Thursday, August 2, 2012

Catastrophe


This is from the minutes of an international seminar. All the participants were super scientists. It was after a global catastrophe, in which almost half the world population perished in it some three billion persons in total. Almost all the communication infrastructure was in shambles. The year was 2111. Most of the major science establishments were in jeopardy, because many top ranking scientists also perished in the catastrophe. It was believed that it was a terrorist attack, from an unknown place, some opined that it was from a remote underground place in in Sahara deserts, others that it was from a nearby planet that was recently made habitable. That was established when most security agencies got busy, with public attacks against mis-governance.

A small group of eminent thinkers, who were leading an almost retired life in remote thinly populated places and hence survived the attack, were the invitees for the seminar, sponsored by a philanthropic institution, they were all transported to the venue in private aircrafts. The venue, an obscure village called Ramana Ville, somewhere in an Indian state called Sikkim. The date is October 31, almost 10 months later. But, still many confirmed and made arrangements for gruesome travel. About 210 persons finally managed to participate. They included persons who had been active biologists, physiologists, technologists, medical professionals, psychologists, physiologists, geneticists, space scientists, sociologists and even some modern astrologers, journalists and philosophers among many others.

The inaugural meet was scheduled in the evening. Very few knew each other, but no need was felt for formal introduction. The president of the organizing committee, started with an introduction. His name is Kalshree. Here is an excerpt of his talk:

Friends, we have gathered here to recapitulate, what led to this Catastrophe. Let me try to do it as briefly as I can. Many of us would know some fragments. I will refrain from a long speech. Let each one of us share from her/his memory. I think it will indeed be a memorable seminar. I handover it to you all.

An old person almost 100 years old, was the first. His name Charlie Hallen. He said:

“ I remember it was in 2011. Human population residing in urban areas was suddenly taken by surprise. A change in attitude was easily discernible. Social protests are widespread, almost everyone appeared to be very anti establishment, anti status quo. Why, no one had a clue!! Sociologists, psychologists are struggling hard to find a clue, a viable theory or hypothesis. Not very long ago, similar happened about two decades ago. That was when, very many revolutions took place, It started with Egypt, India, Syria, Libya and then to even USA, Germany, Russia and Spain. In India, there were large crowds in support of anti corruption movement, spearheaded by a social activist named Anna Hazare, in USA it was an anti Wall Street, eventually it all led to some changes in the political systems, but it soon appeared to have subsided. But, all of a sudden it had revived again, this time in even in China, Sweden and Norway that were left unaffected in the previous unrest climate. All efforts to contain it appeared to have failed. Why?
At first no body paid much attention, thought it was a passing phase, but as it persisted as earlier. But it persisted, for more then a couple of years. All the media was agog, everyone was guessing. Articles in press or blogs on the Internet, interviews galore about it. But no apparent success. No one could hold ground foe long. It was indeed was a wake up call for scientists of all hues, globally. Theories, hypothesis were being put forward almost every week, but nothing appeared attractive.
It was then that an article appeared, it attracted a lots of attention, it was attractive, indeed it set everyone considering.
It was from an obscure scientist from India, but it made sense. He talked of the bacteria in human body, he talked of extraterrestrial influences. People were aware of Human Genome Project and it phenomenal success, and its successor Humam Microbiome Project was in progress. Some believed that indeed affect human attitudes, both personal and social.
Articles had earlier appeared in journals, I recollect from my personal notes that It was known for many years that campylobacter jejuni is a microbe whose infection increases anxiety-like behavior in mice later it was established even in case of human beings. It was reported, in peer reviewed scietce literature that areas of brain-stem activation, such as the nucleus tractus solitarius and lateral parabrachial nucleus, participate, presumably via the vaug nerve pathway; in neural information processing that ultimately lead to autonomic, neuron-endocrine and behavioral responses. These types of experiments all supported the suggestion that the gut microbiome may be intimately involved in the modulation not only of the peripheral but also aspects of the central nervous system including behavior.
I also recall that many years later, It was shown, that this bacteria when suddenly exposed to electromagnetic radiation in sub infrared range of frequencies changes its interaction with several other microbes in the human intestine, for example, when campylobacter family of microbes were exposed to radiation in the range of 30 GHz1 THz for about a week or more, show enhanced modification of mutual interaction. Also it was then reported by some space scientists, that Pluto and Uranus the planets farthest away from Earth, do indeed emit such radiation sometimes, that after being relayed through some asteroids in the Kupfer Belt are received on the Earth in that range of frequency. So it is implied that human body is really subject to these radiation and do are the microbes that can enter the human body through different routes. …..”

