Sunday, October 18, 2015

Is our universe mathematical? Or its just in our head?

Decoding the Universe. The great math Mystery.

Please do watch it with searching youtube.


Minimum two things are required to describe anything or we need a binary information (e.g. 0,1 in case of computer). Because one of it is taken the reference to say that this is not the same object as other. This is perhaps the fundamental principle, which we humans are limited by.
Why do I say minimum two things? I have written it on article: http://bioinsilico.blogspot.in/2015/03/intelligence-and-in-search-of.html

Minimum two different things are required to describe anything.

To reach this conclusion, let's find out what we see or know. We know things by knowing their shapes.  But how to know the shape of a particular object. For it, we have to know the distance (the way of arrangement of the object). But again the question arises, how we know the distance. What makes us aware of the distance?

Let's take an example of colored board problem.
Imagine one red colored board. Also, imagine we are only seeing it and nothing else. Can we distinguish anything from it? We only see red and nothing else. Take an analogy of a person with eyes closed. When he/she enters the room, he/she can't distinguish between a chair, a table, a bed. He/she even can't say the particular object exists or not.

Now come again to the colored board problem. Now another big black color circle comes on the board. But how do we know it, it's a circle, not a square?  To know it we should be aware of distance. With using distance, we can tell whether it's a circle or square. It's because we have a tendency to measure distance, we can distinguish between a square and circle.

But how does distance arises in our mind?
We measure distance by counting. But how do we do counting here? We can only say that red is different from black. We can't count anything in it. How the numbers are so intuitive in our brain. We can't count a number of red dots on the board, neither we can count the number of black dots (circle) on the board.
So there is something that makes us count. It's a reference. The SMALLEST reference.
Imagine a smallest black dot in the board, surrounded by red color. Now take it  (the smallest black dot)  as the reference.
Now we are ready to say whether the black one is a circle or a square by counting. Just start putting the smallest reference black dots in the black circle line by line and measure no. of dots in each line. The first line would have one dot. The second line would have two dots, third 3  dots and at diameter maximum number of dots, then when we go down, the dots decreases and reaches to one again.

Bingo.. we know counting now.



Perhaps our limitation is based on this principle.


The matter is quantized as there is a demarcation between two objects, i.e. we can distinguish between objects but space is not as there is no demarcation is space.
And that demarcation can change in shape based upon interaction or forces.
Oops, we can demarcate space with matter. But as space is only one (i.e. very huge), it won't possible for matter particles to demarcate it if we take complete universe...


Why can't we see air? Why can't we feel the air at rest? It's because it doesn't create a change in our body (i.e. in our nervous system). We feel the heat because it creates a change in our body. We have proteins (other macromolecules) in our body which change based upon the change produced in the outer environment. 

But what is change?
Change is a comparative term arises due to the motion of particles. When few particles changes while other not, we can measure it taking one (that doesn't change) as a reference to other (which change). 
In this way, we can also construct time in our brain. We are always in the present state, all data(or particles) of universe/body are in present state. But past configuration (data points pattern called memory) are stored in the present state. But we can't be even sure that past configuration is actually the past. It's just an democratic validation algorithm. If all says it's our past data than it is. If all our past configuration (everyone) are manipulated than we will feel a different past than the actual one. 
Memory storage is not perfect. Whether you store it on a hard disk, or in more fragile and manipulative brain.
We evolutionarily designed to have the same type of data configurations. But our reality will be completely different from that of a snake or tree or a simple stone.
A stone only react when we give it a specified threshold of force to bring change inside its particles. The similar way our body even reacts based upon the threshold, if the stimulus is below the threshold, we won't know it. As our nervous system works on basis of threshold.

Listen feedback to take decisions, Feedback is Universal.

The feedback mechanism is universal in all life forms. Without feedback mechanism, there wouldn't be evolution, there would be homeostasis, nor there would be human existence. Let me explain how feedback mechanism helps in maintaining homeostasis, how it can be easily applied real life situations.

Feedback at molecular level in cell can be divided into following types

Reference: Molecular Biology of Cell, Bruce Alberts et al. 
Arrows indicate positive control, i.e  A increases productions of more As
Lines with bars depicts negative control, i.e.  A decreases the productions of more As.
Last two figures in right indicate more complicated versions of feedback.

Because of these kinds of feedback, complete homeostasis is maintained. Without feedback, we wouldn't feel hungry, we won't feel the heat, we wouldn't have the life at all.

