Truth

This is the product of 4 years of VNIt, and a few more on my part, and a lot more on the part of my friend, Rahul (now doin even more thinking in IIT Powai)

Its a tribute to all those "discussions" in the hostel corridors, classrooms, mess halls, labs over the campus that we "compsci"s ever had .....

And this one just happens to be a favorite subject for a few of us.

Pardon the "level of abstraction" .... this is 2 compscis goin at it afteral l...

Thaks in advance to Rahul for this absolutely wonderful conversation ... I enjoyed while talking, as also wihle revisiting it each time ....

$h0unak: hows the tree of wisdom?

Sent at 2:09 PM on Tuesday

Rahul: it never ceases to blossom.

$h0unak: and the lateest flower yo plucked off it is : ?

Rahul: ah..but the flower is precious to me. How do i trust it with you?

$h0unak: valid concern....

justified,too

Rahul: in any case....here it goes...

i dont suppose u know the meaning of the word non-causal....

$h0unak: enlighten me

Rahul: ok...can u think of something being non-causal or let me put it this way...u can imagine 

a causal thing right? i.e one that has a cause?

$h0unak: i guess

causality as put forth by the marovingian is pretty clear in my head

Sent at 2:14 PM on Tuesday

Rahul: for some time let go off all the definitions that u know of.....ya.u can think of it in 

terms of the merovingian i.e something that has a cause i.e beginnig point......note that if 

something has a beginning point all i have to do to destroy that thing is to back in time and 

destroy the cause..

assume for a moment that u can go back in time

u thr?

$h0unak: as in travel faster than light?

jst had a look at a guy torchin his fart

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRoYoExRMnU

Rahul: dont worry about the way to do it....just assume that u can go back in time and change 

whatever u want to...

$h0unak: ok

Rahul: the point here is causality

$h0unak: yeah

i remember

my attention span has lessened somewat , of late

Rahul: that means a causal thing can in principle be destroyed simply by moving back in 

time..now comes the million dollar question....

can u even imagine something noncausal...

?????

$h0unak: everything that happens has to have a beginning, but everything that is supposed to 

happen will happen.

you can change the starting point, maybe, but then you are just creating a new set of 

variables, another universe, maybe ...

something on the lines of the Schrodinger's Cat paradox

Rahul: nono...that aint the point...its far from it...what i talk of is something much much 

more subtle..more mysterious and hence more unreachable....

$h0unak: subtlety?

Rahul: u say everything that happens MUST have a cause....?? right?? keep answering in yes or 

no

$h0unak: um.....

ok..lets go along wth this line of thought..

YES

Rahul: all right....now what seperates something that happens and something that is GOING to 

happen?

$h0unak: the occurence of the trigger

or the cause

Rahul: exactly.....which means it is the placement of cause and effect at two seperate times 

that we call causality..note that cause and effect can never occur at the same time

..

now tell me this

$h0unak: by definition, the cause induces the effect

Rahul: suppose..just suppose there was something that was noncausal....firstly can u EVEN 

imagine such a thing????? jsut can u imagine..just answer that...

$h0unak: ok. i assume a noncausal event

Rahul: let me ask u the above question in a totally differnet(but equivalent) way.....do u 

think that IF there is a god , he can think??

$h0unak: exactly (almost) wt the event i had in mind

ws

i rather had the existence or inception of the divine itself as the evet

Rahul: nonono...whatever i am saying does not in any way say there is or there is no god...all 

i am asking is this subtle and a very difficult question..do u think that god can think??

$h0unak: now that is tricky

indeed

he can

Rahul: i wont tell u whether u r right or wrong....because a man must realize the answer on his 

own....all i wl say is this....

the answer to the above question has taken me 22 years to figure out and it has something to do 

with the following question:

IF there is a god WHY would u want to go to him? and if u did go to him and achieve him what 

would u do after that????

$h0unak: but how do you know that what you have figured out is the answer or the complete 

answer and not a part of the answer?

its a question i would say, more of beleif, which you can call causal.

bt it may not be strictly causal

i beleive its our purpose to seek divinity

for we have energy to give back to this universe

and when we reach Him

we shall not have to ask him for anything

as then, we will have served our purpose

and that shall be the end of this journey

Rahul: i shall not justify myself on this point anymore because the nature of the answer is 

like that....and believe me, all the questions that u have now i have had some years back...all 

i wl say is..trust me..whatever u r saying..all this energy thing..all this can be 

refuted..they are not causes or purpose at all..and as much as this might seem unbelievable...i 

hope its atleast reachable

$h0unak: since our purpose ends there

we need not be concerned with what lies beyond

Rahul: and remember my friend...if the mind can think of something beyong god then it is 

necessarily concerned with it....and this point is subtle....

let me give u another hint(i know i sound condescending but i cant help it)....would u get 

bored if u could live forever???

