Nobel winner V Ramakrishnan refuses to attend Indian Science Congress, calls it a 'circus'

[Indx TechStyle]

It's called dry Humor! ...........................................

Didn't understood. What do you mean?

 

[Indx TechStyle]

But if the congress acts in this way why should he? Plus he is a scientist not a diplomat, he is not supposed to politically correct.

He could politely express his disappointment with the Congress but he did not do so which created an issue.
Our scientific community is considered most respected and neutral and away from any hatred or competition which is present among other people of nation.
Totally it follows "Krodh ka tyag"(giving up anger forever). So, such hard protest from a scientist is not a common issue.

 

[Anupu]

He could politely express his disappointment with the Congress but he did not do so which created an issue.
Our scientific community is considered most respected and neutral and away from any hatred or competition which is present among other people of nation.
Totally it follows "Krodh ka tyag"(giving up anger forever). So, such hard protest from a scientist is not a common issue.

Maybe, but I think it is more an insult meant towards the science congress rather than Indian scientific community on a whole. Because I believe he also said in the same interview that we have excellent capability in us but we don't have a habit of training the next generation very much as in the best scientist in India generally take very few grad students under them as RA's. So I think isme kuch humara pyaara media bhi buhat aacha hai you know, thoda masala laga ke bas woh hi kehna jo hungama khada kare types hai :biggrin2:

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Maybe, but I think it is more an insult meant towards the science congress rather than Indian scientific community on a whole. Because I believe he also said in the same interview that we have excellent capability in us but we don't have a habit of training the next generation very much as in the best scientist in India generally take very few grad students under them as RA's. So I think isme kuch humara pyaara media bhi buhat aacha hai you know, thoda masala laga ke bas woh hi kehna jo hungama khada kare types hai :biggrin2:

Janata jale par namak chhidakti hai, Indian Media petrol chhidakta hai.

 

[DingDong]

Axioms are abstract ideas in mathematics, there in no need for science to prove them because, they don't need to be they are just true[I define them that way for eg 1+1 = 2, a triangle has 3 sides, two parallel lines are lines which shall never touch each other if they ran infinitely].

Newton's second law is not an axiom, it can be treated as one, as in since it's been proven to be true you can consider it true, and it has been shown experimentally that it is true, take a car and double it's speed and ram it into a wall, you will exert twice as much force on the wall. you can measure it sir.

Astrology is not an abstract idea, it's a physical practice which is described by those who adhere to it as scientific. It makes claim that there is a connection between movement in heavens and our fates. Don't marry a manglik girl that is astrology, wear this gemstone for success in business. Don't confuse it with astronomy and the work done by the likes of aryabhatta.

So is homeopathy. And both of them don't give a single shred of evidence.

And there is nothing as romantic as an Inventors passion about either of them. They don't have a place in modern science where proof is needed that's it.

1. How do you measure force without taking mass into consideration? Please give it a try. Newton's second law defines Force and Mass in terms of one another. It is actually an Axiom and not a Theorem.

2. I understand the concept of Parallel lines, but there are many axioms related to Parallel lines (e.g. angle created by intersecting line) which cannot be proven, only empirical evidence exists.

3. Now try to define a Straight Line and an Angle.

4. Albert Einstein proposed several theories some of them were proven to be false (related to Black Hole, Time Travel), few others like "Theory of Relativity" were proven recently through empirical evidence.

There will always be a place for pseudo-science in seminars and discussions as long as the views aren't imposed and counter-arguments are respected.

 

[dhananjay1]

I bet he goes to many conferences that could be described as circus-y.

 

[Anupu]

1. How do you measure force without taking mass into consideration? Please give it a try. Newton's second law defines Force and Mass in terms of one another. It is actually an Axiom and not a Theorem.

2. I understand the concept of Parallel lines, but there are many axioms related to Parallel lines (e.g. angle created by intersecting line) which cannot be proven, only empirical evidence exists.

3. Now try to define a Straight Line and an Angle.

4. Albert Einstein proposed several theories some of them were proven to be false (related to Black Hole, Time Travel), few others like "Theory of Relativity" were proven recently through empirical evidence.

There will always be a place for pseudo-science in seminars and discussions as long as the views aren't imposed and counter-arguments are respected.

