Re: paper in preparation for Scientific American or Nature on EPR paradox;;;

Re: paper in preparation for Scientific American or Nature ;;; please await its publication;;;

cpPrayerSBMN2.2;;;... please ...;;; the paper >>> "(.e- and e+.) in Brahman" = "the electron and the positron which emerge from light, exist in Brahman ;and, not in Space-Time" <<< which was rejected by Nature is now in invitingINDIA;;;

"(.e- and e+.) in Brahman" = "the electron and the positron which emerge from light, exist in Brahman ;and, not in Space-Time"

Abstract and body of paper Combined:::-:::

The behavior of electron and positron upon their creation from light is paradoxical ;but, i feel rational understanding of this is possible through a comprehension of the four Mahavakyas which go back to the time of the Vedas;;; ... please ... ;;;

Vedas

The Vedas (/ˈveɪdəz ˈviː-/;[1] Sanskrit: वेद veda, "knowledge") are a large body of knowledge texts originating in the ancient Indian subcontinent.

One of the several meanings of the word "knowledge" given in the Concise Oxford Dictionary is, i remember, ... please ... "understanding";;; The intent of these Mahavakyas, is really that understanding alone, knowledge being really accessible through meditation only and not through mere verbalization {.dic_ verbalization n verbalize v i 3 to use many words; be verbose.}. The four Mahavakyas (Rem: 'Mahavakyas' may be translated as 'noteworthy statements' ;or, 'great statements') (Reference: 1) are:::

Prajnanam Brahma (प्रज्ञानम् ब्रह्म)
"Consciousness is Brahman"
Aham Brahma Asmi (अहम् ब्रह्म अस्मि)
"I <> am Brahman"
Tat Tvam Asi (तत् त्वम् असि)
"That thou art "
Ayam Atma Brahma (अयम् आत्मा ब्रह्म)
"This Self is Brahman"

i think of Brahman as all there is without a trace of egoism. Crucial thing to point out is that knowledge is not in time ::: knowledge, which is understanding, is beyond both Space and Time in Consciousness, that is, in Brahman. {{{Please see and compare here the following response >>>
Re: consciousness vs "consciousness in time";;;
authored by krp under main article >>>
Vedanta's timeless guidance for today's living
(Rem: please note this main article is submitted by krp ;but, the author is Prasad Vepa.)
in the website invitingindia.com.}}} (Reference: 2) Knowledge is in Brahman not in the libraries of the world or in scientists' heads. The uncertainty-principle of Heisenberg
refers to the knowledge in the libraries of the world or in scientists' heads. To bring out the important difference between the two clearly distinct meanings of 'knowledge' i spell-out in full the word ‘knowledge’ to which the uncertainty-principle of Heisenberg applies in capitalized letters as KNOWLEDGE (Ke-eN-Oh-doubleU-eL-Ee-De-Ge-eE) to convey that this 'knowledge' is that which is deliberately put together rather than
directly perceived. By virtue of the fact that atma = Brahman (all the Mahavakyas in fact ::: numbers 2 and 4 in particular), direct understanding of the state of electron is possible without shining light on the electron. Only, we may not be enlightened enough to know the place or state of the electron amidst the laboratory paraphernalia {dic_ paraphernalia n personal belongings or bits of equipment; amidst prep in the midst of or surrounded by}.

Though i am not certain, it seems to me that Physics to-day sees Space-Time as the substratum of reality ;but, if we refer to the four Mahavakyas we can recognize that from ancient times Sages {dic_ sage 2 a very wise man} of India declared Brahman to be the substratum {dic_ sub.sta.tum see below (dic for Dictionary)} of all reality ;and, it
is clearly high time physicists sat-up to grasp it. >>Brahman is not within Space-Time ::: Space-Time is within Brahman<<. The insight of the four Mahavakyas is that Brahman is both deeper and beyond Space-Time ;and, not within Space-Time ;but, encompasses all life.

