Duration : 0:7:34

[youtube dMATi0-iGRM]

Download:
http://devavision.org/videos.html
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7678538942425297587&q=vedic&hl=en

Duration : 0:9:55

[youtube uxW4xEc4R00]

This talk addresses three major challenges of value network-driven enterprise analysis:

(1) unifying the business knowledge of multiple enterprises and their diverse and conflicting objectives in the value network,

(2) sensing the value network and processes through systems design, and

3) analyzing the value offered by multiple service entities in the network based on common goals and metrics.

Biography:
Dr. J. Sairamesh (Ramesh) is currently a Managing Partner at 360Fresh Inc. Previously he was a Manager and Program Leader for Business Solutions and Manufacturing Quality Research at IBM Watson Research, New York. He was one of the functional architects for IBM’s e-business and e-Marketplace products. At IBM, from 2001 to 2007, he helped drive the vision and strategy for business solutions on value-chain management, warranty and enterprise quality in manufacturing (automotive) for IBM. He led a team on early warning solutions, services middleware and end-to-end quality technologies. He has helped incubate and drive three commercial business solutions for IBM’s customers in the areas of Dealer-CRM, Early Warning for Warranty and Supply-Chain Quality. He has numerous US Patents and over 50 research publications. He has won three outstanding innovation awards and a research division award for his eCommerce and Business Solutions work at IBM. He received his M.S., M. Phil.(1992), and Ph.D (1996) from EE and CS at Columbia University.

Duration : 0:54:55

[youtube QnWtGC9DuOg]

Duration : 0:31:32

[youtube _PPH7lA7t_o]

The definition of knowledge as ‘justified true belief’ prompts me to think about what we mean when we say something is ‘true’ and how this relates to ‘belief’. Broadly speaking there are two general categories according to which truth is established; these are ‘correspondence’ and ‘coherence’. A correspondence theory would say that a proposition is true if it corresponds to some phenomena in the physical world. My thought that there is a cat on the mat, as expressed by my saying ‘the cat is on the mat’, is true if, and only if, there is indeed a domesticated feline atop a floor covering. Correspondence theories therefore depend upon both an event in ‘the outside world’ and a cognitive state ‘in my head’ which I might call my belief. When these two components are in alignment then the proposition is true.

Coherence theories of truth work differently however. In this case a proposition is true if it can be shown to be coherent within the system of concepts and proposition that it is claimed to be a part. So for example, the statement ‘2 + 2 = 4′ is true if and only if it is coherent within the system of mathematics. This could be tested by imagining substituting the phrase ‘2 + 2′ is any equation in place of the number 4. If the result is the same when these equations are solved then it has been shown that, within the system of mathematics, ‘2 + 2′ is substitutable for the character ‘4′ and therefore the proposition ‘2 + 2 = 4′ is shown to be true. A second example might be a statement such as ‘this man is my brother-in-law’. Again, this proposition would be true not because if corresponds to some internal state within my cognition but if, and only if, he is married to my sister. That is, if the system of familial relationships which determines what we call one another supports the claim that the man is my brother-in-law as coherent.

The significance of this distinction in relation to knowledge is that, whilst correspondence theories of knowledge require that there be a person or at least a cognitive process with which the material phenomena might or might not correspond, this is not the case with coherence theories. In the latter, a proposition is true or false only in relation to the system of which it is a part, and makes no reference to the internal state of any being. This suggests to me that there may be two forms of ‘knowing’ (which I personally would distinguish into ‘knowledge’ and information’); one which is based on correspondence and the felt sense of belief that accompanies that type of truth, and another based on coherence, which is the acceptance of the truth status of information but without the requirement that it be intuitively or emotionally ‘felt’.

Video of Robert Burton – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QL12c4d0ro4

Duration : 0:10:15

[youtube rTyaPHiwFm0]

Could you sum up your book “The Cosmic Serpent, DNA and the Origins of Knowledge”?
Research indicates that shamans access an intelligence, which they say is nature’s, and which gives them information that has stunning correspondences with molecular biology.

Your hypothesis of a hidden intelligence contained within the DNA of all living things is interesting. What is this intelligence?
Intelligence comes from the Latin inter-legere, to choose between. There seems to be a capacity to make choices operating inside each cell in our body, down to the level of individual proteins and enzymes. DNA itself is a kind of “text” that functions through a coding system called “genetic code,” which is strikingly similar to codes used by human beings. Some enzymes edit the RNA transcript of the DNA text and add new letters to it; any error made during this editing can be fatal to the entire organism; so these enzymes are consistently making the right choices; if they don’t, something often goes wrong leading to cancer and other diseases. Cells send one another signals, in the form of proteins and molecules. These signals mean: divide, or don’t divide, move, or don’t move, kill yourself, or stay alive. Any one cell is listening to hundreds of signals at the same time, and has to integrate them and decide what to do. How this intelligence operates is the question.

DNA has essentially maintained its structure for 3.5 billion years. What role does DNA play in our evolution?
DNA is a single molecule with a double helix structure; it is two complementary versions of the same “text” wrapped around each other; this allows it to unwind and make copies of itself: twins! This twinning mechanism is at the heart of life since it began. Without it, one cell could not become two, and life would not exist. And, from one generation to the next, the DNA text can also be modified, so it allows both constancy and transformation. This means that beings can be the same and not the same. One of the mysteries is what drives the changes in the DNA text in evolution. DNA has apparently been around for billions of years in its current form in virtually all forms of life. The old theory “random accumulation of errors combined with natural selection” does not fully explain the data currently generated by genome sequencing. The question is wide open.

The structure of DNA as we know it is made up of letters and thus has a specific text and language. You could say our bodies are made up of language, yet we assume that speech arises from the mind. How do we access this hidden language?

By studying it. There are several roads to knowledge, including science and shamanism.

The symbol of the Cosmic Serpent, the snake, is a central theme in your story, and in your research you discover that the snake forms a major part of the symbology across most of the worlds traditions and religions. Why is there such a consistent system of natural symbols in the world? Is the world inherently symbolic?
This is the observation that led me to investigate the cosmic serpent. I found the symbol in shamanism all over the world. Why? That’s a good question. My hypothesis is that it is connected to the double helix of DNA inside virtually all living beings. And DNA itself is a symbolic Saussurian code. So, yes, in at least one important way, the living world is inherently symbolic. We are made of living language.

You write of how the ideology of “rational” science, deterministic thought, is and has been quite limiting in its approach to new and alternative scientific theories; it is assumed that “mystery is the enemy.” In your book you describe how you had to suspend your judgement, to “defocalize,” and in this way gain a deeper insight. Why do you think we are often limited in our rational, linear thought and why are so few willing and able to cross these boundaries?
I don’t believe we are. People spend hours each day thinking non-rationally. Our emotional brain treats all the information we receive before our neo-cortex does. Scientists are forever making discoveries as they daydream, take a bath, go for a run, lay in bed, and so on.

Duration : 0:6:35

[youtube Zf5P2TByMxQ]

Duration : 0:1:45

[youtube 6cZ1OTcGyQA]

Duration : 0:1:45

[youtube o1moWjIE9MM]

Duration : 0:9:22

[youtube YHEc2zyOjdI]

Duration : 0:58:0

[youtube 0hnqxIsXcy4]