Dashavathara of a PhD student

As a follower of PhD comics, I have always wondered at the different roles a PhD student takes.  So here is a funny take with the ten incarnations, among the many, of Vishnu.

Matsya - First they gave him the coursework. He completed them. Then the qualifier. He passed them. Then comes the literature review. He digested them. Then the idea and the dissertation. With each task (new environment) he grows (like the Matsya), and in the end ready to contribute something on his own with ideas borrowed from everywhere.

Kurma - The funding agencies have to be churned (the ocean), the professors become the "devas", the univ/admin becomes the asuras (necessary "evil" who want a share), science becomes the churning rod (Mt. Mandara) and the various tools and techniques becomes the rope (Adisesha). Then they look for a solid base. Enter the PhD student who bears the brunt of everything by offering himself as the base.

Varaha - Whether it's for the gaps in the literature review or for the life partner amidst the ruins, it's up to the PhD student to dig deep and bring out the one. And he has to be quick to display it. For someone else might take it (her) and he might have to do the digging all over again.
 
Nrisimha - He can neither say nobody else has done it (for they will say you forgot to quote "his" work which is also related) nor can he say others have done it (for there is no novelty). It should neither be easy (very limited scope) nor should it be too broad. It is neither a full time job (for he is at a university) nor is he a student (for he gets a stipend and he "works").

Vamana - All he asks for is three things: Funding, Fame (publications) and Free stuff. He then has it all covered ;)

Parashurama  - Oh, he can get angry. And when he does it is the generations of undergrads (over the time it takes to finish his PhD) that will inevitably suffer. Grading hundreds of papers that takes him into the wee hours, he slays each one of them. No mercy.

Rama - The favorite student, straight As. Life has been treating him well. And just as the fat offers (corporate) walk in, he rejects them and chooses to do a PhD (vanavasa). Of course, all is well that ends well (the coronation during the doctorate). He will also have his own PhDyayana (the journey of my PhD).

Balarama / Buddha - There is always a question "Do we belong here? Aren't we the odd man out among our friends and relatives?" (much like - what is Balarama or Buddha doing among Vishnu incarnations?)

Krishna - This is tricky. For he is almost never charming to the girls and quickly labeled "too nerdy". His one big discourse does happen during the defense in what can be a battlefield. Alas, Dharma wins.

Kalki / Unknown- For he will always have a hidden dimension/hobby that is rarely revealed. Others have to wait, for the time has not yet come.

P.S - Sorry to all the female PhD students, as I used the male gender through out. It is only to go with the "gender" of Vishnu.

Play it in your mind, I say

It can be simple. All you need to do is make your mind play it.

Call it positive thinking or magnetic waves or telepathy but I think our mind is more capable than what we think it is.

All of us dream, literally and figuratively. While Freud might be more qualified to explain our dreams, we cannot deny the simple fact that dreams are some kind of thought patterns. There are things we want to do and stuff we don't want to do, and they find their way into our thought process and then get played out in our dreams. Of course, most of which we just forget!

Can we make this sub-conscious thought process, conscious? Can we do what Dr. Kalam suggested? And transform our thoughts to action, to reality? We have all heard of this - an action plan. A well thought out sequence of things that we will do/follow to accomplish a particular task. We may play it in our mind to see how the sequence of events will pan out. But is it possible to stretch this and extrapolate?

Here is a personal example. The first year in  my PhD life was easily the most difficult period in my academic life. Courses and topics were bouncing off the top of my head. I questioned myself my choice of doing a PhD. Wondered if I had it in me. What was I doing there? While later on I realized that such thoughts were only too common among PhD students, it was quite a lonely feeling then.

I only took comfort in one thought, in fact an entire scene. I imagined what I would do after I hear about the qualification result. There was a volleyball field just outside my home. I saw myself rushing to the field and leaping in joy, uncontrolled. I could feel my bare feet touching the grass. I could see that my jumps were awkward like that of an out of sync ballet. Each limb moving to its own frequency. There were no eyes watching me do this absurd act, at least not any that I noticed.

It turned out that I ended up doing nothing like that, not even close. I did pass my qualifier. And thankfully for the community residents, my emotions were well in check. :P Tasks look daunting until we finish them. Once achieved, we know they are doable and move on, I think. Of course, the imaginary "ballet" dance was not the reason I passed the qualifier. But it reinforced the thought that I would pass the qualifier. And that could have subtly helped.

My second example was of course my PhD. While my PhD was taking so long and there were thoughts about whether I should quit in between, I again dreamt. Played it out in my mind. This time it was about my graduation day. How would it be posing with my parents, family and friends, wearing the prestigious gown, and so on. Looking back, I am convinced that this process helped me sustain. Of course, graduating is not the reason one does a PhD. But it was necessary, to achieve what I wanted to.