If these feedback mechanism does not work properly, then there would be turmoil in our body without homeostasis. Feedback is not only important inside our body, it's also important when we take the whole community. The simplest example would be bacteria with a process called quorum sensing.

When we expand feedback to ecology, its top down and bottom up effect.

" The first, called bottom-up control, states that it is the nutrient supply to the primary producers that ultimately controls how ecosystems function. If the nutrient supply is increased, the resulting increase in production of autotrophs is propagated through the food web and all of the other trophic levels will respond to the increased availability of food (energy and materials will cycle faster).

The second theory, called top-down control, states that predation and grazing by higher trophic levels on lower trophic levels ultimately controls ecosystem function. For example, if you have an increase in predators, that increase will result in fewer grazers, and that decrease in grazers will result in turn in more primary producers because fewer of them are being eaten by the grazers. Thus the control of population numbers and overall productivity "cascades" from the top levels of the food chain down to the bottom trophic levels. " References: http://www.globalchange.umich.edu

So all these are nothing but feedback.

We all use feedback in day to day life to make decisions, without being much aware of its importance and its universality.

But in order to maintain homeostasis in our life, we should always listen to feedback to know what works and what doesn't. It's no point to repeat the things that don't work. e.g. If A promotes the formation of B and  B at the certain level is harmful to our body, then we should stop producing more As.

So, we should always listen to feedback and take action based upon it.


Monday, September 14, 2015

Shouldn't there be a new method to calculate popularity of programs and channels in media?

Please share your views at quora: http://qr.ae/Ro7MnS

The popularity of programs is based upon TRP, which is based on the number of views. But the TRP does not work, media make use of human psychology to bring content that is bullshit but can increase the curiosity of people, so that people watch it, even if they are psychologically and morally harmed by watching it.

The reason is best described in this article: Deepak Mehta's answer to Why does the Indian media promote pseudo-scientific disciplines like astrology, past life regression, other superstitions and bogus conspiracy theories?

If the popularity of programs would be based on feedback, then I think media will be changed drastically.

Popularity should not be only directly proportional to no. of likes (i.e. no. of views or TRPs) but also, should be inversely proportional to dislikes. Also, there should be a website where people can give feedback to the programs, such as in youtube.

Also, can we provide feedback through a set top box? Is it possible to make a set top box that takes account of feedback?

Friday, September 11, 2015

How health care sector can be improved drastically in India by bringing technology?

You can discuss the topic in quora here: http://qr.ae/RH66Sd

In the era of technology, life can be easier if we start using technology in our health care sector. The computer has gone much smarter to take decisions, thanks to data science. So why shouldn't we rely on machine learning to predict things? We can study a patient in a very personalized way and give them proper treatment.

So here are the steps:

First, we should build a national website, which contains accounts of all the citizens linked with their Adhaar Card.
Every doctor and nurse should be provided with a tablet. In order to make use of a computer to make decisions and predict things, we need digitalizing data. Without digitalized data we can't do anything. So pen and paper should be scrapped as much as possible.
I also found that many are hesitant to use technology because they think it's difficult to learn. They say so because they have never tried to learn the technology. A student in Class I knows how to handle mouse, how to play games in computer. So why can't a person who is more than 25 years old can't learn it in one month. Even a most illiterate can learn to play games in 3 to 4 days.

Digitalization is also required in remote areas even.  Actually, they need the most. But it has a different problem, lack of electricity and Internet.  But giving tablet solves the problem of electricity. Regarding the internet, people can work with even 2G to submit forms. Make an app on form submission, enter the data and hit submit. The textual data are much faster to upload than images. We should also make the app work on offline even (not necessarily to work only in real-time) , so that even if sometimes there is no connectivity, the work goes on and final submission can be made by end the of the day. If some are scared of losing data, they can make a print out of the data if needed.

In data science, a prediction is done based on what data we give, and how it is trained.

So what are the data we need?
As I am not a doctor, I can't say it in very much in detail. I am just giving an Idea about it.
First is feeding the prescription on the website. Each and every prescription should be stored in the database and should be linked with Adhaar card. Also, all the reports of different tests should be stored in the database. So for it, we need a good research, and specific form field should be made for every test. What form field we choose is very important. The benefit will be, when a patient again goes to the doctor, we will know the complete history of the patient. So, a patient will get a more personalized care.

If we have data we can make many statistical reports, such as what are the medicines doctors are prescribing. How can it be improved? What diseases people are suffering most, in a most precise manner, so that effective measures can be taken.

