BBC news website user, Gavin Kinnear, says: "I know we would be socially better off," but he goes on to ask: "But would we be financially as a country better off?" David Furbur asks: "Will England, Wales and Northern Ireland be better off if Scotland leaves the Union?" and John Mcknight asks: "Would England be worse off if Scotland was independent?"
For better or worse?
This is a big question - arguably, THE big question. The polls tell us the answer makes a big difference to the way people intend to vote. So there are big claims made by the two main campaigns in trying to answer it.
Once again, the key figure we're using here is growth measured Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per head. That fell with the recent downturn years, but over the longer term, it's on the rise. Why? Mainly because, in most years, new ways of working, new technology and education make people and machinery more productive, we tend to consume more each year, and to use more resources.
And how has Scotland done compared with the rest of UK as a whole? In the past 25 years, growth per head has been at least as good as the UK. The two decades before that saw much lower growth, as old industries declined.
Government can influence growth, by using taxation - more of that tends to reduce growth. It can use its own spending power - more of that can boost growth, though to do that, it's important that it's spent in the right places. Spending on skills training or transport is often a help to growth.
Government can also regulate the economy. It sets the rules for employment, including the law on hiring and firing. It adds costs to business such as health and safety, environment safeguards, pension requirements or minimum wage levels. And it sets the market rules for banking, energy and telecom utilities.
The big driver of growth is not government, but businesses. They invest in new factories, offices and equipment, and they hire people. But that's if they're confident that sales and markets are growing. So a big challenge for any government is to help businesses feel secure about their future. Which would do that better: at Holyrood, or Westminster?
14% increase in oil and gas production between 2013-18
Tax receipts currently 14% higher in Scotland than UK
Source: Scottish government
In an independent Scotland, the government at Holyrood would have these "levers of power" - taxation, spending and regulation. The Scottish government White Paper sets out ways it wants to use these.
One could be to cut the main tax on profits - corporation tax - below the levels in the rest of the UK. This could make Scotland a more attractive place to do business.
Alex Salmond says people in Scotland would be better off by £1,000 a year
Finance Secretary John Swinney has also said he wants to borrow billions of pounds more in the early years of independence than George Osborne, the Chancellor, has set out in Whitehall's plans.
The Scottish minister wants to simplify tax, and he'll consider ways to improve relations between employers and employees.
The Scottish government's calculation is that "each Scot would be £1,000 better off" after 15 years. That would require a boost to productivity, more immigration and bringing more women into the workplace encouraged by a more generous childcare system.
Some others arguing for independence want to see more radical change, often focused on better social outcomes rather than growth - such as fairer distribution of income and a more generous welfare system.
13% more tax needed to maintain independent Scotland public services, or...
11% cut in public services needed to keep current tax levels
£1.5bn-£2.7bn estimated cost of restructuring Scotland's institutions
Note: Figs relate to a 20-year period starting from 2016-17 Source: Treasury
Those who don't want an international boundary at the Cheviots stress the added cost and inconvenience for businesses trading across the border, and they warn this could hinder growth.
In particular, they warn of uncertainty over the future currency, over public finances and borrowing costs, over access to European markets, saying this could lead to less business confidence and willingness to commit and invest in Scotland. Even with the same currency, they say borders inhibit trade.
Trying to be positive, the same argument is also presented as the benefit of being within a large UK market, providing scale for growth.
There's not much made of the future prospects for UK growth. That's a UK government priority, but it's also uncertain. On past performance, it is assumed to be just above 2% per year over the long term.
On the day in May when the Scottish government set out its claim of a £1,000 independence dividend, the UK Treasury published a document with the claim that there's a £1,400 "union dividend". This is about public finances rather than economic growth. Most of it is explained by higher spending per head in Scotland, as well as costs absorbed by the UK, and claims that SNP tax-cutting policies and likely higher borrowing costs would leave a larger deficit.
So, back to the question, could an independent Scotland be better off or not?
If anyone tells you they know whether an independent Scotland will be better off or not, be very, very sceptical. No-one knows.
The best you can do is figure what factors could make Scots better or worse off, and then make your own judgement on how these are likely to come into play.
And what factors are they? As the Scottish government points out, you can boost growth with higher output per worker or productivity, by raising employment levels and attracting more immigrants. And you can make better use of your natural resources.
But don't be so sure those are achievable. Britain's productivity has behaved very oddly in recent years, and no-one knows why. While Holyrood wants to boost productivity, almost all the levers it wants to pull are already being pulled in Whitehall.
Anyone with experience of government will tell you that the pulling of levers doesn't always get the results you expect. Governments have influence, but often less than they (or we?) would like to think.
Policies can also send contradictory signals; cutting tax to boost business growth may not mix well with moves to boost minimum wages, or making it more difficult for employers to make redundancies.
Where they DO have an effect, these levers may or may not be more successfully pulled at Holyrood. It may be, for instance, that businesses in Scotland would respond to a focused targeting of tax incentives to invest in a strongly-growing sector.
On the other side, it may be that businesses will thrive best with the smoothest possible access into the English market, where regulation and taxation are identical. Or it's argued the UK's network of embassies makes a vital difference for opening doors to more exports.
On corporation tax, it's worth noting that European partners may want to limit the scope for Scottish tax cuts, as part of a deal on making Scotland a new EU member. They don't like Ireland's low tax rate, and won't want to see it elsewhere.
Scotland in numbers
What is Scotland's population?
What is Scotland's share of the national debt?
How does pay in Scotland compare with England, Wales and NI?
Cutting tax rates can also cut your tax revenues. It doesn't always. It could be foreign businesses are attracted to Scotland by low rates, and in total, they pay more. But that's not guaranteed. And until it's happened, there's a gap in the budget.
