Sunday, October 21, 2007

God

According to the uncertainty principle of quantum physics, our senses, and hence our observations/perspectives/views are subjective in nature. "Note also that the product of the uncertainties, of order 10^−35 Joule-seconds, is so small that the uncertainty principle has negligible effect on objects of macroscopic scale, despite its importance for atoms and subatomic particles." (wikipedia)

Though the uncertainty is negligible it is an uncertainty.

On the other hand most physicists have said that this is nothing but a "measurement" and not an observation. A measurement which has to be defined in terms of quantum mechanics and not physics applicable to macroscopic objects.

Besides this I would also like to ask that since our senses are not 100% don't we depend on the "subjective" faculties of our mind to fill into the gaps? Example:- The vase which also looks like 2 faces, or the 3 dimensional cube mapped onto 2 dimensions.

The above, makes possible different perspectives of the same reality (probably the basis for libertarianism). This combined with the fact that there exists a reality independent of the mind gives some room for stuff like "God". And many many other entities and probably the whole concept of religion/spirits/ghosts etc.

When people ask me why I do not believe in God. I ask them to define God. Either there is no definition for God, or the definition given is ambiguous/a paradox at best. So I say by definition, God does not exist.

Consider the observation of certain physical phenomenon like the photo-electric effect and interference of light waves (alternating dark and bright strips occuring on a screen when light falls on it only through 2 slits). Something we learn in high school physics.

While blind faith would squarely attribute this to God. A vibrant mind gifted with reason would try to approach the problem mathematical. It would make assumptions to aid the process. Assumptions to modularise the problem. This is possible only through creative imagination, a romanticism if you will. The mind assumes the light to be a wave and them proceeds to mathematically to derive a "formula" for the phenomenon of interference. Similarly we assume that light travels in the form of packets (photons) and thus causes the photo-electric effect (release of electrons from a metal surface when light falls on it).

So though our senses and observations might not be 100% perfect. Our reasoning and creative mind combined with all the tools it has created should more than make up for that. Notice the irony here. Tt is our mind which has made God. The mind is hungry for an explanation. It is our choice as to whether we believe in blind faith or reason and find out.

Profession

I am a network engineer. I studied Engineering in Computer Science. I learnt programming as a kid. My favourite subjects were Mathematics and History. I love to apply logic and reason (that should be obvious). I love to gather information and read stories.

But my profession has led me to develop another skill. That of creativity and innovation. I also deal with some problems which might not have a known "correct solution" (such problems are called NP hard) or a solution which is guaranteed to complete in a given amount of time. But yet we go ahead and "solve" it using temporary solutions (engineering) and searching for the correct one all the time (research).

Ask yourself why :-

Ragnar Danneskjöld is a pirate, though he wants to study philosophy.
John Galt works as labourer on the rail road despite his obvious talent in making motors.
Howard Roark works as a miner even though he is the best architect around.
Hugh Akston flips burgers.

And what Ayn Rand wants to say when she says "Contradictions do not exist".

They do what they do because for them work is a means of livelihood and thus more important than working in their favourite field. They are willing to give up their passion for the sake of honesty and integrity in their profession whatever it is that they have to do. The world will not allow them to work with integrity in their favourite or chosen field so they simply give it up, but refuse to compramise on their fundamentals. Mind you even when they choose to do what they do it is still some of their skills and their able body that they use to do it.

That is what the Roarks and Galts in this world mostly end up doing. What I want to point out is that even if you are not in the profession you would like to be in what matters is how you earn your livelihood. And also that one should never give up on what he would prefer to do.. keep trying to get into the profession of your choice.

Objectivism is for the strong willed

Objectivism is for the strong willed
While Ayn Rand had very strong views, she was always rational. She was integral with her observations. She could give proper logical explanations leading from her observations to the stance she took, and from the stance to her actions. (Although this sounds simple it really is not). This led her to say that all those who did not agree with her must be irrational. The point is this : what happens when you see a point she misses. She might call you irrational, the whole world might call you irrational/wrong. But, what matters is that you know you are not.

I have 2 points to make here :-
1) Ayn Rand confesses that she was not a good psychologist. So when she made villians out of the irrational people, calling them evil, it induces a tendancy to conform to her views in the weak willed/unintelligent reader. And so Ayn Rand, unknowingly, ends up doing more harm than good for such people. Unfortunate.

2) It is imperative on rational individuals to hold their views/actions which are based on sound reasoning and observations as a line in stone. Unchanging, except when you see that your observations were inaccurate.

3) If you can prove that someone has been irrational or has malintent... then he/she deserves no respect.

