This post answers the question in a way.
http://sidin.blogspot.com/2004/05/travails-of-single-south-indian-men-of.html
2005/12/15
2005/12/01
God's Debris
I was reading this book (electronic version available here) by Scott Adams, the creator of the Dilbert comic. It's about a conversation between two people a delivery guy and an old man calling himself Avatar. The book discusses much about anything and the explanations given seem plausible.
According to the book, the only two unchangeable things are the tiniest particle into which matter can be divided, called God-dust, which has not been discovered yet and probablility. Probability is said to be the cause of all events in the universe and he has tried to explain some concepts like the constancy of the speed of light and evolution using this, though the explanations seem to be impossible.
The first few chapters of the book question the conventional (if it can be called that) notions on thought, life and faith in God. The answers following in the next few chapters offer a new perspective to the way we see the world.
To summarise what the book is about in a sentence it can be called "Philosophy for Dummies",
...in a way.
According to the book, the only two unchangeable things are the tiniest particle into which matter can be divided, called God-dust, which has not been discovered yet and probablility. Probability is said to be the cause of all events in the universe and he has tried to explain some concepts like the constancy of the speed of light and evolution using this, though the explanations seem to be impossible.
The first few chapters of the book question the conventional (if it can be called that) notions on thought, life and faith in God. The answers following in the next few chapters offer a new perspective to the way we see the world.
To summarise what the book is about in a sentence it can be called "Philosophy for Dummies",
...in a way.
2005/11/24
Life is chaotic...or is it?
The answer to the question lies in this conversation between Rabindranath Tagore and Albert Einstein.
Excerpted from: A Tagore Reader, edited by Amiya Chakravarty.
Tagore and Einstein met through a common friend, Dr. Mendel. Tagore visited Einstein at his residence at Kaputh in the suburbs of Berlin on July 14, 1930, and Einstein returned the call and visited Tagore at the Mendel home. Both conversations were recorded and the above photograph was taken. The July 14 conversation is reproduced here, and was originally published in The Religion of Man (George, Allen & Unwin, Ltd., London), Appendix II, pp. 222-225.
TAGORE: I was discussing with Dr. Mendel today the new mathematical discoveries which tell us that in the realm of infinitesimal atoms chance has its play; the drama of existence is not absolutely predestined in character.
EINSTEIN: The facts that make science tend toward this view do not say good-bye to causality.
TAGORE: Maybe not, yet it appears that the idea of causality is not in the elements, but that some other force builds up with them an organized universe.
EINSTEIN: One tries to understand in the higher plane how the order is. The order is there, where the big elements combine and guide existence, but in the minute elements this order is not perceptible.
TAGORE: Thus duality is in the depths of existence, the contradiction of free impulse and the directive will which works upon it and evolves an orderly scheme of things.
EINSTEIN: Modern physics would not say they are contradictory. Clouds look as one from a distance, but if you see them nearby, they show themselves as disorderly drops of water.
TAGORE: I find a parallel in human psychology. Our passions and desires are unruly, but our character subdues these elements into a harmonious whole. Does something similar to this happen in the physical world? Are the elements rebellious, dynamic with individual impulse? And is there a principle in the physical world which dominates them and puts them into an orderly organization?
EINSTEIN: Even the elements are not without statistical order; elements of radium will always maintain their specific order, now and ever onward, just as they have done all along. There is, then, a statistical order in the elements.
TAGORE: Otherwise, the drama of existence would be too desultory. It is the constant harmony of chance and determination which makes it eternally new and living.
EINSTEIN: I believe that whatever we do or live for has its causality; it is good, however, that we cannot see through to it.