Also, don't forget that the rest of the UK, of Europe and of the world wants to boost productivity and expand workforces. There's competition for skilled migrant workers, for instance, and also for investment by multi-national companies.
Every country is pursuing growth. Scotland and the UK will surely see the economy growing in years to come. But it's not clear why a growth strategy created in Holyrood would be uniquely or even relatively successful, any more than it's clear that Whitehall has all the best answers.
One more statistical health warning: if GDP is rising, it doesn't mean everyone's getting better off. It may be because more people are entering the workforce, for instance through immigrant workers.
Also if GDP per head is rising, that won't be shared equally. Some people may be getting better off, or worse off, at a faster rate than others.
There's also the complaint that the focus on economic growth is at the expense of other priorities, such as the environment, fairness or a healthy society.
Former Labour minister Ben Bradshaw says his party's leadership has failed to tackle the "unfair" situation of Scottish MPs voting on English-only matters.
Mr Bradshaw, who represents Exeter, told the Western Morning News: "We have to acknowledge an unfairness where Scottish MPs vote on exclusively English matters. The question as to whether this is unfair has to be a 'yes'. But there are numerous ways you can address this, all very complex."
A House of Commons committee is going to investigate the aftermath of the independence referendum. The Political and Constitutional Reform Committee, which set out the terms of its inquiry today, will look at whether England, Wales and Northern Ireland should be offered the same levels of devolution as Scotland.
The MPs will also consider the best way forward given the disagreements between the three main Westminster parties.
Reporting from the Labour conference fringe, Huffington Post political correspondent Ned Simons tweets: Ed Balls says he would be 'staggered' if Gordon Brown wanted to be first minister of Scotland.
Six men men have appeared in court charged with various offences during Glasgow city centre disturbances on the day the referendum result was announced.
Three appeared in private at Glasgow Sheriff Court over disorder in George Square on Friday.
Three other men were accused of being involved in other incidents in nearby streets.
One was charged with being in possession of a hammer on West Nile Street.
Four of the men were remanded in custody.
It is believed that some people will appear at court at a later date in connection the incident.
Today's final entry from SNP chief executive Peter Murrell: 18,002 new @theSNP members in 96 hours. Welcome one and all.
As MSPs prepare to return to Holyrood after the referendum tomorrow, Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie called on Scottish government ministers to accept the verdict of the Scottish people and work constructively with others.
He said: "Scots delivered their verdict on the SNP's independence plans at the ballot box but we know that a vote to remain part of the UK family is not a vote against change.
"In the past the SNP have been surly bystanders as others worked to deliver new powers for Scotland. This cannot happen again."
He added:"The Liberal Democrat vision of radical reform towards a federal UK is now top of the political agenda. This is a chance of a lifetime to deliver the change that the majority of people wish to see. A stronger Scotland within the United Kingdom."
"I've had a career in finance in which I've had to make projections and limit risk as much as possible. These were my savings, my money, but I felt I'd done enough research to be sure of the outcome.
"It was a decision taken in conjunction with my wife. And although I bounced a few ideas off other friends, nobody else knew what we were doing."
Longstanding Labour voters who deserted the party to vote for Scottish independence "shocked and worried us greatly," a shadow cabinet minister has said.
The shadow business secretary Chuka Umunna said that many in "communities that have supported us" for years were unwilling to support the Labour-backed Better Together campaign.
But Mr Umunna, speaking at a fringe event at the Labour Party conference organised by The Times, said the "wrong lesson" to learn from the experience would be to focus solely on current or previous core Labour supporters.
Marie: I'm a life-long Labour voter, who voted Yes. I researched both side of the argument and made up my own mind, I hated the way the No campaign threatened and bullied throughout. Now I'm disgusted at the smug back patting of Johann Lamont, Margaret Curren, Alistair Darling & co and the personal attacks on Alex Salmond. Labour have lost my vote for good. Incidentally, an Edinburgh university study found that Yes voters were the most politically informed, most voted with their heads, enough of the patronising!
David, Devon: Alex Salmond didn't say ALL no voters were tricked. What he said was that SOME of the crucial undecided ones were tricked in the final few days with the promise of swift change from Westminster, which Cameron seems to be backtracking from. He has a fair point. Cameron must now deliver - or admit the sham.
Scottish Secretary Alistair Carmichael believes the high turnout in Thursday's referendum is evidence that the UK voting age should be lowered to 16.
Writing on his blog, the Lib Dem Northern Isles MP said more than 100,000 under-18s had registered to vote.
"Our young voters were given the opportunity and seized it with both hands. I believe that it is now only a matter of time until we see votes at 16 rolled out across the UK. That time should be now."
A new poll, by ComRes, has found that 39% of Britons agree that the UK has been "damaged by the Scottish referendum campaign".
And 30% of those polled thought Scotland would "probably become an independent country in the next 20 years".
Mrs W, Glasgow: Alistair Darling continues to alienate half the Scottish population, many of them now ex-labour voters. The election result has been accepted Alistair, that is not the issue. The fact that the parties are now not delivering their promise of an immediate increase in devolved powers is an issue for many people other than Alex Salmond.
You have a lot of work to do if you want to get some voters back - saying Alex Salmond has 'lost the plot' is not the way to go about it. So unbelievably out of touch with your own support base!
Struan: I have been a labour supporter all of my 64 years however due to their shocking campaign tactics and post referendum blustering I have now joined the SNP. I find it remarkable that in such a short space of time they have managed to alienate their supporters on both sides of the border so spectacularly.
Political analyst Gerry Hassan says: "There is a mood music case being made at the moment by all politicians, north and south of the border, that greater devolution, greater de-centralism, equals social justice.
"That does not automatically, necessarily work.
"What Ed Balls is trying to make the case for is common, shared services, taxation - a unitary system of income tax across the UK, that is what social democracy is about.