Monday, October 8, 2007

We were taught economics in school

I was reading "The wealth of nations" by Adam Smith. And I realised that I seemed to understand what he was saying really well! It is strange how real life events teach you so much more than you can ever cram. I learnt economics when I was in class 5. And my younger brother learnt it in class 2. I think Funskool had set up shop in Goa recently. They were manufacturing their stuff from somewhere near Panjim. They came to our school (Sharda Mandir School) to promote their products. My bro and I were already huge fans of funskool toys (we had our own collection of G.I. Joe's at home), as were most of the other boys I guess... Don't know about the girls. At that age I hated them anyway ;-).

They gave each one of us some cool G.I.Joe book labels. Remember the kind of labels we used to put on our school books. Well these were no ordinary labels, they had cool G.I.Joe figures printed by the side. Like firefly, snowjob, cobra and gung-ho and gosh I dont even remember their names now :-(. Anyway we were all very excited to have this cool stuff... Two points to be noted here. Sharda Mandir School, a very strict school allowed funskool to distribute the labels. And secondly, funskool, knowingly or unknowingly I don't know, but I suspect that it was a marketing strategy - distributed unequal numbers of various kinds of labels.

So while everyone got like around 50 labels, some labels were quite rare. For example for every 10 firefly labels they gave out, they gave 2 snowjob labels, and maybe just one gung-ho label. Guess what happened in the days that followed. Everyone started collecting these labels. People started showing of their labels and trading them. Someone would have like the rarest of the rare cobra label!! He would be the envy of the whole school.

The labels were treated like currency notes. If a firefly label was worth 10 bucks, the snowjob labels were worth 50 bucks and the gung-ho a 100 bucks. The cobra would ofcourse be pure gold. Note that the "value" of the labels was more if it was rare. This basic funda in economics was known to kids who were still learning addition and substraction in class 1 and 2. Also note that the exchange was strictly barter. No real currency was involved. You give 10 firefly labels you get 1 gung-ho label. But surprise surprise.

The values began to change!! It was probably because some smart kids went and brought some more labels into the system from either the factory or shops. Suddenly
there was a flood of Gung-ho labels (100 bucks) and so its price fell drastically :-). Until one day it was almost equal to the firefly label! So although the guys who "innovated" by procuring labels from the factory itself made a huge initial profit, they had to innovate once again to make the same kind of money :-). One dude had a colour printer in his house ;-) ... hehehe no prizes for guessing what he did.


My collection was basically a joint account with my brother. He once gave away some precious labels to his "friend". He told me that his "friend" had taken them by force. I being the elder brother decided to take matters into my own hands. Went to the kid bro's friend and held him by the collar. Gave him a good trashing, and asked him to return the labels to my bro. Don't really remember if he did though. There were many more such fights happening all over the school. Finally the school administration got fed up and confiscated all the labels. Now everyone was sad.

Soon we got fed up of the damn labels and moved on to bigger things. Now I realise that I am actually stuck with the damn labels for the rest of my life. The only difference is that the new labels look much more boring than the funskool ones and the rare ones have the picture of a bespectacled bald man instead of cobra or gung-ho.

Friday, October 5, 2007

This post is boring!

Only boring people really use this word "boredom". It is a sign of a short attention span. It is somehow the lower standard of any activity they indulge in. As if it is the duty of others to entertain these people. People complaining about boredom are usually very lazy. Here is what wiki says about boredom :-

"Boredom is a condition characterized by perception of one's environment as dull, tedious, and lacking in stimulation. This can result from leisure and a lack of aesthetic interests"

It is an irony how boredom is actually the root of many different phylosophies and thoughts. In 1670, Blaise Pascal's unfinished notes were published under the title of Pensées (i.e., "Thoughts"). In the work, he described many fundamental themes of existentialism. Pascal argued that without a God, life would be meaningless and miserable. People would only be able to create obstacles and overcome them in an attempt to escape boredom. These token-victories would ultimately become meaningless, since people would eventually die. This was good enough reason not to choose to become an atheist, according to Pascal.

Boredom can make man move, take action, do things which seem meaningless to someone else. For example. Some people indulge in sex to drive away boredom. Software engineers in Bangalore who are bored with their daily lives in office decide to go on a "trek". They brave heavy rains, bad weather, leeches, roads which look like the moon's surface, all for a little bit of thrill. In fact just to get tired and feel the nature around them. My friend went on one such trek and was bit at almost a dozen places by leeches. DAMN, I WONDOR IF THE LEECH EVER GETS BORED OF DRINKING BLOOD?

The answer is that it does not, it drinks as much blood as possible.

Boredom at the subconcious level makes many decisions for us. In fact it is a driving force comparable to the ego itself.