Srilakshmi and Fluid Mechanics

When I had just finished my undergraduate education - if someone had asked me "what is a fluid?", I would have answered immediately. After my Master's, I could still have answered the question albeit with considerable doubt and skepticism. After my PhD, I admit, I cannot answer that question properly.
Apparently, Srilakshmi has an idea. The other day, we were at the table eating lunch and my wife whispered "We have only a small quantity of curd left. I have added some water and made buttermilk out of it. Please tell Srilakshmi that it is curd and not buttermilk".
The time for curd rice came and Srilakshmi asked us "I want curd". We pointed to the buttermilk and said "here it is". She looked at it with some suspicion , took a spoon and stirred it.
Then she said, "appa... see, this is not curd. I am able to stir it easily. It has got to be buttermilk."
I laughed!!

முரசு

"நிகரென்று கொட்டு முரசே - இந்த
நீணிலம் வாழ்பவ ரெல்லாம்;
தகரென்று கொட்டு முரசே!-பொய்மைச்
சாதி வகுப்பினை யெல்லாம்

.......

அன்பென்று கொட்டு முரசே!-அதில்
ஆக்கமுண் டாமென்று கொட்டு;
துன்பங்கள் யாவுமே போகும்-வெறுஞ்
சூதுப் பிரிவுகள் போனால்


அன்பென்று கொட்டு முரசே! மக்கள்
அத்தனை பேரும் நிகராம்
இன்பங்கள் யாவும் பெறுகும் - இங்கு
யாவரும் ஒன்றென்று கொண்டால்
-----------------------------------------------


அன்பென்று கொட்டு முரசே!-அதில்
யார்க்கும் விடுதலை உண்டு;
பின்பு மனிதர்க ளெல்லாம் கல்வி
பெற்றுப் பதம்பெற்று வாழ்வார்

------------------------------------------------------
ஒன்றென்று கொட்டு முரசே!-அன்பில்
ஓங்கென்று கொட்டு முரசே!
நன்றென்று கொட்டு முரசே!-இந்த
நானில மாந்தருக் கெல்லாம்

---------------------------------------------------------
"
மகாகவி பாரதியார்

அப்பப்போ கண்ணுல தண்ணி வர வெச்சிருவாறு நம்ம ஆளு மகாகவி. எப்போவாவது இப்படி வாழ முடியுமான்னு யோசிப்பேன்.

பாரதியாரின் பள்ளிக்கூட அனுபவம்

நண்பர் தங்கமணி எனக்கு வ.ரா எழுதிய "மகாகவி பாரதியார்" புத்தகத்தை பரிசளித்திருந்தார். என்னைப்போல் அவ்வளவாக தமிழறியாத பாமரனுக்கும் படிப்பதற்கு எளிதாகவும் சுவையாகவும் இருந்தது. பாரதியாரின் பள்ளிக்கூட அனுபவம் குறித்து அவரே எழுதியது

"
காலை மாலை நூலை ஓது என்கிறார்கள். அது தப்பு. நான் படித்த காலத்தில், நான் நூலையே ஓதினதில்லை. பள்ளிக்கூடத்துக்கு காலையில் போனால் மாலையில் போக மாட்டேன். மாலையில் போகலாம் என்று எண்ணிக் காலையில் போக மாட்டேன். பிறகு ஒரு எண்ணம் தோன்றும். மாலையிலும் போக மாட்டேன். காலை மாலை உருண்டோடிப் போகும். புஸ்தகம் ஹஸ்தபூஷணம் என்பதும் தவறு. ஹஸ்தத்துக்கு பூஷணம் (கைக்கு அலங்காரம்) நல்ல சில்க் சட்டை, ஜோரான பச்சைக்கல் மோதிரம். நான் புஸ்தக மூட்டையை தூக்கிக் கொண்டு பள்ளிகூடத்துக்கு போனதே இல்லை. சட்டை ஜேபியில் சில கடிதங்கள், ஒரு பென்சில்-இவைகள் தான் இருக்கும். வாத்தியார் பாடம் சொல்லிக்கொண்டிருப்பார். அவரைப் பற்றி ஹாஸ்யக் குறிப்புகள், வசனத்திலும் பாட்டிலும் எழுதி அடுத்த பையனிடம் நீட்டுவேன். இருவரும் சிரிப்போம். பிறகு பெஞ்சு பூராவும் பரவிவிடும். ஒரே சிரிப்பு. என்ன சத்தம் என்று வாத்தியார் கேட்குமுன்னரே, மெதுவாக வகுப்பிலிருந்து நழுவிவிடுவேன். வீட்டுக்கு வந்து,மாடியிலேறி, கங்காப் பிரவாகத்தைப் பார்த்துக் கழிப்பேன். இது தான் நான் படித்த கதை.
"
இதற்குப்பிறகு நான் என்ன எழுதுவது என்றே தோன்றவில்லை.

