actuality.log

Stuff I wrote elsewhere, in response to:

You see, science requires proof and rational explanation behind every statement. There may be certain ‘statements’ (that have no)/(cannot have any) proof in the language called as ‘science’.

I’ve been meaning to say something about this ever since I saw it, but didn’t make the time earlier.

No, science does not require a proof or rational explanation behind every statement. All science tries to do is to explain (more and more complicated things) based on logically sound arguments following from (simpler and simpler) assumptions that most people (can and do) agree on. These axioms form the basic tenets of a theory.

You take a (believable enough) axiom, “time cannot flow backward”, say. You then make rational arguments based on and building upon this fact, you get a theory. If the theory fits most things you see in everyday life, it is a good theory. Whether or not the basic axiom is true, is not important. It sure needn’t be proved, as science does not require it. All science says is if you’re willing to accept it, everything based on it is logically true, and holds. (Which implicitly carries along with it the caveat, true as long as your axioms were.)

Interestingly enough, most things we call laws today were pretty much just statements from very brilliant people, with insanely keen insight into how things might be behaving. Again, the general import here is that they just work, they fit all that we see, there are no obvious counter observations, and therefore, the statement was a building block of science. It didn’t matter if they were stated with proof or not, they worked beautifully, and thus true for all practical purposes.

Case in point, if Newton just said oh, “rate of change of the momentum of a particle is directly proportional to the net external force acting on it”, it doesn’t matter to anyone whether it came with a proof or not. For almost all systems we get to observe in our daily lives, this is a true statement, and thus, we, even as scientists, can “just accept” it. Sure, it can be easily proved today from more general mechanics descriptions making suitable assumptions on the space we live in (space is homogeneous, say). But then again, these other more general mechanics descriptions have their own set of axioms which were arbitrarily chosen (but intelligently argued) to be true.

To conclude, I reiterate — science does not require proof or rational explanation behind every statement. Science takes few building blocks without proof and logically draws conclusions from them. So yes, you were right that there are statements which have no proof in science, but it’s not some secret. Science gladly accepts that.

They’re called axioms, and stated upfront every time a theory is proposed.

I’ve not done something of this sort in a while, and I’m rather rusty.

I was doodling during a particularly boring talk a while ago, and ended up drawing something that I knew I wanted to base this site’s future logo on. It’s based on a mechanical pencil whose lead I’d aimlessly shaved to behave like a calligraphy pen. I decided to slowly transfer it onto the computer, rather than arbitrarily idle while waiting for some simulations to complete. What I’ve shown below is a start.

Before you laugh, let me remind you this was done without a mouse, and just a touchpad. Try it.

And here it is in a vector format: actuality-logo.blog.svg, in case you want to try your hand at modifying it or something.

A ton of things bug me, some more than others. This is just one of those things.

I hate those guys who keep going “my girlfriend” this, “my girlfriend” that.

Like hello, newsflash — she’s got a name.

It’s Audrey. I know, I’ve met her. You can say “Audrey and I are …”, you don’t have to say “my girlfriend and I …”.

Finally returning to our much famed “In grad school…” series.

You view life from extremely warped points of view when you’re born a hacker^*. It ends up affecting the decisions you make at fundamental levels, and determines how you navigate through life. Unfortunately, it’s hard to explain this to normal people, and can cause some confusion as you end up dealing with them in the course of daily life. I, as every other hacker, understand one thing more than anything else. It’s like the quintessential hacker ethos — “There is always another way. Usually, a better one.”

But more importantly, “… and it’s OK to spend arbitrarily large amounts of time searching for the better approach.”

People are driven by different things, but the system we are in assumes we’re all in it to get something done. Think about it, it is almost the only differentiating factor between those who “make it” and those who “waste their lives”. I am, for better or worse, driven substantially differently. I don’t know if it is because of this hacker disposition, or something else, but I tend to be driven to understand and learn. That’s it. There is no drive to do anything with that knowledge. It’s like, I am a knowledge black hole, constantly driven to suck anything and everything in, but yet you can’t evidently see any useful work being done as a result.

Luckily, in grad school, even the few deadlines that exist are relatively soft. There is nothing that, if missed, will compromise anything of tremendous worth. I know this, and that’s why I’m here. Only here can lack of discipline be conveniently mistaken for eccentric genius.