TAGORE: There is in human affairs an element of elasticity also, some freedom within a small range which is for the expression of our personality. It is like the musical system in India, which is not so rigidly fixed as western music. Our composers give a certain definite outline, a system of melody and rhythmic arrangement, and within a certain limit the player can improvise upon it. He must be one with the law of that particular melody, and then he can give spontaneous expression to his musical feeling within the prescribed regulation. We praise the composer for his genius in creating a foundation along with a superstructure of melodies, but we expect from the player his own skill in the creation of variations of melodic flourish and ornamentation. In creation we follow the central law of existence, but if we do not cut ourselves adrift from it, we can have sufficient freedom within the limits of our personality for the fullest self-expression.
EINSTEIN: That is possible only when there is a strong artistic tradition in music to guide the people's mind. In Europe, music has come too far away from popular art and popular feeling and has become something like a secret art with conventions and traditions of its own.
TAGORE: You have to be absolutely obedient to this too complicated music. In India, the measure of a singer's freedom is in his own creative personality. He can sing the composer's song as his own, if he has the power creatively to assert himself in his interpretation of the general law of the melody which he is given to interpret.
EINSTEIN: It requires a very high standard of art to realize fully the great idea in the original music, so that one can make variations upon it. In our country, the variations are often prescribed.
TAGORE: If in our conduct we can follow the law of goodness, we can have real liberty of self-expression. The principle of conduct is there, but the character which makes it true and individual is our own creation. In our music there is a duality of freedom and prescribed order.
EINSTEIN: Are the words of a song also free? I mean to say, is the singer at liberty to add his own words to the song which he is singing?
TAGORE: Yes. In Bengal we have a kind of song-kirtan, we call it-which gives freedom to the singer to introduce parenthetical comments, phrases not in the original song. This occasions great enthusiasm, since the audience is constantly thrilled by some beautiful, spontaneous sentiment added by the singer.
EINSTEIN: Is the metrical form quite severe?
TAGORE: Yes, quite. You cannot exceed the limits of versification; the singer in all his variations must keep the rhythm and the time, which is fixed. In European music you have a comparative liberty with time, but not with melody.
EINSTEIN: Can the Indian music be sung without words? Can one understand a song without words?
TAGORE: Yes, we have songs with unmeaning words, sounds which just help to act as carriers of the notes. In North India, music is an independent art, not the interpretation of words and thoughts, as in Bengal. The music is very intricate and subtle and is a complete world of melody by itself.
EINSTEIN: Is it not polyphonic?
TAGORE: Instruments are used, not for harmony, but for keeping time and adding to the volume and depth. Has melody suffered in your music by the imposition of harmony?
EINSTEIN: Sometimes it does suffer very much. Sometimes the harmony swallows up the melody altogether.
TAGORE: Melody and harmony are like lines and colors in pictures. A simple linear picture may be completely beautiful; the introduction of color may make it vague and insignificant. Yet color may, by combination with lines, create great pictures, so long as it does not smother and destroy their value.
EINSTEIN: It is a beautiful comparison; line is also much older than color. It seems that your melody is much richer in structure than ours. Japanese music also seems to be so.
TAGORE: It is difficult to analyze the effect of eastern and western music on our minds. I am deeply moved by the western music; I feel that it is great, that it is vast in its structure and grand in its composition. Our own music touches me more deeply by its fundamental lyrical appeal. European music is epic in character; it has a broad background and is Gothic in its structure.
EINSTEIN: This is a question we Europeans cannot properly answer, we are so used to our own music. We want to know whether our own music is a conventional or a fundamental human feeling, whether to feel consonance and dissonance is natural, or a convention which we accept.
TAGORE: Somehow the piano confounds me. The violin pleases me much more.
EINSTEIN: It would be interesting to study the effects of European music on an Indian who had never heard it when he was young.
TAGORE: Once I asked an English musician to analyze for me some classical music, and explain to me what elements make for the beauty of the piece.
EINSTEIN: The difficulty is that the really good music, whether of the East or of the West, cannot be analyzed.
TAGORE: Yes, and what deeply affects the hearer is beyond himself.
EINSTEIN: The same uncertainty will always be there about everything fundamental in our experience, in our reaction to art, whether in Europe or in Asia. Even the red flower I see before me on your table may not be the same to you and me.
