Dear Dr. Nalin,
Thank you very much for your mail and for enlightening me on your background. I did not want to respond directly to your criticism of my article on Q.M., but just wanted you to know how others view the facts presented in the same. Regarding your doubts, I would like to assure you that there is nothing faulty with your thinking. I was exactly in your stage of thinking 40 years ago! However your curiosity to know as to where one has gone wrong itsef is a very encouraging sign in your search for greater truth. Your questions have opened up the vast arena of philosphy of science which we cannot discuss fully in e mail sessions. I can point out to you other sources which answer your questions. for a begining kindly read the book by Sir Arthur Eddigton- 'Philosophy of Physical Science',Ann Arbor paper backs(1967). He was not a Hindu but arrives at the same conclusions as our ancient seers.(Incidentlly, I am not referring to any specific religion, organized or otherwise). Simple minded rationalism is correct but it is a tunnel vision; that is why Karl Popper has a limited validity. No QM or relativity will arise with Karl Popper. Nor would there be entanglemet, teleportation, dark mattter or dark energy and ultimately no conciousness either! I shall forward to you in a separate mail the English version of an interview which I did for a local language magazine. This is on a book by Sir Roger Penrose "The Road to Reality- A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe". If you have the patience to read it, the last part will clarify where you stand in your perception of reality. Every one is right about what they see; but to see the larger truth one should invariably open up more windows!

Best regards

Girijavallabhan