Traversing into that Pathless Land!

Namaste!

After a long time, this page is going to see some activity. It had been a dry spell and a lot of things have happened. No, I was not busy. I had numerous thoughts and ideas that I had penned down to write them here. But there is always a sense of such things sounding irrelevant and obscure to a greater mass. Though a following of some tens of people may not be considered big, I do sincerely consider it to be more than what I had ever expected. Let’s be realistic, no one likes to read about the thoughts of a layman by taking pains to visit his blog and read through his tedious writing. But that is an option available to the audience whether or not they choose to participate, but not to the mind which is responsible for exhibition of those thoughts. Throughout this entire dormant state, I have been travelling places all over the virtual world. With an increasing curiosity in the idea of deep web, I had been in a state of continuous searching and researching about the life and its versions, available to us on this very Earth. This particular post is one of the many ideas, my serious notes, about delimiting Truth.

Truth, like the Light, has always fascinated me. When someone talks about a person telling truth, the thoughts that come to my mind are about the perception of the listener/believer, the point as well as frame of reference he stands and puts the speaker into, and the force of acceptance, which the listener/believer wants. These were “my” methods of listening to anything that was marketed as Truth and was sold for monetary or spiritual or emotional benefits. It is definitely easy and reliable to assume that The Truth can be twisted and it might even lose its meaning when retold with some inconspicuous lies but my question always was “Was this really The Truth or somebody just mirrored something, I  expected to hear?” There will be umpteen instances in our lives where one single sentence or even a single word or even a mere Yes or No will be accepted easily as truth. Probably, that was what you and I wanted to hear. It is simple science. The path of least resistance is always chosen and preferred. And so are our perspectives, bounded with so many assumptions and eternally denied limitations of ours. How can you tie your hands and legs and still expect to swim into a vast ocean? So what do we do? We make our own swimming pools and bath tubs and criticize the ocean for having a thousand dangers. So, I tried to sort things and then jumbled them once again about my thoughts on Truth. Yeah that’s right. We can’t leave things sorted just because that sorting follows our logical mindset. We need to scramble them a lot to generate different possibilities of our logic and its validity.

Truth, maybe, is like an equation. An equation which may become more and more bizarre if you keep adding variables to it. Now, one cannot keep adding a thousand Xs and Ys just to get an answer. So we draw limits. We restrict our equation with several assumptions. For Truth our assumptions are our memory, our physical prowess, our senses, including the mysterious sixth sense and all the hidden ones about whose existence, we are currently unaware but have somehow mingled amongst these limitations. Now adding to these assumptions and limits, we knowingly/unknowingly add our expectations. If I am having a hundred variables to determine one particular Truth, I will try to, first of all, contain the weirdness to my five senses. I will add a sixth sense factor which will give me a let out if my version of Truth does not hold true. And at last, I will add my expectation variable, which, actually, is a constant! Now think this. Am I really going to find The Truth? Will this method really work for all the possible scenarios and inconsistent behaviors? Is this foolproof? Does this method have a variable that will be able to limit the influence of my senses against knowing Truth? Will this equation hold true even if the Expectation variable becomes redundant? And several more questions which will lead to the similar discussion. Even two persons will see a beggar differently. One may be using his senses to judge him of being a true beggar deserving sympathy and help whereas the other person might dig deep into his logical train and come up with an idea of the beggar being phony and the antisocial purposes for which he might use the money. Which one of them is right? Both? None? Did anyone of them dig deep enough to satisfy their curiosity and coming up with ultimate Truth? No.

