Topic started by Kuttykarthik on Sat Nov 27 23:20:25 .
All times in EST +10:30 for IST.
|
Nanbarkalee,
|
Responses:
- Old responses
- From: venkat (@ dhcp22-25.riken.go.jp)
on: Sun Mar 25 23:57:01
ÓÕ¸ý; «Ê§Âý ýÛõ ¦¾¡Ã¡ñ§¾¡ ¦Åí¸ð ¬¸Å¢ø¨Ä, ýÛõ ÀòÐ ¿¡ð¸û, ƒôÀ¡É¢Â÷¸û ±É «È¢ÂôÀÎõ Âó¾¢Ãí¸Ù¼ý ´ÕÅÉ¡¸...
¸¡ïºÉ¡, «¾¡¸ôÀð¼Ð, ¿¡Åø ¦¾Ã¢Å¢ø §Á¡¸Óû ÌÈ¢òÐ ¿õÁ¢ø ¦ÀÕõÀ¡Ä¡ÉÅ÷¸ÙìÌ Á¡ÚÀ¡Êø¨Ä. ¿£í¸û «¨¾ Ãñ¼¡õ Ó¨È ÀÊì¸ò §¾¨Å¢ø¨Ä ±É ¿¢¨É츢ȣ÷¸û, «Ê§ÂÛìÌ Ìõ§Á¡½õ Á¼òÐò ¦¾Õ ¿¢¨ÉÅ¢ø «¨Ä§Á¡Ðõ ¦À¡ØÐ §Á¡Ó-Å¢ø º¢Ä ¼í¸¨Çò ¾¢ÕõÀô ÀÊôÀ¾¢ø ´Õ º¢Ä¡¸¢ôÒ. ƒÓÉ¡Å¢ý Ð측õÀ¡¨ÇÂò ¦¾ÕÅ¢ø ¿¼ó¾ÅÛìÌò¾¡ý Å¢Âì¸ò ¦¾Ã¢Ôõ «¨¾ «ôÀÊÔõ «Æ¸¢Âø ¾ÐõÀ ±Ø¾ÓÊÔÁ¡ ±ýÚ!!
ÓÕ¸ý! Monte Carlo simulation of Project Management ±Ûõ ÒðÊ¢ø ¿¡Åø â¾ò¨¾ «¨¼ì¸ ÓÊÔÁ¡ ±ýÈ¡ø ¸ð¼¡Âõ ÓÊ¡Р±É ±ýÉ¡ø «Ú¾¢Â¢ðÎì ÜÈÅ¢ÂÖõ. ¬É¡ø ¯í¸Ù¼ý ¿¡ý ´òÐô §À¡¸Å¢ÂÄ¡¾ ´Õ Å¢¾¢ÔñÎ. My feeble intellect does not permit me accept your axiamatizing; 'Literature and Science are mutually exclusive sets and they never can have an intersecting point, let alone a plane'. As someone who knows a little about Goedel's incompleteness theorem on axiamatic sciences (incl. mathematics), I am given to believe that all creations of human mind form complex interacting subsets.
±Ø¾ôÀÎõ Ũà ±ó¾ ´Õ Ä츢Âò¨¾Ôõ ÒðÊ¢ø «¨¼ì¸Å¢ÂÄ¡Ð, ¬É¡ø ±Ø¾¢ ÓÊò¾À¢ý «¨¾ «¨¼ìÌõ ÒðÊ¢ÕôÀ¨¾ ´Õ Ũ¸Â¢ø ¸¡½Ä¡õ. The humbleness I inherited from my scientific training leads me to believe that every creations of human mind should somehow be classifiable by human minds. I am led to believe that Prof. Suri might have meant that his training on connected nets led to *his* understanding of characters of *his* creation. Not having training in neural networks does not permit me refute his statement on how he managed his characters with connected nets. Nor would I harzard generalizing that he would have meant *all* ideas of *all* literature can be mapped within the mathematical modeling of connected nets. Again, I make it abundantly clear that I strongly believe there is no, (rather, there never can be) a *universal* scientific thesis on literature. Re-phrased; I do not believe that science is a superset of literature. But I believe that there can be a considerable overlap of science and literature.
