The origin of the universe has been the gist of scientific exploration since the man procured the competence of perceptivity. Now the argument has taken a new dimension with the advancement of fundamental science in the west culminating in search of Higgs Boson the “God Particle” speculated to be the mass carrying particle at the helm of gravity and universe. The European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), the underground Large Hadron Collider (LHC) built bordering France and Switzerland is the premier analysis centre having the warrant on this industrious task empowered by a block of capitalizing European states. In the midst of these concomitant circumstances of scientific contest converged on realization of Professor Higgs billion dollar speculation supposed to be logically consistent where mathematics is concerned, an unforeseen surfacing of a leaked document of the CERN’s digital archives proclaiming the innovation of Higgs boson took the world’s scientific community by an unexpected encounter. The presumption of the document was so strong and also science being an organized thought of the west, the authenticity of this documentary proclamation was not called into question to date even though there was no official communique issued by the bureaucracy of CERN with reference to this whole episode. 

Now I would like to harness the readers’ thoughts to the prehistory of this argument. According to historic theories, the search for the origin of the universe goes back to dualism, theism, idealism, materialism, pantheism and agnosticism. Though the expositions of these notions are mainly philosophic, the concepts of some of these may serve to the worthy aspects of unseen realities of the universe in a systematic way. The historic thought of the origin of the universe can be reviewed under a pantheon of philosophers from Greek via the Middle ages and the transition to the modern age. Though these reflections are documented in the beginning of modern science they have contributed scores of enlightenment to the culmination of present day scientific thought. The recitals in depth of these scholarships are not the critical theses to be debated in this research paper. 

Before going into the first part of the contention i.e. the Quantum Dynamical Evolution Theory of Sanathdeva Murutenge abbreviated QDE Theory and the Origin of Universe, I would like to focus the reader’s attention to the modern day’s theories of the origin of the universe. 

According to contemporary scientific knowledge of the theme in the reasoning process of this paper, the hypothetical notion is viewed in three contrastive projections viz. mainstream scientific theories, mainstream religious theories and non-mainstream theories. The mainstream scientific theories are based on a conjecture called a “big bang” and come under a discipline proclaimed as speculative physics. The mainstream religious theories are all inclusive in the compendia of Christianity, Judaism, Catholicism and Islamism. The Buddhist doctrine being neither a religion nor a philosophy is not in this category of thought by me in this research paper. Apart from the aforesaid doctrinal systematization of the world that throws light on the contention of origin of universe, Vedanta is another eastern systematization of Indian origin that exposes a supposition on metaphysical basis. Again I must emphasize on the fact that an extensive narrative prose of these treatises is beyond the critical substance of this research paper. Therefore I may like to focus your attention to the works of people who contributed to the mainstream scientific theories having the fundamental root to the “big bang” conjecture whereupon it will be a straightforward quest for me to do constructive criticism in comparison of QDE Theory. 

