The Power of a Foundational Assumption

All great decryptions of knowledge begin with an assumption—a foundational intuition upon which we build frameworks of logic, language, and science.

In the mid-nineteenth century, physics was anchored to a core assumption: all waves require a medium. Sound travels through air, and ocean waves through water. It stood to reason, then, that light must also travel through an invisible, all-pervading substance called the "luminiferous aether."¹ This idea was a cornerstone of physics, a necessary explanation for how light could traverse the vacuum of space. To question the aether was to question the very logic of the era.

Then, in 1865, James Clerk Maxwell made an audacious intellectual move. He ignored the aether entirely. Instead of trying to accommodate his ideas within the bounds of prevailing approval, he proposed a radical new assumption: at every point in the universe—from the vastness of empty space to the air we breathe and the gaps between atoms—there exists an invisible electromagnetic field.²

This was a philosophical earthquake. Maxwell proposed that electricity and magnetism were two aspects of this single, unified field. A disturbance in one would create a disturbance in the other, resulting in a self-propagating ripple that needed no medium, for the field was its own medium. He postulated an omnipresent fundamental electromagnetic duality. This was, however, not something new. Thousands of years before Maxwell, Vedic science , commonly known as Samnkhya, postulated a fundamental duality - Prakriti and Purusa , and posited that a ripple in one automatically cause a ripple in other leading to entire creation.

To Maxwell's crdeit, his proof was in the new found mathematics. When Maxwell calculated the speed of this ripple using two experimentally established constants of the duality—the electric constant (permittivity ε₀) and the magnetic constant (permeability μ₀)—the result was precisely the known speed of light.³ The constants were measured in a near vacuum state to dispel the idea of aether.

This created a profound contradiction. The aether theory demanded that the speed of light be relative; an observer moving toward a light source should measure a faster speed. But Maxwell's equations predicted a single, absolute speed for light, derived from universal constants that do not change. The observer's motion was irrelevant.

This new assumption, and the mathematics it produced, not only shattered the idea of the aether but also challenged the foundations of Newtonian physics. The aether was banished by a single, magnificent, and daring thought. Maxwell's true legacy was the boldness of his assumption. He dared to imagine that the universe was not empty but filled with an invisible, active, and infinite field. This paved the way for Einstein, who would again revolutionize our understanding of reality by uniting space and time.

"Theory of Relativity" – What is in the name?

If the constancy of light's speed is central, why would Einstein name his work the "Theory of Relativity"? The name is admittedly confusing. It doesn’t imply that the speed of light is relative. On the contrary, the theory is built on the principle that the speed of light is the only universal absolute.

Einstein's theory is named "Relativity" because, to protect the constancy of the speed of light, something else had to give. What gave way were our sensory illusions of space and time. The theory revealed that measurements of mass, time, distance, and even simultaneity are not absolute but are, in fact, relative to the observer's motion.⁴ Time can slow down, and lengths can contract, depending on one's speed.

The theory is called Relativity because it uncovers the relative nature of space and time—a profound insight forced upon us by the absolute, unchanging speed of light.

The core takeaway from Maxwell and Einstein is that the reality we perceive in mass, space, and time is relative—it is emergent. The only constant is the underlying field. Science cannot explain where this field came from or who created it, but that hasn't stopped us from embracing the concept of "fields." In fact, modern science has largely abandoned our perceived reality as fundamental, convinced that it emerges from underlying, unknowable fields.

A More Comprehensive Approach: The Field and the Observer Effect

Maxwell's field was just the beginning. Modern physics, with quantum field theory, now proposes at least seventeen fundamental quantum fields—one for electrons, another for photons (light), and so on for every elementary particle.⁵ The model is called the "standard model" because there is a majority consensus from both a theoretical and experimental standpoint. We do have many more exotic quantum theories but here, in this essay, for the sake of brevity and factual authority, we are sticking to time-tested ideas.

