Rajiv Malhotra - the Battle for Sanskrit

I just received my copy of Rajiv Malhotra's "The Battle for Sanskrit", and am just upto page 12.  Rajivji writes about his conversation with the person merely designated as "the financial donor", supposedly a fifth generation follower of the Sringeri Peetham. 

My observation, peripheral to the theme of the book is that this person, a major money man in the financial industry, it seems, exhibits such woolly thinking, e.g., that since the truth is unassailable, it doesn't matter if people propagate lies, that one can only wonder how this person made his money.  A lawyer, a physician, a software engineer, an architect, a scientist can never be successful with a mind with such poor quality of thought.   If people such as this donor can amass a fortune in the financial industry, it simply reinforces the impression that it cannot be honest work and these must be dens of crooks.  If not law-breaking,  it must be low animal cunning.   Moreover, the enormous power that their money gives them makes these people dangerous to everyone around them.  Even more so in modern capitalist society that valorizes the "money maker".

What passes for political discourse

Many of Professor Krugman's readers of his column and blog at the New York Times are upset with him.  It boils down to this (taken from a reader's comment):

The arguments keep changing with the new ones contradicting the old ones, but the aim stays fixed: to tar Sanders

• He is not popular
• Wait, he is popular but he is not serious
• He is serious but is not electable!
• Ok, he polls stronger against Trump and wins with Cruz (unlike Hillary!) but 4 "wonks" I hang out with think Hillary is more electable.
• He has no concrete plans
• He has concrete plans but cannot carry them out
• Policy proposals of his economist are crazy, say 4 guys working for Hillary citing no numbers
• OK, the economist in question actually supports Hillary not Sanders and better macroeconomists than me say his numbers add up, but Sanders' supporters are mean
• He is mean to point out that Hillary gorges on Wall St money
• I think Sanders also takes contributions! No? Never mind, his supporters are so mean
• Obamacare is great but single payer would be better
• Now that Hillary says single payer will never happen and Sanders proposes it, single payer is crazy
• Some health care VSP who worked for Hillary assumed crazy numbers and proved Sanders wrong
• OK, his analysis was debunked by health policy professors, but Sanders' supporters are just too mean to listen to us wonks.

As I recall it, for months, Krugman's readers were asking for commentary on Bernie Sanders, but none were forthcoming.  Until Sanders starting posing a serious threat to Hillary Clinton.  Then there was a whole series of posts, deriding Sanders' supporters as "Bernie bros", and essentially terming them deluded for supporting Sanders.  Krugman then cited other economists, who it turns out, didn't really do their homework.  Krugman, famously a wonk, did not explain whether the premises behind Sanders' programs are flawed, or whether the reasoning leading to the results was flawed; he simply targeted the rosy projections as absurd.  As they may be.  But the sequence above that Krugman is seen to have gone through does not aid his credibility.

The US was on a particular trajectory of economic growth till 2008; and then the financial crisis hit, and since then the US is on a lower trajectory.  This is the famous "output gap".   The economists who are positive about Sanders' plans essentially believe that it is possible to get back to the previous trajectory,  to close the output gap,  and that is where their rosy numbers come from.  Only now is there some substantial argument that, sorry, that is impossible.  And sorry to say, that did not come from Krugman, who gave us only the big sneer.  Great economist though he is, I think he has jumped the shark. 

PS: see this.

Ekam sad viprā bahudhā vadanti - commentary by Koenraad Elst

Koenraad Elst's "Pluralism in Ilā’s city" which is a commentary on Ekam sad viprā bahudhā vadanti is, I suggest, well worth your time.

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Physical Insight

Physicist Lee Smolin has an interesting pre-print in the History and Philosophy of Physics section of arxiv.org : "Lessons from Einstein's 1915 discovery of general relativity".  ( If one has read books at the level of Penrose's popular works, this paper should be quite comprehensible.)

Smolin argues, that contrary to the myth created by Einstein himself, it was not beautiful mathematics that led Einstein to his theory of general relativity.  Historians of physics have gone through Einstein's notebooks, and what they shared with Smolin led him to this:

I had a very happy day about fifteen years ago when I visited Jurgen Renn in Berlin and he showed me images of the notebooks in which Einstein had created general relativity. What impressed me was that Einstein was using the same techniques all physicists use to grasp the essential features of a phenomena they want to model. These are the development of approximate expressions, together with theplayful creation of simple examples and models. These are the tools every physicist is taught, which they employ throughout their career, first, to do their homework and, later, to make progress in their research.

The mathematics Einstein used may appear beautiful to some who study it, but what is going on in Einstein’s notebooks was not beautiful. It was hardheaded and pragmatic.  When you dine at a fancy restaurant you may be impressed by the aesthetic presentation of a dish as it is brought to the table. But this is only the last step, just as the freshness of the ingredients as they come from the farm is only the first step. In between, hidden in the kitchen, it is all just hard, practical work. Mistakes are made, but these, ideally, never leave the kitchen. In Einstein’s kitchen—his notebooks it was no different.

It was Einstein's physical insight and intuition that gave him his greatest successes, and when he had no new insights and relied on the beauty of mathematics, as in his futile quest for a unified theory, he got absolutely nowhere. 

Smolin draws the lesson:

The lesson is that the task of formulating a physical principle must come first—only when we have one in hand do we have a basis to look for new mathematics to express the new principle.

The physical principles "that Einstein invented such as the principle of equivalence and the principle of the relativity of inertial frames"..."are directly about nature."

They constrain, and can be falsified by, individual experiments. They require no mathematics to express them: their contents can be entirely captured in a verbal description of an experiment. Historians talk of “thought experiments”, but in fact the principles invented by the young Einstein referred to genuinely doable experiments.

All very good, but then Smolin goes on to propose that background independence ("...the laws of nature should be statable in a form that does not rely on the specification of a fixed geometry of spacetime") might be one such physical principle. Here, I'm lost. This seems to me to be a statement the real content of which can only be expressed in mathematics. I'm hard-pressed to think of genuinely doable experiments that test this principle.

Smolin weighs in on the holography principle: "This says that a model world with gravity can be described as if it were a world without gravity, with one fewer dimension, where that surface theory has one degree of freedom per Planck area", and says that this principle does not have the physical content of the principles of relativity and equivalence, and cannot be tested in single experiment.

So color me puzzled. But it suits my particular inclination that physics proceeds with physical insight, not with mathematics. Of course, if we're stuck with no unexplained anomalous observations or experimental results, and we have no good physical principle, then we can only pay attention to the mathematics, and hope that it leads to something. The history of the last forty years of particle physics is that this is a slender straw to cling to.

Climate disorders

New York City just had its warmest Christmas Day (66°F) on record, and likely will have its coldest Valentine's Day on record tomorrow.   (The current record is 2°F in 1916.)

The Legal Meaning of "Hindu"

India is a country with "religious" personal (civil) laws.  Its Constitution, adopted in 1947, when the so-called "Hindu Right" was a tiny political minority,  has a directive principle, which states that the State will strive to have a Uniform Civil Code, but apart from the so-called "Hindu Right",  nobody wants to get there.

So, e.g., to govern marriage, divorce, inheritance, etc., there is a Muslim Personal Law, a Christian Personal Law, a Parsi Personal Law and a Hindu Personal Law. The question always arises, to who does the Hindu Personal Law apply?

