A Pseudo-scientific Case For Vegetarianism

Vegetarianism is a lifestyle choice and I respect that. There are a variety of reasons given for being a vegetarian, like empathy for animals. But there are some vegetarians who use religion to justify their choice and argue that it is a superior choice which everyone should follow. Had there been some rational basis in their argument, I could concede their argument is sound. But predictably, religious vegetarianism is based on irrational ideas. It makes copious use of pseudoscience.

"You are what you eat"

That is one common premise of religious vegetarianism. Sites like these give a good explanation for that premise. To sum it up, the human body is composed of different levels of energy, with the mind and consciousness having the highest energy level. Different food sources have different energy levels and effect the body differently. Somehow meat has a negative energy level and affects that body negatively. Vegetables and fruits have optimum energy levels that help the mind vibrate at maximum potential.

There are other similar forms of justifications of vegetarianism, but central to all of them are energy and vibrations of food. Now onto why such justifications are plain stupid.

Retard Arguments

Energy is a word that has been raped through all of its orifices by pseudoscience peddlers (I'll abbreviate them as PPs). They have no basic understanding of how energy works, but pepper their arguments with it.

The human body gets it fix of energy by way of chemicals like carbohydrates, fats and proteins. Those chemicals are broken down in our cells and release chemical energy. It is that energy which drives the human body and not things as energy levels or vibrations (whatever the crap they mean in a pseudo-scientific context. Pseudoscience rarely gives precise definitions of terms).

Also, the human body doesn't care what the sources of those chemicals are - vegetables, fruits, leaves or meat. There's a reason why humans are omnivores.

Willful Ignorance

Processes of life are complex to understand. It requires knowledge of physics, chemistry and biology and considerable investment of time. PPs can't be expected to put in that kind of effort when there are people to be hoodwinked. They have an easy way out. They use fictional ideas of energy levels and vibrations to explain life. When using fiction, you are not restricted by those pesky laws of the Universe. Anything goes!

Ancient Nonsense

A chemical molecule is the same regardless of whether it comes from a plant source or animal source. That is fact which was unknown to the authors of ancient texts like the Upanishads. They didn't know the composition of matter. That is why they have invalid arguments like the food we eat has a direct correlation to the composition of the mind. But for PPs, ancient equals truth. Evidence doesn't matter. PPs piggyback on religious credulity to spread nonsense from ancient texts.

A Different Kind of Oneness

Upanishads talk about knowing the Self and being one with everything. They say that the ultimate goal in life is to attain that oneness. Now there is good evidence that the oneness has its origin in the physical and mutable brain. Apparently damage to certain regions of the brain causes one to lose the concept of one's own body and feel unity with everything.

A few people in ancient times might have achieved that state of oneness (I'm merely speculating here) by damaging parts of their brain. But it does look like Brahman, after all, has its origins in the mundane physical brain and not in some lofty all pervading infinite entity.

Does that mean one has to intentionally tamper with their brain to achieve moksha? No. There are better ways to do that, thanks to science. It involves not giving into the illusion that the real world is an illusion and an imaginary abstraction is reality.

Life has a sense of oneness at multiple levels. At the base level, all parts of the Universe appear to be subject to the same physics. At the next level, to use Carl Sagan's words, we are made of star stuff. As atoms heavier than hydrogen did not exist in the primeval Universe, they were forged inside the cores of stars. The next level is that all life on Earth is replicator based and had a common origin.

To actually appreciate the beauty of those multiple levels of oneness you need to know how the Universe works. Achieving that knowledge was no mean feat. It is the culmination of thousands of years of quest for knowledge with contributions from all civilizations on Earth.

Ignoring that achievement and clinging to a very narrow set of neurological phenomena as the ultimate truth is the ultimate form of parochialism. When the Universe is beckoning you, it is sheer ignorance to renounce it as mere maya. It is escapism in the face of immense complexity.

Sanskrit - The Best Language For Computer Programming?

From time to time I get emails on "Amazing facts about India". One of those facts is that Sanskrit is the best language for computer programming. Being familiar with computer programming, I wondered if there was any truth to that statement.

The claim is based on this paper by Rick Briggs, published in AI Magazine. It talks about using Sanskrit in natural language processing (NLP). The idea of using a natural language for computer programming is to make it easier for people to talk to computers in their native tongue and spare them the pain of learning a computer friendly language like assembly/C/Java.

