Lessons my baby taught me ....

On the 25th of July 2014 I became a father. It is and will remain the first emotionally profound experience in my life, beating even the hormonal giddiness of first love. I realised how fragile life is when I first held my son. He was all of 2 hours old and all he could do by himself was breathe !!! Even suckling milk effectively had to be learnt over a period of an agonising 5 - 6 tries spanning 18 hours or so.

I had held the view that those who say ' life is a struggle' were just being morbid and a little foolish. But now I realise that successful survival is only achieved with effort. I do not think it to be a sad state of affairs, that it has to be so. In fact our whole body and possibly some aspects of our mind are designed to do this effort. But on the whole it was very gratifying when he started suckling enough to burp everytime and when he started pooping and peeing enough. The point I want to make is that I am usually coldly objective about many things including personal stuff ( much to the chagrin of my loved ones at times ). However in the case of my son I find it hard to be objective. For ex. If the need arose I would gladly murder someone to save my son and it would be a decision made without pangs from my conscience. Why does this happen ? It is not my instincts alone that will cause such a huge change in me. This does bear thinking about. So is this what the yogis call attachment ? This irrational preferrence to the whims of someone/something separate from you, is this what makes me a human being ? Then would it not be better to feel this way about the whole universe ?

PhD 5.0

As the name suggests... This will detail the confirmed signs and symptoms of a PhD candidate who has completed or about to complete 5years of back breaking, brain racking, self questioning work and is not sure to what end did all this happen...
The things to look for in a PhD 5.0 are :
1. He/She will never plan his/her life farther than 2 hrs into the future. Most of the concepts of time spans are now aligned either to experiment incubation times or paper/manuscript review times. The reason is the incessant dersire NOT to think too much into the future.
2. The only person hated more that Osama Bin Laden is anyone who asks them any of the following questions "when will your thesis be done ?", "Got any offers after PhD ?"
3. It is a personal insult if anyone talks about their field or about new papers in their field. ( 99% of the times because they have never heard of those papers in spite of reading about 99000 related articles on pubmed)
4. If their character/avatar in an online role playing game gets a cool sword that glows, they think it is a significant achievement in life.
5. They tell others how really they want to be done with it and move on but in reality pray that they never have to because the idea that their work is going to be judged out in the real world and their entire lives depend on it scares the pants off them.
So these five symptoms are the most sure way of identifying possible post doc candidates. Maybe we should find a way to quantify these 5 characters and select people based on these as well as research ability.

systems of belief...

I have thought about this aspect for a long time now. Sometimes consciously, sometimes unconsciously. We all have systems of belief... There is something that we think is a certain way, it can be anything from cosmic truths like monotheism to trivial things like 'pink is lucky for me' the only common pattern in any of this that we 'need' them to be true or at least possibly true. But the most important thing of this I would say is our opinion/definition of ourselves. I know this is not static and will change with changing times but there are some basic premises that we have developed that are always the same. We need these things to be the way they are so that we can feel secured and assured about our view of the world. so that we can justify what we do is correct in the bigger framework. I am NOT saying that we tailor our beliefs to justify whatever we do, what I mean is that we develop this set of beliefs over time and experience. We feel this is the way the world is and therefore we think if this set of basic premises are met everything can be dealt with. This is ok, I guess it is a natural tendency of any mind to generate a world view and function according to that. The problem is more subtle, the thing is we are extremely attached to this world view ( I speak from my experience of myself and a few others who I think are in similar situations ). We are extremely attached to this world view and we get angry, hurt or generally inconvenienced when this world view is challenged by some situations. Why should this be the case ? If the world view is challenged why is so hard to reevaluate it ? I began thinking about this when I came across a situation where my opinion of myself was questioned and I could not stand up to the test and was thus extremely hurt and depressed.
The thing is so very trivial as compared to the rest of the world, it is just how I look at myself but why should that matter so much in governing the rest of my life ? If I just remove the framework in which I judge myself the whole thing seems pointless. Since the framework is a result of the experience of all the restraints, constraints, opinions that I have gathered in my life. Is the only reason I am so attached to them is that they are mine ? or do I sincerely believe that experiences define me in a very fundamental way. That is not necessarily the case I think, I think my view of my own is cherished because it will not have any points that I consider negative and when that is shattered it is very hurtful. The question boils down to why do I consider those points as negative ? and why should I believe that they are not included in my behaviour ?
Is just past experience governing the current ability of my mind to function ? I cannot believe I was in a mental limbo for 6 months because of this small misunderstanding. Why should only I be the best in my own eyes ? Why can't I accept anyone else that is better than me ? Why is that so hurtful ? I have been told that answer is ego.. but i think it is just the ego, it is the block of your world view cluttering up the head, your belief system that one considers necessary for one to function because one thinks we functions the best if their world view is unchallenged. That is wrong, why have this nonsense in head and go around ? I have tried telling it to people and received an amazing plethora of answers. my favorite one is " it is not practical for every day life " that is the most idiotic thing I have ever heard in my life. It is not practical because you do not wish to practice it, because you do not want to reevaluate your world view, or let it go is what I would say to these people. But why is this block there at all ?
Is really letting go of this equivalent to letting go of one's responsibilities ? I would like to believe that is no so, that is part of my belief system but I do not know the answer. But I would like to believe that this is possible, not because of any other reason but that would make living beautiful according to me...
ending the post with a paradox. I do not believe in being so attached to systems of belief because I believe that it is foolish. If I could only say this with experience of not belonging to a system of belief... I would be the happiest fool on earth...