"But it is rather late in the day when Gordon Brown, the previous week, was promising the exact opposite."
Political analyst Gerry Hassan tells BBC Scotland's Newsdrive there was a "conspicuous absence" of the detail behind the Vow that the Westminster parties made to Scotland when Labour's shadow chancellor Ed Balls made his speech to the party's conference in Manchester.
Mr Hassan say: "Basically it turns out that when Gordon Brown went solo in the last week and a half of the referendum campaign he never bothered to clear it with Ed Balls or speak to him. So Ed Balls, paying back in like, didn't feel the need to mention it.
"So it is yet another indication of the threadbare, making it up as you go along, nature of the pledge that was offered pre-vote."
Labour MSP Richard Simpsontweets: Devolution powers timetable to be honoured says Hague. Lord Smith of Kelvin chair commonwealth games will take forward. Promise must be kept
Constitutional expert Professor Vernon Bogdanor tells BBC News that an "unconditional promise" of more devolution was made to Scotland.
"If it now appears that it's conditional, some Scottish voters who voted 'No' will say they have been cheated."
Prof Bogdanor adds: "It is absolutely vital that this devolution promise to Scotland, whether you think it was right or not, should be delivered as rapidly as possible."
Leader of the Commons William Hague, speaking after the meeting at the prime minister's private residence in Buckinghamshire, said today's discussions on the English question were "only the beginning".
He said whatever is or isn't agreed on changing the voting status of Scotland's MPs at Westminster "we will absolutely go ahead with the commitment to Scotland". But he said the need to deal with England was now "urgent".
Mr Hague said if other parties make it impossible to do this in tandem with the draft Scotland bill the English question will become an issue for the general election. He said the Conservatives believed only English MPs should decide laws that apply to England.
The Cabinet Committee looking at this will meet for the first time on Wednesday.
David Cameron has met senior Conservatives at Chequers to discuss barring Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs from voting on issues that affect only England.
Following the meeting, the leader of the Commons, William Hague, said that it was clear that promises to devolve more powers to Scotland would be honoured. However, he added that there had been widespread agreement that decisions at Westminster which affected England only, should be taken by English MPs.
If Scotland is handed more powers through increased devolution, 71% of people think its MPs should no longer be able to vote on issues only affecting England, according to YouGov.
This view is also held by nearly two thirds of Scots, YouGov said.
Not just the SNP but also the other parties in the Yes campaign seem to be benefiting from a surge in membership.
In the case of the SNP they say that their membership has gone up from something like 25,000 to, at 4pm today, more than 42,000.
They are now within striking distance of overtaking the Liberal Democrat membership across the UK.
The Greens say they have also picked up 3,000 members since the referendum vote. They only had 2,000 to start with, so that is an even more extraordinary increase in their size.
It is a fascinating phenomenon and more generally there is talk within the broad Yes campaign about how they keep the energy going and how they campaign in the future.
When the nominations for SNP leader open there will probably be a period of up to three weeks where anybody in the party that can get the required level of support could potentially come forward as a rival.
There are some who think there should be a contest, that it would confer legitimacy on the new leader.
Others think, given that Nicola Sturgeon is the favourite, and is likely to win any contest, that there really is not any point and that the party should really get on with the business of governing because, of course, it remains the Scottish government.
If Nicola Sturgeon does declare there would need to be a contest to replace her in the deputy role and that could be potentially more interesting.
Nicola Sturgeon has the backing of most of the members of the Scottish cabinet. I think we can expect the nominations for SNP leader will open as early as Wednesday. I would expect that Nicola Sturgeon would formally declare herself a candidate at that stage and I am certainly not aware of anybody proposing to stand against her.
If a candidate does emerge there certainly could be a contest but whether it is through that route or through a coronation I think the general feeling is that Nicola Sturgeon will become the next leader of the SNP and the next first minister of Scotland.
She would be the first female to hold either of those posts.
In fact by mid-November, if there are no other changes, the three main parties at Holyrood will be led by women and I can't think of any other parliament on the planet where that is the case.
Bookmaker William Hill says Nicola Sturgeon is now the 1/10 favourite to succeed Alex Salmond as leader of the SNP.
The deputy leader has said she could think of "no greater privilege" than to seek the leadership.
MP Angus Robertson is the 7/1 second favourite.
Labour MP Simon Danczuk says it "beggars belief" that Labour did not have a ready answer to the question of what happens in England in the event of a Scottish 'No' vote.
Speaking at a fringe event at the party conference in Manchester, Mr Danczuk said Labour leader Ed Miliband would have a "real problem" if he did not address the issue in his leader's speech tomorrow.
There is a recognition from most of the speakers on the platform at the Labour conference, including Shadow Scottish Secretary Margaret Curran this afternoon, that they had to do more, that people do want change and that they have to deliver the promised powers.
Margaret Curran said she would not rest until Scotland got all that it had been promised.
Johann Lamont, the Scottish Labour leader, was here at the Labour conference in Manchester and suggested that, yes, they had won the referendum but she said it would be wrong to celebrate the referendum victory without asking how they had got here in the first place.
By that she was suggesting it is clear that voters in Scotland want change.
They are right to want change, she said, and they must reflect on the fact that they did not offer the people of Scotland a vision of change that they felt they could believe in.
Professor Ailsa Henderson, of Edinburgh University, tells BBC News David Cameron is "caught between making good on a promise and also seeing off support from voters leaking away towards Ukip".
The ambitious timetable set out for the devolution changes to be made was "absolutely part of the problem", she added.
Tony Mackin, Ipswich: Now that the referendum is over, the real winners are the people living in Scotland. However, is there any doubt that had the Yes campaign won with the same split of the vote then this would have been labelled "a ringing endorsement of independence?" Finally, the SNP should accept the "sovereign will" of the Scottish people instead of asking for recounts and inquiries.