I believe each of us is unique. What that translates to is that, the only person capable of completely understanding us is ourselves. While our friends and well-wishers, can give us words of wisdom, often it is just up to us to deal with the situation. It may not be possible for an external person to (thoroughly) empathize with our situation and here is where our minds can play a crucial role.

Of course, I don't take any credits for this idea. I dare not. I am sure there are many who do this, consciously or unconsciously, creative visualization or day dreaming, wishful thinking or otherwise. This in fact finds a mention even in our age old scripts (Hanuman's words to Sita in Sunder Khand, Akrura's thoughts during his yatra to bring Krishna and Balarama to Kamsa and so on).

P.S - Scary, but can we make bad things happen as well? A good enough incentive to think positively?

Game theory for the last over

This post was motivated of course by the last over of the World Cup (2015) semi-final.

When Elliott was batting, Steyn had several options and he is well capable of bowling everything. Yet he chose to bowl a length ball, almost a sin during the slog overs. So, why did Steyn choose to bowl length? Pressure? I don't think so. Here is a game theory explanation. For simplicity, let us discuss just two options for Steyn. Yorker vs Length. Similarly, Elliott also had a few options. For simplicity I am going to consider two: Stay put and Play across.

Now, here are the pay-offs.
1. If Steyn bowls a yorker and Elliott decides to Stay put, it's at best a single for Elliott (So, advantage SA)
2. If Steyn bowls a yorker and Elliott decides to move across and flick, because of the short boundaries, the ball might just go for a boundary. (So, advantage NZ)
3. If Steyn bowls length and Elliott decides to Stay put and slog, it's a boundary. (So, advantage NZ)
4. If Steyn bowls length and Elliott decides to move across and flick, because of Steyn's pace, Elliott is likely to miss the flick (It's not easy to time a flick against Steyn's length ball vs a yorker). So, advantage SA.

So, here is the pay-off matrix. (SA, NZ)

	Stay put	Play across
Yorker	(1,-1)	(-1,1)
Length	(-1,1)	(1,-1)

People who understand game theory will immediately realize that there is no pure strategy Nash Equilibrium in this case. That is, there is no one "best" path of action for both players. So, each player has to mix up their strategies a little. In fact, 50% for each action. But if Elliott decides to play across and Steyn know this, then Steyn's best action is to bowl length.

What actually happened? Elliott moved across before the ball was bowled. Steyn tried to outsmart him and bowled length (instead of the yorker). Elliott slogged onside instead of flicking. Game Set and Match!

Acknowledging the Culture Gap

Criminals, politicians, administrators, cops and now KJ Yesudas. It's very easy for us to say "I'm right and you're wrong". But it takes considerably more effort in understanding why we appear as wrong to others. Here is one attempt.

India has progressed at a breathtakingly fast pace since the last decade or so. But as always with such pace, the development has affected only pockets of the society. The result is that we have two vastly different sections of the society each one looking at the other with blatant contempt. Again, note that the contempt is mutual and it is a dangerous harbinger.

One section is forward looking, western, modern, savoring the freedom and liberty that exists in the world and marching ahead at a scorching pace. The other section is caught in its traditional web, unable to release itself from biases and locked and adamant to be in a status quo. The former wants India to be like the western world. Is frustrated at its slow adoption. The latter frustrated with the way the former is behaving. 

India has always found peace in tolerance. Be it the British or the Mughals or even before, tolerance has always been our virtue. It could be debated whether it was the best strategy but when we refused to tolerate it had usually resulted in chaos. While there is evidence that chaos has yielded something good, it's always tricky to predict the result.

I hope the section of the society which has the capability to tolerate finds a middle path and takes the other half along with it. In my opinion, any measure that we take ignoring the other half and considering only one half, however right it may be, is guaranteed to be a failure and cause chaos. And we just cannot afford that.

The first step is to acknowledge their hatred towards our way of life and understand where it comes from. In my opinion, only then a solution will emerge. We all enjoy and want freedom and with that comes a responsibility as well. The responsibility towards the society. It is easy to say that we are not to blamed if they are "behind". Can we ignore those that we think are too behind and do what we think is right? Can we look down upon those who think that we are "modern"? Debatable. I think we cannot if we want to live together.

Note: I'm not trying to say we have to adjust and live according to the other half.

Road trip from Dallas (Texas) to California

First things first. Make sure you check your car with a good mechanic – brakes, tires, bearings etc. Get some good wipers installed and don’t forget to fill the wiper fluid. You should at least able to check the engine oil level.

The major stops I took were at Santa Fe (NewMexico), Colorado Springs and Salt Lake (Utah).