TAGORE: And yet there is always going on the process of reconciliation between them, the individual taste conforming to the universal standard.
Excerpted from: A Tagore Reader, edited by Amiya Chakravarty.
Tagore and Einstein met through a common friend, Dr. Mendel. Tagore visited Einstein at his residence at Kaputh in the suburbs of Berlin on July 14, 1930, and Einstein returned the call and visited Tagore at the Mendel home. Both conversations were recorded and the above photograph was taken. The July 14 conversation is reproduced here, and was originally published in The Religion of Man (George, Allen & Unwin, Ltd., London), Appendix II, pp. 222-225.
TAGORE: I was discussing with Dr. Mendel today the new mathematical discoveries which tell us that in the realm of infinitesimal atoms chance has its play; the drama of existence is not absolutely predestined in character.
EINSTEIN: The facts that make science tend toward this view do not say good-bye to causality.
TAGORE: Maybe not, yet it appears that the idea of causality is not in the elements, but that some other force builds up with them an organized universe.
EINSTEIN: One tries to understand in the higher plane how the order is. The order is there, where the big elements combine and guide existence, but in the minute elements this order is not perceptible.
TAGORE: Thus duality is in the depths of existence, the contradiction of free impulse and the directive will which works upon it and evolves an orderly scheme of things.
EINSTEIN: Modern physics would not say they are contradictory. Clouds look as one from a distance, but if you see them nearby, they show themselves as disorderly drops of water.
TAGORE: I find a parallel in human psychology. Our passions and desires are unruly, but our character subdues these elements into a harmonious whole. Does something similar to this happen in the physical world? Are the elements rebellious, dynamic with individual impulse? And is there a principle in the physical world which dominates them and puts them into an orderly organization?
EINSTEIN: Even the elements are not without statistical order; elements of radium will always maintain their specific order, now and ever onward, just as they have done all along. There is, then, a statistical order in the elements.
TAGORE: Otherwise, the drama of existence would be too desultory. It is the constant harmony of chance and determination which makes it eternally new and living.
EINSTEIN: I believe that whatever we do or live for has its causality; it is good, however, that we cannot see through to it.
TAGORE: There is in human affairs an element of elasticity also, some freedom within a small range which is for the expression of our personality. It is like the musical system in India, which is not so rigidly fixed as western music. Our composers give a certain definite outline, a system of melody and rhythmic arrangement, and within a certain limit the player can improvise upon it. He must be one with the law of that particular melody, and then he can give spontaneous expression to his musical feeling within the prescribed regulation. We praise the composer for his genius in creating a foundation along with a superstructure of melodies, but we expect from the player his own skill in the creation of variations of melodic flourish and ornamentation. In creation we follow the central law of existence, but if we do not cut ourselves adrift from it, we can have sufficient freedom within the limits of our personality for the fullest self-expression.
EINSTEIN: That is possible only when there is a strong artistic tradition in music to guide the people's mind. In Europe, music has come too far away from popular art and popular feeling and has become something like a secret art with conventions and traditions of its own.
TAGORE: You have to be absolutely obedient to this too complicated music. In India, the measure of a singer's freedom is in his own creative personality. He can sing the composer's song as his own, if he has the power creatively to assert himself in his interpretation of the general law of the melody which he is given to interpret.
EINSTEIN: It requires a very high standard of art to realize fully the great idea in the original music, so that one can make variations upon it. In our country, the variations are often prescribed.
TAGORE: If in our conduct we can follow the law of goodness, we can have real liberty of self-expression. The principle of conduct is there, but the character which makes it true and individual is our own creation. In our music there is a duality of freedom and prescribed order.
EINSTEIN: Are the words of a song also free? I mean to say, is the singer at liberty to add his own words to the song which he is singing?