Am I going to offer a method to know Truth? Absolutely, not. What I may offer is a thought of not following any cults or religions for knowing Truth. Why add more limitations to our already set limiting factors? They set up with an ideology or a path or a process which it says to follow for knowing their versions of Truth. Much of the religious philosophies are only as old as we humans are, still we fight for our survival and existence. Keeping that thing in mind, one should adopt the philosophy of viruses which have been in the Universe since the first molecule came into existence. Aren’t they the ultimate Truth of survival? People who follow science will get the point that there have been numerous incidents where a well-established method is challenged and overthrown to pave way for more accurate method, which in turn gives us more precise results. No one can offer Truth or even a foolproof method of knowing it because it cannot simply exist. There is nothing like an absolute Truth or an absolute Lie, unless we confine ourselves with boundaries. Something that gives result, which may explain the condition of that time, isn’t Truth. It is mere our logic. We need to accept that we are definitely trying to refine our logic but it is nowhere near the perfect Truth or even the perfect Logic, something that is infallible, irrespective of space-time or the versions of Truth.

Religions and cults are pathological and to some extent pathetic. They all tend to sermonize us to restrict our lives in one way or the other to achieve The Truth. Does that mean that The Truth is so condensed that it cannot remain valid under myriad conditions? If that really is the definition of The Truth, there is no point in wasting our time. Truth is out there somewhere, with all the burden of our limitations!

Many of my points might be arguable and won’t be coming up easy with most of us. We all have been taught how to “know” The Truth ultimately by a bunch of people whose knowledge is impeccable on the literature which profoundly restricts our thinking. That is really amazing and depressing at the same time. But there cannot be achieving without refining, isn’t it? Who said that this write-up is The Truth? Comments, thoughts and criticism awaited.

I maintain that Truth is a pathless land, and you cannot approach it by any path whatsoever, by any religion, by any sect.

-Jiddu Krishnamurti

*Going Offline*

*Dump*

Let's Make an iPhone in Rs. 699!

Hello Readers,

In this season of misleading political manifestos, promises, agendas, etc., I, myself, tried to lure some of the greedy brains to read something that may mean more precious than an iPhone! Safely, no one can sue me here because I didn't make any inappropriate remark on any inappropriate political reader. That is saved for the further reading, provided you buy the premise that this post has actually nothing to do with building an iPhone.

As usual, passing the time in the scorching summer of India, I was unusually invited to attend a regular academic conference where "they" were keen on "bridging the gap" between students and industry and were "mapping the brains" of their students. Now, as far as Indian inferiority complex and English language's jargony is concerned, such titles always attract the people who are NOT associated with the hosting institutions and are "invited" to attend their "brain storming conference", just because they "sound good". And just like the misleading title of this post and like you, misled readers, those industrial people (some of them out of certain obligations), attended the said conference.

Without falling off the topic, the conclusive terms coming up every now and then were those above mentioned jargons, which the management kept on repeating like some holy mantra. But I sensed something very awkward there. They wanted the industries to help the students to guide them for the projects. The industries will define, the students will work and boom, the problem ends a better society develops! Had it been that shit easy, Africa would have been the leader in innovation. [See TedTalks video: You Don't Need an App for That] The problem they equivocally and ambiguously discussed was the indisciplined approach to involve theindustries to get the students. The management sent out some erratic ideas which rather than being out-of-the-box were actually closing-the-box-for-eternity ideas. Amongst some 50 faculties as qualified as M.Tech/PhD, I was probably the only one holding a B.E. and a project coordinator. So there wasn't much of a case to put forward, when I had raised a doubt and was ephemerally heard while the listener picked up his nose in this already dry environment.

I have a primary question. Why would an industry, give you their problems? Why would they rely on a Bachelor when they can have the same thing, effectively solved by a better, experienced person? Amidst the haphazard policy framework, our industries lack the corporate social responsibility. One can easily blame them. I wouldn't.

