Salaam. Shalom. Shanti (Peace).

Shared by Tahir Mahmood

This article is from Daily Dawn

Salaam. Shalom. Shanti.

Anwar Iqbal | 3rd November, 2012

He is gone, disappeared among the waves. And I am looking for him. Has he disappeared though? He may have gone to another beach, perhaps on the West Coast, away from Hurricane Sandy.

Moving from one place to another was never a problem for him. He lived out of his suitcase, rather a large bag that he carried with him. He ate little, morsels of bread with coffee in the morning and some bread, with coffee and cheese at night. And he carried these with him too.

I met him at Ocean City, Maryland, where I also watched him playing his guitar. He played well. So when the session ended, he collected about $30, put his guitar back in its case and said: “Enough for the dinner and tomorrow’s breakfast. Now I will go back to the waves, they are calling me.”

His name was Johnnie, Johnnie what, he never told me but he did tell me that he was a Vietnam veteran. I met him on the beach when one of my sons wandered away. He saw him far from us, brought him back and said: “You are from India, right? I know you people, you believe this country is crime free, so you let your children wander away. Let me tell you, it is not crime free. He can be kidnapped from anywhere.”

I told him I was from Pakistan, not India, thanked him and offered him a sandwich. He accepted the offer but put two sandwiches in his bag and said “This means less work and more time for the waves.”

He then said he only works to make enough for breakfast and dinner and never eats lunch. “And who pays your bills?” I asked. “No bills, I do not own or rent anything.”

He said he had a friend in Ocean City, and was living in his basement. But there are places where he does not have a friend and in such places, he has to work a little more to pay for sleeping somewhere. For him working a little more is playing his guitar a little more.

We became friends when I told him I was a war correspondent. “In Vietnam?” he asked. “No, in Afghanistan, during the Soviet occupation,” I said. “Do you sing?” he asked. “No,” I said. “Then what do you do? Those who have seen wars always do something other than what they do for a living, like singing, painting, writing poetry,” he explained.

I said I love poetry. Although I am not a poet, I do sometimes write a little poem. He asked me to read a poem about my war experience. I said I did not have one with me but I had one about terrorism in my cellphone and could read it out for him. He agreed.

“No, no, this is not how it happens, when crops of pain are reaped. Nobody beats drums, when village youths return home in body bags. Women do not dance, people mourn, they do not rejoice,” I read the poem.

“Their coffins are brought home, drenched in tears. No, no, this is not how it happens. You cannot sow seeds of hate and hope for flowers. When a storm lands, when a fire rages, homes burn, people cry. They do not rejoice, cities of pain do not thrive, flowers do not grow in fields of hate. No, no, this is not how it happens,” I finished.

He asked me if I wrote it in English. I said no, in my language, Urdu. He copied the English version in his diary and then asked me to recite some lines in Urdu. I did. He noted them too.

“You gave me a lot of work,” he said and disappeared.

He came the next evening and asked me to accompany him and tell him if I liked his composition of my poem.

He used only one Urdu line, istarah naheen hota, istarah naheen hota (No, this is not how it happens). It sounded funny but somehow people liked that particular line, although nobody knew what it meant.

That evening he earned $50 because he told them he had to share the money with the poet. When he finished, he asked me if I wanted my share and when I said no, he pocketed the money and disappeared.

The next morning, I returned to Washington and forgot all about him. But more than month after this performance, he phoned me and said he was in Washington and wanted to meet me.

He was here to attend a gathering of Vietnam veterans. He had come with his girlfriend, Alice. In the evening I took them to a Pakistani restaurant. They loved the food. We discussed Urdu poetry and they asked me if Urdu poets also wrote about the Vietnam War.

I said they did but I did not remember any. I promised to send them some Internet links. Instead, I sent them some Vietnam poems in an e-mail. He loved them and forwarded them to his friends, all Vietnam veterans like him.

We never met again. But he did call me whenever he visited a new place.

One day, Alice called and said: “Johnnie died.” I was shocked. I asked how and she said: “Very peacefully, he had a few drinks and a joint in the evening and passed away in his sleep.”

I asked where, she said: “San Francisco, near the Half Moon beach.”