'Åﺨɸû ¦ºöÅ¡§Ã¡ Ê½í¸ §Åñ¼¡' ±ýÚ ¦¿ò¾¢ÂÊ¡¸î ¦º¡ýÉ¡ø «¨¾ "¿£¾¢ Ä츢Âõ" ±ýÚ ´òÐ즸¡ûÙõ ¦À¡ØÐ, '¸üâÃõ ¿¡Ú§Á¡ ¸ÁÄôâ ¿¡Ú§Á¡' ±ýÀ¨¾ "Àì¾¢ Ä츢Âõ" ±ýÚ Å¨ÃÂÚìÌõ ¦À¡ØÐ, Å¡¨ÆôâÅ¢ý Ũø½¢¾ «¨Áô¨Àô ÀüÈ¢î ͨÅÀ¼ ¦º¡ýÉ¡ø «Ð ²ý Ä츢ÂÁ¡¸¡Ð ±ýÚ ±ÉìÌ Å¢Çí¸Å¢ø¨Ä. "«È¢Å¢Âø Ä츢Âõ" ±ýÚ ´Õ «¾¢¸õ ¸¡½ôÀ¼¡¾ Ũ¸ («Ð ´Õ º¢ÄÕìÌ Á¡ò¾¢Ã§Á Å¢ÇíÌž¡¸×õ, ú¢ì¸ì Üʾ¡¸ ÕôÀ¢Ûõ) ÕôÀ¾¡¸î ºüÚ ¦ÀâÂÁÉмý ´òÐ즸¡ûÙí¸§Çý :-) ±ÉìÌ ¿£¾¢ Ä츢Âò¨¾ô À¢Ê측Р±ýÚ ¦º¡øÅÐ «È¢×º¡÷ §¿÷¨Á. ¬É¡ø ¿£¾¢ Ä츢¦ÁøÄ¡õ Ä츢ÂÁøÄ, ¿¡ý ±ØÐõ ¸¡öó¾ ÁÄò¨¾ ¿¡ÔñÏõ §¸¡½ø§¸¡ðÎì ¸¨¾ÂÇôÒ¾¡ý Ä츢Âõ ±ýÚ º¢Ä÷ ¦º¡øÅÐ ±ÉìÌ «Ã¡ƒ¸Á¡ô Àθ¢ýÈÐ (¡÷ ±ýÀ¨¾ ¦ºýÈ ¾£À¡ÅÇ¢ìÌ ±ñ¦½ö §¾öòÐì ÌÇ¢ò¾ ŨÄÅ¡º¢¸û ±ø§Ä¡ÕìÌõ ¬È¡ÅÐ ¾¼¨Å¡¸î ¦º¡øÄÓÊ¡Ð). Ä츢Âõ ±Ûõ â¾ò¾¢É¡ø «È¢Å¢Âø ÒðÊìÌû ¯¼õ¨À ѨÆòÐ ¯û§Ç ºüÚ §¿Ãõ àí¸¢ ¦ÅÇ¢ÅÃÅ¢ÂÄ¡Ð ±ýÚ ÂÄ¡¨Á ŨÃÂ¨È ²ý?
Some of the amazing developments in human genome leads me even to believe that one day someone will have a compact quantum chaos model of last year's ¾¡Á¢ÃÀý¢ ÀΦ¸¡¨Ä¸û. (remember - after it has happened). The fact that no one has attempted or someone has failed does not mean the zero probability.
ýÉ¡ «ñ½¡ò§¾, ¿¡ "Ä츢Âò¾¢ø ¦Á¡Æ¢Â¢ý Å£îÍ/ÀíÌ ±ýÉ?" «ôËýÛ ¿£í¸ûÇ¡ §ÀÍɾô Àò¾¢ ¦¸¡ïº ¦ÅÄ¡Åâ¡ ŠÐ ¯¼Ä¡ñÏ ¸ñ¼¡, ¿£ ±ýÉ §ÅÈ ÅÇ¢ìÌ ÅÄ¢î͸¢Û §À¡ö¼!!!
- From: Vanchinathan (@ 203.199.192.162)
on: Mon Mar 26 06:10:01
I have been reading the posts of this thread regularly for the past one month or more. Being mostly
ignorant of the books and authors discussed here, the only sensible thing for me to do is to keep
quiet. But the recent posts by ira.murugan and Venkat arising out of Prof Suri's interview in 'The Hindu' makes me say a few words.
