iLife!

Some stuff from the internets.

Check out this article: Its typical of its kind….

The Billion-Year Technology Gap: Could One Exist? (The Weekend Feature)

The part that annoys me:

Since at this point, there is no direct and/or widely apparent evidence that extraterrestrial life exists, it likely means one of the following:

We are (A) the first intelligent beings ever to become capable of making our presence known, and leaving our planet. At this point, there are no other life forms out there as advanced as us. Or perhaps extraterrestrial life does exists, but for some reason extraterrestrial life is so very rare and so very far away we’ll never make contact anyway—making extraterrestrial life nonexistent in a practical sense at least.

Or is it (B) that many advanced civilizations have existed before us, but without exception, they have for some unknown reason, existed and/or expanded in such a way that they are completely undetectable by our instruments.

Or is it (C) There have been others, but they have all run into some sort of “cosmic roadblock” that eventually destroys them, or at least prevents their expansion beyond a small area.

Really? That’s the best you can do towards an exhaustive list? Really? Come on!

And then, further down – more idiocy.

“Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of the Fermi Paradox is what it suggests for the future of our human civilization. Namely, that we have no future beyond earthly confinement and, quite possibly, extinction. Could advanced nanotechnology play a role in preventing that extinction? Or, more darkly, is it destined to be instrumental in carrying out humanity's unavoidable death sentence?” wonders Mike Treder, executive director of the Center for Responsible Nanotechnology (CRN).

Treder believes that some of the little understood new technologies now being developed such as nanotech, and others, could well be either our salvation or just as likely end up causing our ultimate destruction.

“Whatever civilizations have come before us have been unable to surpass the cosmic roadblock. They are either destroyed or limited in such a way that absolutely precludes their expansion into the visible universe. If that is indeed the case—and it would seem to be the most logical explanation for Fermi's Paradox—then there is some immutable law that we too must expect to encounter at some point. We are, effectively, sentenced to death or, at best, life in the prison of a near-space bubble,” suggests Treder. “Atomically-precise exponential manufacturing could enable such concentrations of unprecedented power as to result in either terminal warfare or permanent enslavement of the human race. Of course, that sounds terribly apocalyptic, but it is worth considering that the warnings we heard at the start of the nuclear arms race, and the very real risks we faced in the height of the Cold War, were but precursors to a much greater threat posed by an arms race involving nano-built weaponry and its accompanying tools of surveillance and control.”

You incompetent excuse for a science writer! Aaaaaargh!

Perhaps we just haven’t been contacted – we’ve been aware of our place in the universe in any meaningful way for less than 200 years and on the scale of the universe that’s nothing. NOTHING!

Maybe gigayear (or hell, megayear) civilizations don’t go beyond a single galaxy. Probability alone would solve our little ‘paradox’.

There are at least several other explanations I could think of to explain our little ‘paradox’. (And many have been highlighted in the comments after the post).

Bah!

And why this is important:

Evidence of life on Mars lurks beneath surface of meteorite, Nasa experts claim

Holy crap!!!! I mean, wtf WOW!!!!

WHY ON EARTH (hehe) ISN’T THIS ALL OVER TEH INTERNETS?!

If true, this is one of the single greatest moments in the history of mankind!!!

Why aren’t people making a bigger fuss?!

Elegance, a quest.

Have you ever noticed your math teacher exclaim about how elegant a solution was? Have you ever exclaimed in joy when you managed to cut through the sordid, confusing muck in a problem and found a solution that was simply brilliant!

If you’re an Engineer, or want to be one you know what I mean.

But what’s the big deal? Why is elegance so important? Perhaps we need to see what its really about:

Mathematics, rightly viewed, possesses not only truth, but supreme beauty — a beauty cold and austere, like that of sculpture, without appeal to any part of our weaker nature, without the gorgeous trappings of painting or music, yet sublimely pure, and capable of a stern perfection such as only the greatest art can show. The true spirit of delight, the exaltation, the sense of being more than Man, which is the touchstone of the highest excellence, is to be found in mathematics as surely as poetry – Bertrand Russell

OR perhaps this rather vague one by the late great Paul Erdős -

 "Why are numbers beautiful? It's like asking why is Beethoven's Ninth Symphony beautiful. If you don't see why, someone can't tell you. I know numbers are beautiful. If they aren't beautiful, nothing is."

