Nagas and their ecological and meta physical signifcance

I was witness and a participant to one of the finest Poojas (Ashlesha Bali) conducted by a priest recently and that too not in India but in USA. Kudos to the chief priest Jnanamoorthiji of Krishna Temple in LA.  This Pooja is named after a Nakshatra (or star) called Ashlesha which belongs to one of the 27 Nakshatras of Indian Jyotish or Zodiac system. So this is a "Bali" or a sacrifice to the presiding deity of this Nakshatra which is but the Naga or the chieftain of Snakes. One of the most misunderstood element in our metaphysical systems of Sanatana Dharma is this concept of snake and also its poison overall. The whole Sanatana Dharma has both outward and inward concepts of representation. Snakes too belong to this category. Firstly  Naga Panchami occurs in the month of "Shravana" which according to our seasons corresponds to the rainy season. Now also in rural households in India, one can find maximum instances of snake spotting during this season, their ant hills and habitats usually get washed away and  are mostly out and open during this season. India being an agrarian economy from time immemorial  appreciated the whole concept of food chain  and also the concept of co existence more than anybody else. Snakes are and were farmers best friends. While the west took the concept of ecological co existence pretty late, the traditional Indian system had long adopted this concept in letter and spirit. Thats why every animal is a "vahana" or a vehicle of a deity and is revered upon to make sure that we place and regard their importance in our environment. Similarly when snakes were out and open in rainy season the whole concept of worshiping them at least once a year gathered upon. Also in the Ayurveda system , this is a time when all the three Doshas or humor (Vata, Pitta and Kapha) is imbalanced in the body and one way of settling the same is to invoke the blessings of the deity which will help us to reestablish the balance. In the advanced spiritual practice, there is a concept of Kundalini which many cultures address it with different names, but we know its symbolic representation as an serpent coiled in our spine linking all the energy centers from Muladhara to Saharsadhara or the ones at base of the spine to the crown of the head. Any worship that is externally manifested has also an internal significance in our systems. So the the outward worship of Nagas is also a meditative worship to our Kundalini which is struck with many blockages and we request the almighty's help to remove the blockages which in turn helps us to balance the Doshas internally. Similar to a pipe being blocked the Kundalini is usually blocked disrupting the flow of Prana or energy in the spine center creating all sorts of physical and psychosomatic problems. Then comes to the most important question of Doshas which are associated with Nagas or Sarpas, why do they occur in one'e life and how is snake associated with them.
The most important element of snake is its poison and this too is paradoxical, if one contemplates deep within the most poisonous substances provide the most medicative cures in our lives. Mercury is as much as a poison as much as its an elixir. Radiation (nuclear) is as much as a killer as much as its a radioactive cancer killer. Inwardly our own tendencies of hate, greed, negative tendencies which exist deep within and do not appear in  a day to day life plays the role of a poison creating the Karmic Doshas within ourselves. The play of Karma is best reflected and observed in the pitch of a Jyotish landscape where these Doshas have been defined. Newtonian law is as much prevalent in the metaphysical world as much as its in the outward world. The "Sarpa Dosha" is our Karmic Debt or Rnuna that we have chosen by sowing seeds of poison in whatever form (that we have sown against others ) which are now fructified and we need to bear their consequences. So this concept of repentance and an effort to remove our negative mindsets and tendencies is also reaffirmed through this worship.
Lastly, Snakes are scared and worshiped as compared to any other animals. two most important chief deities either sleep on them (Vishnu ) or wear it as a necklace (Shiva).

Mahabharata: A Case in Leadership Succession Planning

The First Case

•King Bharata was the son of Shakuntala and Dushyant.

•Through valour and leadership Bharat conquered the whole of “modern day indian subcontinent” .•

The land was renamed as “BharatVarsha”

•King Bharat had three sons

•When the time of succession came , he did not choose any one of them.

•He instead brought in “Shantanu” who was not his lineage

•King Bharat chose Shantanu over his three sons, thus establishing an important aspect of leadership planning.

•Lesson :A leader must be selected from a larger pool than from one’s family reservoir.

The Second Case

•King Shantanu had a son named “Devavratha ” (Bhisma) with Ganga

•Devavratha is an able and a just leader and is perfectly suited for succeeding Shantanu

•King Shantanu falls in love with a fisherwoman called Satyavati

•Satyavati’s father imposes a condition that Shantanu-Satyavati’s natural son will be the heir and not Devavratha

•Devavratha pleadges his right to the future Shantanu-Satyavati’s natural son and also life long celibacy

•Shantanu even though reluctantly concedes his son’s pledge

•Lesson : A kingdom or an organization is nobody’s family fiefdom where emotions can be transacted for the benefit of each other , it plays havoc in succession planning. When planning leadership succession keep emotions out of the window, if “you” feel you deserve a leadership position for the benefit of the organization, strike your claim, no sacrifice is worth it for its not greater than the future of the organization. Recognize your ability to achieve a larger goal.

The Third Case

•Shantanu-Satyavati had two sons Chitrangada and Vichitravirya

•Chitrangada died early (before getting married)

•Vichitavirya (married to Ambika and Ambalika), died shortly after his marriage of tuberculosis.

•Vyasa (Satyavati’s son prior to being married to Santanu) was requested to beget sons from Ambika and Ambalika

•Vyasa told them that they should come alone near him.

–First did Ambika, but because of shyness and fear she closed her eyes. Vyasa told Satyavati that her child would be blind. Later this child was named Dhritarāshtra.

–Thus Satyavati sent Ambālika and warned her that she should remain calm. But Ambālika's face became pale because of fear. Vyasa told her that child would suffer from anaemia, and he would not be fit enough to rule the kingdom. Later this child was known as Pāndu.

–Then Vyasa told Satyavati to send one of them again so that a healthy child can be born. This time Ambika and Ambālika sent a maid in the place of themselves. The maid was quite calm and composed, and she got a healthy child later named asVidura

•Now when the time of succession came , Bhisma did not follow his grandafther’s (Bharata’s) tradition of “not picking a leader based out of clan but out of merit “, the ideal choice for leadership was Vidhura, technically he was also half brother of Pandu and Dhritrashatra

•Bhisma chose Pandu who in turn died early and relegated the throne to his brother Dhritrashtra

•Vidura is never considered for throne coz of his mother’s lineage even though he was a brilliant strategist and political mastermind. Author of famous political science commentary called Vidhur Neeti

•If Vidhura would have been the king this mess probbaly would never have occurred

•Lesson : Sometimes previous modus operandi of succession planning or decisions in general serve as valuable lessons , examples and benchmarks. Everytime a new thinking may not be needed. Putting on oneself in the previous leader’s shoes may help us to face current dilemmas. I am reminded of a famous decision of Lous Gestner who turned around IBM when it was about to collapse. One of the most significant decision he took was to ask the employees to “not to have a dress code”. He actually did what the founder Thomas Watson Jr had done decades Thomas Watson had imposed this dress code because customers during that time dressed that way. Gestner’, just applied the same thinking in a renewed context by not having the dress code which was the norm of his day

The Fourth and Final Succession

The crux of Mahabharta is a situation wherein Dhritrashtra is accused of not allowing Yudhistra (Pandu’s son) to become his successor. Let me put some researched facts before you . Some facts which are unknown , courtesy our televised “versions” of epics which present only one version of the story.

