Bass

2009-05-24T14:12:00.001-07:00

Following a lot of other people, I've moved to wordpress .

Why is it hot in here? The not so mandatory apology

2009-05-24T13:03:00.000-07:00

It was one of those damp, cloudy and rainy days. A Cognac was on my mind but a warm cup of bitter coffee would have worked just as well. Considering it was 9 in the morning, I proceeded on to acquire the latter. I'd learned over the years that especially on a dark day like this, one should not commit the mistake of reaching one's workplace too early. For then, they are surely to be understood as a person known in the parlance of our time simply as a 'pushover', 'dupe' or 'mark'. Thus I waited ample time at the coffee shop for no particular reason, pretending to read a book. While waiting and pretending to read, I could not help but overhear the boisterous conversation on the table at my left.

Since, I do not remember it verbatim and it has no connection to the main subject and the introduction has become longer than expected, I shall summarize the dialogue between our young and lovely subjects; who are only tangentially important to the main plot. The young man, aged 19-24 was impressing upon a young girl aged 19-24 that he'd just discovered a new Theory of everything . From what I understood, the theory was supposed to be highly non-mathematical, controversial, simple and yet all explaining. The reason why our young and enthusiastic scientist was not showing this work of genius to his professors was that he was too afraid of academic dishonesty and plagiarism from his professors.

Now, what I am planning to expound upon my limited understanding of temperature is likely to make me feel like that gentleman, viz. Fake. I shall still gather the courage, and with help of a couple of anecdotes try to explain what I do and do not understand about temperature. As is the case with any topic bordering between physics and metaphysics, or better put science and philosophy of science, I'm afraid that the subject matter shall slip out of my hand and what will result is pure verbiage. I shall thus take great care not to be labeled as a mystic. Why then, one will ask, I venture into these realms, instead of writing mundane computer programs which will accelerate my journey towards graduation. The answer is two fold, firstly, one perhaps needs adequate and timely dose of, for the lack of better word(s), scientific obscurantism in order to continue their struggle and contribution towards apparently futile scientific inquiry. Secondly, I like to think that I'm on the verge of an important fundamental unification discovery, a fact that has been overlooked by physicists for at least over a century, the odds for which are obviously minuscule.

With this much unwanted apology, I shall now proceed towards the understanding of temperature.

2009-05-21T06:35:00.001-07:00

मोट्ठ्या इमारतींच्या भाऊ-गर्दीत एकच प्रचंड जल्लोष सुरु झाला. त्या भयंकर रांगेच्या मध्यभागी ती भेदार्लेली साध्वी.

पुढे श्वेताम्बर साधूंचा जत्था, मागे रडवेले कुटुंब. जेमतेम सहा वय असेल तिच. " काय हे पुण्यवान जमनदास!", गर्दित चर्चा सुरु झाली. "ब्राह्मणाला न विचारता घर बांधले नाही, कधी व्यसनांच्या आहारी गेले नाहीत, की कधी धंद्यात लबाडी! आता तर समाजाला मुलगी सुद्धा अर्पण! नक्कीच त्यांच्या स्थायी केवली विहार करत असावा!"

येथपर्यंत आल्यावर तिने आपले जुने व नवीन कपडे, दागिने, जरी पटका आणि इतर गोष्टी जमावात फेकायला सुरुवात केली. प्रत्येक जाणार्या वस्तूबरोबर साधूंचा जप, बायकांचा आक्रोश, जमानादासंचे समाधान आणि तिच उत्साह वाढतच होता. आता सगळ्या भौतिक सुखांचा त्याग करून ती सहा वर्षांची भावी साध्वी मोक्षप्रप्तिस्तव पुढे निघाली. थोड्याच दिवसात ती आपले धड न वाढलेले केस स्वतः च्याच हातांनी उपटून काढेल. तय वेदना तिला स्रामानांच्या जवळ आणि स्वतः पासून दूर नेतील.

"काय हे धन्य जमनादास, ह्या जन्मी का नसेना, मुलीस पुढील जन्मी नक्की पुरुष योनितून पक्का मोक्ष मिळेल." खुद्द सावकार सुद्धा ह्या पापक्षलानाच्या सौद्यात पक्केच निश्चल आणि तृप्त दिसत होते. "एकतर हुंडा वाचला, आणि त्यातून पुण्य लाभ!" आता सरकारी अधिकार्यांना लाच देताना जमानादासंचे मन त्यांना आतून खाणार नव्हते, किमान पुढची दोन वर्षे. "त्यानंतर, एक मंदिर बांधून द्यावे, की मग झाले." "केवढी उलाढाल वाढेल, परत हुंडा वाचला, त्यातून मुलगी साध्वी. सगलेच कसे छान जमून आले आहे."

मुलगी मात्र भयंकर खुश होती. गर्दी, तिच्या मध्यभागी सुवर्ण रथ, रथाच्या मध्यात ती, सगळ्यांचे लक्ष तिच्यावर, सुन्दर वस्त्रे, सुन्दर अन्न. तिचा आजचा दिवस तरी फारच मजेत चालला होता. सावकारही प्रसन्न दिसत होते. खिन्न होता तो वर्धमान, आणि कदाचित रिषभ, आणि पार्श्व.

From the madman's diary

2009-05-11T08:04:00.000-07:00

Perhaps there are still children who have not eaten men? Save the children....

Original link here .

Culture of prohobitions

2009-05-11T06:32:00.000-07:00

Do not eat meat on mondays
Do not use the right hand on your ass
Do not use the left hand while eating
Do not drink wine in silverware
Do not kill the cow, nowhere
Do not eat meat on tuesdays
Do not touch my feet
and I will not touch yours
for we do not eat meat on wednesday
Do not wear coloured clothes, oh widow
and do not wear a bindi
Do not remove your ghunghat in elderly company
and do not eat meat on thursdays
Do not wear footwear in a temple
and do not touch food with feet
salt shouldn't be the first thing in the plate
and do not eat meat on fridays, even if it is late
do not cross the sea, do not touch those people
do not marry out of caste
do not even think about religion
do not come out of your room, dirty woman
and in India, WE DO NOT HAVE GAYS
that's because, we do not eat meat on saturday
and for that matter, on sunday

2009-04-28T16:02:00.000-07:00

He let the lady climb up the stairs and he followed. He always followed. "Up, right at the end, red door on the left", He said; in a rather loud voice. He was hurrying her. A gentleman like him was not supposed to be seen with someone like her. He was indeed a gentleman, and she was too much of a lady for him, with light red lipstick, used so much that it appeared dark, she was surely less than five hundred a night. On her way up, her heels made a rhythmic sound. It made him worry, thinking simultaneously about the neighbor downstairs. A queer old Lithuanian who had a very strong ear and the tiniest of sounds disturbed him.

Ed, the gentleman walked in the apartment. "Cognac?", he asked while taking two glasses out. Two ice cubes per glass, rockioles. She walked to the sofa and said, "This is a nice place", looking at the Matisse on the wall, 'Dessert, harmony in red'. He proceeded to turn on Brahms and dim the lights and made himself comfortable next to her, on the sofa. As soon as his hands were active, he heard a knock on the door. "Sir, keep the voice down, I'm an old man, sleep time sir!".

He lost it there. "Shut the fuck up, you son of a bitch, go away or I'll come out and shoot you!" And the knocking disappeared, followed by a swift noise of old feet, trying to achieve a speed the body didn't allow them to.

He'd seen the girl and now she had to go before everybody knew. Ed wasn't terribly excited about her departure. But he wasn't very unhappy either. His last bit of joy, he thought, was the brown liquid. It would loosen it up before he ceases, to be. A tiring day, but the ice had cooled down the Cognac. He sipped from the wrong end. Now the liquid entered his veins, as he gulped it. He felt as if, as if it was rejuvenating and soaking every single one of his tired muscles with itself. He knew it was doing exactly the opposite, he knew, he will eventually be tired, older and dehydrated with enough of the cold cold drink. The second glass was much faster than the first one. He felt relaxed now. It had to be done, before he loses the courage. "Get up, turn left and find the 44mm. Colt, Always loaded", he said to himself, not that the words came out, but he knew that was what that had to be done. A funny little piece, he'd won it in a bet, racing. Surprisingly, his gait was appreciably distorted for a man of his capacity. Even the Cognac left his side, in the last moment.

Now, he hoped and prayed too, "No disturbances now, please! Lord". He finally had the courage, if not courage Cognac; inside of him. He struggled with the locker, some important papers fell down followed by a bunch of gold bricks clamorously. After all, he was a man in the government, gold, silver, bonds, watches, that was his real income. Surprisingly, the noise did not affect him, and he was determined now, not to worry about the Lithuanian. And then, there, he found it. The funny little shining black piece: Colt 44mm, always loaded. There was a knock on the door, again, for the second time that day. "Can you please keep it down? I'll have to call the police here now!" Ed did not bother, he made his way out of the room. He wanted to be in front of Matisse, and with Brahms. He struggled a bit, he didn't want to mess up with the important papers. In the living room, the knocks were heard more prominently than the bedroom and Ed started losing his patience. He looked at the funny little piece, Colt 44mm, always loaded and smiled; weakly, very weakly. He thought about positions, "neck? head? What's more effective? What should I aim for? Less pain or more surety?" None of the words came out, but they were heard by him, no doubt. The knocks and funny accented warnings were competing with his rational calculations, seeking for his attention, the Cognac was waning too. "Papers, pain, bricks, neck, ice, the lipstick, harmony in red, Colt, Lithuania", suddenly he had a bright idea and he smiled, a bit more expressively than the last time. He calmly walked to the table, in that continual noise from outside. Filled another glass and gulped it down, this time from the correct end. Without ice. He purposefully let the glass off from his hands, ensuring more noise on the inside and thus from the outside. The police were surely on their way, so he had to be quick. He waited a bit for the Cognac to reach his body and mind.

Then, slowly he walked to the door and opened it. The man outside was stunned, looking at him and the funny little piece: Cold 44mm, always loaded. Ed stepped backwards, to make sure that he didn't miss and shoot the man in the chest. The old one crumpled like a piece of paper. On the floor, bleeding. When you die of a shock wound, the blood does not effuse continuously. It sprinkles out, and for someone with arrhythmia, at random intervals. Before Ed could proceed killing himself, he could not help but observe the miracle of life, the death. The face was painless, owing to Parkinson and it was a mute death, Harmony in red. The color, the absence of sound and emotion made his hand stiff and mind numb. He decided to wait, for the police to come.

From an equal music

2009-03-20T06:40:00.000-07:00

The rest of the evening passes uneventfully and happily: a meal at a trattoria, a walk through small streets, a late drink at a bar. She is the woman I love, and we are in Venice, so I presume this is joy. It is.

A J P Taylor

2009-02-18T17:43:00.000-08:00

For a long long time I wanted to go to a bar and read, not get drunk and read but just read. I could do that finally. Surprisingly, history (as boring as it may sound) was my companion, and who's better in narrating history than AJP Taylor! For example,

Revolution is for society what passionate love is for the individual; those who experience it are marked for ever, separated from their own past and from the rest of mankind.

And

Marx did not discover (this) class war. He observed it in France (in 1848) and then generalized it as a formula for the future. That is the only way of the prophet: to foretell as the future what has already happened.

There are are numerous such examples :-) I simply love the man

My beloved homeland: WTF India

2009-02-13T07:26:00.000-08:00

I come from a country where there is at least one bizarre news a day; not from a small corner of the country but mainstream. These days it's about Shri Rama Sene and their intellectual poverty! Today they declared that any couple behaving obscenely in public will be captured digitally and put on the internet. Sadly the definition of obscenity comes from the age old laws of social misdemeanor which are in turn based on the morals of the British society in the fifties.

That aside, the justification for this publicity for couples is this:

Kumar said India is the land of Lord Krishna and nobody should compete with him in terms of love and relationship. . Click here for the bit .

WTF India!

A baysian approach to entropy

2009-02-03T19:08:00.000-08:00

We'll see if this way of looking at entropy makes it more tangible!

We'll assume that we know all the physical definitions and equations from classical mechanics (or quantum for that matter). Quantities such as energy, volume, velocity, forces, interaction potential are known. While quantities such as pressure, temperature, entropy, free energy are yet to be defined. We'll see why we need these new quantities if we hope to describe the system at hand in the least risky manner.
--

Consider a box which does not leak energy, through any mechanism. Let the box be filled with marbles in vacuum. Initially the marbles are stationary and their positions are known. Now the box is given to an unknown person who shakes it vigorously and gives it back to you. You now know the total energy content of the box, but since you didn't witness the shaking yourself you are not very sure about the velocity of each particle.

Now it is commons sense that we expect that some fraction of the energy of the box can be transferred into some other system. We do not yet know if this is entirely possible. But we can always hope, because the law of conservation of energy does not prohibit that (this is a classical mechanical law, hence we know its truth).

In a slight detour, let's consider a system where we have a single marble situated at the center of a cubical box. The box is shaken such that the marble is now moving parallel to one of the walls. This is a perfectly deterministic system, the equation of this system can be written as:

f(U,V,N) == 0

where U is the energy of the system (marble), V is the confinement volume and N is the number of marbles (=1). We can bravely say that the system is deterministic. The energy transfer from such a system is going to be easy since we exactly know how it is behaving. This can be generalized to any number of marbles as long as we know exactly the velocity and initial positions of all of them.

The equation of this multiple marble deterministic system will be the usual Hamiltonian equation:

symbolically f(U,V,N,{p_i,q_i}) == 0

Clearly this simple situation differs from our more complicated box with more than 1 marbles. Let {p_i(t),q_i(t)}_n be the set of all possible trajectories of our system. Depending on the initial shaking, the system will choose one of these trajectories. So the actual equation of the system will be

f(U,V,N,{p_i,q_i}_m) == 0

The subscript m corresponds to the shaking procedure employed and will vary depending upon it. Since we do not know how the energy was transferred to the system, we do not know which m to choose. This is repetition of the same statement that we do not know the trajectory of each and every particle. It is intuitive to assume that the maximal amount of energy that can be transferred from our box to any other system is dependent upon the particular trajectories the marbles are following. For a given method, some trajectories will yield higher energy transfer than others.

