[Mohan.C]

I would like to start this thread with a question-What is a problem?
A problem is something whose solution we don't know. Or a problem is something which has a solution.
But, that solution can be in terms of abstractness or it could be a true solutions(the end of the problem).
While discussing the solutions I would like to bring in 'Limits'.
Limits are important when we are dealing with particular solutions. A limits puts a limit to abstractness and a limit to the human imagination.
While finding a solution we must analyse the problem. Analysis is like a search programme which runs in our mind. It looks into the nooks and corners to find similarities.
When we get a solution to a problem. It is always abstract. Because humans percieve the universe in abstractness. But, this abstracts could be avoided if we think in a broader sense. Analyse Universally.But taking into account the actual happenings. Not how we percieve it but the inner mechanism. As we delve deep we meet abstract. Abstract are caused due to our limited understanding.But when we keep our imagination at bay and get surprised at every step. We can get a true solution.
If there ever is going to be a TOE. The TOE should be a particular solution ie. as I say within limits. Because, a TOE explains the mechanism of the universe not human dreams or to put it in a better way human imagination. Because dreams are from the abstract sub-concious mind.

Cheers,
Mohan.

P.S. I dont know how much I have made my intention clear because my english vocabulary is limited.

[harmonygirl]

Mohan, why would we want to limit ourselves? I think that problems can have more than one solution. If we limit ourselves, we might stop at only one solution which might cause a problem later, when our solution doesn't fit into the 'bigger picture', don't you think?

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Originally Posted by harmonygirl Mohan, why would we want to limit ourselves? I think that problems can have more than one solution. If we limit ourselves, we might stop at only one solution which might cause a problem later, when our solution doesn't fit into the 'bigger picture', don't you think?

HG, do you want to do science or emotions? When I was a child, I was taught that emotions were to feel with, and reason and logic were to think with. I think this still applies. Even though both emotions and logic have their truths, only logic has what can truly be classified as scientific, thus the limits Mohan is talking about. He may not limit as severely as I, but the line must be drawn somewhere and very clearly, not to confuse. This is where the modern world is making its greatest mistake, and that is to think all can be solved integrally. Integral sciences and ideas have their place in the greater scheme of things, but when it comes to specific areas it has no place, except to self-inform ourselves, informally, yet we must understand that to take scientific ideas public, we must use the formal languages of subject requirements. Scientific public formal languages exclude private general emotional languages, and must do so in order to impose order to the discussion. There is no other successful way. Just the way it is...

HG, we don't stop at one solution as scientists, even though many have in the past, we should be smarter today, to do the final integral comparisons of all our new ideas. It's just I feel very strongly that science must be done in particular sections at a time, just the way this board is set up. This doesn't mean we must restrict it in any way, it just means that we stay focused, extremely focused. If we are talking about a micro subject, the focus should stay micro subject. If we are talking about a macro subject, the focus should stay macro subject, etc. I could go on, but it's just more confusing if I do... The rules of science have been laid out very carefully through the years, and there is a set for every subject namable, and believe me there are many, and they cover all areas, emotionally and logically. To me, it all comes down to what the poet Hafez said when the seeker asked him what the secret was; "Hafez looked him in the eyes, a long time, and finally said; 'You have two eyes. Focus. You have two more eyes inside. Focus."

regards

[mkirkpatrick]

Mohan,your use of english,seems to excel my own,so do not be concerned!
What is a problem?Good question!For me a problem can be getting out of bed
on a cold winters morning at 6am to come to work!And if I analysis this situation for too long,the result will be paralysis,and I will go back to sleep and be late for work!To much analysis can indeed lead to paralysis!One needs
to balance action with reaction.Each problem has a solution,if there is no
solution,then that problem is a fact,and if it is a fact,you can either accept
it as such,or pretend it is not so!



kind regards michael.

[Mohan.C]

Originally Posted by harmonygirl Mohan, why would we want to limit ourselves? I think that problems can have more than one solution. If we limit ourselves, we might stop at only one solution which might cause a problem later, when our solution doesn't fit into the 'bigger picture', don't you think?