Duryodhana’s Case

•Duryodhana was a powerful and capable king who governed his subjects fairly (when he ruled as a crown prince of Hastinapur post kingdom division of Hastinapur and Indraprasth)

•When the argument was presented that his father was a stop gap for Pandu, Duryodhana made a strong case of argument that Pandu’s sons were not Pandu’s sons but out of Kunti and Various Devatas like Indra, Vayu etc.

•Bhim's unrestrained, brutal beatings during childhood left psychological scars on him stemming the deep hatred for Bhim

•Duryodhana was well-versed in religious knowledge

•Vidura and other elders were extremely partial towards Pandavas

Yudhistara’s Case

•Universally Respected

•Pious and able administrator

•Righteous and Virtuous

•Well versed in Dharma Shastra

The Question

•If you could time travel and we were given the chance to decide the succession of undivided Hastinapur ? Whom would you choose and why ? Remember the aftermath (war etc) happened due to the division of kingdon?

•Intricate Lesson : Many a times to please or to have “best case” scenarios organizations are divided amongst two able successors ?. This creates more problems than solutions as temptation to transgress each other’s boundaries is highest in such cases. Its imperative in powerful organizations to have only one full authority successor than two organizations with two successors many a times?

•A question to ponder….

•

Deccan Herald Article

In debt we rise

By S Nagendra

As America continues to borrow from China, the rationale of economic superiority in the longer run for it would be in serious decline.

The current debt crisis in Greece reminds one of Kautilya’s perceptions about debt. He considered debt to be ‘instruments of decline’ for kings and governments alike. But modern governments seem to have come a long way and the Chanakyan prescription has truly become outdated. Today, good economics and good politics have become mutually exclusive. At least, so it seems. Sound economic policies need not necessarily yield political dividends to incumbent governments. Conversely, leaders and political parties may actually win renewed political mandates to government on the ‘strength’ of their ‘bad’ economic policies. Thus, it is no secret that modern day governments ‘stimulate’ the economy by spending more and more and earning less and less to ensure their political continuity. In this ‘debt ridden world’, according to ‘The Economist’ magazine, the total current global debt is around $32 trillion. Based on the total world population of around 7 billion, this amounts to an average debt of around $4,600 or around Rs 2 lakh on every human being on this planet. Recently the Indian government sought approval to spend an extra $6.6 billion in part to subsidise food and fertilisers and to halt the inflation. The average debt of an Indian citizen is nearly equal to his 10-month income, which on an annual basis has recently been estimated at Rs 38,000 by the Central Statistical Organisation (CSO) for a population of 115.4 crore. With the government adding about Rs 3,00,000 crore (Rs 3,000 billion) to the public debt annually in the last few years, the total public debt is estimated to zoom to a whopping Rs 34,06,322 crore (Rs 34.06 trillion) by March 2010, nearly double the amount recorded seven years ago. This initiative to spend more than planned is affecting the yields on benchmark 10-year bond. Among the top 10 local-currency debt markets in Asia last year, Indian bonds were the worst performers (except Japan), handing investors a 5.1 per cent loss, as the government spent Rs 1.86 trillion to shield the economy from the global recession. India’s current public debt to GDP ratio is 58.2 per cent — almost close to the US position of 60.8 per cent — and we have much to learn from Uncle Sam. Lessons from US debt Backed by the US Congress, President Barack Obama recently signed into law an increase in the US national debt limit to $12.4 trillion. The US government posted a record $1.4 trillion deficit in the fiscal year ending Sept 30, 2009. The US government needs to spend more or ‘stimulate’ its economy. To facilitate this spending, it needs to borrow more and more to cover its deficit. Historically, the lone super power has been living well beyond its means. Public debt in dollars quadrupled during the Reagan and Bush presidencies from 1980 to 1992, and remained at about the same level by the end of the Clinton presidency in 2000. The most important legacies of President George W Bush have been the rise in total public debt from $5.6 trillion in January 2001 to $10.7 trillion by December 2008. This was the quintessential lesson that the Bush Junior learned from the Bush Senior as the latter lost his re-election bid to Clinton purely due to his attempt to trim the US National Debt by increasing taxes, a far departure from his stated election promise. The trend is expected to continue as Barack Obama intends to spend more on war, health care reforms and social security, leading to a projection of total national US debt of around $20 trillion by 2015. So who is funding this enormous US debt? In May 2009, the US owed China $772 billion. It also owed substantial money to others like Japan and Saudi Arabia. In reality the money that a Chinese saves is spent by an American. This has definitely posed critical economic and political risks for the United States. As America continues to borrow more especially from the Chinese, the rationale of economic superiority in the longer run for America would be in serious decline. China doesn’t intend to fish in the troubled waters at least for now purely due to lack of substantial alternative currency to the US dollar. However, even this is changing as seen from recent increase in diversifying its non US dollar based securities by oil rich countries and also by countries like India, China and Russia. Cumulatively, this poses an enormous challenge to the US dollar in the longer run. The US has been able to withstand its national debt purely due to its economic and political dominance and the power of US dollar so far. But what about India? Obviously, the American approach cannot be blindly followed. Indeed, it is high time that our economic planners adopted a balanced approach which would require them to decrease deficits and trim our national debt. In the urge of economic prosperity we cannot go on borrow from others to spend at home, even if it means sacrificing some growth targets. Our fiscal discipline is quintessential to our long term national and economic security. Its time that we look ourselves as a post-developing nation and make sound economic choices, though that may be politically very hard to accept. Nassim Nicholas Taleb, the author of ‘Black Swan’ recently said in a blog that “A lot of the growth (of America’s) of the past few years was fake growth from de

Deccan Herald Article

Quantity sans quality

By Prof Nagendra

Indian professors are more inclined towards teaching post-graduate students than the ones in the undergraduate level.