1. The second law of motion defines force as rate of change of momentum, momentum as product of mass and velocity and acceleration as rate of change of velocity, I don't see an axiom in here, and it doesn't define mass, you don't need to define mass, he defines mass as the property that creates gravity and that we experience the effect of mass as mutual gravitational pull between them.

2. Sorry who told you that but you have a mathematical proof for every angle formula out there. Mathematics never deals in empirical proofs

3. A straight line is a line whose derivative is same everywhere, or has a constant slope and an angle is the measure turn between line segments joined at a some end point. There can be many different definitions depending on the type of problem you want to solve. It's not difficult really as you think.

The thing is axioms are generally used in maths to represent self evident declarative truth, Astrology is not an axiom.
Axiom is a truth defined for the abstract world of mathematics, for eg when you define bayes theorem in probability you use the axioms for a hypothetical set for any problem.

4. That's what I am saying Einstein was proven false because his theory failed experimental test, and yes his special theory of relativity was experimentally shown to be true. And do you see any experimental evidence for Astrology. Any proof of the fact ki brahspati aur budh ek ghar mein nahi hone chaiye kyunki, budh jo hai tara ka beta tha from chandra but tara rishi brahspati ki patni thi, isliye brahpati can't bear him . Any proof and reason. Einstien was wrong for eg when he was against quantum mechanics and he was proven wrong, why because quantum mechanics had results backing it.

Does Astrology given any empirical proof. See I have attended (and presented) in many top level conferences over the world in my field. No body discusses anything else except science, sorry but no I have never heard of a reputable conference of science which had a workshop on say bible studies or color therapy or astrology, so no we don't need to listen to people who make claims without proof, if you have proof publish it and put it up for scrutiny in a journal, the scientific population in general can look at your paper read it and if you clear peer review then you can talk about it in a conference and claim your own noble.

 

[Anupu]

Janata jale par namak chhidakti hai, Indian Media petrol chhidakta hai.

http://indianexpress.com/article/ci...re-needed-professor-venkatraman-ramakrishnan/
Yeh dekho Punjab university mein toh gaya na bindass.

 

[DingDong]

1. The second law of motion defines force as rate of change of momentum, momentum as product of mass and velocity and acceleration as rate of change of velocity, I don't see an axiom in here, and it doesn't define mass, you don't need to define mass, he defines mass as the property that creates gravity and that we experience the effect of mass as mutual gravitational pull between them.

2. Sorry who told you that but you have a mathematical proof for every angle formula out there. Mathematics never deals in empirical proofs

3. A straight line is a line whose derivative is same everywhere, or has a constant slope and an angle is the measure turn between line segments joined at a some end point. There can be many different definitions depending on the type of problem you want to solve. It's not difficult really as you think.

The thing is axioms are generally used in maths to represent self evident declarative truth, Astrology is not an axiom.
Axiom is a truth defined for the abstract world of mathematics, for eg when you define bayes theorem in probability you use the axioms for a hypothetical set for any problem.

4. That's what I am saying Einstein was proven false because his theory failed experimental test, and yes his special theory of relativity was experimentally shown to be true. And do you see any experimental evidence for Astrology. Any proof of the fact ki brahspati aur budh ek ghar mein nahi hone chaiye kyunki, budh jo hai tara ka beta tha from chandra but tara rishi brahspati ki patni thi, isliye brahpati can't bear him . Any proof and reason. Einstien was wrong for eg when he was against quantum mechanics and he was proven wrong, why because quantum mechanics had results backing it.

Does Astrology given any empirical proof. See I have attended (and presented) in many top level conferences over the world in my field. No body discusses anything else except science, sorry but no I have never heard of a reputable conference of science which had a workshop on say bible studies or color therapy or astrology, so no we don't need to listen to people who make claims without proof, if you have proof publish it and put it up for scrutiny in a journal, the scientific population in general can look at your paper read it and if you clear peer review then you can talk about it in a conference and claim your own noble.

Points 1,2,3 are totally wrong, I won't explain why. But just to leave few hints:

Hint 1: How do you define a "Derivative", a "Slope" and an "Angle"? Try to be rigorous, you will end up with a circular definition, which defines a "Straight Line" in terms of itself.