Data science can also help even predicting type and state of cancers (e.g. malignant or benign) by looking at the images if it is trained properly.

So, benefits are limitless. Only we have to identify, how it can be used and what are our problems.

Also does it require a huge expenditure. No. The attitude of our politicians is what it matters.

Do visit citizen response to health care in my gov: Click Here.

Monday, August 17, 2015

What are the innovative books that every teacher/student must read in order to become an efficient teacher/student?

For maths at school level, I would suggest “Speed Mathematics: Secrets Skills for Quick Calculation by Bill Handley
It is a fantastic book on mathematics, students start to feel and love mathematics like never before. The phobia for math goes away and students become more creative when the techniques of the books are taught to the students. No more learning of table, just by reciting the table (rote learning).

For improving reading skills school going students, I would suggest “Teach your Child to Read in 100 Easy Lessons by Siegfried Engelmann, Phyllis Haddox, Elaine Bruner” Presently I am working on it and looks very promising. I will share my views about it after I taught the exercise completely to my students

For memory improvement, I would suggest “Secrets of Mind Power” by Harry Loryane
It is based upon photographic memory, it really helps to the things that are very difficult to memorize (e.g. periodic table)

A teacher or student should also read psychology books in order to overcome stress and live a successful life. For it I would suggest “The Relaxation and Stress Reduction Workbook” by Matthew McKay and also "The Anxiety & Phobia Workbook" book by Edmund Bourne
It is a complete package of living a healthy and stress-free life if we practice


Teach Like a Champion 2.0: 62 Techniques that Put Students on the Path to College
The main ideas of the book..

Some of the MOOCs for teachers and students:

Learning How to Learn
Page on coursera.org

Becoming a Resilient Person: The Science of Stress Management
Becoming a Resilient Person - The Science of Stress Management


Science of Everyday Thinking
The Science of Everyday Thinking
A must course, which I am presently going through

How People Learn?
One of the best book written about learning, each sentence is so meaningful with evidence.

Some of the important books for Elementary teachers includes:
Conceptual Physical Science by Hewitt, Suchocki, Hewitt

Mathematics for Elementary Teachers, A conceptual Approach by Albert B. Bennet, Burton, Nelson
Nothing is made abstract, all with concrete examples that kids can understand.

Share your views at http://qr.ae/RCAglN

Sunday, June 7, 2015

Do we have free will? Speak out to bring change...

Speak and reward people who speaks right, who do right.
Speak and criticize (constructive criticism) people, by saying what you dislike about them, what is the solution, who speaks nuisance and illogical, and people who do wrong (especially applicable to policy makers such as politicians and people who control us. )

Have you ever compared between human and chimpanzee? Why are humans more intelligent than a chimpanzee? You may say we have a better brain than a chimpanzee. But is this a real fact. Chimpanzee can't speak, so they don't pass their information from one generation to another. But we do it. We pass our information from one generation to another.

So I request people to share information, share your ideas. It can be through social networks, or through tweeter, quora, blog etc. But before sharing or speaking out publicly we need to be little thoughtful by doing some research.


Please hear this ted talk "What happens when our computers get smarter than we are?" and especially its comments:
http://tinyurl.com/m4853fl


Especially comment by Utku Mun:

Do we have free will?

I strongly disagree on the existence of free will, we can only choose to terminate our consciousness freely, all other actions and choices we take are bound to physical principles, you choose to eat because you are hungry or because it's stimulation is overpowering, you choose to piss because of bladder etc, without this reward mechanism, this reasoning, this set of laws, don't think humans can make any kind of choice.

Discussion by me on "What happens when our computers get smarter than we are?"

Me:
Will computers surpass human?
Before saying that we should first define intelligence. What intelligence actually is?
I would say that intelligence in simplest form is making decisions from a given data. And I am saying it based upon mechanism of the cell, that is signal transduction or cell signaling. Do all human have the same intelligence? Of course not. A child has not same intelligence as an adult. I am not saying that child is less intelligent that an adult. Even child can make some important and meaningful decisions that adult can't do. Are we more intelligent than chimpanzees? Think again to say yes. Chimpanzees have more short term memory and can decide more quickly a threat than us.
Take also the intelligence of human based upon time. Do humans before 100 years have the same intelligence as of now. Chimpanzees don't increase their intelligence with time because they don't pass the information from generation to generation. Now even computer exceeds intelligence in many ways.
I would say that intelligence is based on the data we give and the way it will process. It can be only said that computer will make the process faster because of its speed.
So in order to control intelligence, we should train the data (reward and punishment) in a positive manner, not as destructive way.