The Constitution does not really go into this. However, specific legislation does, so e.g., to borrow from Koenraad Elst:

The Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 goes in greater detail to define this "legal Hindu", by stipulating in Section 2 that the Act applies:

(a) to any person who is a Hindu by religion in any of its forms and developments, including a Virashaiva, a Lingayat or a follower of the Brahmo, Prarthana or Arya Samaj,

(b) to any person who is a Buddhist, Jain or Sikh by religion, and

(c) to any other person domiciled in the territories to which this Act extends who is not a Muslim, Christian, Parsi or Jew by religion

This is a legal definition.  How it should be related to cultural realities is yet to be determined.

Why is it possible to legally determine who a Muslim, Christian, Parsi or Jew is?  Because each of these has a definite creed, a definite Holy Book, definite Prophets and so on.

In fact, in "secular" India, the government can interfere with Hindu institutions, such as Hindu temples or schools; but are constitutionally barred from interfering with non-Hindu institutions. So back iwhen the communist government of West Bengal was giving the Ramakrishna Mission a hard time, the Ramakrishna Mission moved the courts that it is not a Hindu institution.

The Supreme Court in its ruling, way back in 1995 stated:

When we think of the Hindu religion, we find it difficult, if not impossible, to define Hindu religion or even adequately describe it. Unlike other religions in the world, the Hindu religion does not claim any one prophet; it does not worship any one God; it does not subscribe to any one dogma; it does not believe in any one philosophic concept; it does not follow any one set of religious rites or performances; in fact, it does not appear to satisfy the narrow traditional features of any religion of creed. It may broadly be described as a way of life and nothing more.  Confronted by this difficulty, Dr. Radhakrishnan realized that ` to many Hinduism seems to be a name without any content. Is it a museum of beliefs, a medley or rites, or a mere map, a geographical expression [The Hindu View of Life by Dr. Radhakrishnan, p.11]]

(Dr. Radhakrishnan was the first Vice President and the second President of independent India.)

and therefore, with this reasoning

In the result we dismiss these appeals, however by setting aside the holding of the learned single Judge in the Writ Petition that Ramakrishna religion being a religion distinct and separate from Hindu Religion was a minority in West Bengal based on religion, entitled to protection under Article 30 (1) of the constitution of India as upheld by the Division Bench of the High Court in its judgment deciding the appeals before it and also by setting aside the holding of the Division Bench of the High Court that Ramakrishna Mission as a religious denomination was entitled to establish and maintain institutions of general education under Article 26 (a) of the Constitution of India as those established and maintained for a charitable purpose. 

PS: one might, based on behavior observed from a distant ship, think that sharks and dolphins are the same, e.g. when they swim at the surface with their dorsal fin sticking above the surface.  Having analogous behavior does not make them the same, one has to look deeper into the structure.  Casting the Indic traditions as religion is akin to someone who only knows sharks, insisting that dolphins are sharks, and throws into doubt whether the someone understands even sharks.

We have no religion

Professor Roddam Narasimha (a Caltecher, by the way) points out that the Kannada word that is used for "religion" in the "what is your religion?" question is "mat" (Devanagari: मत ) which is the same word for the vote. "Mat" means "opinion" or "view".  Anyone who tells you religion is just an opinion or a view, analogous to a vote is simply wrong.  "Religion", even after a millenium of exposure to Islam,  and centuries of exposure to Christianity, simply is not a native Indian concept.

With that,  perhaps this description Kalavai Venkat gives of himself, "a Silicon Valley-based writer, an atheist, a practicing orthodox Hindu" might become a little closer to comprehensible to those from the Western cultures grounded in religion.

How Free Speech Actually Works

Begin at 12:08, for how free speech actually works.  Rajiv Malhotra takes on American academic Sheldon Pollock and the response is to try to stop the publication of his book through "informal" methods.  However, when someone moves the court (e.g., with respect to Doniger's book) that is gross intolerance.

Artificial Intelligence is not yet ready to take over the world

Per Yoshio Bengio, the fears that Artificial Intelligence is on the threshold of taking over the world are misplaced.

I'd also add that a real AI, if asked to take over the world, will probably politely decline.

R1a1: Z93 and Z280

An intriguing paper by G. Lucotte:

In the present study we have extended the field of detection of haplotype XI/haplogroup R1a subject to other countries previously uncovered in our preceding articles [9,10]: these countries are mainly Northern Europe, Georgia and Armenia, Near/Middle East, North-Africa, Iran and Afghanistan, Pakistan and India. We found high haplotype XI frequencies values in Afghanistan (18.4%), in Iran (26.5%), in Pakistan (28% and 30.4%) and in India; in this last sub-continent, the maximal value of 61.3% was found in Punjab.

We have refound in our samples the clear distinction initially established by Pamjav et al. [21] between Indian Z93 populations and European Z280 populations: all our South Asian populations are Z93, while almost all our European populations are Z280. Datations show that the Z93 Pakistan Indian group is the most ancient (about 15.5 K years); in Europe, the Eastern populations are the most ancient (about 12.5 K years) and the Northern ones the most recent (about 6.9 Kyears).

Like a whole lot of other genetics papers, I am told it puts paid to the idea that there was a significant Y-chromosome influx into India 4.5 Kyears ago (which supposedly introduced Indo-European languages to India).

Some stronger conclusions are derived here.

When you see papers like this one, I have been told (I haven't read that one myself) that: "this paper takes only the Z280 and M458 marker found only in Europe and leaves out the much older Z93 branch".

PS: the reason for associating R1a genetics with Indo-European linguistics is, IMO, motivated by the prevailing theories of linguistic history and prehistory.   This map, from the Lucotte paper, which would seem to show some correlation between presence of R1a with the extent of the Indo-European language family, is an example.

PS:  I venture that the linguists see an Indo-European language tree because of the extremely low resolution of the linguistic data that they have, e.g., from a previous post of mine, even the human evolutionary tree is not a tree; and this is visible because of the very high resolution that DNA affords.  For languages, if we really had century-by-century evidence of the form languages took, we would deduce a dense network of cross-connections, so much so that the tree would vanish.

Lincoln and Euclid

Blatantly copied from: http://the-american-catholic.com/2012/08/16/lincoln-and-euclid/. 
I learned of the Lincoln's love of Euclid from Stepanov's recorded lectures; and the link above was a good written source of what Stepanov mentioned.

Abraham Lincoln was not an especially well-read man, but what he read he retained, thought about and frequently used.  One author he was fond of was the Greek mathematician Euclid.  His law partner Billy Herndon relates how Lincoln studied Euclid’s Elements:

He studied and nearly mastered the Six-books of Euclid (geometry) since he was a member of Congress. He began a course of rigid mental discipline with the intent to improve his faculties, especially his powers of logic and language. Hence his fondness for Euclid, which he carried with him on the circuit till he could demonstrate with ease all the propositions in the six books; often studying far into the night, with a candle near his pillow, while his fellow-lawyers, half a dozen in a room, filled the air with interminable snoring.