Historically in India, religious insights have never been at logger-heads {{.dic_ at logger-heads, engaged in dispute; quarrelling} {dic_ quarrel n an angry dispute or altercation; a disagreement marked by a temporary or permanent break in friendly relations}} with scientific insights as has been the case in the West
with Galileo. Perception that Brahman is the substratum {dic_ sub.stra.tum n that which is spread or laid under something else; a stratum or layer lying under another; something that underlies or serves as a basis or foundation} of all Reality is one such insight. The four Mahavakyas delineate {dic_ delineate v tr portray by drawing etc. or in words} the concept of Brahman.

The 1935 paper by Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (Reference: 3) questioning the completeness of the formalism of Quantum Mechanics highlights an epistemological problem. The problem, briefly, is described in what Einstein calls a thought-experiment ::: what i am writing below is from "The Einstein Podolsky Rosen "(EPR) Paradox - A simple explanation" (Reference: 4).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x9AgZASQ4k

Think of birth of an electron and positron -pair from radiation. Imagine one of them say e- stays put but the other, e+ is carried far away to the other end of the globe. The spin of e- is determined, say it is up. We know that the spin of the far away e+ is down {Rem: this it seems is experimentally verified : original reference will be gratefully acknowledged : i learn that this is experimentally verified through the video (.Reference: 4)} . Now, if an attempt is made to measure the spin of the positron e+ in some different direction as the e- ,which stays put, we would be in a position to know the spin of the positron in both the directions, which violates Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.
So, the problem is to explain how e+ "knows" what is happening to e- ::: my hunch on resolution of this problem is to recognize that (.e- ::: e+.) -pair creation happens in Brahman which, as i mentioned already, is defined by the
four Mahavakyas, and may be thought of as all there is without a trace of egoism ;and, not in Space-Time ;but, that Brahman is 'Consciousness' ;or, as i think of it, Knowledge-Absolute which is more like Understanding and not all the knowledge in the libraries of the world or in scientists' heads. Brahman is deeper than Space-Time, which scientists somehow, i feel, mistakenly think of as the container of all reality ::: instead, Brahman is the container of all that is real including Space-Time;;; - ;;; - ;;; Brahman figures prominently in Fritjof Capra's ".The Tao of Physics." (.Reference: 8.);;;

Physics sets out to comprehend reality conceiving of matter as contained in Space-Time subject to fundamental interactions (.Reference: 8.) ::: however, it seems to me the resulting picture leaves a glaring empty hole in the process. Q: what is the place Science (.Physics.) gives to the investigating Soul? Is such a Soul unnecessary? ;and,

again, what is the place Science (.Physics.) gives to substance or Object of its investigations, notwithstanding {{.dic_ notwithstanding prep 1 in spite of.}} the accuracy or the lack of accuracy of the results of its investigations? Is such an Object unnecessary? It seems to me, both the Object and the Soul are necessary. i can do no better than quote Gauthama Buddha … to arrive at this ::: the Object of investigations is Brahman ;and, the investigating Soul is atma ;and, Brahman and atma are both revealed in endless variety to the receptive among us through {dic_ through prep 9 by means or agency of} the four Mahavakyas, which, in essence, declare the identity of Brahman and atma. This is possibly shocking to the scientists --- they are in truth investigating themselves, however farfetched it may seem to be to them.
i quote the Buddha from "The Buddha and Buddhism", Encyclopedia Britannica copy right 1985, 15th Edition ( or, perhaps later ), The University of Chicago.
quote

There is an unborn, an unoriginated, an unmade, and an uncompounded; were there not, there would be no escape from the world of the born, the originated, the made, and the compounded.

unquote;
What the Buddha is referring to without naming is indeed Brahman and atma of the four Mahavakyas. Upon Nirvana one lives in the continuous vision of the atma and the Brahman. To complete the perspective of Physics we may state an important insight
that goes something like this --- hierarchy of concepts … please … Matter, Space-Time, and Brahman … please … Brahman and Atman (atma) are beyond the
categories {{.dic_ category n a class of things with shared characteristics.} {.dic_ cat.e.go.ry n a classifactory division in a system.}} of physical dimensions ::: they are of the nature of existence itself. That is important ::: it is through atma and Brahman that Space-Time and Matter acquire their reality. To elaborate let it be said it is through atma and Brahman that Matter and Space-Time come into being<.=come into existence=.> … please … ;;;

a passage including an idea to be partially set aside begin

>.Brahman is not within Space-Time ::: Space-Time is within Brahman.<;;; So, i wonder if quote-unquote sentient-proof {.dic_ sentient adj having the power of perception by the senses.} of Brahman is possible ::: i hope however, some quote-unquote inferential-proof may, hopefully, be, by the grace of God, granted to us. i desperately and
sincerely pray that such may please be our lot. i am passionately working on the possibility of proving the existence of God using the methodology of Science, because the whole world goes by Science ;and, if Science takes them to God it is only to be passionately loved and desired.