Let's take this example. Why do you pick up a smartphone from Apple or Samsung or Google or Blackberry, when even a simple PDA was enough? Why do you purchase an Samsung S4 when you already had S3? Why would you think of purchasing an iPhone 6 in 2014 when you've already purchased the 5S in 2013? Some call it splurging, some call it utility and the others are Indians because for us, the name itself is enough! For anything to sell, the consumer must need to have a strong reliability 

1. In company 

2. Product's validity over the time 

3. Product's utility

4. Innovation/New features

An intelligent consumer, will definitely keep in mind the above points and maybe start saving for a product sufficing all the above mentioned criteria. But the other splurges, the wrongly philanthropists, don't. The essence of the idea is briefly shown in the figure below:

The point is, when Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Narayan Murthy or Azim Premji become philanthropists, they don't turn themselves into ascetics. They are developing a model where not only their money is being poured into something fruitful, but in a way, it is actually helping their firm to innovate in different areas and fields. [Excellent interview at TedTalks: Bill and Melinda Gates]. In an indirect sense, they are innovating to create a wider scope and arena for their firm and towards the entire economy [Read the abstract: The role of innovation in driving the economy: Lessons from the global financial crisis by Angela Hausmana, Wesley J. Johnston]. If one thinks deeply, this connects somewhere with the academic institutions and their ties with the industries. An academic institute should be able to produce more innovative output (students) rather than focusing on (read, just!) policies to make the students innovative. Somewhere, down the line this is not going to happen.

The current educational system is destroying the curiosity, thereby strangling innovative approach of the students. Even one of my previous posts focussed on the same idea. It is a simple. How are you going to sell a product if it is as conventional as a decade? Will you purchase a Nokia 3120 at a price of Rs. 5500 in 2014? Will you purchase a Maruti Van priced at Rs. 5 lacs in 2014? Can you even think of selling a day old product at the same price as purchased? Unanimously, the answer is "No" for all the questions. If you, as a customer, do not purchase a product that is even a day older, how can an industry pour its earning into a system that is teaching them technology almost 20 years older than what they are using now? What is the meaning of giving the students a project of working on speech recognition software when they have a hard time decoding a simple C/C++ program? What is the use of asking a mechanical engineering student to design an aerodynamically efficient car when he hardly knows anything about the structure of the car? In this time of universal crisis and slowdown, industries are not that wealthy anymore.

Personally, I find the idea of fingerprint recognition in iPhone 5S as supremely idiotic. Although a great admirer of Apple products, but this really is a gimmick for any hardcore smartphone user too. But still, it can be sold. It has a new, innovative feature something the other competitors do not possess, yet. The leaked iPhone 6 is supposed to be made of Sapphire Glass, superior to suddenly-turned-into-obsolete Gorilla Glass. The quality of the glass being, it is the second hardest material after diamond! [Read: iPhone 6 and Sapphire Glass]. Isn't this a heftily paying innovation? What's the source? Curiosity. Apple designed and patented its own process to manufacture sapphire glass on its flagship iPhone 6. [Read: Apple's Patented Sapphire Glass Manufacturing Design]. There can be no money without competition. There can be no competition without new products. There cannot be new products without invention/innovation and there cannot be innovation without curiosity. See? There is no formal education in the cycle! ;)

That conference literally bored me to death by discussing the policies that can be framed to "make students innovative". Due to certain ridiculous circumstances, I had to bear the entire 3 hour ridiculous movie of this great innovators. A movie that was so realistic to get a mention in IMDb's Bottom 100!

Lastly, I want to bust a myth popularly termed as "Knowledge" in 2014. What we, as a students, are gathering, is simply information, which has been misnamed as knowledge! With all these Googling, Wikiing and App downloading, it is just that shared information being passed on. Try searching the patent sites (e.g. Wipo, USPTO, etc.) about the ideas you have or ever had. You will see, what the world really is!

Flick Suggestion: Inside Job. A gorgeous, Academy Award Winner documentary, which although has no direct connection with the post but actually shows the curiosity of director, which has lead to a fabulously researched and awesomely made documentary. Must watch!

Signing Off

*Dump*

Sissy Secularism vs. Apathetic Atheism

Hello Critics!

For the first time, I am addressing my nice bunch (modest 14!) of readers as critics. There is always a reason behind such change. Why? One, "Change is Constant" and Second, "God doesn't play dice with the Universe". In no case, I be alleged of proclaiming myself as God. This is what Einstein tell. But again, Bohr jawed him by saying, "Stop telling God what to do with his dice.". So at the end, sorry for the detour, but again, Hello Readers.