It was brief conversation. She promised to call again, said goodbye and hung up. She never called.

But this morning, while watching a video about the destruction Hurricane Sandy caused in Ocean City, I thought about Johnnie and recalled what he used to say about the sea.

“It is alive, more alive than we are,” he would say. “It is a peaceful creature but gets upset when we take it for granted. And that’s when it shows its wrath.”

“And what makes it upset?” I asked.

“Our disrespect for the environment,” he said.

“No surprise, Johnnie,” I said. “You are a Vietnam veteran. You sing and compose poems. You fit the profile of a typical environmentalist.”

Then I said some environmentalists were alarmists too. They exaggerate the damage we are causing to the environment.

“You will see one day, we are not alarmists,” he replied. “But I would not like to be around when the sea shows its wrath.”

I asked where he would like to be and he said: “I would surrender myself to the sea, in a peaceful manner, like a child returning to a mother.”

He did as he said and now I am writing about him. I don’t know why. I don’t even know if people like reading about such people. I don’t know if people like us – loonies, living on the fringes of the society, without making any useful contribution – matter.

Perhaps we are loonies and that’s why I sometimes miss that guitar player with the crazy hair and sad, sad eyes.

Peace, Johnnie, peace. Salaam. Shalom. Shanti.

 


The author is a correspondent for Dawn, based in Washington, DC.

 

Top Ten Interesting Philosophy Quotes

 

  1. Aristotle: “Men are good in one way, but bad in many.”
  2. Albert Camus: “Man stands face to face with the irrational. He feels within him his longing for happiness and for reason. The absurd is born of this confrontation between the human need and the unreasonable silence of the world.”
  3. Socrates: “The unexamined life is not worth living.”
  4. Plato: “Philosophy begins in wonder.”
  5. Bertrand Russell: “Every proposition which we understand must be composed wholly of constituents with which we are acquainted.”
  6. David Hume: “The life of man is of no greater importance to the universe than that of an oyster.”
  7. Jeremy Bentham: “A full-grown horse or dog is beyond comparison a more rational, as well as a more conversible animal, than an infant of a day, or a week, or even a month, old. But suppose the case were otherwise, what would it avail? The question is not, Can they reason? nor, Can they talk? but, Can they suffer?”
  8. Immanuel Kant: “Nothing can possibly be conceived in the world, or even out of it, which can be called good, without qualification, except a good will.”
  9. Soren Kierkegaard: “A crowd … in its very concept is the untruth, by reason of the fact that it renders the individual completely impenitent and irresponsible, or at least weakens his sense of responsibility by reducing it to a fraction.”
  10. Jean-Paul Sartre: “Man is condemned to be free.”

 Top Ten Interesting Philosophy Quotes

 

 

Fairly Simple Math Could Bridge Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity

The following article is taken from the email received from Scientific American magazine  {Noor Salik}

Some of the comments are interesting:

<–for example —>

Nonsense.  I suppose you don’t consider the transistor to be practical. The transistor could not have been invented without quantum mechanical solid state physics.

<——>

Actual article:

Fairly Simple Math Could Bridge Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity

A framework that relies on college-level mathematics could describe what happens to particles in so-called space time rips, gravity fluctuations such as those that occur during the birth of a black hole

By Eugenie Samuel Reich and Nature magazine

 

inShare14

Image: wylieconlon/Flickr

From Nature magazine.

Could an analysis based on relatively simple calculations point the way to reconciling the two most successful — and stubbornly distinct — branches of modern theoretical physics? Frank Wilczek and his collaborators hope so.

The task of aligning quantum mechanics, which deals with the behaviour of fundamental particles, with Einstein’s general theory of relativity, which describes gravity in terms of curved space-time, has proved an enormous challenge. One of the difficulties is that neither is adequate to describe what happens to particles when the space-time they occupy undergoes drastic changes — such as those thought to occur at the birth of a black hole. But in a paper posted to the arXiv preprint server on 15 October (A. D. Shapere et al. http://arxiv.org/abs/1210.3545; 2012), three theoretical physicists present a straightforward way for quantum particles to move smoothly from one kind of ‘topological space’ to a very different one.