The conjectural introspection of “big bang” was first suggested by Georges Lemaitre, a Belgian priest cum cosmologist and physicist at the Catholic University of Louvain who believed that the universe evolved from an inflammable momentary energy unit which is known as primeval atom and began to inflate to the existent state of today by continuous progressive cooling. The term “big bang” was coined by a British mathematician of Cambridge University called Fred Hoyle. Therefore the big bang theory well substantiates the expanding state of universe wherein the observatory scientific affirmations of the west are also in support of its catholic accuracy. It is an acknowledged fact that the year 1927 expanding theory of Lemaitre is based on Alexander Friedmann’s spatial geometry which was made use of to resolve Albert Einstein’s relativity equations in support of the cosmological constant put forward by Einstein in 1917. In 1922 Friedmann, a Russian cosmologist by way of his Spatial mathematics was able to convince the world that the universe is in a constant state of expansion. However when Einstein reserved his cosmological constant to a steady state universe, both of them retracted from their earlier frame of reference. This in turn led Einstein himself to withdraw his preposition to a new dimension called “critical density of the cosmos”. This change of preposition he did in year 1932 along with Willem Sitter, a Dutch mathematician, physicist and cosmologist wherein both co authored a treatise in which they proposed, the universe is mainly composed of matter that do not emit light, later to be known as “dark matter” along with made provision for the universe to be spatially flat though padding out infinitely. In year 1929 Edwin Powell Hubble an American astronomer introduced the Galactic Red Shift Phenomenon by observing the displacement of the spectrum to longer wavelengths in the light coming from distant galaxies in recession and was the first scientific confirmation to defend expanding state of the universe. In year 1948 a Russian theoretical physicist and cosmologist by the name George Gamow along with his pupil Ralph Asher Alpher count up the big bang notion of origin of universe by publishing a paper on “origin of chemical elements” explicating the presence of quantitative levels of Hydrogen and Helium in the cosmic space within the dynamic stage of big bang evolution. The major drawback of the paper was the unaccountability of leaden elements whereof the interpretation was done by Fred Hoyle at some point in the future. The understanding of the existence of cosmic leaden elements by Fred Hoyle was made to public in the decades of 70s and 80s based on Panspermia Theory he postulated along with Sri Lankan born applied mathematician by the name Chandra Wickramasinghe. According to this theory the life originated from stellar grains of organic nature could be of inter galaxies or within a galaxy and the possible transport mechanism may be of radiation pressure and litho-panspermia. However the exact mechanism of this theory is obscured and unproven to date. Anyway the scientific confirmation of panspermia theory in support of its litho-panspermia mode of operation came to scholastic interest in year 2001 when two Italian born scientists of University of Naples viz. Giuseppe Geroaci a molecular biologist and Bruno D’ Argenio a geologist jointly uncovered bacteria in a meteorite proved to be over 4.5 billion years old. Now let me take you back to the Alpher-Bethe-Gamow paper of Ralph Asher Alpher he did under the supervision of George Gamow wherein a physicist called Hans Bethe’s name was comprised by Gamow to make it a capricious notion though Bethe was not involved in it. The paper of Neutron Capture titled Big Bang Nucleosynthesis Theory of Alpher was submitted to John Hopkins University in 1948 while he was engaged in a Ballistic missile development project as a research dissertation and subsequently earned him a PhD degree. The outstanding drawback of the paper was that it did not shed light on the strength of the existing residual cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB Radiation). However Alpher with Robert Herman forecasted that the subsequent glimmer of the big bang phenomenon would have settled to a uniformity of five degrees of radiation over a billion years above absolute zero. In 1964 two American physicists by the names  Arno Allan Penzias and Robert Woodrow Wilson by chance stumbleupon a result of cosmic microwave background radiation as 2.7 degrees above absolute zero and were awarded the 1978 Nobel Physics Prize. In the year following the breakthrough of DNA configuration by Francis Crick, a British biophysicist and James D Watson, an American molecular biologist in 1953, Gamow was actively associated with a circle of scientists who called themselves as RNA Tie Club dedicated in unfolding the dilemma of Genetic Code. This puzzling matter in question was reviewed by me based on QDE Theory as a paradigm shift in a dissertation published in year 2006 – (See – Murutenge Sanathdeva, P.M., Scientific Basis of the Systematic Philosophy of Buddhism, First Edition 2006, Author Publication, Dehiwala, Sri Lanka, pp. 460-465). Now after going back to the principle notion of this research paper, I am reluctantly compelled to say that with all the involvement of great scientific thought of the century, the standard cosmology of big bang theory has survived to date with many questions remaining unanswered viz. dilemmas of flatness, density fluctuation, horizon, dark matter, magnetic monopole, thermal state, cosmological constant, singularity and time scale of the universe. 

Now with the aforementioned backup scholarship in hand let us see how the QDE Theory of Sanathdeva Murutenge is going to fathom on set down enigmas of universe on a constructive decisive analytical basis and at the same time exposing the mechanism of emergence of animated and large scale celestial bodies therein. First of all I would like to weigh up the two dilemmas that go hand in hand in making the physical universe that we see today. 

