Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 19

Some thoughts on the foundations for Non-Science

Dear All: Some of you might recall that I coined a new word "Non-Science" (not Nonsense) to describe the study of Cosmology Lessons from chapter 8 of the Bhagavad Gita. http://www.scribd.com/doc/89443432/Cosmology-Lessons-from-TheBhagavad-Gita http://www.scribd.com/doc/92191620/Did-the-Universe-Start-in-a-Big-BangHow-did-we-arrive-at-this-idea We can apply the principles of logic and mathematics and understand this "Non-Science". I will come to this shortly, believe me - just like the earlier description of the three types of everything that we find in chapter 18 of the Bhagavad Gita! This email has to do with what is called ENTROPY - one of the most soul stirring concepts in science because according to the laws of physics, or more specifically thermodynamics, ENTROPY is the ARROW OF TIME and can NEVER decrease. It is also described as a measure of the extent of chaos or randomness in a system. Clausius said, in 1865, in eloquent German, in a scientific publication, see http://physics.info/thermo-second/ Ueber verschiedene fr die Anwendung bequeme Formen der Hauptgleichungen der mechanischen Wrmetheorie. Rudolf Clausius. Annalen der Physik und Chemie. Vol. 125, No. 7 (1865): 353400.

Page 1 of 19

Rudolf Clausius Born 2 January 1822 Died 24 August 1888 (aged 66) Nationality German Fields Physics Known for Thermodynamics and originator of the concept of entropy Signature

1. " Die Energie der Welt ist konstant." The energy of the world is constant. The energy of the universe is constant. 2. " Die Entropie der Welt strebt einem Maximum zu." The entropy of the world strives to a maximum. The entropy of the universe is increasing. 3. And, he also said, using math symbols, S = Q/T Now, after what I have just completed, I truly believe that we can take this Non-Science thing further and talk about ENTROPY and WHY AND HOW it can be decreased --- contrary to Clausius famous assertions. I am referring to my recent foray into the analysis of financial data following the
Page 2 of 19

Facebook IPO fiasco. The same ideas about (x, y) data analysis also extend into other fields, like the medical sciences. The basic ideas are actually very simple. (I received an email from a classmate of mine from my MIT days stating that he had forwarded my emails to his son and is very intrigued by all this thing! Now, we are making some real progress ..... Cheers!) For example Mendel's laws of genetics (I studied Mendel's original data on the pea plant experiments a few years ago) can be rewritten as a linear law, which is a special case of Planck's equation. The data on fatality epidemics, such as those fatality data published daily by CDC during the 2003 SARS scare (bird flu epidemic started by an American-born Chinese who traveled into interior of China and ate some contaminated food, in 2003 http://www.sars-dtv.nl/SARS/2003_SARS_Epidemic.html ) can be explained using similar equations.

On March 12, 2003, WHO published a global alert for the emerging SARS-Coronavirus on its website. Subsequently, for four months, the novel infectious disease gripped the world, and in particular Asia, and had a severe impact on public life and economy.

The catchy idea that energy in physics is just like money in economics was something that I conceived back in 1998-2000 when I got interested in understanding the low productivity of American labor when I was employed at the GM R&D Center. This soon led me to look at financial data since this
Page 3 of 19

provided a greater opportunity to test the mathematical theory. I have now formally published a short article where I have described how to extend Planck's quantum physics equation to economics or even beyond, please see link given below. http://www.scribd.com/doc/95329905/Planck-s-Blackbody-Radiation-LawRederived-for-more-General-Case Ironically, the profits-revenue data that I was looking for was already available in a nice tabular form in a recent report on the performance of Ford Motor Company by an automotive consultant, based in the Cleveland area. However, this consultant (who has a MBA degree and other business background) did not bother to prepare a x-y graph. If he done that, he would have found the maximum point too and, perhaps, got very intrigued. Very, very intrigued, indeed. It is stunning to me to see a maximum point on the graph of profits versus revenues for Ford Motor Company - or any company for that matter. I surely hope everyone, who sees this graph, is equally stunned. We should all wonder how a company can continue to operate when profits keep on decreasing even as revenues increase! Just makes no sense at all. But, that is the truth. That is also the reason why huge companies like Ford and GM struggle. In the case of GM it actually went through a bankruptcy. President Obama was right in not letting GM disappear. (This is one of the few things he did that I fully support.) The impact that Ford and GM have on our local community here in Metro Detroit is something that we can all understand and relate to. Yet, nobody seems to care enough to understand the financial data that is being compiled meticulously, quarter after quarter, using sound scientific methods of data analysis which any science or engineering major will use instinctively, when confronted with a table of x and y values. I believe I have done my part in this. Now, it is up to the business world to take
Page 4 of 19

