As usual, Tiwari jee's made very relevant and accurate observations.
It has so much in common with Bimal jee and myself also said.
A scientific study is a must. And I agree that there is no need to rush for the dredging project. There is no pressing urgency. I also agree that development has to be paid for in terms of ecology at times but anything just because it damages ecology/ environment can't be termed deveopment.
Then there is another issue. If people really believe that it's Ram setu, immatrial of what scientific study concludes, should we go ahead with it presuming that environmental issues can be addressed?
There may be scope for sci- fi by rationalising the bridge-making in terms of technoloy as Tiwari jee also indicated.
CMN
Vishwa Mohan Tiwari <onevishwa@...> wrote:
There is sufficient interest in the subject which shows that it is important to us SF buffs. The most important point that comes out is that more study needs to be done, apart from publishing the findings of earlier studies. Why havent they been published so far, and if publishe, then why have been neglefting them so far? Obviuously, the project is being rushed, why? The reasons are obvious, in a democracy where national interests are less important than the party' interest,
Nation suffers. What is the harm if the project is delayed till the important issues are sorted out? We may lose few dollars for a few years!! Are we so poor?? Build the canal or break the bridge after the facts and repercussions of the project are understood properly. Just because no major development work can be done without damaging the ecology, it cannot be taken as a point supporting the major work. More than enough damage has been done to our ecology, shouldnt we become more careful now ? Can we afford to continue damaging our ecology till we are destroyed? And then can we feel satisfied that species have been vanishing and entering, so what if we are lost? Yeas species have been vanishing, but not by their own deeds. If human race vanishes because a huge astroid strikes the earth then of course we have no choice, and future generatios, if any evolve, may say the same. But canwe destroy or help in destroying the human race by our deeds, so called deeds for
so called development?? Man does not live by bread alone. therefore economic considerations cannot be the dominant ones. Lwet us look at the other areas like longterm effects on our eco system on the thorium that may be washed away. on the impacts of tsunamies, on the cultural mindset of the people of India, a country known for its noble cultural heritage, and probably one with the most humane culture. Insultint Ram is almost insulting the ideals that Ram stands for.
I believe that the feature that now we see is NATURAL. And not the man made Ram Setu that was built many thousands of years ago. To me even if it is a natural feature, it is believed to be the site on which a bridge was built to kill a Raksha like Ravana, who was devoid of many humane qualities and represents consumerist culture in the worst sense. So the war of Ram and Ravan was a war for a humane life versus demonic life. The war has to continue. The memory of Ram setu inspires us
towards that war. I do not like writing long posts, but this is as short as I could make it. I find that I am not being understood properly because of perhaps my brevity, so I have made this exception. Vishwa Mohan Tiwari ________________________________> To: indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in> From: arvind_drmishra@yahoo.co.in> Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 02:47:35 +0000> Subject: [indiansciencefiction] Re: Ram Setu :the myth and reality !>> No one appears to be interested in economics of Ramsetu-[rs].O.K. we> could shift out attention to fictional part of rs.At the outset why it> is called RS?> While antiquity of Ram Katha is any body's guess,I have my own> observations on the issue.Valmiki wrote[rather compiled]his on own> epic version of Ram Katha around 1000 BC.Definitely
he would have> depended largely on the popular sources of the story as it passed from> generations top generations in Indian pathos.The first detailed> account of RS ,its survey part,its construction involving floating> stones [?],and apprehensions that it may not lost long is given in a> very lucid and descriptive manner.One has to really read it to> appreciate the tale.Hanuman in the leadership of Jambvant first> surveys the entire region to facilitate the passage of a huge army> ,Nal a local craftsman does the needed engineering,while Angad another> prominent protagonist shows hi apprehensions in no unclear terms that> comeback from from the same very route may not be possible.And> Everyone now knows RAMA and his whole jubilant army took an aerial> root to return after victory over Lanka.> But why I am telling these oft repeated account everyone of you knows> very well !Because I have to make a point -please do not look on
the> legend in its apparent sense but try to deduce the logical and> rational meanings hidden in between the lines.> The recent studies in genography-> [https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/participate.html> ]reveal that the first human entered India from Afria around 20 lakhs> years ago from west coast in initially in Kerala and then spread other> parts of country.The definite genetic footprints also indicate that> the same band of early humans crossed the sea ridge what might have> been the same RS [though much later named the same]and reached LANKA> and further far away even to Australia.The y chromosome and mit dna> studies have confirmed this.> Again a powerful band of same African early human appears to have> entered India through north a bit later and established their> kingdom[!]in northern parts.Genography studies
do not just stop here> but further reveal that the same migratory band later exterminate> males of already established southern people in a major> combat/encounter leaving only females to be adopted by these> victorious people.> Now it is time to do some guesswork!Is not it the saga of mythical> Devaasur sangraam ?or Ram -Ravana yuddh ?or Aryaa-dravid combats?> My hypothesis-The said event could be the the Ram-Ravan Yudhh and the> preexisting Setu is utilized again of course after certain innovations> and rehabilitation work to enable a whole army to cross over to reah> other side of the mighty ocean.> It is the memory of the same event passed through generations as we> know it today.> Its not all myth only, we have to apply a bit of our brain-the human> brain which humanity often boasts about!> NAAMULAA LOKSHRUTI-pop-memories are not altogether baseless.> I would like not only to know what you think about all this,but
also> to support me if you like the idea and think that it holds some water.> How a siene communicator can be aloof on a matter of national interest?> Your reticence on the issue may be interpreted in terms of a rotten> lot of what Indian science communicators are about.> efiction@yahoogroups.co.in, "arvind mishra" wrote:>>>> Friends,>> Recent views so eloquently expressed by Shri Bimal ji and CMN>> provides enough food for thought on the issue ,though certain points>> need to be elaborated further in order to reach to an intelligible>> conclusion.>> I do not think it is justified to compare Ram Setu with>> Panama and Suez as they were dug through land corridors not like the>> Ram Setu in which a massive dredging[some sort of yet another mythical>> ocean churning-One more Samudra Manthan !] of sea ocean is>> envisaged.Panama and
Suez do not face heavy inundations which is an>> usual feature within the sea.It is feared that a deep furrow in the>> sea bed in the form of Setusamudram canal if built shall be completely>> on mercy of mighty waves bringing huge amounts of sand per day.And>> the clearing of a vast amount of sand from the furrow may be a very>> costly affair.It has rightly been apprehended by some wise people that>> project shall not ruin the surroundings rather the environment shall>> ruin the project itself.The fears of Tsunamis could also not be ruled>> out. Wiping out a seizable coastal population and dumping enough sand>> to even close down the canal once and forever.Mythological sources too>> reveal that sea portion in question has been very turbulent since time>> immemorial.An army in leadership of Ram is said to have waited for>> long to cross the turbulent passage.>> Thus on economic considerations
also the project needs a serious>> appraisal.The maintenance,dredging costs for an estimated two million>> cubic meters per year may render the project uneconomic.It may be very>> costly affair and a counter productive effort to combat the full fore>> of nature-it may even be impossible.>> Then what is the big deal? And that too on the cost of hurting>> sentiments of millions people who contribute heavily to government's>> revenue.>> Though I have not finished as yet you are please invited to express>> your views on this segment of the discussion and oblige.>> Regards,>> arvind>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --- In indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in, CHANDRA MOHAN NAUTIYAL>> wrote:>>>>>> It
doesn't happen very often, but I find that my views would echo>> what Vimal jee has written.>>>>>> I doubt if any major developmental project has been possible>> without disturbing the ecology. That's a price we pay. Any>> artificial structure would hinder flow of water, air, humans or>> animals etc. This would invariably mean affecting the components and>> their relationship. Making a quantitative estimate is very- very>> dificlt. The simplistic picture presented by activists or in the>> popular press, may be misleading. There are many gaps in our>> knowledge including inter- dependence of these components that>> prevents a clear image of future. In the case of linking rivers, for>> instance, no one thought so much about the result of mixing water of>> diffrent kinds on living beings. However, rhere is choice to stop the>> developmental projects, carry them out with minimum cost
to the>> environment or make up for that damage in some other way (planting>> trees to make up for uprooted treed in road- construction etc. for>> instance) . Another option is to weigh the pros and cons and>>> then go ahead if there are more pros. But it's not easy to weigh>> because to diferent people, things mean different.>>>>>> I am all for preserving the heritageincluding the monuments and>> not just for the emotional or sentimental reasons. They may hold>> clues to historical facts we have no idea of , due to technological or>> other limitations. But at times, they may go to ridiculous length.>> Take this: The dust in Ayodhya is what Bhagwan Ram treaded on, so>> let's not walk there!>>>>>> Life has gone after more than 85 percent of life- forms were wiped>> off at the end of Permian. Even dinosaurs appeared only after that!>> Then, at the end of
Cretaceous, dinos were also wiped off. Change is>> the only constant. Life evolves and adjustments go on. Mankind is>> only a few million year old (in any form). Our fear is that mankind>> may become the casuality. The fear is real. The process of evolution>> (intellectual) and material development may have to start all over>> again. That' s the real reason behind the scientists' fear.>> However, the activitists have little knowledge of the real issues.>> That's what makes them vulnerable to outside influence.>>>>>> There has been a trend especially over the last decade or so to>> make a hue and cry over any major development peoject. This may be>> due to the increased environment- awareness also. But, at times, I>> wonder if the anti- development lobbies are at work. In our caste->> striffen, religion - striffen, region- striffen society it's very easy>> to throw a spanner and
stall any work.>>>>>> To me, security is the most serious issue. It can't be compromised.>>>>>> So in tune with what Bimal jee has written, in personal capacity>> I'd advocate, scientiifc study of the structure to find out whether>> it's man- made or natural. This should not linger on but dealt with>> expeditiously. However, if most of the people believe that it is the>> bridge made by Lord Rama, what do we do?>>>>>> CMN>>>>>>>>>>>> Bimal Srivastava wrote:>>> Dear Sir,>>> My views on the topic are as given below;>>> 1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?.>>> It is a very difficult question to answer. No one can be far sure.>> However, some unbiased scientific studies can definitely throw some>> light on the matter.>>> 2-If it is not man made how come that it is associtaed
with name of>>> Lord Rama.>>> Ofcourse, Names of a place may not always be taken as a solid>> historical evidence, unless and untill is is supported by other facts.>> In any case, as the issue is centimental the project should not be>> taken up unless and untill it becomes unavoidable.>>> 3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the structure>>> and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport>>> in between east and west coasts.>>> While I do have all faith in god and 100 % respect for our>> religion, however, I feel that any project of development should be>> considered, provided it can be proved that it would not harm the>> ecology, and would not damage the balance of nature. Same thing had>> been done in case of Suez and Panama canals. Not only that India can>> earn lot of money by allowing International sea route in the form
of>> fee, as being done by Egypt & Panama in case of Suez and Panama.>>> 4.Do you think that all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing>>> to do with realities of the contemporary world?>>> No.All mythologies (For all religions) have a solid foundation>> based on facts. The mythologies may get distorted with time, however,>> we should never discard them. If possible we should always make>> efforts to discover, the hidden truth behind them by undertaking>> suitable research projects.>>>>>> 5.And above all do you find any science fictional elements in the>>> whole affair?>>> A creative Science Fiction writer can always find some such element>> in such affairs.>>>>>> Bimal Srivastava>>>>>> arvind mishra wrote:>>> Respected All,>>> I know that a discussion on a topic like such in this forum
shall be>>> genuinely disliked by some but I have a point to make to defend my>> stand.>>> Many of you might have noticed a picture on the homepage of this forum>>> [If not please jut check it right now!]and yes it is a satellite>>> imagery of the structure released by NASA in 2003 which in India is>>> popularly called 'Ram Setu' or 'Nal setu'.After the publishing of this>>> very picture all heavens and hells let loose and the hue and cry began>>> claiming the said structure as a long awaited scientific proof that>>> Lord Rama really made a bridge to cross the mighty sea and defeat the>>> demon king Ravana.Though the NASA hastily denied any association with>>> such claims,it immediately dawned on me that the issue is definitely>>> going to begin a great upheaval in India.>>> Since mythology always tempts me and has some queer connections to sf>>>
and because I rightly predicted an upheaval in our society over the>>> issued I chose to focus the aerial view of Rama Setu on the home page>>> of this forum and no one of you,good heavens has ever objected to>>> it.After all sf is about making the predictions of all sorts and the>>> prophetic vision of the moderator is solicited to be taken in this>>> context only.Just bear it please.>>> Now could I dare to invite your views on the topic and ask what do you>>> think on the following->>> 1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?.>>> 2-If it is not man made how come that it is associtaed with name of>>> Lord Rama.>>> 3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the structure>>> and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport>>> in between east and west coasts.>>> 4.Do you think that all the
mythologies are just bogus and has nothing>>> to do with realities of the contemporary world?>>> 5.And above all do you find any science fictional elements in the>>> whole affair?>>> Come on please as how a science communicator can be behind if a whole>>> nation is talking on a 'burning isue'like this.>>> Regards,>>> arvind>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------->>> For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit Yahoo! For Good>> this month.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------->>> Get the freedom to save as many mails as you wish. Click here to>> know how.>>>>>>
__________________________________________________________ News, entertainment and everything
you care about at Live.com. Get it now! http://www.live.com/getstarted.aspx
"Can we afford to continue damaging our ecology till we are destroyed?" no definitely not Tiwari ji ,I fully endorse your views. arivnd
--- In indiansciencefiction@..., Vishwa Mohan Tiwari <onevishwa@...> wrote: > > > There is sufficient interest in the subject which shows that it is important to us SF buffs. > The most important point that comes out is that more study needs to be done, apart from publishing the findings of earlier studies. Why havent they been published so far, and if publishe, then why have been neglefting them so far? > Obviuously, the project is being rushed, why? The reasons are obvious, in a democracy where national interests are less important than the party' interest, Nation suffers. > What is the harm if the project is delayed till the important issues are sorted out? We may lose few dollars for a few years!! Are we so poor?? Build the canal or break the bridge after the facts and repercussions of the project are understood properly. > Just because no major development work can be done without damaging the ecology, it cannot be taken as a point supporting the major work. More than enough damage has been done to our ecology, shouldnt we become more careful now ? Can we afford to continue damaging our ecology till we are destroyed? And then can we feel satisfied that species have been vanishing and entering, so what if we are lost? > Yeas species have been vanishing, but not by their own deeds. If human race vanishes because a huge astroid strikes the earth then of course we have no choice, and future generatios, if any evolve, may say the same. But canwe destroy or help in destroying the human race by our deeds, so called deeds for so called development?? > Man does not live by bread alone. therefore economic considerations cannot be the dominant ones. Lwet us look at the other areas like longterm effects on our eco system on the thorium that may be washed away. on the impacts of tsunamies, on the cultural mindset of the people of India, a country known for its noble cultural heritage, and probably one with the most humane culture. Insultint Ram is almost insulting the ideals that Ram stands for. > > I believe that the feature that now we see is NATURAL. And not the man made Ram Setu that was built many thousands of years ago. > To me even if it is a natural feature, it is believed to be the site on which a bridge was built to kill a Raksha like Ravana, who was devoid of many humane qualities and represents consumerist culture in the worst sense. > So the war of Ram and Ravan was a war for a humane life versus demonic life. The war has to continue. The memory of Ram setu inspires us towards that war. > I do not like writing long posts, but this is as short as I could make it. I find that I am not being understood properly because of perhaps my brevity, so I have made this exception. > Vishwa Mohan Tiwari > ________________________________> To: indiansciencefiction@... From: arvind_drmishra@... Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 02:47:35 +0000> Subject: [indiansciencefiction] Re: Ram Setu :the myth and reality !>> No one appears to be interested in economics of Ramsetu-[rs].O.K. we> could shift out attention to fictional part of rs.At the outset why it> is called RS?> While antiquity of Ram Katha is any body's guess,I have my own> observations on the issue.Valmiki wrote[rather compiled]his on own> epic version of Ram Katha around 1000 BC.Definitely he would have> depended largely on the popular sources of the story as it passed from> generations top generations in Indian pathos.The first detailed> account of RS ,its survey part,its construction involving floating> stones [?],and apprehensions that it may not lost long is given in a> very lucid and descriptive manner.One has to really read it to> appreciate the tale.Hanuman in the leadership of Jambvant first> surveys the entire region to facilitate the passage of a huge army> ,Nal a local craftsman does the needed engineering,while Angad another> prominent protagonist shows hi apprehensions in no unclear terms that> comeback from from the same very route may not be possible.And> Everyone now knows RAMA and his whole jubilant army took an aerial> root to return after victory over Lanka.> But why I am telling these oft repeated account everyone of you knows> very well !Because I have to make a point -please do not look on the> legend in its apparent sense but try to deduce the logical and> rational meanings hidden in between the lines.> The recent studies in genography-> [https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/participate.html> ]reveal that the first human entered India from Afria around 20 lakhs> years ago from west coast in initially in Kerala and then spread other> parts of country.The definite genetic footprints also indicate that> the same band of early humans crossed the sea ridge what might have> been the same RS [though much later named the same]and reached LANKA> and further far away even to Australia.The y chromosome and mit dna> studies have confirmed this.> Again a powerful band of same African early human appears to have> entered India through north a bit later and established their> kingdom[!]in northern parts.Genography studies do not just stop here> but further reveal that the same migratory band later exterminate> males of already established southern people in a major> combat/encounter leaving only females to be adopted by these> victorious people.> Now it is time to do some guesswork!Is not it the saga of mythical> Devaasur sangraam ?or Ram -Ravana yuddh ?or Aryaa-dravid combats?> My hypothesis-The said event could be the the Ram-Ravan Yudhh and the> preexisting Setu is utilized again of course after certain innovations> and rehabilitation work to enable a whole army to cross over to reah> other side of the mighty ocean.> It is the memory of the same event passed through generations as we> know it today.> Its not all myth only, we have to apply a bit of our brain-the human> brain which humanity often boasts about!> NAAMULAA LOKSHRUTI-pop-memories are not altogether baseless.> I would like not only to know what you think about all this,but also> to support me if you like the idea and think that it holds some water.> How a siene communicator can be aloof on a matter of national interest?> Your reticence on the issue may be interpreted in terms of a rotten> lot of what Indian science communicators are about.