Hi HG,
You may choose not to limit but it exists anyway. Think of it You go on imagining things in your head at some time you will be thinking still when you yourself get the feeling "How could this be possible!", "Oh, where am I?"
That's a limit, like zero and infinity in maths. When you do integral calculus we use limits 0 to infinity that is a limit or to find an area two lines in the dimensions over that limits nothing related to that exists if it does its abstract. That's why we need a line which cannot be crossed, though you can change the limits but it will just make it more abstract. The solutions become more complicated. Think of it, is it not better to have a true solution than to have a lot of abstract ideas and confuse ourselves.

But your last statement is really important yes we must be careful while selecting the limits.

[Mohan.C]

Originally Posted by Lloyd Gillespie HG, do you want to do science or emotions? When I was a child, I was taught that emotions were to feel with, and reason and logic were to think with. I think this still applies. Even though both emotions and logic have their truths, only logic has what can truly be classified as scientific, thus the limits Mohan is talking about. He may not limit as severely as I, but the line must be drawn somewhere and very clearly, not to confuse. This is where the modern world is making its greatest mistake, and that is to think all can be solved integrally. Integral sciences and ideas have their place in the greater scheme of things, but when it comes to specific areas it has no place, except to self-inform ourselves, informally, yet we must understand that to take scientific ideas public, we must use the formal languages of subject requirements. Scientific public formal languages exclude private general emotional languages, and must do so in order to impose order to the discussion. There is no other successful way. Just the way it is... HG, we don't stop at one solution as scientists, even though many have in the past, we should be smarter today, to do the final integral comparisons of all our new ideas. It's just I feel very strongly that science must be done in particular sections at a time, just the way this board is set up. This doesn't mean we must restrict it in any way, it just means that we stay focused, extremely focused. If we are talking about a micro subject, the focus should stay micro subject. If we are talking about a macro subject, the focus should stay macro subject, etc. I could go on, but it's just more confusing if I do... The rules of science have been laid out very carefully through the years, and there is a set for every subject namable, and believe me there are many, and they cover all areas, emotionally and logically. To me, it all comes down to what the poet Hafez said when the seeker asked him what the secret was; "Hafez looked him in the eyes, a long time, and finally said; 'You have two eyes. Focus. You have two more eyes inside. Focus." regards

A really interesting post and one that needs to be very less commented upon.

[Mohan.C]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick Mohan,your use of english,seems to excel my own,so do not be concerned! What is a problem?Good question!For me a problem can be getting out of bed on a cold winters morning at 6am to come to work!And if I analysis this situation for too long,the result will be paralysis,and I will go back to sleep and be late for work!To much analysis can indeed lead to paralysis!One needs to balance action with reaction.Each problem has a solution,if there is no solution,then that problem is a fact,and if it is a fact,you can either accept it as such,or pretend it is not so! kind regards michael.

Hi Michael,
My english isn't that bad but it is very simple (kind of Enid Blyton's english) Though I can't use words like succinct.Well, I am the best in my college in languages especially english. But I wrote the P.S Because it was difficult for me to put that thought in English.

If it is a problem for you to wake up at 6 on winter morning then there is not much to analyse . Take some hot spicy Indian food you will be ready in a jiffy.

One does need to balance action with reaction that is the job of your Vortex.

It cannot be a problem that does not have a solution but it is the solution. Which has arisen from a problem.

- Mohan

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by Mohan.C Hi Michael, My english isn't that bad but it is very simple (kind of Enid Blyton's english) Though I can't use words like succinct.Well, I am the best in my college in languages especially english. But I wrote the P.S Because it was difficult for me to put that thought in English. If it is a problem for you to wake up at 6 on winter morning then there is not much to analyse . Take some hot spicy Indian food you will be ready in a jiffy. One does need to balance action with reaction that is the job of your Vortex. It cannot be a problem that does not have a solution but it is the solution. Which has arisen from a problem. - Mohan

Many thanks for your comment my friend,it brought a smile
to my weary old face!Curry for breakfast,I did have curry for breakfast in Rajastan,before going tiger spotting,but at home all I can manage is cornflakes.
take care my friend,michael.

[Robert Fritzius]

In my experience, each time I have found a solution to a given problem, I have found that at least two problems have been solved by the solution.
Stated another way: good solutions solve at least two problems.


Mundane example: If something is lost, that means the object (or whatever) is not where it is supposed to be. Likewise it is somewhere where it should not be. When you find the object and it and returnit to its proper place you have solved two problems.

Bob Fritzius

[Mohan.C]

Yes I guess you ar right. Any problem does not have a single origin but they have many dimensons. So A true solution will have solved all the problems associated with it.