There is a striking similarity between the just-released blockbuster movie ‘3 Idiots’ and the Yashpal panel report on ‘higher education’ in the country: they speak the same language. Both the film and the report are refreshingly innovative and yet convincing in their message regarding the need for rejuvenating the entire higher education system in the country. Consider this critical paradox in higher education policy in India: much has been written and discussed on how the policy-makers have tilted public spending towards higher education at the cost of primary and secondary education; but very little is actually spent on higher education. The 10th Five Year Plan (2002-2007) had envisaged an expenditure of 65.6 per cent of the total education budget on elementary education, 9.9 per cent on secondary education; 10.7 per cent on technical education, 2.9 per cent on adult education and the planned spending for higher education was just 9.5 per cent. Even if we combine technical and higher education, the spending accounts for just about 21 per cent. Even after a big increase in the expenditure for higher education in 2007-08, the fact remained that the country continues to lag behind in terms of per student public spending on higher education, compared to its Asian counterparts. At the moment, public spending on higher education per student in India stands at Rs 18,000. According to United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) data, India had the lowest public expenditure on higher education per student among developing and developed countries. Yet, for the record, India’s higher education system is the third largest in the world, after China and the United States. As of 2009, India has 20 Central universities, 215 state universities, 100 deemed universities, five institutions established and functioning under the State Act, and 13 institutes which are of national importance. Other institutions include around 21,000 colleges, including 1,800 exclusive women’s colleges. But only three Indian universities have been listed in a recent list of the world’s top 200 universities. While we go gaga over the 8 per cent GDP growth, there is actually a crisis-like situation in the higher education sector. But it is hidden and is systemic in nature. The situation calls for serious interventions from the government. The ‘Indian growth story’ could be a bubble as the country will be unable to meet the human capital demand for a sustained transition from a developing country to a developed country. Indian universities lack multi-disciplinary approach to education and research. In fact, universities have been reduced to mere affiliating entities. The Yashpal panel has questioned the logic of granting university status to specialised entities, be it technology, management or industrial labs like CSIR. Out of the three Indian universities named among the 200 global best, two are IITs and IIMs which are super specialised entities in education and only one — Jawaharlal Nehru University — is a full-fledged university in the true sense, which means the third largest higher education system in the world has only one university of any quality! Multi-disciplinary approach The Yashpal panel emphasises the need to promote multi-disciplinary approach. It questions the logic of eliminating the need for subjects like economics, philosophy, etc in professional courses like engineering and medicine. It makes no sense to produce truck loads of engineers and doctors without any basic background in economy, society or liberal arts subjects. The US has a pre-med degree, where students opt for a variety of courses before beginning their medical education. The committee quotes a fantastic example of students pursuing mathematics opting for philosophy and vice versa. This can’t be underestimated as the whole branch of logic and induction and other epistemological subjects have been synthesis of mathematics and philosophy. University of Penn, Stanford, and New York University are some of the many top universities that boast of research and teaching in these areas. India needs to integrate such wide disciplines qualitatively in universities as opposed to merely proliferating centres of higher education and research that offer narrow areas of specialisation. A part of the problem, perhaps the most important part at that, is that Indian colleges are no more than super schools where rote learning is continued and reinforced. That is what the Yashpal report has pointed out. A very important aspect covered in the report is the role of undergraduate education. While universities stress on post-graduate education, the undergraduate is the business of ‘affiliating’ colleges. This creates a great impediment in overall quality drive in renewing and reuniting higher education. Barring some centres of excellence, Indian professors are inclined to teach only post-graduate students and not prefer to teach at the undergraduate level. The report recommends mandatory teaching for undergraduate students by professors, who have been more or less confined to post-graduate departments. Finally, the most critical, perhaps also controversial, recommendation of Yashpal committee is its prescription of subsuming entities like UGC, AICTE in one National Commission for Higher Education and Research — which will be a grand overall authority reporting directly to parliament. The report is not only critical about the functioning of higher education regulatory agencies but asks a fundamental question of the need of uniformity as against diversity. Diversity doesn’t mean decrease in standards, it means enabling of setting up of standards where universities can adhere to. Diversity will help institutions of higher learning to come up with their own syllabus, the students to opt courses of their choice, etc.

Uncertainty Principle in Organizational Strategy

When the new particle collidor was commissioned in CERN (European Organization for Nuclear Research www.cern.ch) Geneva last year there has been a speculation that apart from couple of nobel prizes, the future of science and physics in particular is at stake. I do recommending reading “The trouble with Physics” (http://www.thetroublewithphysics.com/) by the great theoretical physicist “Lee Smolin” (founders of Perimeter Institute of Theoretical Physics, http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/)who has put up some serious questions on how physics is being hijacked with the obsession with “String Theory” (http://www.superstringtheory.com/). Well this (string theory) has been a fundamental drive in physics since last decade for the quest of “unification theory” that unites all four fundamental forces (electromagnetism, strong interaction, weak interaction (also known as "strong" and "weak nuclear force"), and gravitation) in one grand theory. Another interesting aspect of modern quantum gravity has been this mysterious energy called the dark energy and particle , Higgs-Boson , popularly known as God’s particle. Recent observations of supernovae are consistent with the fact that the universe is made up of 71.3% of dark energy (http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/science/mysteries_l1/dark_energy.html).

So essentially , almost three fourth of the universe composition is unknown to mankind (though I doubt even if we know remaining one-fourth fully! . Go through “What we Don’t Know” at http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/15.02/bigquestions.html?pg=3 )

Essentially our inability to know the majority of composition of universe also makes us quite inefficient on how , what , when and why a universe creates a particular element and thereafter its interactions as well. Yes we all know through elementary physics that vacuum triggers electrons, etc etc. And now physics knows leptons, dutrons, quarks etc etc. There are roughly 2.5 x 10⁸⁹ elementary particles in the observable universe

From an organizational perspective , we can consider universe as a macrocosm and organization as a microcosm , this (organization) boils down to a system reflecting the complexities of particles (human beings, economic etc ) and making it as difficult to decipher and predict as it is for the universe. By the way I strongly urge you to google “The story of Stuff” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLBE5QAYXp8) a wonderful research which shows 99 % of what consumers buy ends up in TRASH IN 6 MONTHS in North America, others are not far behind.. And we can imagine this shelf life getting even shorter and shorter. The fundamental aspect that we ignore in our discussions is trying to see everything in a linear fashion which makes things so damn easy. If we have to understand on what will happen or more “controlled” way what should happen, we should know the “uncertainty principle in the organization”. In elementary physics most of us have read the Heisenberg uncertainty principle which stated that certain pairs of physical properties, like position and momentum, cannot both be known to arbitrary precision. That is, the more precisely one property is known, the less precisely the other can be known. It is impossible to measure simultaneously both position and velocity of a microscopic particle with any degree of accuracy or certainty.