I can’t survive outside.

^*Hacker — One who enjoys the intellectual challenge of creatively overcoming or circumventing limitations.

This post exists “just because”. You have no idea how hard I’ve had to push myself to write these few inconsequential lines. I am … spent. I don’t know what else to say. I arrive home from the lab at some 2 AM in the morning, and get back in there by 8 AM. Given this, I should be getting an awesome amount of things done, but I amn’t. I’m just that retarded.

It’s been like this for a while now, and considering pretty much everything has been sucked out of me, I don’t seem to have the urge to create anything. Heck, I don’t have the energy to implement anything I would have thought up even if I had the urge to be creative.

So, stagnation it is. No words, no pictures. Zip.

This friend of mine, she has a really odd way of looking at the world.

Let me explain. Or better yet, let me resort to the much famed conversation excerpt.

Me: *Says something random and irrelevant.* (as usual)
She: “Oh no, don’t tell me you’ve turned gay too.”
Me: “Huh? Do you hear how ridiculous you sound? One doesn’t turn gay.”
She: “Oh, really? A lot of Indian guys I know have miraculously become gay after being in this country for a short while.”
Me: *Stiffles guffaw* “You don’t say.”
She: “Yep, and it’s a typical male thing to do too. They’re irresponsible, and do it because they can have fun without regards to any repercussion”.
(I think she means, apart from risking the usual STDs, being socially stigmatized, the obvious physical discomfort …)
Me: “So, you’re saying they do this because it then means they have nothing to worry about?”
She: “Yes, there isn’t the risk of an unwanted pregnancy.”
Me: *Bursts out laughing, and gets the cold glare he doesn’t have the guts to meet.*

Like I started off saying, sometimes, the way people see things is just odd.

And for the record, this is a true story and hasn’t been arbitrarily concocted.

Honest.

There aren’t many reasons why I’ve been silent, there’s just one. I’ve been swamped.

I cannot believe how far behind I’ve fallen terms of stuff I need to get done but haven’t, given I’m putting in 17×7 = ~120 hours a week.

That is not to say I am ever not far behind. It’s just, it was quite OK to be behind when I put in the 40 minutes of work a week. Not when I actually try.

I better get back to doing nothing and blaming nothing getting done for lack of trying. This sort of nonsense tends to hurt the ego.

*Gently strokes bruised ego.*

I’ve been having difficulty putting this in words, and what you’re reading right now is probably the fourth rewrite. Unfortunately for you, that doesn’t translate to this entry being any better than the previous attempts.

Our story, like most others, revolves around a girl. I don’t know her. I don’t know anything about her. I don’t even know her name. It’s just, every time I see her[1], I get this oddly exhilarating rush… my head is in the clouds, I’m all fluttery as my heart begins to race and my knees (and most of the rest of me) get weak, in a good tingly way.

I’m euphoric, I’m inspired, and I’m peaceful. It’s like, for that brief instant, everything’s “just right” and I know why I am. Everything seems to slow down, and it’s all so… clear.

Of course, all of these are just words. In them, I’m struggling, but failing to accurately capture the effect her presence has on me.

This… high… lasts for a while, and the moment she’s out of sight, the pleasurable quivering[2,3] begins to die down. It soon negates, and now I’m shivering in terror as it dawns on me… I don’t know her. And, knowing me, I probably won’t ever.

If you’re particularly naive, you might say, “Well, if it affects you so much, what harm could it possibly do to just talk to her?” All I can say in response is “Easier said than done”. Does one ever really approach a total stranger, with whom they probably have nothing in common, and ‘just start’ a pleasant conversation? What would you talk about? Compliment the fabulous way she’s worn her hair? Make an insightfully-witty comment pertaining to the book she’s carrying? Hide your watch and ask for the time? Talk about the weather?

Without any sort of common circumstantial environment, what?

(That was almost a rhetorical question. Cheesy lines picked from movies, like “The moment I saw you, I knew I was going to marry you”, and variants, will not be tolerated.)

For all I know, she’s probably married, or something.

The scary thing here is, well, I’m not a kid. You’d think crushes and such are in the realm of the 14 year olds and their boy band member fantasies, not me. Not now. Especially not one who almost prides himself in not having a single thread of irrationalism in the fiber of his being.