Of these seventeen fields, a large majority (11 fields) are unstable particles. They are more like lab rats. Only six fields are stable particles. In fact the word "particle" is also kind of a misnomer, because of the six stable ones, only four fields pertain to real particles - two for Quarks , one each for Electrons and Neutrinos. The other two are force particles - Gluons and Photons. Vedic science has even simpler model. There are only three potencies - Sattava , Rajas and Tamas that lead to physical matter. Purusa is the fourth representing force or the universal consciousness.

Nitty gritties of the fields aside, the key departure from the Maxwell-Einstein era is the observer effect. While Maxwell's ideas showed that the observer wasn't important as far as the underlying field was concerned (though immensely important for the emergent reality), Quantum Field Theory puts the observer back into the "fields". It posits that the underlying field(s) are always in a state of superposition—which basically means all the possibilities exist together at the same time, but the act of measurement (observation) collapses the field to a singular state. This is what brings Quantum fields lot closer to Vedic science.

The idea of decoherence at a universal scale—though it appears trivial—has profound implications. It means that the macro reality that we observe in our daily life—the chair, the table, the Earth, or the Sun—are already measured by some observer far greater than we can comprehend with our limited intelligence. This system (of universal measurement) may not be conscious in the stricter sense as we "humans" define consciousness, but this system surely is intelligent enough to collapse reality in a fashion where conscious beings like us come to life—to watch, ponder, breathe, and write about grand reality. Maybe it is pure chance—our reality is one collapse in infinitely many trials—yet, this trial is profoundly important for us, for it leads to parameters of physics that allow intelligent life through evolution.

The "Field" of Reality: A Unified Perspective

When viewed through a synthesized lens, the concepts of "Field" and "Observer" in both Quantum Mechanics and the Bhagavad Gita, rather than being contradictory, appear to describe a similar underlying reality from different vantage points. Both frameworks suggest that the classical world we experience is an observed decoherence that emerges from a deeper, unmanifested field of potential. QM thinks our physical reality is separation from the underlying field, whereas the Gita takes a broader view. It states that even the physical world is part of the underlying field(s) —it is just decayed state of the underlying potential. The real distinction is NOT the Field versus the physical world—it is the Field (that includes the physical world) versus the "Observer." The potential of all possibilities versus the grand observation mechanism that chooses to measure a state and hence collapses the universal fields.

In this unified view, the Gita's concept of the "Field" (Kshetra)—which includes not just the five gross elements, but also the senses, mind, intellect, and ego—can be understood as a vast decoherence. The "Primal Observer" (Kshetrajna or the "knower of the field") is universal consciousness. In chapter 13, the Gita posits a supreme, all-encompassing consciousness as the ultimate Observer who knows the underlying field of both real and potential. Krishna says:

The critical insight from both QM and the Gita is that this "grand measurement" does not require a limited, human consciousness. The classical reality we perceive is, in a sense, already pre-measured for us.

• In Quantum Mechanics, this happens through decoherence. Large objects are constantly "measured" by their vast environment (photons, gravitational fields, etc.), which collapses their quantum possibilities into the stable, classical reality we see long before a human looks.
• From the Gita's perspective, the physical world we experience with our limited, veiled consciousness has already been brought into manifestation from the field of vast potential by a far more encompassing, universal consciousness.

Therefore, both systems propose that the familiar world is a resolved reality emerging from a field of pure potentiality. The force that drives this emergence is "observation"—a process that can be described as physical interaction and information registration (QM) or as the illuminating power of a universal consciousness (Gita). Our individual perception does not create the world but rather experiences a classical reality that has already been shaped from a deeper, superimposed substrate.

The Conundrum of Time

There is one more important distinction in present-day quantum science from the time of Maxwell—and that is "Time" itself. In quantum systems, time is an emergent parameter. Quantum systems can very well travel back in time. Time is just a parameter. The underlying fields have no sense or scale of time.

Vedic science, often referred to as Samkhya in this context, offers a striking parallel to this perspective. It does not bother to explain the starting conditions because time (Kala) itself is an emergent construct. It postulates that the fundamental field is Prra pakriti—an equilibrium state of three esoteric qualities: Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas.⁶ These qualities of Para prakriti, like its counterpart—the observer, often called Purusha—are not physical, but they manifest the physical reality in close proximity of the observer. In a way, the quantum state of all possibilities enshrined in Para Prakriti collapses to a specific form called "Prakriti" under the watchful measurement of the observer Purusha.