> efiction@..., "arvind mishra" wrote:>>>> Friends,>> Recent views so eloquently expressed by Shri Bimal ji and CMN>> provides enough food for thought on the issue ,though certain points>> need to be elaborated further in order to reach to an intelligible>> conclusion.>> I do not think it is justified to compare Ram Setu with>> Panama and Suez as they were dug through land corridors not like the>> Ram Setu in which a massive dredging[some sort of yet another mythical>> ocean churning-One more Samudra Manthan !] of sea ocean is>> envisaged.Panama and Suez do not face heavy inundations which is an>> usual feature within the sea.It is feared that a deep furrow in the>> sea bed in the form of Setusamudram canal if built shall be completely>> on mercy of mighty waves bringing huge amounts of sand per day.And>> the clearing of a vast amount of sand from the furrow may be a very>> costly affair.It has rightly been apprehended by some wise people that>> project shall not ruin the surroundings rather the environment shall>> ruin the project itself.The fears of Tsunamis could also not be ruled>> out. Wiping out a seizable coastal population and dumping enough sand>> to even close down the canal once and forever.Mythological sources too>> reveal that sea portion in question has been very turbulent since time>> immemorial.An army in leadership of Ram is said to have waited for>> long to cross the turbulent passage.>> Thus on economic considerations also the project needs a serious>> appraisal.The maintenance,dredging costs for an estimated two million>> cubic meters per year may render the project uneconomic.It may be very>> costly affair and a counter productive effort to combat the full fore>> of nature-it may even be impossible.>> Then what is the big deal? And that too on the cost of hurting>> sentiments of millions people who contribute heavily to government's>> revenue.>> Though I have not finished as yet you are please invited to express>> your views on this segment of the discussion and oblige.>> Regards,>> arvind>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --- In indiansciencefiction@..., CHANDRA MOHAN NAUTIYAL>> wrote:>>>>>> It doesn't happen very often, but I find that my views would echo>> what Vimal jee has written.>>>>>> I doubt if any major developmental project has been possible>> without disturbing the ecology. That's a price we pay. Any>> artificial structure would hinder flow of water, air, humans or>> animals etc. This would invariably mean affecting the components and>> their relationship. Making a quantitative estimate is very- very>> dificlt. The simplistic picture presented by activists or in the>> popular press, may be misleading. There are many gaps in our>> knowledge including inter- dependence of these components that>> prevents a clear image of future. In the case of linking rivers, for>> instance, no one thought so much about the result of mixing water of>> diffrent kinds on living beings. However, rhere is choice to stop the>> developmental projects, carry them out with minimum cost to the>> environment or make up for that damage in some other way (planting>> trees to make up for uprooted treed in road- construction etc. for>> instance) . Another option is to weigh the pros and cons and>>> then go ahead if there are more pros. But it's not easy to weigh>> because to diferent people, things mean different.>>>>>> I am all for preserving the heritageincluding the monuments and>> not just for the emotional or sentimental reasons. They may hold>> clues to historical facts we have no idea of , due to technological or>> other limitations. But at times, they may go to ridiculous length.>> Take this: The dust in Ayodhya is what Bhagwan Ram treaded on, so>> let's not walk there!>>>>>> Life has gone after more than 85 percent of life- forms were wiped>> off at the end of Permian. Even dinosaurs appeared only after that!>> Then, at the end of Cretaceous, dinos were also wiped off. Change is>> the only constant. Life evolves and adjustments go on. Mankind is>> only a few million year old (in any form). Our fear is that mankind>> may become the casuality. The fear is real. The process of evolution>> (intellectual) and material development may have to start all over>> again. That' s the real reason behind the scientists' fear.>> However, the activitists have little knowledge of the real issues.>> That's what makes them vulnerable to outside influence.>>>>>> There has been a trend especially over the last decade or so to>> make a hue and cry over any major development peoject. This may be>> due to the increased environment- awareness also. But, at times, I>> wonder if the anti- development lobbies are at work. In our caste->> striffen, religion - striffen, region- striffen society it's very easy>> to throw a spanner and stall any work.>>>>>> To me, security is the most serious issue. It can't be compromised.>>>>>> So in tune with what Bimal jee has written, in personal capacity>> I'd advocate, scientiifc study of the structure to find out whether>> it's man- made or natural. This should not linger on but dealt with>> expeditiously. However, if most of the people believe that it is the>> bridge made by Lord Rama, what do we do?>>>>>> CMN>>>>>>>>>>>> Bimal Srivastava wrote:>>> Dear Sir,>>> My views on the topic are as given below;>>> 1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?.>>> It is a very difficult question to answer. No one can be far sure.>> However, some unbiased scientific studies can definitely throw some>> light on the matter.>>> 2-If it is not man made how come that it is associtaed with name of>>> Lord Rama.>>> Ofcourse, Names of a place may not always be taken as a solid>> historical evidence, unless and untill is is supported by other facts.>> In any case, as the issue is centimental the project should not be>> taken up unless and untill it becomes unavoidable.>>> 3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the structure>>> and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport>>> in between east and west coasts.>>> While I do have all faith in god and 100 % respect for our>> religion, however, I feel that any project of development should be>> considered, provided it can be proved that it would not harm the>> ecology, and would not damage the balance of nature. Same thing had>> been done in case of Suez and Panama canals. Not only that India can>> earn lot of money by allowing International sea route in the form of>> fee, as being done by Egypt & Panama in case of Suez and Panama.>>> 4.Do you think that all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing>>> to do with realities of the contemporary world?>>> No.All mythologies (For all religions) have a solid foundation>> based on facts. The mythologies may get distorted with time, however,>> we should never discard them. If possible we should always make>> efforts to discover, the hidden truth behind them by undertaking>> suitable research projects.>>>>>> 5.And above all do you find any science fictional elements in the>>> whole affair?>>> A creative Science Fiction writer can always find some such element>> in such affairs.>>>>>> Bimal Srivastava>>>>>> arvind mishra wrote:>>> Respected All,>>> I know that a discussion on a topic like such in this forum shall be>>> genuinely disliked by some but I have a point to make to defend my>> stand.>>> Many of you might have noticed a picture on the homepage of this forum>>> [If not please jut check it right now!]and yes it is a satellite>>> imagery of the structure released by NASA in 2003 which in India is>>> popularly called 'Ram Setu' or 'Nal setu'.After the publishing of this>>> very picture all heavens and hells let loose and the hue and cry began>>> claiming the said structure as a long awaited scientific proof that>>> Lord Rama really made a bridge to cross the mighty sea and defeat the>>> demon king Ravana.Though the NASA hastily denied any association with>>> such claims,it immediately dawned on me that the issue is definitely>>> going to begin a great upheaval in India.>>> Since mythology always tempts me and has some queer connections to sf>>> and because I rightly predicted an upheaval in our society over the>>> issued I chose to focus the aerial view of Rama Setu on the home page>>> of this forum and no one of you,good heavens has ever objected to>>> it.After all sf is about making the predictions of all sorts and the>>> prophetic vision of the moderator is solicited to be taken in this>>> context only.Just bear it please.>>> Now could I dare to invite your views on the topic and ask what do you>>> think on the following->>> 1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?.>>> 2-If it is not man made how come that it is associtaed with name of>>> Lord Rama.>>> 3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the structure>>> and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport>>> in between east and west coasts.>>> 4.Do you think that all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing>>> to do with realities of the contemporary world?>>> 5.And above all do you find any science fictional elements in the>>> whole affair?>>> Come on please as how a science communicator can be behind if a whole>>> nation is talking on a 'burning isue'like this.>>> Regards,>>> arvind>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------->>> For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit Yahoo! For Good>> this month.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------->>> Get the freedom to save as many mails as you wish. Click here to>> know how.>>>>>> > > _________________________________________________________________ > News, entertainment and everything you care about at Live.com. Get it now! > http://www.live.com/getstarted.aspx >
"Can we afford to continue damaging our ecology till we are
destroyed?" its really a very pertinent question which has been raised
by respected VMT in context to Ram setu.We have to pause and think
twice before embarking on such project which is also associated with
peoples' sentiments.
arvind
--- In indiansciencefiction@..., Vishwa Mohan Tiwari
<onevishwa@...> wrote:
>
>
> There is sufficient interest in the subject which shows that it is
important to us SF buffs.
> The most important point that comes out is that more study needs to
be done, apart from publishing the findings of earlier studies. Why
havent they been published so far, and if publishe, then why have been
neglefting them so far?
> Obviuously, the project is being rushed, why? The reasons are
obvious, in a democracy where national interests are less important
than the party' interest, Nation suffers.
> What is the harm if the project is delayed till the important issues
are sorted out? We may lose few dollars for a few years!! Are we so
poor?? Build the canal or break the bridge after the facts and
repercussions of the project are understood properly.
> Just because no major development work can be done without
damaging the ecology, it cannot be taken as a point supporting the
major work. More than enough damage has been done to our ecology,
shouldnt we become more careful now ? Can we afford to continue
damaging our ecology till we are destroyed? And then can we feel
satisfied that species have been vanishing and entering, so what if we
are lost?
> Yeas species have been vanishing, but not by their own deeds. If
human race vanishes because a huge astroid strikes the earth then of
course we have no choice, and future generatios, if any evolve, may
say the same. But canwe destroy or help in destroying the human race
by our deeds, so called deeds for so called development??
> Man does not live by bread alone. therefore economic considerations
cannot be the dominant ones. Lwet us look at the other areas like
longterm effects on our eco system on the thorium that may be washed
away. on the impacts of tsunamies, on the cultural mindset of the
people of India, a country known for its noble cultural heritage, and
probably one with the most humane culture. Insultint Ram is almost
insulting the ideals that Ram stands for.
>
> I believe that the feature that now we see is NATURAL. And not the
man made Ram Setu that was built many thousands of years ago.
> To me even if it is a natural feature, it is believed to be the site
on which a bridge was built to kill a Raksha like Ravana, who was
devoid of many humane qualities and represents consumerist culture in
the worst sense.
> So the war of Ram and Ravan was a war for a humane life versus
demonic life. The war has to continue. The memory of Ram setu inspires
us towards that war.
> I do not like writing long posts, but this is as short as I could
make it. I find that I am not being understood properly because of
perhaps my brevity, so I have made this exception.
> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari
> ________________________________> To:
indiansciencefiction@...> From: arvind_drmishra@...>
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 02:47:35 +0000> Subject: [indiansciencefiction]
Re: Ram Setu :the myth and reality !>> No one appears to be interested
in economics of Ramsetu-[rs].O.K. we> could shift out attention to
fictional part of rs.At the outset why it> is called RS?> While
antiquity of Ram Katha is any body's guess,I have my own> observations
on the issue.Valmiki wrote[rather compiled]his on own> epic version of
Ram Katha around 1000 BC.Definitely he would have> depended largely on
the popular sources of the story as it passed from> generations top
generations in Indian pathos.The first detailed> account of RS ,its
survey part,its construction involving floating> stones [?],and
apprehensions that it may not lost long is given in a> very lucid and
descriptive manner.One has to really read it to> appreciate the
tale.Hanuman in the leadership of Jambvant first> surveys the entire
region to facilitate the passage of a huge army> ,Nal a local
craftsman does the needed engineering,while Angad another> prominent
protagonist shows hi apprehensions in no unclear terms that> comeback
from from the same very route may not be possible.And> Everyone now
knows RAMA and his whole jubilant army took an aerial> root to return
after victory over Lanka.> But why I am telling these oft repeated
account everyone of you knows> very well !Because I have to make a
point -please do not look on the> legend in its apparent sense but try
to deduce the logical and> rational meanings hidden in between the
lines.> The recent studies in genography->
[https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/participate.html>
]reveal that the first human entered India from Afria around 20 lakhs>
years ago from west coast in initially in Kerala and then spread
other> parts of country.The definite genetic footprints also indicate
that> the same band of early humans crossed the sea ridge what might
have> been the same RS [though much later named the same]and reached
LANKA> and further far away even to Australia.The y chromosome and mit
dna> studies have confirmed this.> Again a powerful band of same
African early human appears to have> entered India through north a bit
later and established their> kingdom[!]in northern parts.Genography
studies do not just stop here> but further reveal that the same
migratory band later exterminate> males of already established
southern people in a major> combat/encounter leaving only females to
be adopted by these> victorious people.> Now it is time to do some
guesswork!Is not it the saga of mythical> Devaasur sangraam ?or Ram
-Ravana yuddh ?or Aryaa-dravid combats?> My hypothesis-The said event
could be the the Ram-Ravan Yudhh and the> preexisting Setu is utilized
again of course after certain innovations> and rehabilitation work to
enable a whole army to cross over to reah> other side of the mighty
ocean.> It is the memory of the same event passed through generations
as we> know it today.> Its not all myth only, we have to apply a bit
of our brain-the human> brain which humanity often boasts about!>
NAAMULAA LOKSHRUTI-pop-memories are not altogether baseless.> I would
like not only to know what you think about all this,but also> to
support me if you like the idea and think that it holds some water.>
How a siene communicator can be aloof on a matter of national
interest?> Your reticence on the issue may be interpreted in terms of
a rotten> lot of what Indian science communicators are about.>
efiction@..., "arvind mishra" wrote:>>>> Friends,>>
Recent views so eloquently expressed by Shri Bimal ji and CMN>>
provides enough food for thought on the issue ,though certain points>>
need to be elaborated further in order to reach to an intelligible>>
conclusion.>> I do not think it is justified to compare Ram Setu
with>> Panama and Suez as they were dug through land corridors not
like the>> Ram Setu in which a massive dredging[some sort of yet
another mythical>> ocean churning-One more Samudra Manthan !] of sea
ocean is>> envisaged.Panama and Suez do not face heavy inundations
which is an>> usual feature within the sea.It is feared that a deep
furrow in the>> sea bed in the form of Setusamudram canal if built
shall be completely>> on mercy of mighty waves bringing huge amounts
of sand per day.And>> the clearing of a vast amount of sand from the
furrow may be a very>> costly affair.It has rightly been apprehended
by some wise people that>> project shall not ruin the surroundings
rather the environment shall>> ruin the project itself.The fears of
Tsunamis could also not be ruled>> out. Wiping out a seizable coastal
population and dumping enough sand>> to even close down the canal once
and forever.Mythological sources too>> reveal that sea portion in
question has been very turbulent since time>> immemorial.An army in
leadership of Ram is said to have waited for>> long to cross the
turbulent passage.>> Thus on economic considerations also the project
needs a serious>> appraisal.The maintenance,dredging costs for an
estimated two million>> cubic meters per year may render the project
uneconomic.It may be very>> costly affair and a counter productive
effort to combat the full fore>> of nature-it may even be
impossible.>> Then what is the big deal? And that too on the cost of
hurting>> sentiments of millions people who contribute heavily to
government's>> revenue.>> Though I have not finished as yet you are
please invited to express>> your views on this segment of the
discussion and oblige.>> Regards,>>
arvind>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --- In
indiansciencefiction@..., CHANDRA MOHAN NAUTIYAL>>
wrote:>>>>>> It doesn't happen very often, but I find that my views
would echo>> what Vimal jee has written.>>>>>> I doubt if any major
developmental project has been possible>> without disturbing the
ecology. That's a price we pay. Any>> artificial structure would
hinder flow of water, air, humans or>> animals etc. This would
invariably mean affecting the components and>> their relationship.
Making a quantitative estimate is very- very>> dificlt. The simplistic
picture presented by activists or in the>> popular press, may be
misleading. There are many gaps in our>> knowledge including inter-
dependence of these components that>> prevents a clear image of
future. In the case of linking rivers, for>> instance, no one thought
so much about the result of mixing water of>> diffrent kinds on living
beings. However, rhere is choice to stop the>> developmental projects,
carry them out with minimum cost to the>> environment or make up for
that damage in some other way (planting>> trees to make up for
uprooted treed in road- construction etc. for>> instance) . Another
option is to weigh the pros and cons and>>> then go ahead if there are
more pros. But it's not easy to weigh>> because to diferent people,
things mean different.>>>>>> I am all for preserving the
heritageincluding the monuments and>> not just for the emotional or
sentimental reasons. They may hold>> clues to historical facts we have
no idea of , due to technological or>> other limitations. But at
times, they may go to ridiculous length.>> Take this: The dust in
Ayodhya is what Bhagwan Ram treaded on, so>> let's not walk
there!>>>>>> Life has gone after more than 85 percent of life- forms
were wiped>> off at the end of Permian. Even dinosaurs appeared only
after that!>> Then, at the end of Cretaceous, dinos were also wiped
off. Change is>> the only constant. Life evolves and adjustments go
on. Mankind is>> only a few million year old (in any form). Our fear
is that mankind>> may become the casuality. The fear is real. The
process of evolution>> (intellectual) and material development may
have to start all over>> again. That' s the real reason behind the
scientists' fear.>> However, the activitists have little knowledge of
the real issues.>> That's what makes them vulnerable to outside
influence.>>>>>> There has been a trend especially over the last
decade or so to>> make a hue and cry over any major development
peoject. This may be>> due to the increased environment- awareness
also. But, at times, I>> wonder if the anti- development lobbies are
at work. In our caste->> striffen, religion - striffen, region-
striffen society it's very easy>> to throw a spanner and stall any
work.>>>>>> To me, security is the most serious issue. It can't be
compromised.>>>>>> So in tune with what Bimal jee has written, in
personal capacity>> I'd advocate, scientiifc study of the structure to
find out whether>> it's man- made or natural. This should not linger
on but dealt with>> expeditiously. However, if most of the people
believe that it is the>> bridge made by Lord Rama, what do we
do?>>>>>> CMN>>>>>>>>>>>> Bimal Srivastava wrote:>>> Dear Sir,>>> My
views on the topic are as given below;>>> 1-Do you think that the
structure shown is really man made?.>>> It is a very difficult
question to answer. No one can be far sure.>> However, some unbiased
scientific studies can definitely throw some>> light on the matter.>>>
2-If it is not man made how come that it is associtaed with name of>>>
Lord Rama.>>> Ofcourse, Names of a place may not always be taken as a
solid>> historical evidence, unless and untill is is supported by
other facts.>> In any case, as the issue is centimental the project
should not be>> taken up unless and untill it becomes unavoidable.>>>
3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the
structure>>> and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the
sea transport>>> in between east and west coasts.>>> While I do have
all faith in god and 100 % respect for our>> religion, however, I feel
that any project of development should be>> considered, provided it
can be proved that it would not harm the>> ecology, and would not
damage the balance of nature. Same thing had>> been done in case of
Suez and Panama canals. Not only that India can>> earn lot of money by
allowing International sea route in the form of>> fee, as being done
by Egypt & Panama in case of Suez and Panama.>>> 4.Do you think that
all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing>>> to do with
realities of the contemporary world?>>> No.All mythologies (For all
religions) have a solid foundation>> based on facts. The mythologies
may get distorted with time, however,>> we should never discard them.