My feeling is that most people when asked how they were able to do something, or why they did
something (typical questions asked in an interivew) very rarely do they give correct answers. Very rarely would they be able to. Those are the questions for which most people would not not have answers (however noble or great their achievements be). Invariably one tries to reason out and tries to explain after the fact.
Motivations and explanations for peoples actions are not that easy.
Writer Suri trying to explain trying to ascribe his literary achievements to his mathematical training also fall into this type of things perhaps.
In one of Isaac Asimov's science fiction short story, (Kanchana: you'd heard it already from me and Asokan) an "author of dreams" (dreaming becomes an esoteric ability in that futuristic setting which their technology gives a way of 'broadcasting' to the entertainment of non-dreaming population giving all these dream-capable persons a star status in the society) is asked
by 'fans' how he is able to dream.
Asimov makes his dreaming hero give an honest answer. He simply retorts "how do you NOT dream?" Then this 'dreaming hero' goes on describing the travails of being a dreamer. (When I shave I cut myself, when I drive I don't concentrate and get into accidents ...). It gives an impression that he is affected by this dreaming disease. {from the collection "Earth is Room Enough". The title of the short story is "Dreaming is a private Thing")
For example, I am sure Sujaathaa and ira.murugan would agree that service to the thamizh people was not their aim when they wrote their very much readable articles on science and technology. That what they have done is a good service to Thamizh people is of course undeniable.
Mathematics is commonly believed to be a boring tormenting subject, and a normal human being one should be proud of being ignorant of it. ANd many successful mathematicians when asked why they chose Mathematics often say,"Real life is so much chaotic, in mathematics everything is so clear-cut and easy(!) and in perfect order".
THat explanation is mostly nonsense. One is attracted to something for no reason at all. When asked to explain why you are attracted to it, one tries to justify it. And many great, eminent and successful scientists have been known to do illogical things in life!
Though I agree with Venkat that scientific and literary pursits of a person should not be put into
independent water-tight compartments, it still is not meaningful to say one is the raison d' etre for another.
- From: era.mu (@ 210-214-131-77.lan.sify.net)
on: Mon Mar 26 11:04:26
«ýÒûÇ ¦Åí¸ð,
ÀòÐ ¿¡Ç¢ø À½õ ¨ÅòÐì ¦¸¡ñÎ ã𨼠ÓÊîÍì¸¨Ç (Ó츢ÂÁ¡¸ô Òò¾¸í¸¨Ç) ýÛõ ¸ð¼ ¬ÃõÀ¢ì¸Å¢ø¨Ä¡? :-)
¿¡ý ´Õ Ó¨È ¾ï¨º ¦ºýÈ¢Õó¾§À¡Ð ¸¡Ä了ýÈ ¿ñÀ÷ ±Øò¾¡Ç÷ ¾ï¨º À¢Ã¸¡„¢ý º¢§É¸¢¾ Åð¼ì '¸¨¾ ¦º¡øÄ¢' ¸§Ç¡Î §Àº¢ì ¦¸¡ñÊÕó§¾ý. ±í¸ ¬º¡ý (À¢Ã¸¡‰¾¡ý!) ÂÓÉ¡¨Åô À¡÷ò¾¢Õ측÷ ±ýÈ¡÷ «Å÷¸Ç¢ø ´ÕÅ÷. À¢Ã¸¡‰ Åó¾§À¡Ð §¸ð§¼ý - "«ó¾ «õÁ¡¾¡ý ÂÓÉ¡í¸ÈÐ ´Õ ³¾£¸õ" ±ýÚ ¿ÓðÎî º¢Ã¢ô§À¡Î ¦º¡ýÉ¡÷ «Å÷.
§Á¡¸Óû¨Çô ÀÊò¾ ÕÀ¾¡ÅРž¢ø ¿¡ý Ð측õÀ¡¨ÇÂò ¦¾ÕÅ¢ø ¿¼óÐ §À¡Â¢Õó¾¡ø, «í§¸ ¾ðÎôÀð¼ ±ó¾ Ááò¾¢Âô ¦Àñ¨½Ôõ ÂÓÉ¡Å¡¸ò ¾¡ý À¡÷ò¾¢Õô§Àý :-) «÷îºÉ¡ §ƒ¡ì§Ç¡¸¨Ãìܼ ÂÓÉ¡Å¡¸ô À¡÷ì¸ ÓÊÂÅ¢ø¨Ä ô§À¡Ð.
