I beg to differ.

I beg to differ.

Freud : There are only two basic ‘instincts’,’i’, ; Food and Sex.

I think, there is only one basic ‘i’, not two. That ‘i’ is ‘H’;Happiness.

There are scientific observations to prove it.

Business, व्यापार।

I=H : The Kashyap Equation of Psychology and Philosophy.


Nasal Paranoia !

I have coined a new phrase for allergic rhinitis. Its NASAL PARANOIA.

A paranoid person is usually very suspicious. He feels insecurity by apparent innocent and non threatening gestures of others. He interprets the harmless comments of others as intended to harm his reputation or to malign him in some way. He immediately puts his defensive and aggressive side to action in such situations.

Similarly an allergic nose reacts to apparently harmless substances of the world,  in a weird way, to host an allergic response against it. It immediately starts having sneezes and watering. It reacts in full glamour against apparently harmless substances as if they were there to harm it. Hence the term ‘NASAL PARANOIA’.

Let your imagination go wild and then test it !

My this blog consist of many different topics which are in no way connected to each other. These are just random ideas which come to my mind at different times and I write it down.

1.When ever there are riots between two fractions of society try ‘laughter bomb’. Police or civil authorities can play LOUDLY jokes, comedy tapes etc, instead of using weapons for shooting, lathi charge or using water cannons or tear gas. Lets test this thing and see if it works. If it works then it will be a novel and safe thing.

Basis for this is that mutually opposite emotional states cannot exist in  the mind simultaneously.

2. If you want to change the destiny of a nation then the first thing a child should listen in his life just after birth is the process of ‘SCIENCE’. First six years of life (and of course through out the life) the child should be encourage to ask ‘QUESTIONS’ and to find their ‘ANSWERS’ and to ‘TEST’ the answers for correctness.THE RATIONAL THINKING ! Within fifteen years that nation will be full of Scientists.

Basis for this is the phenomenon of ‘Imprinting’.

3. As soon as I wake up in morning I start having sneezing. Sneeze is a reflex, not under voluntary control. It should happen even when the individual is asleep.If I am allergic to something in the room then the sneeze should happen even when I am sleep, rather it should wake me up from sleep. But I have noticed that it is not so. Sneeze start as soon as I wake up.

The possible reason could be–

a. Sneeze reflex is suppressed (to some extend) while one is asleep. Reticular activating system in brain stem lies near to those centers that control sensation in nose (V cranial nerve), and the spasmodic contraction of respiratory muscles (C 5 nerve root) and lacrimation (inferior salivary nucleus) and watering from nose.

b.There might be some psychological component to my sneeze, which requires my conscious wakeful awareness.

c. Are there some postural, physical environmental reasons for this. All these are just unproved untested speculation and can be wrong.

4. To save water while using taps there should be foot operated control system to on/off the water flow. It gives hands free comfort while water wastage is also stopped. The gadget or extension can be attached to the pipe line just before the water outlet. There are thermo senser devices also available but they are expensive. So a simple mechanical device can do wonders.

5. What is “Time” ?

“Time is an abstract concept that describes the relative change (happening) of events in space with respect to each other.”


When earth rotates one full circle relative to the sun we say its “one year”.

When earth revolves one full circle relative to its own axis we say its “one day”.

If there were no rotation or revolution of earth ( i.e. no change of earths position relative to sun or its own axis) we would say we have no time, i.e. no year, no day.

Time is different from mass and energy. Mass and energy are physical ‘things’. Time is a non entity. Time is not a physical thing but it is conceptual illusion which is created with passage of events in universe. It does not have any independent existence. It exists only because the constituents of universe are constantly changing relative to each other. Had there been no change in universe (as before the big bang) there would be no Time.

There need not be any observer for time’s existence. It exists even if there is no observer. Only thing the time needs to exist is the relative change in the components of universe(mass and energy, i.e. mass vs mass, energy vs energy, mass vs energy) relative to each other. As soon as there is change in universe time “starts” and when there is no change in universe it “stops”.

I am thinking over the concept of slowing and speeding of time due to influence of gravity, as proposed by Einstein.