This theory appeared viable, it had some sound experimental backing, based on accepted observations. A reputed scientist of Indian origin, Professor Aditya Subramani, got global recognition, not because of the hypothesis alone, but because of sound falsifiable statements. Experiments were conducted world wide, to test the hypothesis and the results were positive.

Now a scientist from USA Professor Atkinson joined in. He added: “Soon, the markets got flushed with devices, that claimed to be able to produce such radiations and affect human behavior. Many companies flourished, the media was agog with advertisements. It was the year 2072, the human microbiomes were deciphered almost as much as the genomes. Studies of the effects of many extraterrestrial radiation on several microbes was the fashion among graduate students.

A sociologist from France, Geneneve Sante then added: “Science, as we all know, had spread far and wide, not just limited to some prosperous countries. The limit of speed is no longer c, the speed of light. Many more particles that can travel faster then light, in fact as much as 10c have been discovered or hypothesized. 'Science' was undergoing a revolution!

A Space scientist Sumanna Raju then added: “Some people had started to believe that human body and mind is not controlled by genomes or microbiomes alone much else was hypothesized. For example, influences of extraterrestrial bodies. It was discovered that some extraterrestrial bodies need not be only planets in the solar system. It is now known that many other bodies come close to our solar system, periodically. Bodies space scientists had never detected all through the history of science. Bodies that emit particles/waves that can travel much faster, even faster then neutrinos. Particles/waves that can penetrate through the skin and flesh of human body very easily. It was discovered that they can influence not only a few microbes present in the body, but even the biochemistry of the interaction. how a particular kind of biomolecule can interact with another.

A sociologist from Brazil intervened at this point. He said: “ Yes, science had indeed undergone a revolution in the next five decades. It was no longer limited to certain institutes and laboratories, located in a few countries, it got spread much thinly across the globe. Any intelligent thinking individual, could be recognized as a scientist. Even some astrologers! So when some people, said that there are indeed bodies in the universe, that come close to the solar system, after every century, people listened carefully, not with disdain but with respectful skepticism. Because some people could indeed prove it with experimental and empirical information. That had been ignored so far, only because it was believed that only the science of the western countries was the true science. Even homeopathy, was accepted and the theory that even after much dilution, some substances could indeed influence a human body. Law of mass action is not universal! Students often wondered when the studied history.

A Nigerian philosopher Andrew Osgale added: “Just in a few decades, scientists from the early twentieth century, started appearing like alchemists did to students hundred years ago. The names like Einstein, Heisenberg, Planck were like the names of Plato, Socrates a century ago. The only doctrine that was gaining wide acceptance, was the doctrine of change. People started believing that this also was just a doctrine, not an eternal law. Because it was now believed that there can never be any eternal laws, because they are subject to change with time. Not just minor changes but in some cases major changes. One of the changes was to accept the individuality of each one. In the past it was almost assumed that every human being is more like an automobile, with minor differences, that could be accommodated easily. People started wondering, what next? This appeared to be the ultimate of human thought. But, it assumed that the status quo will persist. No one knew what could be the next step.”
Another philosopher from Spain Professor Feldman Gonzalez, added: My grand father Dr Ruben Feldman Gonzalez, talked often of unitary perception. He used to say that unitary Perception is is being aware of everything perceptible, at the same time, right now, without naming that which is perceived, without comparing and without effort. It implies being conscious of something. Even while unconscious. Perceptible means we are not aware of something only, but of everything that crosses our field of perception. It implies that if we want the brain to operate as a unit, expressing its maximum potential, it is necessary to perceive everything perceptible at the same time. His thought really influenced scientific thoughts in decades to come.

A physician from Indonesia, Grerard, Macvinta, present there now added: It was appearing as if there was an epidemic of fast mutations in genes. The genes seemed to be mutating very fast. Persons who had no family history of diseases like cancer, diabetes, suddenly were easily diagnosed to be suffering from them. Most often these diseases were fatal. It started being evident somewhere around 2011, when it was discovered that many more women had started to develop breast cancer and many more men started having, bowel cancer or lung cancer besides asthma attacks and heart attack.