Lincoln wrote about why he decided to study Euclid:

In the course of my law reading I constantly came upon the word “demonstrate”. I thought at first that I understood its meaning, but soon became satisfied that I did not. I said to myself, What do I do when I demonstrate more than when I reason or prove? How does demonstration differ from any other proof? I consulted Webster’s Dictionary. They told of ‘certain proof,’ ‘proof beyond the possibility of doubt’; but I could form no idea of what sort of proof that was. I thought a great many things were proved beyond the possibility of doubt, without recourse to any such extraordinary process of reasoning as I understood demonstration to be. I consulted all the dictionaries and books of reference I could find, but with no better results. You might as well have defined blue to a blind man.

At last I said,- Lincoln, you never can make a lawyer if you do not understand what demonstrate means; and I left my situation in Springfield, went home to my father’s house, and stayed there till I could give any proposition in the six books of Euclid at sight. I then found out what demonstrate means, and went back to my law studies.

In the fourth Lincoln Douglas debate Lincoln used Euclid to illustrate a point:

If you have ever studied geometry, you remember that by a course of reasoning, Euclid proves that all the angles in a triangle are equal to two right angles. Euclid has shown you how to work it out. Now, if you undertake to disprove that proposition, and to show that it is erroneous, would you prove it to be false by calling Euclid a liar?

In a speech in Columbus, Ohio in 1860, Euclid came up again:

There are two ways of establishing a proposition. One is by trying to demonstrate it upon reason, and the other is, to show that great men in former times have thought so and so, and thus to pass it by the weight of pure authority. Now, if Judge Douglas will demonstrate somehow that this is popular sovereignty,—the right of one man to make a slave of another, without any right in that other, or anyone else to object,—demonstrate it as Euclid demonstrated propositions,—there is no objection. But when he comes forward, seeking to carry a principle by bringing it to the authority of men who themselves utterly repudiate that principle, I ask that he shall not be permitted to do it.

However Lincoln did not merely cite Euclid in speeches, but used him in his private thoughts about slavery.  In an unpublished note from 1854 on slavery:

If A. can prove, however conclusively, that he may, of right, enslave B. — why may not B. snatch the same argument, and prove equally, that he may enslave A?– You say A. is white, and B. is black. It is color, then; the lighter, having the right to enslave the darker? Take care. By this rule, you are to be slave to the first man you meet, with a fairer skin than your own. You do not mean color exactly?–You mean the whites are intellectually the superiors of the blacks, and, therefore have the right to enslave them? Take care again. By this rule, you are to be slave to the first man you meet, with an intellect superior to your own. But, say you, it is a question of interest; and, if you can make it your interest, you have the right to enslave another. Very well. And if he can make it his interest, he has the right to enslave you.

Lincoln throughout his life was fascinated by logic and mathematics.  In considering him as a thinker, it is always best to keep this in mind when looking at his thought processes as reflected in his writings and his speeches.

Dr. A.G. Bhat: Tolerance on the Foundations of Intolerance

A very good essay by Dr. Ajakkala Girisha Bhat.  It is worth it, IMO, if only the reader understands the full import of these two sentences:

Two: Hindus believe that they should offer Pooja to the created as well as the Creator. (Amir Khan’s film PK miserably fails to understand the Indian context when the hero says that all other numbers except that of the Creator -God- are wrong numbers).

Aatish Taseer talks

"The guest for the first edition was author and journalist Aatish Taseer, who joined us for a lively discussion about one of the more incendiary topics in Indian politics: the elite of Delhi."

Ancient Heliobacter Pylori

About the Heliobacter pylori found in “Otzi,” the 5,300-year-old frozen iceman found in the southern Alps:  (this news is likely to give some people ulcers :) )

Today, roughly half of all people worldwide are infected by H. pylori, which lives in the acidic human stomach and about 10% of the time causes ulcers. Varied strains of the bacteria are tied to populations across the world, with modern-day Europeans afflicted by a unique one that appears to be a mixture of older African and Asian ones.

But not Otzi, according to the new study, published in the journal Science. The complete genetic map, or genome, of the H. pylori bacteria found in his frozen stomach shows it belongs to an Asian strain of bacteria now largely confined to the guts of people living in northern India.

That suggests the north Indian strain once belonged to most prehistoric Europeans, prior to an influx of farmers from the Middle East into the continent more than 4,000 years ago. Those new arrivals likely carried the African H. pylori strain that mixed with the older Asian one to produce today’s signature European H. pylori bugs.

What this means is that fresh H. pylori strains that might have entered India, with the supposed migrating/invading Aryans some 2000 years after Otzi did not change the make up of H. pylori in India as much as the subsequent incursions of humans into Europe changed H. pylori in Europe.

It takes 26 hours for the entire globe to enter the New Year!

Based on New York City time, the New Year on the globe begins at 5:00 AM on December 31st, Samoa & Christmas Island, Kiribati.  The entire globe has entered the New Year by 7:00 AM on January 1st, the last entrants being "Much of US Minor Outlying Islands - Baker Island, Howland Island".  That is 26 hours, not 24!

This time zone map (courtesy Wiki) makes it clear why.  Notice the funny shape of the international date line.  Yes, Kiribati lies within the hammerhead, and is +14 hours ahead of UTC (GMT), while Howland Island and Baker Island are at the handle of the hammer and are 12 hours behind UTC.

 This detail from another map from Wiki might help:

India's carbon future: the design of buildings

This article by Charu Bahri, of IndiaSpend.com outlines how India can save a lot on the energy consumed within its buildings by good building design practice.

Some quotes:

In 1971, residential and commercial buildings accounted for 15% of all the electricity consumed in India. By 2005, that share had doubled, and it has stayed at about 30% since.

...In absolute terms, however, the electricity consumed by buildings is rising, and is poised to rise 700% over 2005 levels by 2050, says a study by Rajan Rawal, executive director of the Centre for Advanced Research in Building Science and Energy, CEPT University, Ahmedabad.

...Unless energy use is curbed, domestic consumption of electricity in India is projected to grow 800% between 2005 and 2050, according to Rawal’s research.

...Enforcing the Energy Conservation Building Code, an energy-saving code designed for commercial establishments, in residential buildings, could reduce residential energy consumption up to 57% and curtail rise in consumption to 300% over 2005 levels, over the same period, said Rawal.   “It would also make buildings so much more comfortable to live in,” he said.

....With more than half of commercial building stock needed by 2030 yet to be constructed, the country has a huge opportunity to get its act right and construct better. In recent decades, India seems to have been doing the opposite.

 Example:

Prior to 2008, Infosys, India’s second-largest IT company, developed some of the country’s most iconic glass buildings. Then, something changed.

...So far, Infosys has cut per capita electricity consumption by 46% from 2008 levels. Despite doubling employee numbers from 2008, its energy needs have grown only 13%.

 

Binge watching mathematics

If you are into binge-watching, and are of a certain bent of mind,  I recommend Professor Alexander Stepanov's Four Algorithmic Journeys (actually only 3 were made).  Be sure to go in order.

1. Spoils of the Egyptians
2. Heirs of Pythagoras
3. Successors of Peano
4. Epilogue

The collection of Stepanov's books, papers, class notes, and source code, covering generic programming and other topics.

In these talks, Stepanov traces the history of some simple, foundational mathematical ideas and their value in computer science.   In the process he also demonstrates that the love of mathematics for its own sake is good for the soul.

High Speed Rail and India's Carbon Future

The news has been full of the India-Japan announcement of the first high speed rail (HSR) project in India.  It will be built to run between Mumbai and Ahmedabad (Wiki information here).  While Japan has offered extremely low cost financing, the overall project cost (of the order of 10^12 Indian rupees) has raised a lot of concern about the viability of the project, whether it is the right investment to make, etc., etc.  You can do a news search and look that up.