advantage of this finding. I sincerely hope to live to see the day when finance and business majors prepare x-y graphs and start determining the constants h, c, a, etc. that I have introduced, or talk about the (a, b, p) triplets where a, b and p are the numerical constants in the costs and revenue equations for a product. The total cost C to produce N units of a product equals the sum of the fixed cost a and the variable cost bN. Thus, C = a + bN. If p is the unit price, the Revenues generated from selling the N units is R = pN. Hence, we must know the (a, b, p) triplets for each product if we want to make progress in learning how to operate a business successfully, or learn about how the economy really works. It is clear that Profits = Revenues Costs = pN a bN = (p b)N a and rewriting this after eliminating N = R/p, we get P = R C = [ (p b)/b] R a, which implies a simple linear relation between profits P and revenues R. The graph of profits versus revenues must be a straight line. It is so simple to deduce this fundamental law of business, or finance, or economics. But, alas, it has escaped attention to date, or so it seems. The well-known laws of supply and demand in economics are often depicted as simple straight lines. But, look at those lines again in any Economics text book. You will rarely see any hard numbers associated with them. We still do not know by exactly how much demand will go up or down if gasoline prices go up or down. It is all a lot arm waving. Physics does not work like that. If the problem had been assigned to a physicist, we would have hard numbers to back up everything. And, with hard numbers, we cannot lie. The whole game that is now being played will then be exposed! Hard numbers is different from arm waving numbers like we find here http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newSTR_69.htm Having said that, here's the Non-Science part. We all know what happens when we put water in a pot, place it on a stove, and turn on the "fire". The water starts heating up and its "temperature" rises. We can feel it by sticking our finger into the water. But this business of heat as a form of energy escaped scientists for a long time. Even
Page 5 of 19

Newton studied these topics and even developed a thermometer to measure temperature. Outside of gravity, he also formulated two basic laws of great significance. Newtons law of viscosity, a simple linear law, y = x, where is the viscosity and x and y are experimental variables. Newton's law of cooling, another linear law, Q = h(T T0), relating the amount of heat Q gained from, or lost to, to the surroundings due to the temperature difference (T T0) between a body and the surroundings, h is called the heat transfer coefficient. The law of cooling is still used in medical science and in forensic studies to predict the time of death after a body has been discovered -- after death occurs the body cools off following the law discovered by Newton -- but he did NOT apply it to forensics. But, there is another definition of temperature. This is what was used to develop quantum physics. Understanding of this leads us to Non-Science. I was thinking about this yesterday as I finished the above document. It turns out, interestingly, that there are three different ways in which heat can be added, from a scientific experiment standpoint. Interesting isn't it? Three ways to add heat. Einstein uses the entropy change for one of these three ways to describe why we should think of light as being made up of particles called photons. Please bear with me and you will see shortly where the Non-Science is. The three ways of adding heat are as follows. All of us actually studied this when we were in college, especially those with an advanced degree in any field, see discussion at the NASA website http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/k12/Numbers/Math/Mathematical_Thinking/ideal_gases_under_constant.htm ).

We can add heat by holding the "volume" constant. The mathematical expression is dQ = CvdT where dQ is the heat added and dT is the temperature rise (or fall, if cooling) and Cv is the specific heat of the body getting heated. It is called specific heat at constant volume.
Page 6 of 19

We can add heat holding the "pressure" constant. Now dQ = Cp dT and Cp is called specific heat at constant pressure. We can add heat in such a way that the temperature does not increase at all... yes, it can be done. This is called isothermal process. This happens if we allow the material (such as a gas) to expand and adjust both its pressure and volume as the heat is being added. Theoretically, this happens every time you turn on the engine in your car. This is what engineering students study. It yields the law called Boyle's law. This elegant law is one of the first science laws that we all learn. Even those who went on to get their MD or MBA degrees know this law. Actually, they may even be still using it. The law is written as PV = constant where "constant" comes from the fact that the "temperature" is constant. If the pressure P increases, the volume V decreases, and vice versa. This is true for what is known as an ideal gas.