The geneticist, Regenna Fowls, present then added: It was some mutagen very widely present in the environment. I remember some people had even theorized that it was present in the omnipresent dust in cities. People started thinking that some mutagens were present in the dust particles. Many of us investigated, but the results were never very conclusive.
The astrologer from India, Ramamurthy added very briefly: For ages Indian astrologers have based their predictions based on the age of the universe. The universe passes through various ages as the time passes, it is like cycles of time. I believe, many factors had accumulated over the ages, and the catastrophe was a cumulative effect. We do not know what is in store for us in near future, but we can only hope for the best, and lead our life in a contented and spiritual manner. That only helps, is my personal experience.
Irene Tesonova, a computer specialist then added: But I think a very deadly blow to the world was when suddenly many computer systems stopped working, hundreds at a time. It was a tech virus. Since 2175 the computer memory had become dirt cheap, the memory of the hard disks was most commonly in the range of Terra-bytes, this was made possible due to an innovation of little known origin, but it was so attractive that it was lapped up by almost all computer systems, even corporate and banking systems. All information was stored only on such systems. But slowly it started revealing that something was amiss. Before any one could realize what, lots of information started disappearing, even of private assets. When it really struck, billions of people were affected, in a matter of a minute. People lost all their property records. It was, then that many many had fatal heart attacks, with hardly enough physicians to attend to. Within a day some half a billion persons passed away!
A journalist added now, “ I recall that all the deaths in that catastrophe were not only due to computer networks meltdown due to a virus attack. I recall it was more due to the nature of material used to manufacture the computer media, hard disks and others. Due to a global economic downturn about a century ago, corporations were in for quick profits, research quality control was dismal. So it was possible to accept disks that were not thoroughly checked. As it turned out all the disks had a life time of only twenty years. So there was an expiry date but no body paid an attention, because of the market pressures. And as the expiry date approached many disks started collapsing. In the beginning it was a mystery, but by the time mystery got unveiled, the catastrophe was there. It not only affected the financial institutions, but even many nuclear power stations. Nuclear accidents were very frequent. Mostly because of the greed of the powerful.

At the end, the chairperson, Kalshree concluded with a message:

We all have suffered in the catastrophe, many of our close relatives are no more, the grief is deep and will take several decades to heal. We all have to contribute to the healing process. Perhaps, the best would be to spread the lessons humanity has learned in this catastrophe. We are very few, but we know a bit more and many will listen to us, our responsibility is therefore manifold. I think, the lesson we all have learned is that change is imminent, the path it takes is unknown so we have to be humble. Its all a matter of time, as the time changes at a certain point, many factors add up to bring about a massive change, that we never expected, a catastrophe. To be proud of any past achievements has its price, often unbearable. Greed although a very human trait must be banished in the new society that is being raised. Every king was once a crying baby, and every great building was once a map, It's not important where you are today, The most important thing is where you will reach tomorrow. Never be proud of what position you hold, because after a game of chess, the king and the soldiers go into the same box. We must try to be humble, as wise persons, across ages have been saying. Only the humble passes the test when the time for a catastrophe arrives. All of us, present here had been humble, that is why we survived, and we will survive in the future also.

Rakesh Mohan Hallen


Thinking About Politics


Politics affect each and everyone, often we tend to hate it as well as people called as politicians. But is that a correct attitude? I wondered on this, and here is the result of my explorations and thoughts about it.

What Is Politics

On hearing the word politics, what usually springs to mind are images of government, politicians and their policies or more negatively the idea of corruption and dirty tricks. The actual definition seems to have been obscured and almost lost by such representations and clichés that tend not to pinpoint the true essence, which defines this thing, called politics. In order to make an attempt at a definition of politics a systematic approach is required. To begin with, a brief historical overview will be considered, to understand the origins of politics. Following this, different core concepts, which are imperative to a definition of politics, will be discussed, in the hope to discover a true and fair interpretation of the word politics.

The word politics comes from the Greek word "polis", meaning the state or community as a whole. The concept of the "polis" was an ideal state and came from the writings of great political thinkers such as Plato and Aristotle. In his novel "The Republic", Plato describes the ideal state and the means to achieve it. Hence, the word politics originally has connotations in the ways in which to create the ideal society. An ideal society is in practice a rather difficult aim and even an impossible aim to achieve. Politics implies measures which could and should, in the views of their devisor, be implemented in the hope to create a better society, than that which is already present. The very fact that Plato and Aristotle saw imperfections in the societies in which they lived, prompted them to write their political philosophies. These philosophies provided the first written recognition of politics. In his writings his "The Politics", Aristotle states that "Man is by nature a political animal"(The Politics, 1) in another words, it lies deep within the instinct of man. It is almost primal. Due to his nature man should consider and realise his role within the "polis".