The analysis does not model gravity explicitly, and so is not an attempt to formulate a theory of ‘quantum gravity’ that brings general relativity and quantum mechanics under one umbrella. Instead, the authors, including Nobel laureate Frank Wilczek of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge, suggest that their work might provide a simplified framework for understanding the effects of gravity on quantum particles, as well as describing other situations in which the spaces that quantum particles move in can radically alter, such as in condensed-matter-physics experiments. “I’m pretty excited,” says Wilczek, “We have to see how far we can push it.”

The idea is attracting attention not only because of the scope of its possible applications, but because it is based on undergraduate-level mathematics. “Their paper starts with the most elementary framework,” says Brian Greene, a string theorist at Columbia University in New York. “It’s inspiring how far they can go with no fancy machinery.”

Wilczek and his co-authors set up a hypothetical system with a single quantum particle moving along a wire that abruptly splits into two. The stripped-down scenario is effectively the one-dimensional version of an encounter with ripped space-time, which occurs when the topology of a space changes radically. The theorists concentrate on what happens at the endpoints of the wire — setting the ‘boundary conditions’ for the before and after states of the quantum wave associated with the particle. They then show that the wave can evolve continuously without facing any disruptions as the boundary conditions shift from one geometry to the other, incompatible one. “You can smoothly follow this process,” says Al Shapere at the University of Kentucky in Lexington, a co-author on the paper, adding that, like a magician’s rings, the transformation is impossible to visualize, but does make mathematical sense.

The desire to escape the mathematical headaches caused by such transformations is one motivation for string theory, which allows smooth changes in the topology of space-time, says Greene. He suggests that the approach developed by Wilczek, Shapere and MIT undergraduate student Zhaoxi Xiong could be applied within string theory too.

Although Wilczek originally believed that the result was new, a 1995 paper by Aiyalam Balachandran of Syracuse University in New York proposed a similar strategy for describing changes in topology in quantum mechanics (A. P. Balachandranet al. Nucl. Phys. B 446, 299–314; 1995). Balachandran acknowledges that his work hasn’t hit the mainstream and says that he hopes Wilczek’s paper will prompt others to take a closer look. “Conventional approaches to this problem don’t get very far,” he says. “This opens up a new technique.”

 

A framework that relies on college-level mathematics could describe what happens to particles in so-called spacetime rips, gravity fluctuations such as those that occur during the birth of a black hole

By Eugenie Samuel Reich and Nature magazine

 

inShare14

The framework might also provide inspiration for experimentalists working on condensed matter. Rob Myers, a string theorist at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Canada, says that he expects it to be relevant to an area called quantum quenches, in which quantum systems evolve in isolation from the environment and are then kicked out of equilibrium by an action of the experimentalist. Condensed-matter physicists have developed several quantum systems — including cold-atom traps and superconducting circuits — that can be used to test this idea.

Although the authors lay out their solution in only one dimension, Myers expects that the approach will readily generalize to describe real experiments in three dimensions. But he cautions that the paper represents only a first step. “To really see the impact of this work, that will take a while,” he says.

This article is reproduced with permission from the magazine Nature. The article wasfirst published on October 30, 2012.

 

 

14 Comments

Add Comment

  1. 1.    1. owlafaye08:57 PM 10/30/12

Bridging a 100 year old theory to a theory that has yielded nothing of practical value is a great way to continue wasting resources on roads that lead nowhere.

The protons were upset enough before quantum came along…leave them alone, admit you fell off the path somewhere, go back to a more promising idea and stop making fools of yourselves.

  1. 2.    2. robert schmidtin reply to owlafaye09:52 PM 10/30/12

Never have to wait long before some idiot comes along and says essentially that the world should take his word for it that the scientists are all wrong. Thanks for your contribution. You have made the world a much better place.

  1. 3.    3. slackerkeithin reply to owlafaye10:24 PM 10/30/12

@ owlafaye – You’re claiming quantum mechanics has “yielded nothing of practical value”? Man, you are a tool of the highest order.

  1. 4.    4. owlafayein reply to slackerkeith10:58 PM 10/30/12

Its a matter of your understanding of the word “practical”.

Physicists and their theories are at loggerheads with each other. You might say they always have been but in the past it led to great revelations and progress.