a passage including an idea to be partially set aside end;;;

This was written before i became aware of Alain Aspect’s work. Alain Aspect proves, in my reading, the existence of Brahman experimentally. Needless to say, Brahman is God. The traditional view of Hindu Vedanta (Hindu Philosophy) is that not only is Brahman inaccessible to senses of the humans but also to inferential processes of the human intellect (.Reference:11.) ;but, Prof Alain Aspect proves, by way of inference, in my reading, the existence of Brahman experimentally. Prof Aspect uses polarization of light instead of (.e- and e+.) pair. The inferential processes in context, i feel, are of temporal human experiences in which case it is understandable because Brahman is not within Space-Time ;but, i feel the unqualified claim that Brahman is inaccessible to inferential processes is certainly questionable ;because, Prof Alain Aspects work, if my reading is accepted, proves the existence of Brahman.

IMPORTANT --- “.local realist worldview.” of Einstein is not to be rejected as Alain Aspect declared ;but, it is to be recognized as Einstein’s single handed discovery of “atma”(Atman), with this important clarification that quote-unquote local is to be taken to be “essentially local ” ;and, interpreted to be beyond Space-Time as “atma” (Atman) of the Vedas.
Einstein is a great sage {.!.};;; Einstein is said to have wondered as a boy, in his own
words, what would happen if he travelled with light ;and, answered everything would be the same. In my reading, it meant, the en-lightened would be in the presence of Brahman, which is existence itself. Q: does ‘atma’ have mass? i don’t think it has :::
IT is not matter.

Alice and Bob can both be understood to be beyond Space-Time in Brahman which is existence alone, their corporeal aspects not being relevant though those aspects are also certainly in Brahman according to the four Mahavakyas;;; … please … ;;;
Pair of photons considered in Prof Alain Aspect’s experiment are both clearly in Brahman beyond Space-Time and their polarization is under consideration by Prof Aspect while in the original EPR thought-experiment emergence of electron positron pair from light is considered ::: “the spirit is the same” Prof Aspect, quote The strong correlation between particles which are created together is not a big surprise. Measurement of polarization on one photon seems to influence instantaneously at a distance the state of the other photon unquote;;; in contrast it occurs to me to say, the reality is that the two photons are in Brahman and Brahman alone beyond Space-Time in the realm of pure existence ;and, so there need be no faster than light transmission of information between them ;and, they are in essence in touch, figuratively, with one another in Brahman beyond Space-Time. Aspect’s inference of faster than light communication between two points at a distance may be set aside ;but, interpreted as proving the existence of Brahman. Brahman Itself, pardon me for being repetitive, is beyond Space-Time. IMPORTANT. “local realist world view” of Einstein needs to be interpreted as being beyond Space-Time in atma (.Atman.) Itself.

What Einstein called “spooky action at a distance” referring to the communication between electron and positron, is actually Brahman which is beyond Space-Time;;; … please … ;;;

‘atma’ is not contiguous {.dic_ contiguous adj very near or touching.} ;and, Brahman is not continuous --- as it stands in the presence of paraphernalia {dic_ paraphernalia n personal belongings or bits of equipment} ;but, both Brahman and atma are beyond Space-Time and ever present everywhere. The connection between spacially separate events beyond the reach of light-signals discussed by Prof Aspect’s indicates the presence of Brahman;;;

[ ] i pray all thoughts come to their end in my heart ::: … please … ::: so i live in love.