Now, even if we don't know all information about the system, we are required to estimate the maximal amount of energy transfer that is possible. We have no inclination towards any of the specific trajectories and all of them are . We've ignored (or we are unaware of) the actual state of the system and yet we hope to characterize it. We are not familiar with such lack of knowledge in classical mechanics. Let us hope to quantify this ignorance and call it

Hence instead of the old equation of state, our equation now looks like the following:

f(U,V,N,S) == 0

Notice the absence of a particular trajectory. It is also intuitive that since we do not have access to some of the information about the system. This new approach is going to be an approximate one. We can at the best hope that it applies .

If we further write f(U,V,N,S) == 0 as S == S(U,V,N) we arrive at the first postulate of classical thermodynamics. The postulate of existence of entropy. More properties are boldly ascribed to this entropy function (which it seems to obey! in experiments) in further postulates.

---

In various good books on thermodynamics, the existence of entropy is either postulated as a mathematical fact or is justified retrospectively as a useful tool. I find this ignorance approach much more realistic and logical since it justifies the postulate for me.

Something for Dawkins

2009-02-02T15:02:00.000-08:00

I'd written this a couple of months ago. Still unfinished!
--------
According to Dr. Dawkins, in his wonderful book “The God delusion”, Polytheism for Hindus is essentially monotheism in disguise. He also claims that Buddhist and other eastern traditions are “philosophies of life” and not religions.

“There is only one God - Lord Brahma the creator, Lord Vishnu the preserver, Lord Shiva the destroyer, the godesses Saraswati, laxmi and Parvati(Wives of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva), Lord Ganesh the elephant god, and hundreds of others, all are just different manifestations or incarnations of the one God.”

Later in the section on polytheism, Prof. Dawkins analyzes the Roman Catholic version of polytheism and refutes it with utmost wit.

There are two limitations with this approach. First of all, limiting himself to the religion of God, he saves himself from the trouble of analyzing the atrocities of Zen and Tibetan Buddhism. The lack of an almighty entity in these eastern traditions, according to him disqualifies them as being part of the world religions. Interestingly, both of them are attacked by an older British heretic, Bertrand Russell. Though Russell’s focus was on Christianity and perhaps other Semitic religions, he did superficially touch upon Hindu and other eastern traditions. At the same time, Russell admitted fully that the scope of his analysis was indeed the western world.

In an effort to generalize his refutations for the Semitic god, Prof. Dawkins neglects far eastern traditions and trivializes Hinduism as “monotheism in disguise”. Doing this, his theory automatically applies for all world religions (as defined by him) and he conclusively proves that all world religions are false and harmful. This neglect and trivialization is similar to Prof. Steven Weinberg (in atheism tapes on BBC) saying that “Hindus have not thought about the nature of their gods, they don’t really know who Shiva is”.

We are in no way suggesting that this is not the case! Our only concern is that, to understand the nature of psychological control and the inflicted horrors by the Hindu and similar such religions (Jain, Buddhist and even the other atheist in ancient India), we need a different theory than the one used for Semitic religions.

The above quoted trivialization of the Hindu religion is not even the most popular image of the same amongst its followers. None of the Hindus would consider Lord Brahma as the creator of the universe. The Hindu mythology, unlike the Abrahamic one, doesn’t start at a certain point of time. The Hindu time line is always circular, the history repeats itself in form of Yugas. The lives and souls are carried over from one life form to another, from one Yuga to another in a continuous cycle. There is no one almighty god (as suggested by Dawkins) the gods, as a matter of fact, are not even important in the theoretical framework of the religion.

Two things can be considered important in the theoretical framework of the present day Hinduism. One is Brahma, which is similar to the Monad of Leibniz or the substance of Spinoza. The other is Karma which is a balance of good vs. evil deeds of a given individual. Karma is balanced by itself without intervention of any particular God. God or Iswara is felt / perceived by human experience only because our knowledge of the Brahma is faulted in a process of Maya. When the individual attains perfect knowledge of “what is”, he can see the Brahma and no god or gods are required for such individuals. The founders of the theoretical principles of Hinduism (Vishistha Adwaita) were ready to accept that Jain ascetics had acquired Brahma, even though Jainism is a strictly atheist religion. Thus the two main functions of the western god, that of (a) creation and maintenance and of (b) punishment and justice are taken care of by (a) cyclic nature of time and (b) Karma theory, rendering the God useless and absent.

In other words, if one were to analyze Hindu religion from its theoretical principles, (similar to the treatment Dawkins has given to Semitic religions) he/she has to classify it as “monism” and not “monotheism”. Further criticism of eastern “monism” is eagerly awaited as it still remains a physically unreal theory. We will not go into the matter of “what Hindus actually believe?”, since it’s a question enormously difficult to tackle. But the main reason is that in his thesis, Prof. Dawkins has always criticized the Christian religion “as defined by the church” or “as a theology” not as practiced by the masses. Hence, in criticizing the Hindu religion from its founding principle, one should identify with the vast difference between the Semitic theology and the Indic theology.

Interestingly mass of Hindus, Jains and Buddhists still remain religious and perhaps more superstitious than their western counterparts with a strong God tradition. This observation perhaps has led Prof. Dawkins to conclude the similarity between Indic and western religion (“Monotheism in disguise”). It is both interesting and horrifying that such mentality can exist even without a presence of an omnipotent and omniscient God. Different tools of analysis are required to decipher the Hindu version of “thought crime” and “big brother” if any.

Thus, according to us, it is in no way helpful to trivialize and dismiss the Hindu religion. Firmly believing in the irrefutable logic of Prof. Dawkins, we expect a similar dissection of the Hindu religion, both in theory and practice. Perhaps by him or someone else.

2009-01-13T18:04:00.001-08:00

I've had the Germinal for the last two years. Thanks to the dauntingly large size of the book and extremely descriptive first few pages I could never make it past the first chapter.

The barrier was crossed suddenly, and now I find myself on the 150th page and that's when I stopped to take a moment celebrate the fact that now it's highly likely I'll finish it! It's a wonderful book, about coal mine workers. It's a very graphic portrayal of poverty, inequality, injustice and hypocrisy; I'm loving it.

And I just finished the Razor's edge. A typical Sommerset Maugham. He has this knack of inserting acute observations of human conditions otherwise irrelevant to the plot, for example (thanks to Karthik I have one from my all time favorite, Of Human Bondage:

Like most people who cultivate an interest in the arts, Hayward was extremely anxious to be right.

2008-12-03T18:08:00.000-08:00

I remember talking to a friend one night in Paris when she remarked that all the new people she'd met in America appeared to be artificial and formal. It's been a more than a couple of years now and she might have revised her opinion. What struck me today was a passage from The Razor's edge, where Maugham confesses his incapacity to genuinely portray American characters. The reasons he gives make me believe that it was a coincidence that they appeared unnatural to one person and were beyond comprehension for the other.

I don't think one can ever really know any but one's own countrymen. For men and women are not only themselves; they are also the region in which they were born, the city apartment or the farm in which they learnt to walk, the games they played as children, the old wives tales they overheard, the food they ate, the schools they attended, the sports they followed, the poets they read and the God they believed in.

It is much easier to start writing again after a long hiatus by simply borrowing someone else' words.

Mundane discovery

2008-08-30T10:15:00.001-07:00

With the start of the new academic year, it was decided that one shall cook more. More cooking obviously leads to more cooking experiments. I do not intend to say this in a sexist man chauvinistic way (the 'Oh, crap now I have to cook!' and 'Look, how pathetic I am!' jokes). I am a (self proclaimed) darn good cook otherwise (Here!).

Anyways, I discovered three things. I can make hummus. I can make Burritos (sort of) and I can make a directory titled 'Cooking' on my computer and download recipes there.

Yippee

2008-08-25T07:17:00.000-07:00

thetimesarechanging.blogspot.com has been added to The Atheist Blogroll. You can see the blogroll in my sidebar. The Atheist blogroll is a community building service provided free of charge to Atheist bloggers from around the world. If you would like to join, visit Mojoey at Deep Thoughts for more information.

Reasons

2008-08-13T16:51:00.000-07:00

Those who reason that though they'd love to, but they are currently too busy to exercise should know that Swami Vivekananda and Lokamanya Tilak spent 45 minutes each day on their body. Either you are busier than both the men; or I don't want to say...

Farmer's market

2008-07-09T22:54:00.000-07:00

I took my mother who's visiting me for two months to the farmer's market this saturday.

One of the stalls had parsley, sage, rosemary and thyme for sale, in that order :-)

On the taxonomy of the rational religious

2008-07-02T12:30:00.000-07:00

The rational religious is a peculiar species constantly dwelling in contradictions and willfully ignorant of it. Here we discuss the primary classification into trivial and interesting categories.

Trivial rational religious are irrational and religious who claim to be rational. There is no other contradiction than this in your face lie. A perfect example of such is Bill O'reilly or Dinesh D'Souza. Since these fall under the broader classification of liars, no further inspection of this category is required.

The next category is of hypocrites who are rational towards every other faith than their own. With assistance of the magic goggles acquired through years of indoctrination, these individuals are eager to point out mistakes, irrationalities and plain stupidities in other people's faiths. These shall be called Rayban rationals. When it comes to their own faith, these stupidities according to them, are either absent or are present through a complicated process of misinterpretation. If this were to be true for one of the faiths, one would expect that such individuals tend to concentrate in that particular faith. Curiously, these species occur across all religions, this weakens their position on truth and misinterpretation as seen by an external observer.

For example, marrying four women in Islam is not a sign of male dominance but Manusmriti is. Similarly caste system is a stable social structure in which all factions of society are merry while slavery as was practiced by Christians and Muslims is sinful. Interestingly these individuals are known to be extremely apologetic towards their faith. Which makes them even more pathetic.

Further, we find some religious who tend to extract the common elements of all religions and rationalize those. From here onwards, these are termed, religious rationalizers instead of rational religious. These interesting species are sometimes found to defend faiths other than their own, to an extent where they misrepresent their own. This category is further divided into racist and non-racist.

The racist religious rationalizer generally belongs to the judeo-christian faiths. When referring to religion, this category of individual only has those religions in mind. Quiet interestingly, most of the religious rationalizers and surprisingly, militant irreligious (more on that later) fall in this category due to their western or mid-eastern upbringing. The unifying features of religion as commonly cited by this species appear to be the unifying features of judeo-christian faiths. Viz. a unique and almighty god, a moral code of conduct as directed by him and possibility of super-natural incidents on earth. Obviously a vast sea of atheistic, non-theistic, polytheistic, positivist and moral religions from the east and far east is invisible to this individual. The plain ignorance towards culture of the east carries no other name than racism.

One such example of contradiction occurs when a rabbi/imam is asked to argue for the virgin birth of Jesus Christ as a possible supernatural phenomenon. Either they refute it as an unreal incident (yet accept fairies talking to Mohammad as perfectly realistic) and fall into the category of Rayban rationals. Or, they defend the virgin birth and contradict their own religion. When asked about non-theistic nature of some Chinese or Indian religions, the imams,rabbi and priests are found to be silent in condescension, possibly thinking that their judeo-christian faiths are obviously better than the eastern crazies!

To this time, there is only one known individual who may be classified as the non-racist religious rationalizer. A mahatma who tried to integrate all faiths, from Ahimsak Jainism to conquering Islam, from moderate Buddhism to missionary Christianity into his life and living. A task so mammoth that a life abruptly ended at 80 years was too short.

The last and the most sad category is of rationals who are religious only for indoctrination reasons. To be called indoctrinated rationals. All their cognition supports a positive, realistic view of the world, yet the religious upbringing creates a barrier mostly unshakable. The degree with which they acknowledge the indoctrination and the real nature of the world varies from individual to individual. It is with these species lies the hope for a better tomorrow. Honest and struggling, truth seekers carrying the burden of childhood trauma.

Christ fail

2008-06-26T19:13:00.000-07:00

Richard Dawkins was once on the O'Reilly factor, while narrating the history of science in successfully explaining the world around us, the following happened:
------
Richard Dawkins: We are in the beginning of 21st century, we don't know everything, we have to be humble, we have to, in humility say...

Bill OReilly:(Cutting Dawkins) You know being humble is a christian virtue
------

In short, O'Reilly stopped Dawkins in the middle of the sentence (not so humble) to stress that humbleness is a christian virtue.

Firstly, humbleness is NOT an exclusively christian virtue. It is a christian virtue in the same sense as breathing is an American activity. Humbleness is part of ALL cultures across the world in some form of another. The places which were lucky enough to develop the framework of philosophy around human behavior (Bible is NOT a book of philosophy) had formalized and glorified humbleness as a virtue independent of the Christians. The Chinese and the Jains/Buddhist to list a few.

Apparently being ignorant to facts and and staunch proud stupidity is humbleness. This kind of ironic behavior is similar to our dear Cat Stevens who says Islam is a religion of peace and then also has the opinion that death would be too small a punishment for Rushdie.

Occam's razor and the fall of ether

2008-06-11T13:37:00.000-07:00

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck - it's a duck

That's the easiest example of the Occam's razor, in action. Though this may sound trivial, consider this example.

Suppose we create an artificial robot which looks exactly like a duck. Upon observation of the above kind (watching it from a distance), Occam's razor would force us to conclude that what we are seeing is a duck (and not the duck robot). Surely, upon further investigation, we will know that it's not a duck (when we dissect it, we will see motors and circuits and not blood and flesh). Till we have that extra bit of data about the interior of the duck-robot, the simplest conclusion is that its a duck and that's Occam's razor.