We are going nowhere towards the discovery of free energy solutions and travel amongst the stars.

Most physicists no longer have a “holy grail” relevant to humanity. Directed energy matters lay on the laboratory floor.

Leedskalnin, Tesla and other brilliant men were ignored by the rapaciousness of people like Westinghouse…once their research and goals are claimed and enhanced on by today’s scientists, we might just get somewhere.

Quantum mechanics only leads to answers that needed no question. They chase foolishness.

There is another scientific path to knowledge.

  1. 5.    5. Of NoImportance in reply to owlafaye11:55 PM 10/30/12

You speak as if, at present, every application of quantum mechanics is known – that there will never be a need to further study a certain science that works yet clashes with another.

And it’s not like the world is short on physicists. People can specialize; can pursue seemingly pointless goals for the purpose of finding out why – much like mathematics.

It is foolish to discard knowledge when it exists and no one knows why.

  1. 6.    6. negabladein reply to owlafaye12:13 AM 10/31/12

You haven’t actually said what that path is, other than something about upset protons which I’m assuming isn’t a literal description. If you have a self consistent framework with testable theories you should follow that path yourself and report on where it leads you. Or you could pay others to follow that path on your behalf. Your current approach is unlikely to succeed.

  1. 7.    7. And Then What?07:32 AM 10/31/12

Any theory that appears to constructs a mental bridge that allows us to understand why our current theories seem to be in conflict is worth exploring. To me it is a foregone  conclusion that the information we have at this point in time is just a glimpse of Reality. What lies in wait beneath and teases us with small bits of information about its true nature does not purposely hide from us. It simply is. We are curious, and want to know what drives everything, but unfortunately our vision of everything is not really everything, and so we interpret according to our perceptions. In a strange way we may be trying to go down the road with the cart before the horse. It may be that we will solve the true nature of the riddle by observing how the riddle affects its surroundings, but I suspect that any true understanding of how the riddle is constructed will only come once we understand the riddle itself. Mathematics may well describe the effects but in order for it to describe what produces the effects it must be “proven mathematically” that such a result is unique. This will always be open to attack based on the fact that “sample size” cannot be ignored as a determining factor with regard to the uniqueness of the result. Having said this, at our current stage of development, Mathematics and its underlying Logical framework would appear to be the best tools we have and may in fact lead us to our Eureka moment.

  1. 8.    8. bigbopperin reply to owlafaye09:36 AM 10/31/12

Nonsense.  I suppose you don’t consider the transistor to be practical. The transistor could not have been invented without quantum mechanical solid state physics.

  1. 9.    9. jahtez01:30 PM 10/31/12

owlafaye sez: “We are going nowhere towards the discovery of free energy solutions and travel amongst the stars”.

Think about that before you bother to respond.

  1. 10.  10. M Tuckerin reply to owlafaye05:13 PM 10/31/12

You have no idea of what you are talking about. It would be best for you to attempt to get some sort of basic notion of quantum mechanics before you decide it is a waste of resources. You might start with history. When you mentioned, “Bridging a 100 year old theory to a theory that has yielded nothing of practical value…” I was a bit perplexed but the rest of your rant made it clear that you consider general relativity to be the older theory but you are wrong. When general relativity gets to be 100 years old in a few more years I’m sure SA will have a nice article to commemorate the event. Perhaps you could investigate quantum mechanics to find out just what that theory has contributed to both physics and chemistry.

 

An important lecture by Dr. Akmal Hussain (an economist)

An important lecture by Dr. Akmal Hussain (an economist)

Shared by Zafar Khizer

Introductory notes by Zafar Khizer

Pakistan and India need to pay serious attention to what Dr. Akmal Hussain, one of the most important thinkers (and economist) of our time, is saying.

 1– Rethink about national security (stop spending too much on defense and Pak and India must cooperate to solve serious crises Southasia is facing because of climate change.)

2– Rethink about growth. It must be to eradicate poverty.  (Growth is useless if it increases inequality.)

3– Stop Exploiting the nature

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzyYsJlbDRQ&NR=1&feature=endscreen

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22yGbqCYy7A&feature=relmfu