TAGORE: Yes. In Bengal we have a kind of song-kirtan, we call it-which gives freedom to the singer to introduce parenthetical comments, phrases not in the original song. This occasions great enthusiasm, since the audience is constantly thrilled by some beautiful, spontaneous sentiment added by the singer.
EINSTEIN: Is the metrical form quite severe?
TAGORE: Yes, quite. You cannot exceed the limits of versification; the singer in all his variations must keep the rhythm and the time, which is fixed. In European music you have a comparative liberty with time, but not with melody.
EINSTEIN: Can the Indian music be sung without words? Can one understand a song without words?
TAGORE: Yes, we have songs with unmeaning words, sounds which just help to act as carriers of the notes. In North India, music is an independent art, not the interpretation of words and thoughts, as in Bengal. The music is very intricate and subtle and is a complete world of melody by itself.
EINSTEIN: Is it not polyphonic?
TAGORE: Instruments are used, not for harmony, but for keeping time and adding to the volume and depth. Has melody suffered in your music by the imposition of harmony?
EINSTEIN: Sometimes it does suffer very much. Sometimes the harmony swallows up the melody altogether.
TAGORE: Melody and harmony are like lines and colors in pictures. A simple linear picture may be completely beautiful; the introduction of color may make it vague and insignificant. Yet color may, by combination with lines, create great pictures, so long as it does not smother and destroy their value.
EINSTEIN: It is a beautiful comparison; line is also much older than color. It seems that your melody is much richer in structure than ours. Japanese music also seems to be so.
TAGORE: It is difficult to analyze the effect of eastern and western music on our minds. I am deeply moved by the western music; I feel that it is great, that it is vast in its structure and grand in its composition. Our own music touches me more deeply by its fundamental lyrical appeal. European music is epic in character; it has a broad background and is Gothic in its structure.
EINSTEIN: This is a question we Europeans cannot properly answer, we are so used to our own music. We want to know whether our own music is a conventional or a fundamental human feeling, whether to feel consonance and dissonance is natural, or a convention which we accept.
TAGORE: Somehow the piano confounds me. The violin pleases me much more.
EINSTEIN: It would be interesting to study the effects of European music on an Indian who had never heard it when he was young.
TAGORE: Once I asked an English musician to analyze for me some classical music, and explain to me what elements make for the beauty of the piece.
EINSTEIN: The difficulty is that the really good music, whether of the East or of the West, cannot be analyzed.
TAGORE: Yes, and what deeply affects the hearer is beyond himself.
EINSTEIN: The same uncertainty will always be there about everything fundamental in our experience, in our reaction to art, whether in Europe or in Asia. Even the red flower I see before me on your table may not be the same to you and me.
TAGORE: And yet there is always going on the process of reconciliation between them, the individual taste conforming to the universal standard.
What I infer from this conversation is that life at the micro level (i.e.,what we ordinary humans see, feel and hear) is chaotic. This can be compared to the movement of an electron in a conductor. It seems to encounter many obstacles before it can reach an end of the conductor. The longer the conductor, the more its travails.
When we transcend this level and enter a new state of consciousness/knowledge - the macro level (the existence of such a state is another question), the world appears in a different light, where the dependence of effects on the causes is more direct. This can be compared to the flow of current in the same conductor in which the electron "suffers". The flow of current follows very deterministic principles, apply a voltage (cause) and the current flows (effect). Pretty straightforward.
Taking the analogy of the electron in the conductor to life, what is the voltage that moves us humans? Some call it fate, some call it destiny, but what is it really? What happens at the other end of the conductor and beyond? Is the travel amid obstacles within the conductor worth the trouble? Is it possible for the electron to transcend the limits of the conductor and control the path toward its destination? Finally, what is the contribution of this electron to the current?
2005/11/12
Life = Chess
Is life a game of chess? Yes, but with a few differences.
You always play black and thus don't get to make the first move, ever. Because the decision to start the game was not yours. The first few moves are easy as the people who started the game are there to guide you. The opposition is not strong either. Everything looks good.