by the seat of one's pants...

I was reading a book on complexity theory and am really and truly fascinated and totally into it, when my mind started wandering and then got to thinking about "am I destined to be a better theoretical scientist ( whatever the hell that means) than a practical one ?" As it is I like to study things from a theoretical point of view, building new hypotheses and testing them ( preferably in my head and as soon as possible because I am too lazy to remember them and test them later and another reason for that is .. 'The Moment' is gone so it is no longer fun ), using concepts from one discipline somewhere else in a way that no sane person would even think of doing it. Essentially dreaming in the field of science and to answer any question, the first thing that jumps to me is make a theoretical model of it and see if it works. Whether it works in practice or not is not my problem. To add to that, am not really that interested in the practical things I have done in my PhD, but am very much interested in the concepts that are addressed by doing those things and reasons for doing those things. I am not interested in 'honing' my skills for doing a western or a southern. If it gets too much I would just get someone who can do it better to do it for me. I do NOT believe that expertise in a variety of techniques is a way to achieve greatness in science, but rather the ability to tell which experiments to do is more important. Being this way and in a lab where computation or any kind of theoretical construction is avoided with a furrow in the brow and pained look ( this may have some association with the ability to comprehend too much of imagniation, but that theory is yet untested.. :D ), I think I have stumbled upon a new method of research. I call it 'by the seat of one's pants' research.
We know what the meaning of the phrase is " doing something by the seat of one's pants" it is usually meant as 'not being very serious about something and taking risks willingly and gladly, goofing around not caring about the results.Often with total disregard to rules.' Obviously doing things this way will be frowned upon since it is often of no productive value. So it is... but in science they way I envisage, 'by the seat of one's pants' seems like a great idea... There is a higher chance of this happening in theoretical research simply because less money is involved. The way to do this type of science is simple :
1. Read lot of stuff till you find something that triggers your imagination ( for purposes of a coherent discussion let us say that imagination is restricted to ideas and not fantasies, though fantasies sometimes do help... )
2. If you like an idea, just incubate it.. keep it in your head and don't think about it.. suddenly sometime somewhere this idea will click with another and viola !! something interesting is already happening ( Until the viola happens.. you are still treading the road and not flying by the seat of your pants... And PLEASE DO NOT do anything to trigger or hasten the 'viola !!' stage. Otherwise the whole point is lost. Here is where the pants come in.. )
3. Now, we you get your viola!! done.. test it out in the computer or in your head, or in component space or wherever the hell you think it is the most fun and easiest to do. Don't worry about publishing it or convincing others of it or other such trivial things... and if it works.. IT is past the first stage...
4. Now the most important thing... now test it against known knowledge about whatever you are doing. If your idea has already been proved by someone else then ah!.. too bad but at least you are bright enough to think about it on your own. If it is going against whatever is being said by 'bigger' people then hmm.. one wonders, because obviously I am not wrong there must be something I haven't explained or thought about. So rethink your idea, do patch up jobs and these are not necessarily to solve the question that has arisen in the first place. More often that not the patch up jobs are more fun than the idea it self.. Who cares about convincing others or getting this published or written.. If it works in your head, if it is cohesive with each other not like sticky goo but like an array of light then waaah... that feeling is the most wonderful thing in the world. This is not a fantasy creation, be sure to test your idea against all that you can with the harshest of measures, but when you think it works, and literature says it does not... don't believe the literature, patch up your idea. Often to the extent that the original thing is unrecognisable but then it will become something really beautiful !!
Point no.4 is the 'seat' of my point. But there are severe warnings before doing this..
1. If you are worried about career or are otherwise bothered by thoughts of the future please do not go down this path
2. If you think you know everything and that a particular problem is solved please do not go down this path
3. If you want to work to get more funding please do no go down this path
4. If you are afraid this will lead you to 'loose your focus' and other trivial things, please do not go down this path
If the above 4 things do not apply to you please welcome to this amazing field of science. Experience the warm rush of thrill down one's spine when two seemingly unconnected ideas just melt into one like one wonders why were they ever separate. See the beauty of it all. Sadly people will not understand/like you, they will think you are mad, but are still favoured. they will say you are lazy and not work but still would wonder how you get things done to an equal extent as them. If you start wondering how to explain what is there in your head and start looking for alternative ways of communication.. the signs are clear.. you will soon take off and fly.. by the seat of your pants...

