Advertisements

Personal and conceptual

How did we invent sex.

Something just occurs to me. We often do stuff so that we could get some pleasure remembering it. We don’t have to do stuff that are too hard. Thats what makes us human. Thinking about it thats how we invented… Read More ›

Advertisements

Mathew and anti Mathew effect.

I wanted to write this article, separately, as I didn’t want to break the flow of Physics arguments in the article, where this point came up.

This point was originally raised by Feynman; as far as I know. If David Mermin comes, he will stick his cotton buds, and wipe this out, and claim he said it, there is no lack of such incredible people. All he does say in that article, linked here, is so typical of plagiarists that you wouldn’t believe how murkily he dismisses Feynman as the original fellow who might have said so, “he is a great mind calculator, so nobody would ask him to shut up and calculate”.

How about nobody would think “Madonna” is a slut. A beautiful lady in the corner, well nobody would be harsh to her, such harshness would only be toward me, only I would be one to whom such a treatment can be mated, and that would be David Mermin’s famous and infamous proof and evidence of Mathew Effect of which he is apparently a victim.
If, anything, even I knew of “shut up and calculate” in my grad days, as a phrase ascribed to Feynman, in my privacy of studies, in other words never discussed with anyone, but knew of it, and grew in associating this behavioral treatment towards myself, going as far idiosyncratically, even to compare the thickness of my own hair, with Feynman’s, I can’t be Feynman, or can I be? Can “shut up and calculate” be used on any grad student or similarly placed researcher? Yes, it can be and thats the whole message, not the interpretation by the name of the city of Copenhagen.

सत्य कि बिबिधता सिमित हैं, यद्यपि सिर्फ एक में सीमित नहीं।

बिज्ञान अक्सर परिभाषाओं के दायरे में सिमित रह जाती है क्यों कि इस से ऊपर उठना अल्बर्ट आइनस्टीन के भाषा में “बिज्ञान चमत्कार है अगर इसे कमाने कि एक पन्था से दुरी से देखा जाये तो” जैसे “पूर्ब सोम कि सत्य” जैसा प्रतीत है. यह अलग बिचारों से अलग हो जाती है, पर सत्य एक मात्र उपलब्धि न होने पर भी बहत सारे उपलब्धि भी नहीं हैं, कुछ और सीमित उपलब्धियां सत्य कि भरमाई करते हैं।

चेतन भगत के बिकने के कारण भी ढेर सारे हैं जो बिज्ञान से तालुक नहीं रखते, इसके परिभाषाओं के दायरे में, लेकिन क्या हम कह सकते हैं वो कामशास्त्र से ज्यादा महत्व रखता है? चेतन एक जातीय आशा कि कयामत से परिबंधित है, पर कामशास्त्र एक प्राचीन अतः अंतराष्ट्रीय, तथा एक कोमल भाबना कि महिमा जैसे परिकल्पनिया है. यह चेतन कि महनीयता के ऊपर प्रश्न नहीं, बल्कि सत्य कि बिबिधता के ऊपर आलोकित करने की चेष्टा है।

सत्य कि बिबिधता सिमित हैं, यद्यपि सिर्फ एक में सीमित नहीं।

सत्य अनिर्बचनिया है. यह सुन्दर भी है, शील भी है …

Growing Above All.

What we conveniently forget is what I just parenthesized as “Ethereal Relativism”. Before Einstein’s work, the ether was taken to be something that gives motion a sense of absoluteness. Ether was the absolute measure or reference of motion, therefore all motion seemed to be known as absolute. But its widely silent that Galileo and Newton worked in a frame-work of Physics or laws of nature where a frame of reference keeps motion relative, and not absolute: a concept known as Galilean Relativity.

In other words, if there is an object falling under gravity, in telling our story, we almost forgot that, there can also be a situation where, the relative motion of the falling object, can be studied; with or without the gravity acting on the object. In other words, still, the central question is to ask; did this single object fall faster or slower w.r.t. a situation when there is no gravity? Was it known or not, to Galileo, that, this object can be tested; to be falling faster in presence of the gravity causing object.

