Saturday, February 10, 2007

Koide Mystery

That fundamental constituent of matter, the electron, has two elder siblings, the muon and the tau.

The electron mass is 0.510998918(44) MeV.
The muon mass is 105.6583692(94) MeV.
The tau mass is 1776.99(+29-26) MeV.

MeV is a Million electron Volts, a particle physicist's unit. For comparison's sake, the hydrogen atom has a mass of about 938.8 MeV. The numbers in brackets are the uncertainties in measurement of the mass. The numbers are taken from links on Tommaso Dorigo's article on this.

What is remarkable about these numbers is that they satisfy the Koide formula with a remarkable precision - a formula with little theoretical justification.

koide_formula

Given the masses of the electron and the muon, this formula predicts the mass of the tau to be
1776.968921( 158) MeV. (from Carl Brannen, linked from Dorigo's page).

How likely is this to be a numerical coincidence?

If we measure everything in terms of the tau mass, then, in the plot below, the red triangle represents the experimental situation and the green curve represents the masses of the electron and muon that would be allowed per the Koide formula. The tau, by definition, has a mass of 1. There are no theoretical constraints on the masses that I'm aware of, and the "theoretically allowed" region of masses is everything between the x-axis and the diagonal black line (and please extend the line to the point {1,1}).

koide

Of course, I could make things look a little less spectacular by measuring everything in terms of the electron mass.

Friday, February 09, 2007

Is it the blog or is it the network?

The big liberal blogs (Atrios, DailyKos) recently did a blogroll purge. (A blogroll is the list of links to other blogs that e.g., I have to the left of my page). That lead to this beautiful rant which boths serves to draw attention, but also obscure the question - is dailykos important on its own, or is it important as a supernode in a network of progressive blogs?

A blog linked from a supernode often gets more attention than it would otherwise. More subtle is the feedback that strengthens the supernode.

We'll surely find out in some time whether the big blogs have destroyed the ecosystem that made them influential in the first place.

Saturday, February 03, 2007

Senator Feingold

Senator Feingold is one of the finest, and most courageous senators we have. For example, he was the lone dissenter against the so-called Patriot Act, that has been so damaging to our civil liberties.

He needs our support for this:
http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0202-31.htm
How To End The War

by Russ Feingold



Our founders wisely kept the power to fund a war separate from the power to conduct a war. In their brilliant design of our system of government, Congress got the power of the purse, and the president got the power of the sword. As James Madison wrote, “Those who are to conduct a war cannot in the nature of things, be proper or safe judges, whether a war ought to be commenced, continued or concluded.”

Earlier this week, I chaired a hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee to remind my colleagues in the Senate that, through the power of the purse, we have the constitutional power to end a war. At the hearing, a wide range of constitutional scholars agreed that Congress can use its power to end a military engagement.

The Constitution gives Congress the explicit power “[to] declare War,” “[t]o raise and support Armies,” “[t]o provide and maintain a Navy” and “[t]o make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces.” In addition, under Article I, “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.” These are direct quotes from the Constitution of the United States. Yet to hear some in the Administration talk, it is as if these powers were written in invisible ink. They were not. These powers are a clear and direct statement from the founders of our republic that Congress has authority to declare, to define and, ultimately, to end a war.

If and when Congress acts on the will of the American people by ending our involvement in the Iraq war, Congress will be performing the role assigned it by the founding fathers—defining the nature of our military commitments and acting as a check on a president whose policies are weakening our nation.

There is plenty of precedent for Congress exercising its constitutional authority to stop U.S. involvement in armed conflict.

In late December 1970, Congress prohibited the use of funds for introducing United States ground combat troops into Cambodia or providing U.S. advisors to Cambodian military forces. In late June 1973, Congress set a date to cut off funds for combat activities in Southeast Asia.

More recently, President Clinton signed into law language that prohibited funding after March 31, 1994, for military operations in Somalia, with certain limited exceptions. And in 1998, Congress passed spending legislation that prevented U.S. troops from serving in Bosnia after June 30, 1998, unless the president made certain assurances.

Congress has the power to end military engagements, and there is little doubt that decisive action from the Congress is needed to end U.S. involvement in the war in Iraq. Despite the results of the election, and two months of study and supposed consultation—during which experts and members of Congress from across the political spectrum argued for a new policy—the president has decided to escalate the war. When asked whether he would persist in this policy despite congressional opposition, he replied: “Frankly, that’s not their responsibility.”

Last week Vice President Cheney was asked whether the non-binding resolution passed by the Foreign Relations Committee that will soon be considered by the full Senate would deter the president from escalating the war. He replied: “It’s not going to stop us.”

In the United States of America, the people are sovereign, not the president. It is Congress’ responsibility to challenge an administration that persists in a war that is misguided and that the nation opposes. We cannot simply wring our hands and complain about the administration’s policy. We cannot just pass resolutions saying “your policy is mistaken.” And we can’t stand idly by and tell ourselves that it’s the president’s job to fix the mess he made. It’s our job to fix the mess, too, and if we don’t do so we are abdicating our responsibilities.

Yesterday, I introduced legislation that will prohibit the use of funds to continue the deployment of U.S. forces in Iraq six months after enactment. By prohibiting funds after a specific deadline, Congress can force the president to bring our forces out of Iraq and out of harm’s way.

This legislation will allow the president adequate time to redeploy our troops safely from Iraq, and it will make specific exceptions for a limited number of U.S. troops who must remain in Iraq to conduct targeted counter-terrorism and training missions and protect U.S. personnel. It will not hurt our troops in any way—they will continue receiving their equipment, training, salaries, etc. It will simply prevent the president from continuing to deploy them to Iraq. By passing this bill, we can finally focus on repairing our military and countering the full range of threats that we face around the world.

As the hearing I chaired in the Senate Judiciary Committee made clear, this legislation is fully consistent with the Constitution of the United States. Since the president is adamant about pursuing his failed policies in Iraq, Congress has the duty to stand up and use its constitutional power to stop him. If Congress doesn’t stop this war, it’s not because it doesn’t have the power. It’s because it doesn’t have the will.

Russ Feingold is a United States senator from Wisconsin.

Sunday, January 28, 2007

A question and a answer

This is from TheHeathenInHisBlindness yahoo egroup; since it is open to anyone, I do not feel it wrong to post it here. The following is to be understood. It is part of an effort to understand a culture (and oneself). My apologies in advance to those who do not understand.

----
Prolog:
what does 'hindu does not believe that God's will govern the universe' mean? i cant seem to understand it at all.

-sunil

----

Sunil writes:

Jakob,

I am still not clear what you mean. Let me make some propositions that is based on the shrutis (Madhva school of thought)-

1. Creation is a spontaneous activity of God, just like a blissful person spontaneously breaks into a song without any rhyme or reason.

2. The creation of the world does not serve any purpose of God. He is "AptakAma" - there is nothing he does not have nor is there anything he will ever need.

3. The 'creation' of the universe is just the transformation of the prakriti from its "avyakta" state to "vyakta" state. All the laws of the universe are an expression of prakriti's innate triguna svabhAva.

4. God is at all times impartial and as an antaryami immanent spirit, He is the power behind all the 'being' and 'becoming' (ie, expression of their individual svabhAvas) of souls as well as prakriti.

Hence He governs the universe.

Now what you say in (1) contradicts my understanding as above. Probably you are using certain terms in a very strict sense that i dont grasp.

---
Balu replies:

Dear Sunil,

If we want to grasp the nature of the discussions in the Indian traditions, there is much we need to do beforehand: (a) identify the entity they were talking about; (b) identify the specific questions they were answering; (c) identify the generic questions that defined both the outlines of the acceptable answers and the formulation of the specific questions; etc. (The 'cetera' indicates that I do not know how to enumerate all the things we need to grasp.) In the case of the propositions you have formulated, I assume that 'God' is Vishnu (or even Krishna) and not, say, Shiva or Brahma because you are talking about the Madhvas. However, to keep the discussion faithful to your formulations, I will use the word 'God' to refer to Vishnu.

Your proposition 1: "Creation is a spontaneous activity of God, just like a blissful person spontaneously breaks into a song without any rhyme or reason."

Apparently, this is answering the specific question 'why' (in the sense of 'KaaraNa', mostly translated as 'the reason why') God created (the Universe?). The analogy to a blissful person is a very strict one. That is, in exactly the same way a blissful person does not break into a song for a reason, God does not create for a reason. The underlying thoughts are these: normally, one sings a song to express some emotion or the other or even because he/she is feeling some emotion or another (love, sorrow, devotion, or whatever else), that is, the person "intends" to express something. The blissful person does not need to express anything; he/she is not in need of anything, including the need to express the bliss. That is what bliss (ananda) is all about.

So, the assumption is that 'bliss', something we human beings experience, is what God also feels. The only difference is that God feels this all the time, whereas only some of us can (either occasionally or after some tremendous effort) feel that bliss. (Additional claims that God's Bliss is our bliss raised to "the power of infinity" and such like tell us the same thing: there is no difference in kind but, at best, a difference in degree, between God's emotion and ours.)

In other words, the analogy explicates the nature of spontaneity (and the meaning of that word), whether it is God's spontaneity or human spontaneity: doing something not because one is in need of (or lacks) something. There is no difference in kind between us human beings and God but only one of degree. Your next proposition elaborates on this.

Your proposition 2: "The creation of the world does not serve any purpose of God. He is "AptakAma" - there is nothing he does not have nor is there anything he will ever need." (The 'he' here must also be read strictly: Vishnu is sexed and he is a 'male'.)