Secularism is no new word for any of us. Mostly, the Indian definition of secularism actually limits us to ponder thinking ONLY about the minorities and their welfare. Had it been "Minorities" only, there would've been no problem. But unfortunately, we know what exactly is happening. There is no point in discussing about the same as here we are not one those demo-weird-cratic poly-retard-cians. As the elections of 2014 knock at the door and harder knock the knocked heads of our Indian political drama, something usual occurred in Muzaffarnagar of Uttar Pradesh. Following the proud tradition, the riots were labelled as more political than communal (there is an invisible line differentiating those two things, don't you think?!). Hullaballoo of everything and Mahalo for nothing!

Since independent India's inception (I think our independence is dream too and we are given sedatives named Superpower India!), secularism has been the root of more vices than the virtues it carries. Be it Gandhiji (meticulously, ignored and no, I don't give any importance!) or Sardar or Lal Bahadur Sastri, all of them have been infected with this virus named secularism. Let's just define the word: 

Secularism: the principle of separation of government institutions, and the persons mandated to represent the State, from religious institutions and religious dignitaries. [Source: Wikipedia]

Secularism: a doctrine that rejects religion and religious considerations [Source: Princeton Edu]

One thing that obviously catches the attention is that the both of the definitions "reject" religion in secularism. What we are facing is the loophole politics of the definition. Let's follow the Indian mutilated version of secularism.

Secularism in India: Citizens have complete freedom to follow any religion, and there is no official religion. The Government treats all religious beliefs and practices with equal respect and honor.

[Source: Wikipedia]

Wikipedia has garnered more criticism than praise for its authenticity. So, I went to download the Indian Constitution for the same. Here is something more revealing, more than just the definition.

"Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion." [Source: Indian Constitution, Page 485 "Right to Freedom of Religion"]

The only part I want to emphasize is that in the right to freedom of religion, specifically mentioned is the propagation of religion which technically, legalizes all the religion conversion business. Well, does legal or illegal really matter in India? That's an LOL.

What my thought was about the way of changing the word itself. Why not be an atheist state rather than a conglomeration of colorful religion and their ever colorful conflicting doctrines. Not philosophizing, but I believe that apathy garners more impartial behaviour than love. You can love the evil blindly (e.g. Dhritrashtra) but you can be an apathetic and be more impartial (e,g, Krishna). Mythology has its own power but what is wanted is a philosophy where there is no religion in ruling the state. Religion means believing deeply in something. It maybe a human, animal, object or even an emotion (that's why we pray smileys! :P ). But atheist encapsulates none of them. It is like a crystal clear water of river, where the imperfect pebbles and the perfect stones can be separated. It is like fire which will melt everything, regardless of gold or rust iron. Love is always blind, apathy cannot be. Love has a pair of spectacles corrected by the numbers their sympathy is measured, atheism or apathy is like glasses of Leonard Hofstadter (Trivia: Leonard Hofstadter has spectacles without glasses! The Big Bang Theory Trivia).

About The Pic: Arjuna pondered deeply on Krishna's suggestions. He was mesmerized when he saw the different avatars of Vishnu. What are the chances that he would have been Krishna's blind follower if Krishna had shown this before? What are the chances that Arjuna would have been more sure about Krishna than his Dhanurvidya (skill of archery)? That's the same with monotheism and polytheism/Indian secularism. Our Constitution is mesmerized by so many religions. Maybe, it has blind faith in them more than the power of its own self.

Let's assume that for a second, India becomes an atheist nation, where the only thing that matters is the rules prescribed in its constitution. Now visualize this. A road nearby your home is broken beyond repair. Thousands of people are stranded and chaos seem to be never ending. An old man has to detour to his home in the perspiring hot summer due to that road. You cannot go to the movies because the rickshaw or the bus just can't enter. The reconstruction is currently impossible because there is a religious place situated amidst the road. Neither can they divert nor can they demolish. But if the laws are apathetic to the religion, the site will be demolished and the road will be prepared. No one can do anything. Why? The laws will dictate that neither of the religions be given importance in the work of government. Think what will happen to that noisy, blasting and irritating garba parties then. Think, what will happen to communal riots when communal word itself is purged and is a criminal offence? I think that's the utopia of India.