As we know today: Gravity causes objects to fall faster, it does not cause them to fall in the first place, between heavier and lighter objects it does not make any one of them to fall faster than the other and this is a force of central attraction to the proportion of; strength being as higher as the square of separation is, less.

Why sex can be used to dominate.

Why sex is often used against opponents? There are two most competitive and perhaps the most leading behavior of us human beings. 1. Intimacy, which in its most nonsensical form is sex. 2. Creating and harboring opponents to prove our OWN supremacy.

Is it needful to say that our nonsensical intimacy has procreated and sustained us but our innate desire to kill or vanquish others has nonetheless kept us competitive because lest it only the one that hatches a conspiracy first will have an edge. We strike back not only at our extra-species opponents but at our own species in order to savior ourselves against nature’s odds.

A Physicist is a physicist’s way of talking about himself.

In my case therefore you see, 0 publications in 2001. The year I joined my PhD, I was learning more about snow-fall, JC Peney and Bus rides. 2002 I have hardly 1 or 2, that was the year when in the later half I was given the privilege of being able to sign for science papers. The next year I am already acquainted quite a bit, so signing more than 1 paper a month is no irksome involvement. I already know what I am signing it for. 20 papers a year. Then it grows to 60 papers the next year, thats papers a month, my team of 400 was producing where I have a legit share of expert contributions, through weeks of data-collection, analysis and data-mining etc. (There would be papers where I won’t have legit share, .. ) The next year 2005-2006 was my peak, 70 papers, You can check my pictures from 05-06 (on f-b) and see how much I was involved in the literally tons of ways experimentalists contribute 😉 No kidding not everything is visible outside the vacuum pipe, its risky)

Then you can see I am gradually climbing down, but its hard enough to climb down faster because you already have a history. Becoming celebrity is a one way affair, no return. With years my direct contribution goes down but history has that which is yet to come and that shows up as bigger share in contribution. (Just like the electron’s history-of-all-path must contribute towards its momenta for future)
I think thats a good connection, like the electrons the Physicists are lost, they are picking on different things and survive and their history makes it bigger.

Why scientific inventions are more and more imminent?

Even accuracy of Aristotle’s theory in ZOOLOGY was achieved in 19th century. He was therefore one of the most prolific and far reaching genius ever. After a 2000 year it took only 300 years for Einstein to overturn Newton. It took only 30 years before a group of genius (Heisenberg, Schrodinger, Bohr, Dirac et al and later Feynman, Fermi etal) who could revolutionarily modify the theories put forth by Einstein. Then it often oscillates anywhere between 3 to 100 years to see theories are overturned (or rather significantly modified) by successive group of scientists.

The 1 ppm mentality of India in education.

This article talks about some educational paradigms of India but gives the following anecdote to the end.

Belated Happy Feynman Birthday. 11/may/2013. He was born this day in the year 1918. 8 years younger to my maternal grand father. Which is why I am always amazed by Feynman. My grand pa was a farmer in a village of India and a teacher, a renowned teacher at that in his locality. He was paralyzed in his last years and died in 1996. Thats again exactly 8 years after 1988 demise of Feynman. Hence they both lived exactly 70 years of age. They were both outstanding teachers and artists {my grand pa was a fabulous artist, a fact I had forgotten over the years, he drew many things for me when I was about 7/8 years old, including say Shiva or Ramayana, at an instant’s notice by me}, Feynman was a bright star in the Glove, my grand pa only in his locality which perhaps extended say 100 villages if not more. Feynman was a farmer in some sense because of his hard work. But my point is Feynman’s vigor. A fact of amazement, perhaps since Feynman didn’t grow in a village of India but the communities of advanced localities. Perhaps Feynman was simply the highest standard of exuberance. My grand pa was lively and funny and loving but Feynman was a womanizer. I don’t know about this secret of my grand pa. My grand mother always crushed my interest in knowing such matters.

The approach to unify Language.