The Rick Briggs' paper makes a case that natural languages are not that difficult to use for computer programming. He cites Sanskrit as an example as its grammar can be easily translated to a form understandable by a computer. But nowhere does it say that using Sanskrit is the best way to program a computer. Say if somebody manages to create a computer language based on Sanskrit, how likely is it that it will get adopted by non-Sanskrit speaking people?

There is a lot of difference between Sanskrit being suitable for NLP and it being the best or perfect language for computer programming. For Sanskrit to be truly a best language for computer programming, a majority of computer users should be fluent enough in it. Otherwise it is much easier for them to learn a computer friendly language than to learn Sanskrit and then use it for programming a computer. By that logic, I fail to see how it is the best language for programming a computer when the number of people who are fluent in C outnumber the number of people who are fluent in Sanskrit.

But that did not stop some Indians from expanding their chests with pride based on a false premise. They are so lacking in knowledge of history of India, that even when there are other real reasons to proud of Sanskrit (for example, its influence on modern linguistics or its similarity with Backus-Naur form), they ignore them and spout second hand nonsense to inflate their egos.

Perhaps the people who originate these kinds of falsehoods expect everyone all over the world to recognize the technical merits of Sanskrit and throw away their native tongues and instead adopt Sanskrit. If that really is the case, their hypocrisy is mind boggling. These are same people who are likely to make a stink about "western" elements destroying traditional Indian elements. Yet they would like other cultures to throw away their cultural artifacts just because a researcher published a paper saying that Sanskrit is a good language to use in NLP.

Motivational Nonsense

The motivational business is a huge market. It promises its customers instant success. But just like most businesses which promise quick fixes, the motivational business has its own share of irrationality.

Success is dependent on a lot of factors, of which one of the important things is random chance. Sometimes no matter how hard you try, you will not succeed. At the other extreme you see people who get everything they want without making any effort. That is life. It sucks. The best thing you could do is to accept it and move on, something which the motivational media ignores to tell you. You might say I'm pessimistic. I'm not. The fact that I know that life is random makes me accept unfavorable situations calmly. I don't torture myself with silly questions like "Why me?" and "What did I do wrong?".

The main tool used by motivational business to inspire is anecdotes. But when those anecdotes involve animals, things get absurd. They say to seek inspiration from the fact that an ant can carry 50 times its own weight. But what they will not tell you is, if an ant were to grow to the size of a human, it would collapse under its own weight. So who is the more capable life form here?

Eagles, tigers, lions and wolves are other favorites in the motivational business. Rather than identifying limits of human capabilities and working around them, the motivational business offers feel good examples about the amazing capabilities of other animals. As long as you are reading/hearing the anecdotes you will feel ecstatic, feel a surge of energy which rears you to go do something. But the real world is vastly different from these fantasies and when you try to practice those motivational steps, you are bound to fail and get even more depressed.

When religion gets involved with motivation, things get even more nonsensical. Instead of relying on stories of successful humans and animals with special capabilities, with religion you rely on pure myth. You chase an abstract and unreal goal. Instead of spending time on understanding the world around you, religion goads you to know the "fact" that reality is an illusion and makes you believe that fantasy is real.

So beware of motivational stories. Ask yourself "Does this translate into the real world?". In most cases they don't. You'll find that you'd be much better off reading The Lord of The Rings.

Morality of Rama

In Ramayan, after defeating Ravan, Rama takes Sita to Ayodhya. But rumors start spreading that Sita is "impure", having been enjoyed by Ravan. Bowing to pressure from the public, Rama abandons Sita.

Today, Ramayan is considered as an authority on moral behavior. So what is the moral that we gain from the abandonment of Sita? Let us assume that the Ayodhya public were correct and Ravan did rape Sita. So how does the public want a rape victim to be treated? Throw her into the forest. She doesn't deserve compassion and understanding of her fellow humans. Rama, a God gives into mob demands. So a mob is more mighty than God (Is that why mob violence is so common in India?).

How can Ramayan teach such depraved moral lessons? How can God stoop to the level of a narrow minded commoner? Why didn't he fight the stupid masses and set an example on how to combat idiocy? The answer will be obvious if Rama was not a God, but a human being. Mobs always have their way. You can fight them and die or you can give into their demands and live to see another day. Rama was just protecting himself, just like most humans would do. If there is any lesson to be learnt from Ramayan, it is to make sure that we never have Ramarajya (Kingdom of Rama). We don't want misogynists running amok on the streets.