There is one aspect which I haven't seen discussed very much, and that India's future transportation needs weighed against need to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

At this point, I pause to say, I wish I had command of a thousand mes, to do some serious research in this and so many other areas.  Instead what you get is from a couple of hours of Google search research, with very little validation on my part that the ideas and numbers make sense. Since major economic and political interests are involved, validation is certainly required.

It seems that a good way to think about the demand for transportation is "GDP-transport elasticity". E.g., 

The Indian economy has a GDP-transport elasticity of 1.25 (For every one per cent growth in GDP, transport sector has to grow by 1.25 per cent). 

For comparison, Europe:

• For passenger transport, the GDP elasticity is equal to 0.65 on average for the period 2005 to 2030.

• For freight transport, the GDP elasticity of activity is projected to decrease gradually, first down to 0.92 in 2005-2010, and then further down to 0.72 between 2010 and 2030. 

It would make sense then, to seek "GDP-transport elasticity" for passenger and freight traffic and for rail, road, air transport separately.   Since HSR is passenger-centric, I'll seek numbers for passenger traffic only, to limit the length of this post.

This 2013 Indian Planning Commission Report has some figures and estimates, below the fold:

No, India Was Not The Villain Of The Paris Summit

Ruchir Ferrero Sharma in Swarajya Magazine:

The New York Times

Over the last few weeks, editorials across the Western media have abounded with articles about how India was holding the world hostage at the Paris Summit. These included headlines such as “Narendra Modi Could Make or Break Obama’s Climate Legacy” in the New York Times and “China Won’t Block Global Climate Deal In Paris, But India Might” in Forbes. The latter in particular being outstanding for having no basis at all in fact, amazingly not even including the word “India” once in the actual article, but using the title to take a cheap shot at the country.

 and

The story behind the scenes is that the Indian government, on its own accord, launched its own ambitious green energy target in 2013, which was then upgraded 5-fold by the new Modi government in 2015.

and

....we see an even more egregious example of crass propaganda in Rupert Murdoch’s mouthpiece, The Australian.

The Australian

A part of the News Corp media empire has consistently supported the backward-looking Australian government and coal lobby in pushing coal as the only solution for desperate poverty. It is no surprise that with a tasteless piece such as this, they can hit three of their favourite right-wing bullseyes at once – discrediting solar power, disparaging international development aid, and mocking the poor for their poverty.

One feels the need to point out that it is not as if the Indian poor can eat Australian coal, as much as the benevolent coal industry representatives would have us believe, in order to push through their planned destruction of the Great Barrier Reef for the sake of the poor starving masses.

IBM's predictions from December 2010

IBM's predictions for today from five years ago:

http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/33304.wss

ARMONK, NY     - 27 Dec 2010: Today IBM (NYSE: IBM) formally unveiled the fifth annual "Next Five in Five" – a list of innovations that have the potential to change the way people work, live and play over the next five years:

• You'll beam up your friends in 3-D
• Batteries will breathe air to power our devices
• You won’t need to be a scientist to save the planet
• Your commute will be personalized
• Computers will help energize your city

The Paris Climate Deal

Getting all the countries in the world to agree to something like the Paris Climate Accord is quite remarkable a feat.  Part of the reason there are no legally binding actions in the accord is because they would never get past the US Republican-controlled Senate; and not having the second-largest emitter of CO2 be on board the accord would be a major failure.

All of the Republican POTUS candidates spit on the accord.  Americans who complain about the accord not being enough need first to tackle the opposition at home instead of pointing fingers at China and India.

The Mystery of ISIS

"The Mystery of ISIS" in the New York Review of Books - a must-read.

I have often been tempted to argue that we simply need more and better information. But that is to underestimate the alien and bewildering nature of this phenomenon. To take only one example, five years ago not even the most austere Salafi theorists advocated the reintroduction of slavery; but ISIS has in fact imposed it. Nothing since the triumph of the Vandals in Roman North Africa has seemed so sudden, incomprehensible, and difficult to reverse as the rise of ISIS. 

and

We hide this {our lack of understanding of ISIS} from ourselves with theories and concepts that do not bear deep examination. 

Terrorism: Indian vs. European response

In this very important essay by Balu's school of thought, begins with the observation that the attacks on Mumbai in November 2008 (26/11) and the recent attack on Paris are very similar in dimension.

However, despite all similarities, the Paris attacks took on a dimension that did not and does not exist in reactions to the Mumbai attack. While India and the rest of the world were horrified by the violence and terror caused by these criminals, the self-description of the terrorists – as avengers for the repressed Muslims of India, particularly in Kashmir – was hardly discussed, let alone accepted. There was no talk of a ‘War of Civilizations’, except by the American press. Barring a few exceptions, no columnist or commentator, no eyewitness, Mumbaikar or otherwise, described 26/11 as an attack on something integral and abstract. There are hardly any descriptions to be found of 26/11 as an attack on Indian values, or as an assault on the Indian way of life – not in 2008, and not in the seven years since. 

On the other hand, the Paris attack is described as exactly that: an assault on European values, on the ‘universal values’ Europe has given to humankind, on the European way of life, and on the freedom that Europe embodies.

At the outset, I should note that the terrorists did not "self-describe" in the Mumbai case.  A previously unknown group, the "Deccan Mujahideen" falsely claimed credit for the attack.  Otherwise there was dead silence.  It was only some months later (July 2009, more than 6 months later) that Pakistan admitted that the Lashkar-e-Taiba had committed the act. In contrast, ISIS released this statement after the Paris attack.

Nevertheless, the article makes a serious point, comparing the Indian and European responses to very similar attacks.

Relevant quotes from then-Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's address to the nation after 26/11 that characterize the attack on India are:

"We are not prepared to countenance a situation in which the safety and security of our citizens can be violated with impunity by terrorists."

"We will take up strongly with our neighbours that the use of their territory for launching attacks on us will not be tolerated, and that there would be a cost if suitable measures are not taken by them."

"We will go after these individuals and organizations and make sure that every perpetrator, organizer and supporter of terror, whatever his affiliation or religion may be, pays a heavy price for these cowardly and horrific acts against our people."

The Indian response is about the safety and security of Indian citizens.

The then-President of India, Pratibha Patil, was in Vietnam, at the time, her statement about Mumbai  is sandwiched in between diplomatese with Vietnam.

I condemn in the strongest form the terrorist attacks Mumbai. This mindless attack is the work of those who have no regard for human lives, and are pursuing a path of destruction. My heartfelt condolences to those who have been affected by this act of terror.

The closest statements of the kind that put some abstract value at stake, were, e.g., like that from Sonia Gandhi,

We shall not allow such incidents to deter our firm resolve to combat terror in all its manifestations....India's one billion people have the strength and courage to defend themselves against the assault on its unity and secular fabric...

The contrast:

France's President Francoise Hollande to a joint session of Parliament: (emphasis added):

France is at war. The acts committed in Paris and near the Stade de France on Friday evening are acts of war. They left at least 129 dead and many injured. They are an act of aggression against our country, against its values, against its young people, and against its way of life.

They were carried out by a jihadist army, by Daesh, which is fighting us because France is a country of freedom, because we are the birthplace of human rights. 