The question of flatness of the universe has a close link to the critical density conjecture of Albert Einstein who manipulated the term in order to evade from the difficult situation he confronted with his earlier notion of cosmological constant of general relativity hypothesis. The cosmological constant theory he introduced in year 1917 owing to the fact that he was not convinced about what the year 1915 general relativity theory is spelling out to him as a consequence of its two-way commitment to both either expanding or contracting universe depending on the force of gravitational acceleration and the force of inertia. The degree of compactness of the universe determines the geometrical contour of its frontiers. The critical value of this compactness or the average energy density obligatory to keep the universe flat is called the “critical density of cosmos”. Though the accepted inflation theory foresee the compactness of universe well within the critical density of universe for the astrophysicists to presume that the universe is flat like a sheet of paper, the fluctuating density value has letdown the astrophysicists to a complete uncertainty of their earlier presumption to date. Now with these two unaccomplished symphonies of the standard cosmology of big bang theory let us see how the QDE Theory is going to unravel the two aforesaid puzzles conclusively. 

Before going into further depiction of this argument I would like to enlighten my readers on what we comprehend by the jargon “universe” in context of the tag called “origin” by virtue of its gravity in overall understanding of this formidable topic. The English element of speech “universe” has derived from the Sanskrit word vis-va which means whole or entire. When you take the first part of the Sanskrit word vis, the definition is given as settlement thus the final import of the complete Sanskrit word visva by definition becomes entire or whole settlement. Now with this interpretation in hand let us go back to the earlier notions of flatness and density fluctuation problems of the universe. 

According to QDE Theory, the universe is full of gravitationally confined settlements of coordinate systems called large scale celestial bodies in diverse stages of entropy and the scientists physical workouts of scientific innovations are confined only to the orbital nature of one settlement of coordinate system called planet earth. Therefore the notions of matter , energy, space and time all cast into this singular frame of entropy of the universe and not into the whole settlement of infinitely boundless nature. Also the QDE Theory clearly says that the established matrix of this coordinate system is four dimensional in its derived physical quantity. In other words the spatial behaviour of this celestial body with regard to its inertial mass is four dimensional in space-time continuum. Therefore the space and the time are not two entities; only their fusion can claim some sort of condition and does not elucidate Euclidean geometry. If we take this condition as a point and draw an imaginary line where it exists, the result will be an elliptical orbital nature. This is due to the four dimensional pulling of inertial mass of the celestial body. The four dimensional space time continuum is distorted by the presence of matter in the celestial matrix. This is how the QDE Theory explicates the interjection of space and time by the presence of matter and with this explanation, the speculative thought of “flat universe” is repudiated. According to QDE Theory the universe is a radiating universe with pockets of matrices emerging out of the blue as isolated systems and later go into coordinate systems in diverse stages of entropy. The bombardments of neutrons at the perimeter of this coordinate system intensify the magnitude of the scalar fields of central vacuums by escalating their charge densities. The heighten values of these charge densities of central vacuums are the same in composite units of the matrix where the vectors are derived from identical physical qualities and the density values keep on fluctuating to higher scales due to continuous assault by neutrons coming from other radiating celestial bodies. This occurrence of the universal phenomenon in the gravitationally confined coordinate system of earth’s orbital nature is viewed as “density fluctuation” though it has not been explained by scientists. Now I think all my apt readers would have had a crystal clear recital of this mind exhausting two problems unclouded by QDE Theory for the first time in the history of fundamental high energy astrophysics. 

The next five questions to be debated in this research paper are the horizon, the cosmological constant, the thermal state, the singularity and the dark matter problems. These five problems are taken in conjunction by virtue of their close alliance to each other. Though these subjects of dispute have been symposium and resolute in preceded research papers of mine published in this website, the following prose is going to be only an answer in abstract to the contention in argument of this research paper. 