God, please help me understand Pakistan cricket

Pakistan cricket --- there has been enough said about the fickle nature of their cricketers and administrators. My comments would probably be stale..
They played and lost one match with Afridi as captain and now he wants to resign. We may only conjecture as what went on behind the scenes --- but why, why do you keep disturbing a team's combination?
They played decent cricket (not the very best) but you do expect that out of two debutants and a novice making up the middle order, especially against Australia.
So who expected you to win? We expected a fair fight and you did achieve that!
Pakistan's cricket management is an example of how any management should not be-----with many leaders and poorly defined, overlapping roles!

Another good one from Harsha

This article from Harsha Bhogle made good reading. Especially,

"When they controlled the ICC, England were both condescending and manipulative. Having lost two series to India in 1971, at home, and in 1972-73 away, they forced through temporary legislation restricting the number of fielders on the leg side to five, thus negating India's spinners. They regularly looked down at our part of the world, and I have personally been at the receiving end of three instances of offensive and insulting behaviour at Lord's. This is not to say the English are terrible and villainous, perish the thought, just that power makes certain people behave a certain way. "

It is true that people who are used to controlling others do not want to give it up easily. Just think of the various mother-in-law daughter-in-law problems in India.
I used to think that the Brits were a little like that, but hey, they ruled the world not so long ago!

An owl that visited us yesterday

This was a really huge owl. I have never seen an owl that had this huge a wing-span.

Isn't he right?

Amidst several blogs of Ram-blasting here is one piece that caught my attention recently.

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/editorial/article481036.ece

For once, I think, the fellow makes some sense. I firmly believe too that there is no point trying to cry foul over what is about happen certainly. We can of course have a political lobby which keeps opposing the deal but in the background we need to make sure that the nuclear technology that China is gifting Pakistan is safe!
How do we do that? One way is to lobby for strict implementation of IAEA safeguards (which included visits by neutral personnel) to make sure that they are not making bombs out of the Uranium supplied.
Of course, the fool-proof method is to build technologies on our own that will act as deterrents. In a nuclear world, sadly, that is the only way out. Deterrence is underestimated by many, scorned by many and despised by many! But the fact that we have not had an atomic bomb dropped on any country after 1945 is some proof enough of this, don't you think?

Arundhathi Roy's opinion on the Maoists (poor tribals)

These days I tend to neglect most of Ms.Roy's banter. For a while, she has tried to use her complicated use of the English language (using bombastic words for example) to prove that she has a point. And, like the good sheep, many people think she is right and has a valid point.

This particular banter, though, caught my attention for two specific pieces of ludicrous opinion!


(1)http://news.rediff.com/report/2010/jun/02/arundhati-roy-on-war-of-people.htm
"I am not here to defend the killing of innocent people by anybody, not by the Communist Party of India-Marxist, the Maoists or the government. That is not my brief. When the 76 CRPF personnel were killed, there was this tremendous pressure on me, saying you went inside, you romanticised violence, now come and condemn this violence. BUt I ask what were the CRPF people - she lists an array of heavy arms -- doing there?"

"It is not so simple, it is a very thorny, knotty issue. It is not possible for me to go there and see these people with their loin clothes, bows and arrows, and you want to snatch it from them, and you want me on your side, it cant be done, she says"

Note the use of "bows and arrows". Were the attacks on the CRPF personnel carried out with bows and arrows, madam? Do you want to tell me that the Maoists used guns and other advanced weaponry to protect these tribal people from the clutches of heavy weapon carrying capitalistic CRPF?