This further tells us that creation (of something by human beings) serves some purpose or another. Consequently, one might be inclined to say that God is "in need" of something that he does not have, and hence the creation. This proposition tells us that God has "everything": he is more beautiful than the most beautiful; stronger than the strongest; richer than the richest; the teacher of teachers; braver than the bravest, etc. Again, these are all differences in degree: he has more of everything we "desire", he is "more" than any of us or other 'gods'; and so on. He really does not need anything; he is bliss personified. Therefore, creation should not be seen as making up for some or another lack in God. In this sense, creation does not serve any purpose: one should say that God has "no purpose" in creating. He just creates. In other words, there is no intention behind God's creation. Spontaneity is the absence of intention or purpose of any sort, and the analogy drawn in the first proposition shows that action without intention is typical of a blissful person. Because God is bliss personified, God's creation does not exhibit his purpose or express his intention. (Should it do so, then God needs to express his purpose, which makes God into someone "in need" of such an expression.) Hence the notion of creation as God's "lila". That is to say, creation is completely without purpose. To use a modern terminology, to speak of the universe as an expression of God's intention or God's purpose is to commit a category mistake.

Your proposition 3: "The 'creation' of the universe is just the transformation of the prakriti from its "avyakta" state to "vyakta" state. All the laws of the universe are an expression of prakriti's innate triguna svabhAva."

Therefore, God 'functions' as a catalyst (to use this term from high-school Chemistry) in the process of creation. This function enables the 'potentiality' of Prakriti to become 'actuality'. The laws of the universe, consequently, do not express what God 'desires' or God 'wants' but express the 'nature' of prakriti. That is, the universe retains its character of not being the product of God's intention or God's plans or God's purpose. Universe expresses what universe is like, what it always has been and always will be: namely, "it is in the nature of the universe to be what it is". God has added nothing to the universe that was not already there, nor has he taken away something that was there earlier. "This is the way universe has been, is, and will be, because it belongs to the nature of the universe to be the way it was, is, and will be."

Your proposition 4: "God is at all times impartial and as an antaryami immanent spirit, He is the power behind all the 'being' and 'becoming' (ie, expression of their individual svabhAvas) of souls as well as prakriti".

Because God is bliss personified, he cannot be attached to anything or anybody. Therefore, he is strictly impartial. He is the 'power' behind everything and is everywhere: both in the individuals and in 'the universe' (using 'the universe' for 'prakriti'). He must be an 'antaryami' (present internally in everything and everywhere) because he would not "have everything" if he was not. Were he not to be in a gnat or an ant, he would lack something, namely "what it feels to be like a gnat or an ant". So, he has to be everywhere.

Now, we can begin to sense the generic question behind these propositions: If this is what 'bliss' is, that is, not lacking anything, and if this entity is bliss personified and is present in each one of us (and elsewhere too) are 'we' not, in reality, or in our essence, also identical to this entity? Tat Tvam Asi, 'thou art that': is not this what one of the mahAvAkya tells us? 'Aham Brhmasmi", as another of the mahAvAkya also tells us. Does it really matter what you call this 'blissful entity' as? And so on.

From these propositions, if you draw the inference, which you want to, "hence, he governs the Universe", you need to understand 'governing' as (a) an impartial act; (b) by the 'power' in the 'core' of each one of us and (c) present in the rest of the Universe. One could also identify oneself with one's 'core', and hence with the 'power' present in that 'core', and become an advaitin. Alternately, one could differentiate this 'power' from oneself and postulate 'another' entity: and hence the dvaita traditions.

In other words, the generic question behind these propositions brings us to the Indian debates and Indian traditions, which are far, far removed from the Semitic theological debates. The Biblical God is distinct from, and alien to, the creatures He has created; he has plans and purposes in creation; His intention (or will) expresses itself as the laws of the Universe; we cannot know (or ask) why He created the Universe; even when He tells us (through His revelation) why He did what He did, we do not understand it adequately, and so on and so forth. This is what Jakob was trying to tell you.

Friendly greetings
Balu.

Friday, January 26, 2007

The excitement of discovery

Over on cosmicvariance.com, new member physicist John Conway conveys the excitement of discovery in physics very well in this two part blog post, Bump Hunting, Part 1 and Part 2.

Don't you wish you were a physicist?


PS:
Physicist Tommaso Dorigo with some more insight.

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

Writing off pharyngula

Pharyngula turned from a great place to learn biology to a rather mediocre anti-religion/atheist site.

Nobel Laureate physicist Abdus Salam

"Abdus Salam is known to be a devout Muslim, whose religion does not occupy a separate compartment of his life; it is inseparable from his work and family life. He once wrote: "The Holy Quran enjoins us to reflect on the verities of Allah's created laws of nature; however, that our generation has been privileged to glimpse a part of His design is a bounty and a grace for which I render thanks with a humble heart."

PZ Myers, on "The unfortunate prerequisites and consequences of partitioning your mind", quotes approvingly a blog post that a person like Abdus Salam has no understanding of science, (I cannot but conclude that this person literally doesn't know why you have to look at things. They may have been taught a certain ritual of experimentation, but they don't understand the reason for it.)

and concludes:

"It's like asking someone if they understand science, and they can recite a string of facts at you … but they haven't absorbed the concept."

-----
The facts are contrary to what PZ Myers believes them to be, and he has great difficulty adjusting his mind to that.

The blog would be far more interesting if, e.g., it was discussed why it was that Abdus Salam could do great science (like many other great scientists) while partitioning their mind.

Equally painful are the almost all equally-dumbed-down-by-ideology commenters on pharyngula.

This is not an occasional phenomenon, but an ever-growing one that has taken over the blog.

So, I will go there no more.
-----

Sunday, January 21, 2007

We are eating our planet to death

So claims Kathy Freston.

"The researchers found that, when it's all added up, the average American does more to reduce global warming emissions by going vegetarian than by switching to a Prius."

-- At this point I expect the science of global warming to become much less acceptable to a large number of people. The last time I brought this up, the comment was "But they are so tasty!"

Friday, January 19, 2007

Mr Straight Talk Express

""Do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father.""

Senator John McCain, Republican fundraiser event, 1998.

An interesting exchange

Senator Arlen Specter: "The Constitution says you can’t take it away except in case of rebellion or invasion. Doesn’t that mean you have the right of habeas corpus unless there’s a rebellion or invasion?”

Attorney-General Alberto Gonzales: “The Constitution doesn’t say every individual in the United States or citizen is hereby granted or assured the right of habeas corpus . It doesn’t say that. It simply says the right shall not be suspended” (except in cases of rebellion or invasion)."

-- Harvard Law School should revoke his degree.

PS: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/1/20/191254/626 contains an excellent discussion of the issues involved.

Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Colbert on AT&T

Colbert's hilarious take on telecom divestitures and mergers:

Sunday, January 14, 2007

Ruddy Idiot Guiliani

New York City Police Department

Quote:

"How many police officers are there in NYPD?

The NYPD's current authorized uniformed strength is 37,038, which is scheduled to increase to 37,838 in January 2007."

The New York Times, January 11, 2007

We glean from there that some 15,000 American troops were engaged in "Operation Together Forward II" to secure Baghdad in August 2006. Bush just announced another 5 combat brigades to be deployed - an increase of about 17,500 troops.

Therefore, total American troops engaged in securing Baghdad : about 32,500

Quote:

"Five brigades are to be sent to improve security in the greater Baghdad area — an increase of about 17,500 troops that will double the American force involved in security operations there."


Frank Rich, NYT, January 14, 2007

Quote:

"The one notable new recruit [to President Bush's bunker-world] is Rudy Guiliani, who likened taming Baghdad to "reducing crime in New York" without even noticing that even after the escalation there will be fewer American troops patrolling Baghdad than uniformed officers in insurgency-free New York City."

____________________________
Added a couple of hours later:

Frank Rich informed us a week ago that the Army counterinsurgency manual calls for a minimum of 20 troops per 1000 population. Say Baghdad has a population of 5 million (actually, Baghdad's population is 6 million or greater, at least 20% more). That means 100,000 troops minimum. After Bush's escalation, the US troops will be at 40,000 (actually about 20% less). Thus a minimum of 60,000 reliable Iraqi forces dedicated to Baghdad will be needed. Do they exist?

If it is true as the President says that Iraq is the central front in the decisive ideological struggle of our time, then we have to hope that what the army faces a problem in Baghdad with significantly less manpower requirements.

Otherwise, for success, the President really has only two options:
1. Raise American forces
2. Raise International forces

The US would probably have to pay for troops under the UN flag, but if the international community can be brought on board, there will be immediate availability of manpower. If the US can make no diplomatic headway there or it is unacceptable, then the President must probably call for a draft. In either case, funds will have to be raised via new taxes.

If this war is indeed vital, then the way to win it is to call for a general mobilization.

______________________

PPS:
Atrios on how the calculation above is being fudged.

Saturday, January 13, 2007

Whither the Weather?

From the point of view of a crabapple (the very same one in all cases):

2004, April 24:
2004_0424_153414AA

2006, March 29:
2006_0329_102640AA

2007, January 10:
2007_0110_095831AA

PS: the 2004 picture added later.
PPS: in 2003 also, the crabapple flowered in the last week of April.

