CORNERS

"Cozy, isn't it?"
I knew you'd ask,
If not for the curtains,
I'd be sure to bask.

Comfortable, it is,
I am the Grouch,
But, take me there,
I'd love to crouch.

Push me there,
I'll put you out,
I have my supports,
Don't need another bout.

I'm solid, I'm colourful,
But, expect no pamper;
"It surely is cozy"
I'd love to answer.

Back in Black

Hi People..!!

I am back, 

Back in Black.

Its been a really long time since I've updated the blog. Actually, its been a really long time since I've written anything at all, (except all the answers in examinations). For the past six months, all I've done is study, and find myself a university which is ready to take me in. Now I find myself in Indian Institute of Technology Madras, studying my favourite subject, Biology.

And to top it all, I just met the IIT Writing Club yesterday at the Club Weekender. Getting there and talking to the guys prompted me write a poem (that will appear as the next post), and hopefully this is the start of something good. I guess, the club will keep me going and make me write more often.

More updates about life at IIT Madras will follow (soon).

Without Wax,

Aditya Jeevannavar

Hooke's Law Applied to Life

I had an idea to write about Hooke's Law and its strikingly accurate representation of human emotions in terms of stress and strain about a month ago, but had to defer the article until today due to exams and college applications. Nevertheless, here it goes.

Hooke's Law states that, under certain physical conditions, the strain produced in a material is directly proportional to the stress applied on it. For simplification, consider a spring; the enlargement in its length is directly proportional to the force applied across its ends. This is an idealized behavior. But what is more interesting is the curve of stress against strain that follows it.

The stress v/s strain curve for most materials is typical. In the initial linear phase, the strain is proportional to stress. But as stress increases beyond the elastic limit, the strain increases rapidly. Eventually, the material reaches a point of ultimate strength where the strain increases irrespective of whether the stress is increased or decreased. And, finally the material reaches its fracture point.

Stress v/s Strain Curve

Now, forget all the physics aspect of it. The curve not only represents the behavior of a material under stress, but also represents the emotional strain on a person under stress brilliantly.

Most of the boys that I have encountered belong to the initial linear part of the curve. When under stress, they show signs of a proportional amount of strain. Some of the people belonging to this category are too elastic, like steel (appropriately known to have Nerves of Steel); it takes a lot of stress to produce an infinitesimal strain. Take, for example, bureaucrats, judges (not the TV reality show ones), angel investors, etc. I consider myself also to be a representative of this category (thanks to my genes). Whenever I feel I am under stress, I just take a good look at myself in the mirror, and go silent and solitary unto the next morning. But, the thought of becoming excited, happy or sad when many expect me to be just doesn't get to my mind. I can't see why most people can't be like this, if not for the fear of the world becoming dull because of all the monotonous people.

Most of the girls that I encounter belong to the non-linear part of the curve. Even a little spark causes a wildfire. Even something as small as an original book about 'One Direction' gets them excited and jumping with joy. These are the people who find joy in the little things. But the reason I don't like it is that there is always a disaster waiting to strike. Even a mildly disappointing news like a par score in a test can push a person into depression.

But, for all the people, the complete curve is actually applicable. After a threshold point, even the most stoic person will experience a significant amount of strain for a small stress, and then beyond the point of ultimate strength, even if the stress decreases, the strain accumulates. And finally, the person meets his fracture point, where either his body or his mind gives away. I guess we can compare this to a heart patient's condition, you give very bad news or very good news, the only place they will reach is the fracture point.

I do understand that no generalizations are accurate (including this one), but I found these observations right enough to be written about. What do you think? Which category do you belong to, the stoic or the boisterous?

Are Hindus Born or Made?

According to Hindu Law, Hindus are born, while some are made, by conversion. According to Wikipedia, Religion is a set of organised beliefs. So, a Hindu is a person who believes in Hindu principles. I fail to comprehend how a Hindu can be born. This would imply that a child, as soon as it is born, has full knowledge of all such beliefs and customs, and agrees to become a Hindu. I feel, every person is born amorphous, and then made into a follower. In India, where just about everyone is interested in knowing your religious affiliation, one must be careful of the consequences one will have to face after answering it. Born into a Hindu family, I am now 17 years old, and still don't know about the intricacies of Hinduism. If just being born into a Hindu family makes me Hindu, and there is no difference whether I concur with its beliefs or no, then I find this to be futile concept.