The question is "How did the Maoists get this advanced weaponry?"

Surely, they do not run a weapons factory. Common sense and a little bit of guesswork dictates that they most likely got their weapons from China. Now, do you support this? Please justify why you think it is ok for China to supply weapons to rebel groups here.

(2) "All across South Asia, what are the areas under attack? All of them are under assault by a marauding capitalist system. In Afghanistan, the resistance is taking the form of radical Islam; in India, it is communist extremism -- but the assaulting force is capitalist everywhere."

Note how she connects radical Islam and the resistance against capitalism. Need I say more about this nonsense?

Madam, I have seen much better, much saner and much more committed Leftists than you are... and I have much more intelligent Muslim friends(who condemned radical Islam in one word).

Simply put, you do not make sense anymore..

See, I told you! Look at the heading of this news piece!

Please look at the heading of this news piece from "The Hindu".
If you did not go into the details of the news piece would you know that the Maoists had actually triggered the blast that led to this accident?

http://www.hindu.com/2010/05/29/stories/2010052956580100.htm

Look at Ram's "put-on" obssession with the extreme Left!

Freedom of the press (Journalistic Freedom)

I like to get into arguments. In fact I was called vidhandavadhi in my undergrad school. Something to boast!

Recently I got into an argument with my friend about what constitutes freedom of the press. We were conversing about "The Hindu" and Ram of course and his contention was Ram was free to write whatever he wants to write about and can defend himself citing freedom of the press.

While this is true while writing opinion pieces (he can have different opinions about matters) the same cannot be said when it comes to reporting news pieces. News pieces are what actually happened out there ---- you cannot just write something else or twist them. Of course you can opine on why that happened in a separate piece.
For example, what actually happened would be like this

"The --------- army entered the town of ---------- and in the process of the battle, 30 children were bombed out of existence".

"The Hindu"'s report would read something like this

"The brave and victorious ---------- army entered the ----------infested town of -------- and were met with resistance from -------------. -------------- is a terrorist organization banned in 400 countries. They are notorious for fielding children in war zones. The ------- army resisted attacking children but in the process of the battle they were killed in the cross fire"

You see the difference! The first one is just a news piece. The Hindu's report contains little news hidden inside a dramatic opinion piece.

What a match!

You have to admire the Pakistanis but eventually you have to give it to the Aussies. Dear-O-Dear!! What a match! Before the match I thought Pakistan could prove to be a surprise packet and probably make it very tough for Australia, which they did. Umar seems to be a natural like his brother and hopefully he makes full use of his talent unlike his brother!! When Aamer, another natural, got rid of Warner in the first over, I thought it would get very difficult for Australia if they tried to slow down and consolidate. Watson and Haddin attacked even if only briefly and and kept the tempo going . To me this was the big reason for their success today. Had they slowed down trying to preserve wickets, they would have left too much to do in the end. Tempo is everything in cricket -- be it test matches, odis or 20-20s. Cameron White sustained the tempo later when wickets fell and as Chappell puts it, this was a big phase which they won. The last over to Ajmal was a bad move. You need someone who can bowl good "fuller stuff", yorkers or even low full-tosses are ok. Good length deliveries - a big no no! Ajmal looks like a good spinner otherwise!

Meanwhile, our experts are busy slamming the late-night parties with IPL and other reasons for our early exit. Hey, dudes, I think winners win even while partying and doing other things. Just that their priority is cricket.

A good cricket post

I have been an admirer of Harsha Bhogle for a while now. He writes well in the sense he has a different point of view than the usual cliched argument. The T20 loss does not rankle in my mind very much --- I treat the T20 format as an unwanted diversion: hey! since when did dancing models become part of a cricket game?
Here is Harsha's latest article in cricinfo:
http://www.cricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/459511.html

Other people when giving reasons for the "debacle" in the caribbean gave only one reason- "inability to play the short ball". I wonder: Are we living in an era where the bowlers are allowed to bowl any number of intimidating bouncers per over? No we aren't. The truth is, and this is why cricket is slowly losing its charm, the batsmen are too pampered by shorter boundaries, docile pitches, one bouncer per over rules among other things.
The truth behind India's flop show lies elsewhere as Harsha points out, lack of body language and the lack of will to succeed against odds!