The thought of Sun theory of language is “äny word is an alphabet.” Therefore there are infinite number of languages and infinite number of rules of language and infinite number of alphabet. Therefore humanity has only learned to produce new alphabets, and a word is the way to do it. If I say damn, it says: d, a, m, n is an alphabet. alphabet; literal meaning is miniaturization. {therefore quantization} because alpha means less/ap/ab {ap as in apapsis, alpa as in Indianic: alpayu} and bat/bet is adjective-suffix of alpa. {as English: LY in nicely}

Cockture of India

Believe it or not due to their ramification words will sound coincidental and hilarious. eg Orange would mean O-Kingdom. But also it would mean O-color, the color of sun. But thats what it is. O is often taken to mean Sun, as sun is circular or O like. The fruit Orange is also “philosophically” a vitality of Sun, therefore Sun’s Jurisdiction or Kingdom or Range which in Indianic again means color, again check R.Ange as R Part/limb/organ, R is Sun. But how? Lets take R=Ray, then R being sun is evident. Which is how you should read the occurrence of O in various words if you were to understand its deeper meaning. This practice of giving O as a symbol/phonetics/philosophy of Sun can be found in many languages {eg Japanese}, and then the symbol/phonetics/philosophy alternates, O becomes A, which is how Adam, Adam is O-Dom = Sun’s Jurisdiction, Its this Dom which is Dharma = properties/kingdom/color/woman/man/resting etc which all derive from Sun.

The limits of Theory of Everything !

Difference between everything and anything.

You would think, when you add over, all the ‘anything’s, you get everything. Or in other words; Everything = integration (anything*dthing). That’s not true.

So most people confuse a Theory of Everything with a Theory of Anything. So that will never happen, the latter. The theory of Everything in the sense of Anything will never happen.

Physicists are not thinking that.

The economic “farsightedness” of USA

The USA could never deal properly with it’s immigrant burden. On one hand the immigrants have their own aspirations and they are the biggest task force that keeps the USA economy from faltering, it keeps the labs and the industry going. These immigrants have their various aspirations which are not necessarily fulfilled. On the other hand the natives and the immigrants both have to take the burden of sustainability. It is a new economic condition of the USA that was brewing since several decades, it only took the skin off the American economy. One can only learn lessons from great turmoils. And the Americans are one of the best people to learn faster. Sometimes they are just too taken up in other’s business.

Stephen Hawking, Einstein, and my ideas !

But imagine a world of a different civilization, we just don’t know what it would be like, may be the baby jumps every other way, crawls up the walls and roof , down under like a spider creature and shouts vulgarities at papa and pees to the sky because gravity is repulsive, who ever knows, what the reality of a different universe is.

Safety of science in India, is Indian Democracy in control of science in India?

I have teachers from where I come from, who are the alumni of IITs and likes and they are all engaged in some sort of activities related to science and research, say teaching. They are also of the best quality as I have come across, but when it comes to finding a structure that recognizes and utilizes their potential its quite far away. Is there a database in this country that maintains the list of experts and their expertise so it can be used for future plans for science, education, and teaching.

You can remind me this country doesn’t thrive on such principles; I have come across the corrupt practices of organizations such as the AICTE and I have also come across their dignitaries, who go on government funding to places inside the country but have no worthwhile issues to take care.

They come and see the laboratory and in a careless momentary self gratification remark “Establish LASER in the labs ”, well if we need LASER and you can right away see it, why don’t you take a report from right there and submit it to your office, and sanction the money the next month. I can certainly write a proposal right there in a couple minutes.

A warring dilemma in my mind in conceiving the pain of being a scientist.

If you ask me though I would discourse on an unproven theory of Quantum Mechanics where our imagination is a wave function and gets transmitted like a wave and gets caught by the aliens by their Hubble like telescope which converts such signal into a Xray video clip. But then given their sense of reality which has no connection with our intelligence and understanding we may not realize what we are looking at even if they send us one of their DVD via Netflix. …

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)

Skip to toolbar