Ýâ §Áø ±ÉìÌ ´Õ Å¢§Ã¡¾Óõ ø¨Ä. 'åð¨¼ô §À¡ðÎ ¿¡ð¨¼ô À¢Ã¢ò¾¾¡¸' «Å÷ ¦º¡øÅÐ ¾¡ý ÁÉ¢¾÷ À¡÷ÓÄ¡-44 ¸¨¾ ±Ø¾¢Â¢Õ츢ȡ§Ã¡ ±ýÚ ºó§¾¸ôÀ¼ ¨Å츢ÈÐ.
Å¡¨ÆôâÅ¢ý Ũø½¢¾ «¨Áô¨Àî ͨÅÀ¼î ¦º¡ýÉ¡ø Ä츢ÂÁ¡¸¡§¾¡ ±ýÚ §¸ðÊÕ츢ȣ÷¸û. «ôÀÊî ¦ºö¾¡ø «¾¢ø Å¡¨Æôâ ÕìÌõ. Ũø½¢¾õ ÕìÌõ. ͨŠÕìÌõ. «ùÅÇ×¾¡ý.
§ÀôÀ¨Ã ±ÎòÐì ¦¸¡ûÙí¸û. ó¾î ¦º¡ü¸¨Çì ÌÈ¢òÐì ¦¸¡ûÙí¸û. ¾¢í¸û.. ¦Åñ½¢Ä×.. ±ó¨¾..ÌýÚ.. ¨¾ ±øÄ¡õ ¨ÅòÐ ´Õ À¡ðÎ ±Ø¾ §ÅñÎõ. ó¾ ´ù¦Å¡Õ ¦º¡øÖõ ÃñÎ ¾¼¨Å ÅÃÄ¡õ. «ôÒÈõ «ü¨È..ü¨È..§Åó¾÷, ÓÃÍ..¦Á¡ò¾õ ³óÐ Å⠱ؾ¢É¡ø §À¡Ðõ. «ùÅÇ×¾¡ý ±ØÐí¸û À¡÷ô§À¡õ ±ýÚ À¡÷ÓÄ¡ ¦¸¡Îò¾¡ø ¬Â¢Ãõ À¡ðÎ ÅÃÄ¡õ. ¬É¡ø,
"«ü¨Èò ¾¢í¸û «ù ¦Åñ ¿¢ÄÅ¢ý
±ó¨¾Ôõ ¯¨¼§Âõ; ±õ ÌýÚõ À¢È÷ ¦¸¡Ç¡÷;
ü¨Èò ¾¢í¸û ù ¦Åñ ¿¢ÄÅ¢ý,
¦ÅýÚ ±È¢ Óú¢ý §Åó¾÷ ±õ
ÌýÚõ ¦¸¡ñ¼¡÷; ¡õ ±ó¨¾Ôõ ħÁ!"
±ýÈ «ó¾ì ¸ñ½£÷ Åâ¸¨Ç Á¢ïÍõ ý§É¡÷ Ä츢Âõ Åà ÓÊÔ§Á¡?
â¾ò¨¾ ÒðÊ¢ø «¨¼ì¸ ÓÂüº¢ ¦ºöÂÄ¡õ. ÒðÊìÌû ÕôÀÐ â¾õ ±ýÚ ¸üâÃõ ¦¸¡Ùò¾¢É¡ø ¾¡ý ¸‰¼õ.
Ä츢Âõ Ä츢ÂÁ¡¸ Õì¸ðÎõ. «È¢Å¢Âø «È¢Å¢ÂÄ¡¸ Õì¸ðÎõ. ±ÉìÌ ÃñÎõ §ÅñÎõ. Ãñ¼¡¸ò ¾¡ý §ÅñÎõ.
- From: era.mu (@ 210-214-131-63.lan.sify.net)
on: Mon Mar 26 18:23:47
Dear vAnchi,
We have to discuss in detail about Asimov - may be in some other thread?
- From: JayBee (@ 210.186.100.7)
on: Mon Mar 26 21:00:31
I opened a thread on Asimov quite long ago.
There was'nt much response.
Must see if its lying around.