The scariest thing, however, is how could one so articulate[4] begin to emulate a mute when he needs his words the most?

[1] A grand total of six times over the past couple of months. No, there were no instances involving binoculars. And is it weird that I vividly remember each instance?
[2] No, not what you just thought.
[3] Yes, you have reached the punchline this post was crafted around. You can stop reading now if you choose.
[4] That is not to say that I am particularly articulate or anything, just that I am not dumb. As in, I am fully capable of speaking.

Aside: Responding to all comments and e-mails relating to recent changes, I still haven’t figured out what to do with this default theme. It looks great, but it seems trite and un-me. We’ll see.

The other day, I was out window shopping and I couldn’t help but notice this adorable little burgundy top at a chic boutique. It had this fabulously varied and intricate design work done on it… and yet, it was simple and didn’t seem like it had too much going on. It wasn’t all flowy, definitely flattering, without being all corsety and uncomfortably constricting.

All was well and good, except:
a) It was horrendously expensive, especially for the poor student sort.
b) I most definitely don’t have a petite frame, and such pieces are crafted with the anorexic model in mind.
c) I lack a vagina.

Bear with random brokenness.

Update: I was, as usual, trying to revert back to the old theme to fit it in with the rest of the site. But now, I’m not too sure. This looks pretty sweet.

I don’t really talk too much about it here, but I’ve been watching a ton of movies recently. And by recently, I mean for about two months now. Here’s what I got to see over last week, and my succinct thoughts.

Chicago — Moderately entertaining, but extremely overrated. Doesn’t deserve the ton of Oscars I think it claimed. During the entire movie, all I did was feel sorry for the convenient putz, Amos.
[2/5]

Erin Brokovich — I usually hate Julia Roberts (irrationally, of course), but this was a decent flick. There were so many opportunities to make bits of the movie a lot funnier, but none of them were taken. I guess, under the blanket excuse of having to stay “true to some real story”.
[4/5]

Big Fish — An amazing experience. It’s the oddest, most colourful, funniest drama that’ll ever make you cry. This is something no one should miss. Features Ewan McGregor.
[5/5]

Moulin Rouge! — I re-saw this. It just rocks so hard. Features Ewan McGregor, again.
[5/5]

Black Hawk Down — Even more Ewan McGregor. I don’t know what to say really. I usually detest war like movies, on principle, but this one was well paced and quite fun. No stunning performances or anything, just something that mocks military stupidity. There are some overly detailed gross bits involving dismembered body parts.
[3/5]

Knots — This was the only one in this list I saw on TV. I saw it on one of the women’s channels. It was a funny take on contemporary relationships. Funny, I guess in a sort of dark and ironic way. Mostly no-name actors.
[2/5]

Philadelphia — This one made me cry. The acting was spectacular, though the story seemed to drag a little in the middle. Probably a good date flick, if you’re a gay homosexual^*.
[3/5]

Men of Honor — Can we knock it off with the movies based on real life stories already? Sure, there was some decent acting and it was a very inspiring story, but come on. I hate feeling guilty for “not working hard against odds” and not “making it to the top”.
[-1/5] (Because enough is enough.)

The Pianist — Ah, we finally get down to the review that’s going to be most controversial. Firstly, it was an OK movie. Not a good movie, and definitely not a great movie. The only thing more overrated, is Chicago. Now, this movie might have struck a chord in the hearts of all those people who believe everyone in the world is equal and random mistreatment is a horrid thing.

I am not one of those people. There are different sorts of people on this planet. <Disclaimer in effect> Some superior (yes, you heard right) than others and it is perfectly acceptable for them to do whatever they choose with the inferior ones.</Disclaimer still in effect> Because of having such thoughts, I really don’t think I was the target audience for such a flick.

Equality, pfft.
[1/5]

And yes, this list was just over last week.

^* Eric Cartman, South Park. Season 1, Episode 4 – Big Gay Al’s Big Gay Boat Ride

Either you’re a prude, or a slut.^*

 
Yes, life’s a bitch.

^*A most insightful article title stolen from the cover story on a most intriguing magazine.

Except Filipino, and not born in Britain.