Dallas (Texas) to Santa Fe (NM) – I took Route 287 and then I 40. The scenery is mostly dry and empty with what looked like old and abandoned oil pumps and some huge farms thrown in between. It also takes you through some small towns. So watch your speed! I took a detour to Lake Arrowhead state park where I was surprised to see hundreds of prairie dogs. The lake was however quite dry when I went (late August). The Caprock canyon state park also does not seem like a big detour, though I did not take it. You will have plenty of opportunities to go via the historic route 66 when you reach closer to New Mexico. Not to forget the so called “ghost towns”. The experience will be surreal J There are of course plenty of things to see in Santa Fe. I visited the Cathedral Basilica in downtown but the Loreto Chappel was a waste of my time  (the original hanging stairs has been modified quite a bit and they just looked like a winding fleet of stairs to me). Be aware of the toll ways at Dallas. They had a weird automatic system and there was no way to pay cash! 

Santa Fe(NM) to Colorado – I 25 in Colorado is itself spectacular with views of the front range of the Rocky mountains. If you are short of time, take the scenic high roads to Taos. The high road goes through the Sangre de Cristo Mountains of the Rocky range and the views are spectacular. You need to take Route 84 and follow signs for scenic byway to Taos and then eventually join I 25 to Colorado. You might also stop at the historic Santuario de Chimayó if time permits. I was fortunate to meet the 95 year old priest when I visited the church! The Rio Grande monument is another detour if you are interested. The town Taos itself is a popular destination. The Taos pueblo is a reservation and consists of a private, secretive and conservative population of native Americans. Though I could not enter the pueblo (it became too late) you may try your luck if interested. If you are spending a night at Santa Fe, you may also start the next day by visiting the Bandelier National monument and then to High Roads. Note that the Bandelier involves a foot trail of about 3 miles round trip and the place is accessible only by a public bus (private cars were not allowed). So do this only if you have enough time!  

Colorado springs to Salt Lake – Garden of the gods is a very short (less than 5 miles) scenic drive you just don’t want to miss while you are in Colorado Springs. Take a walk if you have more time. Pike’s peak is another consideration (they also have cog rails). If you continue on I25 (be careful regarding weather though), you will cross Palmer Divide for a spectacular view of the Rocky mountains. Then take I 70 near Denver (the junction is called “mousetrap”) instead of continuing north bound. Reach Salt Lake via Glenwood Springs and Rifle. The several tunnels and the winding route with steep grades along the way make it a very interesting drive. Enjoy the signs posted regarding the steep grades, warning signs for trucks and special runaway ramps for trucks! The route is rightly considered an engineering marvel! Rifle falls is a small detour (less than 20 miles) inside Rifle and you can get a real close view of the falls and is hardly a walk from the parking place. Hanging lake is another attraction near Glenwood springs that involves a not so easy hiking trail of about a mile one way. Arches National park is just 20 miles from I70 as you enter Utah. Ideally you need several hours to see everything in this park. But if you don’t have so much time you could just take the scenic drive through the park (about 20 miles) and come back to catch the highway. North of Salt Lake city is Timpanagos cave national monument on state route 92. To enter the cave there is a small hike (fully paved and hence easy except for the grade) of about 1.5 miles but offers some amazing views of stalactites, stalacmites and helictites (rock straws). 

Salt Lake to California – There are many places in Nevada where they still actively mine gold and some of these are actually open to the public for viewing. But they are open only on Thursdays and so might require some planning. I did not notice anything else interesting in Nevada along I 80. Lake Tahoe is a great place to cool off as you enter CA. Of course CA offers much more to see for a tourist!

My trip was mostly unplanned. All the above places I had discovered were by taking detours as I saw the brown boards (for national or state parks) or stopping by at the visitor center as I entered a new state or by asking my friends who lived in that area. So, perhaps you can find a better route and a better plan and if so I request you to leave a comment. Also, please do comment if you followed this route and if it was helpful! Thanks!

Age of Ravan(a)

This is purely an academic exercise based on some references of Ramayan(a) and other such literature and there is nothing religious about this article. So, whoever is reading this article, I kindly suggest to leave your sentiments and religious beliefs aside and view this piece as objectively as you can. Any comments mocking at the plausibility of the numbers below will be plainly ignored.

Ravan(a) is said to be the mighty king of Lanka and is portrayed as "evil" and one to be slayed in the epic Ramayan(a). But those who have read Ramayan(a) in some detail would also admire some of the traits of Ravan(a). To begin with, it is said that he had the blessings of "God" and was powerful and knowledgeable. He was not only a great king but was well versed in Vedas (the highest possible education at that time) and in music (apparently he was a great player of Veena). To call him a "demon", hence takes away all these good accomplishments from him. Perhaps, it is not without reason that they say 'character makes a man'.