The term “horizon” is taken here in the context of the universe appears statistically of the same kind in all directions despite the fact that the big bang causality does not produce such a causation i.e. the universe is statistically homogeneous and isotropic in which case the scientific decoding is yet to be accomplished. The most remarkable attraction of this degree of excellence of the universe is that of Einstein’s year 1917 cosmological theory accountability to this bearing. Now let us see how QDE Theory is going to find the answers to these problems. First of all I must again emphasize the fact that the whole contention of the problems in the argument of this research paper is confined to the orbital nature of earth. The wholeness of the universe is beyond reach of human appraisal. The QDE Theory clearly says that the capacity of earth’s orbital nature is an established medium of quaternions at intrinsic level emerged as a result of condensation. In the process of condensation the trillions of such intrinsic models of quaternions transpose into matter due to symmetry property of the wave function. This also explains why there is very smooth cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation in this milieu. When the midpoint inter-atomic distance gets smaller to bring forth the quaternion intrinsic particles into thermal equilibrium with their surroundings, the symmetry property of wave function inspires them to occupy a lowest energy state and at the same time conserving the energy at its core as thermal energy (heat). This explains why the “universe” is in thermal equilibrium state. Therefore the impetuously evolved celestial mass called earth and the surrounding orbital nature are not two separate entities, thus they are amalgamated together to give rise to a coordinate system with an interface point. The output of this coordinate system is the orbit made of a singular matrix with trillions of zero determinants embedded throughout. The late professor Albert Einstein coined these central vacuous areas as cosmological constants. This explains why the “universe” is statistically homogeneous and isotropic in nature. According to the quantum mathematical argument of QDE Theory the orbital nature of earth is a square matrix wherein the determinant is represented by centrally conserved energy as thermal energy. Therefore the determinant of this square matrix is zero. When the determinant is zero, the matrix is called a singular matrix with a function of infinite value. This explains the singularity problem of “universe”. The cosmological constant is defined in terms of black hole singularity in QDE Theory and is equivalent to centrally conserved vacuous energy. According to QDE Theory these central vacuums are quantized fields divisible to four individual areas of corresponding singles of the quaternion lattice work. The QDE Theory further says that these black hole singularities are dimensionless points surrounded by dimensionless matrix elements and are in vacuous states with high energy trapped inside. Therefore they do not form manifold structures and integrate in trillions to the “dark matter” of the universe. This explains the dark matter problem of the universe. Again I must stress on the fact that this whole argument is confined to a gravitationally confined one settlement of the universe and not beyond its confinement. 

The next to be debated is the magnetic monopole problem of the “universe”. The likely existence of magnetic monopoles or the exotic particles during the phase transition of the early universe was theorized by Paul Dirac, a British theoretical physicist and Nobel laureate in 1931 as topological defects. This led to the assumption that an isolated particle with a single magnetic pole could be the cause. As the problem of magnetic monopoles has been exhaustively explained by me in a separate research paper published earlier, I do not intend to consume more time on it. I may like to document here only the abstract statement of meaning inferred from QDE Theory depicted in that paper. According to QDE Theory, the hypothesized entity of magnetic monopoles do not exist as particles for us to detect and “in reality it is only an electrical phenomenon that gives rise to hole conduction, a process of filling a vacancy by charge of the asymmetric intrinsic semiconductor crystalline nature of component substances of the quaternion atomic lattice work of cosmic space of earth’s orbital nature” – (See – Murutenge, Sanathdeva, P.M., Quantum Dynamical Evolution Theory and the Phenomenon of Piezoelectricity: A Paradigm Shift to the Magnetic Monopole Paradox of High Energy Physics, www.quantumpsychophysical.com, 10th July 2010, Sri Lanka). 

The last to discuss in this research paper is the time scale problem of the “universe”. The current method of access to quantify the age of the universe is the use of Hubble’s constant wherein the ratio of the distance between the local group of galaxies and a receding cluster of galaxies to the rate at which the distant cluster recedes is taken as an index. The Hubble constant therefore represents the hypothetical period of time since all the matter in the universe was located in one “super dense” agglomeration, if it is assumed that its rate of expansion has been constant over this period and the value being variously estimated between five and ten thousand million years. But whether this independent measurement is consistent with stellar lifetime is uncertain to date. Now with this framework in hand let us see how the QDE Theory of Sanathdeva Murutenge is going to confront this problem of finding an answer admissible to the scientific community. 

According to QDE Theory a planet or a celestial body is defined as an impetuously evolved mass of energy bodies gravitationally confined with energy conserved in trillions of zero determinants and taking an inconceivably long space of time, an aeon. The theory also says that this whole astronomical phenomenon takes place with the distortion of four dimensional space-time continuums due to the gravitational field. In this milieu the space and the time are not two separate entities; only their fusion can claim some sort of condition that mimics existence. If we take this fact into consideration and draw an imaginary line where it exists, the result is going to be an elliptical orbit due to four dimensional pulling of the inertial mass. Here the four dimensional space-time continuums are distorted due to the presence of matter devoid of radiation. Under these circumstances the time as an index of contriving the exact duration of this astronomical process becomes futile. If I am to spell this in simple English, the age of an astronomical object cannot be found by any method”. I must emphasize on one important facet before concluding this answer i.e. the above exposition is defensible only for a viable or living planet, e.g. the earth. In case of dead planets viz. Sun, Moon, Mass or any other planet other than earth, the above definition takes on a reverse process. Here the absenteeism of gravitational pull and conservation of energy are the two major facets that differ from the earlier exposition – (See – Murutenge, Sanathdeva, P.M., Quantum Dynamical Evolution Theory and the Emergence of Celestial Bodies in the Cosmos: The Fundamentals of Astrophysics behind the Evolution of Planets, Asteroids, Comets and Meteoroids, www.quantumpsychophysical.com, 01st April 2010, Sri Lanka). 