Thursday, January 11, 2007

The Curse of (over) Development

Rajan Parrikar's photo-essay on the slumification of Goa is heartbreaking. The over- and ugly- development in the name of tourism that is going on will kill Goa as a tourist destination. It may become a place with merely some cheap sun 'n' sand.

nerul

KOed in Iraq


iraq_turningpoints


He told us of turning points: The fall of Baghdad, the death of Uday and Qusay, the capture of Saddam, a provisional government,the trial of Saddam, a charter, a constitution, an Iraqi government, elections, purple fingers, a new government, the death of Saddam. - Keith Olbermann

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

On the iPhone


iphone
Three views of Apple's iPhone from the material at apple.com.


Thoughts:

This is a reworking of a familiar interface into something new and more useable.

How many other unnoticed opportunities are out there?


David Pogue, NYT

"Remember the fairy godmother in “Cinderella”? She’d wave her wand and turn some homely and utilitarian object, like a pumpkin or a mouse, into something glamorous and amazing, like a carriage or fully accessorized coachman."

"Evidently, she lives in some back room at Apple."

"Every time Steve Jobs spies some hopelessly ugly, complex machine that cries out for the Apple touch — computers, say, or music players — he lets her out."

Why can't the world compete in reinventing itself in this way? (instead of e.g., like the Taliban?)

The project to put together the iPhone was launched two and a half years ago, when Apple's stock was between 6 and 20. In most places I know of, such dire straits means a severe cut back on innovation.

Why doesn't Detroit have this sense of style?

Pedestrian industrial components can be put together into gorgeous product.

I'm hanging on to my few Apple shares!



Why isn't visioneering like this encouraged at work?

Monday, January 08, 2007

Bob Herbert on class warfare

Bob Herbert in NYT TimesSelect:

"There’s a reason why the power elite get bent out of shape at the merest mention of a class conflict in the U.S. The fear is that the cringing majority that has taken it on the chin for so long will wise up and begin to fight back."

What will rile up the cringing majority?
Perhaps these numbers from Andrew Sum of the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University in Boston.

Between 2000 and 2006, labor productivity in the nonfarm sector of the economy rose by 18 percent, real wages rose by 1%.

The (excluding farmworkers) 93 million production and nonsupervisory workers' combined real annual earnings from 2000 to 2006 rose by $15.4 billion, which is less than half of the combined bonuses awarded by the five Wall Street firms for just one year.

"Fairness plays no role in this system."

Sunday, January 07, 2007

Flamenco, Tabla, Kathak, Gypsies and India

A few weeks ago, B. gave me a CD titled "Curandero, Flamenco guitar meets Indian tabla". The music is by Miguel Espinoza (guitar) and Ty Burhoe (tabla).

Some days later when I was playing the CD at home, N. heard it, and told me about this:


Here, flamenco guitar and tabla encounter the Indian dance form of Kathak.

From youtube comments I learned that flamenco and tabla have had a wider experimentation, e.g., IndiaLucia.

A comment there reminded me also of a speculation that I'd heard long ago, that the Romani - Gypsies - are the descendants of a 10th century diaspora from India, from somewhere around the Indus. In the comment, it is said that Flamenco and Kathak are related, because of the Romani people.

I've been intrigued by that because the only event I know of in the tenth century to cause such a migration would have been the devastating attacks by Mahmud of Ghazni.

In the words of his courtier, Alberuni (E. Sachau translation):

"Now in the following times no Muslim conqueror passed beyond the frontier of Kabul and the river Sindh until the days of the Turks, when they seized power in Ghazna under the Samani dynasty, and the supreme power fell to the lot of Nasir-addaula Sabuktagin. This prince chose the holy war as his calling, and therefore called himself Al-ghazi (i.e., warring on the road of Allah). In the interest of his successors he constructed in order to weaken the Indian frontier, those roads on which afterwards his son Yamin-addaula Mahmud marched into India during a period of thirty years and more. God be merciful to both father and son! Mahmud utterly ruined the prosperity of the country, and performed there wonderful exploits, by which the Hindus became like atoms of dust scattered in all directions and like a tale of old in the mouth of the people."

What crystallized this post, is that this morning, S. brought to my attention the following:

Kosovian traces 1000 year old lineage.
24-four-year old Miradiya Giozic from Kosovo is in India attempting to trace her roots.

Also see this.

Note to the unwary - take the gypsies out of India as something to be proved; presumably DNA or literary or linguistic evidence will eventually shed light on this hypothesis. There are many indications that it may be true. But there are other plausible routes for cultural and linguistic influence that result in commonalities.

Do enjoy the music and dance!

Third world government comes to the United States

This kind of trouble with the government bureaucracy used to be a trademark of third-world countries only.

Thank you, George Bush!

Punditocracy

Glenn Greenwald describes some of the worst of the media's opinion makers.

I disagree on only one point, namely, that for all the errors that they are not acknowledging and are trying to make us forget this class of people "have suffered no lost credibility, prominence, or influence". These folks might still have the job titles they do, but I think, more and more people are tuning them out.

Class warfare impending

This daily kos diary that contrasts two exit packages, both recently in the news, is just a beginning.

Frank Rich on the Saddam snuff video

"The awful power of the Hussein snuff film derives not just from its illustration of the barbarity of capital punishment, even in a case where the condemned is a mass murderer undeserving of pity. What really makes the video terrifying is its glimpse into the abyss of an irreversible and lethal breakdown in civic order. It sends the same message as those images of helicopters fleeing our embassy in April 1975 : Iraq, like Vietnam before it, is in chaos, beyond the control of our government or the regime we’re desperately trying to prop up. The security apparatus of Iraq’s “unity government” was powerless to prevent the video, let alone the chaos, and can’t even get its story straight about what happened and why.

Actually, it’s even worse than that. Perhaps the video’s most chilling notes are the chants of “Moktada! Moktada! Moktada!” They are further confirmation, as if any were needed, that our principal achievement in Iraq over four years has been to empower a jihadist mini-Saddam in place of the secular original. The radical cleric Moktada al-Sadr , an ally of Hezbollah and Hamas, is a thug responsible for the deaths of untold Iraqis and Americans alike. It was his forces, to take just one representative example, that killed Cindy Sheehan’s son, among many others, in one of two Shiite uprisings in 2004 ."

Frank Rich in the New York Times; unfortunately behind the TimesSelect firewall.

My thoughts before reading this included that Moktada al-Sadr deserves the death penalty just as much as Saddam did. Yet who is going to arrest him, let alone try him and punish him? All that Bush has done is replace one set of monsters with another set. Decent people never had a chance in Iraq. The monsters sedulously uproot them.

----

PS : Frank Rich

Saturday, January 06, 2007

Take that, Lou Dobbs!

The Financial Express reports that among other things:

"AnnaLee Saxenian, study co-author and dean of the School of Information at UC-Berkeley, estimated immigrants founded about 25 per cent of Silicon Valley tech companies in 1999.

The Duke study found the percentage had more than doubled, to 52 per cent in 2005. The research debunks some recent myths about the notion that immigrants who come to the United States take jobs from Americans."

Read the whole thing.
(via bharat-rakshak.com)

Thursday, January 04, 2007

Delivers the mail and reads it too!

From now on, please address all mail to me as "To Arun and the President".

Jihadis freed in Pakistan

The Telegraph, UK reports:

"Senior officers [in Pakistan] say they are "back to square one" in their fight against international terrorist groups after the release of dozens of militants by Pakistani courts. High-ranking police officials say that as many as 80 hard-core militants are on the loose after being cleared by the courts or released on bail.".....

"Last month, Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller, the head of MI5, warned of the growing threat from within Pakistan. She said young British Muslims were being groomed to become suicide bombers and that most of the 1,600 suspects being tracked by her agents were British-born but linked to al-Qaeda in Pakistan."....

"Anti-terrorism officers in Pakistan say they are deeply alarmed by the security situation. "We are back to square one and the situation is more precarious than it was before 9/11," one senior officer told The Sunday Telegraph. "They are planning more attacks. They have got huge backup. There are so many youths who are joining them. The old ones who are released from the prison are guiding and training the new cadres."....

"Among those released recently are Sohail Akhtar (aka Mustafa), the operational commander of the outlawed Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami group. He has been blamed for a campaign that included a suicide attack in Karachi in which 11 French engineers died, the suicide attack on the US consulate, and the failed attempt on the president's life......Other militants released by the courts include Fazal Karim, who is believed to have been present at the killing of the American journalist Daniel Pearl, and Qari Mohammed Anwar (also known as Abu Darada). Anwar was arrested at an al-Qaeda safe house in Karachi along with Khalid al-Atash — who is wanted by the FBI in connection with the USS Cole bombings off Yemen — and Ammar al-Balochi, who was allegedly involved earlier this year in a plot to attack Heathrow airport".

---
(via bharat-rakshak).

No commentary is needed.

Taking on Hate Radio

This could be subtitled: In which ABC/Walt Disney show themselves to value profit over elementary decency.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/1/3/202110/2838.

A blogger, Spocko, took umbrage at the hosts at KSFO radio calling for the torture and murder of a citizen in Lincoln, Nebraska, burning someone alive, stomping a antiwar protester to death, calling for the editors of major newspapers to be hanged, and for ""We've got a bulls-eye painted on her big laughing eyes." [her referring to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi] - among other things.

Spocko wrote polite letters to various companies that advertise on the radio station, asking them politely if they wanted their brands associated with this kind of rubbish.

The result is that as advertisers ponder pulling their ads, ABC radio lawyers are after Spocko. For copyright infringement.