This is a thought that is never going to be reality, because it will defeat the entire post 1857 Indian history. It shall put the father of the nation behind the bars, will hang its first prime minister just for signing a treaty, will smother the current Indian "progress" (aka congress (a.k.a is antonym known as, for here only!)). It will slit the throat of those vociferous but hollow religious leaders who are leading the cattle of 120 crores to Hell, which they say as Heaven. But again, that's the theory of relativity!

Comments are welcome and obviously that means, at least some one is reading! ;)

Signing Off

*Dump*

Science: From Overture to Symphony. Now to Finalé?

Hola Amigos,

Quite after a long time! Ideally, quite after a long space-time. But who cares to be that precise. Even with the modern knowledge, we are still going on with our weight represented in kg, whereas even a school boy knows that the unit of weight is Newton. I was recently watching A Beautiful Mind, starring Russell Crowe and playing the character of great mathematician John Nash. I was awestruck in one of the marvelous scene of this extremely pleasant movie. In one of the scenes, he and his group are observing the college girls and imagining various “games” with them in their mind. The approach is perfectly boyish. All for one (duh!). Now, there is the complexity of human brain and behavior. All the other group members are trying to woo one same gorgeous blonde and so the normal world problem of “Who goes first?” comes into existence. Born genius, all those math wizards put on their thinking cap and ponder over the problems playfully yet deterministic. But as they are mathematicians, there moves to woo are as real as their hypothetical theories. Nash is already stuck with his career hitting a dead end and is mentally somewhere else already. The atmosphere of the bar is hardly any concern to him. But just at that instance, in his subconscious, he starts to think about the problem his friends are having. They propose using a very famous the then economic model of father of economics, Adam Smith. Simplistically speaking, the model proposed that if each one of the group members played for his own interests, the whole organization will be benefited. Enter the genius, Nash. Sublimely and with his day dreaming eyes, Nash declares that Smith is wrong as his theory seems incomplete. He proposes a theory which initially radicalizes the thought process of his group for achieving their target. Then, he storms out of the bar thanking that blonde in a real genius manner i.e. looking into her eyes momentarily and with utter thinking train rumbling fast in his mind and eyes. From that little incident, he proposes a theory which technically, uproots the 150 years of backbone theory of governing dynamics of economics. Rest is history. Brilliant movie, but still a tragedy to a great extent.

I was listening to my mum, talking about her mother, my nanny. She told that even without the formal education, she was so brilliant. Though being a sub matriculate person, her common sense was par excellent. I almost hope that most of the readers will agree with this thing that their forefathers, or even their fathers and grandfathers were much “cool” in common sense and knowledge. I was listening to my mum, with great gusto. A minute later, after she left, I was immersed in my thinking. I started with our ancient Indian scientists, rolled towards Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Einstein and Hawking. Then I started to think about them more when suddenly my mum came back and asked me about the iPad and its gorgeous performance and features. I then had my “little” speech of 20 minutes starting from modern computation and retrospecting the Shockley et al inventing transistors and silicon chips and logic gates and binary. When I informed her about the working of binary system in computers, she was amazed. That watery sparkle in her eyes gave me a shudder of greatness. Of what? Greatness of how those early geniuses came up with such mind bending ideas. Who would have thought of processing information in just 1 and 0? How can someone digitize everything into 1 and 0? I, myself, was thoroughly amazed that I knew them. And I was disappointed too because I ONLY KNEW them.