It can be gleaned from Ramayan(a) that Ram(a) was in his 30s (about 38 to be precise) when he took on Ravan(a) in battle. But I have always wondered how old must Ravan(a) have been at the time of battle. Just curious. To my knowledge there is no direct or indirect reference to his age in Valmiki Ramayana (and there are several versions of Ramayan(a)). So, I will try and put together some information from other references in Tarantino style ;).

1. When sage Vishwamitra seeks the help of Ram(a) and Lakshman(a), Dasarath(a) is clearly scared at the mention of Ravan(a). This implies that either Ravan(a) was a contemporary of Dasarath(a) or possibly even before. A note here that Dasaratha himself says he has lived for "thousands of years".
2. Ravan(a) had battled with King Karthavirya Arjun(a) and lost the battle. Karthavirya, obviously at some point later, was in turn killed in a battle with Parasuram(a). This implies that Ravan(a) was around even a generation before Parasuram(a)!
3. Various references vaguely mention that Ravan(a) had performed tapas for thousands of years!


My opinion
It is easy to set aside these references as fantasies. I somehow feel it is a lazy way to discard things. Maybe there are other explanations?

1. What if the references were of multiple persons? Most of the names are derived from Sanskrit and hence have a meaning behind it. For instance "Vishnu" just means "the all pervading one" (So, why can't Shiva or any other "God" be a "Vishnu"?) and Ram(a:) means "one who is pleasing (to others)". And the name in focus, Ravan(a), means "crying" or "one who makes others cry". So, could it be that there were (and are) several Ravan(a)s?
2. Was it just a figure of speech at many of these references? My mother often used to say "I have told you this a thousand times.. " I respond to her saying "No, this is the third time actually" :P
3. The earliest definition of year (defined as the time it takes for earth to go around its orbit) is around 7th and 8th century BC. Could it be that the word "year" meant some other time scale in these older references? People from Krita yuga (a phase in Earth) supposedly lived for 1000s of years. What definition of "year" are they using?

Perhaps not without reason they say "ageless" epics :)

Can "we" come out of opinion based politics?

(Written mostly from an Indian perspective)

Region based politics (such as the left front in the NE and Kerala), caste based politics (too many examples to list), language based politics (such as the ones in TN), religion based politics (Hindutva and non-hindutva. Parties who call themselves secular just seem to be non-hindutva in my opinion. If you encourage a reservation system based on religion then you cease to be secular, right?. Reservation was provided in the constitution for demographic groups that were structurally oppressed and it was not based on religion. Anyway reservation system is a different argument altogether) and now we have been bitten by opinion based politics. 

Politics is a very difficult area. And on top of that it is murky. I have always believed that politicians are some of the smartest people on earth. Once they get a powerful position their objective is to maximize their wealth before the next election. Most of them succeed in accomplishing this simple objective. Of course, stuff happens in between. People criticize. People blame, threaten, protest and a majority remain quiet. They are all immaterial. A politician gets the job done. Personal job I mean.

To win an election is no easy task in the first place. Having contested an election at an extremely small scale at IIT, I have a vague idea of what it takes. You can come up with an extremely attractive, practical and useful manifesto. You can spend hours convincing the voters that you will get things done. Those just don't matter. Ultimately many voters don't care who you are. Some have their own agenda. Some have already made their decision, choices that are mostly personal. Some are just not going to turn up for voting anyways. At whatever scale the elections happen more or less the above trend is true.

Why are these choices personal and pre-determined? In other words, why are most votes mostly based on our opinions and not facts or extensive analysis? Why are we so impressionable? For instance, most of you who are reading this blog will fall into one of the following categories:

A. Believe in AAP and want it to succeed
B. Used to believe AAP but have now given up on AAP
C. Think that AAP is just like another political party and has a few tricks up its sleeve
D. AAP - kya AAP.. humko aap vap nahin malum saab

Some of us do wait and watch and our patience is running out with every new article. But most of us just follow what the herd says and blindly believe what the news reports say. "Oh yes, AAP is useless" or "Oh yes, AAP is fantastic". We just don't put thoughts to the reports and on top of that do not accept that we are so impressionable. A simple proof is the fact that both AAP supporters and haters (or non-believers) exist among the literate. Surely, one of them is being misled? I'm scared at this. If educated people cannot (or do not have the time to) fully analyze and come to a decision based on facts, it puts a huge pressure on a genuine political party (if any exists) to change people's opinions. I don't see any difference between us and a guy who has been voting for ADMK (a party started by a movie star in Tamil Nadu) for time immemorial just because he was a huge fan of the cine star who started the party (and who is no more). At least the latter's mind does not waver much.

Jai Hind!