(Decision I mean good and useful decisions. If someone does not make a good and useful decisions we say him/her an idiot.)

Me:
Before saying about super intelligent, we have to define intelligence first. Is it physical? Yes, it is. In our brain so many decisions are made (e.g. cell signaling or opening or closing of ion channels) to reach a final decision. And someone makes a smart decision (may be harmful or good) only if it has data in it and it has been trained to make a type of decision. So in order to make a village idiot to Albert Einstein in a day, we need to feed data to it. It just reshuffles and interconverts and pass through many logic gates to imagine or produce new useful information or decisions. The way reshuffling and interconversion or intermediate logic decisions are done depend upon past training or experiences (Reward and punishment mechanism). So in order to control AI we have to do two things:
1) First, don't feed them with data. A village idiot will never become Albert Einstein if you don't give him the data even if they have the same brain.
2) Second don't train AI to misused. It addresses the values you are talking about. Don't train it to make harmful decisions that are bad for humanity.

And the final note: we don't have free will neither AI will have even.

Discussion on youtube video "Do we have free will"
https://youtu.be/bDkLUBdvOkw


I don't think making a choice is non-physical. The choice is made based upon the information we carried due to evolution (e.g removing the hand from fire) and information that we have due to given environment (choosing to drink water or apple juice). Because of our complexity we think we have free will. If making choices are non-physical then what would you say to the choices made by a present robot (e.g. passing a hindrance etc.)

Saturday, May 23, 2015

Astrology Decoded: Are astrology predictions really correct.


Here is the difference between science and pesudoscience:



In television, we can find many TV programs that talk about astrology i.e. predict your future etc. based upon the date of birth.
Most of us even today, especially our parents and family believe in astrology, whenever marriages are fixed, or whenever you plan to build a house etc.

Many of intellectuals will argue that astrology is science. I was reading the article such as http://innovativeastrosolutions.com/ where it says astrology is 50% science and 50% mystic and give some scientific explanation to it.

But let me define what science is.
Oxford Dictionary defines science as “Knowledge about structure and behavior of the natural and physical world, based on the facts that you can prove, for example by experiments”

More detailed explanation would be:
http://www.sciencecouncil.org/definition

So science first relies on observation or collecting the data, same as astrology is doing.  So what is the data in astrology:
It takes account of the date of birth.  Then its calculates the planetary positions with some set of rules and generate some other data. So far so good.

But now comes the catch:
Taking these data to predict (i.e. future). But do we test it like any other scientific method whether the prediction is correct or not. I think no. We just blindly believe on the astrologers saying.

Here I would give some predictions or suggestions given by the astrologer:

So conversation starts like this.
A person comes to the astrologer talks about his problem.
e.g.
1) My husband business is not going well, give some solutions?
2) I lost my Rs. 30,000 mobile phone in the bus. Guruji please help me in finding it.
3) My son is poor in education, not getting a job, what shall I do.
Then astrologer will ask the date of birth, name, birthplace etc. and then say something about planetary positions like Sani, Rahu, Ketu, Sukra etc.
After that astrologer will start giving suggestions such as:
According to your husband kundalini,  some of his friend/ family members is creating hindrance in the business. Or it's likely that one of the employees in your business is unfaithful.

So, look at these statements, is he really predicting something or just predicting something that is likely to happen. “Some of his friends is creating hindrance” : It's a likely statement, most of the time parents and friends don't believe in your business plan, so what great thing he is talking about. Also, there is a chance that one of the employees is unfaithful, we can't trust everyone.

Then he gives some nonsense solutions or sometimes logical solutions.
The nonsense solution would be wearing a Ruby ring in your hand.
A logical solution would be invest money properly in the market and pay attention to the cash flow.

Can they predict something concrete? I completely doubt. Even if they predict something concrete e.g. you will die at this time, this place, I completely sure it would be false in 99.9% of the time. I am leaving 0.1% because there is always a chance to come something true based on statistics.

Please leave a comment based on your experiences with astrology.

My suggestions to the NEWS channels and Govt would be to stop promoting such astrological claims.
If they believe in astrology, then prove it.