Amazing isn't it? Three ways to add heat. Like three of everything that Krishna talks about in the Bhagavad Gita. I already mentioned that there are three Types of companies which follow the linear law y = hx + c and supported this with actual data for several companies. Now, we find that there are three ways to add heat. What happens when heat is added? There was a Professor named Rudolf Clausius who coined the term ENTROPY in 1865. He was studying this whole theory of what happens when heat is added, like we just discussed here. Then he introduced the term entropy one of the most "feared" terms in all of science. Clausius also said, let dS = dQ/T. If we add a small amount of heat dQ to any body, at temperature T, its entropy will change by a small amount dS given by this simple equation dS = dQ/T. Now, we can turn this around and write T = dQ/dS or 1/T = dS/dQ which means that reciprocal of temperature T is nothing more than the rate at
Page 7 of 19

which entropy will increase as heat is added. Or, alternatively, the temperature is the rate of increase of energy, in the form of heat, as the entropy increases. This is what Planck uses as his definition of temperature to derive his famous blackbody radiation law (confirmed elegantly with the experiments on relics of the Big Bang, the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation Spectrum which I had mentioned).

S = k ln W
Ludwig Boltzmann Born February 20, 1844 Died September 5, 1906 (aged 62) Suicide Signature The above equation for entropy S is engraved on his tombstone.

It is this idea of entropy and temperature that also allows us to extend Planck's quantum physics far beyond where it was first conceived - to economics, politics, social sciences and so on. Entropy of a system can be quantified by using purely statistical arguments, advanced fervently by Boltzmann, from the theory of permutations and combinations. (How many different ways can something be done? Like, how can I distribute $1 million among 10 people, or 10 million votes among 5 candidates, as in primary elections in the USA). This led Boltzmann to the equation S = k lnW
Page 8 of 19

relating entropy S to the number of ways W (also called the number of microstates of the system) of achieving a given macrostate i.e., a certain macroscopically measurable property of a system. This is the starting point of quantum physics. The constant k is called the Boltzmanns constant. This entropy equation is actually engraved on Boltzmanns tombstone.


The heat dQ is like a "stimulus" to a system. When we add heat the temperature rises and the entropy changes. The change in entropy or temperature is the "response". Hence, instead of energy and entropy we can use terms like stimulus and response and reinterpret the meaning of Planck's quantum physics equations. Now we enter into a whole new field of understanding. This is Non-Science, if we start applying it to how a thinking jantu, like a human being, responds to a stimulus.
Page 9 of 19

Let's go back to heat for a moment. In science, we write dQ = dU + dW. This is often understood as the law of conservation of energy. When a small amount of heat dQ is added, two things happen. Some of this heat dQ remains in the system and becomes what we call its "internal energy". This is called dU. The other thing that happens is that the system will interact with its surroundings - such as expand into the surroundings and push against it. This "pushing" into the boundaries of the surroundings is called "work". The system is doing work, and this is called dW. And of course, we have dS = dQ/T = (dU/T) + (dW/T). Planck decided to ignore dW to develop quantum physics and says all the heat added stays within the system. Hence, dQ = dU and dW = 0. Now, see how this applies to a jantu (any being). We are all affected by our surroundings. We receive stimulus through our indriyas (sensory organs). And, when we receive this stimulus, we "push" back against our surroundings. It is like "doing work" - or karma. This is the meaning of karma, really - doing something. Karma is not "fate". Not all of what we do is desirable. This is why we get into conflicts with each other and with society at large. Everything we have learned from our study of the Gita can be translated into this simple equation dQ = dU + dW and dS = dQ/T and the whole idea of entropy. So, what do you think Krishna is teaching us? Simple. ENTROPY can be decreased. ENTROPY is NOT the fearsome Arrow of Time that Clausius conceived in 1865. This is the difference between Non-Science and the Science that we all worship and adore since it shows us how to enjoy the material universe. Like I said with Energy = Money, I need not say anything more. Everything that needs to be said has now been said with this one email. Now time to imbibe some Gita teachings.
Page 10 of 19

l ll . ll

Anudvegakaram vaakyam satyam priya hitam ca yat l Swaadhyaa-yaabhyasanam caiva vaangmayam tapa ucyate ll 17.15 ll