“Quantum Entanglement” owes its existence to Brahman. The electron, the positron, are both in Brahman ;and, so are in touch with one another. Information is within Brahman, which is beyond Space-Time ;and, so there is no surprise the information is available to both electron and positron which are both in Brahman beyond Space-Time ;and, no faster than light transmission of information is in evidence here.

refer to “EPR – simple explanation”::: The Einstein Podolsky Rosen (EPR) Paradox - A simple explanation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x9AgZASQ4k;;;

Brahman is Knowledge-Absolute ;and, no coded … “.no awful lot of coded.” … information within electron and positron is in evidence here, either. Brahman is all knowledge ;and, IT (.Brahman.) is beyond Space-Time.
In our EPR-paradox, Alice and Bob are to be recognized as being in Brahman beyond Space-Time in immediate touch with one another ::: when something is beyond Space-Time, the trappings of Physical dimensions don’t apply to it. The e- and e+ .. or .. the
pair of photons with distinct polarizations are in Brahman ;and, hence they are, by virtue of being in the realm {.dic_ realm n a field of activity or interest.} of pure existence, beyond Space-Time in immediate communication with one another ;and, so there is no Paradox.

What exists exists in Brahman. The approach to Brahman is through the hierarchy of Matter, Space-Time and Brahman. Consideration of Matter is with Mass coupled with
Dimensions in length breadth and depth. Consideration of Space-Time is with Dimensions in length breadth and depth. Brahman is beyond Matter and Space-Time
in purely the realm {.dic_ realm n a field of activity or interest.} of existence, pure existence, alone. Fortunately for scientists, by the grace of Mother Kali, the photon is in the realm of pure existence ::: also, the electron and the positron live in the realm of existence coupled with Mass as Matter. The rest mass of photon, i recall, is zero ::: that is why it is in the easily recognizable the realm of pure existence;;; however, needless to reiterate, all Matter coupled with Space-Time and Space-Time itself are truly in Brahman;;;

We think we exist in Space-Time ;but, in truth we exist in Brahman;;; Alice and Bob also are in Brahman;;; recall the hierarchy Matter and Space-Time and Brahman;;; Space-Time {.as well as Matter.} is appearance ::: that things exist in Brahman is the true order.