Here is more precise definition of science verses pseudoscience



Monday, April 13, 2015

News Channel and Politicians: Please stop discussion on Religion

News Channel and Politicians: Please stop discussion on Religion

Here are some of the true facts:

We all are evolved from a common ancestor. Nature don't give us tag of any religion or caste. We tag it. When a child is born we say them, that you belong to this religion otherwise, the child will never know what's religion is.
The fact is we all are born different from each other. We have all different kind of DNA, which we all know that is used for forensic science to catch the culprit. (Except the Siamese twins, who have the same set of DNA, even they become different after birth because of environmental factors)
Don't we learn anything from the Film like PK. Have we lost our thinking power. Are we just a rote learning machine.


If not then why such discussions. Please work for the improvement of all. I request news channel and political parties, don't ever raise the name of religion or caste.

Friday, April 3, 2015

Education System in India and How it can be improved in scientific perspective?


Education System in India and How it can be improved in scientific perspective?

Even if we have right for education act, in which children have the right to compulsory education, but one of the thing missing is right for quality education. One of the biggest flaws in our country is there is very less quality education available to the students. And the conditions are same for primary as well as higher education.

So what is quality education and how the students are taught now in schools and colleges?


Some of the flaws in Indian Education System.

1) The education system I am aware of and what I feel is only 1 out of 7 teachers give quality education to their student.

2) In India, students are taught only to secure good marks and that is the only motto of students and teachers.

3) Students are scared of teachers.

Students are not free to ask questions to their teachers. Sometimes I feel, student-teacher relationship is like slave and master. Maybe this is a bit harsh statement but for it, I feel our cultural and religious belief system comes to play. Teachers feel that they should be respected and they become harsh to their students. But in order to maintain a healthy relationship between student and teachers, there should be understanding between them, this can be achieved by love and friendship, not by forcefully making them scared.
Whenever students ask a question they are usually discouraged by laughing at their question because for them its silly. But in reality no question is silly. It's silly because teachers/or any human being either don't know the answer or take everything for granted. But instead of discouraging them can't we say that we don't the answer. This won't decrease the credibility of the teacher.

4) Inferiority complex among the students who score low or average grades

In our education system, most teachers don't treat the students same way as others.
We have to realise that we all are born different. We all have a different genome. So as our brain works differently.  Some may have greater strengths than others. But the good thing we all have tendency to learn and secure good marks.
They have to know how our brain works and how the subject should be taught so that even a low-grade student can understand the things.

Here I have collected a MOOCs called Learning How to Learn:
Page on coursera.org

5) Most of the education are memory based, so as the question paper in our exam.
Most teachers think that those who can memorize more are good students as they can secure good marks.

I will give an example of an Indian student studying aboard and written his views:
“Once a question was given to me, and I have done some calculation wrong, but still teacher gave me full marks. When I asked the reason, the teacher replied that even if your calculation is wrong, your approach to the problem is correct. Calculations can be double checked e.g through calculator, but if the approach is wrong you can never find the answer ”
But do we expect this by a usual indian teacher? I think no. They are pretty obsessed with computation.

Take another example of programming.
I don't remember all the exact syntax of the programming code. That doesn't make be a bad programmer. Because I know how to apply logic and also know how to use the programming code. Syntax can be available from the google or books, but logic to build something new, won't be available.

So how our quality of education system can be improved?

In order to improve our education system, we should improve our teachers thinking and style of teaching.


Here are some of my views:

1) There should be an all India entrance exam for all teachers even for the private education system, in order to become a teacher. The entrance should be logical/analytical based, multiple choice questions, not just memory based. One of the exam in India is CSIR NET

2) Teachers should be aware of how our brain works. They should be taught based on the latest and proven scientific research. They should also be taught about child psychology again based on the latest and proven scientific research.

3) And entrance exam should also contain logical/analytical questions about psychology and brain research, how will they approach, when a student behaves in some way.

4) In some way teachers are paid less, also, they are treated as a low-quality job when compared to other jobs. This should not happen.

5) Similarly,
Exam pattern for the student should give much more preference to logical/analytic part, that allows them to think in order to solve a problem, not just mugging up and vomiting on the exam day.