Philosophers have spent ages on the following example, but let me try my bit as well. I apologize for putting on the pompous hat. "Why should we be ethical?" If that's posed as a question, one may answer: "We should obey god", and "God wants us to be ethical". This theory of ethics involves at least 3 axiomatic statements.
1. God exists
2. We should obey him
3. One of god's orders is to be ethical
Out of this, the first statement is not exactly axiomatic because god has to be defined when we say it exists. To my understanding 2 and 3 are pretty straight forward objective statements. On the other hand, if our answer is this in a rather complicated manner as Kant did : "Always act according to that maxim whose universality as a law you can at the same time will". For example, I should not bribe, because I do not want to live in a world where bribery is abundant. This justification of being ethical requires only one axiom or assumption compared to 3 for the god theory. Occam's razor would suggest that we do should not chose the god theory to justify ethics over the Kant theory. People now know better alternatives to the Kant theory as well. Interestingly, if god were an empirical fact of life like ducks and buffaloes, we will not need to hypothesize about it and then the god theory would be better. As I think about this, the chinese had developed a school of thought called the loyalist which was essentially:
1. The king exists
2. We should obey him
3. One of King's orders is to be ethical
Here, the king exists empirically in people's lives. Empirical existence loosely means tangible existence (lokayat in sanskrit). Hence on the face of it, the loyalist theory for ethics is equivalent to the Kantian theory.

The most beautiful example I know, of the success of the razor is due to Einstein. I am going to try and write it in the simplest language possible to me.

In 1864, the young James Clark Maxwell was writing equations to describe how magnets and charged balls attract each other. Just out of curiosity, he applied the same equations to space where there are no magnets and charged balls. Surprisingly, he found out that even in absence of magnets and charged balls, the fields produced by them can exist in a periodic fashion. This field travels in a single direction. From the mathematics of it, he could simply calculate the velocity of the field which turned out to be the measured velocity of light! Indeed, light was an electromagnetic wave. From magnets and pith balls mathematics lead Maxwell to the true nature of light! But there was one problem. As we know in common sense, waves require a medium, sound waves travel through air and water, vibrations take place on strings, sea waves are on water and so on. Maxwell's equations didn't require the light to travel through any particular medium, from the face of it, it seemed that they could exist even in vacuum! Blasphemy, though Maxwell and readily proposed a medium called 'ether' which pervades everything, just like the Brahma of Sankara. Bodies could move in the ether without any friction he said. This ether was required just to support our common sense that waves need 'something' to propagate.

We surely know that while traveling in a car, the fellow drivers appear to us to be slower than their actual speed, since they are traveling with us. But, when we slow down, they appear to be much faster! In short, the speed of the 'observed' depends on the speed of the 'observer'. Now, if our earth is moving through this ether, one can calculate the velocity of light in different ways so as to detect the motion of earth. After the famous Michaelson-Morley experiment to detect earth's motion in ether, it was found out that unlike the speeding car, speed of light is constant, independent of the 'observer'. This was a shocking observation, which defied all human intuition. To explain this rather challenging experiment, Lorentz came up with a theory more complicated than the Maxwell's equations, now known as Lorentz theory of ether. This theory made some unintuitive postulates and confirmed that the drift of earth in ether cannot be detected by measuring the speed of light. The only purpose of the mathematical jugglery was to come up with a framework which supports the theory for ether. In short but very importantly, Lorentz theory could explain all the available experimental observations. To follow the Occam's razor framework, Lorentz had proposed a theory which explained everything that was known about light at that time with some postulates regarding ether. This theory had axioms about the nature of ether and its interactions with matter and light.

Tired by this, Einstein in 1905 simply came up with an alternative (now better known as the special theory) where he didn't require at all, the mumbo-jumbo about ether. Instead, he made fundamental assumptions about the nature of light, viz. the principle of relativity and the principle of invariant light speed. Einstein's formulation also explained everything that was known about light at that particular time. Moreover, if one counted the number of assumptions in special theory, they turned out to be less than the Lorentz theory. Based on this, Einstein argued that the special theory was superior to the Lorentz theory and later, this was found out to be so (with further experiments).

As we've seen, both the theories explained all the known facts about light. Just because Lorentz's theory required more assumptions than Einstein's, Occam's razor guided us to choose Einstein over Lorentz. Later, as we know, it was found out that special theory was a better alternative for various of reasons. But in 1905, there was no reason other than Occam's razor to choose Einstein over Lorentz.

The above (rather long and boring) story is just one empirical evidence for the validity of the Occam's razor. I find it to be the most compelling one because it was the sole reason to choose one explanation over other. And it proved to be miraculous for the future of physics!

Doctrine of misinterpretations

2008-05-20T13:34:00.000-07:00

A news article I read a couple of days ago informed me about the prohibitory actions taken by Imams of different mosques in UP in order to prevent spread of terrorism. The article suggested that after the friday prayers, Imams should talk about terrorists, terrorisms and its tricks to fool young people into their cult using emotional tactics. The article also sweetly mentioned that the Imams will stress on how the Koran does not preach violence.

Doesn't all of the above sound perfectly reasonable and applauding as an effort? But wait, why do the Imams need Koran to say that strapping yourself with bombs and killing a bunch of toddlers is bad? Is the muslim youth so stupid to understand it themselves or the Koran so obvious to certify that it is indeed bad to run an aeroplane into a building killing thousands of people. In february when the all indian muslim law board and the jamat e islami hind denounced terrorism and similar acts of violence, they stressed that it is highly un-islamic to kill innocents. In the following passages, I will try to dissect this particular claim. The full fatwa against terrorism can be found here : http://darululoom-deoband.com/english/index.htm

When this institution wants to denounce terrorism because it is un-islamic it strongly suggests that they want to find the definition of good vs bad or moral vs immoral in the code of conduct suggested by the Koran. Doesn't it then suggest that the definition of innocence itself should come from Koran? One would say it's a trivial point, but then isn't it also clear in the Koran that it is the gravest of sins to pray offerings to multiple gods? Or to have a homosexual relationship? Or for a woman to marry and be a non-virgin? These kinds of people (hindus, gays and non-virgins) are not particularly sinners in todays world for being what they are, but the definition of Koran does suggest that they are. And then if the Koran says that you are not allowed to kill innocent people, aren't these categories outside the realm of innocence and hence _can be or may be_ killed?

One solution out of this is that we agree to the intuitive definition of innocence but we use Koran as a guiding principle on how to behave with innocents Vs non-innocents. This kind of treatment is completely absurd and clearly wants to cover Koran's ass on matter on which it is wrong. One such parallel example of such attitude is saying that people who eat cows are sinners (hinduism) and then stone them to death in public (one form of islamic punishment) and by such a divided treatment all the muslims on the earth will be stoned to death. The cows can be replaced by pork and you'll have the inverse effect. This method uses one set of norms to decide what is innocent/sin and the other set of norms to decide what are our actions regarding it. In short, Hindus (for example) in general are innocents (common sense) and Koran doesn't allow killing of innocent people and hence the argument for Koran.

Isn't this form of interpretation a misinterpretation? One cannot afford to have double standards on what is wrong and right and what one is ought to do about it. The other solution is _accept_ that Koran is wrong on some things and get on with life by introducing better definitions and actions which replace the ones in the book. It was a book written in arabia in 600 AD and has no reason to be applicable in all aspects in any other part of the world in 2000 AD. And if you do think that it is, then sadly you are suffering from some kind of delusion which was fed into your head by the rest of us. We apologize for not helping you out.

This suggests to me that the doctrine of re-interpretation of a book which suits the particular time and place is injustice to the original book and to the people onto which it is imposed. More than re-interpretation its a misinterpretation. I would dare not say that it's a bogus book in all regards, as a matter of fact if it were, we would have thrown it out in garbage a long time ago! But I certainly think that these age old books are now becoming obsolete quiet rapidly and will turn out to be completely bogus and inapplicable in the years to come. It is a good time right now to throw them in garbage and enjoy the better life ahead of us.

Constrast

2008-05-05T22:33:00.000-07:00

When we say agnostics and atheists, religious folk remind us about Hitler (catholic), Stalin and Mao (atheists). What do we say then?

Is this what we want to say: Atheism is a good thing, bad people like Stalin, Thakrey and Mao use it to do bad stuff. People have different interpretations of atheism and everybody discovers it for themselves through a process of internal reasoning and debates.

On the other hand:

What do the religious folk say: Islam is actually a peaceful religion, bad people like Osama bin Laden use it to do bad stuff. People have different interpretations of islam and everybody discovers it for themselves through a process of internal reasoning and debates AND by a close and dedicated study of qoran which was written nearly 1500 years ago which represents ultimate truth.

Another version of religious people: Hinduism actually teaches equality of brahma and everybody. It is the religion of peace and supreme equality. Bad brahmin people have exploited hinduism by enforcing caste system in a way it wasn't supposed to be. People have different interpretations of hinduism and everybody should discover it for themselves through a process of internal reasoning and debates AND by a close and dedicated study of the hindu philosophy through Gita, Vedas and the Upanishadas.

Am I correct when I say these two things? I am pretty sure about the stance of _moderate_ religious people. But I am not sure about our stance (you and me). The world view of the _moderate_ atheist.

There is a certain huge difference between the two, which is the infallibility and absolute nature of the book (or of anything for that matter).

Antithesis

2008-05-01T13:28:00.000-07:00

Religion is not the opposite of atheism and atheism is not the opposite of religion.

Religion is one of the many things that atheism is not.

Thus, non-religion is is not atheism and non-atheism is not always religion.

Direct evidence to Dawkin's selfish gene

2008-04-14T15:51:00.001-07:00

The biophysics department here at Hopkins had invited Dr. Alexander Van Oudenaarden from MIT physics to give a student invited seminar. I was a bit familiar with his work through my junior thesis. He is trying to understand noise and random behavior of cellular signaling pathways through experiments and computer simulations.

The talk had a lot of good things, but what caught my attention the most was a topic I could directly relate to the heading of the post. In our cells (except mine!) , or in any other eucaryotic cell there is a signaling pathway called the GAL switch. When the cell is put in an environment which lacks any other nutrients except galactose (which is a kind of sugar present in milk) the GAL switch operates and produces carriers which help the transport of galactose from outside of the cell in the cytoplasm (inside of the cell). I genetically lack that system and that's why I cannot consume milk which is a major source of galactose.

Suppose we start with a bunch of cells which at time t = 0 do not have the machinary to transport galactose in. We then supply galactose to this culture. What we expect to find and do find is that the internal GAL switch starts functioning and builds up the transport machines which take the galactose in. This makes a lot of evolutionary sense, that to a given change in environment, the cells are able to cope up accordingly. (case A)

Now suppose we start with a bunch of cells which at t = 0 already have the machinery present to transport galactose in. And suppose now we put this culture in a solution where there is a lot of galactose (case B) or there is no galactose (case C), what we would expect is that the cells would continue living with their existing machines in case B and that they would shut off the factory of transporting galactose in case C (since there is none in the environment).

Counter intuitively what we find experimentally is that in case A, there will be some cells which do not produce the machinery, in case B there will be some cells which shut off their machines and in case C, there will be some cells which will keep on maintaining the machines though they are rendered useless. This phenomena is no accident and is a persistent feature of the culture. It is counter intuitive because the cells which are going against the popular vote are eventually going to die because of their apparently stupid decision. If the organism were to evolve such that the selfish unit of evolution were the individual itself, this kind of suicide does not make much sense.

Cleverly when the experiments were performed in a medium/solution where the concentration of external galactose was changed in time, the lab found that this suicidal behavior makes a lot of sense for the gene! During evolution of the yeast, the species was exposed to a time varying environment the nature of which we surely don't know. The gene's way of predicting the future environment or differently put, the gene's way of coping up with random changes in the future environment was to produce individuals of all kinds some of which are unsuitable for the current environment (but might be suitable for the future). By maintaining a population which has some members which are suitable for the present and some members which are not, the gene ensures that for any reasonable change outside of the cells the species as a whole is not wiped out. In other words (I suppose) the gene makes sure that it does not follow a path to extinction by maintaining a pool of suicidal members (who potentially may cope better with random change in the environment in the future).

I thought this is a direct evidence to the selfish gene rather than a selfish individual or a selfish species. And that made me happy :-) This is a direct evidence because neither selfish individual nor selfish species hypothesis can explain this kind of a behavior.

And to conclude, it is important to give some definitions as I understand them. By selfish X (X = gene, individual, species) we understand that X is the unit which will try to survive in case of competition by perhaps eliminating other members of X. For example in case of food shortage, a selfish individual theory would imply that individuals will kill each other to survive so that they can acquire sufficient amount of the limited resource for themselves, a selfish species on the other hand would perhaps imply that humans would kill off other animal and plant species so that they don't have any competition for food resources. The most counter intuitive selfish gene would imply that individuals would take actions in such a way that individual genes are retained in further generations.

Response to Karthik

2008-04-08T20:38:00.000-07:00

I must stress that I do not want to make any quantifiable claims about genesis or similar such things. The central idea behind that (not I think that) lame example was that, events which we think are very very uncertain may have a sufficiently high probability of occurring at least once somewhere in the universe. Like abiogenesis happened right here on our earth! In Stephen Weinberg's words, 'We seem to have won a cosmic lottery!' The reason we think that they are unlikely to happen is because our brain is evolved to handle a certain time and length scale, the stuff beyond which is counter intuitive.

To elucidate that, we can think of two balls colliding with each other or a ball dropped from air hitting the ground. The Newtonian nature of the motion is something very familiar to our brain. At the same time, if we were to see a ball of a very large size where effects of space curvature are important, or a ball of very small size where the effects of Heisenberg's uncertainty are important we will be shocked out of our minds! (So were we, a hundred years ago) Scientific framework helps us overcome the bias of human intuition, and in my personal opinion is not just limited in explaining physical things. It in general has the potential to help us overcoming all sorts of limitations of human mind and make it freer in some sense.

In the same spirit of the above argument, a billion year old universe comprised of billions of galaxies is completely out of reach of a naive brain. Effort has to be made to understand it, similar effort has to be made to understand the beauty in Stravinsky. The people who really do not want to make this effort do think that earth was created 6000 years ago, and one is surprised to know the number of people who actually believe this in America. There are a large number of people who think that Man was created in the image of god. And I think that I can attribute that to the limitations of the imagination more than anything else. I must confess that I will have to justify this strongly.

Your point very well appreciated on a mind which requires a secure universe rather than a consistent one. But there are models of secure universe without a controller, and these models are pretty old. The Samkhyas, Jains, Bouddhas, the Legalists from China and some other eastern religions are all atheistic or in the least non-theistic and yet provide a highly stable, secure and moral universe. I will reserve my opinions on the Abraham's god for somewhere else. I want to say that that particular entity is not required even in a secure universe.