Now with this background scholarship in hand let me take you back to Hubble’s constant wherein the Galactic Redshift discovered by Vesto Slipher in 1912 was used by Edwin Hubble to know the distance of galaxies when observed from earth. This is an accepted phenomenon in astrophysics in which case radiance coming from celestial mass is shifted to the red end of the spectrum when it moves out from the gravitational field. Because of this relativistic effect of cosmological red shift phenomenon it has a conventional significance to Albert Einstein’s relativity theories. By going through these current observations and applications of the redshift phenomenon it is quite clear to all of us that the real definition of universe i.e. gravitationally confined settlements of coordinate systems in diverse stages of entropy is completely disregarded in making this relevance. Now let me explain to you why this simulated redshift is observed when there is no reality in repositioning of celestial masses. Though this has been well explained in a previous research paper published by me and for the sake of fulfilment  I would like to answer this question in abstract notion. The neutron radiation coupled with magnetic moment taking place in those planets at a higher scale get transpose into a picture on the umbrella (photon umbrella) of optically inactive chiral symmetry restoration of perimeter orbit made out of asymmetric intrinsic semiconductor crystalline nature of component quarks and expedite the optical capacity of the medium underneath by way of increase in magnitude. This in turn will simulate as if the distance celestial mass or the electromagnetic radiation is shifting away from earth’s gravitational field to the parameters of Edwin Hubble – (See – Murutenge, Sanathdeva, P.M., Quantum Dynamical Evolution Theory and the Optically Inactive Chiral-Symmetry Restoration of Cosmic Space: A New Dimension to the Quark-Gluon- Plasma Paradox of High Energy Physics, www.quantumpsychophysical.com, 26th August 2010, Sri Lanka). Therefore the QDE Theory does not strengthen the mimicked evidence of expanding universe hypothesis and big bang theory. 

The next to be explained in this research paper is the etiology of animation i.e. how the objective dynamisms of the universe came into existence. To comprehend this exhausting theme it is of paramount importance to expertise the enlightenment of manifold and topology of orbital nature of earth. According to QDE Theory the orbital nature of earth is a singular matrix of quaternion atomic models. They are under the force of continuous deformations due to the influence of the photon umbrella of perimeter orbital nature. The changes of this area of the orbit are due to neutron bombardments of radiating stellar objects. The deformations taking place in the singular matrix do not interfere into the spatial properties and therefore can be expressed in terms of the foundational aspect of topology called point-set topology. The manifold spatial quantization of negative electrical phenomena of the vector component of quaternion atomic models can be expressed in notions of geometric topology. When the effective composite motive force of the quaternion atomic model is taken into consideration it satisfies the mathematical definitive concepts like convergence, connectedness and continuity and can be expressed in notions of topological spaces in which the constituent points function as scalar components to be called as function spaces.  These function spaces have the capacity of retaining knowledge to serve the purpose of cognition and do not participate in forming manifold structures. The manifold structures are formed in geometric topology of vector components of quaternion atomic models. The newly formed composite motive forces act as functional entropies wherein the scalar intelligences and the vector moulds of the manifold structures are dependent on intrinsic fundamentalisms of entropies and at the time of their transpose into coordinate systems. This contrariety of intrinsic fundamentalism is the root cause of diversity in objective dynamisms of the universe. The protraction and the contour of the vector mould of manifold structure are determined by the shift of energy by way of charge from the vector component to relocate in the function space. This is an increasing irreversible process wherein the total destruction of the emerged isolated animated system takes place in the arrow of time. Therefore in reality what we comprehend as the form of a focus viz. a human being or an animal is the destructive process of this functional entropy. As a result the universal law very clearly reveals that there is nothing substantial in the cosmos. In other words what I have to say is that there is no emergence, no condition and no conclusion of anything in the universe. What is found in the universe is only a motion. This is how the QDE Theory explains the mechanism of arising and passing away of diverse objective dynamisms of the universe in conformity with fundamental principles of Astrophysics. 