QM says the world to be (in future) is in superposition {of probabilistic states} ::: not what the world is (now) !!! Q: does that not resolve Schrodinger’s Cat- paradox?[] ::: the cat is not simultaneously alive and dead but ONLY expected to be either dead or alive --- simple !!! That probabilities are relevant for predictions (.of future.) with statistical expectations is no surprise. “The future is not for us to say” --- Julie Andrews, Sound of Music. QM is necessary to know what the world is expected to be not what the world is. what the world is, is directly known to anyone who cares to observe, by virtue of being alive, without the slightest doubt ::: --- ;and, it is a blessing directly from Mother Kali or God Almighty that THAT ((.which we want to know.)) is known without the slightest doubt <<<.Socratic questions don't preclude {.dic_ preclude v t 1 to prevent the presence, existence, or occurrence of; make impossible.} the certainty of the knowledge Socrates aims at. This is also what Adi Sankaracharya asserts winning (.unfortunately for India.) debates against Buddhist scholars ::: the correctness of your knowledge about the world may be in doubt but not of your Self Itself (atma is beyond doubt)(.Mandukya Upanishad also asserts the same.).>>>. That {.statistical-.} expectations of the future are probabilistic is no surprise. NOT what is is in superposition of QM ;BUT, what may, in future, be is in superposition;;; i feel this obsession with prediction is the fundamental point of departure of QM from the Classical Mechanics not size --- small and big --- as my friend, Jacob, pointed out, QM is used to study black-holes as well !!! This is in keeping with the circumstance that science concerns itself with predictions, i feel. If you don't want to predict anything you won't be in doubt at all ::: but if you intend to predict, then inevitably, you will find yourself to be in doubt. You cannot help being in doubt if you wish to open the box and see if the cat is alive or dead ;but, if you only wish to assert that "the cat is either dead or alive", you will be no doubt of being right.
They say Classical Mechanics is not probabilistic but QM is ;but, i say, Classical Mechanics is directly perceived ;and, QM is indirectly perceived using the very components of which it is composed <.Heisenberg's uncertainty: electron cannot be observed without changing its momentum --- Beiser's Modern Physics p113 --- i question it!!! if only you were enlightened enough you would know all about the state of electron without shining any light on it.> ::: no wonder there is uncertainty when you probe ;but, if you were to know the electron directly by the atma (.assuming you were enlightened enough.), there would be no uncertainty. The scientists dug too deep into Mother Kali without appeasing {.dic_ appease v pacify by yielding to his or her demands.} Her ;and, got themselves into trouble;;;
<...> "The Einstein Podolsky Rosen (EPR) Paradox - A simple explanation" ...
link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x9AgZASQ4k ;;;
a few references ---
>>> Schrödinger's cat: A thought experiment in quantum mechanics - Chad Orzel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjaAxUO6-Uw
>>> Quantum Entanglement and the EPR Paradox
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzmp7byh77E
>>> also, see the below reference for a discussion on Einstein's Local realism which i feel is Einstein's single handed discovery of 'atma', though Alain Aspect pronounces, i feel uncomprehendingly, as something to be rejected. In my judgment Einstein's Local realism is his discovery of 'atma' with an important clarification that it needs to be considered to be beyond Space-Time;;; … please … ;;;
2017 Andrew Carnegie Lecture: Professor Alain Aspect
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qh6IHVs6MI
>>> also add two more references one invitingindia.com article
Re: atma --- ‘.self referential | recursive.’ Thought
and two
Mandukya Upanishad “.He goes with his self to the supreme Self who knows ‘this’, who (referring to ‘this’) knows this.”;;; a tantalizingly {.dic_ tantalize v tease with the sight or promise of something unobtainable.} beautiful recursion is in evidence here.
… please … ;;;
What exists exists in Brahman. from the point of view of Physics, the approach to Brahman is through the hierarchy of Matter, Space-Time and Brahman. Apart from the time-dimension, consideration of Matter is with Mass coupled with Dimensions in length breadth and depth ;and, consideration of Space-Time is with Dimensions in length breadth and depth. Brahman is beyond Matter and Space-Time in purely the realm {.dic_ realm n a field of activity or interest.} of existence, pure existence, alone beyond all measures of dimensions. Fortunately for scientists, by the grace of Mother Kali, the photon is in the realm of pure existence ::: also, the electron and the positron live in the realm of existence coupled with Mass as Matter. The rest mass of photon, i recall, is zero ::: that is why it is in the realm of pure existence. However, needless to reiterate, all Matter coupled with Space-Time and Space-Time itself are truly in Brahman;;; … please … ;;;

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
begin acknowledgement
i like to specially thank my long time friend Jacob Thomas of Brookfield, Connecticut for inspiring influence ::: i first thought of the title as well as the substance of the paper "(.e- and e+.) in Brahman" = "the electron and the positron which emerge from light, exist in Brahman ;and, not in Space-Time" in the context of my e-mail correspondence with him;;; Jacob's e-mail address is moolethara@gmail.com ;and, as Socrates said, truth is best unraveled {.dic unravel -eled, -el.ing 1 to separate or disentangle the threads of.} through a meeting of minds --- in fact, he (.Socrates.) left behind no written philosophy ::: all we know of Socrates' teachings comes to us from the student of Socrates, Plato;;; i make no comparison of me to great Socrates ::: far from it ;but, i needed somebody in my mind to address my thoughts to, to effectively draft my paper to send to Scientific American;;; Jacob played that role for me;;; i sincerely thank him;;;
end acknowledgement;;;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

References:

