Spiderman 3 ... arghhhh

After the action-packed and mesmerizing two installments of Spiderman, here's the third one : the worst so far.

But, as a token of respect:) to Spiderman 1,2 ,I'll start with the plus points.
2 overwhelmingly powerful villians join forces to eliminate their common enemy : spiderman. Both of them are amazing. You have the Sandman born out of a mistaken particle physics experiment. (which they perform in open air:) .. outside a lab .... r they crazy?) and the other one Venom, an alien parasite attached to spiderman's peer who wants him dead. Both of them have awful powers.
The climax just rocks. You get this adrenaline boost seeing all the action and turn of events. Rocks!!

But, there's where the plus points end. sigh!:(
The first half of the film is pointless. Spiderman's unsuccessful attempts to woo her girl, his romantic life, etc etc. What crap? Are we here to see how spiderman kisses or how he approaches women? btw ... I bet everyone in the theatre had this feeling of just leaving the theatre at some point or the other in the first half. Awful.
the real movie starts in the 2nd half : and unfortunately, the wooing session continues here too ... but is more in the background and has kinda -ve shades, so its k. By k i mean ... handleable, without getting any feelings of just slapping spiderman in the face for his dumb gaffes.
In the 2nd half, as we are gettin a feel of spiderman, the director has a lot to offer. Understanding the complex relations between harry and spiderman, Venom and Sandman. As a result, there has been sort of an unfair treatment to each character. No one would have minded two separate movies for each of the villians coz both of them have that ability to fill up a movie:)
Finally what you get is ... 15 min of great action and 2:15 hrs of boredom!

So, when u r just gettin that action for what you went for the movie, bang ... the movie just ends. And you come out shaking your head in disappointment. Wasted 3 hours in which you could have solved your own love problems !!:)

Why do we need "scientific" reasons?

When I saw the "Matrix" trilogy for the first time, the concept was fascinating. A virtual world designed to keep the people in the real world unaware of themselves. But, what if someone says you are fast becoming a victim of such a design? And the grand design is made by none other than "SCIENCE"!!

Right from a very young age, a lot of emphasis is given to scientific thinking, scientific point of view and logic. NO problems. But, then science crosses the lines to rubbish spirituality and traditions as "crap". Why are they crap? Because there are no "Scientific" explanations for some of the beliefs.

"scientific" ... the meaning of the term changes with each century. From Newtonian theory to Darwin's theory, every theory has its shortcomings. Even the most "intuitive" Newtonian theory was superseded by the thoroughly complicated and counter-intuitive Einstein's theory. Science is still far away from perfect !!! Then, why do we judge these beliefs based on science? With science's limitations today, the fact that these beliefs can be true cannot be ruled out.

If in the Newton times, someone said, "hey, an electron can be at 2 places at a time", he would have been regarded as deranged and mocked at. But, today we know it is the truth (refer Einstein's theory:). So, whats the guarantee that tomorrow the basis on which we overturn the beliefs, themselves do not exist!

Just because a bunch a scientists could not find the relation between the planet positions and our "supposed" future (Even I do not believe in this crap, but ... ), can science label astrology as crap? Can't it be attributed to our limited knowledge or immature science?

Why do we believe that there isn't anything called "soul"? Why do we rubbish reincarnation theories? Why do we deny the existence of GOD? (here, GOD isn't someone who made this world or controls this world .. NO ... he is just a perfect HUMAN BEING).
Just because science says so? Just because it is illogical? Don't you acknowledge your own shortcomings? Don't you think there might be some things out of your ken? Some things you can't know because you can't see or feel them with your senses?

Actually, the fault is ours. We think our culture is a big hoax. Something called the GOD was imagined so that there'll always be someone who one fears. Well, science chauvinists need to open their eyes to the shortcomings of science.
Thousands of years ago, it was said that eating green vegetables on some days in a month is unhealthy. The belief was rubbished. Today, it is found to be true. 5 times a month, when the moon is nearest to the earth, the gravitational pull of the moon causes increases water-levels
and humidity. This atmosphere is conducive for germs and hence, unhealthy for us.