Thoughts are like wild fire. They destroy and also reconstruct the entire landscape. I was flying in my own ideas and a question arose in my mind. Are we advancing or retreating in science? In music, there is a prelude or an overture that slowly starts any piece of music to thrill the audience. Subsequently, starts the main piece or the symphony which spellbinds them. And then, the finale, an obvious ending of a masterpiece. I started comparing music and science, as both of them have a huge impact on thinking humans (HR fans, bitch please!). Science started with genuine curiosity of ancient humans. Some of them assumed what they thought and kept on hauling that idea as the reason. Some over smart tried to get some basis. Experimenting, checking the authenticity. And when the notion fell apart, they began to re-search about the probable explanations. This is how science ever came into existence. Mild curiosity was transformed into strong emotions to know. Ironically, also to let down the theories proposed by the enemies. But of all that, we got was the science of everything. Religion is also a science of living a life with utmost humility and intelligence, all rolled into one. I marveled and relished the yesteryear inventions and was getting chills of nostalgia.

The pre Newton era was actually the most controversial phase of humans in science. Zillions of theories put forward. Millions discarded. They injected God element to ignore the unexplainable phenomena. Then come the rationale like Copernicus, Galileo and Newton, who changed the way the human race, would ever think. Newton never had a calculator. Neither had he had access to super fine resolution telescopes nor did he have any electronic devices to help him out nor did he have internet access to various forums and ask “Why did that apple fall down and not go up?” Let me rephrase it, can we do the same? Things, right now, are so simple. You have a doubt, you search on the Internet, ask on various forums, have an easy access to various libraries, Skype and what not. Just imagine, how would have Newton formulated his laws without super sensitive sensors. Without Mathematica or without any references available from Google or Wikipedia. Furthermore, he never had any scientist buddies on Facebook or a group there, who would verify his papers, theories and suggest him solutions! Neither was there any group on Facebook during Galileo’s time that would protest against the church or sign an online petition to save Galileo’s work from being burnt! The overture of Science was just getting better, bigger and thrilling.

The symphony began between late 18^th and early 19^th century, when brilliant minds like Bohr, Rutherford, Einstein, Planck and almost incredibly brilliant minds were born and came into action. It maybe the Industrial Revolution that is being considered that has redefined us but I strictly believe that this whole lot of scientists were the backbone of what we say, the modern science. Those who are even a little bit familiar with quantum mechanics would know how hard it to visualize is. It is just stupendous to think so much out of the box. Dual nature of light, photons, orbitals, existence from zero, black holes, quarks, gluons, leptons…Oh! I am exhausted. Most of the theories were tested in an unsophisticated environment, without computers and circuits. Relativity! One word and we bow down with respect and thorough amazement. (People always argue about relativity’s real life utility. I say, “Just give it a little space-time! ;)”). The explosion created by Einstein stirred the entire world just like the by-product of his theories, the atomic bomb. Newtonian Universe was in a head on collision with Einsteinian Cosmos. Ramanujam was almost a poor man with richest brain, which boggled the minds of high profile mathematicians like Hardy. Chandrasekhar proposed an elegant theory of Chandrasekhar limit which the arrogant Eddington refused to believe till eternity. Von Brown created rockets. Destructive at first, that maverick invention is reason you can read this blog at home without suffering the pain to see me in person! So on and so forth, clashes of human intelligence and actual smartness led to some of brilliant fireworks of brains. Ford introduced the concept of assembly line which is the foundation of current industries and production. People enjoyed, the world progressed.  They were all INVENTION.

Coming in the early 20^th century or the 90s, the humanistic progress was throttled with the groundbreaking discovery of computers. The telephones, cellphones and all those amazing devices came into existence due to Shockley et al gigantic invention of transistors in the mid-20th century. Nerve bending computational speed and complex data calculation and accumulation changed the way we used to see the world and vice-versa. Music was revolutionized. Movie making was revolutionized. Everything was revolutionized. It was INNOVATION.