l ll . ll

Manah prasaadah sowmyatavam maunam aatma vinigrahahaa l Bhaava samshuddir ityetat tapO manasam ucyate ll 17.16 ll BG Krishna says in these two verses, Speech should not agitate. It should be truthful. It should be pleasant. It should be well intentioned. This, along with self-study (of scriptures and other worthy texts) and the constant application of these efforts, are considered to be the austerities. These are called the austerities of speech (vaangmayam tapa). Verse 15, chapter 17. That which is pleasing to the mind. That which exudes humility. That which is embellished by vows of silence. That which is valued through the exercise of self-control. That which radiates a purity of self and feelings and emotions. All of this is considered to be performance of austerities the austerities of the mind (manasam tapa). Verse 16, chapter 17. Here are the tools for ENTROPY reduction, beautifully stated by Krishna, and the key to the reversal of that feared ARROW of Time that you find physicists philosophize about. Trust me, there are volumes and volumes of philosophical debates, spurred by the so-called Copenhagen school (founded by the Danish physicist Niels Bohr who got the Nobel Prize for applying quantum theory to the hydrogen atom which led to the explanation about the nature of spectral lines -- what we use to study redshift and the expansion of the universe). Many wild speculations arose from quantum physics and the probabilistic arguments that it leads us to. Einstein absolutely hated them. He famously said, "God does not play dice."
Page 11 of 19


Page 12 of 19

After he immigrated to the USA, being offered a position at the prestigious Princeton University, Einstein was kind of shunned by his younger colleagues in the Physics department, who were all quantum physics enthusiasts. Thus, Einstein spent all of his time thinking about Gravitational Field Equations of General Relativity and so the called Unified Field theory. And, some quantum physicists even used relativity to justify their own speculations. One of them was a young Heisenberg who enunciated the famous Uncertainty Principle. When he was young, Heisenberg, was very excited about the prospect of meeting Einstein, who was to attend the same conference where Heisenberg was also presenting a paper. Heisenberg prepared himself very well for this lecture so that he could impress Einstein, whom he had never met. As he had expected, Einstein invited Heisenberg to have tea with him and take a walk. The two were discussing philosophical issues arises from this uncertainty principle. At one point, Heisenberg used Einstein's paper on the theory of relativity to justify what he was doing. Heisenberg said, "You wrote about such things." Guess what Einstein said, "If I did, I was wrong." This is one of the few instances when Einstein said that to make a point. He was even willing to give up his own favorite theory of relativity to disagree with the probabilistic nonsense from quantum physics. (I have given a link and reproduced this below the signature line.) The birth of both quantum physics and relativity in the 20th century led to some of the most fertile and deepest (or wildest) philosophical speculations in the history of science - including things like the twin paradox (and the Kakudmi and Revati story that we discussed in our Cosmology lessons). I wish physicists had learned to philosophize about the Gita (some did, like Oppenheimer, father of the atomic bomb and the Smoots's Nobel lecture for his Cosmic Background Radiation studies) instead of getting carried

Page 13 of 19

away by the imperfect equations that they derive to understand prakriti using limited abilities to solve even the equations they formulate. This was also the source of Einstein's big frustrations that he felt later in life. He could not solve the general equations of relativity and even disagreed with the philosophical implications of some solutions proposed by others for certain simple cases of his general relativity equations. From dS = dQ/T and dQ = dU + dW with dW = 0 we can learn a lot about how to interact with our surroundings and actually reduce entropy rather than follow that arrow of time. Finally, let me add the following to the above. In chapter 7, verse 4, Krishna explains what prakriti (observable nature) is made up of. Let us remember also that we are all part of prakriti. Krishna says that there are eight components to prakriti. I will use the Sanskrit words: Bhoomi (Earth), Aaapa (water), Anala (Fire), Vayu (Air, or Wind), Kham (Sky or Ether), Manas (Mind), Buddhi (Intellect) and Ahankaram (Ego). Krishna also emphasizes that the eight are different from Him. The Sanskrit pronoun may used here should be interpreted as the fifth case (called ablative case in grammar). The same may is also used for the sixth case (possessive case) but this is NOT implied here. Misinterpretations can readily arise if one takes may as the possessive case. S l ll . ll BhoomiraapO-nalO vaayuh kham manO buddhireva ca l Ahamkaram iteeyam May bhinna prakritir ashTadhaa ll 7.4 ll BG Entropy increases and becomes the feared Arrow of Time only when the last three are NOT exercised. Unfortunately, physics (and chemistry, or study of material nature) deals only with the first five in this list. Manas, buddhi, and ahamkaram are all outside the purview of physics.