Although philosophers of Science like Karl Popper (pls read All Life is Problem Solving

http://www.amazon.com/Life-Problem-Solving-Karl-Popper/dp/0415174864 have questioned uncertainty , but I always have had my faith in probabilistic theories. In Fact its high time that we make Probability , Logic and Epistemology (theory of knowledge It addresses the questions: What is knowledge? How is knowledge acquired? What do people know? How do we know what we know? Why do we know what we know?) as essential subjects in Management & Engineering in the curriculum..

So if through principles of equivalence I deduce position ( from Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle) Organizational Position (positioning a firm, what should it sell , how much etc, position can be a point of reference in a cost-quality-competition-map for an organization) and Momentum where and how fast should the organization head towards ? (what should it become and how should it become based on its size and financials) in terms of an organization, there would be a fair amount of uncertainty in the two.

Strategists, thinkers, and thought leaders all dwell on this for loads of time. There are interactions all along the strategy formulation path with unaccounted factors.

So what should Strategists do ? May be assemble a probability of options keeping in mind principles of uncertainty , by first recognizing that lots of things around are uncertain (not just the mathematical , analytical way only) but with a model which is dynamic and has subjective considerations as well, not just objective. The strategy formulation is an art many a time we have a conceptual model of the end painting when we start , but end product can turn out to be varied, different or completely something else than we imagined.

Here again I reemphasize that our models of thinking are growing static day by day. I am often intrigued by the Philosophy of Fallibilism ( philosophical doctrine) that all claims of knowledge could, in principle, be mistaken. Some fallibilists go further, arguing that absolute certainty about knowledge is impossible. (Read “Knowing and the Known” is a 1949 book by John Dewey who was a great Fallibilist and Arthur Bentley. A full version of the book in pdf is available from the American Institute for Economic Research).

We need to reinvent our ways of thinking as said in one of the Shiva Sutras “ Gyanam Bandah” , ultimately knowledge itself becomes a limitation.

It’s the free spirit ultimately

Thought Engineering

After a long spell of literary dryness , I have finally decided to write , and what motivated me to write this time was the “thought” itself. One of my favorite parts of Rig Veda is the “Nasadiya Suktam” translated as the "not the non-existent" which is the 129th hymn of the 10th Mandala of the Rig-Veda and has attracted a large body of literature of commentaries both in Indian theology and in Western philology. The foundation of this Mandala is its emphasis on how the universe was first created which is now an important question for modern day cosmologists, particle physicists and quantum theory specialists. Nasadiya Suktam goes on to attribute creation to what it calls as the “primal germ of mind” or the “thought” , the question being if nothing was there where was the mind.. Lets assume for a second that mind is a hypothetical center for thought creation, the primal germ or the thought which emerged, triggered creation. So our fundamental basis is thought itself. For me mind is a fictional center in human physiology not occupying a defined set of coordinates. We may unlock the power of neurons and various centers in our brain , but still we are left void of the origin of thought. Does that mean thoughts essentially are self existent ? I can safely say that we are all inundated with millions of thoughts every day and every second itself. Dwelling more on Nasadiya Suktam , one of the several creation stanzas in Rig Veda , there is a quintessential assumption that thought is the source of universal creation and thought (the first thought) itself is self created.. This is a strange dichotomy from an existentialist perspective, if creation is from “x” and x is self created. In Sanskrit and in Upanishads we call it as Swayambhu, but again from where ? answer is from Void, vacuum or in metaphysical terms “shunya or zero”.. the essence of creation of thought is thoughtlessness ..

Lets look it in context of existentialist perspective , all our actions arise by a single thought. Somewhere and sometime.. A thought as an energy vehicle is more or less assumed by even neo classical psychologists. All the motivational write ups revolve around constructing effective thought energies which are essence to our well being. But the question is if a thought is self created (if we assume that), why does it so happen and can we engineer our thoughts.

Engineering our thought is basically trying to put our hands on this process of self creation. we can look this from a perspective of self direction, coz if its self created so it can be self directed as well. In a cathode ray experiment we all know that from vacuum electrons arise which can be directed to an electrode, so if thoughts arise from void can we direct their movement. We need to look at this question little deeper. How do we engineer our thoughts ? This can be achieved stage by stage. As a first step we need to cultivate the power of observation, many of us try to control our thoughts which is an anti-nature cycle ,coz if the creation of fundamental thought itself is through the process of self creation , who are we and what power do we have to stop/interfere in the thought creation process. Observation is important because the moment we start observing something we have two demarcations, that which is being observed and the person who is observing. An observer who is observing. Even though this can be in a fraction of a second we split ourselves from being experienced. No doubt our medium vehicle is again a thought to observe but the click is this is the Creation thought. This thought what I call it as a T=0 thought is a creation thought or an observer thought. Being the first thought or an observer thought its free from any toxicity. The creation of universe is a perfect creation by this thought. the first stanza of Isha Upanishad states that “OM – Purnamadah Purnamidam Purnat purnamudachyate.
Purnasya Purnamadaya Purnamevavashisyate.” meaning, “That is perfect, this is perfect, from perfect comes out of perfect. If perfect is subtracted from perfect, still perfect is left.”. so essentially again through our T=0 thought we can guide creation which would be perfect. Its through gradual cultivation of observation of macro and microcosm around one can dwell on this thought. Our sensitivity has considerably depreciated over ages of human growth. Why so ? this because our physical , mental and spiritual endeavors have been so outwardly that our inner faculty development has been the consequent victim. Then again question comes of self direction, aren’t we then interfering in the creationist process, no , this because the moment we bifurcate observer and experiencer we tend to detach our personalized imprint in the thought. Our thoughts many a times (whether selfish or selfless) tend to be anti creationist , so if we align ourselves with the universal or T=0 thought, automatically we endeavor for a universal harmony. Again as a matter of emphasis our well being is attached to universal well being then only we reap true happiness. Just to give an example if we have a hundred million dollars in an isolated island , whats the use. Our world around is a necessary condition to spend and experience that hundred million dollars. So engineering is moving along the path of self direction. And self here is universal. The word "Aham" in Sanskrit is the equivalent world , its an interesting mix that this word is made of .. a is first alphabet and ha is the last alphabet is Sanskrit so Aham spans across first and last.. similarly self here encompasses everything around..

hAPPY BIRTH DAY CHARLES DARWIN.. 200th birth anniversery

BY the way a quick correction in my last post first  "one of my principal spiritual belief is NOT TO see the universe/religion in a good vs bad.. god vs evil".