being professional... yaah... boo !! being practical... yeah right.. :D

I am surrounded by professional and practical people a lot.. I do not call them that, it is by their own definition of their actions that this comment is made. so I tend to wonder a lot why of why on earth are these people like this and where have the real people gone off to ?.. I do not hate them, criticise their way of life or hold any sort of grudge against them. But I see where they are going and I see how much it is going to hurt some of them. Especially the converts to this fold.. and my heart bleeds. I am not saying that not being these two things should nessecarily be equated to being ireresponsible. I am assuming that the person in question has the basic nature to accept all his or her responsibilites and work on them.
So this is my argument over some of these peoples professed ways to practice...
For a long time I thought that being professional would depend on what profession one is professing.... You know a baker might 'flare up' from time to time, or a doctor might be 'sick of it all'. But sadly that is not so. There is a category of behaviour that I have heard being classified as 'being professional'. Listed below are some of the characters expected from me to be professional and in quotes are my honest to existence questions to them..
Irritating (to me ) things like :
1. Having a proper 'sense' of dress ( am not talking of cleanliness here only 'sense' of dress please make no mistake).. " Now if I would be working my best and what I say and do does not depend on what and whether I wear anything, why the hell should the dress matter ? "
2. Having a proper 'sense' of where to show emotion and where not to show emotion... " This works only for a politician and NOT for anyone else, so if you mean to do it otherwise you are doing what politicians do... dupe yourself and people"
3. 'Being professional' towards only certain people... " this is my favourite hit.. if you want to be professional then please do so towards all the people in your profession and not only the people you want to avoid in your life "
4. Having a 'sense' of behaviour.. ( again am not against the basic tenets of decency and humanity ) " What the hell do you mean by this ? how can anyone else have a sense of behaviour that you have ?" Examples of when to be our self and when not to come to mind, especially dependent on whether the boss or people you don't like are there.
5. Talking only about professional things when you know you can have so much fun by talking about other creative things as well ... " Welll.. if you are so scared of me intruding into your boundary that you limit yourself access to whatever interesting ideas I have to offer about whatever.. then there is only one word for you... COWARD he he he. Creating shields around you so that sooo many people don't get through.. how the hell can one live like that ? I would die of asphyxiation"
so if you are being professional like mentioned above.. I would gladly make a fool out of myself and say yeah.. boo !!!

And now the most trusted defense of professional and practical people... being practical itself !!!
I always wondered.. isn't being practical dependent on what you are going to or already practicing ?
This includes the following things...
1. Giving importance to people based on their use to you... ( this is most of the times done involuntarily by people ) .. " this is such a waste of time.. because then you have spend your energy into evaluating how much use someone is or will be and this turns out to be a continuous process. why not assume everyone is important and go ahead to do your work ? Examples of giving importance to an idiotic boss because they are the boss or to other people like yourself because they are predictable and will not cause you harm, come to mind.."
2. Changing your outlook depending on how much acceptance of the aforesaid useful people will it achieve... " again.. why ?? just be open enough to get acceptance anywhere.. why waste time in doing this nonsense ? Anyway if you are among people who are equally practical and professional it should not matter right ? I think all this boils down to covering one's vulnerability or tweaking gain out of every situation. both of which are logically correct but rationally silly things to do in life."
3. The last and the best... telling non-practical people to be practical.. or trying to take advantage of their 'impracticality' " Please leave people be. you think you are helping them become happier and achieve things. Please understand very clearly you are NOT !! you are stifling them, you are stripping them of their emotions and their capacity to think straight, By telling them to focus on things like their 'career' or their 'work' at the cost of everything else.. you are dehumanising them. You have destroyed your own life.. now don't take theirs to make you feel better that more people are in the same boat, so you have that many less people to analyse real time for your first two tenets."
It is a fact that when confronted about point number 3 practical people get angry but being practical do not show this emotion and do something else instead. but the recent converts get very defensive and try to tell you that their choice is right for such profound things as 'life', 'living', 'happiness', 'satisfaction'. Yes it is true if all these things depended upon not being connected to anyone else in the world more than it is needed and therefore not being affected by the pain, happiness of others. I have never seen a more idiotic way of looking at life. I know the answer to their quandary but I am not going to write it here because who am I anyway ?
I used to imagine ostriches with their heads in the ground, but even they come up to breathe, these people will end up breathing their own stale breath and then they will maybe think if they have some semblance of sense that " yes that impractical, unprofessional fool is right, he might be poorer or less renowned, or less successful but man he is laughing like he has gone crazy... and i am not.. because i am not supposed to..""
Being practical... yeah right... :D