is quite clear that there is no algorithmic (step by step) approach, that may lead someone to the hypothesis from the observational data (as will be argued later). A similar type of thing occurs in mathematics also, in it weve conjectures (in place of hypotheses which mathematicians try to prove on the basis of axioms) which are also given after oberving some repeated patterns in mathematical quantities6 . Here Proof will take place of experiment [13] where the strategy of testing will be to verify each step of mathematical reasoning, basing it upon some axioms, that leads one to the nal conclusion (the proposition which we intended to prove in the beginning), on the basis of common rules of logic7 . After getting the steps its very easy to test whether the proof is correct or not. But there is no systematic, step-by-step method of generating mathematical proofs and systems of ideas. So if hypotheses in science and systems of reasoning in mathematics are not generated by any systematic procedure, then what is their source8 ? We nd that they almost universally arise within the mind of the investigator by sudden inspiration. Such inspirations generally occur suddenly and unexpectedly to persons who had previously made some unsuccessful conscious effort to solve the problem in question. They usually occur when one is not consciously thinking about the problem, and they often indicate an entirely new way of looking at ita way the investigator had never even considered during his conscious efforts to nd a solution. Generally, an inspiration appears as a sudden awareness of the problems solution, accompanied by the conviction that the solution is correct and nal. One perceives the solution in its entirety, though it may be quite long and complicated when written out in full. To support this view in the next section we give a myriad of examples. |F| =

Striking Examples

Inspiration plays a striking and essential role in the solution of difcult problems in science and mathematics. Signicant advances in science almost always involve sudden inspiration, as the lives of great scientists and mathematicians amply attest. In all of these examples well nd that: source of such inspiration lies beyond the subjects conscious efforts.
3 The hypothesis that everything attracts everything else with a force that is proportional to product of the masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance not only explains why apple should fall towards the earth but it also explains a other large number of experimental phenomenon of the elliptical orbits, the T 2 r3 rule of Keplarian orbits and moreover an astronomer Edmond Halley used it to compute the trajectory of Halleys comet with which he predicted its next appearance. 4 Scientists assume that physical laws are space time independent, that they should be applicable at all points in space and time. 5 For example if we assume that matter is made of atoms. Then it becomes very easy to argue out as to why a soup should get cooler when you blow air on it.[12] 6 For example Goldbachs conjecture says that every even number greater than 2 can be written as the sum of two primes, for example:

4 6 8

= = =

2+2 3+3 5+3

and so on. 7 Common rules of logic were given by Aristotle, they are actually three in number (1) law of non contradiction ((p p)) (2) law of identity (A A) (3) law of excluded middle (p p). Using them there are some valid rules of inference like modus ponens, modus tollens, hypothetical syllogism, disjunctive syllogism etc. 8 In this regard I would like to tell a story [6] of an Indian svami who was visited by a European philosopher. When the philosopher rst saw the svami he found him very tensed, he was very strongly thinking about something. So the philosopher asked him why was he so tensed. Then he (svami) told him that he doesnt know from where the thoughts come, so he was contemplating on the same. Inspirations are anyways some kinds of thought only. So the source of thoughts is still unknown, no one knows from where the thoughts are coming.

3.1

Physics

Archimedes9 is accredited to give the laws of buoyancy and oatation10 . He was assigned the task of determining the impurity in king Midass golden crown without doing any damage to it. After a long period of fruitless endeavor, he received the answer to the problem by sudden inspiration while taking a bath after which it is said that he ran across the streets naked shouting, Eureka, Eureka!

3.2

Mathematics

CF Gauss after trying unsuccessfully for years to prove a certain theorem about numbers, suddenly became aware of the solution. He writes: Finally, two days ago, I succeeded.... Like a sudden ash of lightning, the riddle happened to be solved. I myself cannot say... what made my success possible. a Srniv sa R m nujan also had these kinds of experiences, his mentor Prof. G.H. Hardy at Cambridge was amazed to see a a the level of complexity his formulae had. But on his part he used to say that goddess N magiri by coming in his dreams [2] is a giving him all these revelations11 .

3.3

Music
When I feel well... thoughts crowd into my mind as easily as you could wish. Whence and how do they come? Once I have a theme, another melody comes, linking itself with the rst one....The work grows; I keep expanding it...until I have the entire composition nished in my head, though it may be long....

Wolfgang Mozart once described how he created his musical works:

3.4

Biology
I was driving... and suddenly I saw it. I saw the polymerase chain... on a blackboard in my head, so I pulled over and started sibbling.

Dr. Kary Mullis who got the insight to develop PCR12 (and later got a Nobel Prize for it) writes [3]:

Henry Poincar in order to explain this phenomenon too in the beginning associated divinity to it, but later he moved away from his position and gave a mechanistic model.