- From: Kanchana (@ ac9fa4d4.ipt.aol.com)
on: Mon Mar 26 21:31:18
¦Åí¸ð,
'§Á¡¸Óû'ÙìÌõ ¯í¸ÙìÌõ ¯ûÇ ¼õ-º¡÷ó¾ ¯È× Ò⸢ÈÐ. ¯í¸¨Çô §À¡Ä§Å
(ºüÚì ̨È󧾡?) «Æ¸¢Â¨Ä ¬úóРú¢ì¸¢§Èý; Òò¾¸ò¾¢ý ÅÊÅõ, ¸¨¾ì¸Õ Ţâ¾ø,
À¡ò¾¢Ãô À⽡Á ÅÇ÷ Ó¾Ä¡É §¸ûÅ¢¸û ýÛõ ±ýÛû ¦¾¡¼÷¸¢ýÈÉ. ¿£í¸û ÓýÒ
¦º¡ýÉÐ §À¡ø, ̨ÈÂüÈ Òò¾¸¦ÁýÚ ´ýÈ¢ø¨Ä. Å¡º¸Ã¢ý ¬§Ã¡ì¸¢ÂÁ¡É §¸ûÅ¢¸ÙìÌ
«ôÀ¡üÀð¼ Òò¾¸¦ÁýÚõ ´ýÈ¢ø¨Ä.
šﺢ,
«…¢§Á¡ù ¸¨¾ ÀüÈ¢ ¿£í¸Ùõ «§º¡¸Ûõ ¦º¡ýÉÐ »¡À¸Á¢Õ츢ÈÐ. ܼ§Å «ó¾î
¦ºðÊ¿¡ðÎì ¸¡Ç¡ý ¦À¡Ã¢ÂÄ¢ý ¸¡ÃÓõ, ýÛõ º¢Ä Á½¢ §¿Ãí¸Ç¢ø ¿¡ð¨¼
Å¢ðÎô §À¡¸¢§È¡§Á ±ý¸¢È ¸ÉÓõ...
*
Á½¢ø Ýâ¢ý §¿÷¸¡½ø ÀüÈ¢:
I have had only a few doctoral level courses on Neural Networks, Human Perception, Cognitive Psychology and
the such, and that doesn't make me expert enough to offer in-depth technical comments on Suri's statement. In fact,
I interpreted it rather casually not causally. I tend to agree with Vanchi that it is an ex post facto observation re his new creative writing experience, using his professional jargon. I also agree with Venkat that Suri wasn't attempting to draw
any universal conclusions from this single-point observation. ¸½¢¾Å¢ÂÄ¡Ç÷ «øÄ¡¾, ¿õ ¦Á¡Æ¢
¿¡ÅÄ¡º¢Ã¢ÂÃ¡É ¦ƒÂ§Á¡¸ý ¾ÉÐ À¨¼ôÀ¡ÛÀÅò¨¾ô ÀüÈ¢ §¾ ¨Æ¢ø, º¢Ä Å¡Ãí¸ÙìÌ Óý
¦º¡ýÉÐ Á½¢ø Ýâ¢ý §Áü¦º¡ýÉ Åâ¸¨Ç ´ò¾¢Õó¾Ð. ¦ƒÂ§Á¡¸ý ¦º¡ýɾ¢ø »¡À¸Á¢ÕôÀÐ: "º¢ì¸Ä¡É ÀÄ ¿¡Åø ¨Æ¸¨Ç ´§Ã §¿Ãò¾¢ø Áɾ¢ü¦¸¡ñÎ ºÁ¿¢¨Ä¨Â (equilibrium) §¿¡ì¸¢î
¦ºøÅÐ ±ý ÂøÒ." Õ ÜüÚ¸Ùõ ¿¡Åø ±ýÛõ ÅÊÅò¾¢ý ÀÄÀâÁ¡½ò ¾ý¨Á¨ÂÔõ,
«¨¾ô À¨¼ôÀ¡Ç¢ ¦¾Ç¢×¼ý «ÏÌõ ӨȨÂÔõ Å¢ÇìÌž¡¸ «¨Á¸¢ýÈÉ ±ýÚ ¿¢¨É츢§Èý.