At this exceptionally solemn moment, I wanted to address a joint session of Parliament to demonstrate our national unity in the face of such an abomination and to respond with the cool determination that this vile attack against our country calls for.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel also described the Paris incident as an attack on liberty and on European values. The statement in German is here.

US President Obama:

...This is an attack not just on Paris, it’s an attack not just on the people of France, but this is an attack on all of humanity and the universal values that we share.....Paris itself represents the timeless values of human progress. Those who think that they can terrorize the people of France or the values that they stand for are wrong. The American people draw strength from the French people’s commitment to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness.  We are reminded in this time of tragedy that the bonds of liberté and égalité and fraternité are not only values that the French people care so deeply about, but they are values that we share.  And those values are going to endure far beyond any act of terrorism or the hateful vision of those who perpetrated the crimes this evening.

British Prime Minister David Cameron:

These were innocent victims enjoying a Friday night out with friends and family, no doubt at the end of a hard week. They were not seeking to harm anyone. They were simply going about their way of life – our way of life.

And they were killed and injured by brutal, callous murderers who want to destroy everything our two countries stand for. Peace. Tolerance. Liberty.

....The terrorist aim is clear. It is to divide us and to destroy our way of life.

Even the King of the Netherlands

...Together with France, we will continue to steadfastly defend freedom against those who use terror to try and undermine it. We will never give up our values of freedom and solidarity....

(The Queen of England only issued sympathy and condolences, as far as I can tell.)

The thrust of the essay is that the Indian response is different and possibly superior to the European response.  It is argued that the European/American response concedes to ISIS the status of representing an alien civilization, instead of being just a bunch of criminals with a criminal ideology; and thus sets the stage for a conflict much wider than it needs to be.

Go to the essay: Paris, Mumbai and the Terrorist 'Assault on Freedom'.

Chennai

From this article on the Paris conference on climate change, and how India supposedly holds the fate the negotiations in its hands:

Chennai, a city of 4.4 million, received 34 times its normal rainfall on Wednesday alone—so disruptive that its daily newspaper was not published for the first time since 1878 because its staff could not reach the press. The rains are expected to continue throughout early December. India’s chief meteorologist has said the recent extreme weather events “fit the larger picture of climate change.”

Dunno about 34 times;  the facts are:
http://www.skymetweather.com/content/weather-news-and-analysis/record-breaking-december-for-chennai-rains/ 

During the month of November, the city recorded a whopping 1218.6 mm of rain, which is three times its monthly rainfall. The normal rainfall figures for November stand at 407.4 mm. However, this was not it, December began on a rainy note as well.

On December 1, in just a span of 12 hours, Chennai has received a record breaking 272 mm of rainfall. The city’s normal rainfall for December stands at 191 mm. Not only this, Chennai has also broken over a 100-year-old 24 hour rainfall record.

Previously, on December 10, 1901, Chennai had recorded 261.6 mm rainfall in a span of 24 hours. Chennai has also broken monthly rainfall record of December 1910.

 and

Updated on December 2, 2015 at 08:00 AM: Chennai rains seem to be never ending. The city has received torrential rainfall on the first day of December itself. As per the data available with Skymet, Chennai has recorded 374 mm of rainfall in a span of 24 hours from 5:30 am on Tuesday {December 1}.

and so on.

Carbon dioxide equivalents

Source: https://www.carbonfund.org/how-we-calculate


Some interesting numbers:

• Electricity sources emit 1.222lbs CO2 per kWh (0.0005925 metric tons CO2 per kWh)

• 0.005 metric tonnes of CO2 per 1 therm of natural gas

• There are 10.15 kg of CO2 per gallon of home heating oil.

• Unleaded gasoline emits 8.91 kg of CO2 per gallon.

• CO2 emissions in air travel vary by length of flight, ranging from 0.277 kg CO2 per passenger mile to 0.185 kg CO2 per passenger mile, depending on the flight distance (long haul flights have the lower emissions per passenger mile).

• On average, commuter rail emits 0.172 kgs CO2 per passenger mile and subway trains emit 0.163 kgs CO2 per passenger mile, and long distance trains (i.e., intercity rail) emit 0.185 kgs CO2 per passenger mile. For rail trips under 20 miles, we calculate your emissions at 0.172 kgs CO2 per passenger mile, and over 20 miles we calculate at 0.185 kgs CO2 per passenger mile.

• On average, bus trips emit 0.107 kgs CO2 per passenger mile. Road and transportation conditions vary in real life beyond what can be estimated.

• Emissions associated with a one night stay in a hotel room are calculated at 16.8 kg CO2 per room day for an average hotel (budget through mid-scale). For upscale hotels, that include restaurants, meal service and meeting space, emissions are calculated at 33.38 kg CO2 per room day.
  
• The average person's diet contributes 2,545 kilograms CO2e to the atmosphere each year. By dividing by 365, it is deduced that the average person's diet contributes, on average, 7 kg CO2e a day from their meals. This calculation is based on an average US, non-vegetarian diet. The emissions for food preparation are not included in this calculation.

Other:

• Air cargo – 1.527 kg CO2 per Ton-Mile
• Truck– 0.297 kg CO2 per Ton-Mile
• Train – 0.0252 kg CO2 per Ton-Mile
• Sea freight –0.048 kg CO2 per Ton-Mile

Conversion factors:

1 Renewable Energy Certificate = 1 Megawatt Hour (MWh) = 1,000 Kilowatt Hours (KWh)
1 Kilowatt Hour = 3,413 British Thermal Units (BTUs)
1 Metric Tonne = 2,204.6 Pounds
1 Pound = 0.00045 Metric Tons
1 Short Ton = 2,000 Pounds
1 Short Ton = 0.90719 Metric Tons
1 Therm = 100 Cubic Feet
1 CCF = Abbreviation for 100 Cubic Feet
1 CCF = 1.024 Therms

Reduce your individual carbon footprint: https://www.carbonfund.org/individuals

Firearm Mortality, USA

USA: Deaths from firearms injuries - Percentage that were homicides - derived # of homicides

1997 - 32,436 - 41.7% - 13,526 [1]
1998 - 30,708 - 39.4% - 12,099 [2]
1999 - 28,874 - 37.5% - 10,828 [3]
2000 - 28,663 - 37.7% - 10,806 [4]
2001 - 29,573 - 38.4% - 11,356 [5]
2002 - 30,242 - 39.1% - 11,825 [6]
2003 - 30,136 - 39.6% - 11,934 [7]
2004 - 29,569 - 39.3% - 11,621 [8]
2005 - 30,694 - 40.2% - 12,339 [9]
2006 - 30,896 - 41.4% - 12,791 [10]
2007 - 31,224 - 40.5% - 12,646 [11]
2008 - 31,593 - 38.5% - 12,163 [12]
2009 - 31,347 - 36.7% - 11,504 [13]
2010 - 31,672 - 35.0% - 11,805 [14]
2011 - 32,351 - 34.2% - 11,064 [15]
2012 - 33,563 - 34.6% - 11,613 [16]
2013 - forthcoming