6) One last thing I would add about primary education, government school should have same syllabus that of CBSE or ICSE. I know this will bring controversies because now love for mother tongue will arise. But believe me, it has humongous benefits. First, as the teacher will be selected by entrance exam we will get quality teachers. Then the result will be middle-class family will prefer their students to send to the government school. This will finally lead to interactions of poor with the middle class or rich. This will also decrease the disparity between poor and rich. Because poor will understand the living style of rich, also rich will have some emotional attachment to them.
In today's race in India, the middle-class family is not really interacting with poor. They always want to stay away from them.  About those who will bring controversies, I can bet that even they say, they love their mother tongue, they don't send their children to the government school, instead send their child to good international school. So why this hypocrisy. Poor has also right to get the quality education like you. Poor can't think for their good, does not mean you will take benefit of it and mislead them.

7) Important subjects like science, mathematics, economics, social studies book should be in English in the case of primary education. But instructions can be in both local language and English.
What will be the benefit of it?
Benefits are huge. As students e.g. 7th and above can understand and write English, they will get exposure from not only India as a whole country but also all over the world. Imagine, highly qualified Ph.D. faculties from the different discipline in India or all over the world will come for summer training to coach, our students, and also our local teachers or to make us aware of their latest technology. Students will also know the use of the internet, can learn from different MOOCs.

Is this practical in the present system? Of course, it's a big NO.





Thursday, March 12, 2015

Intelligence and In search of fundamentals : Break, join and duplicate

Intelligence and In search of fundamentals
Break, join and duplicate

Quora link: http://qr.ae/7cdYZh

Our DNA is made up of just shuffling of just 4 bits of information ATGC and from it, we get the whole DNA and then the whole cell and finally an organism with a brain that has intelligence.
It may be analogous to our computer made up of 0's and 1's. Most of the algorithm of today make use of mathematics, that is an addition, subtraction, multiplication or division.

But what living organisms do?
Can they do mathematics? I don't think so. The small bits of information just duplicate, break and join to produce new information. It may be DNA, mRNA, proteins or microRNAs
The same way perhaps our brain works, give some information to the brain, it will join it, break it or duplicate it to produce new information.
e.g. Our alphabets: A-Z, from the shuffling of it, we get words and then sentences.

A note of Zero and mathematics:
What is zero? Zero in mathematics means the absence of something.
But we use zero for representing that exists, e.g 10, 100 etc. The problem comes when we use this zero for division or multiplication. We can't divide that is not present by something which is present e.g. 0/5 or we can't multiply with a present object with something that is absent e.g. 0 X 5. We may argue that 0 X 5 is zero times 5, that is adding zero 5 times to give zero results.
But that type of system does not exist in living world. If we think zero as the absence of something and 5 as information that is present, we never multiply absence of something with the information that is present. In the living system, fundamental bits of information just break, join or duplicate.



So what is nothing in the living system?
It’s likely to be single space, where bits of information break or join

But here the question arises, how these small fundamental bits interact that is breaking and joining process. What's the rule behind the break and join?

Let us imagine something: 

The universe consists of space (which represent single nothing) and has two types of particles or information, A and B. Maybe the number of particles are constant in-universe and they are huge in number. I have taken two because just two types of particles are enough to produce information of huge complexity (such as intelligence in our brain) by the break and join.  Break or join I mean forming different kinds of arrangements.
But what can be the rule for breaking and joining? That can be related to the distance at which two pieces of information lies and their mass (that is the number of particles in an information) and the behavior of A and B (that is A will behave differently than B).
It can also be said that in order to interact, all the particles of A can't be in equilibrium with all of with B. Otherwise it will be dormant that is all forces cancel out.  It’s likely that process of breaking and joining should be random, even not completely. But what is mass, distance and behavior works which I can't infer now that will decide whether they will break or join/ repel or attract. Maybe it's directly proportional to the number of particles in an information and inversely proportional to distance and, A and B attract each other, A – A or B-B repel each other like most system works as we can see in the real world.
Can photons be made of two kinds of things, one doing  up and down along y-axis (produces electric field) and other doing up and down along z-axis producing the magnetic field and both up and down are in sync and dragged due to force?



In double slit experiment , if we observe the electron, it produces two bands instead of the interference pattern. Also, how do we observe electron? Is it by producing the electromagnetic field. Also does double slit experiment only works with coherent sources of light or all sources?
In the figure, the length of up and down represents amplitude and the speed of up and down represents wavelength. If we are observing electrons by producing the electromagnetic field, won't it disturb the wave nature of electrons
Here another question arises, how A will know that B exists so that it will attract to B because in between nothing is there.  So here another concept arises: nothing (the space) is just a field of all the unit particles or information (like in schools we have learned about the electric or magnetic field). So space is nothing but a way to transfer information between unit particles. But we can never see these different types of fields because we are not made of it. In order to see something, we must have to replicate it. e.g. We can see objects in the mirror because light is replicated ( I mean is positions of light before reflection and after reflection). So we can never see these fields but only feel its influence.