Page 14 of 19

So, Clausius can be forgiven for his exuberant Die Entropie der Welt strebt einem Maximum zu. The der welt that Clausius is talking about is outside, not inside. We have to look inside, if we want to reduce entropy and reduce the work done, or the interaction, with the boundaries of the surroundings. Very sincerely V. Laxmanan May 31, 2012 Heisenberg's encounter with Einstein. There is also a book by this title, W. Heisenberg, Encounters with Einstein Princeton U.P. (1989), p. 120.

Einstein was trying to make the point that we learn from "theory" (such as his own theory of relativity) biases us and dictates what we choose to observe. When Heisenberg (who was much younger) tried to advance counterarguments by citing how his own theory of relativity was created, Einstein said, Then relativity must be wrong! http://www-personal.umich.edu/~sanders/214/other/news/Holton.html http://www.imamu.edu.sa/Scientific_selections/abstracts/Physics/Werner% 20Heisenberg%20and%20Albert%20Einstein.pdf In the discussion with Einstein, Heisenberg once more tried to draw attention to his having dealt not with unobservable electron orbits inside atoms, but rather with observable radiation. He said to Einstein: "Since it is acceptable to allow into a theory only directly observable magnitudes, I thought it more natural to restrict myself to these, bringing them in, as it were, as representatives of electron orbits." Einstein responded, "But you don't seriously believe that only observable magnitudes must go into a physical theory?" Heisenberg goes on, "In
Page 15 of 19

astonishment, I said, 'I thought that it was exactly you who had made this thought the foundation of your relativity theory. . . .' Einstein replied, 'Perhaps I used this sort of philosophy; but it is nevertheless nonsense.' " And then came Einstein's famous sentence: "Only the theory decides what one can observe." 5 All this must have come to Heisenberg as a scathing attack on what he regarded as his fundamental orientation, derived from reading Einstein's early works, and being guided by them from the start, right through his most recent triumph. Yet another way of interpreting this exchange is that Einstein firmly believed that the foundations of the theory of relativity were based in pure intellectual speculations rather than any experimental observations. This is paradoxical since Einstein refers to Faradays well known experiments on electromagnetic induction to explain why relative motion is all that matters, in the very first paragraph of his famous 1905 paper on special relativity. This is reproduced below from the English translations of this paper. http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/On_the_Electrodynamics_of_Moving_Bodies http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/ It is known that Maxwell's electrodynamicsas usually understood at the present timewhen applied to moving bodies, leads to asymmetries which do not appear to be inherent in the phenomena. Take, for example, the reciprocal electrodynamic action of a magnet and a conductor. The observable phenomenon here depends only on the relative motion of the conductor and the magnet, whereas the customary view draws a sharp distinction between the two cases in which either the one or the other of these bodies is in motion. For if the magnet is in motion and the conductor at rest, there arises in the neighbourhood of the magnet an electric field with a certain definite energy, producing a current at the places where parts of the conductor are situated. But if the magnet is stationary and the conductor in motion, no electric field arises in the neighbourhood of the magnet. In the conductor, however, we find an electromotive force, to which in itself there is no corresponding energy, but which gives riseassuming equality of
Page 16 of 19

relative motion in the two cases discussedto electric currents of the same path and intensity as those produced by the electric forces in the former case.

In view of the above remarks from his 1905 paper, the fact that Heisenberg was stunned by Einsteins refusal to accept observable phenomenon as the essential basis for a theory is quite understandable. But, in 1924, Einstein told Heisenberg, Then, if I said so, I must be wrong and it is all nonsense.