Each of the reports below is titled "Deaths: Final Data for YYYY" (YYYY = year)
The main page is here: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/nvsr.htm
[1] CDC National Vital Statistics Reports, Volume 47, Number 19
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr47/nvs47_19.pdf
[2] CDC National Vital Statistics Reports, Volume 48, Number 11
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr48/nvs48_11.pdf
[3] CDC National Vital Statistics Reports, Volume 49, Number 8
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr49/nvsr49_08.pdf
[4] CDC National Vital Statistics Reports, Volume 50, Number 15
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr50/nvsr50_15.pdf 
[5] CDC National Vital Statistics Reports, Volume 53, Number 3
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr52/nvsr52_03.pdf 
[6] CDC National Vital Statistics Reports, Volume 53, Number 5
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr53/nvsr53_05acc.pdf
[7] CDC National Vital Statistics Reports, Volume 54, Number 13
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr54/nvsr54_13.pdf
[8] CDC National Vital Statistics Reports, Volume 55, Number 19
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr55/nvsr55_19.pdf 
[9] CDC National Vital Statistics Reports, Volume 56, Number 10
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr56/nvsr56_10.pdf 
[10] CDC National Vital Statistics Reports, Volume 57, Number 14
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr57/nvsr57_14.pdf
[11] CDC National Vital Statistics Reports, Volume 58, Number 19
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr58/nvsr58_19.pdf 
[12] CDC National Vital Statistics Reports, Volume 59, Number 10
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr59/nvsr59_10.pdf 
[13] CDC National Vital Statistics Reports, Volume 60, Number 3
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_03.pdf
[14] CDC National Vital Statistics Reports, Volume 61, Number 4
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_04.pdf 
[15] CDC National Vital Statistics Reports, Volume 63, Number 3
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr63/nvsr63_03.pdf 
[16] CDC National Vital Statistics Reports, Volume 63, Number 9
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr63/nvsr63_09.pdf 



 

What the NYT editorial board heard Modi say, and what Modi actually said

NYTimes Editorial: What Narendra Modi can do in Paris
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/03/opinion/what-india-can-do-in-paris.html

What Modi said in Paris (full text):
http://www.firstpost.com/world/full-text-pm-narendra-modis-speech-at-the-plenary-session-at-cop-21-summit-in-paris-2527862.html
or
http://www.narendramodi.in/pm-modi-addresses-the-plenary-session-at-cop-21-summit-in-paris-385298

What the NYT Editorial board heard Modi say:

Speaking in Paris on Monday, Prime Minister Narendra Modi blamed “the prosperity and progress of an industrial age powered by fossil fuel” for the climate change crisis, and noted that “we in India face its consequences today.”

What Modi said:

Over the next few days, we will decide the fate of this planet. We do so when the consequences of the industrial age powered by fossil fuel are evident, especially on the lives of the poor.

The prosperous still have a strong carbon footprint. And, the world's billions at the bottom of the development ladder are seeking space to grow.

a. What else other than the industrial age powered by fossil fuel is responsible for the increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere?

b. India doesn't have a billion poor; Modi here is talking about all the world's poor, not just "we in India".

What the NYT Editorial board heard:

In framing the Paris climate talks in terms of historical responsibility, India could be setting itself up for playing the role of the spoiler for a climate change agreement that, for all its shortcomings, does something important: acknowledge a collective responsibility among nations to avert a global catastrophe.

What Modi said (some emphasis added):

Democratic India must grow rapidly to meet the aspirations of 1.25 billion people, 300 million of whom are without access to energy.

We are determined to do so, guided by our ancient belief that people and planet are inseparable; that human well being and Nature are indivisible.

So, we have set ambitious targets. By 2030, we will reduce emissions by 33 to 35% per cent of 2005 levels, and 40 per cent of our installed capacity will be from our non- fossil fuels.

We will achieve it by expanding renewable energy - for, example, by adding 175 Gigawatts of renewable generation by 2022. We will enlarge our forest cover to absorb at least 2.5 billion tonnes worth of carbon dioxide.

We are reducing dependence on fossil fuel through levies and reduction in subsidies; switching sources of fuel where possible; and, transforming cities and public transportation.

We hope advanced nations will assume ambitious targets and pursue them sincerely. It is not just a question of historical responsibility. They also have the most room to make the cuts and make the strongest impact.

And, climate justice demands that, with the little carbon space we still have, developing countries should have enough room to grow.

i.e., India accepts collective responsibility - human well-being is inseparable from Nature, and Nature does not respect national boundaries. India will try to alleviate the impact of its growth necessary to remove poverty with cleaner technology.  But just as robbers target banks because that is where the money is, carbon footprint cuts should go after where the largest carbon dioxide emissions are.  It is not just a question of historical responsibility, it is where one can make the quickest strong impact.  Stopping the future growth of developing countries (carbon dioxide not yet in the atmosphere, and not there for another 10 years or so) has less impact than cutting existing emissions of carbon dioxide.

PS: Four myths about climate change in South Asia

 

A Casualty of the Tolerance Stampede

In India, there was a recent movement of intellectuals to return their awards to protest the supposed rising tide of intolerance.  (This movement seems to have receded after the Bihar elections were completed, but that is another matter.) This tolerance herd caused the withdrawal of Vikram Sampath from the Bengaluru Literary Festival that he co-founded, because he didn't join their stampede.

India: The Rising Tide of Intolerance???

http://m.thehindu.com/news/national/300-cases-of-communal-violence-in-four-months/article7904417.ece

In the past four months, the country witnessed 300 incidents of communal violence, 75 every month, where 35 people were killed, according to Home Ministry data accessed by The Hindu. In the entire year till October, 630 incidents were reported and 86 persons lost their lives.

The data do not show any spike in incidents under the NDA government. In 2013, when the UPA was in power, 823 such incidents were reported and in 2014 the figure stood at 644, the NDA came to power on May 26, 2014.

Till June this year, 330 incidents of communal violence were reported and 51 people were killed in these incidents. As many as 1,899 people were injured in 2015.

The report said that in 2015, there were “no major communal incidents” but “two important communal incidents” took place — at Atali in Faridabad, Haryana (feud over construction of a place of worship) and Bisahda, Dadri, Uttar Pradesh (when 50-year-old Mohammad Akhlaque was killed by a mob over rumours that beef was stored in his fridge).

The report said there were “disputes pertaining to religious issues including processions and over alleged objectionable portrayal of religion/religious symbol on social media; gender related issues; land and property disputes; political rivalry and miscellaneous issues like road rage, personal enmity and financial disputes.”

CPI MP D. Raja who was present at Standing Committee meeting, which was supposed to be addressed by Home Secretary Rajiv Mehrishi, said “the Union Home Secretary did not find it important to come and address the MPs on an issue as important as communal violence. The meeting took place but the committee members were anguished at his absence. The Home Ministry also came up with a report where it said that no major incident took place in 2015.” A senior Home Ministry official said Mr. Mehrishi could not attend the meeting as he had to attend the Union Cabinet meeting.
The committee is headed by P. Bhattacharya (Cong.) and comprises 10 Rajya Sabha MPs and 21 Lok Sabha MPs.

The Home Ministry report also said the onus on containing such incidents lay primarily on the State governments which were responsible for maintaining law and order.

The Hierarchy of Arguments

The Hierarchy of Arguments – by @paulg pic.twitter.com/Ek2M6FodKS

— Max Roser (@MaxCRoser) November 21, 2015

The rules at daily kos

Apparently, this item is "outside of site rules" of dailykos.com.