Monday, January 01, 2007

2006 Top Ten Astronomy pics

I had failed to provide a link to the top ten astronomy pics. of 2006; here it is:
http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2006/12/27/the-top-ten-astronomy-images-of-2006/

Saturday, December 30, 2006

Solar transit of space shuttle and space station

The picture of the space shuttle and space station against the sun in the picture by Theirry Legault here touches some mystical part of me, which was no doubt nourished by too much sci-fi.

The separation between the shuttle and the space station was 200 meters, as per the photographer (or you can estimate it from the photograph and fact that the sun subtends an angle of 0.5°).


iss_shuttle_crop2

Two on Pakistan

Can't find the byline, but whoever wrote the following shows a perception uncommon in the Western press:

Pakistan could become next US nightmare

"Soon after he seized power in 1999 - ahead of being sacked by Sharif - The Economist magazine called Musharraf a "useless dictator". Seven years later, he hangs onto power without having achieved much in the way of reform, largely because the US regards him as key to keeping the Islamists out of power. That is turning out to be another big misconception in Washington."

Here is Tariq Ali, in a piece originally published in the London Review of Books:
The General in his labyrinth.

Two items that struck me:

On the death of one dictator yesterday, this remembrance of another dictator seems apt:

"Pakistan’s first uniformed ruler, General Ayub Khan, a Sandhurst-trained colonial officer, seized power in October 1958 with strong encouragement from both Washington and London. They were fearful that the projected first general election might produce a coalition that would take Pakistan out of security pacts like Seato and towards a non-aligned foreign policy. Ayub banned all political parties, took over opposition newspapers and told the first meeting of his cabinet: ‘As far as you are concerned there is only one embassy that matters in this country: the American Embassy.’ In a radio broadcast to the nation he informed his bewildered ‘fellow countrymen’ that ‘we must understand that democracy cannot work in a hot climate. To have democracy we must have a cold climate like Britain.’"

The second is this:
"In western Afghanistan, it is only the Iranian influence that has preserved a degree of stability. If Ahmedinejad was provoked into withdrawing his support, Karzai would not last more than a week."

Thursday, December 28, 2006

Uncertain about Heisenberg

In a comment at Woit's Not Even Wrong, Paul Jackson points to this essay by E. Prugovecki, which is about the less-than-solid foundations - both mathematical and philosophical - of modern physics, in particular, quantum field theory.

There are many things to examine in that essay. However, for now, I look at a quote from Heisenberg that Prugovecki actually uses twice!

Quote 1:

And, in a similar vein, Heisenberg (1971) comments: If predictive power were the only criterion of truth, Ptolomy's astronomy would be no worse than Newton's.

Quote 2:

...but as Heisenberg acerbicly pointed out on one occasion, if predictive power were indeed the only criterion for truth, Ptolemy's astronomy would be no worse than Newton's (Heisenberg, 1971, p. 212).

The reference is : Heisenberg, W.: 1971, Physics and Beyond, Harper and Row, New York

To produce Newton's astronomy, we need his three laws of motion and the law of gravitation. The laws of motion are of great generality and describe non-gravitational phenomena as well (e.g., a lot of today's civil and mechanical engineering is included) Leaving that aside, Newton's laws describe bodies falling at the earth's surface, as well as the motions of planets, and the motions of their satellites. One also finds Newton's laws adequate, e.g., for galactic motions - general relativistic corrections are small. Ptolemy has nothing to say about anything but the planets. Just on predictive power, Newton's astronomy is infinitely superior to Ptolemy's.

So, I disagree with Heisenberg's remark, as presented in Prugovecki's essay. Heisenberg, no doubt, knew all of what I just wrote, and that is what leads to my feeling of uncertainty. What did he mean?

Another paper from SAAG

Somalia : Jihadis emulating Taliban's tactics by B Raman.

Quote:

"An important lesson from Afghanistan and Iraq is the danger of under-estimating the motivation and resilience of the jihadi forces. How to prevent the recent Afghan history from repeating itself in Somalia? This cannot be done by non-Muslim forces. Muslim countries such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Morocco etc have to be encouraged to take the initiative in bringing about an Islamic solution to the problems of Somalia, which will not serve the agenda of Al Qaeda and the IIF. The time has come to encourage these countries to come together in a strategic alliance with the twin objectives of countering ----with Islamic and not Western arguments and tactics --- Al Qaeda and the IIF on the one side and Iran on the other. Islam of Al Qaeda brand poses a threat to the peace and stability of this region today. Iranian machinations could pose an equal threat tomorrow.

End quote.

The Saudis supported the Taliban until 9/11, so presumably their solution would be Talibanism minus anti-Western rhetoric and actions.

Monday, December 25, 2006

Yet another war

Another war - Ethiopia and Somalia's nominal government versus Somalia's Islamists who have control of most of the country - is launching itself. No quick resolution is likely. This will likely be touted as an expansion of the Jihad. All such areas of war are fertile nesting grounds for terrorists of the al Qaeda ilk.

--

Meanwhile, Kabul Express still lingers with me. Plus stories of a Vietnam Christmas (on turcopolier) and the story of a WW I Christmas truce. It seems to me that recognizing the humanity of the adversary is only one tiny part putting an end to war. Right now, all it does is give one a mild regret that the other chap has to be killed.

Sunday, December 24, 2006

Kabul Express

Kabul Express is a movie I greatly enjoyed, and would strongly recommend to most people. It is best if you know Hindi; but the subtitles are adequate. If you're not familiar with the subcontinent you might not follow some bits. The story is that of two rather green Indian journalists who go to Afghanistan, after the Taliban were overthrown, to interview a Taliban or two, and the adventures they have with a few other folks. The movie is light-hearted in a grim setting, and most of the time you will be laughing.

A review picked at random.

Thursday, December 21, 2006

Tagged

-- They reflect the money I have (or in the credit card's case, don't have) at any period of time. These appear on my balance sheet. Income and expense accounts reflect where money comes from or goes to. --

Analysis Patterns - Reusable Object Models
Martin Fowler.

---
What does that mean?
I've been tagged by CIP.
That being so, the rules are:

Grab the book closest to you.
Open to page 123, go down to the fifth sentence.
Post the text of the next 3 sentences on your blog.
Name the book and the author.
Tag three people.

I tag:

Desi
Sayvasachi and (a long shot)
Perpetual-Outsider.

Wednesday, December 20, 2006

Sufficient cause for death penalty

I won't be happy until I can impose death penalties on Saudis who annoy me. Not that I ever will. But I think Saudi Arabia should be expelled from the community of nations.

http://www.newindpress.com/NewsItems.asp?ID=IER20061219232053&Page=R&Title=Kerala&Topic=0

Wednesday December 20 2006 09:42 IST

ALAPPUZHA: Losing one’s way in Saudi Arabia could mean losing one’s life. Jojo Joseph, 31, a native of Mariyapuram, near Edathua, in Alappuzha district stumbled on this great truth on Monday. What saved him from the sword was the timely intervention of the Union Government.

Jojo, an employee of an electronic firm in Jeddah in Saudi Arabia, who had gone to a place near Madina to see his wife Sheeba, a nurse, and their new-born, lost his way and ended up on the road to Madina.

Jojo, who did not know that the road was out of bounds for people belonging to other religions during the pilgrimage season, was arrested by the police at Al-Azeez, a place near Madina. The Saudi religious court ordered that Jojo be beheaded at noon (IST) on Tuesday ‘for trespassing into the area.’

Jojo conveyed the news to his folks in Mariyapuram who contacted Opposition Leader Oommen Chandy.

Chandy, who was in Kottayam, directed his office to send fax messages to the Indian embassy in Saudi Arabia, Overseas Indian Affairs Minister Vayalar Ravi, Minister of State for External Affairs E Ahmed and T K A Nair, Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister. “It was a race against time,” said Oommen Chandy.

“After sending the messages, I called up Vayalarji, Ahmed and Nair. They swung into action in no time. The embassy came to know about the incident only when they received my fax,” Chandy said.

Chandy spoke to Jojo on his cellphone who gave him the name of the police station where he was lodged.

At the instance of the Prime Minister’s office, the External Affairs Secretary contacted the Saudi Government and convinced the authorities that Jojo had lost his way and that there was no ulterior motive in moving along the road.

Thursday, December 07, 2006

Bell Labs - a memorial

Dave Burstein, at dslprime.com has the following -

"As Lucent and Bell Labs Dies
Set the flags to half-mast
"They looked for dung but found gold, which is just opposite of the experience of most of us." Describing Wilson and Penzias’ Bell Labs discovery of the Big Bang radiation.

Claude Shannon would ride his unicycle through the halls of Bell Labs, but when he stopped he invented communications theory. Applying that theory suggested megabit speeds over copper were possible, and DSL is the practical application. Crucial early work came directly and indirectly from the Bell Labs and Telcordia. Today, 160 million homes have DSL connections. Dozens of the engineers whose work has been reported by DSL Prime were deeply influenced by their time at the Labs.

Another great moment came when Wilson and Penzias couldn’t get rid of some noise in their radio telescope, even after shoveling off the bat guano. No matter which way they pointed, that three degrees above absolute zero noise wouldn’t go away. Eventually, they found an explanation; this was the cosmic background radiation from the big bang.

Alcatel deserves no blame for picking up the final pieces and hopefully preserving some of the fragments. I’ve been covering the decline of Bell Labs literally since my first solo interview as a reporter. Jeremy Bernstein came to the WBAI studios nearly twenty years ago and discussed his worries about the lab’s future. He had just written 3 Degrees Above Zero, which chronicled both the Wilson-Penzias experiment and glory days of the institution.