If possible we should always make>> efforts to discover, the hidden
truth behind them by undertaking>> suitable research projects.>>>>>>
5.And above all do you find any science fictional elements in the>>>
whole affair?>>> A creative Science Fiction writer can always find
some such element>> in such affairs.>>>>>> Bimal Srivastava>>>>>>
arvind mishra wrote:>>> Respected All,>>> I know that a discussion on
a topic like such in this forum shall be>>> genuinely disliked by some
but I have a point to make to defend my>> stand.>>> Many of you might
have noticed a picture on the homepage of this forum>>> [If not please
jut check it right now!]and yes it is a satellite>>> imagery of the
structure released by NASA in 2003 which in India is>>> popularly
called 'Ram Setu' or 'Nal setu'.After the publishing of this>>> very
picture all heavens and hells let loose and the hue and cry began>>>
claiming the said structure as a long awaited scientific proof that>>>
Lord Rama really made a bridge to cross the mighty sea and defeat
the>>> demon king Ravana.Though the NASA hastily denied any
association with>>> such claims,it immediately dawned on me that the
issue is definitely>>> going to begin a great upheaval in India.>>>
Since mythology always tempts me and has some queer connections to
sf>>> and because I rightly predicted an upheaval in our society over
the>>> issued I chose to focus the aerial view of Rama Setu on the
home page>>> of this forum and no one of you,good heavens has ever
objected to>>> it.After all sf is about making the predictions of all
sorts and the>>> prophetic vision of the moderator is solicited to be
taken in this>>> context only.Just bear it please.>>> Now could I dare
to invite your views on the topic and ask what do you>>> think on the
following->>> 1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man
made?.>>> 2-If it is not man made how come that it is associtaed with
name of>>> Lord Rama.>>> 3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised
to break the structure>>> and make a lee way to ships in order to
facilitate the sea transport>>> in between east and west coasts.>>>
4.Do you think that all the mythologies are just bogus and has
nothing>>> to do with realities of the contemporary world?>>> 5.And
above all do you find any science fictional elements in the>>> whole
affair?>>> Come on please as how a science communicator can be behind
if a whole>>> nation is talking on a 'burning isue'like this.>>>
Regards,>>> arvind>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--------------------------------->>> For ideas on reducing your carbon
footprint visit Yahoo! For Good>> this month.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--------------------------------->>> Get the freedom to save as many
mails as you wish. Click here to>> know how.>>>>>>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> News, entertainment and everything you care about at Live.com. Get
it now!
> http://www.live.com/getstarted.aspx
>
There is sufficient interest in the subject which shows that it is important to
us SF buffs.
The most important point that comes out is that more study needs to be done,
apart from publishing the findings of earlier studies. Why havent they been
published so far, and if publishe, then why have been neglefting them so far?
Obviuously, the project is being rushed, why? The reasons are obvious, in a
democracy where national interests are less important than the party' interest,
Nation suffers.
What is the harm if the project is delayed till the important issues are sorted
out? We may lose few dollars for a few years!! Are we so poor?? Build the canal
or break the bridge after the facts and repercussions of the project are
understood properly.
Just because no major development work can be done without damaging the
ecology, it cannot be taken as a point supporting the major work. More than
enough damage has been done to our ecology, shouldnt we become more careful now
? Can we afford to continue damaging our ecology till we are destroyed? And then
can we feel satisfied that species have been vanishing and entering, so what if
we are lost?
Yeas species have been vanishing, but not by their own deeds. If human race
vanishes because a huge astroid strikes the earth then of course we have no
choice, and future generatios, if any evolve, may say the same. But canwe
destroy or help in destroying the human race by our deeds, so called deeds for
so called development??
Man does not live by bread alone. therefore economic considerations cannot be
the dominant ones. Lwet us look at the other areas like longterm effects on our
eco system on the thorium that may be washed away. on the impacts of tsunamies,
on the cultural mindset of the people of India, a country known for its noble
cultural heritage, and probably one with the most humane culture. Insultint Ram
is almost insulting the ideals that Ram stands for.
I believe that the feature that now we see is NATURAL. And not the man made Ram
Setu that was built many thousands of years ago.
To me even if it is a natural feature, it is believed to be the site on which a
bridge was built to kill a Raksha like Ravana, who was devoid of many humane
qualities and represents consumerist culture in the worst sense.
So the war of Ram and Ravan was a war for a humane life versus demonic life. The
war has to continue. The memory of Ram setu inspires us towards that war.
I do not like writing long posts, but this is as short as I could make it. I
find that I am not being understood properly because of perhaps my brevity, so I
have made this exception.
Vishwa Mohan Tiwari
________________________________> To: indiansciencefiction@...>
From: arvind_drmishra@...> Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 02:47:35 +0000>
Subject: [indiansciencefiction] Re: Ram Setu :the myth and reality !>> No one
appears to be interested in economics of Ramsetu-[rs].O.K. we> could shift out
attention to fictional part of rs.At the outset why it> is called RS?> While
antiquity of Ram Katha is any body's guess,I have my own> observations on the
issue.Valmiki wrote[rather compiled]his on own> epic version of Ram Katha around
1000 BC.Definitely he would have> depended largely on the popular sources of the
story as it passed from> generations top generations in Indian pathos.The first
detailed> account of RS ,its survey part,its construction involving floating>
stones [?],and apprehensions that it may not lost long is given in a> very lucid
and descriptive manner.One has to really read it to> appreciate the tale.Hanuman
in the leadership of Jambvant first> surveys the entire region to facilitate the
passage of a huge army> ,Nal a local craftsman does the needed engineering,while
Angad another> prominent protagonist shows hi apprehensions in no unclear terms
that> comeback from from the same very route may not be possible.And> Everyone
now knows RAMA and his whole jubilant army took an aerial> root to return after
victory over Lanka.> But why I am telling these oft repeated account everyone of
you knows> very well !Because I have to make a point -please do not look on the>
legend in its apparent sense but try to deduce the logical and> rational
meanings hidden in between the lines.> The recent studies in genography->
[https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/participate.html> ]reveal that
the first human entered India from Afria around 20 lakhs> years ago from west
coast in initially in Kerala and then spread other> parts of country.The
definite genetic footprints also indicate that> the same band of early humans
crossed the sea ridge what might have> been the same RS [though much later named
the same]and reached LANKA> and further far away even to Australia.The y
chromosome and mit dna> studies have confirmed this.> Again a powerful band of
same African early human appears to have> entered India through north a bit
later and established their> kingdom[!]in northern parts.Genography studies do
not just stop here> but further reveal that the same migratory band later
exterminate> males of already established southern people in a major>
combat/encounter leaving only females to be adopted by these> victorious
people.> Now it is time to do some guesswork!Is not it the saga of mythical>
Devaasur sangraam ?or Ram -Ravana yuddh ?or Aryaa-dravid combats?> My
hypothesis-The said event could be the the Ram-Ravan Yudhh and the> preexisting
Setu is utilized again of course after certain innovations> and rehabilitation
work to enable a whole army to cross over to reah> other side of the mighty
ocean.> It is the memory of the same event passed through generations as we>
know it today.> Its not all myth only, we have to apply a bit of our brain-the
human> brain which humanity often boasts about!> NAAMULAA LOKSHRUTI-pop-memories
are not altogether baseless.> I would like not only to know what you think about
all this,but also> to support me if you like the idea and think that it holds
some water.> How a siene communicator can be aloof on a matter of national
interest?> Your reticence on the issue may be interpreted in terms of a rotten>
lot of what Indian science communicators are about.> efiction@...,
"arvind mishra" wrote:>>>> Friends,>> Recent views so eloquently expressed by
Shri Bimal ji and CMN>> provides enough food for thought on the issue ,though
certain points>> need to be elaborated further in order to reach to an
intelligible>> conclusion.>> I do not think it is justified to compare Ram Setu
with>> Panama and Suez as they were dug through land corridors not like the>>
Ram Setu in which a massive dredging[some sort of yet another mythical>> ocean
churning-One more Samudra Manthan !] of sea ocean is>> envisaged.Panama and Suez
do not face heavy inundations which is an>> usual feature within the sea.It is
feared that a deep furrow in the>> sea bed in the form of Setusamudram canal if
built shall be completely>> on mercy of mighty waves bringing huge amounts of
sand per day.And>> the clearing of a vast amount of sand from the furrow may be
a very>> costly affair.It has rightly been apprehended by some wise people
that>> project shall not ruin the surroundings rather the environment shall>>
ruin the project itself.The fears of Tsunamis could also not be ruled>> out.
Wiping out a seizable coastal population and dumping enough sand>> to even close
down the canal once and forever.Mythological sources too>> reveal that sea
portion in question has been very turbulent since time>> immemorial.An army in
leadership of Ram is said to have waited for>> long to cross the turbulent
passage.>> Thus on economic considerations also the project needs a serious>>
appraisal.The maintenance,dredging costs for an estimated two million>> cubic
meters per year may render the project uneconomic.It may be very>> costly affair
and a counter productive effort to combat the full fore>> of nature-it may even
be impossible.>> Then what is the big deal? And that too on the cost of
hurting>> sentiments of millions people who contribute heavily to government's>>
revenue.>> Though I have not finished as yet you are please invited to express>>
your views on this segment of the discussion and oblige.>> Regards,>>
arvind>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --- In
indiansciencefiction@..., CHANDRA MOHAN NAUTIYAL>> wrote:>>>>>> It
doesn't happen very often, but I find that my views would echo>> what Vimal jee
has written.>>>>>> I doubt if any major developmental project has been
possible>> without disturbing the ecology. That's a price we pay. Any>>
artificial structure would hinder flow of water, air, humans or>> animals etc.
This would invariably mean affecting the components and>> their relationship.
Making a quantitative estimate is very- very>> dificlt. The simplistic picture
presented by activists or in the>> popular press, may be misleading. There are
many gaps in our>> knowledge including inter- dependence of these components
that>> prevents a clear image of future. In the case of linking rivers, for>>
instance, no one thought so much about the result of mixing water of>> diffrent
kinds on living beings. However, rhere is choice to stop the>> developmental
projects, carry them out with minimum cost to the>> environment or make up for
that damage in some other way (planting>> trees to make up for uprooted treed in
road- construction etc. for>> instance) . Another option is to weigh the pros
and cons and>>> then go ahead if there are more pros. But it's not easy to
weigh>> because to diferent people, things mean different.>>>>>> I am all for
preserving the heritageincluding the monuments and>> not just for the emotional
or sentimental reasons. They may hold>> clues to historical facts we have no
idea of , due to technological or>> other limitations. But at times, they may go
to ridiculous length.>> Take this: The dust in Ayodhya is what Bhagwan Ram
treaded on, so>> let's not walk there!>>>>>> Life has gone after more than 85
percent of life- forms were wiped>> off at the end of Permian. Even dinosaurs
appeared only after that!>> Then, at the end of Cretaceous, dinos were also
wiped off. Change is>> the only constant. Life evolves and adjustments go on.
Mankind is>> only a few million year old (in any form). Our fear is that
mankind>> may become the casuality. The fear is real. The process of evolution>>
(intellectual) and material development may have to start all over>> again.
That' s the real reason behind the scientists' fear.>> However, the activitists
have little knowledge of the real issues.>> That's what makes them vulnerable to
outside influence.>>>>>> There has been a trend especially over the last decade
or so to>> make a hue and cry over any major development peoject. This may be>>
due to the increased environment- awareness also. But, at times, I>> wonder if
the anti- development lobbies are at work. In our caste->> striffen, religion -
striffen, region- striffen society it's very easy>> to throw a spanner and stall
any work.>>>>>> To me, security is the most serious issue. It can't be
compromised.>>>>>> So in tune with what Bimal jee has written, in personal
capacity>> I'd advocate, scientiifc study of the structure to find out whether>>
it's man- made or natural. This should not linger on but dealt with>>
expeditiously. However, if most of the people believe that it is the>> bridge
made by Lord Rama, what do we do?>>>>>> CMN>>>>>>>>>>>> Bimal Srivastava
wrote:>>> Dear Sir,>>> My views on the topic are as given below;>>> 1-Do you
think that the structure shown is really man made?.>>> It is a very difficult
question to answer. No one can be far sure.>> However, some unbiased scientific
studies can definitely throw some>> light on the matter.>>> 2-If it is not man
made how come that it is associtaed with name of>>> Lord Rama.>>> Ofcourse,
Names of a place may not always be taken as a solid>> historical evidence,
unless and untill is is supported by other facts.>> In any case, as the issue is
centimental the project should not be>> taken up unless and untill it becomes
unavoidable.>>> 3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the
structure>>> and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea
transport>>> in between east and west coasts.>>> While I do have all faith in
god and 100 % respect for our>> religion, however, I feel that any project of
development should be>> considered, provided it can be proved that it would not
harm the>> ecology, and would not damage the balance of nature. Same thing had>>
been done in case of Suez and Panama canals. Not only that India can>> earn lot
of money by allowing International sea route in the form of>> fee, as being done
by Egypt & Panama in case of Suez and Panama.>>> 4.Do you think that all the
mythologies are just bogus and has nothing>>> to do with realities of the
contemporary world?>>> No.All mythologies (For all religions) have a solid
foundation>> based on facts. The mythologies may get distorted with time,
however,>> we should never discard them. If possible we should always make>>
efforts to discover, the hidden truth behind them by undertaking>> suitable
research projects.>>>>>> 5.And above all do you find any science fictional
elements in the>>> whole affair?>>> A creative Science Fiction writer can always
find some such element>> in such affairs.>>>>>> Bimal Srivastava>>>>>> arvind
mishra wrote:>>> Respected All,>>> I know that a discussion on a topic like such
in this forum shall be>>> genuinely disliked by some but I have a point to make
to defend my>> stand.>>> Many of you might have noticed a picture on the
homepage of this forum>>> [If not please jut check it right now!]and yes it is a
satellite>>> imagery of the structure released by NASA in 2003 which in India
is>>> popularly called 'Ram Setu' or 'Nal setu'.After the publishing of this>>>
very picture all heavens and hells let loose and the hue and cry began>>>
claiming the said structure as a long awaited scientific proof that>>> Lord Rama
really made a bridge to cross the mighty sea and defeat the>>> demon king
Ravana.Though the NASA hastily denied any association with>>> such claims,it
immediately dawned on me that the issue is definitely>>> going to begin a great
upheaval in India.>>> Since mythology always tempts me and has some queer
connections to sf>>> and because I rightly predicted an upheaval in our society
over the>>> issued I chose to focus the aerial view of Rama Setu on the home
page>>> of this forum and no one of you,good heavens has ever objected to>>>
it.After all sf is about making the predictions of all sorts and the>>>
prophetic vision of the moderator is solicited to be taken in this>>> context
only.Just bear it please.>>> Now could I dare to invite your views on the topic
and ask what do you>>> think on the following->>> 1-Do you think that the
structure shown is really man made?.>>> 2-If it is not man made how come that it
is associtaed with name of>>> Lord Rama.>>> 3.Do you support Setu Samudram
Project poised to break the structure>>> and make a lee way to ships in order to
facilitate the sea transport>>> in between east and west coasts.>>> 4.Do you
think that all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing>>> to do with
realities of the contemporary world?>>> 5.And above all do you find any science
fictional elements in the>>> whole affair?>>> Come on please as how a science
communicator can be behind if a whole>>> nation is talking on a 'burning
isue'like this.>>> Regards,>>> arvind>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--------------------------------->>> For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint
visit Yahoo! For Good>> this month.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
--------------------------------->>> Get the freedom to save as many mails as
you wish. Click here to>> know how.>>>>>>
_________________________________________________________________
News, entertainment and everything you care about at Live.com. Get it now!
http://www.live.com/getstarted.aspx
No one appears to be interested in economics of Ramsetu-[rs].O.K. we
could shift out attention to fictional part of rs.At the outset why it
is called RS?
While antiquity of Ram Katha is any body's guess,I have my own
observations on the issue.Valmiki wrote[rather compiled]his on own
epic version of Ram Katha around 1000 BC.Definitely he would have
depended largely on the popular sources of the story as it passed from
generations top generations in Indian pathos.The first detailed
account of RS ,its survey part,its construction involving floating
stones [?],and apprehensions that it may not lost long is given in a
very lucid and descriptive manner.One has to really read it to
appreciate the tale.Hanuman in the leadership of Jambvant first
surveys the entire region to facilitate the passage of a huge army
,Nal a local craftsman does the needed engineering,while Angad another
prominent protagonist shows hi apprehensions in no unclear terms that
comeback from from the same very route may not be possible.And
Everyone now knows RAMA and his whole jubilant army took an aerial
root to return after victory over Lanka.
But why I am telling these oft repeated account everyone of you knows
very well !Because I have to make a point -please do not look on the
legend in its apparent sense but try to deduce the logical and
rational meanings hidden in between the lines.
The recent studies in genography-
[https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/participate.html
]reveal that the first human entered India from Afria around 20 lakhs
years ago from west coast in initially in Kerala and then spread other
parts of country.The definite genetic footprints also indicate that
the same band of early humans crossed the sea ridge what might have
been the same RS [though much later named the same]and reached LANKA
and further far away even to Australia.The y chromosome and mit dna
studies have confirmed this.
Again a powerful band of same African early human appears to have
entered India through north a bit later and established their
kingdom[!]in northern parts.Genography studies do not just stop here
but further reveal that the same migratory band later exterminate
males of already established southern people in a major
combat/encounter leaving only females to be adopted by these
victorious people.
Now it is time to do some guesswork!Is not it the saga of mythical
Devaasur sangraam ?or Ram -Ravana yuddh ?or Aryaa-dravid combats?
My hypothesis-The said event could be the the Ram-Ravan Yudhh and the
preexisting Setu is utilized again of course after certain innovations
and rehabilitation work to enable a whole army to cross over to reah
other side of the mighty ocean.
It is the memory of the same event passed through generations as we
know it today.
Its not all myth only, we have to apply a bit of our brain-the human
brain which humanity often boasts about!
NAAMULAA LOKSHRUTI-pop-memories are not altogether baseless.
I would like not only to know what you think about all this,but also
to support me if you like the idea and think that it holds some water.
How a siene communicator can be aloof on a matter of national interest?
Your reticence on the issue may be interpreted in terms of a rotten
lot of what Indian science communicators are about.
efiction@..., "arvind mishra" <arvind_drmishra@...> wrote:
>
> Friends,
> Recent views so eloquently expressed by Shri Bimal ji and CMN
> provides enough food for thought on the issue ,though certain points
> need to be elaborated further in order to reach to an intelligible
> conclusion.