I suppose it is a very important question as both theist and atheist would agree that why do people need god in the first place and they would obviously offer different answers. Ranging from 'Everybody kneels before god's glory, Jesus Christ died for your sins' to 'Religion is useful for the powerful and hence they purposefully poison their subjects with it'. What science demands from us is to understand the process by which god has become so important for us as humans. And my previous post was a feeble and (sadly) polemic (and thus useless) effort towards that.

To conclude, one of the reasons I think supernatural is important for us is that we exist in this marvelous world, that is comprised of the earth, rain, beautiful birds and french wine! There doesn't seem any fathomable reason for it's existence. This reason is then attributed to the supernatural. According to me a very likely reason that we think that all this is too specific to have happened by chance is that we cannot comprehend the grandeur of the space-time in which this can take place where such events may cease to be unlikely.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's Karthik's response, it was too big to be continued in the comments section.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is true that human imagination is truly limited. Even when steven spielberg makes a movie on aliens, he imagines them to be conveniently anthropomorphic. So I agree with that point of yours.

The genesis of life is something that is understandably more difficult. Even if we are able to reconcile the popping up of a replicator as a plausible probabilistic event at some point on the immensely large time co-ordinate there are definitely more complicated questions that creep up.

Why was natural selection favoured as a mechanism? How the hell did consciousness arise from nowhere? I believe we are not even close to answering these questions convincingly right now? It might probably require a bigger leap of imagination to explain consciousness than relativity or quantum mechanics.

But more importantly, I believe that it is possible for great leaps of imagination to be built on wrong premises. Newton's is one example that we're familiar with but no one in her right mind would say that he was deluded to think of a universe where time is absolute. Similarly, I find it reasonable to acknowledge personalities like Christ and Buddha; they were clearly mavericks who thought in a radically different manner considering the time that they lived. It must have been a truly original mind to conceive then, something as rudimentary as collective ethics and principles based on universal aspects of human nature. Nonetheless, like the case of Newton, these were done on incorrect premises (holy spirit, Abraham etc).

While Newton has been superseded by Einstein (who will in good time be superseded by someone else), Jesus and Muhammad refuse to give up their positions of vantage. This is clearly disappointing and I can understand your concern. But I have some reservations on the manner in which you put forth your arguments; they tend to get really polemical sometimes.

The situation that we live in is funny. I think every person (theist or atheist, scientist or not) would acknowledge your premise, that human imagination is terribly limited. The atheists and theists are separated by a big chasm that needs to be explored. What is contained in that chasm is still open to speculation While the theist clutches her holy book and looks up at the sky, the vanguards of science have, for the past four hundred years burrowed to great depths in this chasm and disinterred wonderful things - Fraunhofer lines, probability theory, quantum mechanics, high speed computation etc.

Our repertoire is indeed much more impressive than theirs but the chasm is still so big that it is difficult to get points across. With the natural human instinct to choose a world that bestows a sense of security and not bother about a sense of consistency, the choice for the mode of security becomes highly subjective-and religion is chosen by many over science.

I cannot comprehend why someone would outrightly reject the billion year old universe that we are a part of, where recorded human history is like a few grains of sand in a vast desert; a universe so vast that the light we intercept from different stars carries the sweat of events that happened a million years ago; a universe where a small planet has seen life evolve and consciousness thrive. It is more beautiful than can be found in any holy book!

The question as to what to do while we are confronted with this chasm, I guess it is a choice much like what Alice had to make :-).

Futility II

2008-04-08T11:17:00.000-07:00

I am going to demonstrate a small calculation, which I think will hopefully be useful for something more important than the subject of it. The example is for no doubt so extremely simplified that there is no direct quantifiable analogy to what I am going to connect it to. Nevertheless there is a qualitative analogy and I think that would suffice. Simply because I do not want to prove a point here, I just want to make the reader understand what large numbers can do which is beyond the scope of our imagination and intuition.

And when something is beyond our intuition or imagination for example the distance from earth to the sun, or the age of man kind, mass of a black hole etc, a feeble mind does take support in an easy to understand yet most probably wrong explanation! As usual, it connects to my favourite creature :-) There are a lot of logical and physical arguments for it, and the believer shall refute them because they don't trust the safety in logical arguments or/and it's very difficult to imagine a smoothly running universe without constant intervention. IMO, it's difficult to imagine because it's counter intuitive (for example it's very intuitive to conclude that a machine requires a mechanic, and thus the world requires a think tank), but as we find it, and we have good reason to believe that most of the world around us is indeed counter intuitive! And that's okay, because there's nothing sacred about intuition anyways.

One needs to understand that science suggest that there is nothing sacred about human imagination and intuition or human existence for that matter when it comes to the time and length scales much bigger than the biggest we can really imagine. Science has had a pretty nice track record in explaining things. If one doubts the success of science, all I can say is that they need to read a bit more than they have! So in a sense, it might be actually true that in a cosmic balance, humans offer nothing and nothing at all. I must make it clear that this doesn't take away all the values and ethics and beauty we believe in. That is related to human experience and consistent with the earlier statement, has no contribution in the cosmic balance! Though it matters the most for us.

I would like to use the shock treatment method of explanation, I'll work out the calculation first and then dwell into its implications.

Consider a coin tossing machine. After every 2 , 4 , 6 (every even number) tosses, it counts the number of heads and the number of tails. We know that for large n, we expect half of the things will be heads and half of them will be tails. Suppose in a trial, we get 2 head more than tails, we call it event A. The relative probability for event A with respect to the even of having half and half heads and tails is what we want to look at. It is intuitively clear that this relative probability will be small for low n and large for big n. For example, if I am just doing 6 coin tosses it is a bit unlikely to have 4 heads and 2 tails compared to 3 heads 3 tails. It's a trivial calculation and I am plotting the relative probabilities for some values of n. Surely and stressing again, this is not a simplification but a way to imagine how things happen at large scales.

Now we can consider the following analogy. It is clear that the event of having 2 more heads than tails is an unusual event. But we also find that in vague terms, the degree of unusualness decreases . The X axis can be regarded as either time or space and we want to study the Y axis which we will define shortly when the time or space under consideration increases beyond our imaginations to several billion years and several billion galaxies.

Now suppose when the unusual event happens, it triggers a very special mechanism. Suppose the earth was populated by molecules which replicated themselves using other stuff from other replicator molecules. There are indeed examples of such molecules which can be considered the first steps of abiogenesis. Let the unusual event be that this replicator molecules gets enclosed in a semi permeable membrane. The probability of that happening is similar to having the unusual dice statistics and thus the Y axis.

Now certainly this molecule has a better chance to survive and thermodynamics tells us that such molecules will have a longer life time than the rest. Boom! That's life created right there. Now suppose we decide to stick to our own brain's imagination of distance and time, we will stick to 6000 years and size of the earth. By our brain's imagination, I mean the following:

When someone tells us that Baltimore is 200 miles away from Newyork, we can imagine the route, perhaps traverse it in our mind. Maybe we can do it for Newyork to Bombay. But in the middle world we have evolved, we certainly cannot grasp the vastness of a light year. (If you can, you are lying or you are awesome!) Similarly, we can imagine time intervals of 100s of years, but when the numbers say that Hamlet was written 1600 years after water was turned into wine, it's very difficult to imagine the time gap such large. And yet again! 1600 years is surely a nothing in the cosmic balance. So I think 6000 years and size of earth are very generous estimates of our imagination.

So if we stick to our own intuition and try to build a theory for life, we are very close to 0 on the X axis, and consequently we are very close to 0 on the Y axis as well. What I want to stress is that for our naively thinking brains, the probability of creation of life is so low that we have to seek naiver explanation. And what I want the reader to appreciate is that the imagination limits of our brains are nothing compared to the cosmic scales (even the age of earth is big enough!). When our close friend Kent Hovind asks the audience if they think that their great great great great ... (he'd say this 20 times) grandfather was a monkey, the audience is ought to say no! For essentially the reason that we cannot imagine the time scale of evolution because our life spans are so tiny with respect to that. We can perhaps write the age of the earth, sun and the universe, I can say the age is 4 billion years, but it is very unlikely that I grasp the grandeur of that in the mere number. But if I were to look at the probability of that event happening in the vastness of the universe, it doesn't seem like the really rare event we thought it was! Obviously the numbers are qualitative. I hope it helps the reader understand the parallel I am trying to draw.

What science has to offer is the promise that though the universe is counter intuitive, there is a systematic way to explain it. This method teaches us to think above my imagination, and against my intuition. This whole exercise was a support for the previous post, the gist of which was, If you believe in crap do it for yourself, don't say it's logical. That's the harsh way to put it, but what I eagerly want to show is that there is a way to circumvent the theistic belief by realizing our position in the universe. I do strongly think that this belief arises because of the physical limitations our brain imposes on us and surely there is a way to get rid of the ego-centric nature of the brain child of theism which personally is far more peaceful and satisfying.
-----------------

Fuck that shit, Jesus Christ died for your sins. Muhammad will show you the path to eternal pleasure.

Futility

2008-04-07T11:17:00.000-07:00

I shall have to say something more about this later! But for now,

Trust my judgment boy, he's much hotter without the beard!
- Oscar Wilde on Jesus Christ

Two things

2008-02-21T06:31:00.001-08:00

\IMO

Yesterday I watched a debate between Dan Dennet and Dinesh D'souza. The topic was 'Is god a human invention?' which was suggested by D'souza. D'souza has the charm and enthusiasm of a used car salesman. He stands up every time he has to talk, he uses his hands more than the mouth while talking. Saying all this, he did have certain interesting objections and views. It was very clear that he's an intelligent man and does not resemble the people he dated before (read Ann Coulter who's plain entertaining in her stupidity) or someone like Kent Hovind.

When Richard Dawkins says that one can never point out an atheist who committed atrocities in the name of atheism, he always covers up people like Stalin as people who committed the crimes because they wanted to safeguard their position andthey were an evil person and it had nothing to do with their atheism. But when something like Hammas or Al-queda commits an atrocity, Dawkins and the likes are eager to blame it on the religious abstraction they are working with and not the badness of the people who are responsible for the crimes. D'souza rightly pointed this out as a hypocritical stance. According to him, if people are going to blame christianity for inquisitions and islam for terrorism, the atheist also should take some responsibility for Stalin's crimes. Though there were weaknesses in his arguments, that Stalin was more of an antitheist than an atheist and there is a huge difference between marxist atheism (which is essentially antitheism) and Russell's agnosticism. Russell's agnosticism and Dawkin's and Dennett's atheism rely on scientific method while Stalin/Hitchen's antitheism relies on the fact that religion (ie abrahemic religion) has done a lot of bad things hence should be hated. But, if one wishes to club all the non-believers together, one has to take moral responsibility for the other non-believers like Stalin who also fall in their class.

So, in short D'souza's point was that if one blames his religion (a conservative christian) for inquisition and other crimes by abrahemic religion then it is the moral responsibility of the atheist to acknowledge that Stalin and Mao were atheist and killed people in name of atheism.

Ok, this is boring. The other important thing in the two things is frustration!

I can really appreciate Amrita's habit of connecting the technical terminology with real life, when most of the terminology is indeed derived from real life. Today we attended a seminar where the speaker was talking about frustrated systems. Frustrated systems are those systems where the individual particles are confused/frustrated about what state to occupy so as to be in the lowest possible energy. Such systems are generally observer in anti-ferro magnets.

Imagine a lattice of points. Each point is either up or down. Further, every adjacent pair of points want to be in an up-down conformation. Now consider a triangular lattice. If two vertices of the triangle are up and down, the third vertex gets irritated because it can occupy either an up or a down position and hence is termed as a frustrated vertex. This is an example of a geometric frustration. The only prominent example of a geometrically frustrated system is a n anti-ferro magnet. One drawback with such a system is that one can never observe the individual spins and if one wishes to study the phase transition and similar behaviors, one has to limit oneself to averaged properties such as net magnetization. There is no way one can think of to observe individual spins in case of anti-ferro magnets.

But today in the seminar we learned of a system of double layer of colloidal particles trapped inside a thin space of less than the double the thickness of one particle exhibits geometrical frustration phenomena similar to anti-ferro magnets. This was an example of a system which maps exactly onto anti- ferro magnets and yet it is possible to observe every single particle! It means that one can directly observe the individual spins while they are performing the act of phase transition. It also means that one can observe phase transition at a microscopic level. The ability to observe phase transition at a microscopic level means that one can see how infinities emerge from stable finite systems when one changes one thermodynamic variable.

I don't know if this excites you but it surely excites me. (In spirit of the following:http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/science.jpg)

2008-01-07T10:38:00.000-08:00

On the New year's eve, a couple of women were molested by a mob of 40 people outside the JW Marriot hotel in Bombay. This was very widely reported on all sorts of media in India, raising questions about safety of women in Bombay and in India in general.

I was watching a tv show today where the reporter was asking a group of junior college students (boys and girls, men and women) about the molestation cases in Bombay. The general opinion of the men/boys was that if women wander on the streets in tight and provocative clothes, it's understandable that they get molested. Amusingly,when the reporter asked the girls/women about this and they showed exactly the same sentiment, that the girls in Bombay are high-class and should observe some Maryada and the freedom given to the girls by the parents should be regularly checked. It was also well understood amongst the boys/girls/men/women that the limitations imposed by family and society for girls and boys should be inherently different; a fact which was easily attributed to our great culture.

Best wishes to all the females in India who possess these self destructive tendencies and inferiority complex or ignorance towards their fellow comrades who possess these views.

Kent Hovind and how I lost my 250,000$

2007-12-19T21:31:00.000-08:00

I recently once again watched the creationist seminars by Kent Hovind. First of all, I love the creationists for their ignorance, belief and all that crap. The favorite creationist has to be the one belonging to young earth category.

I simply love the idea that my grandpa was a monkey/dragonfly/reptile/fish at the same time, I don't think there exists many grandpas who can do that kind of magic, thankfully at present moment he's just an old human being. The other awesome thing is the age of the earth, and various insightful details about curing cancer in the Bible.