Through the roll of a Dice

3039290-a-blue-twelve-sided-dice-with-the-number-eleven-showing13We all are familiar with the Dice. Many games are available which use them. Ancient India game of Chausar, which is in the very heart of the epic Mahabharata, is an example of such a game.

Many types of dices are available. The most famous is the cubical Six Faced Dice ( here after referred as SFD). Each face is marked with a single number from 1 to 6. All faces of SFD are exactly equal to each others in dimensions.

Other types of polyhedral dices, having number of faces different from 6 can also be made, say like a polyhedral 10 faced dice.

Today I will look at the dice from a mathematical point of view. Lets explore and quantify the mathematical reasons for the results we get on rolling the dice. In the end I will conclude by touching the philosophical aspects of the ‘Dice of Life’

Now lets first consider the following situations.

1. If we throw only one SFD then the probability of getting a particular face ( marked by a particular number from 1 to 6)  is exactly equal for all the six faces. And mathematically we can calculate this probability to be,  16.7 %.

2. Now lets calculate the probabilities in a slightly different situation. Here we will throw two SFDs simultaneously and add their individual face values. In this situation also the probabilities of each of the two dices, rolling to any of the six possible face values is exactly 16.7 % for each face value of each dice.

It is required in some games that we have to sum up the face values of each of the two SFD and use that sum in the play. The number of different summations values, while using two SFDs are from 2 to 12. So there are a total of 11 different summations values possible.

Suppose  we make a  single symmetric Eleven Faced Dice (here after referred as EFD) and throw that dice in the play, then the probabilities of getting each of the face values ( from 2 to 12) of EFD will be exactly 9 % for each face value. In other words while using a EFD the possibility of getting face value 2 will be equal to the possibility of getting face values 7 or 10 or 12,  and that is 9 % for each of them.

BUT if we add the face values of two SFD, then, it is an observation that probability of getting 2 or 12 as the summation value is extremely low. The reason being that there is only 1 possible way out of 36 different possible ways in which the dices can roll, of getting the sum as either 2 or 12. And that way is,  each dice getting face value as either 1 or 6 respectively.

On the contrary, the number of possible different ways in which we can get  the other summation values of 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 are 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 respectively.

So, on calculations we get that, when ever we throw two SFDs, then 17 % of the time we will get 7 as the summation value, 14 % of the times we will get  6 or 8 as the summation value, 11% of the times we will get 5 or 9 as the summation value, 8 % of the times we will get 4 or 10 as the summation value, 5.5 % of the times we will get 3 or 11 as the summation value and the least i.e., 3 % of the times we will get 2 or 12 as the summation value.

Therefore while throwing two SFDs, there is highest possibility of getting a score of 7, followed by getting either 6 or 8, then still lesser  5 or 9, then 4 or 10, followed by 3 or 11 and the least possibility is of getting a score of 2 or 12.

Statistically this data will give a inverted ‘V’ shaped curve.

The beauty of the game of chance is that,  when we need 7, to be in the game, then, though we have the highest, i.e., 17 % probability of getting 7 as the summation value, as compared to other values, BUT this also implies  that we have 83 % probability of not getting 7 !

A deduction from the above facts is that, there are about 45 % chances ( almost 50 % ) of getting one of the following three face values i.e.,6, 7 or 8. The problem is that, at the same time, we also have 55 % chance of not getting either of 6, 7 or 8 !

3. A third situation is in which we throw three SFD  and sum their face values.

Then the summation values range from 3 to 18. They are 16 in number.

Mathematically we can deduce that there are 216 different possibles permutations and combinations in which the three SFDs will roll.

By applying the same mathematics we can get that there is the highest i.e., 12.5 % probability of getting either 10 or 11 as the summation value,  11.5 % probability of getting either 9 or 12 as the summation value,  9.7 % probability of getting either 8 or 13 as the summation value,  6.9 % probability of getting 7 or 14 as the summation value,  4.6 % probability of getting either 6 or 15 as the summation value,  2.7 % probability of getting 5 or 16 as the summation value,  1.4 % probability of getting either 4 or 17 as the summation value and the least i.e., 0.5 % probability of getting either 3 or 18 as the summation value.