DARWANian model of evolution has been more of a philosophical and church centric debate rather than that of scientific merit.. again politics of religion.. evolution is the most fantastic concept availble for human thinking.. everything evolves to a pattern .. those who dont evolve die as furthered in survival of the fittest theory.. what about organizations.. there is a constant evolution happening within the structures evolve and so its strategy.. people.. resources..

i want to hear your views first on theory of evolution w.r.t organizations.. 

i will then post my underlying view

THE HIDDEN DIMENSION..

thanks for posting views again on ravana and rama.. quickies.. have i been biased towards ravana , my answer is no .. i just want to bring the other side of the coin.. whether your hero/god is rama or ravana is a matter of personal choice, its just my endevaour to uncover facts and present it to you.. esp since i believe to  a tribe of "participative sociologists" who observe and try to bring multi dimensional perspectives.. one of my principal spiritual belief is to see the universe/religion in a good vs bad.. god vs evil.. all religions have this bifrucation so it limits our perspective of understanding..  how many of us dig Vedas/ upanishads/  which is monotheistic and works on nature .. logic and judgement.. ? we as human psyche wants love to dramatize our gods beliefs.. 

anyways why do i say all this ? somebody had queried is it related to strategy ? well everything is connected.. i want to develop multidimensionality  of perspectives and approach in viewing things/objects/organizations.. much of the views i see is single at most bi dimensional.. reality many a times (as string theorists proclaim .. i am from the other school though) is in 6th.. 7th or nth dimension.. i call this as hidden dimension..

welcome to the world of mind-physics.. as now its proved as  the god's particle (Higgs's Boson.. did the cyclotron find it by the way )..  unravels the truth..

its very easy to bisect or trisect a strategy or organization and pinpoint causes of success/failure.. but what about the hidden dimension..

in coming days i will write about this "HIDDEN DIMENSION" ... in strategy, organizations, economics, society and behaviours.. let the suspense continue

A book that changed my life .. early on

Among all the books that I have read or heard.. This is a life changer and I mean it. I had heard some sort of an audio version of this book when a great (unknown) master had mentioned in his discourses which in turn was brought in by my teacher at my engineering college.

Just a jist : is a 1981 book by Harold Kushner, a Conservative rabbi. Kushner addresses in the book one of the principal problems of theodicy (justice of god), the conundrum of why, if the universe was created and is governed by a God who is of a good and loving nature, there is nonetheless so much suffering and pain in it — essentially, the evidential problem of evil.

This devout Rabbi (jewish priest), an excellent human being , devoted to god throughout his life
has to see his young son, Aaron, who die at age 14 in 1977 of the incurable genetic disease progeria in which the body ages faster.

Bottomline : he had to see his son die in front of his eyes , every day by seeing him grow old much faster than him and was helpless..

if you are a biking enthusiast .. you will like this

The first pictures of the production version of the BMW S1000RR supersport motorcycle have been unveiled at BMW’s Berlin production plant. Until now, only the carbon-fiber clad World Superbike-spec version has been seen in action. This 403-lb performance riding machine is as high tech as any M-series automobile the Bavarian-based company has ever produced. Everything from traction-control to ABS as well as high-tech engine internals will make this first-ever BMW superbike a legitimate challenger to the Italian and Japanese sportbikes that have ruled the racetracks and back-canyon bi-ways of our little blue planet. Below is the press release on the unveiling as provided by BMW. -Ken

Staff and fans of BMW Motorrad are looking forward to March 1, 2009 with great excitement. At the introductory race to the Superbike World Championship in Phillip Island, Australia, two BMW motorcycles will be in the starting line-up for the first time. After recent tests in Portimao and Valencia, riders Troy Corser and Ruben Xaus are optimistic about the future and the mood in the BMW Motorrad Motorsport team is positive. The racing bikes will be fairly close to serial production models, allowing for the greater audience identification characteristic of the sport. Behind the scenes meanwhile, production of the serial machine is getting underway: the BMW S 1000 RR. The package of this completely newly developed motorcycle with its 999cc in-line 4-cylinder engine is very compact and light. The dry weight of the motorcycle is 183 kg. Both its supreme performance figures and its outstanding riding properties make the BMW S 1000 RR an extremely attractive offer in the supersports segment.

The engine has a very compact cylinder head and is narrow in shape. The valves are activated by means of very small, light cam followers, virtually at Formula 1 level in terms of their dimensions. This construction ensures very high engine speeds and allows maximum freedom in engine design in terms of torque and output. For the supersports bike BMW S 1000 RR, a completely newly developed sports ABS featuring four different modes as well as the dynamic traction control system DTC will be available. The functional principle of the traction control system has been borrowed directly from racing.

The distinctive design of the S 1000 RR reflects the general style of the segment but also clearly represents the brand BMW. The new S 1000 RR will be available in the four finishes Mineral Silver metallic, Acid Green metallic, Thunder Grey metallic and - based on the BMW Motorrad racing colours - Alpine White/Lupine Blue/Magma Red. The serial production machine BMW S 1000 RR will be presented to the public in the early summer of 2009 but can already be ordered in dealerships.

Servant Leadership: Book of the week

book : "fooled by randomness"

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com Review
If the prescriptions for getting rich that are outlined in books such as The Millionaire Next Door and Rich Dad Poor Dad are successful enough to make the books bestsellers, then one must ask, Why aren't there more millionaires? In Fooled by Randomness, Nassim Nicholas Taleb, a professional trader and mathematics professor, examines what randomness means in business and in life and why human beings are so prone to mistake dumb luck for consummate skill. This eccentric and highly personal exploration of the nature of randomness meanders from the court of Croesus and trading rooms in New York and London to Russian roulette, Monte Carlo engines, and the philosophy of Karl Popper. Part of what makes this book so good is Taleb's ability to make seemingly arcane mathematical concepts (at least to this reviewer) entirely relevant in evaluating and understanding everything from the stock market to the success of those millionaires cited in the aforementioned bestsellers. Here's an articulate, wise, and humorous meditation on the nature of success and failure that anyone who wants a little more of the former would do well to consider. Highly recommended. --Harry C. Edwards 

From Publishers Weekly
In this look at financial luck, hedge fund manager Taleb (Dynamic Hedging) addresses the apparently irrational movement of money markets around the world. Using his own investing experience and examples of others' successes and disappointments, he discusses theories like Monte Carlo math (easy; considered cheating by purists) and the concept of Russian roulette. Taleb tells interesting, well-wrought stories about individual behavior: "While Nero has succeeded beyond his wildest dreams, both personally and intellectually, he is starting to consider himself as having missed a chance somewhere." While serious investors and mathematics enthusiasts will be intrigued, readers looking for practical investment strategies will be disappointed by this rambling intellectual discourse. Tables. 40,000-copy first printing; $150,000 marketing budget.

why ravana is my hero and not rama

i am so glad that my first post on ravana stirred a debate which was on expected lines.  i am also glad to see views  on ravana by my good friends reinforcing views albiet traditional saying him to be a scholar but  "arrogant" , ego centric etc..