I wish I had the skill to write an obituary worthy of the Labs. From Chekhov’s The Cherry Orchard, the ending axe blow, one of the great moments in theater.

“I didn't see. ... Oh, these young people! [Mumbles something that cannot be understood] Life's gone on as if I'd never lived. [Lying down] I'll lie down. ... You've no strength left in you, nothing left at all. ... Oh, you ... bungler!

[He lies without moving. The distant sound is heard, as if from the sky, of a breaking string, dying away sadly. Silence follows it, and only the sound is heard, some way away in the orchard, of the axe falling on the trees.]” Project Gutenberg

Never again are we likely to read:

Nobel Lecture (8 December 1978 or other dates)
Robert W. Wilson (or ten others)
Bell Laboratories Holmdel, New Jersey, USA

Fractional Quantum Hall Effect (1998) Horst Stormer, Robert Laughlin, and Daniel Tsui
Optical Trapping (1997) Steven Chu
Laser 1981 Arthur L. Schawlow
Cosmic Background Radiation (Big Bang) (1978) Arno A. Penzias and Robert W. Wilson
Improved Understanding of Local Electronic States in Solids (1977) Philip W. Anderson
Maser 1964 Charles H. Townes
Transistor (1956) John Bardeen, Walter H. Brattain and William Shockley
Wave Nature of Matter (1937) Clinton J. Davisson"

Tuesday, December 05, 2006

Jefferson on Gandhi and Jinnah

Men by their constitutions are naturally divided into two parties:

1. Those who fear and distrust the people, and wish to draw all powers from them into the hands of the higher classes.

2. Those who identify themselves with the people, have confidence in them, cherish and consider them as the most honest and safe, although not the most wise depository of the public interests.

In every country these two parties exist, and in every one where they are free to think, speak, and write, they will declare themselves. Call them, therefore, Liberals and Serviles, Jacobins and Ultras, Whigs and Tories, Republicans and Federalists, Aristocrats and Democrats, or by whatever name you please, they are the same parties still, and pursue the same object. The last appellation of Aristocrats and Democrats is the true one expressing the essence of all.


Thomas Jefferson
A note to Henry Lee, Aug 10, 1824

Jinnah was the Aristocrat and Gandhi was the Democrat.

It was when Gandhi opened the doors of the Indian National Congress to everyone that Jinnah left the party.

Press and Government

Something that a perceptive person soon suspects is that the American Main Stream Media is very much in bed with the Government. With regard to such suspicions, Teresa Neilsen Hayden's essay is a must-read.

Saturday, December 02, 2006

A Primer on Afghanistan

Christian Parenti provides a short, comprehensive view of Afghanistan.

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1201-23.htm

Some excerpts that are of particular interest to me:

"Pakistan’s support for Gulbuddin Hekmatyar dates back to 1975 when the ISI supported the young radical against the nationalist government of Daud Khan. With the Communist coup in 1978 and Soviet invasion of 1979, Pakistan’s support for Hekmatyar and other Afghan guerrillas increased: CIA and Saudi money was managed by the Pakistani ISI.

....

Throughout the Reagan years, U.S. funding for the mujahedeen steadily increased. Facilitated by innocuously named lobbying groups like the Afghan American Educational Fund, above-board appropriations for the largely secret campaign reached $250 million annually by 1985. Much more issued from the CIA’s black budget. Fully a third of U.S. monies went to the religious zealot and Pashtun Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. Now this feverishly anti-American warlord has joined forces with the Taliban.

....

The guerrillas here got a major boost when the extremist and pathologically ruthless commander Gulbuddin Hekmatyar pledged the support of his Hezb-i-Islami, an old mujahedeen party, to Al Qaeda and made peace with the Taliban.

Pakistan yesterday and today

Borrowed from the bharat-rakshak.com forum:
UNDERSTANDING PAKISTAN:
Jinnah's Pakistan: An Interview with MA Jinnah, and how the Pakistan of Yesterday is the Pakistan of Today
http://iref.homestead.com/Messiah.html

My comment: Margaret Bourke-White was quite on the money in her assessment; and what is scary is that nothing really has changed in the last sixty years.


The Messiah and The Promised Land
Margaret Bourke-White was a correspondent and photographer for LIFE magazine during the WW II years. In September 1947, White went to Pakistan. She met Jinnah and wrote about what she found and heard in her book Halfway to Freedom: A Report on the New India ,Simon and Schuster, New York, 1949. The following are the excerpts:

Pakistan was one month old. Karachi was its mushrooming capital. On the sandy fringes of the city an enormous tent colony had grown up to house the influx of minor government officials. There was only one major government official, Mahomed Ali Jinnah, and there was no need for Jinnah to take to a tent. The huge marble and sandstone Government House, vacated by British officialdom, was waiting. The Quaid-i-Azam moved in, with his sister, Fatima, as hostess. Mr. Jinnah had put on what his critics called his "triple crown": he had made himself Governor-General; he was retaining the presidency of the Muslim League -- now Pakistan's only political party; and he was president of the country's lawmaking body, the Constituent Assembly.

"We never expected to get it so soon," Miss Fatima said when I called. "We never expected to get it in our lifetimes."

If Fatima's reaction was a glow of family pride, her brother's was a fever of ecstasy. Jinnah's deep-sunk eyes were pinpoints of excitement. His whole manner indicated that an almost overwhelming exaltation was racing through his veins. I had murmured some words of congratulation on his achievement in creating the world's largest Islamic nation.

"Oh, it's not just the largest Islamic nation. Pakistan is the fifth-largest nation in the world!"

The note of personal triumph was so unmistakable that I wondered how much thought he gave to the human cost: more Muslim lives had been sacrificed to create the new Muslim homeland than America, for example, had lost during the entire second World War. I hoped he had a constructive plan for the seventy million citizens of Pakistan. What kind of constitution did he intend to draw up?

"Of course it will be a democratic constitution; Islam is a democratic religion."

I ventured to suggest that the term "democracy" was often loosely used these days. Could he define what he had in mind?

"Democracy is not just a new thing we are learning," said Jinnah. "It is in our blood. We have always had our system of zakat -- our obligation to the poor."

This confusion of democracy with charity troubled me. I begged him to be more specific.

"Our Islamic ideas have been based on democracy and social justice since the thirteenth century."

This mention of the thirteenth century troubled me still more. Pakistan has other relics of the Middle Ages besides "social justice" -- the remnants of a feudal land system, for one. What would the new constitution do about that? .. "The land belongs to the God," says the Koran. This would need clarification in the constitution. Presumably Jinnah, the lawyer, would be just the person to correlate the "true Islamic principles" one heard so much about in Pakistan with the new nation's laws. But all he would tell me was that the constitution would be democratic because "the soil is perfectly fertile for democracy."

What plans did he have for the industrial development of the country? Did he hope to enlist technical or financial assistance from America?

"America needs Pakistan more than Pakistan needs America," was Jinnah's reply. "Pakistan is the pivot of the world, as we are placed" -- he revolved his long forefinger in bony circles -- "the frontier on which the future position of the world revolves." He leaned toward me, dropping his voice to a confidential note. "Russia," confided Mr. Jinnah, "is not so very far away."

This had a familiar ring. In Jinnah's mind this brave new nation had no other claim on American friendship than this - that across a wild tumble of roadless mountain ranges lay the land of the BoIsheviks. I wondered whether the Quaid-i-Azam considered his new state only as an armored buffer between opposing major powers. He was stressing America's military interest in other parts of the world. "America is now awakened," he said with a satisfied smile. Since the United States was now bolstering up Greece and Turkey, she should be much more interested in pouring money and arms into Pakistan. "If Russia walks in here," he concluded, "the whole world is menaced."

In the weeks to come I was to hear the Quaid-i-Azam's thesis echoed by government officials throughout Pakistan. "Surely America will build up our army," they would say to me. "Surely America will give us loans to keep Russia from walking in." But when I asked whether there were any signs of Russian infiltration, they would reply almost sadly, as though sorry not to be able to make more of the argument. "No, Russia has shown no signs of being interested in Pakistan."

This hope of tapping the U. S. Treasury was voiced so persistently that one wondered whether the purpose was to bolster the world against Bolshevism or to bolster Pakistan's own uncertain position as a new political entity. Actually, I think, it was more nearly related to the even more significant bankruptcy of ideas in the new Muslim state -- a nation drawing its spurious warmth from the embers of an antique religious fanaticism, fanned into a new blaze.

Jinnah's most frequently used technique in the struggle for his new nation had been the playing of opponent against opponent. Evidently this technique was now to be extended into foreign policy. ....

No one would have been more astonished than Jinnah if he could have foreseen thirty or forty years earlier that anyone would ever speak of him as a "savior of Islam." In those days any talk of religion brought a cynical smile. He condemned those who talked in terms of religious rivalries, and in the stirring period when the crusade for freedom began sweeping the country he was hailed as "the embodied symbol of Hindu-Muslim unity." The gifted Congresswoman, Mrs. Naidu, one of Jinnah's closest friends, wrote poems extolling his role as the great unifier in the fight for independence. "Perchance it is written in the book of the future," ran one of her tributes, "that he, in some terrible crisis of our national struggle, will pass into immortality" as the hero of "the Indian liberation."