L. Payne: Yet again Mr Salmond you insult the majority of Scottish voters by claiming we were fooled or tricked into voting No. Most of those who voted No did so after careful informed investigation for the truth of the issues & were not fooled by you or anyone else. All you had to offer was a half-finished "New House" with no solid foundation, only half a roof & no electricity, no chance. Then, you played with the emotional hopes of the 16/17-year-olds. How very cynical, shame on you and that's when you lost it. We, the 'Nos' voted with our heads; the Yes group with their hearts.
SNP chief executive Peter Murrelltweets: If this keeps going, we'll soon be bigger than the UK-wide @LibDems. 16,186 new @theSNP members and counting.
On the stage at the Labour conference in Manchester, party leader Ed Miliband says it is becoming "like the Oscars" as he thanks figures within the party who helped with the 'No' campaign.
He pays tribute to people "who knew the gravity of the challenge their country faced, who knew how important it was and who wanted to give their help".
The Shadow Scottish secretary, Margaret Curran, says the Scottish people have "taught us a lot about our politics".
While it was great to have the backing of David Bowie and David Beckham, she said, it was more pleasing to have support from "ordinary people".
Gillian: Nationalism? Wrong, I voted Yes for political power and constitutional change. Easy answer to blame nationalism. Look deeper Labour. Not everyone who voted Yes is on benefits. Genuine thoughts for equality across Scotland - that will be harder now.
Tam: Is this to be the new way to represent support for independence? Wave a Saltire, paint your face a la 'Braveheart', take to the streets to drown out anyone with different views from your own? I think and hope that many long-standing supporters of independence may be troubled by this and reflect on the price being paid along the way.
Johann Lamont tells Labour supporters: "I believe those who sought change through separation were wrong, but I salute their passion for change, I salute their commitment and I ask them to share their energy with us to change Scotland and change Britain and build that society we all seek without borders."
More than 70,000 people have signed an online petition demanding "a revote counted by impartial international parties".
In a statement, the chief counting officer Mary Pitcaithly said all counts "were properly conducted and scrutinised".
Ten votes in Glasgow are already being investigated over a separate claim of multiple voting.
Former SNP deputy leader Jim Sillars has called for an official inquiry into the claims raised by the petition and in an online video.
Scottish Labour Leader Johann Lamont is next up at the party conference in Manchester.
She says is would be wrong to celebrate the 'No' result "without asking how we got there in the first place".
"People want change," she says. "They are right to want change and we must reflect on the fact we did not offer the people of Scotland a vision of change they felt they could believe in.
"We allowed disappointment to become despair and to ferment into nationalism."
Anon: I am one of the 45% [who voted Yes] and accept the vote, Don't like it. I am now awaiting the offer promised and have every right to scrutinise both the process and offer. Not sour grapes just being sensible.
The people of Scotland are sovereign, Mr Darling says.
He also praises the turnout in Thursday's vote, saying: "It's come to something when the lowest turnout was 75%.
"That is something we should acknowledge as a strength for the future."
Ian McCallum: It is contemptuous of the Labour Party to believe they have the divine right to someone's vote. It is my vote and I will use it as I choose. I have stopped buying certain products because they became poor quality. What was on the label did not reflect content.
Mr Darling tells the Labour Party conference: "Some people have not entirely accepted this result."
Alex Salmond, Mr Darling says, has said "never mind, we might be able to seize power some other way".
The Better Together leader adds: "I just say this to Alex Salmond: you lost the argument, you've lost the referendum, you've lost office, and now you have lost the plot."
Mr Darling expresses thanks for the cross party campaign as it proved that the United Kingdom was "Better Together".
He also thanks those No voters who are not affiliated to any political party, but who wanted to act to preserve the United Kingdom.
Alistair Darling, Better Together leader, tells the Labour Party conference that he has three things he wants to say...
"The first is to thank all of you here and in the Labour Party for doing so much to help us in the last few months of our campaign in Scotland.
"The people of Scotland have spoken and they've chose unity over division; positive change not separation.
"Last Thursday's vote was a momentous result for Scotland and also a momentous result for the UK as a whole.
"Because, confirming our place in the Union, we've re-affirmed all that we have in common; all the bonds that tie us together, let them never be broken."
Shadow Scottish secretary Margaret Curran is addressing the Labour Party conference in Manchester.
"My fellow Scots have spoken and we have said no to separation, 'no' to division, no to the end of solidarity and 'no' to a false border being erected between the working people of our four great nations.
"But I tell you something else conference: we said 'yes' too. Not yes to independence but yes to recognising interdependence, yes to co-operation and yes to a strong Scotland inside a changed United Kingdom.
"As we meet here in Manchester with the referendum behind us now, the call for change that we heard on Thursday still rings out.
"And let me tell you this Scotland: you have been heard."
Nominations for a new SNP leader are expected to open on Wednesday. The party's deputy leader, Nicola Sturgeon, is likely to formally declare her candidacy that day. She has already been publicly endorsed by almost every member of the Scottish cabinet.
It is understood that she will not choose a running mate for the post of deputy leader. The results of both elections will be declared at the SNP conference in November.
Fiona McLaren: The referendum didn't go Mr Salmond's way, so now he is saying the "No" voters were tricked by Westminster - an insult to our intelligence. Lots of Scots are proud of being Scottish AND British. He needs to accept the result and move forward.
Jon: Just wondering if all these people who are joining 'Yes' parties realise that voting against Labour at the general election will just be helping the Tories! I bet they're loving the negative reaction to Labour in Scotland post-indyref. They'll squeeze all they can out Labour in the English votes debate - before delivering Scots promises in the nick of time (stopping indyref2), and then they'll have a bonus prize of Scottish Labour being decimated.