Then it gets a bit more complicated. You enter the middle game and find that there is no one guide to anymore. Sometimes it seems they have joined the opposition. Suddenly you find that to progress further, you have to sacrifice some pieces. The opposition is stronger now and the decisions difficult to make. The game accordingly becomes difficult or easy based on these decisions and the way you started the game.
This is when the game becomes unbearable. Late in the game, the arbiter informs that the game is timed and you have to play faster, just to survive. You are happy that the rules are still the same. After this you are either all at sea to save the game, or totally in control. At this point you may start a few games of your own and play simultaneously. Finally, both the players may lose all pieces and end the game a stalemate or may draw earlier. As for a more conclusive result, I am waiting to see how my game proceeds.
You always play black and thus don't get to make the first move, ever. Because the decision to start the game was not yours. The first few moves are easy as the people who started the game are there to guide you. The opposition is not strong either. Everything looks good.
Then it gets a bit more complicated. You enter the middle game and find that there is no one guide to anymore. Sometimes it seems they have joined the opposition. Suddenly you find that to progress further, you have to sacrifice some pieces. The opposition is stronger now and the decisions difficult to make. The game accordingly becomes difficult or easy based on these decisions and the way you started the game.
This is when the game becomes unbearable. Late in the game, the arbiter informs that the game is timed and you have to play faster, just to survive. You are happy that the rules are still the same. After this you are either all at sea to save the game, or totally in control. At this point you may start a few games of your own and play simultaneously. Finally, both the players may lose all pieces and end the game a stalemate or may draw earlier. As for a more conclusive result, I am waiting to see how my game proceeds.
2005/11/02
Love at first sight
எந்தையும் நுந்தையும் எம்முறைக் கேளிர்
யானும் நீயும் எவ்வழி அறிதும்
செம்புலப் பெயல்நீர் போல அன்புடை நெஞ்சம் தாம்கலந் தனவே
தலைவனின் காதலைச்சொல்லும் ஒரு குறுந்தொகைப் பாடல்.
This is a sangam age song (kuRunthogai) describing what the protagonist felt on seeing the love of his life. I tried to translate it, but I am no Keats. What follows below is a translation of only the words in the poem to the best of my ability.
Our fathers related like strangers
How do I even know thee
Yet our hearts have mingled
Like falling rain on a clay field.
Try as I may, I have not brought out the feel of the song. This song exactly picturises what goes through the mind when confronted with mesmerising beauty.
2005/10/31
Shawshank Redemption
Shawshank Redemption is one of the few movies that appeals and elevates you to another plane. This movie can at best be described as poignant with excellent performances by Tim Robbins and Morgan Freeman.
The movie is about a man wrongly accused for the murder of his wife and sentenced for life. The hope he has of being free someday and the manner in which he achieves it is extraordinary. Among other movies that rely on special effects and exaggerated emotions to captivate the audience, Shawshank Redemption stands tall, depending entirely on the performances of the artistes and the taut screenplay. No wonder it is high on the list as one of the best movies of all time. For more details and some interesting dialogues visit the link above. What follows is the tag-line for the movie.
Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
The movie is about a man wrongly accused for the murder of his wife and sentenced for life. The hope he has of being free someday and the manner in which he achieves it is extraordinary. Among other movies that rely on special effects and exaggerated emotions to captivate the audience, Shawshank Redemption stands tall, depending entirely on the performances of the artistes and the taut screenplay. No wonder it is high on the list as one of the best movies of all time. For more details and some interesting dialogues visit the link above. What follows is the tag-line for the movie.
Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
2005/10/24
It's not easy
I can't stand to fly
I'm not that naive
I'm just out to find
The better part of me
I'm more than a bird
I'm more than a plane
More than some pretty face beside a train
It's not easy to be me
Wish that I could cry
Fall upon my knees
Find a way to lie
About a home I'll never see
It may sound absurd
But don't be naive
Even heroes have the right to bleed
I may be disturbed
But won't you concede
Even heroes have the right to dream
It's not easy to be me
Up, up and away
Away from me
It's all right
You can all sleep sound tonight
I'm not crazy
Or anything
I can't stand to fly
I'm not that naive
Men weren't meant to ride
With clouds between their knees
I'm only a man in a silly red sheet
Digging for kryptonite on this one way street
Only a man in a funny red sheet
Looking for special things inside of me
It's not easy to be me
This song (Superman by five for Fighting) has been playing in my head for the past week or so. Though this song is written from the Clark Kent point of view, I feel I could relate to some of the lines - marked in bold. Sometimes I feel it really is not easy to be me. By the way, who am I?!
I'm not that naive
I'm just out to find
The better part of me
I'm more than a bird
I'm more than a plane
More than some pretty face beside a train
It's not easy to be me
Wish that I could cry
Fall upon my knees
Find a way to lie
About a home I'll never see
It may sound absurd
But don't be naive
Even heroes have the right to bleed
I may be disturbed
But won't you concede
Even heroes have the right to dream
It's not easy to be me
Up, up and away
Away from me
It's all right
You can all sleep sound tonight
I'm not crazy
Or anything
I can't stand to fly
I'm not that naive
Men weren't meant to ride
With clouds between their knees
I'm only a man in a silly red sheet
Digging for kryptonite on this one way street
Only a man in a funny red sheet
Looking for special things inside of me
It's not easy to be me
This song (Superman by five for Fighting) has been playing in my head for the past week or so. Though this song is written from the Clark Kent point of view, I feel I could relate to some of the lines - marked in bold. Sometimes I feel it really is not easy to be me. By the way, who am I?!
2005/10/17
Nemo
Another aspect of myself I found this morning. I tend to underestimate myself very seriously, so much so that I forget what I am capable of. I become a nobody and feel like a blob gaping at others.
One silver lining to this thing is that I am able to function properly once I am reminded that I can do what I can. This again relates to my previous observation of me being a bot. A bot that forgets the functions it has been programmed to perform and operates normally upon receiving an external interrupt.
I still hope to become a human… someday.
One silver lining to this thing is that I am able to function properly once I am reminded that I can do what I can. This again relates to my previous observation of me being a bot. A bot that forgets the functions it has been programmed to perform and operates normally upon receiving an external interrupt.
I still hope to become a human… someday.
2005/10/15
Deus ex machina??
Of late I have been wondering if I am a machine that imitates humans biologically but is not so emotionally. This thought sometimes takes me over for hours that I have to convince myself that I am still human.
I am trying to find the time when I was last human, when I last emoted. I want to do this because I was nicknamed arnold. Some gave the reason for the name as being due to the size of my biceps. But one guy told me that i had a very wooden countenance. This actually got me thinking and I realized that I was living an unemotional life, no feelings for anything or anybody.
I hope I can change this... someday and become human.
I am trying to find the time when I was last human, when I last emoted. I want to do this because I was nicknamed arnold. Some gave the reason for the name as being due to the size of my biceps. But one guy told me that i had a very wooden countenance. This actually got me thinking and I realized that I was living an unemotional life, no feelings for anything or anybody.
I hope I can change this... someday and become human.
2005/10/13
Odi et Amo
I hate and I love. That is what the title means. I believe this summarises my behaviour towards anything. Hate and Love. Brings out a sense of irony not unlike publishing your innermost thoughts on the web.
You cannot classify anything as what you hate and what you love. You can hate something today that you loved yesterday and you will again tomorrow. So if you think you will love something always, try not to think bad about it for it will lead to hatred. And if you think you will hate somehting always, give it a chance to be loved.
You cannot classify anything as what you hate and what you love. You can hate something today that you loved yesterday and you will again tomorrow. So if you think you will love something always, try not to think bad about it for it will lead to hatred. And if you think you will hate somehting always, give it a chance to be loved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)