Throughout history, people have participated in politics on many different levels. Participation in politics has been the way that people have a voice and change the things that directly affect their lives. Throughout the course of history, politics has been the competition of ideas; they decide who gets what, when, where and how.

So, is it wise to hate politics?

Politics is the means for attaining valued things, that are different in every society, the means of securing those things has never changed. The competition for power, authority and influence will always be the backbone of politics. Applying power, authority and influence to the valued things that support the public good, will produce the quality of life a society desires. In the present day, citizens in the United States demand certain valued things such as welfare, education, safe streets and healthcare. Through politics, citizens can apply their power in many different ways to get the things they want. Power is the ability to get someone to do something they may or may not want to do. Through the use of or the application of coercion, persuasion, manipulation and negotiation, power is used to influence the system.

It would seem as if valued things, such as safe streets and healthcare, would already be established in a society such as ours. Using safe streets as an example, it is hard to believe a person would not support safe streets. But the discussion about safe streets is not exactly whether we want them or not. The disagreement on this topic, and most political topics, is how much should be spent fiscally on achieving and maintaining safe streets. The question of how much money should be spent on what and where is usually decided by whomever or whatever has applied the most power, influence and authority.

How active or inactive should the government be in getting valued things? Politics must be used as the means of answering this question. Politics should be used to attain the things that the society needs most and should represent all of the people equally. Politics, as we witness it in our society or the university is the fight for power, authority and influence. Through discourse, debate, and the knowledge of the public good, politics decides who gets what, when, where and how.

It is the season for politics and politicians in India nowadays. Lately I have been giving some thought why do politicians behave the way they do? And I am half way reaching a conclusion that is because of the accepted codes of social conduct that determines this behavior.

Let me clarify a bit more in detail. Every human being in a society has certain position, which s/he would like to improve upon through actions moral or amoral. Politicians are no exception! So if a particular set of politicians incited crowds to massacre the members of a particular community at a particular time, we should try to understand their behavior with some empathy. A politician achieves a certain status in a particular political party only through his/her actions which please his superiors, say the party president. So, if s/he thinks that by encouraging his goons to punish some people, for what they consider to be deviant behaviour, s/he stands to improve his status in the party, which is the normal mode of conduct for most politicians and perhaps all human beings. The end is always considered to justify any means to achieve it.

After all there is a popular proverb. Everything is fair in love and war. And life is invariably a struggle for existence, be it towards successful biological or social life. Tell me the name of a person who does not employ unfair means like this, he would invariably either a saint or seer; a much more coveted social status! Most of us never aspire to become a saint or seer, and as common human beings most often exhibit social conduct without a thought how it affects people around us, except when they are in a superior social position. We often trounce on the feeling of people we consider inferior to ourselves, and wait for the opportunities hen we would be in a better position then our present superiors to show the world our merit. In the process we very often earn the wrath of people we consider weak and poor.

Politics is not limited to the utterances in the public space. Often, different political parties have a hidden common agenda, and that is to perpetuate the prevalent social inequalities.
How?

By refusing to take steps, while in power, to empower the traditionally underprivileged sections of the society. Most political parties, and by implication most politicians are very comfortable with uneducated and economically poor masses of electorate. Because, it allows them to lure them to vote in favour of them in any elections. Imagine, what would be the fate of the present general elections, if many more members of the public were capable of thinking critically and independently. If they were in economic situation so as not to fall prey to the bribes offered by some politicians. Take the example of Muslims, a large majority of them are uneducated and poor, they trained from childhood to follow the local religious leaders, who often bargain benefits for themselves in return to large chunk of votes that are under their control. Or the situation in backward states like Bihar; why do people vote for known criminals, only because of their own feeling of social insecurity. They know that given their economic status, the hired goons of these criminals can easily harm them.