In the "terrible crisis," Mahomed Ali Jinnah was to pass into immortality, not as the ambassador of unity, but as the deliberate apostle of discord. What caused this spectacular renunciation of the concept of a united India, to which he had dedicated the greater part of his life? No one knows exactly. The immediate occasion for the break, in the mid-thirties, was his opposition to Gandhi's civil disobedience program. Nehru says that Jinnah "disliked the crowds of ill-dressed people who filled the Congress" and was not at home with the new spirit rising among the common people under Gandhi's magnetic leadership. Others say it was against his legal conscience to accept Gandhi's program. One thing is certain: the break with Gandhi, Nehru, and the other Congress leaders was not caused by any Hindu-Muslim issue.

In any case, Jinnah revived the moribund Muslim League in 1936 after it had dragged through an anemic thirty years' existence, and took to the religious soapbox. He began dinning into the ears of millions of Muslims the claim that they were downtrodden solely because of Hindu domination. During the years directly preceding this move on his part, an unprecedented degree of unity had developed between Muslims and Hindus in their struggle for independence from the British Raj. The British feared this unity, and used their divide-and-rule tactics to disrupt it. Certain highly placed Indians also feared unity, dreading a popular movement which would threaten their special position. Then another decisive factor arose. Although Hindus had always been ahead of Muslims in the industrial sphere, the great Muslim feudal landlords now had aspirations toward industry. From these wealthy Muslims, who resented the well-established Hindu competition, Jinnah drew his powerful supporters. One wonders whether Jinnah was fighting to free downtrodden Muslims from domination or merely to gain an earmarked area, free from competition, for this small and wealthy clan.

The trend of events in Pakistan would support the theory that Jinnah carried the banner of the Muslim landed aristocracy, rather than that of the Muslim masses he claimed to champion. There was no hint of personal material gain in this. Jinnah was known to be personally incorruptible, a virtue which gave him a great strength with both poor and rich. The drive for personal wealth played no part in his politics. It was a drive for power. ......

Less than three months after Pakistan became a nation, Jinnah's Olympian assurance had strangely withered. His altered condition was not made public. "The Quaid-i-Azam has a bad cold" was the answer given to inquiries.

Only those closest to him knew that the "cold" was accompanied by paralyzing inability to make even the smallest decisions, by sullen silences striped with outbursts of irritation, by a spiritual numbness concealing something close to panic underneath. I knew it only because I spent most of this trying period at Government House, attempting to take a new portrait of Jinnah for a Life cover.

The Quaid-i-Azam was still revered as a messiah and deliverer by most of his people. But the "Great Leader" himself could not fail to know that all was not well in his new creation, the nation; the nation that his critics referred to as the "House that Jinnah built." The separation from the main body of India had been in many ways an unrealistic one. Pakistan raised 75 per cent of the world's jute supply; the processing mills were all in India. Pakistan raised one third of the cotton of India, but it had only one thirtieth of the cotton mills. Although it produced the bulk of Indian skins and hides, all the leather tanneries were in South India. The new state had no paper mills, few iron foundries. Rail and road facilities, insufficient at best, were still choked with refugees. Pakistan has a superbly fertile soil, and its outstanding advantage is self-sufficiency in food, but this was threatened by the never-ending flood of refugees who continued pouring in long after the peak of the religious wars had passed.

With his burning devotion to his separate Islamic nation, Jinnah had taken all these formidable obstacles in his stride. But the blow that finally broke his spirit struck at the very name of Pakistan. While the literal meaning of the name is "Land of the Pure," the word is a compound of initial letters of the Muslim majority provinces which Jinnah had expected to incorporate: P for the Punjab, A for the Afghans' area on the Northwest Frontier, S for Sind, -tan for Baluchistan. But the K was missing.

Kashmir, India's largest princely state, despite its 77 per cent Muslim population, had not fallen into the arms of Pakistan by the sheer weight of religious majority. Kashmir had acceded to India, and although it was now the scene of an undeclared war between the two nations, the fitting of the K into Pakistan was left in doubt. With the beginning of this torturing anxiety over Kashmir, the Quaid-i-Azam's siege of bad colds began, and then his dismaying withdrawal into himself. ....

Later, reflecting on what I had seen, I decided that this desperation was due to causes far deeper than anxiety over Pakistan's territorial and economic difficulties. I think that the tortured appearance of Mr. Jinnah was an indication that, in these final months of his life, he was adding up his own balance sheet. Analytical, brilliant, and no bigot, he knew what he had done. Like Doctor Faustus, he had made a bargain from which he could never be free. During the heat of the struggle he had been willing to call on all the devilish forces of superstition, and now that his new nation had been achieved the bigots were in the position of authority. The leaders of orthodoxy and a few "old families" had the final word and, to perpetuate their power, were seeing to it that the people were held in the deadening grip of religious superstition.

India springs a strategic surprise

In "A Matter of Honour", a history of the British Indian Army, historian Philip Mason theorizes on why Indian armies suffered defeat time and again. According to him, it was not the quality of the fighting men, they were as courageous as anyone else, and their training was actually superior to that of Europeans. Nor was it their equipment - until the 1850s when the Industrial Revolution really kicked in - Indian manufactures matched or exceeded that of Europe in quality. Indian workshops quickly duplicated European improvements in weaponry; Mason says Europeans would often rearm themselves with captured weaponry.

The reasons for failure lay in political organization, and lack of attention to the arts of war, both strategy and tactics.

Please note that these failures were in defensive wars; Indian rulers seldom had ambitions outside of their "natural sphere" between the Himalayas and the seas, and from the Indus in the West to the mouth of the Ganga/Brahmaputra in the East.

The result of military failures was disastrous for India. It lost its political independence, its sciences and its arts, and its economy. India would enter the modern world in the third world.

It seems independent India has at least partly, taken those lessons of the past to heart.

The latest is this (for a limited time, you may find the full article here
It is only a "proof-of-concept". Its significance lies in the proof-of-effort. It is an attempt to increase the cost of Chinese and Pakistani threats to those countries.

Ten centuries ago, when Mahmud of Ghazni's father, Nasir-ud-din Sabuktagin, was laying the groundwork for Mahmud's devastating invasions of Northern India, it does not seem that Indian rulers of the time recognized the threat. There is a unstated "never-again" consciousness at work here, I believe.

Quote:

"The New Guardian

India unveils an all new anti-ballistic missile expected to be the fore-runner of a sophisticated air defence system to thwart, among other threats, a Pakistani nuclear weapons attack

By Raj Chengappa

It looks like the Prithvi and even flies like one, but that's where the semblance ends. On November 27, not just India but the world got to know the difference after the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) unveiled a brand new missile, said to be a precursor to an advanced national air defence system.
The test was short but decisive. At 10.15 on a blustery winter morning off the east coast of Orissa, a conventional Prithvi missile posing as an enemy weapon was launched. Within seconds after its take-off, a sophisticated, long-range radar picked up the signals, analysed its flight path and sent an electronic command to an interceptor missile stationed at Wheeler Island. Almost immediately, the interceptor codenamed pad01 lifted off with a roar and plume of smoke. Travelling at five times the speed of sound, it rapidly closed in on the incoming Prithvi. Two minutes later and after some mid-course corrections, pad01 detonated its proximity fuse at a height of 50 km above the Earth. Both the missiles exploded in a ball of gas and the debris fell harmlessly into the Bay of Bengal."

End quote.

Does it make the world a safer place?
Probably not.

Should it matter?
Only in a world that embraces a concept of collective security would this be a wrong thing to do.

Friday, December 01, 2006

Glenn Greenwald on Thomas Friedman

Glenn Greenwald on Thomas Friedman is a must-read. The essay exposes the rotten core of Washington punditry.

Quote:

"Put another way, these are the premises which Friedman, prior to the invasion, expressly embraced:

(1) If the war is done the right way, great benefits can be achieved.
(2) If the war is done the wrong way, unimaginable disasters will result.
(3) The Bush administration is doing this war the wrong way, not the right way, on every level.
(4) Given all of that, I support the waging of this war."

.....

To support a war that you know is going to be executed in a destructive manner is as morally monstrous as it gets. The fact that there is some idealized, Platonic way to fight the war doesn't make that any better if you know that that isn't what is going to happen. We learn in adolescence that wanting things that we can't have -- pining for things that aren't real or possible -- is futile and irrational. To apply that adolescent fantasy world to war advocacy is the hallmark of a deeply frivolous and amoral person.

End quote

Thursday, November 30, 2006

Pearls from a Pig

Our favorite Capitalist Imperialist Pig predicts the next fifty years of science.

Teach girls and die horribly

The Independent reports:

"The gunmen came at night to drag Mohammed Halim away from his home, in front of his crying children and his wife begging for mercy.

The 46-year-old schoolteacher tried to reassure his family that he would return safely. But his life was over, he was part-disembowelled and then torn apart with his arms and legs tied to motorbikes, the remains put on display as a warning to others against defying Taliban orders to stop educating girls.

Mr Halim was one of four teachers killed in rapid succession by the Islamists at Ghazni...."

------

Is it because this is a male teaching girls?
No, the article reports that Ms. Fatima Mushtaq has been threatened for not sending
girls home.

------


We need to be as fanatic about our values as the Islamists are about theirs.

It means making war on them in Afghanistan.

It means boycotting Pakistan, which supports the Taliban, and making war on it if necessary.

It means boycotting Eric Margolis, who is a Taliban apologist. He claims that the Taliban don't want girls in school to keep them from Communist influence, the Commies having infiltrated the ranks of the teachers.