Á½¢ø Ýâ¢ý Òò¾¸ò¨¾ô ÀÊò§¾ý. ¿¡Åø ¦ºÂøÀÎõ ãýÚ ¾Çí¸Ùû, metaphysical ¾Çõ º¢È¢Ð
ÀÄÅ£ÉÁ¡ö Õ츢ÈÐ; ¸½¢¾ Å¢¸¢¾ ·À¡÷ÓÄ¡ ¨ÅòÐ ±Ø¾ôÀð¼ ¿¡ÅÄ¡¸ ±ÉìÌò §¾¡ýÈÅ¢ø¨Ä.
ó¾ô Òò¾¸ò¾¢ý Å¡º¸-Å¢Á÷º¸ ¦ÅüÈ¢, ¨¾ò ¦¾¡¼ÃÅ¢ÕìÌõ Õ Òò¾¸í¸Ç¢ø ŨÃ
´ü¨È ·À¡÷ÓÄ¡ ±Øò¾¡ÇḠÁ¡üÈ¢ Å¢¼¡ÁÄ¢Õó¾¡ø ºÃ¢.
*
À¢ÃÀïºô §ÀâÂì¸õ ÀüȢ ¸ñÎÀ¢ÊôÒ¸û ÁÉ¢¾ Áɾ¢ý, ÁÉ¢¾ô ÒÄý¸Ç¢ý º¡ò¾¢Âí¸ÙìÌ
¯ðÀð¼ ¸üÀ¨É¸û ãħÁ ±ýÈ¡÷ ³ýŠ¨¼ý. "²ý, ±Ð/¡÷" §À¡ýÈ «ÊôÀ¨¼
Á¡É¢¼ì §¸ûÅ¢¸Ùì¸¡É À¾¢ø¸Ç¢ý §¾¼ø ¿¢¸Øõ «È¢Å¢Âø, Ä츢Âõ ¬¸¢Â
ÃñÎ ¸Çí¸Ùõ º¢Ä ÒûÇ¢¸Ç¢ø ºó¾¢òÐ, ¦À¡ÐÅ¡É «È¢Å¢Âø Ä츢Âì ¸Çò¨¾
¯Õš츢¾¢ø ¬îºÃ¢Âõ ø¨Ä§Â.
*
¨Å¦ÂøÄ¡õ ´Õ ÒÈÁ¢Õì¸, ó¾ Á¡¾¢Ã¢ Ó¾ø-10 ÀðÊÂø §À¡ÎÅÐ ÀüÈ¢:
íÌûÇ (U.S.) áý¼õ ¦†ªŠ Òò¾¸ ¿¢¨ÄÂõ Õ ÅÕ¼í¸ÙìÌ Óý Ó¾ø-100 ¬í¸¢Äô
Ò¨É׸¨Çô ÀðÊÂÄ¢ð¼§À¡Ð ±Øó¾ ´Õ §¸ûÅ¢: ÀÄ ÀâÁ¡½í¸Ç¢ø, ÀýÓ¸ò¾ý¨ÁÔ¼ý
ÀÃóРŢâÔõ ¦ºÈ¢Å¡É Ä츢 ¦ÅÇ¢¨Â ´ü¨ÈôÀ¨¼ô ÀðÊÂÄ¢ðÎî ¦ºÂü¨¸Â¡¸ì
ÌÚì̸¢§È¡§Á¡?
- From: venkat (@ dhcp22-25.riken.go.jp)
on: Tue Mar 27 01:43:39
ÓÕ¸ý, «ôÀʦÂýÈ¡ø ¿£í¸û ƒÓÉ¡¨Åô À¡÷ò¾§¾Â¢ø¨Ä¡? ::-))
¦ÀðʸðÊô Òò¾¸í¸¨Çì ¸ôÀ§ÄüÈ¢ «ÛôÀ¢Â¾¡ø¾¡ý ô¦À¡ØÐ íÌ ¯ð¸¡Ã Óʸ¢ýÈÐ.
>«ôÀÊî ¦ºö¾¡ø «¾¢ø Å¡¨Æôâ ÕìÌõ. Ũø½¢¾õ ÕìÌõ.
ͨŠÕìÌõ. «ùÅÇ×¾¡ý.
²ý?