If we draw a graph out of this data, we will get a inverted ‘U’ shaped normal curve.

If we use a single, symmetric 16 faced dice then the probability of getting each of the face value from 3 to 18 will be 6.25 % each.

No one can be 100 % sure how the dices will roll and what face values we will get. We can only predict the probabilities of getting a particular face value, or saying the other way, the probability of not getting that particular face value.

General conclusions about results in rolling multiple dices are–

  1. The probability of getting same face value in all of the multiple dices is less common.
  2. There is a more probability of getting a middle summation value, then the extreme value.
  3. We can check the structural symmetry of a dice by studying the probabilities of each face value. If the probabilities are more or less equal then the dice is ‘perfectly’ made.

Philosophical aspects of the Dice of Life—

If we think philosophically,  the game of dice can teach us about the truths of some aspects of life(Beware not all).

We live in our society, where rules to which we all have ‘agreed to’, decide our behaviors and the outcomes of events. The outcome’s probability can be predicted based on the basis of these rules. The various possible outcomes in a particular case can be taken as the face values of the Dice of Life.

Life doesn’t play with a ‘single’ dice, if this would be the case, then everything would become predictable and there will be no uncertainties of life, NO THRILL, NO SUSPENSE. The game of life is played with multiple dices. And the number of dices with which the life plays its game is not two, three four or five, it can be much more than that. This complicates the matter and thats what life is all about, The Complexity !

  1. In life, the probabilities of occurrence of extreme fortunate/unfortunate events is low. The religious people calls the occurrence of such a rare event as a ‘miracle’ and the scientists call the occurrence of such a rare event a ‘statistically rare event’.
  2. Most of the time mixed blend of fortunate and unfortunate events keep occurring  in our life, the ‘middle summation values’.
  3. Every event which happens can have multiple possible outcomes, each outcome having its unique magnitude of probability of occurrence, which we can judge based upon our understanding of societal rules.The predictability of these outcomes by us depends upon our depth of understanding of these rules. We make our life decisions based on our assessment of such probabilities.
  4. If a person habitually overestimates the probability of occurrence of unfortunate events he is bound to be depressed. The word habitual is important here.
  5. If a person habitually overestimates the occurrence of fortunate events he is bound to make foolish decisions and suffer losses.
  6. A person with balanced and healthy mind correctly estimates the magnitude of occurrence of various probabilities. He makes life judgement based on such assessments. He doesn’t overestimate or underestimate the probabilities of occurrence of fortunate/unfortunate events. Because of thorough knowledge of the rules of the game,the error of judgement doesn’t occur. Even if he is betting his money for the rare fortunate event, he ensures that he is prepared for the occurrence of a rare unfortunate event( The Back Up Plan). And such ‘risk taking’ is a cool calculated ‘conscious’ decision, not a rash arbitrary action.

It is this understanding of the game of Dice of Life which gives a person the necessary courage to take risks, the mental strength to suffer set backs and above all, the modesty to be composed in success.!rodtheistic-evolution-of-adam-300x154 (1)

Handfull of Uranium, Skyfull of Plutonium !

India has launched a Mars orbiter Mission(MOM) on 5th November 2013. It is basically a rocket carrying a satellite.The rocket will travel more than 666 million km over a span of about 11 months, before placing the orbiter satellite in the martian sphere of influence, to orbit around it.The orbiter is expected to reach the red planet on 24th Sept 2014 at about 7:30 AM IST.

The aims of this mission is to explore the planet’s morphology, mineralogy and the martian atmosphere. This mission is also a show of strength of ISRO, to the world, about it’s rocket launch systems, spacecraft building and operational capabilities.

Apart from these there are other potential benefits of such out of space explorations.

There is possibility of finding abundance of radioactive materials like uranium, plutonium etc on these far reached planets.These elements, if can be discovered on extra celestial bodies, can be brought back to earth and be used in nuclear reactors for producing energy. There is already scarcity of such elements on earth.