Anyways, I truly believe that masochistic entertainment (not the s&m kind) can be really fun. I like watching really bad movies, documentaries about god and religion, conspiracy theories etc etc... you get the picture. I was watching this kent hovind seminar series on youtube where he declared a prize of 250, 000$ for anyone who has a scientific and laboratory testable proof for evolution. Easy money!

While there are people out there who believe that evolution is just a theory (well, it is just a theory, that's why it's called the theory of evolution!) and there also exist people who believe that it's a wrong/bad/propagandist one, I know a graduate/undergraduate level course taught by Marc Ostermier in Johns Hopkins university which deals with laboratory techniques (there goes the scientific tests) regarding directed evolution (so it does exist!) To add to that story, the whole Ostermier lab works in synthesizing new proteins using techniques of directed evolution. Cool stuff ain't it? I am sure that the lab won't need the 250, 000$ they probably have infinite funding :-) But I can make use of it. So I thought....

To find out more about this curious guy, I wikied (is that a verb yet?) him to find out that the poor soul is in jail for a number of frauds. Apparently he told the police that the property wasn't his (it was god's own :D ) Damn! There goes the easy money. I hope there are more of such monkeys around so that I don't have to find a job when I graduate, I'll just direct them to the course and get rich :-)

---

On a different note, I had a long debate about some random topic with a dear friend. She was disturbed in the end, though we didn't reach an agreement neither did we agree on our disagreements, she made a remarkable point that the topic of discussion wasn't merely an intellectual debate for her, it was her profession/work/area of study. Maybe not directly but... you get the point. She also said that most of the people who'd talk to her about things will have formed their opinions from the so called main stream. And she was getting tired of repeating the same arguments over and over again.

People who say ayurveda/qoran/astrology and similar rubbish is scientific really really need to understand what is meant by scientific theory. There are descriptions available which are fairly agreed upon by scientist and philosophers which are reasonably non-technical and yet sufficiently deterministic. This is our territory, if you want to pee here, please use our language :-)

2007-10-23T10:37:00.000-07:00

"But! it's a misinterpretation of the book, how can any religion teach bad things?"

"I am unclear with the word misinterpretation. If it's a book written in a language, the words will never convey a meaning narrow enough not to be interpreted in different ways. Also, if it's supposed to be a code book for life, it better be simple! The last prophet enforces the idea of a perfect book in the form of Koran which cannot be misinterpreted. The Abraehemic texts prior to that as well as code books in other religions such as Manusmriti better be damn clear."

"From now on, in arguments against the crimes perpetrated by god lovers, I am going to use their books against them, in the most literal and obvious interpreation, that's the price they'll pay for following a vague legislature."

And by the way

2007-10-22T07:34:00.001-07:00

I finished the half marathon (20 kms) in 2 hours 4 minutes. It's kind of slow, but if you've known me for some time, it's an achievement in itself. The positive side of it being, I didn't stop for a single moment.

Purushottam

Oxymoron

2007-10-18T09:49:00.001-07:00

Fighting for peace is fucking for virginity.

-Anon on youtube

The arrow of time

2007-09-27T13:35:00.000-07:00

Some days ago, I had come across an intriguing article about how our intuition about the forward direction of time or the celebrated arrow of time is linked with the theoretical predictions arising from fundamental and applied physical theory.

Consider a world full of objects obeying classical laws of mechanics. A little inspection would trivially show that the equations of motion are time reversible i.e. as far as the equations are considered, there is no preferred direction of time. This observation became a major worry for physicists with the advent of the second law of thermodynamics which stated that the entropy should always increase (thus giving a direction to time).

Though entropy was not a directly accessible experimental quantity, it had become obvious for a lame physicist to determine the positive direction of time. As trivial as the problem might sound in a common sensical way, consider that you are given a movie about a real life experiment and then you are asked to identify if the movie is played backwards or forwards. This question is certainly a non-trivial one (e.g. waves on water, where forward and reverse might look the same. I must mention that this strictly is not a very good example!) With the aid of the entropy law, the physicist will be quickly able to tell which is the positive direction!

This entropy law was a shocker to all the physicists and notably, since it hasn't been proved yet for a classical system, it is legitimate to believe that we will find instances where given a movie we exactly determine the arrow of time. In the realms of classical mechanics, though the law has not been proved, it's limitations are well known. E.g. a ball rolling on the floor does not indicate any direction of time. It is only when the system becomes macroscopic (A rolling ball, though is macroscopic in nature, here is modeled as a point particle for simplicity) that the entropy law is valid and it is the only case where we can with firmness determine the direction of time.

This brings me to the lecture I attended today, by one of the notable statistical physicists of our times. The main topic of the talk was violation of the second law of thermodynamics in systems which are neither microscopic nor macroscopic but lie on the boundary and give rise to interesting results. For concreteness, suppose we are given a movie about stretching a rubber band. By a movie, I mean every possible accessible detail about the experiment. It would be trivial to find out if the rubber band is being stretched or if it is being compressed based on our intuition. But when it comes to molecular level rubber bands, like RNA molecules. To put things in the lecturers own words, we only have a maximal likelihood of predicting if the RNA molecule is going forwards in time or backwards. To add more spice and mysticism to the story, the molecules itself doesn't know if it is going forward or backward in time. There is a probability associated with that :-)

On a more fundamental level, these issues have been resolved thanks to the asymmetry in the realms of quantum mechanical world, or the world which we live in. But nevertheless, for systems like the molecular rubber bands, which can still be treated classically for good reason, time might not know which direction is forward!

A baysian estimate for prayer

2007-09-10T19:19:00.000-07:00

It so happened that I went to a Church with my room mate for he had to pray. I promised not to say anything bad for an hours time. In that hour, I read some horrifying books about introducing religion to children. Some of them were written for parents and more disgustingly, some of them catered small children of age 5-10, but that's not the point here. (To understand my grief, one is referred to a chapter on religion and childhood in the 'God Delusion')

Another thing that occurred to me, my otherwise not so religious room mate had gone praying because he is applying for a residency in medical school as an oncologist (He's a Hopkins/Princeton graduate with tonnes of research and practical experience). The question was, what is the probability of succeeding when you pray, or P(success|prayer) for a general situation. As the title suggests, we define the following quntities:

Event A : is any event where you can succeed or lose. (eg, running 3 miles, getting into MIT for grad school, trying not to eat a burger for 1 month etc)

Event B : You pray for event A

For the estimate of P(success|prayer), we need the following:

P(prayer|success) i.e. the probability that you'd prayed and you actually succeeded as well. (correct me if I am wrong here) = X

P(Success) : How many times in general you succeed or in other words, how much of a loser are you? = Y

P(Prayer) : How many times do you pray before and event A occurs. = Z

then, P(Success|prayer) = X * Y / Z

I know that estimating X, Y and Z is as difficult as estimating P(Success|prayer), but we can look at interesting special cases and for the benefit of our religious friends, we will try to maximize P(Success|prayer)

First special case is a devote religious person and a devote atheist, both equally losers in life, so Y is same for both. Since the person is very religious, he prays at every event A, so X == Z, hence, his P(Success|prayer) is Y. For a devote atheist, X == Z == 0, so we can with all non-rigorousness, claim that P(success|prayer) == Y. An awesome conclusion! So a religious person and an atheist are equally likely to succeed when (and if) they pray.

Now consider the problem that you want to maximize P(Success|prayer). We assume that loser ness thus Y is a personal quality independent of the the praying statistics (which is a valid assumption in the scientific world we live in). Hence we want to maximize X and minimize Z.

A way to maximize X is to pray only when you know you are going to succeed. So you can pray before going for a small walk that you will succeed in doing so, but don't ever pray for getting into MIT which is kind of unlikely (statistically speaking). Also, try to pray only for selective events and don't go around praying for all the stupid things in life.

In summary, an atheist and a complete devote (both idealized cases) are equally likely to succeed when they pray for it. And if you want to increase your chances of success because of praying, keep on praying for stupid things at which you'll surely succeed, but don't do that in excess.

People who are more intelligent than me should correct me in the above arguments :-)

Purushottam

ps : I thank Mr. Varun Kanade for the maximization argument

pps : Thanks to constant pricking by Mr. Karthik Shekhar, I hereby acknowledge that the above analysis is not valid at all.

ppps : pps , the above thing was not meant for you

pppps : why do I always do that?m

Poll A poll

2007-08-30T12:10:00.000-07:00

which of the following is a more daring and bold statement?

1. Osama bin laden is a peace loving creature
2. Gujju food is healthy food. Somebody I know came pretty close to that :-|

Minute Waltz

2007-08-23T10:52:00.000-07:00

Piano overtook the Harp chord by the time Mozart had arrived on the musical scene in Vienna. I think he was the first accomplished composer to write music for piano. By the time of Beethoven, the piano had technically developed so much, that it was clear that it couldn't just be an instrument to replace its predecessor, the Harp chord. It became a fashion to write concertos, symphonies, sonatas with piano as a lead instrument rather than a violin.

Later in the century, when it was eccentric Frederic Chopin's time to glory, piano was recognized as a stand alone solo instrument, thanks to efforts by Schubert, Schumann and Liszt. Piano, as opposed to violin or guitar offers a clearer sound without overtones. Also, compared to their string counterparts, piano in theory can play 10 notes at a time, while violin (1-2) and guitar (6) are far less rich. The only major disadvantage of piano sound is absence of clear micro-tones.

Since piano was recognized as a stand alone instrument, the number of pianos in a concert is strictly less than or equal to one. To my astonishment, I heard a waltz by Chopin, which can be arranged for a string quartet, a full orchestra (I already had this version), a single piano and interestingly, for 2 pianos. After listening to it for a number of times, I figured out that both the pianos are playing a similar role in terms of importance which was further shocking. Here is a link.

And finally, OT but I created a website for my group.

2007-07-07T10:38:00.000-07:00

When I am drunk I think about liberty, love, lust and you. When I am not drunk, I think about liberty, love, lust and you. It is strange isn't it, that I still drink?

Sale

2007-06-27T14:10:00.000-07:00

Pigs on sale!

Here, at A. B. Dukkar Corp, we have an excellent breed of Pigs, fashionable and fat, just made for you. Attractive features include ogles of nose and ear hair.
The pigs we sell are a carry around type.

Don't get depressed with your sex life. The pigs are here. Roam around with the pigs and attract the ladies.

Pigs, Pigs, pigs with hair, fat pigs, ugly pigs, pigs which make every woman like you.

Buy now and get a leash for free. Call now!

Pacman

2007-06-20T11:38:00.000-07:00

In an academic discussion (hmph!), it was pointed out that Lysozyme is equivalent to Packman in it's job. It' lyses ie. cuts and kills proteins when they are vulnurable to attack. It also turns out that they are isomorphic in shape as well.

Red pudding

2007-06-18T07:54:00.001-07:00

And as I wait here beneath the heavy roof carved out of a single rock supported by 24 pillars (as if it's a holy number!), you will think that a shade of serenity has been painted over my face. Don't be fooled because of my posture, I stand still only because I am made to. I can wait here for eternity and yet not make a move, but that is not going to happen, soon a green man with a white shining blade and a black and white beard would come near my neck and slit my throat open and you the 108 men with white clothes and saffron caps will exclaim and exhaust yourself. There are far less white hair on the beard than black. Some say this is worse than Halal, the others say this is better, in both cases I die so it doesn't make much of a difference.

In there, the blade is kept on my neck, the almighty himself comes down as a bloodthirsty vulture. He slides his tongues one by one in the differential opening of the throat, his 666 tongues acting as suction pumps inside the main 786 veins of the body. With each drop of blood which falls on the ground or vanishes inside his mouth, I die small amounts, big enough to kill me completely in the end. But here, it's novel. Since the 108 men are not allowed to kill me, the man with the beard takes the position. The 108 men are screaming, to the ugly female statue in front of them. They are all saying the same words, but it's beyond my comprehension. I feel dizzy, but I do not want to lose conscious, I do not want to miss the moment and the way Antoinette felt, or Lavoisier or the King Luis himself. Now you 108 have gathered around me in a circular shape, I at the center. The man with the beard looks at me through his beard and blade, a wicked grin on his face. He knows, this is what he's best at. "Blood, blood", they scream, "The red pudding" . And silence prevails in the void of my body for a moment.

This is where, I stop talking because I am already dead. The blood pours on the floor. You 108 are in a hurry now, "Collect it, don't let it go waste!". There are clammering sounds of steel and aluminium plates near my neck, but thankfully, the head has flown quiet a distance and I am saved of the noise of metal and the smell of sweat. I can feel my essence being poured onto the shallow plates, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, they are getting filled, it's unstoppable. You the 108 are getting filled at the same time, with anxiety, hunger and humble devotion to god, the purest feeling of them all. The plates are collected now, the flesh goes to the ladies camp, 108 men with their 216 wives. There shall be prepared the feast, the spicy mutton curry. Here, the 36 plates of raw blood are waiting for further processing.

Now is the time the coagulation cascade kicks in.

The cranberry juice like liquid in the 36 plates starts thickening because of the process shown above. The colour changes from fresh red to dull brownish red. The viscocity increases. Spices are added, "Don't add that much salt", "Give me jeera", "Where are the chillies?". And finally it is done. The plates are kept under the heavy roof where I was standing once. The job of the green man with the blade and the beard is done and he departs. You 108 now gather around once more, to offer the final holy procession to the ugly black lady statue. There are in total 7 different chants. You scream them one by one in maximal possible dissonance. Perhaps that is the only way the blood-sucking-kind-hearted almighty can hear your voice!

Now the cranberry juice has turned into jelly. "Perfect", you cry with joy. The plates are sent to the ladies camp too, 36 of them, the jelly is cut into isochoric pieces, 24 pieces. Each man gets 4, each woman gets 2. As you put the red pudding onto your tongues, it melts and becomes liquid again, just blood like. I feel as if this is a step backwards towards my reconstruction. But it is not. Now I am inside the throat, stomach, esophagus, tongues of you all, twice as much inside the men than the women. I feel like forming a continuum, inside you all, connecting you through your vigorous passion and humble devotion. I, through my weak jelly like fibrotein network, have been proven to be successful in connecting you more strongly than any force could have. The humble devotion of god.