Mechanistic Explanation & Its Limitations

Mechanistic models presuppose that nature follows certain physical laws and thus everything observable can be explained in terms of some equations of physics. So if we all are mere atoms, then we can know everything about us by solving quantum mechanical equations for all of the atoms. In this connection Prof. Stephen Hawking13 says [4]: Though we feel that we can choose what we do....biological processes are governed by the laws of physics and chemistry.
even consider him to be in the list of three greatest mathematicians who ever lived only with Newton and CF Gauss [2]. to which if the weight of water that an object displaces becomes greater than the weight of the body than the body oats otherwise it will sink. 11 Some of these theorems are related to continued fractions, partition functions etc. he also gave innite series expansions for . 12 Polymerase Chain Reaction is an efcient method for generating a huge number of copies of any segment of DNA. 13 He once held the post of Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge, the position once held by Sir Issac Newton in 1663. He is considered to be the most brilliant theoretical physicist after Einstein.
10 According 9 Some

So that if you are in pain then instead of saying the same you should say that cbres in your brain are ring. In order to account for this observation of sudden inspiration Henry Poincar (one of the most inuential mathematician of the 20th century) suggested subliminal self (SS) together with the presence of conscious self. SS is able to put together many mathematical symbols, manipulating them till it nds a combination satisfying the desire of conscious self for a certain kind of result it needed. Conscious mind would remain unaware of the many useless and illogical combinations running through the subconscious, but it will do the manipulations according to what is needed by the conscious self and that it would immediately become aware of a satisfactory combination as soon as it is formed. Subliminal self is able to make a large number of combinations in a very short time. Well call it SUPER SUBLIMINAL ALGORITHM (SSA). But here well argue that even if this sort of neural algorithm is present with in us then it would take huge amount of time for SSA to reach a proof of a given proposition. We here give example an from Euclidean Geometry to illustrate our point14 . Example from Euclidean Geometry In it there are 5 axioms 1. A straight line can be drawn between two points. () 2. Finite straight line can be produced in a straight line. ( ) 3. A circle can be drawn with a given center and radius. () 4. All right angles are equal to one another. ( ) 5. If three straight lines meet then if the lines are extended they will meet on that side where the sum of angles is smaller than 180 . () that are taken to be always true[8]. Besides this there are some common notions and denitions in the system. That will add even more number of choices but here just to keep things simple well omit them. Let us for the sake of convenience take A = {x|x is the axiom of Euclidean Geometry} Strategy: The rule of inference used will be modus ponens which has the form. Reasoning used in the derivation also assumes the usage of other three rules of inference that have been enumerated before. p q, p = q. So that if more than one axiom is required to prove a proposition then the argument will have the following form i P,
i i

i = P. i A

So if a proposition q is to be dervied then if it can be derived by using say , A, then there are ve choices each for and before q was derived. Thus one may have 24 unsuccessful attemps before the proof is reached. Thus there are total 52 = 25 ways. One of the theorems is that the sum of internal angles of a triangle has the sum equal to 180 . So now we would show that if one starts from scratch how many combinations he has to try in order to hit the nal proof. Here we are doing it for the sake of explaining the type of thought process that is used in mathematics. Although we are doing it in the reverse order (because I know the proof already. But I want to argue out that what would happen in case when a person was starting from the very axioms) by looking what other things we need to prove in order to prove the original proposition. Proposition: The sum of internal angles of a triangle is equal to radians. Proof: To show this we have to show so many things in advance. They are enumerated (sectionwise) as follows:
14 The reason as to why Im giving this example is that mathematics starts with a problem and the solution is given either in the form of conjecture or set of axioms (in order to give it some aesthetics)[13]

4.1 ABC Can Be Constructed: Proposition 1

Given points A and B by a line AB can be drawn through them, now if we know AC and BC (which are the lengths of other sides) then taking A and C as centers and AC and BC as radii by , circles can be drawn, and the point of intersection which is C can be joined to A and B by . But to measure distances AC and BC we have used . Thus the proposition 1 that a triangle can be constructed can be written as, more than 3125 combinations15 (55 ). ( ) ( ) 1

4.2

Alternate Angles made by a Transversal on two Lines are equal iff the Lines are parallel: Proposition 2

The line of reasoning in this case can be explained as follows: Th 1.13 Th 1.15 Th 1.13 2, Th 1.13 Th 1.13 Th 1.15. Thus we can also write Th 1.13 Th 1.13 Th 1.13 Th 1.13 2, which is nally equal to [ {( ) ( )} ( ) () ()] [ {( ) ( )} ( ) () ()]

[ {( ) ( )} ( ) () ()] [ {( ) ( )} ( ) () ()] 2 The number of combinations is enormous 7.27 1025 (537 ).