Nothing to prove and nothing to grieve, but this is the thing I am concerned about. The human life and its progress started with meager curiosity. We landed on invention and now it is in the phase of innovation. Thing is, invention is a phase where something maverick comes out. To summarize, invention is like the Big Bang moment. It may not be having any strong factor or base, nothing at all in the time before. Right now, people are obsessed with the word innovating and creativity. They throw those words relentlessly and freely. Yes they are important. Innovation is very important. Modification, ramification, changing the perspective, yes, is important. But, have we invented everything? Is everything already invented that we need to just modify them now? I highly doubt that. Current concern is this thing. Apple and Samsung are two giants whose locking horns are giving the geeks orgasms of electronics. What I have observed, that nowadays, the only thing that is coming out is the apps. The high end graphics, the superb touch, this many GHz, that many cores and CUDA and teraflops and petaflops but no ground breaking invention like transistor. No path breaking theories like gravity. No unnervingly brilliant ideas like quantum. We are just flowing with the flow of river or to be frank, like a flock of sheep. The only difference is that some of the sheep are thinking a little different. We have encased our thinking to the limited theories that we know. To the limited devices we can improvise. But can we have a device, just as astounding as computer, now? Unfortunately, even innovation is being subdued by resurfacing of creativity. And creativity is dryly apprehended as designing a little better with totally a consumer utility based logic. Seems that consumerism is the main culprit here. Moreover, we are losing the magnitude of intelligence too. With reference to my mother's inputs about my nanny's times, people had a greater common sense and practical knowledge. Of course, they weren't all that geeky smart but the overall intelligence and reasoning of the mass was stronger. Right now, the intelligence of a handful of mass is staggering. You can't compete with them but the common man is really turning into a stupid common man. Their mind has been purged from the quintessential common sense. I always ask my mum in a sarcastic but genuine worry tone about who is going to follow the legacy of cooking now. Their delicious hand made cooking is also becoming extinct, as a greater mass of fairer sex is getting involved with job. I have the same worry about invention. Legacy lost? God, hope not!

Nash didn't overthrow Smith’s theory for money. Einstein didn't oppose Newtonian mechanics for any monetary gains. Chandrasekhar didn't argue with world class physicist Eddington to achieve any financial appreciation. Ramanujam died poor. All these examples point us out that in the race of earning money; we have devolved from inventors to innovators. Furthermore, innovators will be converted to mere formula restricted designers. All of the things that changed our entire human race’s thinking were not just to encash money but were the fruits of original and myriad brainy thinking. Tesla is nowadays considered to be one of the greatest innovators. But his genius was more in the arena of inventor rather than innovator.

Anyway, the world is moving fast. Hoping for a better future of science and better definition of invention.

Must see: Apple's WWDC XIII keynote. Something for the readers to get spellbound beyond words. Enjoy!

Signing off

*Dump*

The Private Proclamation

Hello Readers,

Ever since the last post, there has been a significant amount of change in our lives. News have already changed. Lots and lots of information. Science, religion, politics, anything that shared a common wall with the Time, has changed. Some sounded louder and some were faint. Some of them had a party and some of it mourned in silence. The Time saw it, heard it, felt it and then kept moving in the endless infinitely dimension Universe, remaining passive at the back of the wall. India and Indians, experienced some best moments and some worst scenarios.

I am not going to talk much about Delhi incident. The entire Internet has been filled up, like a compendium of the ideas, frustration, protest, vulgar writings and much much more about it. The entire world saw it, felt it and has remained stuck to its routine. The news channels telecasted endlessly about the girl and her condition. Twitter and Facebook went nuts by continuous sharing of the type of punishment, people wished. Adding fuel to media's havan, our begrime politicians passed comments and stole the limelight of that victim by being dissented by the public. The entire humdrum of the incident turned into a sadistic bonfire for Sodom festival. The rallies were stoned and curbed. Candle light marches. Guys, stop there. Give your mind a break. Think. Who are you dealing with? You're dealing with one of the most corrupt and filthy generation of bastards who can rape anyone and still make it a case of consensual one or in their own "Lalu chaap" humor, sperm donation. You're dealing with a dark species of inhumane, who are literally million times cruel than Idi Amin or Vlad Tepes Dracul. Hitler has been continuously epitomized as the face of cruelty and inhumanity but I bet that the world hasn't seen Hitler's Big Brothers, yet. 