To understand it better, let's go back to the origin of Hinduism. During ancient history, Aryans used the term Hindus for people living East of the river Sindhu (now Indus). Then, under the Aryan rule, Hinduism referred to the Aryan Caste System (Varna Vyavastha) of Kshatriyas, Bramhins, Vaishyas, and Shudras. Then, comes the modern interpretations of Hinduism as a religion. So, Hinduism actually originated as sects of people divided based on the way they lived or the work they performed. If we extrapolate the same theory for a time 2000 years in the future, we will see teachers forming a separate religion, and likewise engineers, scientists, doctors, politicians, all forming separate religions. That will be a time when a doctor's child will be declared a doctor by birth, just as a Hindu's child is pronounced Hindu by birth. One easily accepts the latter, but not the former; Why? Can a small child know whether his body, mind, and conscience, will allow him to be a doctor, or a teacher, or just about anything at the time of birth? Doesn't the same analogy apply to religion?

Is the concept of religion valid in this modern generation of science and technology? We hear from all quarters about how one has to accept failure, face adversaries, and strive to progress. If religion supports coping with such pressures and getting accepted in the society, then it can be accepted with open arms, but in a society where religion has become the root cause of multiple problems, I believe it has to be shunned. Proper value education and an active conscience obviate the need for a religion to govern society. When virtues are the need of the hour, religion is not doing much help.

If we view it from a very broad perspective, a religious group is not very different from a social club, if not more evolved (not superior), pompous, and having a large following. You get to meet new people and have a good conversation starter, since both perform the same old rituals. But, this never guaranties meeting like-minded people. One gets to meet like-minded people in clubs of one's interest, be it a sports club, social club, recreational club, or professionals' club. Other than networking, religious groups readily offer people who can support you, in a fight. This is one of religious people's worst habits. Just because a person belongs to your religion, you mustn't blindly support him, unaware of any possible criminal motives that he may have. By any means, one can garner better support by being a good human being, and not by merely being part of an out-spoken sect.

I think, this division of people based on religions is an ingenious scientist's off-the-records genetic experiment. What better way could there be to segregate people living in the same neighborhood? One can easily study populations living in the same physical conditions, but reproductively isolated. If you think about it, it is one of the best way to observe human genes and their inheritance in action.

Forcibly performing rituals, talking to religiously equal people and ignoring others, and finding religions and non-existent castes and sub-castes to fill out application forms, will either induce inferiority complex or megalomania. Just as every person is given the opportunity to choose his occupation, hobbies, and lifestyle, I believe, every person, on reaching adulthood, should be given the opportunity to choose the religion he wishes to be affiliated to, or to none at all.

GOD = CONSCIENCE

I don't believe in the concept of God, as the creator and controller of the universe, or as a supreme being having authority and power over nature and man. I aspire to become a scientist, someone who explores, observes, and interprets. I hope to be an oar to take humanity's boat across the treacherous waters of ignorance, to the island of knowledge; and the belief, in God as a supreme being, is the biggest hurdle in our way. This entity is like a small island in the sea. It can accommodate all, not without conflict, but it makes man a vegetable. In the comfort of this island, we lose the instinct to explore. I'd rather hop on a raft and explore the open seas, than stay complacent on a soon-to-capsize island.

People preach about God citing lines from scriptures and holy books. Well, these scriptures and holy books are nothing more than stories and theories. Ancient scholars wrote about their experiences and interpretations as stories, and presented them as theories to explain the behaviour of an ideal man, just as Darwin proposed a theory for evolution and Mendel proposed a theory to explain inheritance (of course, with much less recorded observations). Just because theories appealed to our ancestors, doesn't mean they are universal truths. They are to be questioned, and when proved wrong, people must adopt a newer theory to allow for newer observations.

In any case, scriptures are just compilations of stories. They were written to be interpreted as metaphors, not verbatim. They were written to guide people, not to scare them into doing certain things. We must make ourselves capable of reading between the lines, interpreting the stories, deriving the morals, and applying them in our lives. Scriptures are great storehouses of our ancestors' knowledge and lives; Reading them gives us a measure of the change and development, and the depth of history. But, the obstacle hindering our efforts of tapping into this knowledge is language. Many of the ancient languages like Sanskrit and Hebrew are no longer in common use. So, for the attainment of that knowledge, one has to learn a wholly different language. Since most of us can't, we have to turn to translations. Translators, no matter how good, are bound to err, get stumped at some point, and add in their own interpretations. This leads much loss of actual matter, and ambiguity. I've heard that scriptures have so many stories that a clever man, citing different connotations, can prove two contradictory statements true. Thus, all-believing non-investigative naive common people become prey to faithless vulpine group of greedy individuals.

A proverb I find worth debating over and proving false is, 'The fear of God is the beginning of Wisdom'. I mean, really, what wisdom is the adage hinting at. Fear always leads to ignorance, never to wisdom. I have often come across this fear. People tell, don't do this, else God will punish you, or do this to make God happy and he will grant your wishes. I believe Man punishes Himself, Conscience punishes Man; but never God. Weak people need God. For example, consider you are waiting for a bus, and a man standing close to you starts smoking. The strong one will oppose him, force him to stop causing harm to others, while the weak will just have thoughts running in his mind like,"What can I do?", "I'm mot strong enough", "It is out of my reach", and "God will punish him." I don't fear God, but I do fear faith and tradition. Every day, one or the other quack pops up with mindless acts and prophecies, that he says have been performed for years as tradition. Faith in such mindless and diverse tradition is sure to lead to conflict and loss to everyone involved.