4.3

The Angle made by a Straight Line is equal to Radians: Proposition 3

The proof of this depends upon futher a large number of theorems [8] which is dependent upon Theorem (Th) 1.11 which is further dependent upon Th 1.3, Th 1.4, & Th 1.8. Th 1.8 depends upon Th 1.7 which is furhter dependent upon the axioms thus 1 ( ) () () Th 1.3, Th 1.4, Th 1.3 Th 1.4 Th 1.4() Th 1.5, Th 1.5 Th. 1.8, Th 1.31 Th 1.8 Th 1.11, Th 1.11 Th 13, Th 1.13 3, which can also be written as [ {( ) ( )} ( ) () ()] [( ) ( )] 3

[ {[ {( ) ( )} ( ) () ()]} {} {} () ]

for which one has to make at least (528 ) 3.72 1019 attempts in order to reach to hit the proof if he goes systematically. Thus nally the total number of attempts one has to make is roughly 8.47 1048 (570 ). Ref[9] assumes that each cubic volume of the brain if contributes to one combination in every 109 of a second for one year then the number of combinations that can be prepared by the brain in one year is 1044 . So that if it were for some SSA it would have taken 85,000 years for SSA to hit such a simple proof! Frontiers of mathematical research will include even more complex problems16 . By looking all this it can be inferred that the process of inspiration cant be explained by current theories that are conformal with current physical laws, but Vedic hypothesis provides a framework that can easily account for inspiration together with explaining many other phenomenon.
the following equation we are using the axioms again because without using them again we wont be able to reach our conclusion. example Andrew Wiles in 1993, a Princeton University mathematician proved the Fermats last theorem (problem posed by French mathematician Pierre de Fermat in 1637) that took him around 200 pages, even while using the highly concise language of mathematics.[11]
16 For 15 In

An Alternative Method

It has become a fairly commonplace for scientists to look for correspondence between modern physics and ancient Eastern thoughts from Upanisads, Buddhist texts alike17 . So here using some fundamental concepts from Bhagavad Gt we present a a . theoretical framework that can naturally account for inspiration. It assumes that 1. Consciousness is not a byproduct of material manifestations, it has its own fundamental existence. Consciousness is attributed to soul. 2. Individual consciousness is a minute part of what is called as SUPER CONSCIOUSNESS possessed by some universal conscious being which we call as God. Thus according to the Gt omnipresent Super consciousness can interact directly with the localized conscious selves which a are also called as jvas. Because God is present everywhere (even present in hearts also) it is possible for all varieties of artistic and mathematical creations to directly manifest within the minds of an individual (once it has been manifested in the hrdaya) . as the sloka from the Gt itself suggest: a sarvasya c ham hrdi sannivis. o, mattah smrtir j nam apohanam ca a a . . .t . vedai ca sarvair aham eva vedyo, ved nta-krd veda videva c ham s a a .

Conclusion

In the article we saw that mechanistic explanation of the phenomenon of inspiration suffers some serious problems for example Mechanistic explanation presupposes the presence of SSA, but that itself has to be accounted for, that why it is there in some persons ans why not in others. One may argue that on the basis of genetic theory it all can be explained. Then why it happened that B. Riemanns any of the kids were not as talented he was. So mere genetic theory cant explain it. In this regard as was explained above the philosophy of the Gt can be helpful, for not only it explains the question of a inspiration but as Ref[10] suggests that this also explain some bizarre phenomenon of clairvoyance, reincarnation memories and so forth.

References
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] Oxford Online Dictionary Samsara Ke Mahanatam Ganitajna, Mule Gunakara, Rajakamala Publications, New Delhi Singh T.D., Life Matter and their interactions, BVI publications, 2006 Hawking Stephen, Mlodinow Leonard, The Grand Design, Bantam Books New York, 2010 Brian Greene, The Elegant Universe: Superstrings, Hidden Dimensions, and the Quest for the Ultimate Theory Thoughts on Synthesis of Science and Religion, The Mind of God by Dr. Deepak Chopra, BVI publications, 2005 Peter Godfrey Smith, Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science, University of Chicago Publications Euclids Elements of Geometry, edited by Richard Fitzpatrick On Inspiration, Sad p ta D sa, Bhaktivedanta Vedabase 2003 a u a

[10] Human Devolution, An Alternative To Darwin Theory by Micheal Cremo, Torch Light Publications, Los Angeles [11] Contemporary Abstract Algebra, Joesph A. Gallian, Narosa Publications, 4th Edition
17 See

for example: F Capra, The Tao of Physics, an exploration of the parallels between modern physics and Eastern mysticism

[12] Feynman Lectures on Physics, Vol-1, Feynman, Sands, Leighton, Addison Wesley Publications MA [13] Reuben Hersh, What Mathematics Is Really, Oxford University Press 1999