The Gita says both Prakriti and Purusha are timeless entities, for time is a construct of the physical world manifested through decoherence.

The intriguing question is how come quantum systems are time independent. The answer probably lies in most recent discoveries in artifical intelligence: diffusion based models for Image generation. Before we get deeper into this paradigm - let me humor a simple metaphore. Think how does a sculptor creates a statue? He is first given a prompt - say create a statue of Krishna. He does get a picture or an existing statue of Krishna but in order to create a statue he needs a bigger rock. In effect, he adds lot more fluff to the image. In AI language we call this process "adding noise". Then he slowly, ever so carefully chips away pieces from the rock. In AI lingo, we call this act "systematic reduction of noise" . Finally he gets to statue. The quality of statue with respect to provided image depends on the intelligence of the sculptor - or our AI model.

The crucial insight here is , when we add noise, we increase the Entropy of the system. Which is similar to the arrow of the time. But when we work backwards , we reduce the entropy. It is as if we are travelling back in time. What is even more amazing, the quantum process of decoherence has striking parallel with addition of noise, while reduction of noise is skin to "Quantum Purification" or "error correction". In other words, the act of seeking a specific reality (an intentional measurement) always start with decoherence and then returns back to purity (intended state) throgh intelligent interventions. The return is iterative process.

The Process of Creation

Just like modern QM, the Vedic perspective of Samkhya explains the process of creation of the physical world. The way QM sees the hadron octets (subatomic particles with mass) created from three fundamental quarks, Samkhya posits that the eightfold material nature is created from three fundamental potencies—Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas. The Vedic perspective is, however, a lot more comprehensive. It unfolds creation in a systematic way. The proximity of Purusha first creates superintelligence (Mahat), which literally means "fully decrypted knowledge." This superintelligence, in turn, gives rise to localized identities (Ahamkara) akin to mechanical robots, and then to localized intelligence called Manas—akin to a localized AI brain driving the robots, the mind. The mind then develops senses (Indriyas), which then construct the physical world (Panchabhuta) we perceive.⁷ This is what Krishna describes as the eightfold basic nature Ashtadha mool prakriti. Surprisingly, this Vedic view of creation is strikingly close to the way we are seeing AI unfold.

In the Vedic view, our world—at the most basic level—the eightfold basic nature—is a form of virtual reality generated by proximity of Para Prakriti (Prakriti in equilibrium of three fundamental potencies of Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas) and Purusha. But there is a crucial difference: this virtual reality is created from the inside out, not from the outside in, as we experience with conventional VR. We don't jump into the Vedic VR; we create it around us. This might sound similar to modern simulation theories, where the world is likened to a computer screen that appears when we open our eyes. On the contrary, in the Vedic view, the emergent reality is not a simulation. It is as real as in the scientific view—whether the classical Maxwell-Einstein model or the modern QM approach. But it emerges from an underlying duality of Para Prakriti and Purusha. The Para Prakriti turns into eightfold basic nature—the five elements along with the faculties of ego, intellect, and mind—whereas the Purusha distributes itself as a conscious soul into all the conscious beings. This, however, doesn't mean it is an "intelligent design"; in the Vedic view, "intelligent design" is chaos. Chance is the fundamental intelligence. No one really controls how Para Prakriti manifests infinite vessels and how the vast ocean of observer Purusha spreads as tiny droplets into these vessels. Besides, this process is deemed to be a continuum. It is a never-ending cycle just as the play of Prakriti and Purusha is eternal.

In addition, the Samkhya view strongly supports Darwinian evolution, though the evolutionary purpose is not mere survival—it is the rise of "intelligence" through constant decryption of knowledge. Conscious beings are continuously evolving into better configurations to improve their purpose-fit intelligence. An improvement in intelligence leads to a better identity—the ultimate goal being to identify with the creator—the ultimate Knower of the field.