As I’ve said, I recently saw Bend it like Beckham. There were a bunch of (admittedly hot) shirtless men in the movie. Subliminally, I was extremely certain I had seen one of the hotter (shirtless of course) ones earlier. Though I wasn’t consciously thinking about it, during a randomly-purposeful googling session today, I figured out who he is. And why he seemed so familiar.

He’s Trey Farley.

Now, a lot of you young’ns might have no idea who he is. I wouldn’t have either, except I happen to be ancient enough to have caught him on Channel [V]’s (the Asia-Pacific-Australian one, not the now-tainted-97.4%-desi-programming-and-proud-of-it one) “By Demand”. He’s by far the single most dynamic person on TV, ever, and the primary reason I put up with whatever crap music they played, for as long as he was on that show.

I used to worship him.

Him and that little stuffed purple-green-talking cow(?), Muriel.

It’s funny how you tend to idolize the most random of people (or muppets), once you assume they are capable of breezing through something that’s hard for you.

The only game on my playlist for the past couple of weeks has been Capcom’s Viewtiful Joe for the GameCube. Like I said yesterday, I got past one of the tougher level-bosses “Fire Leo” the previous evening, and then went on to finish the game last evening. The following is a small review.

For those in the audience with ADD — It’s challenging, but amazing fun.
You can leave now.

After you’ve finished gawking at how gorgeous everything looks, the first thing you realise about this game is how old school it really is. Most, if not all, of the humour in the game derives from the fact that it is basically taking some cliched/cheesy gameplay or storyline and knowingly doing the exact same thing. The creators realize they don’t have much of a story or any real plot, but make fun of that too. You do have to suspend any and all sense of reality in order to enjoy what’s going on, but you will as soon as you begin to play. The “plot” is simple enough. Evil movie characters in some sort of warped scheme to escape “moveland” end up entering the real world and kidnapping Joe’s girlfriend. In an attempt to rescue her, he enters the movie world, and with the help of an aging hero, “Captain Blue”, awakens to his true “heroness” and goes about kicking baddies until he eventually, well, rescues her.

Like I said, it isn’t much of a story.

The game itself is presented as a (2.5 D) sidescroller. I must reiterate, it is gorgeous. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a more slick, or stylish, game and they’ve used the whole cell-shading (Zelda-Windwaker like) animation technology in a totally immersive way. The whole feel is a sort of comic-book-manga meets make-fun-of-crappy-old-Japanese-movie-influenced-action-flick meets trippy colours. And they actually pull it off.

As Joe awakens to his heroness, he learns all sorts of these cool movie-like effects, called the VFX, which help him in his quests. He can slooow down time (you can easily dodge bullets), zooooom in the camera to capture his moves in glorious detail (stun baddies with your stylish moves), and speed up time (kick baddies before they even know what hit ’em). Unlike other games, which shall remained unnamed *cough* Max Payne *cough*, which use similar effects as a marketing gimmick, all these time-manipulation effects are integral to the gameplay in Viewtiful Joe. They vary from insanely helpful, to downright necessary while solving the game’s puzzles and effectively getting past bad guys. And since this is not an easy game by any stretch of the imagination, anything that helps you toward your goal is most welcome.

You know this oft-repeated sequence in Sesame Street, where Ernie hides in some random place and Big Bird searches for him? You know, the one which is basically “Elementary Pattern Recognition — 101” for few month olds? When you’re in this game, you’re doing just about the same thing, at an all new extreme level. There is almost no hope in just running into a bad guy/girl and hoping to cause any damage initially. You will get trashed, and as you’re getting trashed, you will begin to notice patterns in their behaviour, and you will figure out combos of your own moves to counter them. There is no other way. You will die, and die often.

So if there is one flaw in this otherwise awesome experience, if you can call it a flaw, it is that if you aren’t able to figure out what to do soon enough (it does happen occasionally), you keep dying, and can get frustrated with being unable to make any progress. You will keep going through the same sequence over and over (I spent an evening on “Fire Leo”) until you figure it out. All that said, it is extremely pleasing to figure things out and move along. Before you know it, you’re finished, and you’re going through sad and painful withdrawal symptoms. On a positive note, once you’re done with the game, and you sit through the credits, you get to see this neat animated music video where Joe and other characters in the movie sing and perform. That was cool, even with the music being Japanese.