Hint 2: What is Gravity? Is it a kind of force? What is Force, do care to explain :biggrin2:. And, did you just define Mass in terms of Force (mass is something which creates gravity). Again, you will eventually end up defining mass in terms of force and force in terms of mass, and eventually produce a circular definition which defines force and mass in terms of themselves.

And did you just say that everything doesn't need to be proven. Did you just contradict yourself?

Do you know that there exist several contradictions in Mathematics particularly in Set Theory, which are an indication of the fact that Mathematics as we humans have come to understand is flawed.

4. Just because something hasn't been proven as "true" until now doesn't mean that it is "false".

 

[Screambowl]

Since it is Indian science CONGRESS the name of event, how can politics and religion remain absent?





may be he is pressurizing to change the way the organize these events. Obviously , they are spending money on these events which are going in drains. No productive outcome.

 

[Anupu]

Points 1,2,3 are totally wrong, I won't explain why. But just to leave few hints:

Hint 1: How do you define a "Derivative", a "Slope" and an "Angle"? Try to be rigorous, you will end up with a circular definition, which defines a "Straight Line" in terms of itself.

Hint 2: What is Gravity? Is it a kind of force? What is Force, do care to explain :biggrin2:. And, did you just define Mass in terms of Force (mass is something which creates gravity). Again, you will eventually end up defining mass in terms of force and force in terms of mass, and eventually produce a circular definition which defines force and mass in terms of themselves.

And did you just say that everything doesn't need to be proven. Did you just contradict yourself?

Do you know that there exist several contradictions in Mathematics particularly in Set Theory, which are an indication of the fact that Mathematics as we humans have come to understand is flawed.

4. Just because something hasn't been proven as "true" until now doesn't mean that it is "false".

Nahi ji pata nahi apne kaunsi maths padhi hai apne but a straight line is what I have defined. a line with curvature 0. Anyways I can see when someone moves from tark to kutark, and how it's futile to discuss with people of rigid opinion.
Toh sahab leaving message is you keep your opinion of astrology but aap ulte bhi latak jay toh bhi astrology ko koi established scientist, science nahi manega bina evidence ke.

 

[DingDong]

Nahi ji pata nahi apne kaunsi maths padhi hai apne but a straight line is what I have defined. a line with curvature 0. Anyways I can see when someone moves from tark to kutark, and how it's futile to discuss with people of rigid opinion.
Toh sahab leaving message is you keep your opinion of astrology but aap ulte bhi latak jay toh bhi astrology ko koi established scientist, science nahi manega bina evidence ke.

Allow me to assure you that my Mathematics is not as weak as you assume.
Now tell me what is the meaning of Curvature 0? Define it independently if you can.

There is absolutely no rigorous definition of a Straight Line, just like there exists absolutely no definition of Time. Similarly, Force and Mass cannot be defined independently.

And like I said, just because something hasn't been proven to be "True" doesn't mean it is "False" one of the basics of the Sequent Calculus, do brush up your knowledge of the section called "Negation and Contradiction".

 

[Sakal Gharelu Ustad]

Allow me to assure you that my Mathematics is not as weak as you assume.
Now tell me what is the meaning of Curvature 0? [emoji14]oundefine it independently if you can.

There is absolutely no rigorous definition of a Straight Line, just like there exists absolutely no definition of Time. Similarly, Force and Mass cannot be defined independently.

And like I said, just because something hasn't been proven to be "True" doesn't mean it is "False" one of the basics of the Sequent Calculus, do brush up your knowledge of the section called "Negation and Contradiction".

Although you have strong maths, I will ask you a question.

In maths you define axioms and then rest of the arguments are logical and follow from the axioms unless some contradiction is found and axiom revised. So the arguments have a logical consistency once you fix the axioms. Also once defined, axioms let you test future hypothesis. For eg. Once you define law of gravity you can use it to find escape velocity etc.

What is the similar counterpart in astrology?



Sent from my MI 3W using Tapatalk

 

[Ancient Indian]

Although you have strong maths, I will ask you a question.

In maths you define axioms and then rest of the arguments are logical and follow from the axioms unless some contradiction is found and axiom revised. So the arguments have a logical consistency once you fix the axioms. Also once defined, axioms let you test future hypothesis. For eg. Once you define law of gravity you can use it to find escape velocity etc.

What is the similar counterpart in astrology?