PS: I learned of this article from this interview of Sarah Haider on The Rubin Report. ("The Regressive Left is our Tea Party.").

http://www.ora.tv/rubinreport/2015/11/19/sarah-haider-on-feminism-atheism-and-homegrown-terrorism-0_4sorba3ovpxo

PPS: Shadi Hamid has an analytical take here:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/11/18/does-isis-really-have-nothing-to-do-with-islam-islamic-apologetics-carry-serious-risks/

-----

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/11/17/iraqi-born-writer-brutally-satirizes-liberals-who-refuse-to-blame-islamic-terrorists-for-their-atrocities/

"In the wake of the Paris terror attacks, Iraqi-born writer and human rights activist Faisal Saeed Al-Mutar posted a friend’s scathing satire on Facebook aimed directly at liberals who “shift blame inwardly on themselves, denying the terrorists even the satisfaction of claiming responsibility.”

“It must be incredibly frustrating as an Islamic terrorist not to have your views and motives taken seriously by the societies you terrorize, even after you have explicitly and repeatedly stated them,” the author began.

The author then launched into a mock Monty Python-type exchange between a “self-loathing” liberal and an Islamic terrorist about exactly who is responsible for Islamic acts of terror — and what the motivations are.

It began with the Islamic terrorist’s declaration that “we did this because our holy texts exhort us to …”

The liberal is having none of that: “No, you didn’t.”

And then things get really interesting:

“Wait, what? Yes we did…”

“No, this has nothing to do with religion. You guys are just using religion as a front for social and geopolitical reasons.”

“WHAT!? Did you even read our official statement? We give explicit Quranic justification. This is jihad, a holy crusade against pagans, blasphemers, and disbelievers.”

“No, this is definitely not a Muslim thing. You guys are not true Muslims, and you defame a great religion by saying so.”

“Huh!? Who are you to tell us we’re not true Muslims!? Islam is literally at the core of everything we do, and we have implemented the truest most literal and honest interpretation of its founding texts. It is our very reason for being.”

“Nope. We created you. We installed a social and economic system that alienates and disenfranchises you, and that’s why you did this. We’re sorry.”

“What? Why are you apologizing? We just slaughtered you mercilessly in the streets. We targeted unwitting civilians — disenfranchisement doesn’t even enter into it!”

“Listen, it’s our fault. We don’t blame you for feeling unwelcome and lashing out.”

“Seriously, stop taking credit for this! We worked really hard to pull this off, and we’re not going to let you take it away from us.”

“No, we nourished your extremism. We accept full blame.”

“OMG, how many people do we have to kill around here to finally get our message across?”

Since the Paris terror attacks, a Minnesota Democrat said “ISIS isn’t necessarily evil,” Hillary Clinton refused to use the term “radical Islam” and Bernie Sanders reiterated that climate change is our greatest threat at Saturday’s Democratic debate, an anti-gun group blamed the attacks on “gun violence” and liberal website Salon tweeted: “Real terror unfolds in Paris. Perhaps this will convince the right to done down their incessant violent rhetoric.”
The satire on Al-Mutar’s page has received nearly 20,000 likes since Sunday.

On Niall Ferguson

Need to save this comment.

Empire Guy said...

I was once having a discussion with a friend and colleague (both of us do, or have done, academic work on empires) about Ferguson's "American Empire" stuff, and he pointed out that Ferguson's an interesting scholar. Why? Well, if you ask British imperial historians about his work, they'll say its rubbish but they hear his stuff on economic history is pretty good. When you ask economic historians about Ferguson's work in their area, they'll say its not so good but they've heard positive things about his World War I book. If you ask military historians about his World War I book, they dismiss it but mention that people seem to like his book on the Rothschilds. Not sure if all of these criticisms are right (his stuff on American Empire is rubbish, though), but I think it might capture an essential truth about Ferguson's ability to maintain his reputation despite mostly contributing shoddy arguments to the public sphere.

Reply                                                                                   August 11, 2009 at 01:15 PM

Grumpy

A diary on dailykos has the bright idea "#CallThemDaesh". One of the reasons not to call ISIS ISIL or ISIS is because of the word "Islamic". "....it blurs the lines between Islam, Muslims and Islamists".
Then, in the comments, when someone posts "we should bomb those animals", there is a conversation about how we should never forget that Daesh is made of human beings too.

My response (with minor corrections)

Hilarious!
There is this thread down there in which they try to argue that we must never forget that Daesh is made up of humans.  But the whole “call them Daesh” movement is to make us forget that they are Islamic.  It is very hard to know what liberals want one to remember and what they want one to forget.

I’ll also note that Daily Kos liberals have no problem in calling the Indian RSS Hindu, instead of just using the name “RSS”.  They’re welcome to dislike the Indian Prime Minister Modi and his political party, the BJP; but would they show the same consideration in not terming them “Hindu” as they are trying to not term ISIS “Muslim” or “Islamic”?

For that matter, would they stop talking about the “Christian Right” in America? After all, they are not Christian, right, right?

Of course not, they’d never do so.  They’re Daily Kos Liberals, a mirror reflection of the brain-dead Tea Party.  Sunday morning we’re going to hear from Egberto Willies about whether liberals live in a bubble.  The answer is a resounding Yes!

Rangoli 2015

Previous years.

The meaning of "smart"

neuroguy on dailykos, in an article that argues that Dr. Ben Carson is not smart, gives this description of  smart that I want to preserve:

“Smart” is a multifaceted cognitive feature composed of excellent analytical skills, possession of an extensive knowledge base that is easily and frequently augmented, possession of a good memory, and being readily curious about the world and willing, even eager, to reject previously accepted notions in the face of new data. Being smart includes having the ability to analyze new data for validity and, thinking creatively, draw new insights from existing common knowledge.

November 10, 2015 - likely a big day for computer science

As R.J. Lipton narrates:

László Babai is one of the world experts on complexity theory, especially related to groups and graphs. He also recently won the 2015 ACM Knuth Prize, for which we congratulate him.
Today we wish to discuss a new result that he has announced that will place graph isomorphism almost in polynomial time.

More exactly László shows that Graph Isomorphism is in Quasipolynomial Time: that is time of the form

for some constant . Polynomial time is the case when , but any is a huge improvement over the previous best result.

Luca Trevisan already has made a post on this result, and Scott Aaronson likewise. Luca further promises to be in Chicago next Tuesday when László gives his talk on the result......

Ben Carson's pyramids

Prof. Paul Krugman has a post on his blog about Ben Carson's idea that the ancient Egyptian pyramids were built to store grain.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/11/05/pyramid-schemes-and-overderp-dot-com/

My couple of comments:

In this era, as a practical matter, no one can be elected to President of the United States without giving public allegiance to some of these ideas: that the Red Sea parted to let people through, that a virgin birth occurred, that a dead man was resurrected - none of these events comply with the laws of nature as we understand them.

Yet, only the idea that may violate engineering sense, architectural sense, even common sense, but NOT the laws of nature, that the pyramids might have been used for grain storage, is held up for criticism and ridicule.

That is the true absurdity.

Someone asked:

One day we'll elect a fundamentalist atheist to office. Will you be happy then?

My reply:

Well, when does a belief go from being religious, and so beyond most criticism, and into being absurd or superstitious?