> I do not think it is justified to compare Ram Setu with
> Panama and Suez as they were dug through land corridors not like the
> Ram Setu in which a massive dredging[some sort of yet another mythical
> ocean churning-One more Samudra Manthan !] of sea ocean is
> envisaged.Panama and Suez do not face heavy inundations which is an
> usual feature within the sea.It is feared that a deep furrow in the
> sea bed in the form of Setusamudram canal if built shall be completely
> on mercy of mighty waves bringing huge amounts of sand per day.And
> the clearing of a vast amount of sand from the furrow may be a very
> costly affair.It has rightly been apprehended by some wise people that
> project shall not ruin the surroundings rather the environment shall
> ruin the project itself.The fears of Tsunamis could also not be ruled
> out. Wiping out a seizable coastal population and dumping enough sand
> to even close down the canal once and forever.Mythological sources too
> reveal that sea portion in question has been very turbulent since time
> immemorial.An army in leadership of Ram is said to have waited for
> long to cross the turbulent passage.
> Thus on economic considerations also the project needs a serious
> appraisal.The maintenance,dredging costs for an estimated two million
> cubic meters per year may render the project uneconomic.It may be very
> costly affair and a counter productive effort to combat the full fore
> of nature-it may even be impossible.
> Then what is the big deal? And that too on the cost of hurting
> sentiments of millions people who contribute heavily to government's
> revenue.
> Though I have not finished as yet you are please invited to express
> your views on this segment of the discussion and oblige.
> Regards,
> arvind
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In indiansciencefiction@..., CHANDRA MOHAN NAUTIYAL
> <cmnautiyal@> wrote:
> >
> > It doesn't happen very often, but I find that my views would echo
> what Vimal jee has written.
> >
> > I doubt if any major developmental project has been possible
> without disturbing the ecology. That's a price we pay. Any
> artificial structure would hinder flow of water, air, humans or
> animals etc. This would invariably mean affecting the components and
> their relationship. Making a quantitative estimate is very- very
> dificlt. The simplistic picture presented by activists or in the
> popular press, may be misleading. There are many gaps in our
> knowledge including inter- dependence of these components that
> prevents a clear image of future. In the case of linking rivers, for
> instance, no one thought so much about the result of mixing water of
> diffrent kinds on living beings. However, rhere is choice to stop the
> developmental projects, carry them out with minimum cost to the
> environment or make up for that damage in some other way (planting
> trees to make up for uprooted treed in road- construction etc. for
> instance) . Another option is to weigh the pros and cons and
> > then go ahead if there are more pros. But it's not easy to weigh
> because to diferent people, things mean different.
> >
> > I am all for preserving the heritageincluding the monuments and
> not just for the emotional or sentimental reasons. They may hold
> clues to historical facts we have no idea of , due to technological or
> other limitations. But at times, they may go to ridiculous length.
> Take this: The dust in Ayodhya is what Bhagwan Ram treaded on, so
> let's not walk there!
> >
> > Life has gone after more than 85 percent of life- forms were wiped
> off at the end of Permian. Even dinosaurs appeared only after that!
> Then, at the end of Cretaceous, dinos were also wiped off. Change is
> the only constant. Life evolves and adjustments go on. Mankind is
> only a few million year old (in any form). Our fear is that mankind
> may become the casuality. The fear is real. The process of evolution
> (intellectual) and material development may have to start all over
> again. That' s the real reason behind the scientists' fear.
> However, the activitists have little knowledge of the real issues.
> That's what makes them vulnerable to outside influence.
> >
> > There has been a trend especially over the last decade or so to
> make a hue and cry over any major development peoject. This may be
> due to the increased environment- awareness also. But, at times, I
> wonder if the anti- development lobbies are at work. In our caste-
> striffen, religion - striffen, region- striffen society it's very easy
> to throw a spanner and stall any work.
> >
> > To me, security is the most serious issue. It can't be compromised.
> >
> > So in tune with what Bimal jee has written, in personal capacity
> I'd advocate, scientiifc study of the structure to find out whether
> it's man- made or natural. This should not linger on but dealt with
> expeditiously. However, if most of the people believe that it is the
> bridge made by Lord Rama, what do we do?
> >
> > CMN
> >
> >
> >
> > Bimal Srivastava <bksrivastava2000@> wrote:
> > Dear Sir,
> > My views on the topic are as given below;
> > 1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?.
> > It is a very difficult question to answer. No one can be far sure.
> However, some unbiased scientific studies can definitely throw some
> light on the matter.
> > 2-If it is not man made how come that it is associtaed with name of
> > Lord Rama.
> > Ofcourse, Names of a place may not always be taken as a solid
> historical evidence, unless and untill is is supported by other facts.
> In any case, as the issue is centimental the project should not be
> taken up unless and untill it becomes unavoidable.
> > 3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the structure
> > and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport
> > in between east and west coasts.
> > While I do have all faith in god and 100 % respect for our
> religion, however, I feel that any project of development should be
> considered, provided it can be proved that it would not harm the
> ecology, and would not damage the balance of nature. Same thing had
> been done in case of Suez and Panama canals. Not only that India can
> earn lot of money by allowing International sea route in the form of
> fee, as being done by Egypt & Panama in case of Suez and Panama.
> > 4.Do you think that all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing
> > to do with realities of the contemporary world?
> > No.All mythologies (For all religions) have a solid foundation
> based on facts. The mythologies may get distorted with time, however,
> we should never discard them. If possible we should always make
> efforts to discover, the hidden truth behind them by undertaking
> suitable research projects.
> >
> > 5.And above all do you find any science fictional elements in the
> > whole affair?
> > A creative Science Fiction writer can always find some such element
> in such affairs.
> >
> > Bimal Srivastava
> >
> > arvind mishra <arvind_drmishra@> wrote:
> > Respected All,
> > I know that a discussion on a topic like such in this forum shall be
> > genuinely disliked by some but I have a point to make to defend my
> stand.
> > Many of you might have noticed a picture on the homepage of this forum
> > [If not please jut check it right now!]and yes it is a satellite
> > imagery of the structure released by NASA in 2003 which in India is
> > popularly called 'Ram Setu' or 'Nal setu'.After the publishing of this
> > very picture all heavens and hells let loose and the hue and cry began
> > claiming the said structure as a long awaited scientific proof that
> > Lord Rama really made a bridge to cross the mighty sea and defeat the
> > demon king Ravana.Though the NASA hastily denied any association with
> > such claims,it immediately dawned on me that the issue is definitely
> > going to begin a great upheaval in India.
> > Since mythology always tempts me and has some queer connections to sf
> > and because I rightly predicted an upheaval in our society over the
> > issued I chose to focus the aerial view of Rama Setu on the home page
> > of this forum and no one of you,good heavens has ever objected to
> > it.After all sf is about making the predictions of all sorts and the
> > prophetic vision of the moderator is solicited to be taken in this
> > context only.Just bear it please.
> > Now could I dare to invite your views on the topic and ask what do you
> > think on the following-
> > 1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?.
> > 2-If it is not man made how come that it is associtaed with name of
> > Lord Rama.
> > 3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the structure
> > and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport
> > in between east and west coasts.
> > 4.Do you think that all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing
> > to do with realities of the contemporary world?
> > 5.And above all do you find any science fictional elements in the
> > whole affair?
> > Come on please as how a science communicator can be behind if a whole
> > nation is talking on a 'burning isue'like this.
> > Regards,
> > arvind
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit Yahoo! For Good
> this month.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Get the freedom to save as many mails as you wish. Click here to
> know how.
> >
>
Friends,
Recent views so eloquently expressed by Shri Bimal ji and CMN
provides enough food for thought on the issue ,though certain points
need to be elaborated further in order to reach to an intelligible
conclusion.
I do not think it is justified to compare Ram Setu with
Panama and Suez as they were dug through land corridors not like the
Ram Setu in which a massive dredging[some sort of yet another mythical
ocean churning-One more Samudra Manthan !] of sea ocean is
envisaged.Panama and Suez do not face heavy inundations which is an
usual feature within the sea.It is feared that a deep furrow in the
sea bed in the form of Setusamudram canal if built shall be completely
on mercy of mighty waves bringing huge amounts of sand per day.And
the clearing of a vast amount of sand from the furrow may be a very
costly affair.It has rightly been apprehended by some wise people that
project shall not ruin the surroundings rather the environment shall
ruin the project itself.The fears of Tsunamis could also not be ruled
out. Wiping out a seizable coastal population and dumping enough sand
to even close down the canal once and forever.Mythological sources too
reveal that sea portion in question has been very turbulent since time
immemorial.An army in leadership of Ram is said to have waited for
long to cross the turbulent passage.
Thus on economic considerations also the project needs a serious
appraisal.The maintenance,dredging costs for an estimated two million
cubic meters per year may render the project uneconomic.It may be very
costly affair and a counter productive effort to combat the full fore
of nature-it may even be impossible.
Then what is the big deal? And that too on the cost of hurting
sentiments of millions people who contribute heavily to government's
revenue.
Though I have not finished as yet you are please invited to express
your views on this segment of the discussion and oblige.
Regards,
arvind
--- In indiansciencefiction@..., CHANDRA MOHAN NAUTIYAL
<cmnautiyal@...> wrote:
>
> It doesn't happen very often, but I find that my views would echo
what Vimal jee has written.
>
> I doubt if any major developmental project has been possible
without disturbing the ecology. That's a price we pay. Any
artificial structure would hinder flow of water, air, humans or
animals etc. This would invariably mean affecting the components and
their relationship. Making a quantitative estimate is very- very
dificlt. The simplistic picture presented by activists or in the
popular press, may be misleading. There are many gaps in our
knowledge including inter- dependence of these components that
prevents a clear image of future. In the case of linking rivers, for
instance, no one thought so much about the result of mixing water of
diffrent kinds on living beings. However, rhere is choice to stop the
developmental projects, carry them out with minimum cost to the
environment or make up for that damage in some other way (planting
trees to make up for uprooted treed in road- construction etc. for
instance) . Another option is to weigh the pros and cons and
> then go ahead if there are more pros. But it's not easy to weigh
because to diferent people, things mean different.
>
> I am all for preserving the heritageincluding the monuments and
not just for the emotional or sentimental reasons. They may hold
clues to historical facts we have no idea of , due to technological or
other limitations. But at times, they may go to ridiculous length.
Take this: The dust in Ayodhya is what Bhagwan Ram treaded on, so
let's not walk there!
>
> Life has gone after more than 85 percent of life- forms were wiped
off at the end of Permian. Even dinosaurs appeared only after that!
Then, at the end of Cretaceous, dinos were also wiped off. Change is
the only constant. Life evolves and adjustments go on. Mankind is
only a few million year old (in any form). Our fear is that mankind
may become the casuality. The fear is real. The process of evolution
(intellectual) and material development may have to start all over
again. That' s the real reason behind the scientists' fear.
However, the activitists have little knowledge of the real issues.
That's what makes them vulnerable to outside influence.
>
> There has been a trend especially over the last decade or so to
make a hue and cry over any major development peoject. This may be
due to the increased environment- awareness also. But, at times, I
wonder if the anti- development lobbies are at work. In our caste-
striffen, religion - striffen, region- striffen society it's very easy
to throw a spanner and stall any work.
>
> To me, security is the most serious issue. It can't be compromised.
>
> So in tune with what Bimal jee has written, in personal capacity
I'd advocate, scientiifc study of the structure to find out whether
it's man- made or natural. This should not linger on but dealt with
expeditiously. However, if most of the people believe that it is the
bridge made by Lord Rama, what do we do?
>
> CMN
>
>
>
> Bimal Srivastava <bksrivastava2000@...> wrote:
> Dear Sir,
> My views on the topic are as given below;
> 1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?.
> It is a very difficult question to answer. No one can be far sure.
However, some unbiased scientific studies can definitely throw some
light on the matter.
> 2-If it is not man made how come that it is associtaed with name of
> Lord Rama.
> Ofcourse, Names of a place may not always be taken as a solid
historical evidence, unless and untill is is supported by other facts.
In any case, as the issue is centimental the project should not be
taken up unless and untill it becomes unavoidable.
> 3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the structure
> and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport
> in between east and west coasts.
> While I do have all faith in god and 100 % respect for our
religion, however, I feel that any project of development should be
considered, provided it can be proved that it would not harm the
ecology, and would not damage the balance of nature. Same thing had
been done in case of Suez and Panama canals. Not only that India can
earn lot of money by allowing International sea route in the form of
fee, as being done by Egypt & Panama in case of Suez and Panama.
> 4.Do you think that all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing
> to do with realities of the contemporary world?
> No.All mythologies (For all religions) have a solid foundation
based on facts. The mythologies may get distorted with time, however,
we should never discard them. If possible we should always make
efforts to discover, the hidden truth behind them by undertaking
suitable research projects.
>
> 5.And above all do you find any science fictional elements in the
> whole affair?
> A creative Science Fiction writer can always find some such element
in such affairs.
>
> Bimal Srivastava
>
> arvind mishra <arvind_drmishra@...> wrote:
> Respected All,
> I know that a discussion on a topic like such in this forum shall be
> genuinely disliked by some but I have a point to make to defend my
stand.
> Many of you might have noticed a picture on the homepage of this forum
> [If not please jut check it right now!]and yes it is a satellite
> imagery of the structure released by NASA in 2003 which in India is
> popularly called 'Ram Setu' or 'Nal setu'.After the publishing of this
> very picture all heavens and hells let loose and the hue and cry began
> claiming the said structure as a long awaited scientific proof that
> Lord Rama really made a bridge to cross the mighty sea and defeat the
> demon king Ravana.Though the NASA hastily denied any association with
> such claims,it immediately dawned on me that the issue is definitely
> going to begin a great upheaval in India.
> Since mythology always tempts me and has some queer connections to sf
> and because I rightly predicted an upheaval in our society over the
> issued I chose to focus the aerial view of Rama Setu on the home page
> of this forum and no one of you,good heavens has ever objected to
> it.After all sf is about making the predictions of all sorts and the
> prophetic vision of the moderator is solicited to be taken in this
> context only.Just bear it please.
> Now could I dare to invite your views on the topic and ask what do you
> think on the following-
> 1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?.
> 2-If it is not man made how come that it is associtaed with name of
> Lord Rama.
> 3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the structure
> and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport
> in between east and west coasts.
> 4.Do you think that all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing
> to do with realities of the contemporary world?
> 5.And above all do you find any science fictional elements in the
> whole affair?
> Come on please as how a science communicator can be behind if a whole
> nation is talking on a 'burning isue'like this.
> Regards,
> arvind
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit Yahoo! For Good
this month.
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Get the freedom to save as many mails as you wish. Click here to
know how.
>
It doesn't happen very often, but I find that my views would echo what Vimal jee has written.
I doubt if any major developmental project has been possible without disturbing the ecology. That's a price we pay. Any artificial structure would hinder flow of water, air, humans or animals etc. This would invariably mean affecting the components and their relationship. Making a quantitative estimate is very- very dificlt. The simplistic picture presented by activists or in the popular press, may be misleading. There are many gaps in our knowledge including inter- dependence of these components that prevents a clear image of future. In the case of linking rivers, for instance, no one thought so much about the result of mixing water of diffrent kinds on living beings. However, rhere is choice to stop the developmental projects, carry them out with minimum cost to the environment or make
up for that damage in some other way (planting trees to make up for uprooted treed in road- construction etc. for instance) . Another option is to weigh the pros and cons and then go ahead if there are more pros. But it's not easy to weigh because to diferent people, things mean different.
I am all for preserving the heritageincluding the monuments and not just for the emotional or sentimental reasons. They may hold clues to historical facts we have no idea of , due to technological or other limitations. But at times, they may go to ridiculous length. Take this: The dust in Ayodhya is what Bhagwan Ram treaded on, so let's not walk there!
Life has gone after more than 85 percent of life- forms were wiped off at the end of Permian. Even dinosaurs appeared only after that! Then, at the end of Cretaceous, dinos were also wiped off. Change is
the only constant. Life evolves and adjustments go on. Mankind is only a few million year old (in any form). Our fear is that mankind may become the casuality. The fear is real. The process of evolution (intellectual) and material development may have to start all over again. That' s the real reason behind the scientists' fear. However, the activitists have little knowledge of the real issues. That's what makes them vulnerable to outside influence.
There has been a trend especially over the last decade or so to make a hue and cry over any major development peoject. This may be due to the increased environment- awareness also. But, at times, I wonder if the anti- development lobbies are at work. In our caste- striffen, religion - striffen, region- striffen society it's very easy to throw a spanner and stall any work.
To me,
security is the most serious issue. It can't be compromised.
So in tune with what Bimal jee has written, in personal capacity I'd advocate, scientiifc study of the structure to find out whether it's man- made or natural. This should not linger on but dealt with expeditiously. However, if most of the people believe that it is the bridge made by Lord Rama, what do we do?
CMN
Bimal Srivastava <bksrivastava2000@...> wrote:
Dear Sir,
My views on the topic are as given below;
1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?.
It is a very difficult question to answer. No one can be far sure. However, some unbiased scientific studies can definitely throw some light on the matter. 2-If it is not man made how come that it is associtaed with name of Lord Rama.
Ofcourse, Names of a place may not always be taken as a solid historical evidence, unless and untill is is supported by other facts.In any case, as the issue is centimental the project should not be taken up unless and untill it becomes unavoidable. 3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the structure and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport in between east and west coasts.
While I do
have all faith in god and 100 % respect for our religion, however, I feel that any project of development should be considered, provided it can be proved that it would not harm the ecology, and would not damage the balance of nature. Same thing had been done in case of Suez and Panama canals. Not only that India can earn lot of money by allowing International sea route in the form of fee, as being done by Egypt & Panama in case of Suez and Panama. 4.Do you think that all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing to do with realities of the contemporary world?
No.All mythologies (For all religions) have a solid foundation based on facts. The mythologies may get distorted with time, however, we should never discard them. If possible we should always make efforts to discover, the hidden truth behind them by undertaking suitable research projects.
5.And above all do you
find any science fictional elements in the whole affair? A creative Science Fiction writer can always find some such element in such affairs.
Respected All, I know that a discussion on a topic like such in this forum shall be genuinely disliked by some but I have a point to make to defend my stand. Many of you might have noticed a picture on the homepage of this forum [If not please jut check it right now!]and yes it is a satellite imagery of the structure released by NASA in 2003 which in India is popularly called 'Ram Setu' or 'Nal setu'.After the publishing of this very picture all heavens and hells let loose and the hue and cry began claiming the said structure as a long awaited scientific proof
that Lord Rama really made a bridge to cross the mighty sea and defeat the demon king Ravana.Though the NASA hastily denied any association with such claims,it immediately dawned on me that the issue is definitely going to begin a great upheaval in India. Since mythology always tempts me and has some queer connections to sf and because I rightly predicted an upheaval in our society over the issued I chose to focus the aerial view of Rama Setu on the home page of this forum and no one of you,good heavens has ever objected to it.After all sf is about making the predictions of all sorts and the prophetic vision of the moderator is solicited to be taken in this context only.Just bear it please. Now could I dare to invite your views on the topic and ask what do you think on the following- 1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?. 2-If it is not man made how come that it is associtaed with name of Lord
Rama. 3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the structure and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport in between east and west coasts. 4.Do you think that all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing to do with realities of the contemporary world? 5.And above all do you find any science fictional elements in the whole affair? Come on please as how a science communicator can be behind if a whole nation is talking on a 'burning isue'like this. Regards, arvind
For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit Yahoo! For Good this month.