The main problem with religion is, the reasons why we follow some of the mores are lost in time. So, there is no way of distinguishing between what are true traditions and what are just blind beliefs.

One of the unintended victims is : Spirituality. Although science dosen't directly attack spirituality, it has come under the scanner. If spirituality is overthrown and "logic" emphasized so much, I fear we might be reduced to robots, devoid of emotions and relationships. What makes us humans unique is NOT only the science but our culture, which is a fine mix of science, religion, traditions, spirituality and social inclinations.

Also, there's no reason to abandon our beliefs about soul and GOD and the higher facets of our spirituality. Science should just keep itself in check. It should understand its limitations. We should understand its limitations.

The Subconscious

Spoiler : I do not try to explore the mystic and hermetic lands of the subconscious and propound the ways to tap its omnipotent powers for your spiritual upliftment. NO. I am not into that crap. This blog is merely a collection of my some of my observations and conclusions drawn from them.

For skeptics, lets first try to establish that there is something called "the subconscious".

Have you experienced something called "the lightning solution" (It is unlikely that you know this term, coz i just coined it!!:) ) ? Lemme explain.
There's a knotty and complicated problem badgering you since days. You aren't able to figure out the solution no matter how hard you try. Finally, somehow, while you are doing something else or just goofing off, your mind interrupts you to announce the solution to the problem !! You haven't been thinking on it for days, then how did you "stumble" upon the solution?
Well, some might say that the quantum waves of the solution somehow penetrated your mind blah blah blah ... others might say ... ghosts of the primordial period whispered the solution into your ears:P.
I beg to differ

Here's where the subconscious comes into the picture. According to me, the conscious is the part of the mind you can discern through your senses. But, the mind is far more complex than this. the subconscious mind is where the problem are actually pondered upon. It would be unwise to assume that we have only one subconscious, there may be many (like Threads in a processor:P).
Anyways, the important thing is - how does it work?
What I think is, the conscious part of the mind provides the subconscious some inputs to work on. (Thus, it logically follows that if you don't mull sufficiently on a problem, the subconscious has a lesser chance of coming up with a solution) Then, it is the job of the subconscious to work out a solution and interrupt the conscious whenever necessary.

So, enough of this boring blabbering ... now we have a theory as to how the subconscious works, so how can we put it to test?
Try this out -
1) Suppose you encountered a problem just as you are about to sleep. Don't defer it to the next day. Think on it a bit and then doze off. This (hopefully) will kick off the subconscious and will probably simplify your problem solving task the next day.

2) Give the subconscious enough time. Studying everything at the last moment is not going to help you. The job of subconscious is not only to find solutions to problems, but also to reflect on whatever you have learned in the course of the day (the process of reflecting may take months:D). So, it is recommended (by me:P) that start studying asap and go slow, don't overstuff yourself. It will help you to grasp the concepts well and retain them longer. Remember, the earlier you start studying, the more time your mind has to consider the aspects of the issue in question.

So, it is not that we have NO control over what our subconscious does. We do have some. We just have to figure out how to exploit it.
The power of subconscious is soo vast, its not worth neglecting it.

GRE (old sylabus) : how to maximise ur score

You can either learn from someone's mistakes or you can learn from someone's success. Surely, both the forms are equally important. This is a guide to the former.

I didn't get a particularly good score in GRE. 1340. Not that bad, but obviously if you are reading this, your aim will be significantly higher (say 1500+). So, here are some of the "avoidable" mistakes I made. Learn from them, don't repeat them:P