Fred Comerford, Fife: I voted No - not because I am against independence, but because I am against political and economic suicide. I was concerned at the "oh yes we will" "oh no you won't" attitude of both sides. In my opinion the entire debate came down to that of a pantomime with no clarity on how we planned to address any of the issues. I felt the SNP were as surprised as Westminster was at the interest in seeing independence through.
Nil by Mouth campaign director Dave Scott said the sight of groups acting in an aggressive and sectarian manner on Friday was depressing coming just hours after such a democratic process came to an end. Read his views here.
Mark, Fife: Re: John Swinney and the 'shifting goalposts'. Nobody's shifted the goalposts! Just because there's a bigger conversation than just Scotland going on involving all of the UK does not mean the needs of Scotland are getting ignored. Of course, if you just want to stir things up rather than be constructive you can take Swinney's view.
John Usher: I'm getting rather tired of Alex Salmond's inability to accept he lost the referendum. I voted No by postal vote. This was way before any talk of 'Vows'. I knew Westminster would do all it could to keep the Union and also knew they would quickly renege on any deal so that really cuts no ice with me. I voted No simply because I wasn't persuaded enough by the Yes campaign. As a 64-year-old I'm also getting rather tired of the Yes campaign's continuing dismissal of the older voter. I was always told the older you get the wiser you get - not in the Yes camp it seems.
Prof Michael Keating said he agreed that some of the sample sizes meant Lord Ashcroft's survey of how people voted needed some caution.
He says: "The younger people (16 and 17-year-olds) did appear from our earlier work to be leaning quite heavily towards No.
"Our project's post-referendum material will be coming out in the next few weeks."
He says: "They had a very small sample of 16 and 17-year-olds for instance. They find from 17 kids that they surveyed - just 17 out of the 2,000 in the sample for the survey - that 71% or so of 16 and 17-year-olds were Yes. That completely contradicts all the other survey work.
"A majority of high school votes where they had mock referenda were No."
Martin in Nairn: The fight for independence goes on. Round one had gone to No. If they don't deliver then round 2 will happen: our day will come.
Disgusted Al: The only 'country' in history ever to reject independence - we are no longer a country - we have been reduced to a mere region - our capital city is London.
Isobel: I voted Yes for democracy, for a more representative system of government and an end to self-serving elites.
Anon: This whole idea that the 55% plus who voted "No" were "tricked" into it by Westminster is contemptible. Again, Alex Salmond seeks to equate voting for independence with being more intelligent, compassionate and even more Scottish but he fails to understand that most of Scotland just didn't want separation.
Scotland's pro-independence parties, including the SNP and the Greens, report a continuing surge in membership in the wake of the referendum "No" vote.
The SNP says it now has 40,000 members compared to 25,642 at 17:00 on Thursday, while the Greens also said thousands joined their party over the weekend.
Prof Michael Keating, director of the Scottish Centre for Constitutional Change, told BBC Scotland's John Beattie programme men were more likely than women to have voted Yes in Thursday's independence referendum.
He added: "People over 55 seemed to have been voting overwhelmingly No.
"Young people were more inclined to vote Yes, although not necessarily the very youngest people.
"And people living in poorer neighbourhoods were more likely to vote Yes than people living in wealthier neighbourhoods."
The £900,000 bet on a 'No' vote is believed to be the largest ever placed on a political event.
"The first thing I would say is don't try this at home", the man who staked told the Jeremy Vine programme.
He describes himself as "definitely not super rich".
The man, who wanted to remain anonymous, collected £1,093,333.33 - including his stake.
He says it was a "reasoned wager" based on "a series of statistical observations".
It is "not something you should lightly", he adds.
Socialist politician Tommy Sheridan, the co-convener of the left-wing Solidarity party, has urged all Yes supporters to back the SNP.
In a statement, he said: What I am about to say is uncomfortable for a socialist like me. I oppose the SNP position on Nato membership, cutting corporation taxes for big businesses, retaining the Queen as a head of State, sharing sterling and other policies.
"BUT in order to maximise the pro-independence vote in next May's General Election I believe all Yes supporters should vote for the SNP and all other pro-Independence parties should not stand if the SNP candidate will commit to fight for a new Referendum as soon as possible and against all Westminster austerity cuts to welfare and public services."
Pure politics and pure political advantage is now at play after the referendum.
It was very noticeable on Friday morning when David Cameron made his speech how he linked these two issues.
He said there should be more devolution for England, there should be more devolution for Scotland but England's concerns would have to be met as well.
Downing Street are saying the two things work in tandem but one is no longer conditional on the other.
Like all political issues there is going to have to be compromise at some point if there is going to be an agreement.
I think all the Westminster leaders know very sharply that if they were to be seen in any way to be reneging on extra powers for Scotland, that would cause quite a backlash.
At the moment Labour has more than 40 MPs in Scotland, if Ed Miliband was to win the general election those MPs from Scotland would be very useful to him, not only in voting on Scottish matters but also in voting on perhaps health and education reforms which would primarily affect England.
Without the votes of those Scottish MPs he may not be able to get those reforms through. That is what really concerns Labour.
Labour says it wants extra devolution for Scotland. It also wants extra devolution for England. But it does not want the two issues linked.
Here at the Labour conference in Manchester, the repercussions of the Scottish independence referendum and the knock-on effects for constitutional reform, not just in Scotland but in the whole of the UK, have dominated proceedings - I think a little to the annoyance of the Labour leadership.
Also down at the prime minister's private residence Chequers in Buckinghamshire today we have Tory backbenchers meeting Mr Cameron to discuss what they want as devolution for England and of course the West Lothian question concerning the voting rights of Scottish MPs on English matters.