Welcome and thanks Bimal ji, your comments are convincing ,I shall come to the topic shortly.
Bimal Srivastava <bksrivastava2000@...> wrote:
Dear Sir,
My views on the topic are as given below;
1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?.
It is a very difficult question to answer. No one can be far sure. However, some unbiased scientific studies can definitely throw some light on the matter. 2-If it is not man made how come that it is
associtaed with name of Lord Rama.
Ofcourse, Names of a place may not always be taken as a solid historical evidence, unless and untill is is supported by other facts.In any case, as the issue is centimental the project should not be taken up unless and untill it becomes unavoidable. 3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the structure and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport in between east and west coasts.
While I do have all faith in god and 100 % respect for our religion, however, I feel that any project of development should be considered, provided it can be proved that it would not harm the ecology, and would not damage the balance of nature. Same thing had been done in case of Suez and Panama canals. Not only that India can earn lot of money by allowing International sea route in the form of fee, as being
done by Egypt & Panama in case of Suez and Panama. 4.Do you think that all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing to do with realities of the contemporary world?
No.All mythologies (For all religions) have a solid foundation based on facts. The mythologies may get distorted with time, however, we should never discard them. If possible we should always make efforts to discover, the hidden truth behind them by undertaking suitable research projects.
5.And above all do you find any science fictional elements in the whole affair? A creative Science Fiction writer can always find some such element in such affairs.
Respected All, I know that a discussion on a topic like such in this forum shall be genuinely disliked by some but I have a point to make to defend my stand. Many of you might have noticed a picture on the homepage of this forum [If not please jut check it right now!]and yes it is a satellite imagery of the structure released by NASA in 2003 which in India is popularly called 'Ram Setu' or 'Nal setu'.After the publishing of this very picture all heavens and hells let loose and the hue and cry began claiming the said structure as a long awaited scientific proof that Lord Rama really made a bridge to cross the mighty sea and defeat the demon king Ravana.Though the NASA hastily denied any association with such claims,it immediately dawned on me that the issue is definitely going to begin a great upheaval in India. Since mythology always tempts me and has some queer connections to sf and because I rightly predicted an upheaval
in our society over the issued I chose to focus the aerial view of Rama Setu on the home page of this forum and no one of you,good heavens has ever objected to it.After all sf is about making the predictions of all sorts and the prophetic vision of the moderator is solicited to be taken in this context only.Just bear it please. Now could I dare to invite your views on the topic and ask what do you think on the following- 1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?. 2-If it is not man made how come that it is associtaed with name of Lord Rama. 3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the structure and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport in between east and west coasts. 4.Do you think that all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing to do with realities of the contemporary world? 5.And above all do you find any science fictional elements in the whole
affair? Come on please as how a science communicator can be behind if a whole nation is talking on a 'burning isue'like this. Regards, arvind
For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit Yahoo! For Good this month.
arvind mishra
5, 50, 500, 5000 - Store N number of mails in your inbox. Click here.
1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?.
It is a very difficult question to answer. No one can be far sure. However, some unbiased scientific studies can definitely throw some light on the matter. 2-If it is not man made how come that it is associtaed with name of Lord Rama.
Ofcourse, Names of a place may not always be taken as a solid historical evidence, unless and untill is is supported by other facts.In any case, as the issue is centimental the project should not be taken up unless and untill it becomes unavoidable. 3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the structure and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport in between east and west coasts.
While I do
have all faith in god and 100 % respect for our religion, however, I feel that any project of development should be considered, provided it can be proved that it would not harm the ecology, and would not damage the balance of nature. Same thing had been done in case of Suez and Panama canals. Not only that India can earn lot of money by allowing International sea route in the form of fee, as being done by Egypt & Panama in case of Suez and Panama. 4.Do you think that all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing to do with realities of the contemporary world?
No.All mythologies (For all religions) have a solid foundation based on facts. The mythologies may get distorted with time, however, we should never discard them. If possible we should always make efforts to discover, the hidden truth behind them by undertaking suitable research projects.
5.And above all do
you find any science fictional elements in the whole affair? A creative Science Fiction writer can always find some such element in such affairs.
Bimal Srivastava
arvind mishra <arvind_drmishra@...> wrote:
Respected All, I know that a discussion on a topic like such in this forum shall be genuinely disliked by some but I have a point to make to defend my stand. Many of you might have noticed a picture on the homepage of this forum [If not please jut check it right now!]and yes it
is a satellite imagery of the structure released by NASA in 2003 which in India is popularly called 'Ram Setu' or 'Nal setu'.After the publishing of this very picture all heavens and hells let loose and the hue and cry began claiming the said structure as a long awaited scientific proof that Lord Rama really made a bridge to cross the mighty sea and defeat the demon king Ravana.Though the NASA hastily denied any association with such claims,it immediately dawned on me that the issue is definitely going to begin a great upheaval in India. Since mythology always tempts me and has some queer connections to sf and because I rightly predicted an upheaval in our society over the issued I chose to focus the aerial view of Rama Setu on the home page of this forum and no one of you,good heavens has ever objected to it.After all sf is about making the predictions of all sorts and the prophetic vision of the moderator is solicited to be
taken in this context only.Just bear it please. Now could I dare to invite your views on the topic and ask what do you think on the following- 1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?. 2-If it is not man made how come that it is associtaed with name of Lord Rama. 3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the structure and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport in between east and west coasts. 4.Do you think that all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing to do with realities of the contemporary world? 5.And above all do you find any science fictional elements in the whole affair? Come on please as how a science communicator can be behind if a whole nation is talking on a 'burning isue'like this. Regards, arvind
For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit Yahoo! For Good this month.
Thanks VMT,Zeashan and Swapnil for your views on the topic,the majority opinion on the forum so far favours the standpoint of protecting the structure notwithstanding varying claims on its's origin and existene. I am waiting for others to comment before I deliberate further on the issue. swapnil BHARTIYA <arnieswap@...> wrote:
Hi!
I don't know much about who created the adam's bridge. Scientifically that reagion is known for such structures -- the whole Andaman and Nikobar islands are an example of scattered islands, may be adams bridge is also
such thing that has been in existence since planet reshaped and continents separated, Australia went south etc. Or may be it was made by man.
What is shameful on part of India is despite so much boating of scientific prowess, we could not inspect and determine the origin of the bridge. What use of our science and IITs?
And Zeeshan, as per NASA, "Remote sensing images or photographs from orbit cannot provide direct information about the origin or age of a chain of islands, and certainly cannot determine whether humans were involved in producing any of the patterns seen," NASA official Mark Hess had said then."
Strategically, breaking the bridge would make the sea between SriLanka and India International Waters which would allow warships to enter that water thus challenging our sovereignty and security.
Even it is not man made, it should and must be used for tourist
activities, similar to Australia's Great Coral reef. We as Indians miss alot of good things.
But, my verdict would be -- "Never ever bring a fence down unless and until you know why it was put up."
1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?
Yes, there is most
possibility. It is a fact that recent science and technology was much advanced than we think. Egypt Pyramids, Babylon's Hanging garden, China's wall etc are the real examples. The said structure is most probabilistic man made. One more thing, NASA neither accepts nor denies that the structure is man made. It is a topic of research.
2.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the structure and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport in between east and west coast?.
I don't support Setu Samudram Project. I am totally agreed with Mr. VMT that it causes environmental misbalances. At the
earth there are mountains, valleys etc. If we plane all these surfaces then it will be very beneficial to transport, but then where will be our environment? There is no much need of making path for ships from the point of view of India. But it is more important to stabilizing good environment at that place. I think in a similar way the parallel Ganga Road project is also unnecessary and harmful for environment. In that region of U.P. there are sufficient roads for transport.
3.Do you think that all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing to do with realities of the contemporary world?
Every story is always has some or
much part of reality.
Respected All, I know that a discussion on a topic like such in this forum shall be genuinely disliked by some but I have a point to make to defend my stand. Many of you might have noticed a picture on the homepage of this forum [If not please jut check it right now!]and yes it is a satellite imagery of the structure released by NASA in 2003 which in India is popularly called 'Ram Setu' or 'Nal setu'.After the publishing of this very picture all heavens and hells let loose and the hue and cry began claiming the said structure as a long awaited scientific proof that Lord Rama really made a bridge to cross the mighty sea and defeat
the demon king Ravana.Though the NASA hastily denied any association with such claims,it immediately dawned on me that the issue is definitely going to begin a great upheaval in India. Since mythology always tempts me and has some queer connections to sf and because I rightly predicted an upheaval in our society over the issued I chose to focus the aerial view of Rama Setu on the home page of this forum and no one of you,good heavens has ever objected to it.After all sf is about making the predictions of all sorts and the prophetic vision of the moderator is solicited to be taken in this context only.Just bear it please. Now could I dare to invite your views on the topic and ask what do you think on the following- 1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?. 2-If it is not man made how come that it is associtaed with name of Lord Rama. 3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the
structure and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport in between east and west coasts. 4.Do you think that all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing to do with realities of the contemporary world? 5.And above all do you find any science fictional elements in the whole affair? Come on please as how a science communicator can be behind if a whole nation is talking on a 'burning isue'like this. Regards, arvind
Luggage? GPS? Comic books? Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search.
-- Swapnil Bhartiya Assistant
Editor EFYTimes.com
arvind mishra
Download prohibited? No problem. CHAT from any browser, without download.
I don't know much about who created the adam's bridge. Scientifically that reagion is known for such structures -- the whole Andaman and Nikobar islands are an example of scattered islands, may be adams bridge is also such thing that has been in existence since planet reshaped and continents separated, Australia went south etc. Or may be it was made by man.
What is shameful on part of India is despite so much boating of scientific prowess, we could not inspect and determine the origin of the bridge. What use of our science and IITs?
And Zeeshan, as per NASA,
"Remote
sensing images or photographs from orbit cannot provide direct
information about the origin or age of a chain of islands, and
certainly cannot determine whether humans were involved in producing
any of the patterns seen," NASA official Mark Hess had said then."
Strategically, breaking the bridge would make the sea between SriLanka and India International Waters which would allow warships to enter that water thus challenging our sovereignty and security.
Even it is not man made, it should and must be used for tourist activities, similar to Australia's Great Coral reef. We as Indians miss alot of good things.
But, my verdict would be -- "Never ever bring a fence down unless and until you know why it was put up."
1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?
Yes, there is most possibility. It is a fact that recent science and technology was much advanced than we think. Egypt Pyramids, Babylon's Hanging garden, China's wall etc are the real examples. The said structure is most probabilistic man made. One more thing, NASA neither accepts nor denies that
the structure is man made. It is a topic of research.
2.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the structure and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport in between east and west coast?.
I don't support Setu Samudram Project. I am totally agreed with Mr. VMT that it causes environmental misbalances. At the earth there are mountains, valleys etc. If we
plane all these surfaces then it will be very beneficial to transport, but then where will be our environment? There is no much need of making path for ships from the point of view of India. But it is more important to stabilizing good environment at that place. I think in a similar way the parallel Ganga Road project is also unnecessary and harmful for environment. In that region of U.P. there are sufficient roads for transport.
3.Do you think that all the
mythologies are just bogus and has nothing to do with realities of the contemporary world?
Every story is always has some or much part of reality.
Respected All, I know that a discussion on a topic like such in this forum shall be
genuinely disliked by some but I have a point to make to defend my stand. Many of you might have noticed a picture on the homepage of this forum [If not please jut check it right now!]and yes it is a satellite
imagery of the structure released by NASA in 2003 which in India is popularly called 'Ram Setu' or 'Nal setu'.After the publishing of this very picture all heavens and hells let loose and the hue and cry began
claiming the said structure as a long awaited scientific proof that Lord Rama really made a bridge to cross the mighty sea and defeat the demon king Ravana.Though the NASA hastily denied any association with
such claims,it immediately dawned on me that the issue is definitely going to begin a great upheaval in India. Since mythology always tempts me and has some queer connections to sf and because I rightly predicted an upheaval in our society over the
issued I chose to focus the aerial view of Rama Setu on the home
page of this forum and no one of you,good heavens has ever objected to it.After all sf is about making the predictions of all sorts and the prophetic vision of the moderator is solicited to be taken in this
context only.Just bear it please. Now could I dare to invite your views on the topic and ask what do you think on the following- 1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?. 2-If it is not man made how come that it is associtaed with name of
Lord Rama. 3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the structure and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport in between east and west coasts. 4.Do you think that all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing
to do with realities of the contemporary world? 5.And above all do you find any science fictional elements in the whole affair? Come on please as how a science communicator can be behind if a whole nation is
talking on a 'burning isue'like this. Regards, arvind
Luggage? GPS? Comic books?
Check out fitting gifts for grads
at Yahoo! Search.
1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?
Yes, there is most possibility. It is a fact that recent science and technology was much advanced than we think. Egypt Pyramids, Babylon’s Hanging garden, China’s wall etc are the real examples. The said structure is most probabilistic man made. One more thing, NASA neither accepts nor denies that
the structure is man made. It is a topic of research.
2.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the structure and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport in between east and west coast?.
I don’t support Setu Samudram Project. I am totally agreed with Mr. VMT that it causes environmental misbalances. At the earth there are mountains, valleys etc. If we
plane all these surfaces then it will be very beneficial to transport, but then where will be our environment? There is no much need of making path for ships from the point of view of India. But it is more important to stabilizing good environment at that place. I think in a similar way the parallel Ganga Road project is also unnecessary and harmful for environment. In that region of U.P. there are sufficient roads for transport.
3.Do you think that all the
mythologies are just bogus and has nothing to do with realities of the contemporary world?
Every story is always has some or much part of reality.
Zeashan Zaidi
arvind mishra <arvind_drmishra@...> wrote:
Respected All, I know that a discussion on a topic like such in this forum shall be
genuinely disliked by some but I have a point to make to defend my stand. Many of you might have noticed a picture on the homepage of this forum [If not please jut check it right now!]and yes it is a satellite imagery of the structure released by NASA in 2003 which in India is popularly called 'Ram Setu' or 'Nal setu'.After the publishing of this very picture all heavens and hells let loose and the hue and cry began claiming the said structure as a long awaited scientific proof that Lord Rama really made a bridge to cross the mighty sea and defeat the demon king Ravana.Though the NASA hastily denied any association with such claims,it immediately dawned on me that the issue is definitely going to begin a great upheaval in India. Since mythology always tempts me and has some queer connections to sf and because I rightly predicted an upheaval in our society over the issued I chose to focus the aerial view of Rama Setu on the home
page of this forum and no one of you,good heavens has ever objected to it.After all sf is about making the predictions of all sorts and the prophetic vision of the moderator is solicited to be taken in this context only.Just bear it please. Now could I dare to invite your views on the topic and ask what do you think on the following- 1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?. 2-If it is not man made how come that it is associtaed with name of Lord Rama. 3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the structure and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport in between east and west coasts. 4.Do you think that all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing to do with realities of the contemporary world? 5.And above all do you find any science fictional elements in the whole affair? Come on please as how a science communicator can be behind if a whole nation is
talking on a 'burning isue'like this. Regards, arvind
Luggage? GPS? Comic books?
Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search.
All of you amazed me to make the heartiest congrates on my first step in VP.I am so much obliged for your affection and expectation. I will perform my best efforts to enhance the VP' s expedition of science popularization at a great extent on national level.
Once again my very very thanks.
M.M.Gore
CHANDRA MOHAN NAUTIYAL <cmnautiyal@...> wrote:
I also join Zeashan. We are sure that Manish jee will go on honing his skills further and serve the cause better.
CMN
zeashan zaidi <zeashanzaidi@yahoo.com> wrote:
I have heard that one of our younger members of the group Mr. Manish Mohan Gore has been appointed as a Technical Officer in Vigyan Prasar, an apex autonomous organization based in
Delhi. I myself on the behalf of all the group members extend heartiest congratulations to Mr. Manish Mohan Gore on his achievement.
Zeashan Zaidi.
Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
Forgot the famous last words? Access your message archive online. Click here.
All of you amazed me to make the heartiest congrates on my first step in VP.I am so much obliged for your affection and expectation. I will perform my best efforts to enhance the VP' s expedition of science popularization at a great extent on national level.
Once again my very very thanks.
M.M.Gore
CHANDRA MOHAN NAUTIYAL <cmnautiyal@...> wrote:
I also join Zeashan. We are sure that Manish jee will go on honing his skills further and serve the cause better.
CMN
zeashan zaidi <zeashanzaidi@yahoo.com> wrote:
I have heard that one of our younger members of the group Mr. Manish Mohan Gore has been appointed as a Technical Officer in Vigyan Prasar, an apex autonomous organization based in
Delhi. I myself on the behalf of all the group members extend heartiest congratulations to Mr. Manish Mohan Gore on his achievement.
Zeashan Zaidi.
Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
Forgot the famous last words? Access your message archive online. Click here.
Meet people who discuss and share your passions. Join them now.
1. The structure shown is definitely natural and not man made.
2. The epc says that Ram got a bridge construted to cross over to Lankaa. We are
keenly looking for evidence of such descriptions in the epic. Hence a connecton
has been made. But the connection need not necessarily be as far fetdced as it
may appear to some. It is quite probable that the natural feature which is a few
hundred feet below the surface,, may have been just one or two feet below,
especially during low tides, a few thousand years or few hundred years ago. In
order to cross it all that was required was to fill that one or two feet of gap.
Later of course the man made structure got washed off, and now only the natural
feature exists. This is not the only feature which matches with the
descriptions, and many other natural descriptiions match the realiity. The
above saiid probability needs to be researche to determine with some more
certainty the 'belief'.
3. I am against the project for three reasons
1.It is going to harm the environment, and its survival is in doubt because
Tsunamis are going to act on the feature further because it would be disturbed.
Further it is likely to disturb the badly needed thorium bed which is lying near
the coast.