1) There seems to be a pervasive misunderstanding that GRE is a test of Barron's words. Although it was quite true until some time ago, things have changed significantly. Today, Barron's is a guide to - which words are least likely to be asked in the GRE, and it is a good guide:). Even if you learn each and every Barron's word carefully, paying attention to the minutest nicety, you would be very lucky to cross 550 in verbal.
This dosen't mean you go to the market and buy a book giving you a list of non-barron's words. The point I wish to propound is that "learning" words from "lists" is no longer the only thing required to crack the GRE. What you need is good language which only comes from voracious reading (not only fiction, but a wide variety of books, magazines and articles). The words asked are not obscure words coined by a jobless pedant, they are the words which we have heard here and there, yet they are not as popularly used.
Words like "hull"(v) or "ream"(n) etc. These words won't appear in any of the lists.
Yet, a good reader will be well aware of these words. Also, it is less likely yo find these words in a fiction or a non-fiction book. What you need is a comprehensive reading habit.
That is the new GRE !! nothing great .... nothing to be afraid of ... very few esoteric words, but its a real test of your language !! and thats what people are afraid of !:). The test of your language and NOT your ratta skills.

I suggest, if you have time, start reading newspapers, magazines, watch sitcoms, movies, etc. Don't discount on the Barron's lists ... they are going to fetch yoy 550 ... its the way to 800 that we are trying to uncover and the way has to pass through Barron's !!:)


2) Do not neglect RCs and SCs. People tend to leave RCs for option assuming that they can cover up the score in the other question types. They are grossly mistaken. RCs is going to be your saving grace in the GRE (it was my saving grace, words totally screwed me). + If you get easy questions for the other types, good answers for the RCs can land you well above 1500. Also, RCs are NOT as difficult as people tend to think. Its difficulty is merely aggrandized by the grapevine. They are manageable, but only with practice can you tackle RCs.

And the last thing, don't neglect analytical section either, although it is not at all difficult to score above 4, people tend to bungle up in over-confidence. It is not that easy either. + a good 5 or 5.5 can compensate for a mediocre GRE score.

In summary, Barron's is NOT the ultimate guide, concentrate on improving your language.
DO NOT neglect RCs and SCs.

Best of luck !!

What is time?

Have you ever spared a thought to this, seemingly "trivial" question? It is not as simple as it looks. Time, as we perceive it, is clock-ticks, hours, minutes, days, years, centuries and ages. But, is this really time that is passing?

Well, you guessed it right, it depends on how we define time. If time is defined as "something measured by a clock" then the above hypothesis might be true and you don't need to read all the prolix prattle which follows. But, if we consider time as something which gradually passes, then we have a problem.

Consider an Arrow. its motion is similar to passing of time. Now, according to Heisenberg's Uncertainity principle position and momentum of this arrow cannot be accurately and simultaneously determined (Yes, it is true even for macroscopic bodies!!). And it is true, if we photograph the Arrow, we know its position, but we have lost all the information about its momentum. and if we see an arrow moving, we know its momentum (as a vector), but we can't determine its position !!

Now, its analogy with time. If time is an Arrow. and say the arrow is moving, then we can't say whether we are in Past, Present or Future !!(its position can't be determined). and if we assume that we are in the Present. then Time is stationary (momentum cannot be determined !!). Thus, a fallacy!!

The thing is, we confuse time with relationships. We measure time (lets call it that for the time being:) ) with respect to some cyclic changes like Earth's revolution around the sun or moon's revolution around the earth. Which implies, that if these motions slow down, time will slow down !! ... therin lies the fallacy! .. we don't measure time, we compare ourselves with other activities. This comparison should not be confused with time!

So, there is nothing called time.
Time is just a perception. An imagination of human mind. That explains why time (the colloquial "time", acutally there is nothing like time) seems to pass slowly while we do a boring piece of work and why time seems to fly away when the work we are doing is interesting! Because, clock-ticks is not time, neither is the location of sun or moon with respect to the earth!

Then what is past? what is future?
Past is just an improbable event. i.e. the waves of probability have grew stronger for the Present and weaker for the past. Also, the waves of probabilty are weak for the future. So, future is also an improbable event, as of now.
To understand it completely, well, consider a gramophone record. Assume, the needle is at a particular point playing your favorite song. Well, it just implies that the other parts of the record are improbable and the part which is being played in highly probable (the analogy with past, present and future in simple).
To summarize the above paragraph, well, past and future are nothing but, improbable events. There is nothing called "time" as such !!