It is being suggested today the prime minister may sanction a vote before the general election which would seek to reduce the voting power of Scottish MPs.
Labour's shadow chancellor, Ed Balls, tells delegates in Manchester: "The people of Scotland did not vote for the status quo.
"They voted for the opportunity to shape Scotland's future with greater devolution, and it's our duty to deliver on that promise."
The UK's constitution does need to be changed, he says, but this process "must start with the people not politicians".
SNP chief executive Peter Murrell tweets: Mega drum roll... @theSNP now has 40,000 members. Big welcome to all 14,358 newbies. Join too and make a difference: https://my.snp.org/join
Grahame Smith, Scottish Trades Union Congress general secretary, says the "perpetual squabbling" between the Tories, Labour and the Lib Dems over devolution shows "they have learned nothing from the recent referendum campaign".
"Many of those who voted, some for the first time, and on both sides, voted for the constitutional settlement they felt would create a fairer and more just Scotland. They also voted for significant new powers for the Scottish Parliament and for more direct engagement with people and communities over the decisions which affect their lives.
"They aren't going to be passive participants in the process or tolerate political obfuscation or compromise. The sooner the politicians recognise this, and get down to working with civil society and the communities and people of Scotland to deliver a comprehensive new devolution settlement, the better."
Robert, aged 77: I voted Yes. Fed up with Westminster, don't believe we can't run our own country, the big money men are a threat 2 an independent Scotland.
Peter, Ayrshire: I voted Yes, because with a No vote there is a good chance Scotland will be involved in a war in the Middle East, and David Cameron will be prime minister for a second term because the people of England will see him as the saviour of the UK; the man who saved the strength of the pound, and a hero for middle England. In short: another government Scotland did not vote for.
Dave from Fife: I am very proud and fortunate to be born a Scot. However, I am equally proud to be a UK citizen and will never give either up.
Len McCluskey, general secretary of Unite, has dismissed David Cameron's plans for a devolution settlement, saying constitutional change should not be decided by "posh boys in Chequers" but by political debate with the people.
He says working people throughout England and Wales "have also had enough" and want change - and says: "Let the Scottish referendum be the tombstone on 20 years of our party's indifference to the interests of the working class".
Today's simple question: why did you vote the way you voted? You can listen to the political debate on the John Beattie show here.
Dr Gerry Hassan, of the University of West Scotland, says there is a "bit of a political hangover in Scotland at the moment".
Some people, he adds, "are simply not willing to let the referendum go, to accept and move on.
"It's all fine, but Scotland at one point has to pause, and breathe, and allow people to move on - because the referendum was last Thursday."
Another Tory MP meeting David Cameron today, James Wharton, said the aim was to "deliver a package that works for the people of England, Wales and Northern Ireland, just as it does for the people of Scotland".
Shadow chancellor Ed Balls has said that if there was a vote in the Commons on English devolution, the Labour Party would not "vote for something that wouldn't work".
It comes as Prime Minister David Cameron holds a summit with key Conservative figures to discuss his plans to limit the voting rights of Scottish MPs on English issues.
Folks, on the prog @BBCRadioScot today we will try to look at who voted what and why... and find out what it means for political landscape.
The voters may have rejected the SNP's defining policy of independence, but the party clearly isn't done fighting yet.
As Labour makes its appeal to win back supporters who voted "Yes" last Thursday, the SNP is talking itself up as a force to be reckoned with, suggesting it's on-track to win the 2016 Holyrood election - citing a membership surge and promising poll predictions.
Outgoing First Minister Alex Salmond, who will address the Scottish Parliament on Tuesday, says his opponents tricked people into voting "No" with a last-minute promise of new devolved powers, and the Scottish government now wants to put itself in a strong position to argue for as many new powers from Westminster as possible.
The problem with all this, say Scotland's pro-Union parties, is that Mr Salmond needs to fully accept the referendum result, while No 10 has dismissed claims that it's reneging on more devolved powers.
Meanwhile, the SNP leadership contest is on the horizon following Mr Salmond's decision to stand down, with current deputy Nicola Sturgeon the clear frontrunner to succeed him.
The new leader will take the reins at the SNP conference in November, after which Mr Salmond will stand down as first minister.
MSPs vote on his successor in that job, although the SNP's parliamentary majority will ensure it goes to their new leader.
One of the Conservative MPs meeting David Cameron at Chequers for constitution talks is former Attorney General Dominic Grieve.
This morning, he told BBC Radio 5live Breakfast it was "bizarre and "rather strange" that the three main Westminster party leaders, ahead of the referendum, promised that the Barnett funding formula should continue.
"It was introduced as a stopgap over 30 years ago and it's still with us today," Mr Grieve said. "
It does seem to me a little bit surprising if this is not an issue that shouldn't be looked at, at the same time."
David Cameron is meeting senior Conservative MPs at Chequers today to discuss his plans for constitutional change after Scotland rejected independence.
Political commentator Alex Massie says it remains to be seen what will be raised and subsequently delivered.
"It's a bit of a mess and a muddle at the moment and nobody's quite sure exactly what the prime minister is going to propose," he told BBC Radio Scotland.
"Although, presumably, it'll based upon the Tory Party's existing policy. Lots of Tory MPs don't appear to know that they do have a Scottish policy at the moment which is to base recommendations on those made by Lord Strathclyde and his commission, which was published earlier this year.
"That would be the devolution of all income tax, some modest welfare responsibilities and so on.
"But, any time you get a whole load of politicians in a room together, you can't be entirely sure of the outcome, except that it's probably going to disappoint a lot of people."
Mark Diffley, research director of polling company Ipsos Mori, has told BBC News that voters will be asked why they voted the way they did in the referendum so the result can be analysed.