I don’t know about you. But to me they don’t really seem to know what they’re talking about do they? There, done, now bear with me for a moment, before you condemn me to the pits for such sacrilege.

Look at those two statements, look at the words they use and the feeling they seek to evoke. Its ill defined and nebulous at best. And that, I feel is because they’re tapping into one of those poles that define human thought. They aren’t able to explain what it is that they’re talking about because it isn’t possible to do so. Other things are defined in relation to our need for elegance. It, itself is a part of out minds as much as ‘wonder’ is.

We seek elegance in all things. And unlike so many of the other things that define what it is to be human, its a very concrete thing. Elegance can be seen and felt. It can be crafted and imagined and built. Of course, I refer to the elegance of simplicity. The elegance in which the form that is defined by function is in itself a beautiful thing. The faux notion of elegance – the one so often applied to fashion doesn’t appeal to me. It might to you, but to me it doesn’t carry anything like the primal weight that accompanies the elegance sought after by the sciences.

Elegance is simplicity. Elegance is where everything falls into perfect place with the least effort. Elegance is economy without any loss of efficacy. Elegance.

So much of mathematics is driven by our primal desire to seek elegance. So much of physics is driven by our desire (unfounded though, it may be) to define the universe in elegant terms. Indeed, the LHC was built, in a large part to satisfy our hunger for elegance – our current understanding of the universe (the standard model) is about as far from elegant as physicists could stand to be.

And it has an obvious origin. Elegance, as I said, is economy. And when economy and efficiency is the difference between being a meal and catching one – as it surely would have been to our ancestors hunting the Pleistocene savannah, it pays.

The quest for elegance among engineers is probably closer to that primeval need than the desire that drives mathematicians and physicists. In engineering, an elegant solution is often intuitive. And and intuitive solution is easy to verify. It matters in a physical sense too – a simple solution is often much cheaper than a complex one (but don’t let your intuition fool you – this is not often the case) and it is usually much easier to debug.

But its mostly some combination of economy of effort (read: laze) and economy of expense that drives us engineers towards elegance.

So where is this heading? Nowhere for now. I just wanted to set the stage for an argument I intend to post here soon (or at least as soon as is feasible).

The second movement.

This is an addendum of sorts to 'The harmonies and the synchronies'.

That’s a Delta IV launch vehicle in its ‘Heavy’ configuration taking off. The pretty lights under it are shockwaves cascading through superheated water. (The engines use H2/Lox – the exhaust is almost plain water. Albeit, vaporized and partially ionized)

Tell me again why science isn’t the most awesome thing ever?

The picture was sourced from http://gizmodo.com/5372241/this-insane-photo-destroyed-a-camera-lens and it was taken by an awesome dude named Ben Cooper

The harmonies and the synchronies

I just read an article about computers and AI. Its at http://web.media.mit.edu/~minsky/papers/ComputersCantThink.txt.

(Stumble upon rocks!)

In any case, the main body of the essay starts with a very interesting line":

'We naturally admire our Einsteins and Beethovens, and wonder if
computers ever could create such wondrous theories or symphonies.'

How absolutely brilliant! To equate Einstein with Beethoven and a theory of science with a great symphony! That people actually think in those terms makes me so happy. It cuts through so much of the clutter that always encompasses the great human endeavors and brings us to a very, very important fact. Science rocks because it is cool. A production line churning out cars rocks not because of its end effect on human comfort but because it is just awesome – a literal symphony of mechanical engineering, computer science and electronics. And a Saturn V lifting off – pouring out enough thrust to power entire cities, is poetry comparable to Keats or Homer

For a long time I wondered about space travel. It was (and is) a colossal expenditure of money and resources. Is it really worth it? Sure, telecommunications and GPS came of it. And lets not forget non-stick pans. But that doesn’t justify the enormous costs and the lives lost in the space race. What then was the need? Why was it even a goal? And why did people (who knew that their money was being siphoned off to fund these projects) support them? Why should they have?