Food

2007-06-17T19:05:00.000-07:00

Being so good at it, I generally don't take pride in cooking. But this time, it was the sheer quantity of things that put a smile on my face. Obviously, it tasted delicious but it also formed a continuum of Wadas in the basket. I remember once undertaking a task of finishing all the Wadapao in the world. With all this, I just made my job far more difficult.

Movies

2007-06-11T13:22:00.000-07:00

After realizing that I actually do have time to watch movies, I made it a point that I watch a recommended movie at least once a week. First came the story of the 9th symphony, in Copying Beethoven.

There's a lot of poetic licence used, for no effective reason at all. Most of the historical facts about Beethoven have been distorted and the new lies created are neither poetic nor climatic nor interesting. The movie compresses the symphony in 10 minutes (which is actually an hour long work). The cutting of such a free flowing sheet is a challenging task, but the musicians have scored perfectly there. Conducting actions by Ed Harris are also pretty close to the actual ones. As the legend goes, the completely deaf Beethoven didn't realize that the symphony was over and kept on conducting while the crowd burst into tears and applause. That particular effect is magnificently captured in the movie where all you can listen to is Beethoven's heartbeats and the crowd is heard only when he turns his back to the orchestra. The rest of the movie is quiet ordinary.

Roshomon :

I'd read the story In a groove some time ago, and this is a movie based on that. It's a black and white Japanese movie directed by Kurasawa, and is a must watch. The story is an account of 6 testimonies about a murder (including the murdered spirit). Every person describes a slightly different tale so that his/her own ego and self is preserved. The story is nice and haunting and the movie in the least adds lots of other dimensions to it.

Throne of blood :

Inspired by Macbeth and directed by Kurasawa, another Japanese black and white movie. The lady here is far more villainous than lady Macbeth. The story revolves around a castle in a dense jungle and might get creepy sometimes. This one is not as good as Roshomon, but it's a wonderful film considering that it was made in the late 50s.

Amadeus : Epitome of poetic licence. This was the movie which made me watch Beethoven and because of this, I had so high expectations from Beethoven. The movie dates back to 1833, just years after death of Salieri, Alexander Pushkin wrote a play called Salieri and Mozart. The play was put onto opera by Rimski-Korsakov (the Bumble Bee fame). It was converted into a play first in 1978 by Peter Shaffer, and later made it onto Broadway. A movie was made which was slightly altered from the play (and thus 5th generation deviation from reality). The basic plot revolves around Salieri's jealousy about much talented Mozart and his plans to kill the man. Apart from the story and the acting, an obvious strength of the movie is the background score which relies completely on Mozart and some parts on Salieri (on second thoughts, he's not that bad!)

Finally, I accidentally watched this animal rights movie. Most of it only strengthened my current stand, some of it was highly emotional and drifted away from facts. There was a nice quote at the end, commenting on the natural origin of human cruelty.

As long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be battlefields.

-Leo Tolstoy

Qualified

2007-06-04T15:18:00.000-07:00

To do more things :-)

Purushottam

Amadeus

2007-06-02T15:50:00.000-07:00

The 70s people will say that the era taught them rebel, freedom and expression and most imortantly weed. All they have to look into is the late 17 hundreds, and they will know of Mozart. He was wasted, prodigal and prodigious, vulgar, married a woman his father didn't wish him to and fought bitterly with his contemporary musicians. He died young at the age of 35 due to excessive drinking, he was burried in a public cemetary for his woman had no money to arrange a grand sepulture for him. And I think it will take me atleast a lifetime of understanding to praise him for his music.

Useless

2007-06-01T13:48:00.000-07:00

After all those mistakes, lots of coffee and screaming Altos of the 9th symphony, it was time to theorize. After successfully publishing the AB argument and the Like-Dash-Like theory, it was time for the More game to be explained to the general public.

The More game was devised by AM and PD and later formalized by PD and VK (Yes! they are obsessed about formalization, so is KS but he is too busy makin' out and sleeping with his bum facing the ceiling and getting fatter of course!) The More game is actually more trivial than the AB argument (which was discussed some time ago) but we believe that it will find suitable real life analogies (we also mention that we haven't found one yet!) (The More game from now on will be abbreviated as MG for the sake of brevity :-P )

MG is defined as follows:

AM : I Give you 100 Rs.

PD : Thanks! (Accepts the money)

AM : Now give me 500 Rs.

PD : (Wondering) Here you go. (Gives the money) (Wonders what will happen now)

AM : That's it, the game's over!

PD : @#$^#$

This was initially how the MG was introduced to the world, the more formal version goes like this:

A : Here's 1 Rs.

B : Thanks

A : Now give me 5 Rs.

B : Here.

So, in short after looking at the initial description, the reader might have an impression that the MG is all about cheating, but we warn the reader that it's not! B may or may not know that he/she is at loss, the game essentially is a motif which explains B losing to A in the most simplistic manner. So it's a simplistic explaination of the world where though all people try to win, some times they lose. We claim that they are playing the MG somewhere hidden in their mind. The game is also closely related to the Sadist, Masochist problem, which goes as follows:

Masochist : (to the sadist) Hit me in the face!
Sadist : No!

(Btw, the novel Venus in furs is awesome and is related to this)

PD and VK.

Mistakes. Some more

2007-06-01T13:17:00.000-07:00

I've realized that it's no fun committing the same mistakes again and again without learning the lesson. Now I am not even mad at myself, I am just bored of going through the same process again :-) Hopefully next time, I'll make a different ones.

Purushottam

Communication breakdown

2007-05-09T11:02:00.000-07:00

A typical conversation in the land of plenty amongst the students will go as follows. The matter of the conversation as we show below is not important but the recurrence of certain motifs is.

I'm like, I went to like this bar last night, and the bartender was
like, the skirt is awesome, and I was like blushing. And it's like, we
are like with fake id's so it's like scary to go in such places and I
was like all daring and it's like it was like awesome.

What it means:

Dash dash dash like dash dash dash like dash dash dash dash dash dash dash dash like dash dash dash dash dash dash like dash dash dash dash like dash dash like dash dash dash dash dash dash like dash dash dash dash dash dash dash dash like dash dash dash dash dash like dash dash like dash.

The theory:

Because this kind (the first of the paragraphs) of conversations are frequent in universities, researchers were lead to believe that there exists a deeper pattern in them. It was soon proposed out that the original pseudo-English conversation is actually a Morse-code with everything other than the revered word like being determined as redundancy in the information packet travel. This theory is now finding a wide spread acceptance amongst the scientific community.

Safir Merchant.
The Johns Hopkins University

(Communicated by Purushottam Dixit)

Song

2007-05-04T15:07:00.000-07:00

Just today, a sophie (thirdie? fourthie?) from my wing sent me a song he'd composed. He started learning music last fall (He's one of the most brilliant people I have seen otherwise). The song is just a simple conventional chord based piece. There is no musical jugglery or talent show in there, just simple song and simple lyrics (and still moving). There's still hope, in simplicity and beauty just like Chopin.

Thanks Sudeep.

Sincerely,
Purushottam

Nerd joke

2007-04-16T09:49:00.000-07:00

Heisenberg was driving his new Merc on the autobahn when he was pulled over for high speeding by a police officer. "Do you know what your speed was!", the officer exclaimed. "Well, I don't know that, but I know exactly where I am", the snooty scientist replied.

"You smartass", the officer screamed. He started beating the snout out of Heisenberg. Unbearable with pain, Heisenberg asked him, "How long does this going to take?". With a grin on his face, the officer explained, "Well, I don't know anything about that, but I know exactly how much effort I am putting in"

Bass

2007-04-03T21:29:00.000-07:00

A girl who is a bassist is always hot!

I don't belong here

2007-04-01T21:20:00.000-07:00

When you are walking on the road, on a normal day sometimes there is a strong burst of realization that you don't belong here in this place at this time doing this. For the past 3-4 months in here, I haven't even got close to anything of that sort at all :-)

Definition

2007-04-01T18:47:00.000-07:00

Yesterday and today in the afternoon, I followed a bunch of crazy and interesting people showcasing avant garde art. Today at the Wyman park near my place, one of the performers was ready to talk to anybody about anything for free. And I ended up talking to him for roughly two hours. A very nice thing he did was to define art: 'Something which I put a frame on'

Eg. A man sleeping, is surely not art, but a man videotaped sleeping is a masterpiece by Warhol. Or in a more conventional way, a sunrise behind the mountains may not be art, but its imprint on the canvas is. The act of framing as can be seen above is subjective to the art form. The definition retains the essential vagueness which is necessary for it is a compact one.

The Morrison way of life

2007-03-29T17:31:00.000-07:00

Well, I woke up this morning
And I got myself a beer.

The futures uncertain
And the end is always near.

Let it roll, baby, roll.
Let it roll, baby, roll.

(From the Roadhouse blues)

A B argument

2007-03-27T08:23:00.000-07:00

An AB argument is a conversation between two people PD and VK which proceeds as shown below:

VK : A
PD : B
VK : A
PD : B
VK : A
PD : B

.. ad infinitum (or till one of them gives up)

If VK is replaced by AM, PD always looses the AB argument. The essence of the conversation is that VK claims A is true while PD claims B is true where B<==> ~A (or !A) and both of them want the other to believe that what they believe is true is the truth. Do not take this construct lightly for its triviality, this has been proved to be a useful model for explaining adamant people.

Recently I had to perform a technical survey, all the scientists were people who have achieved a significant amount of discovery (some of them Nobel laureates) and all the papers I read were either in Nature or in Science. And the argument goes like this:

RM: S4 linker moves 20 angstrom
RH: S4 linker does not move 20 angstrom
RM: See results from XYZ experiment, S4 linker moves 20 angstrom
RH: See results from XYZ (the same XYZ as above) experiment, the S4 linker does not move 20 angstrom

They continue this way for every other aspect of the problem. There are around 5-10 aspects to the problem and each of them results in atleast 10-20 Science or Nature papers.

The end of the AB argument as told above comes only when t --> infinity or one of them gives up. The giving up has been observed within 30 minutes with probability 1 when the mode of conversation is speaking in front of each other. But we believe that it is really difficult to observe the giving up phenomena when the mode of communication is writing up 1 page papers in Science or Nature. Thus a more evolved type of argument is needed to to settle the issue.

Promising

2007-03-13T09:39:00.001-07:00

http://www.indianexpress.com/story/25336.html

One of the few good efforts from the Government of India, if they can actually pull this off :-)

Purushottam

Spring

2007-03-07T09:53:00.001-08:00

Two shirts lay on the big bed, one of them made from the finest fabric, a creamy Van Heusen and a usual black collarless t-shirt. I always thought that for such occasions, t-shirts were a bad omen. So I put on the t-shirt as an instrument for future rationalization. It was late November and the night was pleasantly cold, thankfully my sister had given me a sweater carefully chosen in colour, black. Far away from us, a group of violinists and cellists were playing Vivaldi. The aggression and the freshness of the music must have changed the weather. They were far apart because I couldn't see them, but the sound clearly penetrated my ears. The gush of wind and the chromatic arpeggios of the climax went together in perfect harmony. It was the end of fall and start of winter, but the air was spring and so was the music.

The wind was such that all the streets were equally inviting to walk on, it was time to take a stroll and talk and not the time to sit down and relax. 'Get me out of this place for tonight', he called upon me, 'I am bored'. As pleased as I was at that invitation, I took him out. We met on a dark street just outside my place. 'Talk', he exclaimed. And I started telling my favourite story, the story of creation and metaphysics. 'So, it so happened that God one day wanted to create a habitat for his favourite, the man...', I'd gone till Thursday and he cut me, 'Oh, by the way, I have to get back in fifteen minutes', so disappointed was I, the whole creation, followed by the rise of humanity, the holy prophets, my interpretations and then our discussion, that was my plan.

His Italian descent was completely overshadowed by his suave modern accent. The curl of the dark, heavy and longish Sicilian hair rolled over the back of his neck. His moustache and bear ed were neatly trimmed. The muscles on his face moved in such a beautiful manner, just like the Greek figures Michelangelo would have had carved for the pope. His smile contoured the nerves on his neck in an amiable manner. The colour of his lips was faint pink, eyes dark brown and hair dark black. They were red some day, but he told me that they turned to black the another. He had lived the lifetime in Sicily and just a few years in western Europe. But he had acquired all the modernity of the west, still maintaining the raw and crude humanness and shear beauty of the south east. So beautiful and charming were his manners that I was too much engulfed in looking at him, silently observing him walk, move and exclaim calmly. I wished the time to stop or at least slow down for some moments for I wanted to talk to him for eternity. And I completely forgot about the 15 minutes I had at my stake.

It was clear that to attempt this agenda, I had to hurry. Obviously, if I ran while talking, my efficiency would have increased, so I began to run and resumed from Thursday. I went on and on, from God to Abraham, to Moses, Noah, Christ, Mohammad, I kept on talking and as the content of the conversation increased so did my sprinting. And now I was at the climax with the clashes of Martin Luther with the pope.

'The pope actually was collecting money for the Sistine Chapel, though Martin Luther had reasons to oppose, it would had been better for the art if he were to oppose something else. The papacy did a lot of foolish things back then and he could have found a different issue to raise as well.' I went on, I also realized that I was sitting in a cafe under the starry night, 'It is interesting to see how Taylor connects that same psyche of the German mind to the Nazi agenda, he claims..', 'Oh, 15 minutes, I have to go now, bye' and I was crushed under the avalanche of his words, crushed in the heart and in body as he quickly disappeared. It was disturbing enough that he didn't agree with my views on creation, but he could have at least heard me out.

Now I when I found he was gone, I could listen to the music again all alone by myself, they had finished spring and had started on winter. The frequency of the bass matched with my heart beats, the temperature of the surroundings fell down drastically and I began to shiver. And since now he was gone, I stopped running and started walking, it didn't matter where I went because all the streets now were equally bad and I had nowhere else to go.

---------

It was a cold day, especially cold since it was a winter day. But it was a dull night to end the day. While returning from work, I made an acute observation that all the streets were equally bad to walk on. I badly needed to go out and he was pestering me for a long time now. And yet he failed to talk about whatever he wanted to, each time! But today, in this early winter, I found myself alone and had no other option than inviting him.