Apart from this there is a growing market for multi-billion dollar business of space tourism. To tap this business, India should first develop a technical capability to carry out such missions.The missions like MOM not only provides such opportunity but also demonstrate the strength that India is capable of such interplanetary missions. The Richie richs of the world are more than ready to spend their money for such space travels provided that they are assured of  a economic, affordable, foolproof and safe space capabilities. India is a having a natural advantage in this area.

All these can earn money for India in near future.

All these scenarios may seems to be very unlikely and unreal to a common ordinary man. But we should not forget that the possibility of man landing on moon also seemed very unlikely to many of fellow humans. BUT THAT HAPPENED.

There are voices raised, in and out of India, questioning the need for such an adventure, by a country like us. The reasons quoted by those people are stereotyped…India is a developing country…30 % of Indians are very poor…earning less than 1 $ a day…this money should be spent on feeding the poor, education… tax payers money should not be wasted on space explorations…bla bla bla…

India’s Mars mission is the cheapest in the world. NASA’s Mavens Mars mission is about nine times  more costly than India’s Mars Orbiter Mission. ($ 671 million vs $ 75 million).

The cost of Mangalyaan -1 Mars mission is only Rs 450 crores.The box office collections of movies like Dhoom-3 is Rs 502 crores. The box office collection of science fiction movie Krissh-3 is Rs 300 crores.  So we Indians have spent Rs 805 crores of rupees on entertainment.

If poor citizens of a developing country can spend such a huge amount of money on entertainment then whats wrong in investing money in a scientific project like space exploration, which will ultimately earn money for the country. I am not saying that entertainment is wrong.

Accepted, that 30 % of Indians are very poor, but they are also not paying any tax either. Its the tax payers money which is spent in space projects, not theirs.

The tax payers should understand that, due to satellites launched in space by such space programs only, the modern means of communications like internet, television, telephones, tele medicines. tele education, remote sensing, GPS,  etc are working. Our life would have been much worst without such conveniences.

Some people reap the benefit of such space programs and at the same time criticize it also. Some one said HYPOCRISY !

Every year we Indians burn crackers of crores of rupees during the Diwali festival. This causes pollution also. All those, myopic peoples, who are very critical of space programes’  expenditure, should first raise their voices against such issues.

Daily on our roads we can see the superstitious wastage of lemon and chillly, in the voodo witchcraft, to shed away the ‘bad omens’. Gallons and gallons of milk is wasted by superstitious people on the shiv ling worship. Liters and liters of oil is wasted in worshiping the stone god shani dev. Is this justifiable ? Cant we divert this wastage of edibles to feed the empty stomachs?

Nobody raises voices against these issues.

I think, missions like MOM are definitely not a wastage of money, in fact they are the initial investments in the huge space business.This investment will give returns in the times to come. More ever the money earned by this business will be spent on the poor only.

Looking at the potential benefits of space exploration the arguments against it don’t stand.lift offredmars-orbitermangalyaan-mars-mission2kumbh-sadhu_with_mobile_phone-AFPlp sadhu

Altruism is directly proportional to your own selfish interest !

Have you ever felt altruistic for a bacteria ? No !    Why ? ?

I will ask a few questions to make a point.

If you were given an option by the god/nature/ or whatever to sacrifice your life, with a condition that if you die, then only one of the following will benefit from your death. Then whom of the following would you want to survive ?  The options are….1) A tree  2) A bacteria   3) A goat    4) Your neighbor  5) Your son.

Whom of the following would you prefer to benefit from your sacrifice ?  The options are…..1) A tree  2) A bacteria   3) A goat  4) Your neighbor

Whom of the following would you prefer to benefit from your sacrifice ?   The options are…1) Tuberculous bacteria  2) HIV virus   3) Lactoferrous bacteria   4) Pathogenic bacteria

Why is that most of the people are altrustic about human beings only. Why there are no NGOs working selflessly for bacterias or fungi or viruses.

Most of the people would prefer to benefit their son in question number one.  Most of the people would prefer to benefit their neighbor in return of their sacrifice in question number two. A friendly neighbor is more likely to help your kins and kids, in your absence. Most of the people would prefer to benefit the useful lactoferous bacteria than other harmful organisms.

The more close a person is to you in blood relations more likely you are to be altruistic for them. More likely a organism is closer to you in the evolutionary tree and hence more ‘brotherly’ , more sympathetically you are likely to behave with them.