Âü¨¸ Å÷½¨É¸û Ä츢Âò¾¢üÌ ¯¸ó¾É. «¨Å ¯Å¨Á¸Ç¡¸×õ ¾üÌÈ¢ô§ÀüÈò¾¢üÌõ ÀÂýÀÎò¾ò ¾ì¸É. ¯¾¡Ã½Á¡¸, ¯¾Âò¨¾Ôõ ¿¢Ä¨ÅÔõ ÀÂýÀÎò¾¡¾ ¸Å¢¸Ùõ ¸¨¾ ¦º¡øÄ¢¸Ùõ Á¢¸×õ ̨È×. ¨¾î ºü§È ¿£ÊòÐ ¸ñ¼ÈÔõ, ¯öò¾È¢Ôõ ¸ÕÅ¢¸¨Çô §À¡ø («È¢Å¢ÂÄ¡ø) ¬öó¾È¢Ôõ ÑðÀí¸¨ÇÔõ Ä츢Âò¾¢ø ͨÅÀ¼ì ÜÈìܼ¡Ð ±Ûõ Å¢¾¢ ²ý?
º¡öó¾Ãõ ¸¡ø «ÄõÀ¢Å¢ðÎì ¸¨¾¦Âؾ ¯ð¸¡Õõ Ýâ «ÅÃРŨÄ츽¢¾ ã¨Ç¨Âî ºð¨¼Ô¼ý ¸ÆüÈ¢ Á¡ðÊÅ¢ðÎò¾¡ý ¯ð¸¡Ã §ÅñÎÁ¡? ¸¡¨Ä¢ø ¦º¡øĢ즸¡Îò¾ Self organized criticality ¿¢¨ÄìÌ «ÅÃÐ À¡ò¾¢Ãí¸Ùõ ¦¿Õì¸ôÀðÊÕôÀ¾¡¸ «Å÷ ¯½÷ÅÐ ±ó¾ «ÇÅ¢ø ¦¾öÅÌüÈõ ±É ±ÉìÌô ÒÄôÀ¼Å¢ø¨Ä.
>§ÀôÀ¨Ã ±ÎòÐì ¦¸¡ûÙí¸û. ó¾î ¦º¡ü¸¨Çì ÌÈ¢òÐì ¦¸¡ûÙí¸û.
>¾¢í¸û.. ¦Åñ½¢Ä×.. ±ó¨¾..ÌýÚ.. ¨¾ ±øÄ¡õ ¨ÅòÐ ´Õ À¡ðÎ ±Ø¾
>§ÅñÎõ. ó¾ ´ù¦Å¡Õ ¦º¡øÖõ ÃñÎ ¾¼¨Å ÅÃÄ¡õ. «ôÒÈõ
>«ü¨È..ü¨È..§Åó¾÷, ÓÃÍ..¦Á¡ò¾õ ³óÐ Å⠱ؾ¢É¡ø §À¡Ðõ.
>«ùÅÇ×¾¡ý ±ØÐí¸û À¡÷ô§À¡õ ±ýÚ À¡÷ÓÄ¡ ¦¸¡Îò¾¡ø
>¬Â¢Ãõ À¡ðÎ ÅÃÄ¡õ. ¬É¡ø,....
±ýÛ¨¼Â ¸ÕòÐ ¾¢¨º¾¢ÕôÀô Àθ¢ýÈÐ. ±ÉìÌì ¸Å¢À¡Îõ ¸½¢É¢Â¢ø ¿õÀ¢ì¨¸ì ¸¢¨¼Â¡Ð ±É ¦¾Ç¢×À¼ì ÜȢ¢ÕôÀ¾¡¸ ¿õÒ¸¢ý§Èý. ±ýÛ¨¼Â Å¡¾õ Ä츢Âõ ±ýÀÐ ÀÃóÐÀð¼ ¾ý¨Á¦¸¡ñ¼Ð «Ð ÁÉ¢¾ ã¨Ç¢ý À¨¼ôÒ¸Ç¡É ¨º, µÅ¢Âõ, «È¢Å¢Âø, ÌÎõÀ «¨ÁôÒ ±Ûõ ±øÄ¡ Ó¸í¸Ù¼ý °¼¡Î¾ø Âü¨¸. Å¡úÅ¢ÂÄ¢ý ÀýÓ¸í¸û ´ýÚ¼ý ´ýÚ ÀÄÅ¢¼í¸Ç¢ø ¯Ã͸¢ýÈÉ. ¯¾¡Ã½Á¡¸ ý¨ÈìÌ ƒ£§É¡õ ¬öÅ¢ø ®ÎÀðÊÕìÌý ´ù¦Å¡ÕÅÕõ ¾í¸û ¬ö¨Åî ºÁÂì ¸ñ§½¡ð¼òмý, ¦¿È¢Ó¨Èì ¸ñ§½¡ð¼òмý À¡÷츧ÅñÊ ¸ð¼¡Âõ Õ츢ÈÐ. ¦ƒøÄ¢Á£É¢ý ƒ£¨Éì ¸ÕíÌÃíÌû§Ç ¾¢½¢ìÌõ ¦¿¡Ê¢ø, «ÅÙìÌô À¨¼ôÀÅÉ¢ý ¬ö¾ò¨¾ì ¨¸Â¢¦ÄÎ츢§È¡§Á¡ ±ýÈ ¾Â츧Á¡, «¸ó¨¾§Â¡ ¾¨ÄàìÌÅÐ ¾Å¢÷ì¸ ÓÊ¡¾¾¡¸¢ýÈÐ. «ôÀÊ¢Õì¸ Ä츢ÂÅ¡¾¢¸û Á¡ò¾¢Ãõ '¾¡ À¡÷ ¨¿É¡, ±ý ÕðÄ ÅóÐ §Àƒ¡÷ Àñ½¡¾, ¦À¡ÈÅ¡Ä ¨¸Á¡ ¬¸¢ ¸¡½Á §À¡Â¢ÕÅ" ±ýÚ Ìñ¼¡ó¾Ê¨Âì ¨¸Â¢ø ±ÎôÀÐ ²ý?