Beauty of the Buddha

Do not accept anything by mere tradition ... Do not accept anything just because it accords with your scriptures ... Do not accept anything merely because it agrees with your pre-conceived notions ... But when you know for yourselves – these things are moral, these things are blameless, these things are praised by the wise, these things, when performed and undertaken, conduce to well-being and happiness – then do you live acting accordingly.

So called science of Gayatri Mantra

Update: There is a much better version of this post at the Nirmukta forums

There is an email floating around which is supposed to demonstrate the scientific meaning of Gayatri Mantra. Here it is in its full glory (the dissection is towards the end):

* * *

Subject: Scientific Meaning of the Gayatri Mantra

Gayatri mantra has been bestowed the greatest importance in Vedic dharma.This mantra has also been termed as Savitri and Ved-Mata, the mother of the Vedas.
Ombhur bhuvah swah
Tat savitur varenyam
Bhargo devasya dheemahi
Dhiyo yo nah prachodayat
The literal meaning of the mantra is:
O God! You are Omnipresent, Omnipotent and Almighty. You are all Light. You are all Knowledge and Bliss. You are Destroyer of fear, You are Creator of this Universe, You are the Greatest of all. We bow and meditate upon Your light. You guide our intellect in the right direction.

The mantra, however, has a great scientific importance too, which somehow got lost in the literary tradition. The modern astrophysics and astronomy tell us that our Galaxy called Milky Way or Akash-Ganga contains approximately 100,000 million of stars. Each star is like our sun having its own planet system.

We know that the moon moves around the earth and the earth moves around the sun along with the moon. All planets around the sun. Each of the above bodies revolve around at its own axis as well. Our sun along with its family takes one round of the galactic center in 22.5 crore years. All galaxies including ours are moving away at a terrific velocity of 20,000 mile s per second..

And now the alternative scientific meaning of the mantra step by step:

(A) OM BHUR BHUVAH SWAH:
Bhur the earth, bhuvah the planets (solar family), swah the Galaxy. We observe that when an ordinary fan with a speed of 900 RPM (rotations Per minute) moves, it makes noise. Then, one can imagine, what great noise would be created when the galaxies move with a speed of 20,000 miles per second. This is what this portion of the mantra explains that the sound produced due to the fast-moving earth, planets and galaxies is "OM"

The sound was heard during meditation by Rishi Vishvamitra, who mentioned it to other colleagues. All of them, then unanimously decided to call this sound Om the name of God, because this sound is available in all the three periods of time, hence it is set (permanent). Therefore, it was the first ever revolutionary idea to identify formless God with a specific title (form) called upadhi. Until that time, everybody recognized God as formless and nobody was prepared to accept this new idea. In the Gita also, it is said, "Omiti ekaksharam brahma", meaning that the name of the Supreme is Om, which contains only one syllable (8/12).

This sound Om heard during samadhi was called by all the seers nada-brahma a very great noise), but not a noise that is normally heard beyond a specific amplitude and limits of decibels suited to human hearing. Hence the rishis called this sound Udgith musical sound of the above, i.e., heaven. They also noticed that the infinite mass of galaxies moving with a velocity of 20,000 miles/second was generating a kinetic energy = 1/2 MV2 and this was balancing the total energy consumption of the cosmos. Hence they named it Pranavah, which means the body (vapu) or store house of energy (prana).

B. TAT SAVITUR VARENYAM: Tat that (God), savitur the sun (star), varenyam worthy of bowing or respect. Once the form of a person along with the name is known to us, we may locate the specific person.Hence the two titles (upadhi) provide the solid ground to identify the formless God, Vishvamitra suggested. He told us that we could know (realise) the unknowable formless God through the known factors, viz., sound Om and light of suns (stars).

A mathematician can solve an equation x2+y2=4; if x=2; then y can be known and so on. An engineer can measure the width of a river even by standing at the riverbank just by drawing a triangle. So was the scientific method suggested by Vishvamitra in the mantra in the next portion as under:-

C) BHARGO DEVASYA DHEEMAHI:
Bhargo the light, devasya of the deity, dheemahi we should meditate. The rishi instructs us to meditate upon the available form (light of suns) to discover the formless Creator (God). Also he wants us to do japa of the word Om (this is understood in the Mantra).. This is how the sage wants us to proceed, but there is a great problem to realize it, as the human mind is so shaky and restless that without the grace of the Supreme (Brahma) it cannot be controlled.