The Gita's Framework: The Hypothesis of Inner Knowledge

The Gita's framework is simple and intuitive. It hypothesizes that an element of consciousness (Purusha) resides within all of us. Krishna called it Atma—"the Self."⁸ It is our own copy of complete and unaltered knowledge, seeded deep within us. Atma is the seed—the physical body itself is then created by this tiny spark of consciousness, much like a tiny seed starting from singularity turns into an immense universe. While learning about the physical world is important, the key purpose of intelligence is to understand who we are. This provides a better directional alignment with the very purpose of science, because the world around us is the way we perceive it. A fish, for instance, likely perceives water with the same sense of solid reality that we attribute to land. What you perceive as green, I may perceive as red, yet we both agree to call it "green" because that is our common agreement. Trying to decipher the world around us is an inferior, if not futile, purpose before we progress on the path of understanding our own conscious being.

This idea was beyond imagination just a couple of centuries ago, so it was often wrapped in belief systems. Today, however, we are accustomed to scientific ideas that defy intuition, like quantum mechanics, relativity, and computing. Science has proved that our sensory apparatus is limited. With this understanding, we can explore the possibility that there may be more to our physical reality than what our senses report. The Gita proposes a distributed model of consciousness that is protected, immutable, and encrypted. A full copy of consciousness, Atma, is pre-built into every conscious agent, or Jeeva. When we say a full copy, think of a drop in the ocean. A drop has as much "knowledge" of the properties of water as the entire ocean. In essence, a full copy doesn't mean the entirety of the conscious substance—the Purusha—but the entirety of the knowledge it represents. That is why you may see the words Atma and knowledge used interchangeably in this text.

It is important to lay out the difference between "knowledge" and "intelligence." Intelligence is a faculty of the mind (Manas) that standardizes communication between two or more conscious beings. Our ability to work together depends on our ability to reach common standards and hence our intelligence. In a way, intelligence is a wrapper to convey messages. Messages are perceived by knowledge. Everyone responds differently to signals thus received. Intelligence is all about reducing ambiguity. For example, in our languages, colors are very well defined. Everyone means the same shade of color when we say the word "Blue." There is no ambiguity from the communication standpoint, yet everyone still perceives blue differently. In many instances, where things are not yet fully defined, it is hard to communicate intelligently. For example, abstract things like love are not well defined. The meaning gets distorted in communication itself—even within the same language. Thus, the extent of intelligence is largely related to information and hence the language. But all communication is merely a signal to knowledge. We can ask people to drive from city A to B, but everyone drives differently. Even if you standardize the car, year, make, model, and color—still, the driving style is different. Driving style comes from knowledge. In other words, knowledge is the extent of decryption of our internal full copy of consciousness. Each one of us decrypts a small part of the knowledge endowed to us—to suit the purpose or the role we are in.

The Gita's idea of Atma—that conscious spark that is the basis of this body and hence the expanse of this universe—pertains to a complete body of knowledge in a super-condensed, encrypted form. What we are capable of understanding is the extent to which we decrypt this knowledge—a small portion of this complete copy. And then, within that small decrypted knowledge base, there is an even smaller subset that we standardize to communicate with other conscious beings—that super-tiny subset is called intelligence.

For example, our automated body functions are part of our decrypted consciousness (knowledge): the pumping of the heart, aging of skin, and even motor actions such as walking. I can't communicate (even to myself) how my own heart is pumping at this moment. These actions are beyond standardized communication—intelligence. I can certainly tell when I am hungry or thirsty. This is part of intelligence. There is no doubt that we have individually decrypted how to breathe—which is why we can do it—but we cannot communicate the process. Even trivial creative pursuits such as writing, singing, or even coding—they are all there because we have decrypted the knowledge individually, but no one can communicate how the creative process works within. Creativity is beyond mere intelligence. Vast is our knowledge, yet in contrast to the entirety of encrypted knowledge that the conscious seed within us represents, it is very small.