2. Tsunamis would cuse greater havoc in future.
3. It is going to change the status of marine rights of India.
vmt
Vishwa Mohan Tiwari
________________________________> To: indiansciencefiction@...>
From: arvind_drmishra@...> Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2007 03:34:53 +0000>
Subject: [indiansciencefiction] Ram Setu :the myth and reality !>> Respected
All,> I know that a discussion on a topic like such in this forum shall be>
genuinely disliked by some but I have a point to make to defend my stand.> Many
of you might have noticed a picture on the homepage of this forum> [If not
please jut check it right now!]and yes it is a satellite> imagery of the
structure released by NASA in 2003 which in India is> popularly called 'Ram
Setu' or 'Nal setu'.After the publishing of this> very picture all heavens and
hells let loose and the hue and cry began> claiming the said structure as a long
awaited scientific proof that> Lord Rama really made a bridge to cross the
mighty sea and defeat the> demon king Ravana.Though the NASA hastily denied any
association with> such claims,it immediately dawned on me that the issue is
definitely> going to begin a great upheaval in India.> Since mythology always
tempts me and has some queer connections to sf> and because I rightly predicted
an upheaval in our society over the> issued I chose to focus the aerial view of
Rama Setu on the home page> of this forum and no one of you,good heavens has
ever objected to> it.After all sf is about making the predictions of all sorts
and the> prophetic vision of the moderator is solicited to be taken in this>
context only.Just bear it please.> Now could I dare to invite your views on the
topic and ask what do you> think on the following-> 1-Do you think that the
structure shown is really man made?.> 2-If it is not man made how come that it
is associtaed with name of> Lord Rama.> 3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project
poised to break the structure> and make a lee way to ships in order to
facilitate the sea transport> in between east and west coasts.> 4.Do you think
that all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing> to do with realities of
the contemporary world?> 5.And above all do you find any science fictional
elements in the> whole affair?> Come on please as how a science communicator can
be behind if a whole> nation is talking on a 'burning isue'like this.> Regards,>
arvind>
_________________________________________________________________
Capture your memories in an online journal!
http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us
Respected All,
I know that a discussion on a topic like such in this forum shall be
genuinely disliked by some but I have a point to make to defend my stand.
Many of you might have noticed a picture on the homepage of this forum
[If not please jut check it right now!]and yes it is a satellite
imagery of the structure released by NASA in 2003 which in India is
popularly called 'Ram Setu' or 'Nal setu'.After the publishing of this
very picture all heavens and hells let loose and the hue and cry began
claiming the said structure as a long awaited scientific proof that
Lord Rama really made a bridge to cross the mighty sea and defeat the
demon king Ravana.Though the NASA hastily denied any association with
such claims,it immediately dawned on me that the issue is definitely
going to begin a great upheaval in India.
Since mythology always tempts me and has some queer connections to sf
and because I rightly predicted an upheaval in our society over the
issued I chose to focus the aerial view of Rama Setu on the home page
of this forum and no one of you,good heavens has ever objected to
it.After all sf is about making the predictions of all sorts and the
prophetic vision of the moderator is solicited to be taken in this
context only.Just bear it please.
Now could I dare to invite your views on the topic and ask what do you
think on the following-
1-Do you think that the structure shown is really man made?.
2-If it is not man made how come that it is associtaed with name of
Lord Rama.
3.Do you support Setu Samudram Project poised to break the structure
and make a lee way to ships in order to facilitate the sea transport
in between east and west coasts.
4.Do you think that all the mythologies are just bogus and has nothing
to do with realities of the contemporary world?
5.And above all do you find any science fictional elements in the
whole affair?
Come on please as how a science communicator can be behind if a whole
nation is talking on a 'burning isue'like this.
Regards,
arvind
A science fiction “Kekde Dweep Par Ghoomte Hain” by “A. Deneprove” is published in New Issue of “Electroniki Aapke Liye”. It is a good sci-fi and I think it is related to our topic Robots vs Human. See in the following link
We are guessing about future. So lots of gas may be there.
I guess that we would like to go along and develop the lines laid by Asimov.
However if by mistake we lose control on robots who happen to be smarter than
us, then...... that is a good subject of SF.
Vishwa Mohan Tiwari
________________________________> To: indiansciencefiction@...>
From: cmnautiyal@...> Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 13:24:57 +0100> Subject:
RE: [indiansciencefiction] Robots Vs Human>> The question is not whether we will
want to make or not. We shall definitely go on making better and better robots.
Some of them will be certainly higher than some human beings. Some will be on
such borderline that may even posses or develop creative intelligence without
our realising and will grow further. After all, human beings are also a product
of such selections/ changes/ mutations/ chance etc. So the possibility is there,
whether we like it or not....> CMN> zeashan zaidi wrote:> In this context, there
was a question. If human will be able to make intelligent robots, is he will
made such robots? Because in such cases robots can capture his controlling on
the earth.> My answer is affirmative. As we see in present human is fully known
about the fatality of atom bombs, vacuum bombs and other dangerous weapons. But
he is making such weapons without thinking about the future of mankind. In the
same way humans can try to make such robots that will not only be intelligent
but also have ability to capture sovereignty of human beings.> Zeashan Zaidi>
Arvind Mishra wrote:> In my previous post close has gone lose in last lines
giving just an opposite meaning sorry it stands corrected now pl bear with me!>
Arvind Mishra wrote:> There are two school of thoughts on the subject i.e.Robot
vs human.One is clearly an escapist one as depicted in R.U.R -Rossum's Universal
Robots written in 1920by a Czech playwright Karel Capek,who in fact introduced
this word to English and then to other languages and showed the frankenstenian
possibilities of too much dependence of man on the intelligent machine.> Another
view, an optimistic one is advocated by ISSAC ASIMOV,the s.f. maestro himself
which simply maintain that if the intelligent machines are kept in certain
checks and bounds they would be serving humanity in eternity.To put his points
strongly he derived the laws of robotics now known to even a beginner in s.f.
literature.> I find there is nothing new in this discussion which is of any
worth.This way or that way robots are going to be with us for all ages and time
to come and we have to keep a lose vigil on them .That is all .> And coming
robots are not out fashioned metallic ones but are very similar to us even in
flesh and blood-they are androids ! Of the same types referred in R.U.R.>
ARVIND> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari wrote:> Dear Swapnil,> What I meant by
electromechanical robots was the traditional robots being made with mechanical,
electrical and electronic devices, certainly not using the futuristic bio
devices.> vmt> ----------------------------------------> To:
indiansciencefiction@...> From: arnieswap@...> Date: Tue, 11
Sep 2007 22:31:29 +0530> Subject: Re: [indiansciencefiction] Robots Vs Human>>
Res Tiwari Ji,>> In that case I would apologize. Could you please elaborate>
electromechanical. Coz I have little knowledge about that.>
Pleasssssssssssssssssss. :-)>> Swapnil>> On 9/11/07, Vishwa Mohan Tiwari
wrote:>>>> Swapnil jee,>> I never said that 'humans will always be smarter than
robots, and therefore I never asked you to agree.>> Indeed I also foresee that
robots will become 'smarter' than humans, and that is precisely the reason that
humans would keep a tight control on them, or at least try their best to do
so.Whether they would succeed in this is a billion dollars question, certainly
worth exploring.>> I have been talking of electromechanical including
electronics etc, and not of Bio-robots, which are a different kettle of fish,
and I did not talk about them, for my lnowledge about them is scanty. Yes, Life
keeps breaking all the barriers, and electromechanical robots do not have
flife.>> VMT>> ________________________________> To:
indiansciencefiction@...> From: arnieswap@...> Date: Mon, 10
Sep 2007 11:12:25 +0000> Subject: [indiansciencefiction] Robots Vs Human>> Res
Tiwari Ji,> Time and again, it has been noticed that life breaks all barriers.
Intelligent beings/robots cannot be eternally controlled by some code of
conduct, whatever they are. And here we need to see how robots will actually
evolve in reality and not in the 'secure' world of Asimov. A simple example is
nano bots working in a distributed intellegent environment. They follow some
model to execute a task. Then these technologies will be developed by
independent companies and they would want their work to be done and many not
focus more on future consequences or absolute control.> And I also disagree with
the notion that human will always be smarter than robots.> For instance,
Singularity Institute Research Fellow Eliezer Yudkowsky explained over the
weekend at the Singularity Summit why many believe that machines will eventually
be smarter than their makers. The stunning progress in packing more computation
power onto silicon chips, married with software designers' increasing ability to
take advantage of this power, virtually guarantees that machines are progressing
faster than humans are. One day, machines will start building themselves, he
predicted. And at that point, humans will certainly no longer be the smartest
creatures in the room.> Professor Alan Turing's Turing Test may raise some
questions, but that is still debatable.> As Nautiyal ji said that robots with
intelligence of humans will be huge in size is not actually correct. IBM and
Intel many other companies are working on reducing the size of transistors, IBM
recently came out with 3D chip staking tachnology, thus reducing the size and
increasing processing speed manifold. Them Moore's Law is still holding fast.
Look at the Apple Mini, it is much more powerful than any supercomputer of
sixties, but 'mini' is just 6-inch large (or small). The computing capacity is
increaing at space age. Supercomputer on chip is already a reality with IBM,
Sony and Toshiba unveiled a supercomputer on chip microprocessor architecture
two years ago.> Even the small form factor Nokia smartphones are more powerful
than 486 computing machines.> So the bottom line is, humans will soon encounter
beings more smarter than they are, and those will be the machines created by
humans.> I reall a famous line from a SF movies.> A supercomputer says: "When I
was a machine, I yearn to be human. Now I am better than bother, the CREATED has
become the CREATOR!"> :-)> Regards> Swapnil> NOTE: PLease discuss this topic
under this Title Only!> --- In indiansciencefiction@..., Vishwa
Mohan Tiwari wrote:>>>>>> Swapnil jee>> Should humans let robots be free to do
what they desire to do? This assumes that their desires are also not being
controlled by any code of conduct given by humans.At best they develop their own
code of conduct.If there is a code of conduct given to them by humans, then they
are not free, and that is what humans would like to control, otherwise there
would be conflicts between humans and robots. As it is we have more than enough
conflicts within humans.>> If the robots are totally free then they may start
controlling humans.>> VMT>>>> ________________________________> To:
indiansciencefiction@... From: arnieswap@... Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007
07:47:19 +0000> Subject: [indiansciencefiction] Re: Surrealism and Science
Fiction!>> Tiwari Ji,> Nautiyal Ji would answer that question in his own manner,
I would just> like to add, when the machines become 'intelligent' and instead
of> depending on set of rule, start learning from experiences especially> in
"distributed intelligence", computers will not depend on how much> freedom we
give them. If they are learning and evolving, they would> modify the set of
instruction and will not be much in our control.> Another worrying area is
'nanobots', these will be working on various> models of distributed intelligence
and it would almost impossible to> keep a tab on their behaviour patten. I
think, once robots enter the> true AI environment, it would not be in our
control to give them freedom.> They will be as free as we are.> Swapnil> --- In
indiansciencefiction@..., Vishwa Mohan Tiwari> wrote:>>>>>> Dr.
Nautial jee>> How much freedom would you give to a robot?>> I guess not more
than you give to a loyal and intelligent subordinate.>> Here lies the difference
between a most advanced robot and a human> being.>> VMT>>
________________________________> To:> indiansciencefiction@...
From: cmnautiyal@ Date:> Sat, 8 Sep 2007 13:12:12 +0100> Subject: Re:
[indiansciencefiction]> Re: Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> The issue has come
up because of> comparison with robots. If both are programmed, where are the>
differences? Can robots feel depressed, joyed or sad? Can they committ> sucide
and if yes, what would be the form?> CMN> "swapnil.bhartiya"> wrote:> Actually I
was expecting that there would be no discussion> over> whether humans/all living
being are programmed or not. That is a> fact> and all of us know that. That's
the basic. DNA carries the> instruction> that instructs cells how to develop and
behave. So, yes> biologically> we are completely programmed and what its
genetic> enginerring does but> reprgramme genes and create pervasive things>
like BT cotton GM seeds.> They are playing with stem sells as well. I> should
not have written> all this coz there are expert on the panel> who already know
this, so> in the first place there shouldn't have> been ay discussion on the>
issue but unanimous agreement.> And yes, we> do get programmed, if this word
could be used there, in> day to day> life by our surroundings, experiences and
the way we learn> things.>> So, we are well programmed.> Swapnil.> autonomus
with In addition,---> In> indiansciencefiction@..., CHANDRA MOHAN
NAUTIYAL>> wrote:>>>> I wold say yes, we are being programmed. I wrote in the>
previous mail:>>>> "human beings (or advanced animals) are being> reprogrammed>
continuously with experience.">>>> I feel Tiwari jee has> agreed with that. Our
initially> programming, as Tiwari jee also> wrote, is with respect to our basic>
needs. Thereafter it's> programming by society and its members. We> respond in a
certain way> because that's what comes to us from (now)> built-in set of>
instructions.>>>> So I feel we both agree.>>>> CMN>>>>>> Vishwa Mohan> Tiwari
wrote:>>>> Are we programmed ? !>> I would suggest that we are> given a set of
hardware and a structure> for programming.>> But we are> not programmed in a
broad sense. In a narrow sense we are> programmed> for we all have needs
pertaining to "Aahaar, Nidraa, Bhaya> and> Maithun'; these may be equivalent of
energy requirements, cooling> and> production etc.; but there is tremendous
freedom even in this> regime.>> A child is being programmed by his parents and
the entire> village,>> or is he really being programmed or learning to
programme> ??!!>>>> We are entering into the field of ontology, and I do not>
mind> entering, but others may consider it to be a field not> pertaining to> SF
writing.>>>> VMT>> ________________________________>> To:>
indiansciencefiction@... From: cmnautiyal@> Date:>> Fri, 7 Sep
2007 13:51:06 +0100> Subject: Re: [indiansciencefiction]>> Re: Surrealism and
Science Fiction!>> Actually the feelings of>> depression, sorrow or joy are also
a result of programming. We are> all> programmed. One difference from computers
at present is that> human> beings (or advanced animals) are being reprogrammed>
continuously with> experience. The biochemocals produced in our body> are also
result of> programmes. These chemicals lead to our switching> temperament etc.
The> signals, which are probably electro magnetic,> are sent to the brains>
leading to perception of different feelings.> Or is it that these> signals lead
to production of bio chemicals?>> CMN> Arvind Mishra> wrote:> Yes Zeashaan if
there remains no> difference in man and robot> ,robots may very well adopt
behavioural> aberrations like suicide etc> and also may indulge in surrealistic>
activities .But a lot>> depends on us what way we are going to shape> and design
our future> robots.They would be made on a optimistic> promise as opined by
great> Asimov or on Mary Shelley's Frankenstein> pattern.> In wake of mobile>
explosions your story suddenly attains a> remarkable significance.>> Great work
dear! Go ahead dear, you have a> great writer within you!>> ARVIND> zeashan
zaidi wrote:> If computer> has power of imagination, as> well as sentiments.
Then an external> cause may be depressed it to> commit suicide. Obviously in
case of> computers this depressing cause> will be a virus like program.>>
Zeashan Zaidi> "swapnil.bhartiya"> wrote:> Still, I am not convinced> that
computers will commmit> "suiside" in> that manner that chips will> start to
melt. And my> previous objections> remain that this could not> be done as every
chips> development process> is very meticuous.>> Swapnil> --- In>
indiansciencefiction@..., Vishwa Mohan> Tiwari>> wrote:>>>>>>
Vishwa Mohan Tiwari>> Surrealism is much more>>> than imagination!!>> Computers
suicide in the story was a direct>> result of instructions> to that effect, aand
not due to pain, misery> ,> sorrow or depression> etc, as I understood from the
story.>> VMT>>>> ________________________________> To:>>>
indiansciencefiction@... From: zeashanzaidi@> Date:>>> Wed, 5 Sep
2007 22:41:25 -0700> Subject: RE: [indiansciencefiction]>>> Re: Surrealism and
Science Fiction!>> Surrealism is just associated>>> with level of imagination
power of brain. Those brains having much>>> power in this sense have more
sentiments also. And suicide is>>> obviously related to boom of sentiments.>
Zeashan Zaidi> Vishwa> Mohan>> Tiwari wrote:> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari> The SF story
is> interesting and>> good. hOWEVER THE CLAIM THAT THE COMPUTERS HAD THE>
CAPABILITY TO USE>> IMAGINATION IS NOT VALID. The plot of the story> does not
need the>> computers to use imagination, infact they blindly> followed the>>
instruction to commit suicide.> VMT>>>> ________________________________>> To:>>
indiansciencefiction@... From: zeashanzaidi@>> Date:>> Wed, 5 Sep
2007 10:15:35 -0700> Subject: Re:> [indiansciencefiction]>> Re: Surrealism and
Science Fiction!>> In the> context of surrealism> in> robots/computers, I am
presenting a sci-fi> `Computer Ki Maut'> where> it is shown a possibility of
imagination in> computers. This> story had> been published in Vigyan Pragati in
1998.>> Zeashan Zaidi>>> "swapnil.bhartiya" wrote:> I agree with everything>
Tiwari ji said>> except that Robots can't use> surrealism. How could we> be so
sure?>> Robots can be for more advanced> and may have their own> form of>>
surrealism. Surrealism is only obscure> thought, imagination> and>>
interpretation of any being who is capable of> thinking and>>> imagining. Thus,
robots could also have their own suurealism.> On>>> question raised by Nautiyal
ji.> 1. Yes our story is SF -- elements>>> that build the story are futuristic>
and science is integral element>> of>> ths story.> 2. My basic understanding is:
'remove science from> a>> story and if the> story still sustains, its not
science fiction. A> SF>> story should> collapse as soon as element of science
is> removed!'> 3.>> Depends.> 4 I cant understand the last point, please>
elaborate. " If>> Mays> needs supplementing, how about doing it? We> still have
more> than> a> month let for it to be finalised."> Swapnil>> the e, as the--->
In> indiansciencefiction@..., CHANDRA>> MOHAN NAUTIYAL>>
wrote:>>>> While some> .>> ________________________________> Shape>> Yahoo! in
your own image.> Join our Network Research Panel today!>>>>>
__________________________________________________________>> Discover>> the new
Windows Vista>>>>
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE>>>>
Yahoo! Groups Links> To visit your group on the web, go to:>>>>
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/> Your email>>> settings:>
Individual Email | Traditional> To change settings> online>>> go to:>>>
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join>> (Yahoo!>> ID
required)> To change settings via email:>>>>
mailto:indiansciencefiction-digest@...>>>
mailto:indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@... To>>> unsubscribe
from this group, send an email to:>>>>
indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@... Your use of>>> Yahoo! Groups
is subject to:> http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>>>>
________________________________> Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha!>>>> Play
Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at>>> Yahoo!