He was obviously thrilled in my company. He was full of vigour and energy, I couldn't have spent more than a couple of minutes with him without getting bored. Pitying his situation, I told him that I had 15 minutes for him. He was grossly disappointed and surprisingly eager to finish his task. He was talking something about religion or something, obviously, I didn't pay any attention. When it became too boring, I just disappeared.

Romantic legends

2007-03-05T12:58:00.000-08:00

After the partial loss in hearing, Beethoven was thrown into the abyss of depression. Seldom were the times when he didn't think of committing suicide. But he continued writing the most charming music that man has ever known. Not just that the melodies were heavenly and aesthetic masterpieces, they had no trace of melancholy and at the same time defied the classical conventions of the techniques of contemporary music.

One of such many beauties he wrote is the 9th symphony for the choral. It is completely beyond a common man's comprehension how he could come up with something so elegant, vibrant and superb when he was completely deaf, known to be his last complete symphony, it was received by the Viennese crowd who were highly under the influence of Italian masters such as Rossini in the most jubilant and moving response.

In the middle of the performance, one of the witnesses says that the public started clapping with a standing ovation which was not visible (neither audible) to Beethoven since he was conducting facing the orchestra. After a while, with the turbulent and tense emotions of the pieces to follow, some of the audience couldn't resist and started crying with exhilarated emotions. Looking at the crowd's response even the orchestra found it difficult to continue and the Kappelmeister of the theatre forcefully turned Beethoven towards the crowd only to see them crying, throwing their hats in the air, applauding, laughing with joy and every other possible emotion.

2007-03-05T10:30:00.000-08:00

And girl it looks so pretty to me just like it always did
like the spanish city to me when we were kids

No one can possibly write this crap in a song and get away with it. But Knopfler does, only with the music to follow :)

Third person introspection

2007-03-02T17:29:00.000-08:00

He had known neither the pleasure of companionship nor the vigour of rude male health nor filial piety. Nothing stirred within his soul but a cold and cruel loveless lust. His childhood was dead or lost and with it his soul capable of simple joys, and he was drifting amid life like the barren shell of the moon.

2007-02-20T19:25:00.001-08:00

Leave the unachievable to the ego, it will take care of it, either successfully or through rationalization.

P in the family

2007-02-19T19:18:00.000-08:00

P (the verb) and my family have a long relation which turns out to be rewarding for the receiver. My dad in his early days had peed on one of the greatest humorists of Marathi language Pu La Deshpande before the time he had established his image in the hearts of the ghat. And I had once peed on Suresh Wadkar at the start of his successful career. Thankfully these glories were achieved when our respective ages were with zero integral part. But I continued the tradition when the age had already surpassed 21, and thus I claim that Varun Kanade is going to be a famous man. Details of the P stories except the last one can be acquired by personal communication.

Purushottam

The Johns Hopkins University

2007-02-17T14:48:00.000-08:00

The Gillman Hall and quadrilateral

If you ever happen to visit Johns Hopkins and wonder why all buildings are small, here's the reason. (Though the university disclaimer denies it) It has become a convention that no building should be taller than the Gilman hall (Mr. Gilman was the first president) and the Gilman hall should be visible from the North Charles street.

Chocolate

2007-02-10T10:24:00.000-08:00

Last time I had attempted chocolate was a disaster. But then, I found the old book. And besides me, I have dark chocolate in a square bowl and coffee chocolate in an oval bowl. But then again arose a situation regarding cooling. Whether to use the fridge or keep it outside.

A little chat with a friend revealed that cooling outside would be more correct. And since the details are essentially geeky, I shall refrain from troubling poor souls. But it essentially involved a discussion on domain formation in 3-D ising lattice under steep temperature gradients (fridge) and achievement of global minimum in case of moderate temperature gradients (room).

Summarizing, I have chocolate, and lots of it :)

Purushottam

On the house

2007-02-06T17:14:00.000-08:00

I always thought that the concept of On the house was only restricted to hot women. Yesterday, I got a cup of coffee at star bucks on the hosue. Now it seems to me that the concept is reserved for those who are hot (and not hot && woman).

Aesthetics

2007-01-28T09:20:00.000-08:00

Too much has been written about beauty. That is why I have written a little more.
-Somerset Maugham

Beauty is form of genius, higher indeed than genius as it does not require explaination.
-Oscar Wilde

Simplicity is the final achievement. After one has played a vast quantity of notes and more notes, it is the simplicity that emerges as the crowning reward or art.
-Frederik Chopin

Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.
-A. Einstein

The sea and the me

2007-01-23T15:27:00.000-08:00

And we went to the sea, just before the sunset, tired with all the not allowed biking on the highways. In the sand you would sit in the center, treating everybody with cheap ice cream which you bought from money stolen from Mom's purse. And then you'd tell us fairy tales about men, heroes, politicians and scientists. Everybody revered you. I looked at you with pride as we were blood related.

And we went to the sea, three of us, all walking. The world outside seemed enormous to our young eyes. You told us about the city, history and of course life in a manner our childish brains could understand. I still remember the exact details of Reclamation, Mahim Fort, Elphinston college and King George the 5th. In time I went on to be a young man from a boy, and in time you became an older man from an old man.

And we went to the sea, all of us together. And then the rest of them left. And you got quieter than you ever were. And then you wrote names in the sand, his name. Obviously it hurt then, a lot. Somehow I smiled. I miscalculated that seeing you at that moment writing a wrong name was a lot worth than joining the rest of the gang. I said something like "Thank you". And you wrote the name again, over and over again.

And then we went to the sea, four of us, and the other two went away as usual. Then you said, "Siddhartha is not just a nice book. He fails to understand it. You know what, the sea always makes me realize what paripakwata is" And then said things to each other, the words flew away with the land breeze towards the sea and never came back. Over time, even the pictures of the memories faded away, but some words stuck to it, like a soundless motion picture with a legend at the bottom.

And we went to the sea, this time just the two of us, still in the excitement of the novelty. We walked around in the sand in epicycloids trying miserably to make a romantic conversation, but kissed instead. We walked again, on a different path, but close enough where I could see the old footprints in the sand. And on the older path sometimes the old footprints were chaotic. That is where we had kissed.

And we went to the sea. You went away to swim so that I was alone. I didn't even know you much. But I made some music, had some beer and thought a lot about the other you in the plural. The cold blue Adriatic sea glanced at me but it had a lot to look after. The alps smiled white teeth. The castle was still in its proud photogenic position and Croatia as usual poor and beautiful.

And we, we could never go to the sea and we never might.

I am sorry if this offends you.

Reservation: For those who oppose

2007-01-20T08:11:00.000-08:00

After a lot of discussions with wide variety of people, I have found something basic which differs between the stand of the constitution and the Youth for equiality and similar kinds are arguing ardently against reservation.

For those who oppose reservations, I have two points to think about. If you are convinced on those, the affirmation towards the philosophy of reservation according to me follows trivially. And if you are not convinced, catch me or Karthik somewhere on the coffee shack or CCD HN :-)

1. A suitable end for a democratic government is of equitable representation rather than of inequitable efficiency.

2. Reservations are meant for upliftment of socially (not economically) backwards because the scheduled cast community can no longer hope justice from the upper class.

--
Addendum: The above two points are highly concise and might lead to confusion upon a wrong interpretation of the words (eg. the exact meaning of Justice, upliftment, representation etc.)

We killed a dog

2007-01-14T12:05:00.000-08:00

And I feel terrible. But, in our defence it was his (its) mistake. It was oscillating on the road and it suddenly jumped in front of us and Salim couldn't help it. We hit it at around 40Km/hr and I feel terrible.

We probably killed it but I don't know. I hope we didn't.

Purushottam

A cafe near a university

2006-12-20T14:43:00.000-08:00

I was sitting at a cafe, and a guy is impressing a girl by telling her the Russell's paradox. Then he moved onto Godel's incompleteness theorem. The girl was completely awestruck. Then a french man came for some help with wireless net and we talked about the paradox and then life.

Also, when you wake up and go to work or whatever that you are meant to do. Do you feel that you are not meant to be there and all this is going on is wrong? For the last few days, I am feeling exactly the opposite about graduate school.

:)

ps: I realized that I have issues with pens. Can't work with bad pens, simply can't.

Thus in livejournal language, the mood can be described as cheerful and the music, without doubt the beatles.

We're gonna stop this show.

2006-12-15T17:28:00.000-08:00

And from now on, I am a practising atheist.

Avant garde

2006-12-10T19:34:00.000-08:00

First of all, I like the word(s) Avant garde and secondly I (sometimes/mostly pretend to) like avant garde art. But most importantly, I have had enough of rum (read coffee) inside my head (again!, read belly) to write this.

A few days ago, I re-listened to this Beatles's song: Her majesty, it's a 20 odd second song

I want to tell her that I love her a lot
But I gotta get a bellyful of wine
Her Majesty's a pretty nice girl
Someday I'm going to make her mine.

Ciao
Purushottam

And this is how it all started

2006-12-07T16:00:00.000-08:00

Though this is a lot more cliched than I ever imagined it to be. I am going to write their story (By their, I mean his and her) (gosh! even the suckiest of the Hindi movies start like this. Ref: Hum-tum). It is difficult writing a story, generally I lose track of the plot and the control over the characters as it proceeds. Hence it becomes easier if I base it on something real or something I have already read. But basing a story on an already written story doesn't increase the dimensions of the creativity space, I will merely end up linearly combining things and end up with nothing new. (It's like constructing new equations from what I already know is true by simply adding and multiplying them. Umm, wait, isn't it exactly like that?) It is also like writing a new James bond movie after a bunch of them have already been released (Not that new Bond movies should not be made, just that I don't want to make one). And hence I shall choose the real thing to base my story upon, or perhaps the fictional one.

So this is about him and her meeting each other and getting married (I didn't say falling in love) and having kids. They are yet to die, so they won't die in the story either. I am still undecided who will be the scapegoats of this, real people or fictional characters. Fictional characters usually won't mind me twisting them and their persona, real ones would break off their relationship with me, both (him and her) of them perhaps. At the same time, people have so much to offer in terms of hidden characteristics. Their personalities promise me infinitely more than any of the round characters I have ever met in a story. (Every beating heart in the hundreds and thousads of breasts their is, in some of its imaginings, a secret to the heart nearest to it! : from Dickens, which I couldn't read much because of my inadequacies in comprehending complex sentence constructions)

With this, I can begin the story.

To start with her, she was very self centered. She always thought people were trying to undermine her. By the time she was 80, she was sure that her husband was trying to kill her, though she also (sometimes) knew that her husband was already dead. She was the kind of person similar to Major Major Major Major, with those 4 degrees of mediocracies sticking up her butt.

He, at the same time (actually at a different time, he was 16 years older to her) was brilliant and a wannabe libertine who could never achieve that status. He ended up working in a commercial bank (though they paid a lot, they never cared).

Since both of them are yet alive and I mistakenly mentioned his death indirectly, you shouldn't think that this will cover up their entire lives. This might just be about the moment they loved each other for a moment, or their fight(s) or something more or less significant than this. But this is how I can begin.

(BTW, this is not how it ALL started, as I wrote earlier, this can be very insignificant compared to it ALL, or very significant as well)

Golden

2006-12-06T15:00:00.000-08:00

For my whole life, I was made to believe that sun is golden. I read it in the books, I heard it when people talked, I heard it when people taught me. I never could find it anything other than yellow, perhaps orange and red. As young kids, we often used to go to Sea side (obviously without parent's permission) on cycles and watch the entire motion picture of the sunset. The sun sets on the west of the east (and the west). But it never occurred to us that it gets golden. It was always, yellow, then suddenly orange and red and then nothing.

In time, we grew up and as we grew old, we travelled north and we travelled west. We stopped using cycles because it was childish and stupid. And one day in a western winter, the sun was golden in the evening. It was golden on the grass, through the reflections on the windows, on the barren trees and in my eyes. I could stare at it for lengths of time and it still remained golden.

New song

2006-12-03T20:14:00.000-08:00

I first met this girl when she had big specks
And I am sure that she didn't see me
I had my problems, I minded my business
I never new it wasn't meant to be

I met this girl across the wall
In midst of colours and the beach
We talked a while we walked a lot
And yet it wasn't meant to be

I met this girl at the coffee house
Who sold not the coffee but the beans
Well she had her beans and I had my dreams
And yet it wasn't meant to be

I met this girl on the one tree hill
When she talked and smiled around the tree
I think I thought that she was then mine
And yet it wasn't meant to be

I met this girl in the big city
And I thought that the trip was for me
We went to a park and sat under a tree
And yet it wasn't meant to be

And now I meet her every year or so
And I wonder what's the future to be
I bet she don't know, and I be still
And hence it isn't meant to be

-
Why not

I know this sound stupid, but that is what we have tried to do when we were writing it. Plus, it's a song not a poem so, with musric (of which wee already have the skeleton structure) it ain't that bad. What we need with this is some nice chorus and a title.

Companion II

2006-12-03T19:54:00.000-08:00

"Do you know where my towel is, I just had a wet dream. That is because I didn't wear my socks"

Paris

2006-11-16T19:38:00.000-08:00

"Don't do anything romantic!"

"Dont' get her flowers."
"Don't get down on your knees."
"Don't get the blue string quartet."
"Don't be in Paris."

That is Paris.

Beatles, again!

2006-11-15T20:39:00.000-08:00

It is an old saying (A. R. Dixit and P. D. Dixit, 2003) that any Beatles song can be your favourite Beatles song if you listen to it continuously for 5-6 times. This statement as true it is for almost all of the Beatles songs, some of them continue to be exceptions over generations. E.g. this one:

What would you think if I sang out of tune,
Would you stand up and walk out on me?
Lend me your ears and I'll sing you a song
And I'll try not to sing out of key.

Oh, I get by with a little help from my friends
Mm, I get high with a little help from my friends
Mm, gonna try with a little help from my friends

What do I do when my love is away
(Does it worry you to be alone?)
How do I feel by the end of the day,
(Are you sad because you're on your own?)