I came across this film named Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom by Pier Paolo Pasolini. I still remember this film for two things. I will go for the second thing first. After watching this film, I failed in my class test of one of my most favorite and mastered subjects. I still recall that I nearly puked while giving that exam and was so uncomfortable, that I almost decided not to attend the other day. Now, this might seem a hyperbolic reaction but I assure you that no one and absolutely no one can watch that movie for more than 15-20 minutes. Come to the first thing. I will never ever forget the horror, depicted in that movie. It isn't just the gore that makes it intolerable, the way it is so grim, so ever horrorealistic that maybe you would (at least I felt!) want to format your brain and make it sure that you never watched it. So what about it? I recalled the same movie after this Sodom festival of Delhi and the first thing came into my mind was that it was quite equivalent to few scenes of the movie. Although there is no point in discussing this thing here but I believe that the perpetrators shown in this movie are perfect mirror images of our politicians. No hyperbole here and no unrealistic comparison. In the movie, the sadist ministers, who have abducted those unlucky souls, perpetrate unbelievable and unimaginable atrocities on them. It's done one by one. And the ones who are chosen are punished and enjoyed by the others like them, who are in line. That means, the left ones rejoice (or are forced to rejoice) because it isn't their day and they are spared. The punishment dim the word gruesome, setting aside a newer definition of sadism. The leftover group isn't spared. They are made to sit in their own shit and things that might make your stomach bereft of food. But their turn is on the next day, again in couples, a girl and a boy. Again, the remaining group torture them and laugh at it. It goes painfully on and on.

Saw the similarity? I did. I hope you will find it too. Maybe the movie was in 1975 and since then everything has changed. But I found this. I found that that group of hostages are like our people and but of course, the perpetrators are our politicians. Just like them, they found fun or were unmoved by the plight of their fellow hostages. Cause they knew that it was their turn next and they couldn't do anything. We all are in the same boat. The movie shows a prostitute who sing songs erotic stories which arouses the politicians. I mirrored them as the media and people who have lost senses of their tongue and lead to horrors. They say, it arouses. Ergo, compared to the tongue torture of our PM, son of a President (sounds like S-O-B, right?) and many others. Indian people, we are being sodomized. I am not accounting this thing for the recent unspeakable Delhi horror, I am actually seeing that we are being inflicted upon at each and every phase of life. We are those unlucky Salo souls and we won't do anything because "Chalo, humare saath to aisa nahin hua! Thank God!". Rallies, candle marches, signing petitions, are you people freaking idiots? If this had to happen and awake these bastards, we would never have needed this. 

Drop the candles. Put on an empty AK-47. March now. Show that this guns are just empty at this moment but may empty your bodies if we suffer injustice. This isn't uncivil. This is perfectly civil. You're not going to use a weapon unless you're in need of self defense. Don't show your frigging candle. Don't burn those effigies and all. Cordon a police station. House arrest them. Make them do the justice and the inquiry. People, you give the deadlines for the case. You set the courts. You set the morality values. It needn't be democracy, it needs to be the "YOU"th now. If it isn't "U", it isn't "US". Think this; a female CM (Sheila Dixit), a female behind the curtains PM (Sonia Gandhi), a female Police and former Interpol (Kiran Bedi) and still their safety is at stake. Well, we people maybe intelligent but we are severely dumb to our own selves. We march and protest silently when these dogs of Hell laugh and derogatorily comment. Worst feeling and idea, which I got; maybe that girl was "kept" alive for the TV TRPs and when the politicians show that she was ruining their limelight, they started pissing from their foul mouth. They will keep cornering this case. Will increase diesel prices so that you start redefining your budget. Will make India-Pak match super exciting, so that the TRPs and the attention will be diverted. Maybe, by 2014 election, a series of bomb blasts, scams and God forbid, but a 26/11 attack might be hosted so that this Delhi case is forgotten.

But guys, do we really remember that?

MovieBank: Came across Stanley Kubrick's "A Clockwork Orange". Thought for a moment that such treatment might be helpful to set our pee-liticians straight. But the end justified that we still live in India.

Offlining

*Dump*