Hence Vishvamitra suggests the way to pray to HIM as under:
D) DHIYO YO NAH PRACHODAYAT:
Dhiyo (intellect), yo (who), nah (we all), prachodayat (guide to right Direction). O God! Deploy our intellect on the right path. Full scientific interpretation of the Mantra: The earth (bhur), the planets (bhuvah), and the galaxies (swah) are moving at a very great velocity, the sound produced is Om, (the name of formless God.) That God (tat), who manifests Himself in the form of light of suns (savitur) is worthy of bowing/respect (varenyam). We all, therefore, should meditate (dheemahi) upon the light (bhargo) of that deity (devasya) and also do chanting of Om. May He (yo) guide us in the right direction (prachodayat) our(nah) intellect dhiyo. So we notice that the important points hinted in the mantra are:-

1) The total kinetic energy generated by the movement of galaxies acts as an umbrella and balances the total energy consumption of the cosmos. Hence it was named as the Pranavah (body of energy). This is equal to 1/2 mv2 (Mass of galaxies x velocity2).

2) Realizing the great importance of the syllable OM, the other later date religions adopted this word with a slight change in accent, viz., AMEN and AMEEN!

* * *

The "science" in it basically boils down to these two points:

1. Galaxies rotate. Rotating objects make sound. The sound that Milky Way galaxy makes is OM.

2. Galaxies have infinite mass. Moving galaxies have kinetic energy. That energy balances the energy consumption of the cosmos.

If you thought "WTF?", read no further. It means you have a basic understanding of physics and could see the colossal stupidity of the two premises. If you didn't, read on.

Now take the first premise. Sound needs a medium to propagate. Galaxies have a hell lot of stars, but they are at least a few light years apart and guess what is there in between that space? Vacuum. Does vacuum conduct sound? Not in this Universe. So the first argument is a truck load of crap.

Coming to the second premise, it says galaxies have infinite mass. Again, in this Universe galaxies have finite mass. Then it talks about "Energy consumption of cosmos", an extremely vague statement. How does it consume the energy? Why does that consumption need "balancing"?

So there it is. The scientific explanation of Gayatri Mantra is nothing but an utter lack of understanding of elementary physics.

Absurdity of timelines given by hindu cosmology

Some hindus love bragging about how the ancient scriptures of full of science and how modern science is just re-discovering those ancient truths. One of the most frequently cited "proofs" for this ancient knowledge is the time of one day of Brahma which is equal to 4.32 billion years. That is close to the age of Earth (around 4.54 billion years) and those proud hindus wildly thump their chests with "You see! It matches with the value given by science. Hinduism has all the truths!"

Let us take a closer look at hindu cosmology. (The timelines are from Wikipedia)

One day of Brahma (4.32 billion years ) consists of 1000 mahayugas. Each mahayuga has 4 yugas. In the current Brahma's day, 27 mahayugas have elasped. 28th is in progress with the present yuga being Kaliyuga. So around 120 million years (1 mahayuga = 4.32 million years. 27*4.32 + (4.32 - 0.43) = 120.096) have elapsed out of the 4.32 billion years of the current Brahma's day. So according to hindu cosmology, the age of the current cosmos is just around 120 million years.

Also at the end of a mahayuga, Kalki appears and cleans up the Earth of sin. This usually involves some sort of catastrophe. According to hindu cosmology, 27 such cleansings should have taken place at 4.32 million years apart. But modern science has no record of such cleansings.

According to science humans evolved around 400,000 - 250,000 years ago. But as per hindu cosomology humans have always existed, so in the current cycle they have been around for 120 million years. Even if we consider only the current mahayuga, at least 3.88 million years have elapsed and humans were there in all of that time. Again science has no evidence of humans dating back to 3.88 million years ago.

Even if we extend the creation/destruction cycle of the cosmos to 100 years of Brahma and not to one day of Brahma, and given that 50 years of Brahma have elapsed, it would give the current age of the cosmos to around 155 trillion years. Again science doesn't agree with that number.

So out of all the numbers spouted by the hindu texts for the age of cosmos, just one number comes close to a scientific value. But that is enough proof for the hindus who think their scriptures are the ultimate science. It doesn't matter most numbers don't match with the observed Universe.