It means ostracizing anyone who says "the Taliban are bad, but..."

Tuesday, November 28, 2006

The Myth of the Enlightenment?

A Richard Shweder had a op-ed piece in the NYTimes on Monday, Atheists Agonistes. He wonders why the phenomenon someone called "AAAA" - the angry arrogant atheist attitude - is manifesting itself at this point in time.

One obvious answer that he considers is that it is a reaction to the increasing religious fundamentalism, both within and without America. But he speculates that perhaps it is because the myth of the Enlightenment is coming undone.

"The Enlightenment story has its own version of Genesis, and the themes are well known: The world woke up from the slumber of the “dark ages,” finally got in touch with the truth and became good about 300 years ago in Northern and Western Europe.

As people opened their eyes, religion (equated with ignorance and superstition) gave way to science (equated with fact and reason). Parochialism and tribal allegiances gave way to ecumenism, cosmopolitanism and individualism. Top-down command systems gave way to the separation of church from state, of politics from science."


But the world seems to be headed in a different direction. Hence an anxiety and AAAA.

--

Here, I continue without Shweder. One idea that is not working out is that Enlightenment values are based on objective truths about human nature and hence are universal. But these "universal" values are far from being accepted in the Islamic world, for instance. Why might this be so? My answer requires a digression.

Professor S.N. Balagangadhara (Balu) examined Western accounts of Indian culture and religion and found that the object of their descriptions is not recognizable to Indians - except those who have accepted the Western discourse. The Indian misunderstanding arises from a faulty understanding of the West. To give a probably not-so-good example, Indians identify the Western "God" with "Ishwara", even though the two are conceptually quite different, and then proceed to misunderstand everything the West says about "God".

The Western side of the misunderstanding is a bit more difficult to grasp. After all, don't they have the imprimatur of science? Hasn't the study of other cultures been ever more scientific ever since the Enlightenment?

We must detour a bit more. The social sciences say that religion is a universal. Since Christianity describes itself as a religion, Balu examines religion (in The Heathen in His Blindness) and asks what is it that makes Christianity a religion? The answer I will not explain here; but equipped with that answer, one sees that many cultures in the world do not have religion - the native Indian culture in particular does not have religion, and the construct of Hinduism as a religion is a mirage. "Hinduism" is a barrier to a truer understanding of India and must be discarded as a concept. What made the social scientists think that every culture has a religion?

The answer is that the Enlightenment is really a secularization of Christianity. One loses God, Jesus and the Bible, but retains the epistemology, metaphysics - the theology without the theos. It is Christianity that defined the non-Christians as having (false) religions; the Enlightenment thinkers and their successors continue to think of non-Christians as having religions. Science itself - as insight into the mind of God, an idea one finds echoed by Newton and Einstein - had religious roots and had to have arisen in a religious culture. The idea of God as sovereign who has delegated His sovereignty to a king or ultimately to individual humans and the human rights that arise from this sovereignty also arise from religion.

One of the implications of all this, to my mind, is that while Hindus do not have religion and are able to handle a rather incoherent 'secularism', Muslims do have a religion and if the Enlightenment is at its roots Christian, they must resist its values or abandon their religion.

---

Returning to Shweder - he thinks the Enlightenment story is a myth because any viable society needs religion. We think the Enlightenment is a myth because it is secularized theology. The understanding of cultural differences and managing them is a work just begun, it cannot be done within the current framework.

---
PS: the above is my understanding and is not binding on the authors cited.

Sunday, November 26, 2006

If you say so...

"The stereotypic image of the Muslim holy warrior with a sword in one hand and the Koran in the other would only be plausible if he was left handed, since no devout Muslim should or would touch a Koran with his left hand which is reserved for dirty chores."

- Ibn Warraq
- From: The Origins of the Koran, Classic Essays on Islam’s Holy Book

It is possible that someone flipped the photo below, or miscaptioned it. Or maybe the subject has two right hands, or is not carrying the Koran but a book of al-Sadr speeches? Or somebody forgot to mention to the warrior below not to feed into the stereotype. Or that these folks in the stereotype were not devout in the Ibn Warraq sense.

"MASKED A militiaman in Baghdad carries a rocket launcher and a Koran during a parade by the Mahdi Army, a militia that is reported to be splintering, as other armed gangs proliferate."


26glanz.395

Friday, November 24, 2006

The New Physics

In the comments thread on Bee's blog

Bee:
"I used the word 'unverified' with the meaning it's not verified through experimental facts that it is actually realized in nature."

Lumo:
"This is a nonsensical assertion. AdS/CFT is a statement about the character of mathematics that describes quantum gravity, and if you agree that it is an essentially proven one, then it follows that it is realized in Nature much like 2+2=4 is realized in Nature."

____________________________________

What is AdS/CFT you ask?
Wikipedia on AdS/CFT
"In physics, the AdS/CFT correspondence (anti-De-Sitter space/conformal field theory correspondence), sometimes called the Maldacena duality, is the conjectured equivalence between a string theory defined on one space, and a quantum field theory without gravity defined on the conformal boundary of this space, whose dimension is lower by at least one. The name suggests that the first space is the product of anti de Sitter space (AdS) with some closed manifold like sphere, orbifold, or noncommutative space, and that the quantum field theory is a conformal field theory (CFT). However, the conjectured equivalence is more general, and is therefore sometimes termed gauge / gravity duality."

and

"The most known example and the first one to be studied is the duality between Type IIB supergravity on AdS5 * S5 (a product space of a five-dimensional Anti de Sitter space and a five-sphere) on one hand, and N=4 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory on the four-dimensional boundary of the Anti de Sitter space (either a flat four-dimensional spacetime R3,1 or a three-sphere with time S3* R).[6] This is known as the AdS/CFT correspondence, a name often used for Gauge / gravity duality in general."

________________________

The reader should note:
1. AdS/CFT is a conjecture; a very well-founded one perhaps, but still a conjecture.
2. Even if proven, it does not mean it is realized in nature. In particular that we live in a 5-dimensional AdS spacetime is yet to be established. :)
3. Even if AdS/CFT is established, its relevance to ultra-high energy heavy atomic nuclei collisions is yet to be established.

This is the new style of physics. In theology, non-existence would be a permanent imperfection that mars The Perfect God, and therefore God must exist. In the new physics, the same holds with Superstring Theory.

__________________________

Tuesday, November 21, 2006

Rules for the mind

One should avoid multitasking as much as possible.

The constant breaking of attention, the switching between different tasks is detrimental to the mind.

The phone on the desk, the cell phone, email, instant messenger - turn them all off.

Don't channel-surf. Don't watch television with commercials.

When driving, drive. The driver's seat is not a home away from home.

I'd say more but I have to answer the phone :)

Sunday, November 19, 2006

The laws of human stupidity

Via a comment on turcopolier

"The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity, according to Dr. Cipolla:

First Law - Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation.

This is not as obvious as it sounds, says Cipolla, because:

1. people whom one had once judged rational and intelligent turn out to be unashamedly stupid; and,

2. day after day, with unceasing monotony, one is harassed in one’s activities by stupid individuals who appear suddenly and unexpectedly in the most inconvenient places and at the most improbable moments.

Second Law
The probability that a certain person be stupid is independent of any other characteristic of that person.

Stupidity quotients appear unrelated to gender, ethnic heritage, education or other sociodemographic.

Third (and Golden) Law
A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses.

Fourth Law
Non-stupid people always underestimate the damaging power of stupid individuals. In particular non-stupid people constantly forget that at all times and places and under any circumstances to deal and/or associate with stupid people always turns out to be a costly mistake.

Fifth Law
A stupid person is the most dangerous type of person.

---
The Fourth Law greatly resonates with me. (chowk.com if anyone wants an example).

Saturday, November 18, 2006

Internet Lesson

Life is too short to be spent debating the endless supply of idiots that become visible because of the Internet.


Added later:

Example 1 : chowk.com
Example 2 : Lumo on this thread

Wednesday, November 15, 2006

Webb - the Conservative

The Main-Stream Media characterizes James Webb, recently elected Senator from Virginia as a conservative. After all, he was a Reagan appointee (Secy. of the Navy) and was against women in the armed forces and so on.

As pointed out on dailykos.com, this is an interesting conservative :)
Read this and figure it out!

Three paragraphs from there:

"The most important--and unfortunately the least debated--issue in politics today is our society's steady drift toward a class-based system, the likes of which we have not seen since the 19th century. America's top tier has grown infinitely richer and more removed over the past 25 years. It is not unfair to say that they are literally living in a different country. Few among them send their children to public schools; fewer still send their loved ones to fight our wars. They own most of our stocks, making the stock market an unreliable indicator of the economic health of working people. The top 1% now takes in an astounding 16% of national income, up from 8% in 1980. The tax codes protect them, just as they protect corporate America, through a vast system of loopholes."

"This ever-widening divide is too often ignored or downplayed by its beneficiaries. A sense of entitlement has set in among elites, bordering on hubris. When I raised this issue with corporate leaders during the recent political campaign, I was met repeatedly with denials, and, from some, an overt lack of concern for those who are falling behind. A troubling arrogance is in the air among the nation's most fortunate. Some shrug off large-scale economic and social dislocations as the inevitable byproducts of the "rough road of capitalism." Others claim that it's the fault of the worker or the public education system, that the average American is simply not up to the international challenge, that our education system fails us, or that our workers have become spoiled by old notions of corporate paternalism."