He adds: "Scottish voters now, whether they voted 'Yes' or 'No', really do expect the proposals that were made in relation to the Scottish Parliament to be delivered according to the timetable that was set out before the referendum last week."
Anon: For me, a major issue is the quality of MSPs in Holyrood. If Holyrood is to have more powers, we need to attract quality MSPs. The majority of them are dire, and I wouldn't trust them to organise a school reunion, let alone Scotland's tax and benefit system. They are already making a right pig's ear of the Scottish NHS.
Nathan, Forres: Oh Jim Murphy - despite many attempts to ask you and Better Together could never provide an answer to that. Labour chipped away at the older folk, calling back several times despite them telling you they knew such things as pensions were safe. Well done to you all for fighting a dirty yet predictable campaign.
Anon: I voted for a fairer country. One where all politicians from all persuasions would have been able to focus their politics and efforts on those living in Scotland, for the benefit of everyone including the less well of! No doubt many No voters will have a crisis of conscience soon, having accepted, no bridge tolls, free bus passes, tuition fees, council tax etc. Who do these former SNP voters support now at the next election? The Better Together coalition? What an alliance forged by Thatcher's children!
Ian Telfer: Over the last three months Scottish Labour recruited circa 17 new members. Since last Friday morning, 13,382 new members for the SNP and counting. At this rate, the annual conference in November will have to be moved from Perth to Hampden
Ged, Dundee: I voted and made my mind up before the election. Mr Salmond should join together as he said it's Team Scotland. What is he doing now, keeping the country split.
Anon: Scottish Labour is dead. Standing side by side with the Tories has killed them in Scotland. Now all we hear from Westminster is backtracking and broken promises. Tricked? Of course, the No's were tricked by lies.
Labour's Jim Murphy, on stage at the Labour conference, says there are "so many things to celebrate" about the "No" vote.
"One of the lessons I would take is that we have to put the divisions of the past two years behind us," the shadow Cabinet minister said.
"Both sides of that referendum spent two years emphasising their differences rather than what we had in common.
"It has to be a victory without a vanquished.
"We surely cannot have a United Kingdom but a divided Scotland."
Journalist Jack Blanchard, at the Labour conference in Manchester,tweets: Jim Murphy arrives to a hero's welcome: "It's great to be on a stage that's a bit bigger and more stable than an Irn Bru crate."
Gavin: The powers will be delivered. However, it will take time. Why are people crying out that they have not been delivered yet? If Scotland voted for independence, this would not have happened overnight either and in fact it would have taken several years.
Elaine in Glasgow: I did not vote No for devo max. I am not old; No because I won't be intimidated by Yes; No to keep the UK together. Alex Salmond made false promises. Yes need to accept that No won. Let's move on together.
Murray, Dundee: I'm one of many people who voted No but don't want any extra powers. In fact, I want less powers for the Scottish parliament. A great expensive white elephant.
Finance Minister John Swinney has criticised the "utterly unseemly activity" by the Westminster parties.
Speaking on BBC Radio Scotland this morning, he said they had "shifted the goalposts" over devolution of powers to Scotland.
On the assurances from Labour's shadow Scottish secretary that powers would be transferred as promised, Mr Swinney says: "It's interesting that Margaret Curran was giving assurances this morning on behalf of the Conservative Party... as far as I know she has not been invited to Chequers".
David Cameron is hosting a summit of senior Conservative MPs at his official country residence today to discuss his plans for constitutional change.
Mr Swinney also reiterated his support for deputy SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon to replace Alex Salmond, saying she would be "an excellent candidate for the leadership of this party".
He said: "I have made clear to Nicola that she can rely on my unreserved support for the leadership of the party."
Marg, Sutherland: Would it be better to keep the promises to Scotland first, then deal with England? Or am I very naive?
Nathan, Forres: Ed Balls seems to take the West Lothian Question back on track with the wording "English votes for English Laws". It had morphed over the weekend to "English matters - English financial decisions" etc when we know fine well a lot of those things affect Scotland too.
Anon: All the noise being made is by the Yes voters being sore losers. I voted No and would vote No again tomorrow. I would be more worried if some rush decision was made in two days than people actually debating the issues and working out what is best for everyone in the UK. It is ludicrous to think those who voted No expected change within the week. Let's be realistic and not get caught up in this Yes voter "everyone must be happy now, or else!" mentality.
Scotland's only Tory MP, David Mundell, told Morning Call: "The powers will be delivered. I'm sure we could spend the rest of the programme listening to people saying that they won't be and the only way I can refute that is to deliver them.
"The test is the powers being delivered and I am absolutely confident that they will be."
Speaking to the BBC this morning, Labour's Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls said the prime minister's pledge to offer "English votes for English laws" is "possibly the most un-prime ministerial thing I've seen David Cameron do in the last few years".
Former Highland Council leader, Michael Foxley expects there to be another independence referendum within five years.
The long standing Lib-Dem politician voted 'Yes' for independence, contrary to his party's stance on staying part of the UK.
He says he believes a second vote is likely because there is a "major risk" Westminster won't deliver substantial new powers to the Scottish Parliament and may also scrap the Barnett Formula.
Journalist Martin Hannan told Morning Call on BBC Radio Scotland: "Without any shadow of a doubt Gordon Brown's intervention with the promise of these powers swung the vote at the last minute. It stopped the momentum for Yes dead in its tracks and people were able to go in and vote No with a clear conscience, because Scotland would be getting more powers.
"The fact is, we were told these things would happen over the weekend and what have we got today? We've got a meeting between the prime minister and Tory backbench MPs, who are furious at his promise to give more devolution."
John, Kirkcaldy: It'll be a compromise. The lowest common denominator will prevail. The question is, if it'll be enough to get the agreement of the majority.