They should have because space science it awesome. Using a giant telescope in space to understand the origins of everything is beautiful. To speak nothing of hurling a probe to the stars.

It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience – Carl Segan

Carl Segan was so right in so many ways. The nature of astronomical truth and its effect on the human psyche is at least as important as any perceived utility that we might derive from the investment.

Stop thinking of science and engineering as means to an end. They are ends in themselves – as much as art or literature. Sure, we pick those lines of research with the most apparent utility… but don’t artists so often paint for their audiences?

Hiatus…

Its been a rather long time since I last posted on this blog. Indeed, for a time, I was feared this blog was on its way to internet heaven (its atheistic, so… internet hell? *Imagines blog posts migrating to 4chan* but I digress… ) like the ones that preceded it. But no, it will not.

And neither will I be this guy:

This blog was meant to be a long term Endeavour and so it shall be. Essentially, the process of getting a visa and planning for two years in a country where you have barely any base (I must be one of the three Indians with no close relatives in the US) takes wayyy too much time and leaves little space for creative thought. But its done now. I’ve settled down in Raleigh, NC. Grad school is going great and our first projects are just beginning. The fires that drive the engines of creation have been rekindled, the flames stoked. The mill-wheels turn and the minds once more begin to make.

Expect more to come. Soon.

They aren’t bullet-proof Mr Creedy

Creedy: [desperately shooting at the approaching V] Die! Die! Why won't you die?... Why won't you die?
V: Beneath this mask there is more than flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea, Mr. Creedy, and ideas are bulletproof.     [sourced via IMDB]

I loved V for vendetta. It was a perfect blend of mindless action and flowing thought. It was powerful, yet exciting. I’d easily rate it among the best movies I’ve ever seen.

One of the many, many great dialogs in the movie is the one I’ve quoted above. It was beautiful. The injured V staggering on despite his wounds. The terrified Mr Creedy’s true colours showing through. Beautiful.

But Is that really true? Are all ideas bulletproof? Equally so? Can an Idea be killed, stamped out and erased from history’s memory? I’d wager they can. Its been done before and its being done now. I know this. I’ve seen too many dreams and ideas worn down to nothingness by the grinding machinery of apathy to say otherwise. This post is about that idea – that ideas and dreams are not bulletproof and that need constant support and help to keep from falling apart.

I’m from the National Institute of Technology, Tiruchirapalli. Its supposed to be one of the best schools of engineering in India. And accordingly, each year, a batch of India’s finest minds (or nearly so – the very cream is taken by the IITs) enrols there with dreams of changing the world and doing great things. But, for the large part, they don’t. Most seem to take up paid jobs. Some Join the IIMs, doubtless drawn by the huge salaries and comforts of corporate life.

But do they join with that in mind? Does the average NITTian or IITian join with aspirations of a decently paid job at a multinational or does he (and it seems to be overwhelmingly ‘he’ with women a small minority in these institutions – but that sad fact is material for another post) enter with dreams of changing the world in one way or another? I’d wager its the latter, if only in an un-expressed, back-of-the-mind sort of way.

But then something goes wrong. The vast majority of these people seem to loose interest in the path they believed would be theirs and stray towards something more comfortable. Why? Is it perhaps because age and maturity (! lol) have changed their outlook? Perhaps. Is it because they feel that it is their responsibility to earn well and keep their families happy at the expense of their dreams? Perhaps, but I doubt it is so in many, many cases.

Apathy. A state of indifference, or the suppression of emotions such as concern, excitement, motivation and passion – Wikipedia.

It can be induced.