Before concluding this important recital I must say something about the two statements used in the main theme of this research paper viz. origin of universe and emergence of universe. On account of the facts stated as definitions and explications of this paper I can confidently say that there is neither origin nor emergence of the universe. 

In the absence of dynamism there is noobjective focus of the universe – Sanathdeva Murutenge. 

Sources – 

1. Murutenge, Sanathdeva, P.M., Quantum Dynamical Evolution Theory of Sanathdeva Murutenge: A Paradigm Shift to Theories of Modern Physics, The Theory of Everything, Author Publication, Dehiwala, Sri Lanka, 2008, ISBN 978-955-97940-2-8. 
2. Murutenge, Sanathdeva, P.M., Scientific Basis of the Systematic Philosophy of Buddhism: Metaphysical and Metapsychological Analysis of Phenomena of Molecular Consciousness of Theravada Abhidhamma, Author Publication, Dehiwala, Sri Lanka, Limited Edition 2006, ISBN 955-97940-1-9. 
3. Murutenge, Sanathdeva, P.M., Beyond Einstein’s Relativity towards the final goal of Quantum Dynamical Evolution Reality: Sixteen Research Papers that Changed the Face of Modern Physics, Sooriya Publishers, 114, Rev. S. Mahinda Mawatha, Colombo 10, Sri Lanka, First Edition 2012, ISBN 978-955-656-230-9.
4. Murutenge, Sanathdeva, P.M., Quantum Dynamical Evolution Theory and Black Hole Singularity: The Search for Dark Energy in the Universe, www.quantumpsychophysical.com, 24th June 2009, Sri Lanka. 
5. Murutenge, Sanathdeva, P.M., Quantum Dynamical Evolution Theory and the Emergence of Celestial Bodies in the Cosmos: The Fundamentals of Astrophysics Behind the Evolution of Planets, Asteroids, Comets and Meteorites, www.quantumpsychophysical.com, 01st April 2010, Sri Lanka. 
6. Murutenge, Sanathdeva, P.M., Quantum Dynamical Evolution Theory and the Quaternion Atomic Model: The Wave Function of Symmetry Model that affirms the Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking of Subatomic Particles and Asymptotic Freedom of Quarks, www.quantumpsychophysical.com, 14th May 2010, Sri Lanka.
7. Murutenge, Sanathdeva, P.M., Quantum Dynamical Evolution Theory and the Phenomenon of Piezoelectricity: A Paradigm Shift to the Magnetic Monopole Paradox of High Energy Physics, www.quantumpsychophysical.com, 10th July 2010, Sri Lanka. 
8. Murutenge, Sanathdeva, P.M., Quantum Dynamical Evolution Theory and the Optically Inactive Chiral Symmetry Restoration of Cosmic Space: A New Dimension to the Quark-Gluon-Plasma Paradox of High Energy Physics, www.quantumpsychophysical.com, 26th August 2010, Sri Lanka. 
9. Spain, B., Vector Analysis, 1965, D Van Nostrand Company LTD., London
10. Bowler, M.G., Gravitation and Relativity, First Edition 1976, Pergamon Press Ltd., Oxford, England.
11. Bose, S.K., An Introduction to General Relativity, 1980, Wiley Eastern Limited, New Delhi. 
12. Sachs, Mendel, Ides of the Theory of Relativity: General Implications from Physics to Problems of Society, 1974, Israel University Press, Jerusalem, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
13. Einstein, A., Relativity: The Special and the General Theory, A Popular Exposition by Albert Einstein, Translated by Lawson, R.W., 1961, Random House, New York.
14. Wangsness, Roland K., Electromagnetic Fields, 2nd Ed. 1986, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York. 
15. Yariv, Amnon, An Introduction to Theory and Applications of Quantum Mechanics, 1982, John Wiley & Sons, New York. 
16. Rae, Alastair I.M., Quantum Physics: Illusion or Reality ?, 1986, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
17. Davies, Paul, More Big Questions in Conversation with Philip Adams, 1998, ABC Books for the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Sydney, NSW. 