Sent from my MI 3W using Tapatalk

When you add kuja to sani (I don't know english terms), It is like addition.
Two of them will combine forces, and fuk you up.

Kuja is known for mind fuk. Sani known for life fuc.

Both of them will total fuk. I never learnt astrology but heard some kind of scientific explanation to it.
About periodic table and it's relation to grahas and what not.

Hope my post helped you.

 

[anoop_mig25]

Nobel winner V Ramakrishnan refuses to attend Indian Science Congress, calls it a 'circus'


@Scarface @Bornubus @SREEKAR @Srinivas_K @rock127 @guru-dutt @sabari @cobra commando @Vishwarupa
Well, he must be saying right.
I've watched this Congress many times. We discuss better in our school's quiz than this.

Well what his view about God `s existence . ..

A scitenist worth his salt would never believe in God

till then i know his views about God existence i believe he belongs to indian cateogry of scientish who believes in god existence

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

When you add kuja to sani (I don't know english terms), It is like addition.
Two of them will combine forces, and fuk you up.

Kuja is known for mind fuk. Sani known for life fuc.

Both of them will total fuk. I never learnt astrology but heard some kind of scientific explanation to it.
About periodic table and it's relation to grahas and what not.

Hope my post helped you.

Laymen cannot recognise or validate scince and pseudo science, it takes a expert in and scientists

Well what his view about God `s existence . ..

A scitenist worth his salt would never believe in God

till then i know his views about God existence i believe he belongs to indian cateogry of scientish who believes in god existence

Although majority of scientists are atheists or at lest followers of non traditional religions, those who belive in god are not lesser scientists in their field of work.. yes they can be called irrational when it comes to the matter of god or the Absense of it.

 

[anoop_mig25]

Although majority of scientists are atheists or at lest followers of non traditional religions, those who belive in god are not lesser scientists in their field of work.. yes they can be called irrational when it comes to the matter of god or the Absense of it.

I am not calling him lesser scientists I am just stating facts


Few years back there was study around word whether scientists believe in God`s existance ???

While in America 90% of scitentist didn`t believe in god existience

While reverse was true for most indian scitentist

 

[DingDong]

Although you have strong maths, I will ask you a question.

In maths you define axioms and then rest of the arguments are logical and follow from the axioms unless some contradiction is found and axiom revised. So the arguments have a logical consistency once you fix the axioms. Also once defined, axioms let you test future hypothesis. For eg. Once you define law of gravity you can use it to find escape velocity etc.

What is the similar counterpart in astrology?



Sent from my MI 3W using Tapatalk

Mathematics is not science, it is the "language" of science, it is one of the tools relied heavily upon by the scientists to "express" their observations (Mathematical Modelling) because it is the best we have got at the moment.

Ultimately, everything boils down to how our "Brain" observes and interprets this world as we know it, our interpretation may very well be flawed and that is why our theorems and axioms are riddled with contradictions, and we are still searching for better model.

For example, there may be more than three dimensions in this Universe, but our brain may not be able to interact with all of them or interpret them because it is constrained by it's designs and impulses (AI practitioners and Statisticians use something called "Dimensionality Reduction" because it is easier for us Humans to visualize and interpret the data when it is reduced to 2D or 3D).

There is a popular theory which says that we might not be able to recognize other forms of life even if we encounter them just because our brain will fail to recognize them or any evidence of their existence.

There will always be place for Pseudo-Science simply because they encourage discussions and counter-arguments. In my view Pseudo-Science helps in developing curiosity and scientific temper. Scepticism is good, out-rightly rejecting ideas just because they do not match our standards is not good for science.

 

[Ancient Indian]

Laymen cannot recognise or validate scince and pseudo science, it takes a expert in and scientists

Really?
I am an expert in more than few fields.
Just ask me tricky question. I will kick shit out of it.
@Sakal Gharelu Ustad
Come on friend. Do you like my astrology post?

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

Really?
I am an expert in more than few fields.
Just ask me tricky question. I will kick shit out of it.
@Sakal Gharelu Ustad
Come on friend. Do you like my astrology post?

What i meant is that non experts may not be able disprove a pseudo science because he doesn't have expertise to find flaws and wrong things said in that pseudo scientific theories. Experts debunk it and we in good faith/ rational read their explenations to why a so called theory/ practice is unscientific.