I have worked on this topic for couple of years and every word that i speak can be verified and autheticated. I have read alternate books, spoken to "genuine" spiritual masters and last but not the least self-contemplated on various modes of facts presented.  I have always  greatly believed in being an observer or "analyst" ( sounds more managerial ) in life without forming an opinion. I leave that part (forming opinions) to my esteemed readers.  Unfortunately most of the facts that people have come from the  popular folklores, Valmiki's Ramayana and TV serial !!!

Firstly I dont see these two gentleman (Ram and Ravana) as demons or gods (or avtaaras) but as mortal beings who occupied a prominent place in history during the pre indus valley civilization. while the dates are disputed but what can be inferred with their timings is some time during the famous "Atlantis" when the geogrpahical structure of the earth was different than we see at present. We all have now agreed that due to continental drift  all the continents are drifting apart. During the occurence of Ramayana , the continents were closely knit. Which means one could traverse Australia , by land itself. In the alternate perspective book on Ravana called "vayam rakshamah" debunks the myths that have been prevealent for time immemorial. For example , the "Narak" or Hell was the old name of Persia ,  "Vaikunth" was a name of a place in Iran and Rakshasas were Maritime People who primarily dwelled on Seas. "Patal" or underground as its commonlyy known was modern day Australia because it was the southern part of continental land. So who were these "devatas" and  "Rakshas".  It was a clash of races and civilizations. two specific tribes, Devtas were more "European" whitish in race as compared to Rakshaasa who were colored, and as in human social modelling , color always looses to white.  Rakshas (which means protection) were demonized permanently in history.

Their was a historical battle for the control of earth and resources. which is still on between these two races. So it was methodical and surgical way of telling your story. Please remember its the same tactics which British have employed. They systematically destroyed the Indian form of education and replaced it with that of Lord Macaulay's system of education. what we have read is British interptetion of history. Our "gurukul" for example had subjects like Logic, Grammer and Mathematics, the 3 pillars of any educational system but was destroyed. Its said that if you want to destroy any country "rewrite its history" and thats what happened. Rakshasas were hardworking and nature worshipping tribes and races who won all battles. Devtas were tactiticans who always wanted to win over through "any" means.

Ravana was a cross breed and had both characteristics.  He was a master scholar in medicine, mathematics,astronomy, astrology . He has written many books  like "Arka Shastra" .  in arka shastra he has compiled every herb its usage and dosage revealing cures to some complex dieases.In one book he wrote "Eating beef cause to infect ninety eight new diseases to human beings". The book "Kumara Tantraya" (Gynecology and Peadetric Medicine) which reveals the treatments for infant diseases was written by him accepting the request of his pregnant queen Mandodari. He has similarly written many books on astrology and also created new  Raagas in Music , esp in Sama Veda , our 4th veda. He was such an eloquent master that he controlled Navagrahas (the nine "grahas" aspects of human astro system). I can go on and on his scholarly pursuits. Meanwhile the Ravana having 10 heads is nonsense, he was a master in tantra and had created an optical  illusion of  soughts while fighting his enemies. In fact in the famous Book "ravana samhita" an excellent compliation of his scholarly works is give,

He is said to be one of the greatest physicians who ever existed, and even authored the book Arka Prakashaya. The Bisajjya Grantha and Nadi Shasthra mentions that King Ravana and his grandfather Pulasthi Muni had graced the world-famous medical conferences held in those ancient days in Janasthan Pura near Pakistan. In Sri Lankan folk tales, it is said that king Ravana treated both Rama and Lakshmana with his own hand when they were badly injured on the battlefield.

The only King of Sri Lanka who managed to wipe out all the divisions among the Sri Lankan people was the Great King Ravana. Under his leadership, King Ravana managed to unite all the Sri Lankan tribes. Sri Lanka became a secular country not subject to or bound by any religious dogma, with no official religion, language or official yes men. Not only ruling Sri Lanka, he governed a vast kingdom with boundaries extending over South Asia – and was hence named Chakravarthi. In chronological records about Ravana, it is almost impossible to find a single battle fought against another community of people in order to invade their land or usurp their throne. Not a single ‘racial’ conflict is mentioned in any of those records written during his reign, though the chronicle of the Ramayana by Valmiki stereotyped him as the most evil human to have ever existed, providing an erroneous and biased interpretation of the Rama-Ravana war.

well then if he was such a great scholar , why was he wronged ? well for this the first nonsense has to be cleared  which is Rama and Ravana fought wars because of Sita, it was a political war which predated Rama. as mentioned, Ravana's maternal side (Raksh Tribes) were driven out of their own  land by Devtas tribes.  Rama belived in a doctrine (quoted) " The entire earth belongs to Raghu Vansh " Raghu was the ancestor of Rama. This sounds like the more racist quote ofBritish  Rudyard Kipling in which he called colonization or imperliamsm as a "white man's burden". Anyways , Ravana won back Lanka from Kuber (his step brother) and turned it into riches. Lanka was an object of envy ..  

Ravana and Shiva propogated the greatest theory of modern humanism which is their is no greater force than human will power.  "Atma so Paramatma" meaning soul is the the ultimate or what jesus has said " father and son are one" was rendered by these two gentleman which ran odds with people who had commercialized, objectified and "branded" gods for self interest. 

ravana also debunked caste system as in Vedas and Upanishads (original ones, if you want to see original Vedas, go to Germany not India.. what a pity ) as nowhere caste has been mentioned.

Raksh tribe believed in nature worship and universal identity without any bias for caste or creed and gender. The other tribes had deep caste divides and wanted to keep that alive.  Ravana was a master of 10 vidyas or 10 forms of knowledge another symbolic representation of his infamous "10 heads". Ravana as a social refomer took this message deep down to other tribal areas albiet by force which were at odds with the social fabric.