18. Davies, Paul, Superforce: The Search for a Grand Unified Theory of Nature, 1989, Unwin Hyman Limited, London. 
19. Ferris, Timothy, The Whole Shebang: A State-of-the-Universe(s) Report, First Published 1997, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London.
20. Barrow, John D., The Origin of the Universe, 1995, Phoenix a Division of Orion Books Ltd., London. 
21. Davies, Paul, God and the New Physics, 1990, Penguin Books. 
22. Cairns, R.A., Plasma Physics, First Published 1985, Blackie & Son Ltd., Glasgow and London. 
23. Davies, Paul, The Mind of God: Science and the Search for Ultimate Meaning, A Penguin Book.
24. Clay, Roger and Dawson, Bruce, Cosmic Bullets: High Energy Particles in Astrophysics, 1997, Allen & Unwin, NSW, Australia. 
25. Rees, Martin, Our Cosmic Habitat, 2002, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, Great Britain.
26. Drees, Willem B., Beyond the Big Bang: Quantum Cosmologies and God, 1990, Open Court Publishing Company, Illinois, USA. 
27. Schroeder, Gerald L., The Science of God: The Convergence of Scientific and Biblical Wisdom, 1997, The Free Press, A Division of Simon & Schuster, Inc., New York. 
28. Penrose, Roger, Shadows of the Mind: A Search for the Missing Science of Consciousness, 1995, Vintage. 
29. Silver, Brian L., The Ascent of Science, 1998, Oxford University Press, Inc. New York.
30. Choudhuri, Arnab Rai, Astrophysics for Physicist, First Published 2010, Cambridge University Press, New York, USA.
31. Gates, Evalyn, Einstein Telescope: The Hunt for Dark Matter and Dark Energy in the Universe, First Edition 2009, W.W. Norton & Company, Inc. New York. 
32. Drake, Stillman, Foreword by Einstein, Albert, Galileo, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems – Ptolemaic and Copernican, University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1962. 
33. Hawking, Stephen & Mlodinow, Leonard, The Grand Design: New Answers to the Ultimate Questions of Life, First Published 2010, Bantam Press, Transworld Publishers, London. 
34. Hawking, Stephen, The Universe in a Nutshell, 2001, Bantam Books, New York, USA. 
35. Roseman, Dennis, Elementary Topology, 1999, Prentice Hall, New Jersey. 
36. Radhakrishnan, S., Brahma Sutra: The Philosophy of Spiritual Life, First Published 1960, George Allen & Unwin LTD, London. 
37. Gambhirananda, Swami, Brahma Sutra Bhasya of Shankaracharya, Advaita Ashrama Publication, 8th Impression 2004, Kolkata. 
38. Heisenberg, Werner, The Physicist’s Conception of Nature, 1962, The Scientific Book Guild, Beaverbrook Newspapers, Great Britain. 
39. Heisenberg, Werner, Physics and Beyond: Encounters and Conversations, 1971, Harper & Row Publishers, NY, USA. 
40. Heisenberg, Werner, Physics and Philosophy: The Revolution in Modern Science, 1962, Harper & Row Publishers, NY, USA. 
41. Hoyle, Fred, Wickramasinghe, Chandra, Evolution from Space, First Published 1981, J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd., London. 
42. Hoyle, Fred, Wickramasinghe, Chandra, Proof that Life is Cosmic, Memoirs of the Institute of Fundamental Studies, Sri Lanka, No. 1, December 1982. 
43. Hoyle, Fred, Wickramasinghe, Chandra, The Origin of Life, First Published 1980, University College Cardiff Press, Cardiff, United Kingdom. 
44. Macdonell, Arthur Anthony, A Practical Sanskrit Dictionary with Transliteration, Accentuation and Etymological Analysis Throughout, 1969, Oxford University Press, London. 
45. Williams, Monier, A Sanskrit English Dictionary: Etymologically and Philologically Arranged with Special Reference to Cognate Indo-European Languages, 2005, Asian Educational Services, New Delhi. 

Share this post: on Twitter on Facebook on Google+