Comments are welcomed, what you all have to say about it.

Here are some of the discussion in physforum I am writing only important ones:

ozo:
I can add to that: A and B are the same particle but with different spin orientation. The basis of time (energy). fundamental energy is spin and duration of spin are time.

Me:
I agree that A and B have different spins.

But I look at time little differently. Time is related to state/motion. We can take it as any reference. For example, you took it as the duration of spin. Or standard 24 hrs which we take as reference to motion of earth 

e.g. Just take it the duration of spin as one unit time.
Imagine we look at all the particles state or position in the complete universe and take a snap than after one unit time we look again to all the particles and their position. If some the particles have changed in position, we say a change in state. If all the particles are at rest (which is not possible) then there is no change in state or time.


HarboorSeal:
Do you have some scientific reference, that there are only two types of particles in the universe, or is this just a dream that you had last night while sleeping at a Holiday Inn?

1. Proton
2. Neutron
3. Electron
4. Quark
5. Photon
6. Higgs Boson


Now which 4 of the above, do you believe are not real?

Me:
I believe all of them are real. As I said only two particles are enough for giving a universe of any complexity. For scientific evidence, I would say that take the example of today's computer software, they are made from 0s and 1s but can produce software of any complexity. The 6 particles you are talking about can be made from these two fundamental particles, provided we know what's the rule for this combination.

HarboorSeal:
Zeros and one's in binary code are not particles, and if you believe that protons, neutrons and electrons can be made from the computer binary code that was invented by humans, you have no fundamental understanding of reality or any part of the universe. I would say that you need an education, but saying that the universe is composed of zero's and one's, is in all probability not an issue of education, but of perception. I would suggest that you speak about your theory with a medical professional of some sort.

Me:
Ya, I agree that zeros and ones are binary code are not particles. I have used an analogy here, to show you how we can form complexity from two simpler objects. There is a huge difference between zero's and one's that is binary code and particles I am taking about. Zero's and one's in the computer can be increased to any extent, but the particles I am talking about their number is constant. Yes, zero's and one's like you said are imaginary and obeys mathematics rules that we apply to them. But particle exists that we all observe them. Here particles I mean is larger particles. (Don't say that we can't see the particles that you are taking about) These particles behave by laws of physics and we can't apply any imaginary rules that come to mind.

Moreover, what do you think about the simulation that we make on the computer. We make this combination of zero's and one's to behave like real world objects to predict what will happen in real world. Or you think simulation is also incorrect because zero's and one's are invented by humans.


HarboorSeal:
Is your A and B idea based upon some rational science, or is this just your idea, that you fabricated, and are calling a theory?

Me:
It is based upon rational science. I took some of the fundamental ideas of conservation of energy, Newtonian physics and fundamentals of computer and life evolution. Based upon it I made this theory. I just tried to go to the simplest thing possible. But like any other theory it needs to be proved.
I think simulation can help it. I know that it's impossible to simulate a very large number of particles but we can try for the small number of particles and predict its properties.

HarboorSeal:
Actually, if this were rational science, you would need observations of your two particles, that no other scientist believes in, and or you would need mathematical formulas to demonstrate the theory in some fashion. What you are saying that you did, is to take others ideas, put them in a blender, and create some new idea. If you are interested in the smallest particles were known, do a Google search of CERN and or the Higgs Boson.

Me:
That is what the theory says. You can't get new ideas without old ones.
Do you think mathematics is always the correct way to represent the world (I am talking about the irrational number and use of zero in some way)? 

I am from multidisciplinary field of science. (That is bioinformatics) I am not that math genius that I will give you a magic mathematical formula that will take account of all the particles in the universe. I have some limitations. But I can give some simple rules that particle has to obey and leave the other stuff to the computer. 

What if we found no reference. For example, space contains only one type of objects that has no reference with which we could distinguish it. So we say it does not exist. E.g. to distinguish red color from other, we have to match with some other color, for example, blue to say that they are both different. That is how our brain works. Does it mean we can't know everything because we have no reference for it to distinguish it.

So can we produce time machine:

I think no. It's just a state which changes, to come back to a particular state again, we have to arrange all the particles to the previous state (if we want to go to past).