He propogated "Raksh Neeti" which meant equality for all. The other rulers were ought to get distressed who wanted the demarcation to be preserved. Fast forwarding to famous Shurpanka's episode,  Shurpanka was appointed as the "Governor" of the region where Ram , Lakshman and Sita had entered.  As the present norm states, an unauthorized entry amounted to aggression, unfortunately, which was taken up by Shurpanaka. The famous "enticement" which again has been demonized by popular folk lore and TV serials is silent on this issue. In "vayam rakshamah" its beautifully  argued that Shurpanka was unjustly manhandled. Imagine a girl (who happens to the queen) , in all fairness assuming asked for marriage is manhandled, beaten and have had her nose cut, its so unbecoming of  a man. Our eye brows were raised recently when women were attacked at a pub, how about this now ? isnt it inhuman, firstly you enter a territory which is not yours, then you manhandle the chieftan ? and that too when she is a women, where is the culture  ? . ravana avenged it with taking away Sita not just for this but as a political move, and please remember that he never ill-treated. My friends argue that he was cursed etc etc ,where was the curse when he could lift her and take her on his "Vimana" ? another big interpetitition was that he wanted to marry her. Nonsense, he actually had gone to the Swayamvar of Sita to ask her for his son "Indrajit" not for himself. he kept her with dignity in  AshokVatika. 

now the famous battle scene and its little pre history. 

Rama wanted to construct the famous "sethu" and needed a pandit to do the commencement puja or ritual.  The only pandit nearby was Ravana, the best amongst all. Ravana came and performed Puja for his "enemy" dutifully and blessed him. If this arrogance, be it..

Rama wanted to pick an auspicious time to start the battle. Rama needed an astrologer. Everyone unanimously suggested none other than Ravana. Heeding to the suggestion, Rama went to ravana to ask him a good time. Ravana as a great professional gave him the best muhurtha which (9 navaratris) and blessed him with "Vijaya Bhava". I have never seen a bigger human being than this. Is this arrogance , then I am arrogant, i would love to be..

Finally Rama tired of all weaponry , picked up his Brahmaastra , equivalent of nuclear weapon in modern age. This weapon technically was never supposed to be used in war as it was more of a deterrance. Ravana had this weapon as well. But seeing Rama open this weapon, Ravana did not open his Brahmastra (which he had) because he knew that had he done that , entire humanity and ecology would have been finished, imagine 2 hydrogen bombs colliding. He opted out and gladly accepted death and defeat for the larger purpose.

In fact before his death, Ravana makes a request to Rama to protect the Humanity and Ecology to its fullest !

One of thing that I have observed in human sociology, a person who questions beliefs , assumptions and values  and explores truth impartially   is always painted black .. ravana was just one of them..

Carmakers need to let go of their musty business models and start thinking like 21st century companies—like Google -excerpt from

Detroit Should Get Cracking on its Googlemobile

Carmakers need to let go of their musty business models and start thinking like 21st century companies—like Google

By Jeff Jarvis

If Google (GOOG) ran a car company, what would it look like? What lessons of Google's singular success in the Internet age might apply to remaking this, among other failing industries? Would the Googlemobile be the product of stealth and secrecy or openness and collaboration? Could Detroit release cars in beta? Could cars be ad-supported and free? Is there any hope for an industry that traffics in atoms instead of digits? Would a Googley car company even make cars?

A few years ago, it might have been absurd to look to Google for ideas about the auto industry. But not now. American automakers are in crisis. General Motors (GM) and Chrysler needed a $13 billion bailout from the federal government in December to keep them out of bankruptcy, and, with a new Administration in Washington, the Big Three are likely to head back to the well for billions more. They're suffering from more than the economic crisis. The huge declines in sales reflect a fundamental disconnect between drivers and Detroit. It's time for a radical rethinking of the way U.S. automakers do business.

I sat in Detroit some time ago and suggested heresy: I urged the car people to open up their design process and make it both transparent and collaborative. Car companies have no good way to listen to customers' ideas. If they had opened up, years before, I would have been among the legions who'd have gladly told them to invest 39 cents for a plug-in car radio so we could connect our iPods. Every time I try to listen to my music or podcasts in the car via various kludges—FM transmitters that can't transmit to a radio an inch away and cassette-tape gizmos—I curse car companies and their suppliers. At least let us help design the radios you install, I urged.

THE BIG THREE DON'T WANT TO HEAR IT

My suggestion was sacrilegious because automakers have long been secretive about design. Design and surprise, they think, are their special sauce. That's why they cloak new models like classified weapons, setting off games of cat-and-car with photographers who try to scoop the secrets. Apart from the most fanatical car fan, do the rest of us still care? The excitement I remember about a new year's cars—like a new season's TV shows—is gone. Cars have lost their season. They rarely engender excitement or passion. An Oldsmobile is no Apple (AAPL) iPhone, after all. How could a car company again win our affection for its products and brands? By opening up, by making the process of producing cars transparent so it could involve customers, by turning out cars customers want because they had a chance to say what they want.

Google listens to us and trusts us when it releases unfinished products as "betas" so we can tell them what to do next. That's the approach behind Google News, Gmail, and the new Chrome browser. The company also lets us tailor searches so we turn up only images or book excerpts. And Google pays attention to us by using our clicks and links to determine rank in search results. The more people who connect to a blog post on the best recipe for lamb tagine, the more prominent Google will make that Web site when people hunt for dinner ideas.

Google wants us involved in the creative process; Detroit doesn't. On Peter Day's BBC program In Business, Richard Florida, author of Who's Your City?, said Detroit's car companies were "destroyed" by "a management mind set that said, 'We know it all, we don't need anyone other's ideas, and we can do anything we want with our companies.' "

Car companies have let customers make emblems for cars and create their own ads for certain models, as General Motors did with the Chevy Tahoe in 2006. GM Vice-Chairman Bob Lutz has blogged. Chrysler has solicited customers' ideas (in a closed forum that prevents them from commenting on each others' suggestions) and created a customer advisory board of 5,000 selected drivers. The problem with these efforts is that they don't allow customers to affect the product openly. An idea presented to Ford Motor via e-mail or to Mini in its popular online community might influence a decision that will come off the line in a few years. But we'd never know it. Indeed, these preliminary attempts at interactivity seem aimed at keeping the customer from doing harm. This is interactivity as defined by a children's museum: Here are the buttons you may push without breaking anything; knock yourself out, kids. But just as companies should hand over their brands to customers, so should they hand over their products. Let the customers make the cars.

SAMENESS IN AN AGE OF EXPRESSION

What if just one model from one brand were opened up to collaborative design? I don't suggest that design should be a democracy. But shouldn't design at least be a conversation? Designers can put their ideas on the Web. Customers can make suggestions and discuss them. Designers can take the best ideas and adapt them, giving credit where it is due. I don't imagine customers would collaborate on transmission design—though a few might have good suggestions if given a chance. But they would have a lot to contribute on the passenger compartment, the look of the car, the features, and the options. They could even get involved in economic decisions: Would you be willing to give up power windows if it got you a lower price or a nicer radio? This collaboration would invest customers in the product. It would build excitement. It would get the product talked about on the Web and linked to and boost its popularity in Google searches. The approach could change the relationship of customers to the brand and that would change the brand itself. Imagine that, the collaborative community car: our car.