Its all quantum mechanics. As true for macroscopic objects as for microscopic!

So, go over the topic again ... What is time? .. does it seem that simple yet??:))

Quantum Computing

This is my seminar topic this year. And the most promising new development in the field of computing.

Today the processors are growing faster and faster. But, there's a limit to the speed. A given mass of material cannot perform more than certain calculations. This puts us into a jeopardy. How will we cope with the future requirements ? The answer suggested was PARALLEL processing. But, again traditional computers proved grossly inefficient in implementing the concept. Scientists were in search of something that was "inherently" parallel in processing .... and the ans came in the form of "quantum computing".

Quantum computing emerged from the fact that the processors will grow so small that their elements will be of the size of an atom. Then the classical laws will be rendered meaningless and quantum laws will come into picture. quantum bits - popularly known as qubits - can store 2^n values SIMULTANEOUSLY, where n=size of register. Thus, the inherent prallelism!

Thus, 2^n computations can proceed simultaneously in a n-qubit register. This massive parallelism has gripped the imagination of the scientists world over!

But, the main problem with this field is, as a renowned scientist summarizes
"My students don't understand quantum computing, because i don't understand it"
Such is the intricacy of the subject that even those working in the field can't confess to have complete knowledge of the topic! Also, most of the technology required to implement a quantum computer is rather non-existent.

All in all, quantum computing is NOT the near future. But, in the long run quantum computing will certainly cause revolutions in the quantum field !! ... It will change the way we compute !

GRE : why when and how ?

GRE : Graduate record examination
This is a must exam alongwith TOEFL (which is also compulsary to apply to US universities for higher studies.

The typical question asked today is "Why US? Indian engineers are earning enough, why go to US?" (This post is only for engineers, others shoooo :) ) ... The reason is, the US education system induces some practicality in you. + You have a chance to become independant i.e. live on yourself. Also, although software engineering is a booming field, there are bound to be recessions and your MS degree in US will help your boss NOT to sack you:).

When ? : there is no restriction by ETS (the GRE conducting body) as to when can appear for GRE. But, considering our own benifit, I suggest you should appear for GRE in your TE (that too, the month of March. March because it is believed that the examination is a bit easier then). TE because, you'll need atleast a year to complete all the formalities : GRE score, TOEFL score, VISA, application to universities etc). So, you can leave for USA as soon as your BE examinations are over. Thus, you don't end up sitting at your home for a year straining your father's income:). If you are NOT sure whether you will clear all subjects in TE or BE, then also, it is suggested to appear in TE only, because GRE score is valid for 5 years.

Classes : I don't know about others, but Dilip Oak's is a good option if you are a puneite. But, again classes are not that much of a help. I suggest, buy out the DOAK's material and prepare on your own.

Books and other resources :
The ultimate guide will be Barron's book. A nice work. You can also go for, Princeton or Kaplan's guides. Besides, there's a lot of material available online.
You can also download some from,
http://nidheshjain.googlepages.com/gre2
and if anyone needs anything more, well you can contact me. I pride myself with an awesome GRE collection.

Required score :
for computer engineers anything above 1300 will be called decent.
One can easily score 750+ in the quantitative section. So, you are just supposed to scrape in 550 odd in verbal which won't be a problem.
Also, recently Analytical writing scores have gained importance. try to get atleast 8 out of 12. Again this is NOT at all difficult.

Final words :
Anyone readin this post now would probably appear in the new syllabus. So, beware there are only Reading Comprehension and Sentence Completion type questions. RCs are hell. So, start reading now. You need to have a good vocabulary to understand the RCs and attempt the SCs. So, taking a look at the Barron's list will still be a good idea (although, ypu won't need to learn the words as you needed to do in the OLD syllabus)
Plus, the new syllabus will be a 5.5 to 6 hours ordeal. So, get your concentrations up too.
And, Quantitative and Analytical sections are unchanged, so, NO problems on that front.

(Add a comment if you found this useful or if you need further information.
Best of Luck in your endeavour)