Games.>>>>>>> __________________________________________________________>>
Discover>> the new Windows Vista>>>>
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE>>>>>
________________________________> Luggage? GPS? Comic books?> Check>> out
fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search.>>>
[http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif]arvind>> mishra>
________________________________> 5, 50, 500, 5000>> - Store N> number of mails
in your inbox. Click here.>>> ________________________________> 5, 50, 500, 5000
- Store N number> of> mails in your inbox. Click here.>>>>>>
__________________________________________________________>> Gear up> for
Halo(r) 3 with free downloads and an exclusive offer. It's> our way> of saying
thanks for using Windows Live™.>>>
http://gethalo3gear.com?ocid=SeptemberWLHalo3_WLHMTxt_2>>>>>> Yahoo!> Groups
Links>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------->> 5, 50,> 500, 5000 -
Store N number of mails in your inbox. Click here.>>>>
________________________________> Unlimited freedom, unlimited> storage. Get it
now>>>>> __________________________________________________________>> Capture
your memories in an online journal!>>
http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us>>>>>>>
_________________________________________________________________>> Gear up for
Halo(r) 3 with free downloads and an exclusive offer. It's our way of saying
thanks for using Windows Live™.>>
http://gethalo3gear.com?ocid=SeptemberWLHalo3_WLHMTxt_2>>>>>>>
_________________________________________________________________>> Can you find
the hidden words? Take a break and play Seekadoo!>>
http://club.live.com/seekadoo.aspx?icid=seek_wlmailtextlink>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups
Links>>>>>>>>>>> --> Swapnil Bhartiya> Assistant Editor> EFYTimes.com>>>> Yahoo!
Groups Links>> To visit your group on the web, go to:>
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/>> Your email settings:>
Individual Email | Traditional>> To change settings online go to:>
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join> (Yahoo! ID
required)>> To change settings via email:>
mailto:indiansciencefiction-digest@...>
mailto:indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@...>> To unsubscribe from
this group, send an email to:>
indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@...>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups
is subject to:> http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>>
_________________________________________________________________> Capture your
memories in an online journal!>
http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us> Yahoo! Groups Links> To
visit your group on the web, go to:>
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/> Your email settings:>
Individual Email | Traditional> To change settings online go to:>
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join> (Yahoo! ID
required)> To change settings via email:>
mailto:indiansciencefiction-digest@...>
mailto:indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@...> To unsubscribe from
this group, send an email to:>
indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@...> Your use of Yahoo! Groups
is subject to:> http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
[http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif]arvind mishra>
________________________________> Try the revolutionary next-gen Yahoo! Mail.
Click here.> [http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif]arvind
mishra> ________________________________> Unlimited freedom, unlimited storage.
Get it now> ________________________________> Be a better Globetrotter. Get
better travel answers from someone who knows.> Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.>
________________________________> Now you can chat without downloading
messenger. Click here to know how.>
_________________________________________________________________
More photos; more messages; more whatever – Get MORE with Windows Live™
Hotmail®. NOW with 5GB storage.
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM\
_mini_5G_0907
We are guessing about future. So lots of gas may be there.
I guess that we would like to go along and develop the lines laid by Asimov.
However if by mistake we lose control on robots who happen to be smarter than
us, then...... that is a good subject of SF.
Vishwa Mohan Tiwari
________________________________> To: indiansciencefiction@...>
From: cmnautiyal@...> Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 13:24:57 +0100> Subject:
RE: [indiansciencefiction] Robots Vs Human>> The question is not whether we will
want to make or not. We shall definitely go on making better and better robots.
Some of them will be certainly higher than some human beings. Some will be on
such borderline that may even posses or develop creative intelligence without
our realising and will grow further. After all, human beings are also a product
of such selections/ changes/ mutations/ chance etc. So the possibility is there,
whether we like it or not....> CMN> zeashan zaidi wrote:> In this context, there
was a question. If human will be able to make intelligent robots, is he will
made such robots? Because in such cases robots can capture his controlling on
the earth.> My answer is affirmative. As we see in present human is fully known
about the fatality of atom bombs, vacuum bombs and other dangerous weapons. But
he is making such weapons without thinking about the future of mankind. In the
same way humans can try to make such robots that will not only be intelligent
but also have ability to capture sovereignty of human beings.> Zeashan Zaidi>
Arvind Mishra wrote:> In my previous post close has gone lose in last lines
giving just an opposite meaning sorry it stands corrected now pl bear with me!>
Arvind Mishra wrote:> There are two school of thoughts on the subject i.e.Robot
vs human.One is clearly an escapist one as depicted in R.U.R -Rossum's Universal
Robots written in 1920by a Czech playwright Karel Capek,who in fact introduced
this word to English and then to other languages and showed the frankenstenian
possibilities of too much dependence of man on the intelligent machine.> Another
view, an optimistic one is advocated by ISSAC ASIMOV,the s.f. maestro himself
which simply maintain that if the intelligent machines are kept in certain
checks and bounds they would be serving humanity in eternity.To put his points
strongly he derived the laws of robotics now known to even a beginner in s.f.
literature.> I find there is nothing new in this discussion which is of any
worth.This way or that way robots are going to be with us for all ages and time
to come and we have to keep a lose vigil on them .That is all .> And coming
robots are not out fashioned metallic ones but are very similar to us even in
flesh and blood-they are androids ! Of the same types referred in R.U.R.>
ARVIND> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari wrote:> Dear Swapnil,> What I meant by
electromechanical robots was the traditional robots being made with mechanical,
electrical and electronic devices, certainly not using the futuristic bio
devices.> vmt> ----------------------------------------> To:
indiansciencefiction@...> From: arnieswap@...> Date: Tue, 11
Sep 2007 22:31:29 +0530> Subject: Re: [indiansciencefiction] Robots Vs Human>>
Res Tiwari Ji,>> In that case I would apologize. Could you please elaborate>
electromechanical. Coz I have little knowledge about that.>
Pleasssssssssssssssssss. :-)>> Swapnil>> On 9/11/07, Vishwa Mohan Tiwari
wrote:>>>> Swapnil jee,>> I never said that 'humans will always be smarter than
robots, and therefore I never asked you to agree.>> Indeed I also foresee that
robots will become 'smarter' than humans, and that is precisely the reason that
humans would keep a tight control on them, or at least try their best to do
so.Whether they would succeed in this is a billion dollars question, certainly
worth exploring.>> I have been talking of electromechanical including
electronics etc, and not of Bio-robots, which are a different kettle of fish,
and I did not talk about them, for my lnowledge about them is scanty. Yes, Life
keeps breaking all the barriers, and electromechanical robots do not have
flife.>> VMT>> ________________________________> To:
indiansciencefiction@...> From: arnieswap@...> Date: Mon, 10
Sep 2007 11:12:25 +0000> Subject: [indiansciencefiction] Robots Vs Human>> Res
Tiwari Ji,> Time and again, it has been noticed that life breaks all barriers.
Intelligent beings/robots cannot be eternally controlled by some code of
conduct, whatever they are. And here we need to see how robots will actually
evolve in reality and not in the 'secure' world of Asimov. A simple example is
nano bots working in a distributed intellegent environment. They follow some
model to execute a task. Then these technologies will be developed by
independent companies and they would want their work to be done and many not
focus more on future consequences or absolute control.> And I also disagree with
the notion that human will always be smarter than robots.> For instance,
Singularity Institute Research Fellow Eliezer Yudkowsky explained over the
weekend at the Singularity Summit why many believe that machines will eventually
be smarter than their makers. The stunning progress in packing more computation
power onto silicon chips, married with software designers' increasing ability to
take advantage of this power, virtually guarantees that machines are progressing
faster than humans are. One day, machines will start building themselves, he
predicted. And at that point, humans will certainly no longer be the smartest
creatures in the room.> Professor Alan Turing's Turing Test may raise some
questions, but that is still debatable.> As Nautiyal ji said that robots with
intelligence of humans will be huge in size is not actually correct. IBM and
Intel many other companies are working on reducing the size of transistors, IBM
recently came out with 3D chip staking tachnology, thus reducing the size and
increasing processing speed manifold. Them Moore's Law is still holding fast.
Look at the Apple Mini, it is much more powerful than any supercomputer of
sixties, but 'mini' is just 6-inch large (or small). The computing capacity is
increaing at space age. Supercomputer on chip is already a reality with IBM,
Sony and Toshiba unveiled a supercomputer on chip microprocessor architecture
two years ago.> Even the small form factor Nokia smartphones are more powerful
than 486 computing machines.> So the bottom line is, humans will soon encounter
beings more smarter than they are, and those will be the machines created by
humans.> I reall a famous line from a SF movies.> A supercomputer says: "When I
was a machine, I yearn to be human. Now I am better than bother, the CREATED has
become the CREATOR!"> :-)> Regards> Swapnil> NOTE: PLease discuss this topic
under this Title Only!> --- In indiansciencefiction@..., Vishwa
Mohan Tiwari wrote:>>>>>> Swapnil jee>> Should humans let robots be free to do
what they desire to do? This assumes that their desires are also not being
controlled by any code of conduct given by humans.At best they develop their own
code of conduct.If there is a code of conduct given to them by humans, then they
are not free, and that is what humans would like to control, otherwise there
would be conflicts between humans and robots. As it is we have more than enough
conflicts within humans.>> If the robots are totally free then they may start
controlling humans.>> VMT>>>> ________________________________> To:
indiansciencefiction@... From: arnieswap@... Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007
07:47:19 +0000> Subject: [indiansciencefiction] Re: Surrealism and Science
Fiction!>> Tiwari Ji,> Nautiyal Ji would answer that question in his own manner,
I would just> like to add, when the machines become 'intelligent' and instead
of> depending on set of rule, start learning from experiences especially> in
"distributed intelligence", computers will not depend on how much> freedom we
give them. If they are learning and evolving, they would> modify the set of
instruction and will not be much in our control.> Another worrying area is
'nanobots', these will be working on various> models of distributed intelligence
and it would almost impossible to> keep a tab on their behaviour patten. I
think, once robots enter the> true AI environment, it would not be in our
control to give them freedom.> They will be as free as we are.> Swapnil> --- In
indiansciencefiction@..., Vishwa Mohan Tiwari> wrote:>>>>>> Dr.
Nautial jee>> How much freedom would you give to a robot?>> I guess not more
than you give to a loyal and intelligent subordinate.>> Here lies the difference
between a most advanced robot and a human> being.>> VMT>>
________________________________> To:> indiansciencefiction@...
From: cmnautiyal@ Date:> Sat, 8 Sep 2007 13:12:12 +0100> Subject: Re:
[indiansciencefiction]> Re: Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> The issue has come
up because of> comparison with robots. If both are programmed, where are the>
differences? Can robots feel depressed, joyed or sad? Can they committ> sucide
and if yes, what would be the form?> CMN> "swapnil.bhartiya"> wrote:> Actually I
was expecting that there would be no discussion> over> whether humans/all living
being are programmed or not. That is a> fact> and all of us know that. That's
the basic. DNA carries the> instruction> that instructs cells how to develop and
behave. So, yes> biologically> we are completely programmed and what its
genetic> enginerring does but> reprgramme genes and create pervasive things>
like BT cotton GM seeds.> They are playing with stem sells as well. I> should
not have written> all this coz there are expert on the panel> who already know
this, so> in the first place there shouldn't have> been ay discussion on the>
issue but unanimous agreement.> And yes, we> do get programmed, if this word
could be used there, in> day to day> life by our surroundings, experiences and
the way we learn> things.>> So, we are well programmed.> Swapnil.> autonomus
with In addition,---> In> indiansciencefiction@..., CHANDRA MOHAN
NAUTIYAL>> wrote:>>>> I wold say yes, we are being programmed. I wrote in the>
previous mail:>>>> "human beings (or advanced animals) are being> reprogrammed>
continuously with experience.">>>> I feel Tiwari jee has> agreed with that. Our
initially> programming, as Tiwari jee also> wrote, is with respect to our basic>
needs. Thereafter it's> programming by society and its members. We> respond in a
certain way> because that's what comes to us from (now)> built-in set of>
instructions.>>>> So I feel we both agree.>>>> CMN>>>>>> Vishwa Mohan> Tiwari
wrote:>>>> Are we programmed ? !>> I would suggest that we are> given a set of
hardware and a structure> for programming.>> But we are> not programmed in a
broad sense. In a narrow sense we are> programmed> for we all have needs
pertaining to "Aahaar, Nidraa, Bhaya> and> Maithun'; these may be equivalent of
energy requirements, cooling> and> production etc.; but there is tremendous
freedom even in this> regime.>> A child is being programmed by his parents and
the entire> village,>> or is he really being programmed or learning to
programme> ??!!>>>> We are entering into the field of ontology, and I do not>
mind> entering, but others may consider it to be a field not> pertaining to> SF
writing.>>>> VMT>> ________________________________>> To:>
indiansciencefiction@... From: cmnautiyal@> Date:>> Fri, 7 Sep
2007 13:51:06 +0100> Subject: Re: [indiansciencefiction]>> Re: Surrealism and
Science Fiction!>> Actually the feelings of>> depression, sorrow or joy are also
a result of programming. We are> all> programmed. One difference from computers
at present is that> human> beings (or advanced animals) are being reprogrammed>
continuously with> experience. The biochemocals produced in our body> are also
result of> programmes. These chemicals lead to our switching> temperament etc.
The> signals, which are probably electro magnetic,> are sent to the brains>
leading to perception of different feelings.> Or is it that these> signals lead
to production of bio chemicals?>> CMN> Arvind Mishra> wrote:> Yes Zeashaan if
there remains no> difference in man and robot> ,robots may very well adopt
behavioural> aberrations like suicide etc> and also may indulge in surrealistic>
activities .But a lot>> depends on us what way we are going to shape> and design
our future> robots.They would be made on a optimistic> promise as opined by
great> Asimov or on Mary Shelley's Frankenstein> pattern.> In wake of mobile>
explosions your story suddenly attains a> remarkable significance.>> Great work
dear! Go ahead dear, you have a> great writer within you!>> ARVIND> zeashan
zaidi wrote:> If computer> has power of imagination, as> well as sentiments.
Then an external> cause may be depressed it to> commit suicide. Obviously in
case of> computers this depressing cause> will be a virus like program.>>
Zeashan Zaidi> "swapnil.bhartiya"> wrote:> Still, I am not convinced> that
computers will commmit> "suiside" in> that manner that chips will> start to
melt. And my> previous objections> remain that this could not> be done as every
chips> development process> is very meticuous.>> Swapnil> --- In>
indiansciencefiction@..., Vishwa Mohan> Tiwari>> wrote:>>>>>>
Vishwa Mohan Tiwari>> Surrealism is much more>>> than imagination!!>> Computers
suicide in the story was a direct>> result of instructions> to that effect, aand
not due to pain, misery> ,> sorrow or depression> etc, as I understood from the
story.>> VMT>>>> ________________________________> To:>>>
indiansciencefiction@... From: zeashanzaidi@> Date:>>> Wed, 5 Sep
2007 22:41:25 -0700> Subject: RE: [indiansciencefiction]>>> Re: Surrealism and
Science Fiction!>> Surrealism is just associated>>> with level of imagination
power of brain. Those brains having much>>> power in this sense have more
sentiments also. And suicide is>>> obviously related to boom of sentiments.>
Zeashan Zaidi> Vishwa> Mohan>> Tiwari wrote:> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari> The SF story
is> interesting and>> good. hOWEVER THE CLAIM THAT THE COMPUTERS HAD THE>
CAPABILITY TO USE>> IMAGINATION IS NOT VALID. The plot of the story> does not
need the>> computers to use imagination, infact they blindly> followed the>>
instruction to commit suicide.> VMT>>>> ________________________________>> To:>>
indiansciencefiction@... From: zeashanzaidi@>> Date:>> Wed, 5 Sep
2007 10:15:35 -0700> Subject: Re:> [indiansciencefiction]>> Re: Surrealism and
Science Fiction!>> In the> context of surrealism> in> robots/computers, I am
presenting a sci-fi> `Computer Ki Maut'> where> it is shown a possibility of
imagination in> computers. This> story had> been published in Vigyan Pragati in
1998.>> Zeashan Zaidi>>> "swapnil.bhartiya" wrote:> I agree with everything>
Tiwari ji said>> except that Robots can't use> surrealism. How could we> be so
sure?>> Robots can be for more advanced> and may have their own> form of>>
surrealism. Surrealism is only obscure> thought, imagination> and>>
interpretation of any being who is capable of> thinking and>>> imagining. Thus,
robots could also have their own suurealism.> On>>> question raised by Nautiyal
ji.> 1. Yes our story is SF -- elements>>> that build the story are futuristic>
and science is integral element>> of>> ths story.> 2. My basic understanding is:
'remove science from> a>> story and if the> story still sustains, its not
science fiction. A> SF>> story should> collapse as soon as element of science
is> removed!'> 3.>> Depends.> 4 I cant understand the last point, please>
elaborate. " If>> Mays> needs supplementing, how about doing it? We> still have
more> than> a> month let for it to be finalised."> Swapnil>> the e, as the--->
In> indiansciencefiction@..., CHANDRA>> MOHAN NAUTIYAL>>
wrote:>>>> While some> .>> ________________________________> Shape>> Yahoo! in
your own image.> Join our Network Research Panel today!>>>>>
__________________________________________________________>> Discover>> the new
Windows Vista>>>>
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE>>>>
Yahoo! Groups Links> To visit your group on the web, go to:>>>>
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/> Your email>>> settings:>
Individual Email | Traditional> To change settings> online>>> go to:>>>
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join>> (Yahoo!>> ID
required)> To change settings via email:>>>>
mailto:indiansciencefiction-digest@...>>>
mailto:indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@... To>>> unsubscribe
from this group, send an email to:>>>>
indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@... Your use of>>> Yahoo! Groups
is subject to:> http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>>>>
________________________________> Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha!>>>> Play
Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at>>> Yahoo!
Games.>>>>>>> __________________________________________________________>>
Discover>> the new Windows Vista>>>>
http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE>>>>>
________________________________> Luggage? GPS? Comic books?> Check>> out
fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search.>>>
[http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif]arvind>> mishra>
________________________________> 5, 50, 500, 5000>> - Store N> number of mails
in your inbox. Click here.>>> ________________________________> 5, 50, 500, 5000
- Store N number> of> mails in your inbox. Click here.>>>>>>
__________________________________________________________>> Gear up> for
Halo(r) 3 with free downloads and an exclusive offer. It's> our way> of saying
thanks for using Windows Live™.>>>
http://gethalo3gear.com?ocid=SeptemberWLHalo3_WLHMTxt_2>>>>>> Yahoo!> Groups
Links>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------->> 5, 50,> 500, 5000 -
Store N number of mails in your inbox. Click here.>>>>
________________________________> Unlimited freedom, unlimited> storage. Get it
now>>>>> __________________________________________________________>> Capture
your memories in an online journal!>>
http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us>>>>>>>
_________________________________________________________________>> Gear up for
Halo(r) 3 with free downloads and an exclusive offer. It's our way of saying
thanks for using Windows Live™.>>
http://gethalo3gear.com?ocid=SeptemberWLHalo3_WLHMTxt_2>>>>>>>
_________________________________________________________________>> Can you find
the hidden words? Take a break and play Seekadoo!>>
http://club.live.com/seekadoo.aspx?icid=seek_wlmailtextlink>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups
Links>>>>>>>>>>> --> Swapnil Bhartiya> Assistant Editor> EFYTimes.com>>>> Yahoo!