No, I get by with a little help from my friends
Mm, I get high with a little help from my friends
Mm, gonna try with a little help from my friends

Do you need anybody
I need somebody to love
Could it be anybody
I want somebody to love.

Would you believe in a love at first sight
Yes, I'm certain that it happens all the time
What do you see when you turn out the light
I can't tell you but I know it's mine,

Oh, I get by with a little help from my friends
Mm, I get high with a little help from my friends
Mm, gonna try with a little help from my friends

Do you need anybody
I just need someone to love
Could it be anybody
I want somebody to love.

Oh, I get by with a little help from my friends
With a little help from my friends.
-----------------------------------

This post is dedicated to Pranav, My dad and recently Varun

Garp

2006-11-13T20:38:00.000-08:00

Once said that there are no short cuts in cooking. Never forget that. Especially when creating something exotic, which can the good thing for you on a particular day, never use shortcuts or amateur creative brain.

Just stick to what the old book on chocolate making says and you might actually end up with real chocolate rather than a burnt finger and a black ball of bitter hot paste.

2006-11-06T18:33:00.000-08:00

Gundappa just lit a bidi from his pocket. This was the last one and the shops were closed too. He cursed the shop keeper, his family and cast out loud, and felt a little better. He'd just come out of his shack a few moments ago. It was late in the night, but the ayaa who was taking care of his wife's fifth pregnancy didn't let him in. "Last four times, you watched the babies coming out, and all of them were girls. This time you've worked so hard to get a boy, don't ruin it at the last moment, go out", she yelled at him. Gundappa really wanted a boy this time. Because of his wife, he was looked down at, at every caste gathering. Some even suggested to abandon her, or better to sell her at a decent prize so that he can get a new and young girl who would be auspicious to give him a boy.

He heard the screaming. It was his wife, she was screaming bloody hell, cursing the father, the child, the ayaa and their respective families. "What does it take to have a bidi without any disturbance?", he thought, he wished his wife wouldn't scream as much. Last four of their children, as mentioned earlier were girls. Useless girls, who were a burden on him. A girl in his caste and social status meant a straigthforward 10,000 Rs. for the marriage. With daily wages of 50 + 60, it was really difficult for him to manage. He'd married two of the girls at a very old age of 12 and 14. And the third one was of a suitable age, but Gundappa didn't have the money.

"If this one is not a boy, you know what to do", he warned his wife. She knew it. If it were a boy, Gundappa and her would celebrate with a joint of afoo. Otherwise, the newborn child would celebrate her birth with a puff of afoo and die instantly. It was a very popular technique in the village, to get rid of unwanted girl childs. Widely used, suggested by the haqim on the corner of the peepal tree. He rolled the joint into the vida leaf. Tied it with the home-made thread. The joint was ready. He hoped that it was a boy. That way, he'd get to smoke the joint and it would be a pride for the whole society.

The screams got denser, louder and horrifying. The moon had risen above the coconut trees and the sea was breathing heavily. The trees were responding by whisteling along the wind. His wife added to the whining natural harmony. Time should stop, the screams should stop. He urged to god. He prayed it was a boy, for the family and for the joint.

Now we are in the climax. She was screaming, she cursed his father, his mother, him, the child everyone around her, the ayaa. And finally she was born. She was born, it was a she. His wife didn't believe it. She was born. A moment before, he could have born. But no, she was born. Now the wife had to do the job. Ayaa called Gundappa inside, he lit the joint. He was tempted for a puff. But he knew, it was enough only to kill an infant. If he had one for himself, the girl would live. And everybody knew, it was more difficult to finish off a child who was not nascent. He resisted his temptation, he hated the girl. Now the pride was lost and the joint too.

The girl, still unclean, covered with the motherly fluids was forced with the joint. She was so young, she didn't even cough at the smoke. Those kind of emotions or physical manifestaions hadn't developed yet in her body. She smoked it, she might have smiled for a second they thought. But they thought only for a second, because she was undone then. Gundappa decided, if the next one was a girl, he would sell of his wife to a pimp in a whore house in Bombay. They paid a lot there. He would easily marry of his third girl with that.

Now the joint was over, the wife was tired, the ayaa unclean and the child was dead. He was not a happy man, and there was no pot left to sooth him. And he looked at the moon.

The unbearable lightness of being

2006-11-06T11:01:00.000-08:00

For two whole weeks I thought about this. Surely, one of the most important decisions in my life. Though my decision is almost independant of what will happen. Now I have made it and the mind's clear and light. Unbearably light.

Piano and PDEs

2006-10-31T15:22:00.000-08:00

The story goes back to a conversation between me and analytique de maximus, Lothar. "Which instrument do you like the most Purushottam?", He asked. "Piano", I answered quickly. Though I played only guitar, piano was my favorite always. " And why is that?", he insisted. Why one likes anything is a different issue altogether and I am not going to dwell into that here. Important to this context was the answer I gave. "I like the pure sound, the notes, without mircrotones, not like violin, piano has a definite sound". I was able to satisfy his ultra-inquisitive mind with this. I was relieved for that.

Some years later, that is today, I was sitting in in my PDE class. And the prof. was teaching something about wave equation. It's not that I hate it or something. Being the geek I am, I was enjoying the mathematical aesthetics in the problem. Now, I am going to write something which you might not understand or like, but it's a graduate course and never mind :)

In the wave equation, the initial conditions on time are the initial velocity and the initial displacement on the string. The string is assumed to be bolted at the two ends so that given a displacement, it vibrates periodically. The solution generally is a fourier series, each term representing a definite mode of vibration of the string. If we solve a problem where the initial velocity is zero while the initial displacement is finite and linear, we find that the fourier coefficients die down as 1/n^2. While in the initial velocity (no displacement) case, the fourier coefficients die down as 1/n^4. Even this part was enough interesting for me. But then, the professor started talking about piano.

In a piano, sounds are produced by pressing the keys which in turn results in a small hammer striking the string. Hence an initial velocity is given to the string problem. While playing a guitar, you pluck the string and give it an initial displacement. But since in an initial velocity problem the coefficient which are nothing but the amplitude, decrease rapidly, the higher overtones of the frequency are not heard, while the higher overtones are powerful in guitar and what we hear is a mixture of frequencies. That is why a piano sounds pure and single frequency and the guitar doesn't.

Math is beautiful in her own right. But then you can see her in nature, and in things you love and then it feels like adding more stars in her crown.

Haircut

2006-10-29T06:48:00.001-08:00

The sins should grow on your head, like hair. When the accumulation becomes unbearable, you just cut them off and start anew.

The plot thickens

2006-10-28T08:04:00.000-07:00

Now I pick up the phone and call you one by one, and you are not picking up. None of you.

The movie

2006-10-28T08:01:00.000-07:00

This is exactly the scene where I am sitting in front of my computer and one of you comes online.

For Pritam and the rest

2006-10-26T22:48:00.000-07:00

There are people who claim they prefer not to know anything technical about the music they hear, that to intellecualize the listening experience destroyes their enjoyment of music. Yet most sports fan would hardly suggest that the best way to enjoy football is to avoid learning the rules of the game. A heightened awareness of musical processes and styles brings listener closer to the sounds and allows them to hear and comprehend more.

Excerpts from The Enjoyment of Music

Fall

2006-10-13T07:41:00.000-07:00

One day they were green, the next day they were yellow. Well, some of them red. Some day soon, they'll be black or dead. But before that last tick of the clock, let's go on a short walk.

The university campus is like a 48 coloured crayon set. All shades of green, red, blue and yellow are donated by the nature itself. The rest is taken care of by the weird dressing sense of fellow american students.

2006-10-08T23:06:00.000-07:00

V: "Listen Evey, this is the most important moment of your life. Commit to it. "

Unfortunately, most of us don't know if the most important moment of our life has already passed away. Without commiting, we just let it go.

2006-10-07T01:30:00.000-07:00

It's 4:30 in the night, I cooked, I ain't going to eat it right now. Maybe not even tomorrow. But feels good :)

Companion

2006-10-04T22:35:00.000-07:00

I was sitting in front of my desktop, trying to work desperately on the new design I was preparing for this rich guy. He came home from office, he sat next to me. Slowly, he put his hand on my right thigh. I knew he came right from the laboratory, perhaps he was smelling of chemicals. I was uncomfortable working, while his hand still trying to rub on my thigh. I shuffled a bit, he took his hand away from me. But the green stains remained on my mind. It was like a dull sticky green liquid, a dead algae, floating in water, or phlegm, or something, anything which was more disgusting than that.

He was a perfectly sick man, in mind and body. The mere presence of him was making his image uglier inside of me, day by day. Each time he'd appear in front of me, I saw him more and more grotesque, like a newly drawn water colour painting rubbed with dry cloth. So hard that eventually the paper torn apart, moistly. Each time I heard his voice, more and more chalks screetched on the blackboard, more nails were rubbed against paper.

2006-09-26T13:52:00.000-07:00

Some moments, I grew faster and some just hung on refusing to pass by. I enjoyed the fast ones and the slow ones are still with me.

back on tRack

2006-09-18T06:15:00.000-07:00

You know, if you break my heart I'll Go.
But I'll Be Back again.

-Arnold Schwarznegger to the T1000

Random walks on R

2006-09-14T21:32:00.000-07:00

I was once the king of R
roamed around generously in the car
went to every local bar
fancied getting promoted from king to tzar

Now there is this new R
heir of mine as scoundral as a swine
on every occasion makes his belly shine
and then pretends that the world is fine

Center - Revisited

2006-09-12T08:17:00.000-07:00

A few days ago, I was in central park, on a very sunny and beautiful day. Which is located in the central area of Manhattan, and it was amazing. But this has nothing to do with that. This is about me.

So, I walk into this bar, on a weekend, down in the suburbs, quie late in the night. It's almost closing time, the bartenders are chatting with the regular crowd. None of them has any intentions of drinking more. I go in, nobody pays attention. I barge to the bartender.

"Hey, did you know that I am amazing? and I am very intelligent", I say.

"Well, I didn't know sir, but now sure I do, I am so sorry for my behavior"

"Good enough, you know, I generally don't go places like these, I like smart people, ofcourse none of them is as smart as me, but still I can compromise, but with you people, it's really difficult to manage. I agree that it's a compromise living in this world, but atleast for me I am used to live with people with IQ just lower than mine, not very much lower than mine. I think you are not understanding what I am saying, maybe I am too complicated logically for you. You know it's my habit, since my brain works so efficiently, I think of every situation as a logical puzzle, with finite number of answers, and I then try to solve it."

"Yes sir! I am sure that what you are saying is perfect, but it is the small size of my brain which doesn't allow me to understand it. But I am so glad that such words of wisdom fell on my ear this day"

"Yeah yeah I know, but you know what, I don't want to be a benefactor for stupid people like you, it just wastes my intellect you know. Though I have oodles of it, I don't think you are worth a discussion with me. I can spend that time thinking about myself, and my brain power and try to solve my problems. You know, people like me, who are so amazing, if we people (who are so amazing) try to make our life beautiful, the whole world will be beautiful. I am sure you are not understanding this, but it's okay. It's about the brain, not your fault. Can I have one sour amarreto please?"

"For sure sir, I am so glad that you could talk to me today. I shall remember this moment for the rest of my life"

"Whatever"

Beatles

2006-09-08T08:17:00.000-07:00

When you are zero to five, all you feel about beatles is fear. Small children generally don't like orthropodas. Later, when your senses of audio capturing develope and you start assigning meanings to words you listen. Songs like yellow submarine, I am the walrus, octopus' garden, the old brown shoe are your favourites just because the names are funny and your sense of humour is limited to that.

Later in late teens and early twenties. It's the time when they hit you the most. It is when you want to tell her and your head is filled with things to say. Or she's leaving home,your next door neighbour or sister. Or you've got to get her into your life, or hold her hand or love her eight days a week. It's all there, out in the open. And you feel fine that you are finally a young man and not something like Elanor Rigby.

And then you are 25, and just as the beatles matured, you too pretend to do that, losing the innocence of the youthful mind, you dwell into complicated subjects for simply no reason. This is the time for post Sgt. Pepper's era.

And then you are 64, wondering if you'd get a birthday greeting, or a valentine, what you get is young Mccartney thinking about the same.

Repeat and again, a tribute

2006-09-05T09:29:00.000-07:00

Do you know the warm progress under the stars?
Do you know we exist?
Have you forgotten the keys to the kingdom?
Have you been born yet
& are you alive?

and then,

O great creator of being
grant us one more hour to
perform our art
& perfect our lives

And something I discovered a few days ago

The moths & atheists are doubly divine
& dying

and something for the soul

We live, we die
& death not ends it

and at last the truth

We have assembled inside this ancient
& insane theatre
To propagate our lust for life
& flee the swarming wisdom
of the streets

and something which I forgot at the first

music inflames temperament

and thus you fall in love with the man, and his pen, paper and voice and whatever he does combining all that.

Platonic

2006-08-31T07:45:00.000-07:00

"Answer me!"

"People don't love each other at our age, Marthe- they please each other, that's all. Later on, when you're old and impotent, you can love someone. At our age, you just think you do. That's all it is."

The holy spirit

2006-08-30T06:50:00.000-07:00

In R
We Trust

In hard times, thou shalt not falter from thy course of action. R shall support you just as Brutes supported Caeser. Trust in R, surely thou shalt follow the abyssimal path of self destruction.

In R
We Trust

One of the most difficult questions

2006-08-25T20:26:00.000-07:00

Coffee or Chocolate?

(Courtesy Pritam)

Chopin and Beethoven

2006-08-24T17:17:00.000-07:00

They say Chopin was an ecentric man. He couldn't manage with a whole orchestra. He would stay alone somewhere in the countryside. As a result, he has very few symphonies. All his work is majorly solo pieces on the piano. And thus he is one of the best piano composer ever.

Beethoven on the other side, was the first man to use music for money, since he was very poor, he couldn't hire a well trained orchestra and thus wasn't very famous in his times. Later on he loss hearing. Still managed to produce one of the most amazing pieces in the history of music.

Listen to Symphony #5, Moonlight sonata and Fur Elise to know Beethoven, and anything by Chopin. Though Chopin is the best, Beethoven comes as close as sharing the position with just those 3 pieces.