An organization with any power – be it a College administration or a national government has the ability to bring about a situation in which there are enough restrictions and wrongs to prevent the people it has a hold over from truly realizing their full potential. It can create an atmosphere where the effort needed to do the simplest of things is so great that people just don’t do them. You don’t bother reading that article on the web because it is so annoying to go all the way across campus to reach a PC with internet access. You don’t bother voicing your opinion on an idea of some importance because the threat of litigation over some perceived wrong in your words is just great enough.

You just don’t bother.

The one thing you have to note is that there is always a way to actually do whatever you want. It is theoretically possible to do all the work you want on that piece of new equipment in the lab because a procedure actually exists to acquire permission. Or fight off the blatant attempts at silencing descent because the law is actually on your side. But the machinery of apathy is just strong enough that you don’t bother doing anything in the first place.

And that is how ideas and dreams are killed. By exerting just enough pressure to strangle them without actually alerting them to the fact they they are being killed…

The Palaeontologist’s muse

There are two types of forces in the world. There are the explosive, fast forces like volcanoes, earthquakes and thermonuclear fusion weapons. And then there are the slow ones – the rivers that cleave mountains and the seas which batter entire land-masses into submission. In our brief, fleeting, lives we tend to recognise the fast shapers as superior in some way. But take a look at the Grand Canyon or the Himalayas – they were shaped over thousands of years (by water erosion and tectonic plates moving against each other respectively) by the slow powers that be.

The process of science parallels this aspect of nature. There are the moments of extreme insight – the ‘eureka’ moments where we make giant strides in fleeting instants. And then there is the slow process of chipping away at the barriers nature places between us and knowledge. Where we batter down the obstacles we face and achieve our ends inches at a time. This post is dedicated to that inexorable movement. For though the sprint may get us over a hill, it is the march that moves armies over continents.

I mentioned in ‘Our little friends to be’ that I’d spent the winter (of 08-09) in the US. I stayed in Washington DC for the entirety of that trip (except for two awesome days in New York). And as any geek worthy of that title would have done, I spent more than a few days running around the Smithsonian(s) grinning in delight. They weren’t as great as I thought they would be. Don’t get me wrong, they were brilliant. But they seemed to fall a way short of expectation – the dinosaurs didn’t seem as big and the sabre-toothed cats not as menacing as I thought they would in my imagination. But a few parts stood out. One of them, in the palaeontology section is what’s inspiring this post:

They had this glass room in which the palaeontologists who prepared the fossils worked. You could watch them work like any other exhibit at the museum. The room was brightly lit and the hallway outside quite dark. So, I guess, to someone inside it would seem like the quiet labs they were used to. People knocking on the glass, however, might’ve be a problem. But the hilarious sign I’ve photographed above seemed to stop most of that!

A palaeontologist digs up fossils. Fossils can be pretty large – the fully preserved hip of a brachiosaur for example. But I’m given to believe that most are small – teeth, bone fragments and the like. In any case, Palaeontologists dig them up and clean them with instruments like toothbrushes (only for heavy duty work!), paint brushes and other stuff like that. Imagine the patience it takes to sit in the mid-day heat of a desert and dig out a five tonne piece of mineralised bone embedded 20 meters up a cliff-face with a fine sable! What madness drives them!?! But scientists and engineers do that all the time. We seldom rely on leaps of intuition.

There are hundreds of famous examples of this in the history of science. Men and Women have so often made thousands of models and millions of calculations before they got things right. I myself have spent weeks varying values in a circuit trying to find an optimal configuration.

But the effort is almost always worth it. Look around you. Look at that plane overhead or the cell phone you hold in your hand. They almost surely took a massive effort to design and build. But ask an engineer who creates them or a scientist who discovers the principles they rely on and they’ll tell you that the sheer joy of seeing their work come alive is worth every drop of sweat and ever hour lost in thought.

I know this joy. And I suspect almost every creator of things does too. It is our reason. It is the thing that binds us to our lab-benches and drives us. It is our muse. The muse that inspires the palaeontologist within us all to chip away at his problem one layer of dirt at a time.