1. Mahāvākyas Wikipedia ;;; also see pp 7 and 8 of ".Pancikaranam of Sri Sankaracarya." published by Advaita Ashrama (.Publication Department.) 5 Delhi Entally Road Calcutta 700 014 India;;;
2. Re: consciousness vs "consciousness in time" under ...
... Vedanta's timeless guidance for today's living in the website invitingindia.com ;;;
3. Einstein Podolsky Rosen "Can Quantum Mechanical description of Physical reality be considered Complete?" Phy Rev 47, 777 - Published 15 May 1935 ;;;
4. The Einstein Podolsky Rosen (EPR) Paradox - A simple explanation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x9AgZASQ4k ;;;
5. "Re: Mahayana Buddhism ;" in the website invitingindia.com ;;; Q: is the Universe 4-Dimensional ;or, only 2-Dimensional ? is not 'meditation' 2-Dimensional ?[ ];;; (.not referred to in the body of the paper.)
6. i learnt recently through the news media the Vatican has absolved {.dic_ absolve v clear of guilt or blame.} Galileo Galilee {.Q:?[]Sp : Galileo Galilei?[] (1564 -1642).} of any offence ::: but, i haven't heard that representatives of Science-Community, either collectively or individually, reciprocated the gesture;;; the near-rift {.dic_ rift n 3. a break in friendly relations; 4. a difference in opinion, belief, or interest, that causes such a break.} between Science and Religion in the Western civilization, which happens to be
the domineering {.dic_ dom.i.neer.ing adj inclined to rule arbitrarily or despotically {.= adv ; des.pot.ic adj ; des.pot.ism n the exercise of absolute authority=.}.} civilization in the world to-day as Arnold Toynbee (.Reference: 7.) diagnoses {.dic_ di.ag.nose v.t. to classify or determine on the basis of scientific examination.}, is decidedly unhealthy ;;;
7. "A Study of History", i remember, a monumental several volume work by Arnold Toynbee, published abbreviated as, i remember, one volume work by Addison-Wesley ;;;-;;;
8. Fritjof Capra's ".The Tao of Physics." Flamingo An Imprint of Harper Collins Publishers Copyright 1991;;; Chapter 5 Hinduism and Chapter 15 The Cosmic Dance;;;
9. Pavan K Varma “.Adi Shankaracharya: Hinduism’s Greatest Thinker.” p163 , Copyright Pavan K Varma 2018;;; Tranquebar Rp699;;; reviewed in an article “.A lesson from the past.” by Shashi Tharoor published in The Hindu SUNDAY, June 3, 2018;;;
Rem: (.extract from Varma.) “.the crux of <.the EPR.> experiment is that once the two electrons were separated in space, they still retained a correlation … This interconnected nature of the world is in striking conformity with Sankara’s vision. His
assertion of Brahman as the sole cause and ground of the universe naturally eliminates divisibility.”;;;
10. 2017 Andrew Carnegie Lecture: Professor Alain Aspect
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qh6IHVs6MI
11. Swami Sarvapriyananda at IITK - "Who Am I?" according to Mandukya Upanishad-Part 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGKFTUuJppU
[ ] IT --- thuriya --- {.Rem: ‘.thuriya.’ (.literally.) the fourth, is another name@ for Brahman.} cannot be inferred {.!.} “.alakshanam.”(.a technical term.) {.!.} 44-45/1:27:06 --- the traditional view is to be set aside, in my judgment, by a rational interpretation of Aspect’s experimental investigations;;; however, by ‘inference’ the advaita-traditions {.”.alakshnam.”.} presumably refer to inference in time through experience, which i feel is correct because Brahman is not in time … please … ;;; >.Brahman is not within Space-Time ::: Space-Time is within Brahman.< ;;; v@Rem: (.Reference: 13.)
12. Swami Sarvapriyananda at IITK - "Who Am I?" according to Mandukya Upanishad-Part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0dugc4TrlE
13. Mandukya Upanishad ^@“.The forth condition is Atman.” p83 Juan Mascaro “.The Upanishads.”Penguin Books India 1994 ::: “.thuriya.” is the forth ::: Rem: atma and Brahman are known to be the same ;and, i quote Madukyopanishad respectfully again “.Brahman is all and Atman is Brahman. Atman, the Self has four conditions. The fourth condition is Atman.”Q: does it imply all of the first, the second, and the third conditions are also none other than atma, please?[];;; Q: does this situation differ from the theory of types propounded by Bertrand Russell? ? “.the barber (.a man.) of a village shaves every man who does not shave himself ::: Q: does the barber shave himself or not? either way implies a contradiction;;; the resolution of this paradox requires the recognition that the element of a set and the set are of different types and that a set cannot belong to the set-itself as an element;;; however, if the fourth condition is atma itself, Q: how can the forth condition contain the other three conditions as well as the fourth condition? does that not contradict the theory of types propounded by Bertrand Russell? REVIEW questions and answers of the talk at IITK by Sarvapriyananda part1 Q:does the philosophy of types of Bertrand Russell not apply to the philosophy of Physics?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.