$h0unak: :)

Rahul: or let me ask u another equivalent question

why the :) ?

$h0unak: wts the point of living forever if there is no purpose to drive us?

Rahul: ah....that my friend is an argument that cannot be refuted

$h0unak: it either means we are incapable of fulfilling our purpose even if we are granted all 

eternity

Rahul: but the flaw is that the argument is infallible

$h0unak: or that we have an existence that is beyond obligations

Rahul: nono......i used to think like this about 3 years back

but since then i have "realized" the truth

$h0unak: its infallibiliy is a flaw beacause nothing can be perfect?

Rahul: nono...

more subtle

ok..answer this

whatever is the truth..whatever it is..do u think u can express it in a language??? justify ur 

answer...(very very imp question)

$h0unak: no

Rahul: why not?

$h0unak: language is a medium that is not yet perfect

Rahul: nonononononon

$h0unak: even the simplest of thoughts may not be fully and properly conveyed in words

Rahul: language is perfect...only problem is it is not suited to expressing truth..and why do u 

think is that

$h0unak: and to express something, you must understand it through and through

ambiguity?

Rahul: not exactly ambiguity...something close....

think abou tthe nature of the truth

whatveer is the truth,,what must it be like

$h0unak: :)

Rahul: why the truth CANNOT be expressed using logic??

why

a very finite reason exists

$h0unak: cnat fnd words rt nw itself.....

bcz logic requires a premise

and a predicate

Rahul: u r almost close....let me help u refine ur argument and state it with a little more 

subtelty...

$h0unak: logic takes a cause and an effect and tries to verify if the effect was triggered by 

the cause

Rahul: again almost close but not yet ther..not getting the most imp point

listen to me....

$h0unak: so when it encounters something that is a standalone, it finds o matching cause

Rahul: again very very close...but still one very very imp thing missing..

here it is

....

$h0unak: ...........

Rahul: i dont know much about the truth...but one thing i can tell u abou t it..whatever it 

is..it must be irrefutable....that is there is no way to refute it.....because it is the 

truth..u just cannot refute it...u should not be ABLE to refute it.....

that is u should not be able to challenge it

the word 'ABLE' is very imp here...

$h0unak: right...

Rahul: now...

any language u design

must necessarily have

the means to negate every sentence built into it

that is the nature of logic and language

whatever u can think of ..u can think of negating it

a language is defined like that

and hence if u could express truth in a language u can negate it...

$h0unak: that makes the mind inherently incapbale of thinking anything irrefutable, does it 

not?

Rahul: u have spoken the words of god my friend......

i wish i was with u face to face right now

$h0unak: whoa

Rahul: we could have had a much better conversation

$h0unak: seriously

that day may not be far, if things go a particular way ...

Rahul: i hope so too..

so either the mind must be made to think

without a language

OR

if the mind CAN only thionk in a language

then it is impossible to perceive the truth using the mind

or a nlanguage for that matter

$h0unak: exactly

so when you feel something that you know is special,that you know is there, but you find 

yourself simply incapable of articulating it

you should realisre that what you felt was pure

Rahul: ah....wisdom of the ages....very very pure are the words u speak my friend....i hope u 

continue to think like this for a good part of ur life

$h0unak: i hope everyone gets to feel and realise this sometime in their stay on this earth as 

an intelligent being

Rahul: now the point is this.....if a noncausal entity wanted to communicate with you...can he 

succeed in doing it especially given that u r causal??? if yes how??? if no then what do we do 

then??

$h0unak: interesting...hang on a sec

Rahul: all right

hey listen if u r busy then i dont wanna bea pain in ur ass....u just say the word and i'll be 

out of ur hair...

Sent at 2:59 PM on Tuesday

$h0unak: yeah ..back again

if a noncausal entity were to communicate with us, then

we would miss its signals

or misinterpret them

Rahul: now u just hang on a sec....i'll be back in a moment....but in the meanwhile ponder over 

this....

do u think it wl try to communicate using something causal such as signals or for that matter

DO U THINK IT CAN EVEN PRODUCE SIGNALS???

$h0unak: signal was just a term here

Rahul: do u think it can produce ANYTHING causal??

$h0unak: short for its means of communications

Rahul: just give me a moment ...i'll be back

$h0unak: hang on

lets continue this some other time

ive got a meeting to sleep thru...

btw, im saving this conversation text

Rahul: all right..until the next time or as they say ..until the next flower blooms

$h0unak: :)

Rahul: ur wish my friend

$h0unak: c ya soon. ...

Rahul: i hope so too..

still waiting for the next flower to bloom, but that will happen if and when its destined to

......