Recently, in the newspaper, I read an article about spirituality in the act of yajna. Yajna is not performed for the satisfaction of some supreme outward entity, but for the purification of the mind and conscience. To perform a yajna, one must abstain from smoking, consuming alcohol, narcotic drugs, cooked food, and celibate, for a period of time. Thus, yajna purifies one's body, and a sound body hosts a sound mind. This mind is the god that the yajna, or any ritual for that matter, is supposed to act upon, not some supreme entity residing in the skies. I believe the supreme entity that few worship and many fear must reside in the mind. I believe the supreme entity is CONSCIENCE.

Teacher's Day

Every year, in memory of Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, the 5th day of September is celebrated as Teacher's day. This day usually turns out to be either very bland, or celebrated in a meaningless and pompous way, with gifts and cakes. I regret it when such a day, meant for inspiration and appreciation, is wasted on futile entertainment. As a small step in a new direction, I, on behalf of my classmates, wrote a letter to my teachers, to inspire them and make them inspire us. And we delivered the letter to them one day prior to Teachers' Day. The letter read as follows:




Dear Teacher,

You're an ocean of knowledge, we're empty barrels waiting to be filled. But, we do not seek filtered and purified water, devoid of all its qualities. We want the water with all the salts and impurities in it, whether by means of a pipe, a pail, or handfuls.

You have so much of knowledge, potential, stories, and energy to share, but why do you get entangled in the net of marks. We do not care about how many questions are asked in the exam or what they are. We do not want to know whether mugging up a concept is going to yield us 5 marks in the exam. We do not want to measure a concept merely by the marks it is worth in an exam. We want to understand the various facets of science and society alike; we want them to inspire us. More importantly, we want you to help us understand, and get inspired.

Coming to more real-world scenario, many of our seniors got and surely, many of us will get sky high percentage of marks in the board exams; its just been made so easy and  predictable. According to many, the real hurdles are competitive exams. These hurdles appear unbreachable because we don't understand the core concepts, because all we are ever taught in class is, "How to get good marks?", instead of the "Core Learning", and "Concepts of Science". Learning without purpose is not only useless, it is harmful. Its like knowing the rules and procedure, without knowledge of the vocabulary and aim. This is a precise definition of cancer - growing without purpose. But, we believe, this malignant cancer can be cured with small doses of inspiration and enlightenment.

We believe, you, as a teacher, have the greatest of powers and the heaviest of duties - you shape generations. This teachers' day, we want you to shine your lantern upon us, guide us, and share with us the most valuable lessons of your life. We want 'you' to teach us, inspire us, enlighten us.....


With Regards,
Your obedient students,
Section G - Class of 2016

Through this letter, I euphemistically told them that I am fed up of the marks-oriented teaching and desperately in need of change. The first signs of my letter's effects were seen when our chemistry teacher told us his story. He told us how, in the initial stages of his career, he too wanted to teach us in an idealistic manner, focusing on the concept rather than the marks. But, in the few years he has been teaching, he felt the pressures of completing the prescribed syllabus in the the limited time made available. Nevertheless, he has promised that he will make sure that our learning is more interactive and inspirational.

But, unfortunately, the euphony misled some of our teachers to believe that the letter was a thank you card. After 2-3 such reactions, where they were just happy that we appreciated their efforts and that we thanked them, I began to feel that either I had beaten too much around the bush or they had failed to take the criticism. Their reactions governed them rather than responses. The results of the exercise deviated sharply from the expected one, but I sure learned two things, that I should keep reasonable expectations from others and that most people react and seldom respond.

Scores!! Scores?? Scores?!

Scores will score good scores,
What can we infer from them?
Will we be knowledgeable citizens?
Or just laymen with huge recollections?

Do scores have a role, even when the questions are easily predicted?
Or is it just a formality, that needs to be completed?
Do scores reflect test-taker's expertise, or the test's level of ease?
Or do they show one's capacity to mug up, or one's ability to duplicate?

A dolt who can't tell a lion from a buck,
Gets great scores by sheer luck;
Who's the culprit of the dolt's duncehood;
The tester, the testee or the proctor?

Concepts are the core we fail to comprehend,
And use the scores to defend,
Parents and peers we may offend,
But, eventually, against what else to fend?

The clever judge their own scores, assimilate the data,
The less endowed compare;
Anxiety, depression, fury - the emotions run wild,
The dust settles in the desert of lost hope.

Scores are stars, but can we land on them?
We need a check, seldom, but we need not depend.