A car company could take an existing brand and work with the community that already exists around it. Go to Facebook and you'll find communities of greater or lesser involvement and affection devoted to many car brands. I stopped counting the Facebook groups for BMW when I hit 500—including the "If the BMW M5 was a woman I would marry it" group, with more than 800 members. The online gatherings site Meetup has six clubs where people organize get-togethers for drives in their Beemers. BMW also has an official car club offering 75,000 members rebates on cars and discounts on Brooks Brothers clothes. (Do they see the demographic humor in that?) These are the company's best customers—its partners. BMW should solicit their help in designing cars, in giving advice to fellow customers (there's a little of that in the club forums), even in selling cars.

On Facebook, BMW invited customers to color pictures of its car. It's hard to imagine something more children's museum-like than a company enticing adults to color cars. But more than 9,000 people submitted their designs in only a few days. What that tells me is not just that they love their BMWs but that they would love BMWs that look different—BMWs that express their muses as well as their libidos.

What an opportunity the industry has to bring humanity and personality back to cars. If so many of us like to express ourselves in blogs, YouTube videos, Facebook, Bebo, MySpace, and Flickr—if, as Google understands, many of us want to have a strong identity online through self-expression—why wouldn't we want to express ourselves through our cars? Companies have turned their products into commodities by imposing such sameness on them. I know, it's about efficiency: four models built under four brands on the same body with the same parts, making them cheaper. But the joy of customizing our own cars was taken away by factory efficiencies and dealer economics: We buy off the lot, not out of the factory, and we buy cars that are often loaded, like cable subscriptions, with things we don't want. Sure, there's an aftermarket of options—piney scent strips, hubcaps that spin, mud flaps with mirrors in the shape of naked women—but, well, that's just not me.

Toyota's (TM) Scion moved toward personalization when it let drivers design crests for their cars. Now take the next step and imagine I could take an unpainted car to any of those designers on Facebook or my student the graffiti artist and have my car painted so that it looks like no other. It'll cost me. But I'll bond with that car and love it because it's mine, an expression of me. That unpainted car would be the beginning of an auto company thinking open-source. What if the company also produced a car onto which I could graft another company's dashboard or seats or grille or engine? I tell news organizations to do what they do best on the Web and link to the rest. A car company could do the same.

Google replaced its fleet of company cars with Toyota Prius hybrids modified so their extra batteries could be recharged at solar charging stations. There is the Googlemobile. Google treated the Prius as a platform. Toyota should be delighted. It should build in opportunities to modify its car in countless ways. I can hear the objections: It could complicate production, raise costs, raise prices, confuse brands. Maybe. But it also could give me the car I want. The car company of the future could be a platform on which drivers create the automobiles they want, instead of settling for what's available.

There are projects aimed at building the open-source car, among them OScar from Germany, the c,mm,n (or common) hydrogen car from universities in the Netherlands, and the Society for Sustainable Mobility. But it's damned difficult to get a car company operating at scale. Atoms are a drag.

"NAVIGATION AND ENTERTAINMENT"

That is why I think a car company that already operates at scale should go open-source and welcome these nascent efforts to build atop them. Imagine seeing a million Priuses, Saturns, Fords, Accords (HMC), or electric Apteras on the road and wondering what's inside each one, what makes them run, who painted them, where you can get that great grille: cars no longer as mass-market products but as the product of a mass of niches. Imagine being given the power to customize your car from the ground up. Cars would be exciting again. Such openness would give me control of my car so I will own that brand, make that brand, love that brand, and sell that brand because it is mine, not yours.

That will be the key to marketing Googlemobiles: passion, love, individuality, innovation, choice, excitement, newness. Drivers will not only help design cars but also sell them—better than any car salesman can. They'll start Facebook groups, blogs, and Meetup clubs extolling the wonders of the cars they choose—no, make. Outside product designers and manufacturers will accessorize and improve the open-source car—just like outside developers have created thousands of software applications for the iPhone—which will support new businesses and help sell more cars. There is the advantage to being a platform as Google is a platform.

Creating a platform is a key reason for Google's success and it can apply to many industries. Craigslist founder Craig Newmark is doing much the same thing with the classifieds business. He created an open, easy-to-use service, and then let users do pretty much whatever they wanted with it. They've taken Craigslist in directions Newmark could have never imagined. What if cable companies, banks, even universities let the people have that kind of control? In the Google age, when anyone can talk about you, your product becomes your ad and your customers your ad agency.

I discussed my rationale for the open-source car platform with Fred Wilson, a partner at the venture firm Union Square Ventures in New York, and asked him what a Googley car company would look like. After thinking a moment, he said it already exists. It's Zipcar, which provides 5,000 cars to 200,000 drivers. Customers join Zipcar for $50 a month, then make reservations online and pick up a car in any number of garages, paying $9 an hour or $65 a day in New York, including insurance, gas, and 180 miles. One can get similar rates from traditional rental companies but with less flexibility and convenience. Zipcar says each of its cars replaces 15 privately owned vehicles and 40% of its members decide to give up owning a car. I know what you're thinking (and can hear the peals of laughter from Detroit): The last thing a car company should want is fewer cars. Are you nuts, Jarvis? Are you a communist or some tree-hugging fanatic? No. I'm just turning the industry upside-down.

When I asked adman Rishad Tobaccowala, chief innovation officer of the ad giant Publicis, which works in the auto industry, what business car companies are really in, he said it's not making cars. He channeled the Googley car company and said: "I'm in the business of moving people from place A to place B. How can I do it in different ways? And as they are moving from place A to place B, how do I make them feel secure and connected?" He said that aside from sleep, we spend more time moving around than at home. And what is the automobile really about? "Navigation and entertainment," he said. Not necessarily manufacturing. Manufacturing is expensive, vulnerable to commodity pricing, labor-intensive, and competitive. There's the tyranny of atoms vs. digits.

What if a car company became the leader in getting people around and it used others' hardware: planes, trains, and automobiles? I tell your system where I need to go and you give me choices at various price points: Today, I can take the train for less. Tomorrow, I can drive because I'm running errands. The day after, I'll carpool to save money. This weekend, I get a nice Mercedes to take my wife to dinner. Next week, I get a chauffeur-driven car to impress the clients. Along the way, I can pay for options: my entertainment synced in the car, wireless connectivity on the train, alerts to my iPhone, a navigation concierge who directs me around traffic jams. This is the new personal transportation company, a platform built on the old car company model. Hop aboard the Googlemobile.