Michael Welby: As an English voter and activist I am determined that the Scots people will get all that has been promised to them by the three leaders. At the same time I want the West Lothian Question addressed.
Robin, Glasgow: I voted No and I do have faith in the new powers being provided. What I never had faith in was Salmond's Vow that he and the Yes voters would accept the result of the referendum and move forward. He has clearly reneged on this, and now makes the sinister prediction the independence can be achieved "by other means". He clearly only wants to follow the sovereign will of the Scottish people if they agree with him.
Ewan, Nairn: I am 99% sure that the powers (whatever they are, nobody seems to know) won't be delivered, either with substance or in any decent time. However, it's still only scraps and why ' Scotland' voted No to running its own affairs, getting ALL powers and becoming a democratic country is beyond me. Scotland is a pitiful laughing stock. Independence will come and make no mistake, the YES movement is bigger than ever and British Nationalism here will shrink into history.
Anon: I am a No voter and I am perfectly happy with the way things are progressing with the Westminster parties. I wish Alex Salmond would just accept that; he lost his referendum that nobody asked for and that divided Scotland.
John in Linlithgow: Do I believe Westminster will deliver more powers to Scotland? NO. And in the declared timescale? NO.
Shadow Scottish secretary Margaret Curran said the guarantees made by the main parties during the referendum campaign on more powers for Scotland would not fall by the wayside.
"The Scottish people made an emphatic decision on Thursday," she said. "All parties said before the referendum we'd respect that.
"The sovereign will of the Scottish people has been expressed and we need to respect that and move forward with the guarantees and commitments made during the referendum campaign.
"I absolutely guarantee that we have the work done and have substantial progress under way. We'll be moving forward on that immediately."
Stuart from Fife: I just wish people would be more patient and realistic. It's only been a couple of days since the vote, the country has voted No and all the moaning and groaning will never change the will of the people. Everybody was sick and tired of all the stress caused by this vote, let's move on and give the politicians breathing space to carry out the job in hand!
Stevie, Motherwell: I knew the 3 main leaders would go back on their word to Scotland. Gordon Brown had no right promising what he couldn't keep too. It was a devo-trap and I voted Yes.
Danny: I voted No, I don't care about devo.
Ryan McArthur, Rothesay, Bute: The promise will not be kept, independence is unstoppable and Scotland will be independent within 15 years.
An argument has erupted between Labour and the Conservatives surrounding the timetable for further devolved powers to be granted to Scotland following a 'No' vote in the referendum.
David Cameron says that he also wants constitutional change for England with English MPs only to vote on English Laws and Ed Miliband feels that this shouldn't be attached to The Vow made to Scotland.
Alex Salmond, meanwhile, has claimed that this shows Westminster is trying to renege on the deal.
Do you have faith that Westminster will deliver on 'The Vow'?
Alex Salmond has accused the three UK party leaders of "reneging" on the pledge.
The first part of the agreement promises "extensive new powers" for the Scottish Parliament "delivered by the process and to the timetable agreed" by the three parties.
The second says the leaders agree that "the UK exists to ensure opportunity and security for all by sharing our resources equitably".
The third "categorically states" that the final say on funding for the NHS will lie with the Scottish government "because of the continuation of the Barnett allocation for resources, and the powers of the Scottish Parliament to raise revenue".
"I can absolutely guarantee that the commitments we made during the campaign will be honoured," the shadow Scottish secretary told BBC Radio's Good Morning Scotland.
"They [the Conservatives] can give that guarantee and I think they have given that guarantee. That's my understanding of what they've been saying all weekend.
"What is clear and people should be assured about are those categoric assurances we have from all the parties that were part of this."
Anon: We were not tricked Mr Salmond, we voted NO because you did not have answers to the big important questions.
Robert, Glasgow: Westminster will do what keeps the rest of the UK, their main electorate happy. They don't want to see more power go to Scotland so it won't happen. 1.6 million voices in Scotland will increase to 2.6 surely!
Janine, East Lothian: Those who voted No did so for a range of reasons. What is clear in speaking to my family and friends is that many were unsure about full independence and were attracted by the devo-max we were promised at the last minute. If they don't deliver devo-max, surely the legitimacy of the whole referendum falls apart?
The Herald leads with a claim that Alex Salmond has argued that Scotland could achieve independence without another referendum.
The Daily Record says a "rattled" David Cameron has been forced to make a "no ifs, no buts" commitment to more powers for Scotland.
The Scotsman says the leaders of the three main UK parties are at odds over the delivery of further devolution.
Martin, Glasgow: I don't think a single person in Scotland wants the West Lothian Question to remain. We understand fairness. Why, then, is fixing it supposedly the reason for the collapse of the great Scottish bribe off?
Lorna, Glasgow: These tax proposals are exactly what Better Together objected to for independence: cross border, tax etc. We should have had more info on this before the referendum.
Anon: Nicola Sturgeon for first minister... mon the Irn Bru Lady.
David Cameron has "muddied the waters" on devolved powers in the wake of Scotland's referendum vote, according to a Labour MP.
Graham Allen, the MP for Nottingham North and chairman of the House of Commons political and constitutional reform committee, said the prime minister should deal with devolution for England separately.
"Promises were made by all the union parties; they have to be honoured and they will be honoured," Mr Allen told BBC Radio's Good Morning Scotland programme.
"What's confusing people is the prime minister, threw in on Friday morning, that he wanted to look at English MPs and English votes.
"I think that's muddied the waters and everyone would be happier if those issues were dealt with separately.
"That won't compromise any promises that were made by those parties last week before the [referendum] vote took place.
"There is a separate issue, which is very important, which is Scotland, through their fantastic democratic adventure of the referendum, has raised devolution for everyone else in the union.
"Really, we just need to be honest about this. We're going to have, at some point, a federal parliament and system in the UK."
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.