Back to Gita from Quantum Physics and Facebook

Dear All: By now you have probably learned everything you ever wanted to know about Facebook financials or even about how to apply mathematical equations (like physics and engineering majors, somewhere along the way we lost those brilliant minds who decided to go to medical school, they are now too much into what I call "brute force" statistics). Anyway, I was really intrigued by what I wrote earlier about three types of companies. Why three? We talk about trikalam - the past, the present, and the future. Krishna talks repeatedly about three types of EVERYTHING in chapter 18. Why is everything of three types? In verse 19 of chapter 18, Krishna mentions that this is due to the three gunas - gunabhedatah. There are three types of gunas satva, rajas, and tamas. And, hence, everything is differentiated three ways. Even in the physical world we see this "three" of everything. When we were in high school, we learned about three types of particles that make up the atom: proton and neutrons inside the nucleus of the atom and the electrons orbiting around it...... three types of particles make up the atom. Later, when physicists discovered literally a whole zoo of subatomic particles, a young physicist from MIT, named Gell-Mann, conceived what is now called
Page 17 of 19

the quark theory. With just a few "quarks" Gell-Mann, with the properties he assigned to each quark, Gell-Mann showed that he can reconstruct the whole zoo of particles that physicists were discovering. Again Gell-Mann needed "three" quarks to explain how the proton and neutron are constructed. We need three quarks to make up a proton with a positive charge of +1 (two with a charge of +2/3 and one with a charge of -1/3) and we also need three other quarks to make up a neutron with a charge of 0 (zero, one with a charge of +2/3 and two with a charge of -1/3). Or, just look at the charge on quarks... it is expressed as 2/3 and 1/3 again a division by three! So, now I find three types of companies based on mathematical laws. I am really intrigued the more I think about this "threesome" of everything. I am even more intrigued about my "insistence" of finding a connection to all the equations (that I propose to explain the behavior of companies) and quantum physics. After all, a mathematical equation is just a mathematical equation. Why insist on linking everything to quantum physics? This, I am certain, will be the reaction of all finance and business and economics majors if and when they read what I have published now - thanks to the Internet age. Why? It is just like other things in life. Deluded by our own egos, we often do not recognize the higher purpose. That is what Krishna is constantly emphasizing in the Gita. In fact, in chapter 16, Krishna says that those with demoniac traits are so wrapped up in their sense of self importance that they start thinking that they are responsible for everything. It is they who have accomplished. It is they who have conquered. It is they who have killed. It is they who have acquired wealth. It is they who are enjoying. It is they who are knowledgeable. It is they who are strong. It is they who are happy. There is no end to "it is they". Krishna starts these verses out by saying "Aaashaa paashaa shataih baddaah Tied inextricably by the noose of a hundreds of desires" they cannot see what is wrong with their actions and even refuse to worship Him properly. In chapter 18, verse 32, Krishna takes this description to an even higher level. Adharamam dharmam iti .. these folks are so deeply enveloped by their tasmasic trait that to them adharmam becomes dharmam and they would swear by it and insist on it. Such is the nature of the tamasic buddhi.

Page 18 of 19

The satvic buddhi on the other hand tries to find the Supreme connection in all matters (chapter 18, verse 30). In everything that needs to be done (kaarya) or should not be done (akaarya), in everything that is a matter to fear (bhaya) or not to be feared (abhaya), in everything that is in accord with Supreme laws (prakriti) and that which must be rejected as opposed (nivrutti) - in all of these deliberations - the saatvic buddhi tries to wonder about the deeper implications. Will this lead me to moksha or will this bind me (bandham)? If it is the path to moksha (or so at least the buddhi trains to think) then it is to be done. If it will lead to bandhanam that it is to be avoided. And so it is with quantum physics, when one is thinking at the level of science. If we can relate every mathematical law to that law which also describes all types of radiation and the behavior of light, to that law that also describes the radiation that is the residual effect of the Big Bang (as I have mentioned in the most recent document), then something Supreme has been accomplished. The heart is then filled with joy --- like that poem about the daffodils I quoted recently. Or, like the rishis of NaimisharaNya say, "Yena aatmaa praseedati" ..... tell us O Sootaa that which will bring joy to the aatmaa! Sarvam idam Krishnaarpanam astu. KrishNO rakshati nO Jagat-traya guruh. KrishNaaya Tubhyam namah. Hey KrishNa rakshasva maam. Very sincerely V. Laxmanan May 24, 2012 P. S. Here is the link to this document about three types of companies. http://www.scribd.com/doc/94647467/Three-Types-of-Companies-FromQuantum-Physics-to-Economics

Page 19 of 19

Похожие интересы