Everyone can marvel at a sunset. A trained mind can also marvel at the process of population inversion that starts with spontaneous creation of a photon and ends in stimulated (laser) emission. He can also contemplate on how energetic the seemingly random photons turn. Then, if he is given to observe the world around him, he connects the synergetics of mob psychology with laser emission. If he could metaphorize that, on what ground literary attributes be denied to it? (let it be appealing only to a select band of readers who are familiar with his metaphore - it is also true with every other writer. No one has a universal appeal).
±ýÛ¨¼Â ¸ÕòÐ, ¾ýÛ¨¼Â À¡ò¾¢ÃôÀ¨¼ôÀ¢ý Á£¾¡É ´Õ Í«Ȣ¾¨Ä ´Õ À¨¼ôÀ¡Çý Óý ¨ÅìÌõ ¦À¡ØÐ, «Ð «ÅÛìÌô ÀâîºÂÁ¡É ´Õ ¾Çò¾¢ø ÕôÀÐ Âü¨¸. «ó¾ Ũ¸Â¢ø «Å÷ ¸½¢¾ò¨¾ô ÀüÈ¢ì ÌÈ¢ôÀ¢ðÊÕôÀ¡÷. §¾ "º¢¨È¨Ä «ÛÀÅí¸û ±ý ±Øò¨¾î ¦ºÐ츢É" ±ýÚ ´ÕÅ÷ ÜȢɡø ¿¡õ ²ý ¦¿ìÌÕ¸¢ô §À¡¸¢ý§È¡õ? «È¢Å¢Âø ±ýÀÐ Ä츢 š¾¢¸ÙìÌì ¦¸ð¼Å¡÷ò¨¾Â¡¸ô §À¡ÉÐ ±ôÀÊ?
´Õ ¿øÄ «È¢Å¢Âø ¬º¡ý Å¡úÅ¢ý Àø§ÅÚ ¿¼ôÒ¸¨Ç Óý¨Åò§¾ ¦ÀÕõÀ¡Ä¡É ¸üÀ¢¾í¸¨ÇÔõ, «È¢Å¢Âø ¿¢¸ú׸¨ÇÔõ Á¡½Å÷¸ÙìÌ Å¢Çì¸ ÓÊÔõ. ¦ÅüÈ¢ ¦ÀüÈ ÀÄ ¬º¢Ã¢Â÷¸û õӨȸ¨Çì ¨¸Â¡ñÊÕ츢ýÈ¡÷¸û. Å¡úÅ¢ý ÀÄ «õºí¸¨Ç ´ýÚ¼¦É¡ýÚ ¦À¡Õò¾¢ô À¡÷ôÀ¾¢ø ´Õ ͨÅÔñÎ.
List all pages of this thread