Everybody is aware of these facts, but no one cares to highlight them in elections, because each and every political party stands to gain from this state of society. But,
How many of us, who often pontificate politicians for not 'perfect' social behavior. How often do we pause to think, what effect does our behavior has on people less privileged then us? Thus when we flaunt expensive clothes and ride expensive motorized vehicles, we seldom think what effect it may have on a youth of the poorer section of society, who learns from his peers and relatives, how difficult it is to cross social barriers, without the help of an influential person. S/he knows that merit and hard work seldom pays! So regardless of your merit and hard work, one cannot aspire to be in the top political position unless you belong to the 'G' family. That is the message being spread loud and clear through out the society nowadays. Most of us are so self occupied, that we have not a single moment to pause and think about others around us, without whose services we would be as much handicapped as they without the alms we give them. For example, take the instance when we step out of an expensive mall or restaurant, and hail a rickshaw puller to haul us to the nearby destination, we often bargain for a few bucks, something that we cannot do in the restaurant or mall shop. Why? Because s/he is much more economically rich and hence influential then us. We dare not confront them, but we can definitely do so with a person poorer then us.

When you hear/see a person aspiring for a political career exploiting poor by buying their votes or influencing their immature minds with a speech that appeals to a large crowd, we go about criticizing the person or the political system, but seldom think how much are we ourselves are different from him. How much effort you have put in to be of some help to poorer sections of the society?

A friend of mine, an academic at Indian Institute of Science, once wrote:

Everyone has a need to feel superior to somebody. Research shows that our happiness depends more on the misery of others than our well being. Hate speeches work precisely because of this reason. Poor of any community are essentially identical, they should all be feeling equally miserable. Yet, if I tell someone that they are more important in the scheme of things, or that only they are the true citizens of this country then that might make them feel better. I don't think that only Indian politicians are to be blamed for this. Ultra nationalistic parties in all countries create such hierarchies to exploit this particular human folly to come to power. Also recall that after having come to power, the actions of these parties are not very different from each other. All governments are essentially identical since there are not a lot of different ways that you can run a country, and anyway for that we have civil servants. Everywhere in the world, affluence came with industrialization, and for that we need a strong central government that can push forward various reforms. In UK, from where we borrowed our parliamentary system, the country is not so diverse that state issues would dominate over national issues, but in India it is the other way round. BJP and Congress have very poor presence in the south, and the parties over there hardly have any national agenda. Thus, I largely agree with the PM's comment yesterday that independents should not be encouraged in this election since they would only help to create a fragmented parliament. We have all seen the effect of that during the Nuclear deal fiasco.”

I wondered, why it is so? Isn't it because though Congress ruled these states of India for decades, Congress leaders in these states behave much like the viceroys of the central governments and they were more loyal only to the Central Government then the people the represented in the parliament. Anyway i believe that most politicians belonging to any political party have been more loyal to the interests of their party ( and their families) rather then to the nation! Else how can we explain the poor state of education in our country even after 60 years of Independence. The Nuclear deal indeed made it abundantly clear, just think about the drama in parliament, and all the back stage efforts of the ruling party. It is a popular perception, just as a few congress leaders who stay accused for 84 Sikh riots, or BJP leaders who assisted in Godhra riots, that these national parties have hardly any national agenda really. Is the divisive agenda of BJP really a national agenda, or the agenda of many governments to support construction lobbies really nationalistic? I really wonder f someone has done a survey of the increase in private wealth of Indian politicians vis a vie the total GDP growth of the country (perhaps GDP growth may not be as revealing as the real economic growth for which i think no indicators have so far been recognized.

In my opinion if we really want able and thinking people to rule us with a nationalistic agenda, we should abandon the present parliamentary system we have imported from England, rather we should elect a much smaller group of people in which the whole nation reposes its faith on the basis of their services to nation, rather than their family identities or the number of goons at their command.
Mayawati the CM of a state of India, UP was once much in news because of a garland that is made up of high denomination currency notes. There has been a lot of discussion about in several news channels involving several members of intelligentsia. I happened to watch a few! One point that i could indeed appreciate in these discussions is that for far too long the Indian society has been dominated by the members of upper castes, who became powerful by hook or crook so if a person belonging to the underprivileged section of population is now aspiring to become powerful by accumulating some money, can s/he be faulted. How can the moral principles that have allowed the present lot of powerful politicians to become so, be not allowed for the newly aspiring class. If Mayawati is aspiring to become politically powerful, and we all know that no one can become so unless s/he has lots of money power, can she be indeed faulted on moral grounds. It is argued that if she has the money, why doesn't she spends it instead on the welfare of the extremely deprived Dalits in her state. But, can a change in the prevalent political system possible by simply such philanthropy??

Rakesh Mohan Hallen