Many humans feel sad to see animals being killed for food but they do not feel sad when plants are killed for food, who incidentally are living beings also. Many people do not eat animals but very willingly accept vaccines , in both cases live organism are killed for ‘consumption’.

A person is more likely to be altruistic to that individual who is beneficial for his survival.

It is my observation that people are more altruistic to those organisms who are beneficial for their own subconscious selfish motives, even if that organism is genetically dissimilar to them. For example wife is of course genetically different from husband, but she is needed for the survival for his kids and hence worthy of beneficiary of altruistic acts of husband and vice versa.

I think there is always an selfish interest of the person who is doing an altruistic act…if not conscious then subconscious.

According to me altruism is a myth.



In a brutal emotionless nature, human emotions are unnatural !

The life of universe is 13.7 billion years , the start began with the big bang. Life originated on earth 3.7 billion years ago.

Charles Darwin stated his very famous/in-famous theory of natural selection and the origin of species.  This theory has stood the test of time and there are evidences to prove it and hence it is highly revered by the scientific community. This is a common misunderstanding that process of evolution of a new species takes place over millions of years only, and not in over a short span of time. Few points I want to highlight to show that this general notion of the ‘requirement of millions of years’ is wrong—

  1. The genetically engineered and modified plants (vegetables) and animals (specially dogs) are available on earth now a days. All of them have come on earth in the last century only, a reasonably short time. They are in a way, at least a subspecies of their immediate ancestors, if not a new species.
  2. Viruses, bacteria and other unicellular organisms  have shorter life span, have limited genetic endowment and poor rudimentary repair apparatus to take care of DNA  defects that accumulate during replication ( birth of progeny). Hence large number of mutations accumulate in them over shorter period of time. This can be stated as if they were evolving to a new species in a matter of few seconds or minutes (think of antibiotic resistance in bacteria).
  3. The primate ancestors of human beings, were dominated by the dinosaurs, 65 million years back, before the extinction of dinosaurs by the huge meteorite which fell on earth to destroy many life forms on earth including dinosaurs. This occurred fairly quickly, as the catastrophic event of falling of a meteorite does not take millions of years. In the changed, dinosaur free environment, the human’s ancestors found ample opportunities for development and procreation. As is evident, this occurred in comparatively small time scale.
  4. Human killing by their fellow ones occurs daily in our world, which if happens before the poor victim had any chance of reproduction, can be equated to be a natural catastrophic event ( like falling of a meteorite), which is killing out the weaker ones from the evolutionary race ( as the meteorite did to the dinosaurs) and hence contributing to the evolution of human race by selecting the individuals with aggressive traits.
  5. The human concept of rejecting someone for marriage and halfhearted compromised marriage,  though they occur over a shorter time frame of one life time, also contribute to evolution. The person who is rejected by some one, whom he/she loved, some how manages to marry another person halfheartedly. This halfhearted marriage is not of evolutionary benefit, as there is a element of compromise in it. There will always be some friction between such couples and this will have adverse psychological impact on the mental health of their children, putting them at a disadvantageous position in the evolutionary race.
  6. Hitler killed thousands of Jews over a shorter period of time. Was that contributory to  evolution ?  Why/why not that killings,  over a shorter period of time, cannot/can be equated as a ‘natural’ catastrophic event, which wiped out the weaker unprotected ones from the evolutionary race, as the natural catastrophic-short-time event of a meteorite falling on earth wiped out the weaker dinosaurs out of earth. and as a consequence giving, more adaptive human primates, the opportunity to flourish in a dinosaur fee world.
  7. The black moths of England were selected by nature over the whiter ones over a period of a single century only.

The requirement of time for the development for a new species is a relative thing, highly individualized for the type of organism involved. And the time for evolution to a new species also depends on the severity of selection pressure as well as on genetic variation. Even in a single type of organism there is a scope of a single sudden catastrophic event to change the course of evolution over a shorter period of time.

Screenshot_2014-08-12-23-33-49-1 Screenshot_2014-08-12-23-32-56-1 Screenshot_2014-08-12-23-36-14-1