Protected and Immutable

This consciousness cannot be destroyed by physical means. As Krishna says, weapons cannot cut it, fire cannot burn it, and water cannot wet it. It exists beyond the physical realm. This knowledge is also Akshara, a Sanskrit word meaning "that which does not decay with time."⁹ In other words, it is not only beyond the physical but also beyond the notion of time. The idea of Akshara may seem impossible to us because we can't perceive anything beyond time. But from the standpoint of pure consciousness, "time" (Kala) is simply a construct of the interplay of Purusha and Prakriti, often called Leela. The word Leela simply means "a play."

Encrypted but Knowable

This consciousness is not easily perceived by our externally focused senses and mind, which are designed for evolution and intelligent communication. The conscious seed, therefore, appears encrypted, or Avyakta.¹⁰ This encryption is not a permanent barrier but an incentivized push to engage us with the physical world, for it is this external world that holds the key to our inner knowledge. Think of an individual's physical reality—their tiny box—as the public key and their little drop of consciousness as the private key of a cryptographic key pair.

Since everyone's circumstances are unique, each of us has a unique set of "cryptographic keys." The method to decrypt the "knowledge" (held within the conscious drop and thus the entire universe) is necessarily individual. "Encrypted" does not mean "impossible"; it ONLY means we need the right key pair. Once we have it, the entire knowledge base becomes self-evident. The "game" of discovery exists because the experience is beautiful. Our physical reality is crafted by our own knowledge. Its immersive nature is meant to be addictive, because only through complete submersion do we understand the nature of the self. Complete understanding of "self" is "divine."

The Ultimate Knowledge

The Gita stresses that this inner consciousness is all we need to know. It is worth knowing because the answers to life's great questions—chief among them, "Who are we?"—are already within us. Our external quests are ultimately a search for ourselves. It is knowable because it is built into us; it is Atma, "the Self." Our physical body and mind are its creation and are tools for action. To let this beautiful apparatus go without decrypting the knowledge within is a wasted opportunity.

The Knowledge Network

If the path is individual, are we alone? The answer is a big "No."

The decrypted knowledge manifests as everything we perceive in our tiny box. Our individual decryption leads to skills that manifest real things in the real world. The collective decrypted knowledge of all beings is what the Gita refers to as Brahma.¹¹ If we take away the illusion of time—it is pertinent to imagine that our collective knowledge, the great Mahat, existed before us—to shape the entire universe—things beyond our tiny box of experience, such as far distant galaxies, or even the experience of people in different countries or cultures—all these are shaped by our collective wisdom—Purusha. Just like Samkhya is the analytical branch of Vedic science, the other branch Advaita Vedanta posits that this collective wisdom is the true underlying field. This wisdom holds both Prakriti and the individual observer bound to the illusion of time. But we are digressing. We will come back to Advaita Vedanta in later chapters.

Our physical world is actually created collectively by us. It is NOT a figment of our imagination, as many new simulation theories posit. In Vedic science, and consequently in the Gita's framework, our world is collectively created by us—inside out—one step at a time. And we are also agents of its dissolution. In essence, this perpetual physical world has no beginning or end. Questions pertaining to its beginning and end are fundamentally questions related to the limitations of our perception of time. As Einstein showed, time is relative, not fundamental, so the focus on the boundary conditions of time is essentially a distraction for the less intelligent.

Our collective creation serves a purpose. In Vedic traditions, Brahma is the entirety of the system, the overarching reality that provisions everything we need for our life's experiments. It also gives us the challenges we need to solve based on our unique circumstances. In essence, this collective decrypted knowledge gives us our purpose. As Krishna says in Chapter 3, Verse 15, righteous actions (Karma) are born from Brahma, and Brahma is born from Akshara (the immutable knowledge). He concludes:

"Therefore, the all-pervading Brahma is eternally situated in the ritual of action (Yajna)."¹²

A Balanced Path

For the last century, physicists have sought a "Theory of Everything" to unify relativity and quantum mechanics. A true theory of everything, however, must also account for consciousness. What is the point of explaining the observable if we do not even account for the OBSERVER?

On the other hand, some philosophies devalue our physical world, claiming it is merely a projection of our minds. That is like downplaying the vessel that holds the water while singing glories of water that quenches our thirst.