"The politics of the Karl Rove era were designed to distract and divide the very people who would ordinarily be rebelling against the deterioration of their way of life. Working Americans have been repeatedly seduced at the polls by emotional issues such as the predictable mantra of "God, guns, gays, abortion and the flag" while their way of life shifted ineluctably beneath their feet. But this election cycle showed an electorate that intends to hold government leaders accountable for allowing every American a fair opportunity to succeed."

------

What is unusual is not the message but the messenger. Few politicians dare speak this way, because they are all beholden to the corporate money that they would be attacking by such ideas. So, a newly elected Senator speaking this way is very encouraging, one can hope there will be a debate and useful actions resulting from this.

Stepanov's advice to programmers

A couple of years ago, Stepanov, a noted computer scientist, gave a talk to students in India, and here are some of his remarks taken from here

"1. Study , Study and Study

Never ever think that you have acquired all or most of the knowledge which exists in the world. Almost everybody in US at age of 14 and everybody in India at age of 24 starts thinking that he has acquired all the wisdom and knowledge that he needs. This should be strictly avoided.

You should be habituated to studies…exactly in the same way as you are habituated to brushing teeth and taking bath every morning. The habit of study must become a part of your blood. And the study should be from both the areas: CS, since it is your profession, and something from non-CS…Something which does not relate to your work. This would expand your knowledge in other field too. A regular study, everyday, is extremely essential. It does not matter whether you study of 20 minutes of 2 hours,but consistency is a must.

You should always study basics and fundamentals. There is no point in going for advanced topics. When I was at the age of 24, I wanted to do PhD in program verification, though I was not able to understand anything from that. The basic reason was that my fundamental concepts were not clear. Studying Algebraic Geometry is useless if you do not understand basics in Algebra and Geometry. Also, you should always go back and re-read and re-iterate over the fundamental concepts. What is the exact definition of `fundamental’? The stuff which is around for a while and which forms basic part of the concepts can be regarded as more fundamental. Of course, everybody understands what a fundamental means."

"2. Learn Professional Ethics

As a CS Professional, you are morally obliged to do a good job. What this means is that you are supposed to do your job not for your manager but for yourself. This is already told in Bhagwatgeeta : Doing duties of your life.

The direct implication of this is: never ever write a bad code. You don’t need to be fastest and run after shipping dates; rather you need to write quality code. Never write junk code. Rewrite it till it is good. Thoroughly test every piece of code that you write. Do not write codes which are “sort of alright”. You might not achieve perfection, but atleast your code should be of good quality.

Let me quote my own example in this context. You might have heard about STL, The Standard Template Library that ships in with C++ compilers. I wrote it 10 years ago, in 1994. While implementing one of the routines in the STL, namely the “search routine”, I was a bit lazy and instead of writing a good linear order implementation of KMP which was difficult to code, I wrote a best quadratic implementation. I knew that I could make the search faster by writing a linear-order implementation, but I was lazy and I did not do that. And, after 10 years of my writing STL, exactly the same implementation is still used inside STL and STL ships with an inefficient quadratic implementation of search routine even today!! You might ask me: why can’t you rewrite that? Well…I cannot,because that code is no more my property!! Further, nobody today will be interested in a standalone efficient STL …people would prefer one which automatically ships out with the compiler itself.

Moral is, you should have aesthetic beauty built inside you. You should “feel” uneasy on writing bad code and should be eager to rewrite the code till it becomes upto the quality. And to the judge the quality, you need to develop sense regarding which algorithms to use under what circumstances."

"3. Figure out your Goals

Always aspire doing bigger things in life.”Viewing promotion path as your career” is a completely wrong goal. If you are really interested in studying and learning new things, never ever aspire for being a manager. Managers cannot learn and study…they have no time. “Company ladder aspiration” is not what should be important for you.

You might feel that you want to do certain things which you cannot do till you become a manager. When you become a manager, you will soon realize that now you just cannot do anything!

You will have a great experience as programmers. But if you care for people and love people, you will never enjoy being a manager…most good managers are reluctant managers. If you see people as people, you cannot survive at management level.

Always aspire for professional greatness. Our profession is very beautiful because we create abstract models and implement them in reality. There is a big fun in doing that. We have a profession which allows us to do creative things and even gives nice salary for that.

The three biggest mistakes that people usually make are aiming for money,aiming for promotion and aiming for fame. The moment you get some of these, you aspire for some more…and then there is no end. I do not mean that you should not earn money, but you should understand how much money would satisfy your needs. Bill Gates might be the richest person in the world; he is certainly not the happiest. Our lives are far better than his.

Find your goal, and do best in the job that you have. Understand that what is in your pocket does not matter…what is in your brain finally matters.Money and fame do not matter. Knowledge matters."

"4. Follow your culture

I have seen the tradition that whatever junk is created in US, it rapidly spreads up in the rest of the world, and India is not an exception for this. This cultural change creates a very strong impact on everybody’s life. Habits of watching spicy Bollywood or Hollywood movies and listening to pop songs and all such stupid stuff gets very easily cultivated in people of your age…but believe me, there is nothing great in that. This all just makes you run away from your culture. And there is no wisdom in running away from your culture. Indian culture,which has great Vedas and stories like Mahabharata and Bhagwatgeeta is really great and even Donald Knuth enjoys reading that. You should understand that fundamental things in Indian culture teach you a lot and you should never forget them.

Finally, I would like to conclude by saying that it’s your life…do not waste it on stupid things…develop your tests, and start the fight."

Monday, November 13, 2006

The non-complexity of the mind

Creationists make an argument against the theory of evolution that goes by the name "irreducible complexity". I refer you to Wikipedia here for a detailed discussion of the argument. The idea is that that if a biological system is useless if any of its components is missing or modified then it could not have evolved - arisen from an accumulation of small changes. An every day example would be a mousetrap - it has no utility if any of its parts is missing, and so could not have evolved.

It turns out that in all cases suggested so far by the Creationists, the argument doesn't work. It doesn't work in the case of the mousetrap, either - somewhere out on the net is an example of how a good mouse-trap could arise from a series of small changes to a primitive mouse-trap. Biological systems have another trick up their sleeves as well. While the system may be useless at its current apparent function if a part is missing or changed, the modified system might very well have another use. Thus, e.g., a bacterial secretion system might evolve into a seemingly irreducibly complex flagellum - a means of locomotion that doesn't work if its parts are missing, but very plausibly works as a secretory mechanism.

As puzzles, the latter type of seemingly irreducible complex systems are the most interesting, their evolutionary pathway is not apparent from simple inspection. During the early part of its evolutionary history, the system was under a selection pressure different from that during the latter part. At some point the system "discovers" a new use, and now selection chooses improvements on the new function. Quite unlike, e.g, the idea of how the giraffe neck evolved. Supposedly, the giraffe neck is an accumulation of small changes, each small additional growth in the neck length giving its possesor an advantage in browsing tree-high foliage.

To come to the purpose of this post - it is that the evolutionary explanations of human intelligence and self-awareness to be more like the story of the giraffe neck than like the story of the bacterial flagellum. So, e.g., how did human mathematical ability arise? The standard story would be that mathematical ability is a manifestation of intelligence and from general primate intelligence to human intelligence there is a simple evolutionary pathway, small increments in intelligence almost always being advantageous selection-wise. So our minds have grown in some way analogous to the giraffe neck. Without something seemingly irreducibly complex intervening, our minds and behavior are explained by the conditions under which our predecessors evolved. This parody is the kind of explanation that bothers me. But maybe, the pathway to mathematical ability is more subtle, e.g., the functions associated with language were being selected for, and at some point those faculties "discovered" the new use of mathematics.

Anyway, enough said, I'm already sufficiently confused.

Sunday, November 12, 2006

Macaca Revisited

Now Republican ex-Senator George Allen of Virginia famously threw his campaign for re-election off the rails when he referred to S.R Sidharth, a student worker for the Democratic candidate Webb, as "macaca, or whatever his name is", and "“Welcome to America and the real world of Virginia.”

Frank Rich, in the Sunday NY Times, points out that even if Allen's claim that he meant nothing racist by that epithet is accepted, "Welcome to America and the real world of Virginia” was unmistakably meant to demean the young man as an unwashed immigrant, whatever his race.

Rich tells us that

"As it happened, the “macaca” who provoked the senator’s self-destruction, S. R. Sidarth, was not an immigrant but the son of immigrants. He was born in Washington’s Virginia suburbs to well-off parents (his father is a mortgage broker) and is the high-achieving graduate of a magnet high school, a tournament chess player, a former intern for Joe Lieberman, a devoted member of his faith (Hindu) and, currently, a senior at the University of Virginia. He is even a football jock like Mr. Allen. In other words, he is an exemplary young American who didn’t need to be “welcomed” to his native country by anyone."

--

This story did resonate with the "South Asian" community, but in an unexpected way, perhaps. Please note that Sidharth is a Hindu, and is of Indian descent. Therefore, on chowk.com, a popular Pakistani web-site, Pakistanis began referring to Indians, and not fondly, as "macacas". I suppose they imagine that Allen's bigoted eye would be discerning enough to distinguish the Paki-ness of what otherwise would look to him to be yet another macaca.

There is an effort by some to promote the notion of a "South Asian-American" rather than "Indian-American". But this pretends a solidarity or common cultural mooring that does not exist.

Saturday, November 11, 2006

To blog or not to blog, that is the question!

Still undecided.