Concept of Time & Do present, the past, future are all present:
I think no. We are always at the present state. Just look at all the particles in the universe and take a snap. They are at the present state. Then notice they start moving after snap due to interaction or force (actually particles are always moving). But the particles can come to the same state (i.e. present) after a very very long time. Actually, there is no concept of time at all. It's just a reference. What is present is particles moving. From the movement we calculate time.

Another question lets take two frames of reference, one at rest and another at motion, and we don't have any reference for time. Can we say the motion object is accelerating or moving with constant velocity.
Is it the biological clock that is running in our head that makes us aware of time based upon daylight and night, based upon it, it does computation and make us aware that an object is moving fast or slow looking at both to distinguish, but we can't know an object is moving in fast or slow by looking at it without a reference to a clock or without reference to other moving object. So clock is nothing but a moving object which gives us a reference of motion

Concept of Free will:
Can we predict the next state of all the particles by knowing the previous state of all the particles. If that is the case, don't we have anything called free will.
Maybe not, we don't have that. It is just based on influence. An information that has gone stronger will always influence other information in a strong way, some may break and some may join.  A particular piece of information is influenced by all other information that is present in the universe. 
But can it be a concern for us?
I don't think so we should be worried about, we can't know the state of all the particles to predict the next state.

We are only a tiny part of the universe. Even though we don't have free will if we take the entire universe, it seems like we do have free will.

If we think of whole space, the forces at any particular point are always changing as all particles are in motion. A smaller object has more impact on force than a larger object. Does that lead to quantum behavior of smaller particles i.e we can't predict its position because in order to predict it we need all the forces acting on the particle. It should not have even a minor error. So a probabilistic approach best describe it as we can't know positions of all the particles that influence on a particular particle. Same way even dice work. When we through a dice second time, the position of dice changes because the earth is in motion, so the force acting in it  also changes. Even if we don't change the position of dice, it will be probabilistic because the force acting at that place also changes  all the time.

Can we know everything?
We can only know the things that we are made up (i.e. particles which according to this theory) or that influence on the things that we are made up (i.e. force) Other than that I think we can't know anything, neither a smartest artificial intelligence will tell us even. Also, I think it's unnecessary (maybe) to know the things that don't influence us in anyways

Is there any reverse or forward ways?
If we think of a universe where particles interact due to force, then there is nothing like reverse or forward reaction. At some places or condition reaction go on the forward way and in other places reaction go in backward.

The universe is like a big machine of particles interaction, where its center of gravity holds those particles in space (analogy can be our atmosphere that earth center of gravity holds) Also its seems that universe in not expanding.
If a universe is expanding, then why don't we see it at a molecular level. Why only stars go far away, not the things that we see inside the stars? Also, math is adaptable, i.e. 0's and 1's can explain anything and of any complexity. But the 0's and 1's of universe follow a definite physics law. We cannot get anything from these 0's and 1's. So first, we should observe than describe it in mathematics. Same way Newton did it.  We can't notice if all the particle go fast or slow if distance remains somewhat same( i.e.we can't notice if there is acceleration or retardation if all the particles go for acceleration or retardation) We can notice if it's expanding through reference. e.g. Take today the distance between two particles is 1 units, we can take that as a reference and check it after some days, whether it changed or not. But the problem arises when the reference itself changes after some days. But do our memory changes with time. I think no. What in a universe we measure is the distance? From it only we derive everything, whether its  motion or time. Also, what happen to the forces when its expands. Don't the interaction between particles will change i.e.won't the way forces act should change because of more distance. We know that forces act differently with distance. If it's expanding then the way of interaction should change with an increase in time.  

Everyone must have seen a bottle falling from some height and shattering in pieces.  Do you ever see a broken glass getting back together to make a bottle ? No. Note that glass getting back together and sitting back where it didn't violate any law except the second law of thermodynamics. Is it the real case?

I believe that entropy can increase to some extent than decrease and again increase etc. But the Second Law of Thermodynamics states that the state of the entropy of the entire universe, as an isolated system, will always increase over time.
Imagine a glass made up of a number of particles to give a single information. Now we break it to multiple information. But there is a very low chance that this multiple information will assemble together to give back the previous state. Now imagine two pieces of magnet joined to give a single information, then separate (break) that information and again leave it, it has a high chance that it produces same information that previous. But if we make an information with many lots of magnet, and again separate it and leave it, does it assemble together to give back same information?
Please share your views on entropy at http://qr.ae/7fh5Qf