Ms Sonia Faleiro, who writes columns for the New York Times, on twitter was ridiculing an Indian leader who believes that the ancients had high technology, since lost, and rediscovered only in modern times. I agree that such a belief is not supportable by any evidence, and is thus rendered absurd; but I wondered what the basis for ridiculing this religious belief was. I realized, the only reason was that it is not a Christian belief.
When I pointed out to Ms Faleiro: "Tho ancients having technology lost till modern times is a bit more rational than parting of Red Sea or man rising from dead", she promptly blocked me from following her tweets.

Why is Christian or Jewish superstition privileged over every other superstition? I have a much higher regard for Professor Krugman and want to alert him to the absurdity that he is participating in.

 You see, there is this touchstone (perhaps it is - is it mentioned in the Bible?) that makes an idea "religious" and so beyond scrutiny in a political campaign, or else something that deals with reality, and so it is supposed to be handled with normal logic, science and commonsense.   So, for example, that old Hindu stories mention flying machines and weapons that seem like nuclear weapons cannot be the basis for someone's religious belief that these things existed - it is not mentioned in the Bible, and so it must be deemed absurd.  Likewise with Ben Carson's theory about the pyramids. 

This is what "secularism" means in practice, whatever the pious words are about separation of Church and State and so on.  The underlying social contract in America is that certain beliefs are not to be held up to scrutiny.  The conflict with Islam is because Islam has a different set of beliefs that are not be held up to scrutiny, and there is no agreement on that.  Hindus are a dismissable minority in the US; and the secularization project proceeds apace in India, courtesy the Cambridge-Oxford set, the Marxists and the other Leftists, and the worldwide evangelist movements. 

De-Macaulayization - 9

Mani Shankar Aiyar is a politician of the Indian National Congress.  He is a bit in the news these days for hobnobbing with Pervez Musharraf, even just after Musharraf has admitted to sponsoring terrorism in India.  Journalist Dhiren Bhagat, in his book "The Contemporary Conservative" (1990) claimed that in 1962, when India was in a war with China, Aiyar, then at Cambridge in the UK, and the secretary of the Cambridge unit of the Communist Party, collected funds for the Chinese soldiers.  Supposedly Aiyar's influential family intervened to not let this anti-national activity interfere with his career.  Aiyar is a Sonia Gandhi loyalist, and in 2000 got into a drunken altercation with a Samajwadi Party leader, Amar Singh, for his successful opposition to Sonia Gandhi becoming Prime Minister of India.

This above is relevant because that is where the disgusting Macaulayite attitude comes through.
Reproducing some of the interview here, and highlighting the relevant portion.

What was the provocation for the brawl at Satish Gujral's party?

In spite of being greatly provoked, I kept my cool for a very long time. The party was in honour of H.K. Dua, press advisor to the Prime Minister and a good friend of mine, who'd recently got married. Practically everybody who matters was there. Mani came up to me absolutely drunk and charged: `You are a racist. You prevented Sonia Gandhi from becoming the Prime Minister only because she's a foreigner.' I kept quiet.

Did you think it wasn't worth countering? Or was it because you did stall her premiership?

I did not prevent her from becoming the PM. It was the collective decision of Samajwadi Party MPs and MLAs under Mulayam Singh's leadership. As a spokesperson it was my duty to articulate the party's view.

Surely that wasn't provocation enough?

Mani didn't stop at that. He called me an opportunist, a political weather cock. I countered: I was with Mulayam and I'm still with him. It's you who, when denied a Congress seat, went over to Mamata and when she spurned you, you came back, calling her names. Mani shot back: `You are a broker of industrialists, you are Ambani's dog.' Without losing my shirt, I replied: Fine, as far as the Ambanis are concerned you people are virgins. Your party has not taken a single penny from them. As for proximity with industrialists the Congress has been in close touch with many of them. I told him: Yeh tu nahi, sharaab bol raha hai. To which Mani replied: `Mera dil aur dimaag bol raha hai'. Continuing in the same vein I said: Mote Mani Shankar, sharaab ke nashe mein dhhut tera sara shareer dol raha hai.

He was not offended?

He just wanted to provoke me, and when I didn't get provoked, he said, `What sort of a Thakur are you?' He just wanted to pick up a fight.

Why would he do that?

So that he could go back and tell Soniaji, I fixed Amar Singh, I'm the only one who could do it, and thus ensure a berth in the Congress Working Committee. I told Mani, I know your gameplan. I'm not going to help you get into Soniaji's charmed circle. To which he said, `You are under-estimating my clout with her, I write all her speeches. I did it for Rajiv.' Sure, how can anybody forget those infamous lines, `Mein VP Singh ki naani yaad karadoonga. God help the leader and the party which has a speech writer like you, I replied. He gave a maa ki gali. I said politely, but firmly, I can also abuse your mother, but I won't stoop so low. For god's sake don't provoke the beast in me.

But he did? 

He was irrepressible... He said, `We belong to the Oxford and Cambridge set... your leader can't even articulate himself in English... Oh that bloody Mulayam -- he looks just like me. It could be because my father visited UP at some point. Why don't you check with Mulayam's mother'. This was crossing all limits. I grabbed him by the neck and did what I had to do.

You beat him up?
I did much less than what he deserved.

You said that knowing his gameplan you refused to get provoked. Why did you get provoked?
Mulayam Singh is very close to my heart. He is my leader. I'm sorry about what I did. I don't think it was right.

So you regret what you did?
I don't. I'm human, I'm not an angel. I got provoked when he talked about my leader's mother in such a derogatory manner. As a member of civil society I'm ashamed.

Mani Shankar Aiyar also termed Prime Minister Narendra Modi a chaiwala (tea vendor) not deserving to be Prime Minister.   Whenever the era of elitists like Aiyar is over will not be too soon.

PS: Perhaps I should point out that the stuff about English came fairly late in Aiyar's escalating insults.

India's new metros

Metropolitan railway is undergoing a bit of a building boom in India, and you can follow it from The Metro Rail Guy's blog.

E.g., Kochi.

A sample photograph:

A view of Muttom station’s concourse level – Photo Copyright: Kochi Metro Rail

Fall

Balu makes Derrida intelligible

An Indian View on Derrida and Post-modernists

The fate of the Bison?

Aravindan Neelakandan has a long essay from which I excerpt this:

For Native Americans the buffalo was a sacred resource to be utilized according to human need. For many tribes, the animal is sacred because in their sacred lore the buffalo and humans share a common mythological origin. The nomadic lives of the Native American tribes centered round the sacred bison. Though they did consume the meat of the bison they never slaughtered them wanton and venerated it as a ‘sacred animal’.

If in India cow veneration was deemed uneconomical burden for the Indian farmer, in United States extermination of the sacred bison, was essential for the agricultural settling of native Indians. United States Interior Secretary Columbus Delano wrote in 1872 that he would not be sad for the ‘disappearance’ of the bison as he regarded it as a means of ‘hastening their (Native Americans’) sense of dependence upon the products of the soil and their own labors’. But the real reason was no civilizational altruism but aim for political subjugation as US Representative James Throckmorton would reveal in 1876:

There is no question that, so long as there are millions of buffaloes in the West, the Indians cannot be controlled, even by the strong arm of the Government. I believe it would be a great step forward in the civilization of the Indians and the preservation of peace on the border if there was not a buffalo in existence.