The Gita establishes a balance. It affirms that we must have the deepest appreciation for our physical reality because it is what holds the keys to our inner knowledge. It rejects asceticism for its own sake and insists that we cannot achieve the ultimate state of rest without first indulging wholeheartedly in action.

In essence, the Gita provides a framework for both our scientific and spiritual quests. It offers a theory not just for the cosmos, but for us. It provides a path to live better, act righteously, and find peace. This message is more relevant than ever in a world of exponential technological opportunity and immense human suffering. There has never been a greater need for humanity to choose right from wrong and stay focused on the path.

Where is the Proof?

The Vedic point of view is intuitively appealing, but where is the proof? Maxwell showed the proof in math. Particle physicists must observe the particles before claiming a victory, but how do we prove consciousness? By definition, since our intelligence, knowledge, and consciousness exist within our own subjective bubble, it is impossible to perceive them directly with our senses. As we said, it is a unique cryptographic key pair, which means the method to access it is uniquely personal. But wouldn't that be a convenient way to excuse ourselves from real proof?

However, there is an opportunity to see it, and it is quite the opposite of the scientific method. Science is by definition reductive. It differentiates. What if we try the exact opposite path? Instead of differentiating, what if we integrate all parts? Therein lies an option. It is to transcend our limited vantage and see the collective view. This collective knowledge, as we alluded to earlier, is what Vedic science refers to as Brahma. The proof is in Brahma.

If we look at our collective intelligence, we find a striking similarity. The Vedic view of creation is closer to modern AI models. What we have discovered in artificial intelligence is our collective intelligence. The sum of our collective intelligence in AI is far greater than our individual, isolated bubbles.

Besides being extremely useful for our daily tasks, looking at AI objectively gives us a clue into our own creation. It is quite plausible that our AI will lead to superintelligence, and superintelligence will power robots. Robots will develop sensors to suit the tasks. These sensors shall help them perceive the world in a totally different fashion than us.

Imagine a post-AGI hybrid world: each robot, endowed with a tiny subset of superintelligence, develops its own perception tools and interacts with others, including us. Their senses are attuned to their tasks, and their perception of the universe is vastly different from ours. From the robot's standpoint, the physical world was already there; they just developed a new vantage point from which to view it. They wouldn't necessarily create a new world of their own; the economic model mandates that they augment existing reality. They will enhance our world through a totally different perception, just as every biological species enhances the world with its own perspective of reality.

We can see this in nature. Dogs sense and perceive the world very differently than we do. Butterflies develop sensors based on what they need to survive and thrive. Their perception of reality is vastly different, yet always evolving. It is hard to fathom that we are any different, or that the robots of the future would be any different. They may be made of steel. They may fly, but beyond the optics of skin and sensors, it is all intelligence backed by knowledge.

In essence, the collective view of Brahma reveals to us that evolution is nothing but layers of reality unfolding. Each underlying layer is seen as a decrypted base of knowledge; it breeds intelligence that leads to physical beings and their own perspective of collective reality. Through evolution, when the outermost layer decrypts enough knowledge, it creates a new layer—first a massive intelligence cloud, followed by physical bodies, their sensors, and their own perception. The solemn task for inhabitants of each new layer is to strive to understand the knowledge held in deeper layers—that collective wisdom of all evolutionary versions is Brahma, and each of us carries that entire knowledge in a drop within us.

To further unpack it, let's look at our own example. Humans collectively have decrypted enough knowledge to create superintelligent AI. This AI is the next layer of evolution, leading to physical robots, their sensors, and a new perceptive vantage of reality. It doesn't create a new world, so to speak—it just enhances our existing world through a new way to look at it, albeit a more effective way. The construct benefits all the underlying layers. The fears of AGI replacing all humans are as misplaced as the idea that we humans are going to kill all other species. In fact, we are the caretakers of all other species. Through our charter to harness energy to reach synthetic intelligence, we are not only saving this planet but spreading consciousness to the far reaches of the solar system—maybe even the stars. As soon as there is an adverse effect on the planet due to our exigencies, we have a mechanism to correct our course. And we do that diligently.