Groups Links>> To visit your group on the web, go to:>
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/>> Your email settings:>
Individual Email | Traditional>> To change settings online go to:>
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join> (Yahoo! ID
required)>> To change settings via email:>
mailto:indiansciencefiction-digest@...>
mailto:indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@...>> To unsubscribe from
this group, send an email to:>
indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@...>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups
is subject to:> http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>>
_________________________________________________________________> Capture your
memories in an online journal!>
http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us> Yahoo! Groups Links> To
visit your group on the web, go to:>
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/> Your email settings:>
Individual Email | Traditional> To change settings online go to:>
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join> (Yahoo! ID
required)> To change settings via email:>
mailto:indiansciencefiction-digest@...>
mailto:indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@...> To unsubscribe from
this group, send an email to:>
indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@...> Your use of Yahoo! Groups
is subject to:> http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
[http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif]arvind mishra>
________________________________> Try the revolutionary next-gen Yahoo! Mail.
Click here.> [http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif]arvind
mishra> ________________________________> Unlimited freedom, unlimited storage.
Get it now> ________________________________> Be a better Globetrotter. Get
better travel answers from someone who knows.> Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.>
________________________________> Now you can chat without downloading
messenger. Click here to know how.>
_________________________________________________________________
Can you find the hidden words? Take a break and play Seekadoo!
http://club.live.com/seekadoo.aspx?icid=seek_wlmailtextlink
I have heard that one of our younger members of the group Mr. Manish Mohan Gore has been appointed as a Technical Officer in Vigyan Prasar, an apex autonomous organization based in
Delhi. I myself on the behalf of all the group members extend heartiest congratulations to Mr. Manish Mohan Gore on his achievement.
Zeashan Zaidi.
Don't let your dream ride pass you by.
Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
Forgot the famous last words? Access your message archive online.
Click here.
The question is not whether we will want to make or not. We shall definitely go on making better and better robots. Some of them will be certainly higher than some human beings. Some will be on such borderline that may even posses or develop creative intelligence without our realising and will grow further. After all, human beings are also a product of such selections/ changes/ mutations/ chance etc. So the possibility is there, whether we like it or not....
CMN
zeashan zaidi <zeashanzaidi@...> wrote:
In this context, there was a question. If human will be able to make intelligent robots, is he will made such robots? Because in such cases robots can capture his controlling on the earth.
My answer is affirmative. As we see in present human is fully known about the fatality of atom bombs, vacuum bombs and other dangerous weapons. But he is making such weapons without thinking about the future of mankind. In the same way humans can try to make such robots that will not only be intelligent but also have ability to capture sovereignty of human beings.
There are two school of thoughts on the subject i.e.Robot vs human.One is clearly an
escapist one as depicted in R.U.R -Rossum's Universal Robots written in 1920by a Czech playwright Karel Capek,who in fact introduced this word to English and then to other languages and showed the frankenstenian possibilities of too much dependence of man on the intelligent machine. Another view, an optimistic one is advocated by ISSAC ASIMOV,the s.f. maestro himself which simply maintain that if the intelligent machines are kept in certain checks and bounds they would be serving humanity in eternity.To put his points strongly he derived the laws of robotics now known to even a beginner in s.f. literature. I find there is nothing new in this discussion which is of any worth.This way or that way robots are going to be with us for all ages and time to come and we have to keep a lose vigil on them .That is all . And coming robots are not out fashioned metallic ones but are very similar to us even in flesh and blood-they are androids !
Of the same types referred in R.U.R. ARVIND Vishwa Mohan Tiwari <onevishwa@hotmail.com> wrote:
Dear Swapnil, What I meant by electromechanical robots was the traditional robots being made with mechanical, electrical and electronic devices, certainly not using the futuristic bio devices. vmt ----------------------------------------> To: indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in> From: arnieswap@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 22:31:29 +0530> Subject: Re: [indiansciencefiction] Robots Vs Human>> Res Tiwari Ji,>> In that case I would apologize. Could you please elaborate> electromechanical. Coz I have little knowledge about that.> Pleasssssssssssssssssss. :-)>> Swapnil>> On 9/11/07, Vishwa Mohan Tiwari wrote:>>>> Swapnil jee,>> I never said
that 'humans will always be smarter than robots, and therefore I never asked you to agree.>> Indeed I also foresee that robots will become 'smarter' than humans, and that is precisely the reason that humans would keep a tight control on them, or at least try their best to do so.Whether they would succeed in this is a billion dollars question, certainly worth exploring.>> I have been talking of electromechanical including electronics etc, and not of Bio-robots, which are a different kettle of fish, and I did not talk about them, for my lnowledge about them is scanty. Yes, Life keeps breaking all the barriers, and electromechanical robots do not have flife.>> VMT>> ________________________________> To: indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in> From: arnieswap@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 11:12:25 +0000> Subject: [indiansciencefiction] Robots Vs Human>> Res Tiwari Ji,> Time and again, it has
been noticed that life breaks all barriers. Intelligent beings/robots cannot be eternally controlled by some code of conduct, whatever they are. And here we need to see how robots will actually evolve in reality and not in the 'secure' world of Asimov. A simple example is nano bots working in a distributed intellegent environment. They follow some model to execute a task. Then these technologies will be developed by independent companies and they would want their work to be done and many not focus more on future consequences or absolute control.> And I also disagree with the notion that human will always be smarter than robots.> For instance, Singularity Institute Research Fellow Eliezer Yudkowsky explained over the weekend at the Singularity Summit why many believe that machines will eventually be smarter than their makers. The stunning progress in packing more computation power onto silicon chips, married with software designers' increasing ability to take
advantage of this power, virtually guarantees that machines are progressing faster than humans are. One day, machines will start building themselves, he predicted. And at that point, humans will certainly no longer be the smartest creatures in the room.> Professor Alan Turing's Turing Test may raise some questions, but that is still debatable.> As Nautiyal ji said that robots with intelligence of humans will be huge in size is not actually correct. IBM and Intel many other companies are working on reducing the size of transistors, IBM recently came out with 3D chip staking tachnology, thus reducing the size and increasing processing speed manifold. Them Moore's Law is still holding fast. Look at the Apple Mini, it is much more powerful than any supercomputer of sixties, but 'mini' is just 6-inch large (or small). The computing capacity is increaing at space age. Supercomputer on chip is already a reality with IBM, Sony and Toshiba unveiled a supercomputer on chip
microprocessor architecture two years ago.> Even the small form factor Nokia smartphones are more powerful than 486 computing machines.> So the bottom line is, humans will soon encounter beings more smarter than they are, and those will be the machines created by humans.> I reall a famous line from a SF movies.> A supercomputer says: "When I was a machine, I yearn to be human. Now I am better than bother, the CREATED has become the CREATOR!"> :-)> Regards> Swapnil> NOTE: PLease discuss this topic under this Title Only!> --- In indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in, Vishwa Mohan Tiwari wrote:>>>>>> Swapnil jee>> Should humans let robots be free to do what they desire to do? This assumes that their desires are also not being controlled by any code of conduct given by humans.At best they develop their own code of conduct.If there is a code of conduct given to them by humans, then they are not free, and that is what
humans would like to control, otherwise there would be conflicts between humans and robots. As it is we have more than enough conflicts within humans.>> If the robots are totally free then they may start controlling humans.>> VMT>>>> ________________________________> To: indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in From: arnieswap@... Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007 07:47:19 +0000> Subject: [indiansciencefiction] Re: Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> Tiwari Ji,> Nautiyal Ji would answer that question in his own manner, I would just> like to add, when the machines become 'intelligent' and instead of> depending on set of rule, start learning from experiences especially> in "distributed intelligence", computers will not depend on how much> freedom we give them. If they are learning and evolving, they would> modify the set of instruction and will not be much in our control.> Another worrying area
is 'nanobots', these will be working on various> models of distributed intelligence and it would almost impossible to> keep a tab on their behaviour patten. I think, once robots enter the> true AI environment, it would not be in our control to give them freedom.> They will be as free as we are.> Swapnil> --- In indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in, Vishwa Mohan Tiwari> wrote:>>>>>> Dr. Nautial jee>> How much freedom would you give to a robot?>> I guess not more than you give to a loyal and intelligent subordinate.>> Here lies the difference between a most advanced robot and a human> being.>> VMT>> ________________________________> To:> indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in From: cmnautiyal@ Date:> Sat, 8 Sep 2007 13:12:12 +0100> Subject: Re: [indiansciencefiction]> Re: Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> The issue has come up because of>
comparison with robots. If both are programmed, where are the> differences? Can robots feel depressed, joyed or sad? Can they committ> sucide and if yes, what would be the form?> CMN> "swapnil.bhartiya"> wrote:> Actually I was expecting that there would be no discussion> over> whether humans/all living being are programmed or not. That is a> fact> and all of us know that. That's the basic. DNA carries the> instruction> that instructs cells how to develop and behave. So, yes> biologically> we are completely programmed and what its genetic> enginerring does but> reprgramme genes and create pervasive things> like BT cotton GM seeds.> They are playing with stem sells as well. I> should not have written> all this coz there are expert on the panel> who already know this, so> in the first place there shouldn't have> been ay discussion on the> issue but unanimous agreement.> And yes, we> do get
programmed, if this word could be used there, in> day to day> life by our surroundings, experiences and the way we learn> things.>> So, we are well programmed.> Swapnil.> autonomus with In addition,---> In> indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in, CHANDRA MOHAN NAUTIYAL>> wrote:>>>> I wold say yes, we are being programmed. I wrote in the> previous mail:>>>> "human beings (or advanced animals) are being> reprogrammed> continuously with experience.">>>> I feel Tiwari jee has> agreed with that. Our initially> programming, as Tiwari jee also> wrote, is with respect to our basic> needs. Thereafter it's> programming by society and its members. We> respond in a certain way> because that's what comes to us from (now)> built-in set of> instructions.>>>> So I feel we both agree.>>>> CMN>>>>>> Vishwa Mohan> Tiwari
wrote:>>>> Are we programmed ? !>> I would suggest that we are> given a set of hardware and a structure> for programming.>> But we are> not programmed in a broad sense. In a narrow sense we are> programmed> for we all have needs pertaining to "Aahaar, Nidraa, Bhaya> and> Maithun'; these may be equivalent of energy requirements, cooling> and> production etc.; but there is tremendous freedom even in this> regime.>> A child is being programmed by his parents and the entire> village,>> or is he really being programmed or learning to programme> ??!!>>>> We are entering into the field of ontology, and I do not> mind> entering, but others may consider it to be a field not> pertaining to> SF writing.>>>> VMT>> ________________________________>> To:> indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in From: cmnautiyal@> Date:>> Fri, 7 Sep
2007 13:51:06 +0100> Subject: Re: [indiansciencefiction]>> Re: Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> Actually the feelings of>> depression, sorrow or joy are also a result of programming. We are> all> programmed. One difference from computers at present is that> human> beings (or advanced animals) are being reprogrammed> continuously with> experience. The biochemocals produced in our body> are also result of> programmes. These chemicals lead to our switching> temperament etc. The> signals, which are probably electro magnetic,> are sent to the brains> leading to perception of different feelings.> Or is it that these> signals lead to production of bio chemicals?>> CMN> Arvind Mishra> wrote:> Yes Zeashaan if there remains no> difference in man and robot> ,robots may very well adopt behavioural> aberrations like suicide etc> and also may indulge in surrealistic> activities .But a
lot>> depends on us what way we are going to shape> and design our future> robots.They would be made on a optimistic> promise as opined by great> Asimov or on Mary Shelley's Frankenstein> pattern.> In wake of mobile> explosions your story suddenly attains a> remarkable significance.>> Great work dear! Go ahead dear, you have a> great writer within you!>> ARVIND> zeashan zaidi wrote:> If computer> has power of imagination, as> well as sentiments. Then an external> cause may be depressed it to> commit suicide. Obviously in case of> computers this depressing cause> will be a virus like program.>> Zeashan Zaidi> "swapnil.bhartiya"> wrote:> Still, I am not convinced> that computers will commmit> "suiside" in> that manner that chips will> start to melt. And my> previous objections> remain that this could not> be done as every chips> development process> is very
meticuous.>> Swapnil> --- In> indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in, Vishwa Mohan> Tiwari>> wrote:>>>>>> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari>> Surrealism is much more>>> than imagination!!>> Computers suicide in the story was a direct>> result of instructions> to that effect, aand not due to pain, misery> ,> sorrow or depression> etc, as I understood from the story.>> VMT>>>> ________________________________> To:>>> indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in From: zeashanzaidi@> Date:>>> Wed, 5 Sep 2007 22:41:25 -0700> Subject: RE: [indiansciencefiction]>>> Re: Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> Surrealism is just associated>>> with level of imagination power of brain. Those brains having much>>> power in this sense have more sentiments also. And suicide is>>> obviously related to boom
of sentiments.> Zeashan Zaidi> Vishwa> Mohan>> Tiwari wrote:> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari> The SF story is> interesting and>> good. hOWEVER THE CLAIM THAT THE COMPUTERS HAD THE> CAPABILITY TO USE>> IMAGINATION IS NOT VALID. The plot of the story> does not need the>> computers to use imagination, infact they blindly> followed the>> instruction to commit suicide.> VMT>>>> ________________________________>> To:>> indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in From: zeashanzaidi@>> Date:>> Wed, 5 Sep 2007 10:15:35 -0700> Subject: Re:> [indiansciencefiction]>> Re: Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> In the> context of surrealism> in> robots/computers, I am presenting a sci-fi> `Computer Ki Maut'> where> it is shown a possibility of imagination in> computers. This> story had> been published in Vigyan Pragati in 1998.>>
Zeashan Zaidi>>> "swapnil.bhartiya" wrote:> I agree with everything> Tiwari ji said>> except that Robots can't use> surrealism. How could we> be so sure?>> Robots can be for more advanced> and may have their own> form of>> surrealism. Surrealism is only obscure> thought, imagination> and>> interpretation of any being who is capable of> thinking and>>> imagining. Thus, robots could also have their own suurealism.> On>>> question raised by Nautiyal ji.> 1. Yes our story is SF -- elements>>> that build the story are futuristic> and science is integral element>> of>> ths story.> 2. My basic understanding is: 'remove science from> a>> story and if the> story still sustains, its not science fiction. A> SF>> story should> collapse as soon as element of science is> removed!'> 3.>> Depends.> 4 I cant understand the last point,
please> elaborate. " If>> Mays> needs supplementing, how about doing it? We> still have more> than> a> month let for it to be finalised."> Swapnil>> the e, as the---> In> indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in, CHANDRA>> MOHAN NAUTIYAL>> wrote:>>>> While some> .>> ________________________________> Shape>> Yahoo! in your own image.> Join our Network Research Panel today!>>>>> __________________________________________________________>> Discover>> the new Windows Vista>>>> http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links> To visit your group on the web, go to:>>>> http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/> Your email>>> settings:> Individual Email |
Traditional> To change settings> online>>> go to:>>> http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join>> (Yahoo!>> ID required)> To change settings via email:>>>> mailto:indiansciencefiction-digest@yahoogroups.co.in>>> mailto:indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.co.in To>>> unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:>>>> indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.co.in Your use of>>> Yahoo! Groups is subject to:> http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>>>> ________________________________> Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha!>>>> Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at>>> Yahoo! Games.>>>>>>> __________________________________________________________>>
Discover>> the new Windows Vista>>>> http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE>>>>> ________________________________> Luggage? GPS? Comic books?> Check>> out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search.>>> [http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif]arvind>> mishra> ________________________________> 5, 50, 500, 5000>> - Store N> number of mails in your inbox. Click here.>>> ________________________________> 5, 50, 500, 5000 - Store N number> of> mails in your inbox. Click here.>>>>>> __________________________________________________________>> Gear up> for Halo(r) 3 with free downloads and an exclusive offer. It's> our way> of saying thanks for using Windows Live™.>>>
http://gethalo3gear.com?ocid=SeptemberWLHalo3_WLHMTxt_2>>>>>> Yahoo!> Groups Links>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------->> 5, 50,> 500, 5000 - Store N number of mails in your inbox. Click here.>>>> ________________________________> Unlimited freedom, unlimited> storage. Get it now>>>>> __________________________________________________________>> Capture your memories in an online journal!>> http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us>>>>>>> _________________________________________________________________>> Gear up for Halo(r) 3 with free downloads and an exclusive offer. It's our way of saying thanks for using Windows Live™.>>
http://gethalo3gear.com?ocid=SeptemberWLHalo3_WLHMTxt_2>>>>>>> _________________________________________________________________>> Can you find the hidden words? Take a break and play Seekadoo!>> http://club.live.com/seekadoo.aspx?icid=seek_wlmailtextlink>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links>>>>>>>>>>> --> Swapnil Bhartiya> Assistant Editor> EFYTimes.com>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links>> To visit your group on the web, go to:> http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/>> Your email settings:> Individual Email | Traditional>> To change settings online go to:> http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join> (Yahoo! ID required)>> To change settings via email:>
mailto:indiansciencefiction-digest@yahoogroups.co.in> mailto:indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.co.in>> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:> indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.co.in>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:> http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
_________________________________________________________________ Capture your memories in an online journal! http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/
<*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to: http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join (Yahoo! ID
required)
<*> To change settings via email: mailto:indiansciencefiction-digest@yahoogroups.co.in mailto:indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.co.in
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.co.in
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
arvind mishra Try the revolutionary next-gen Yahoo! Mail. Click here.
I also join Zeashan. We are sure that Manish jee will go on honing his skills further and serve the cause better.
CMN
zeashan zaidi <zeashanzaidi@...> wrote:
I have heard that one of our younger members of the group Mr. Manish Mohan Gore has been appointed as a Technical Officer in Vigyan Prasar, an apex autonomous organization based in
Delhi. I myself on the behalf of all the group members extend heartiest congratulations to Mr. Manish Mohan Gore on his achievement.
Zeashan Zaidi.
Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
Forgot the famous last words? Access your message archive online. Click here.
In this context, there was a question. If human will be able to make intelligent robots, is he will made such robots? Because in such cases robots can capture his controlling on the earth.
My answer is affirmative. As we see in present human is fully known about the fatality of atom bombs, vacuum bombs and other dangerous weapons. But he is making such weapons without thinking about the future of mankind. In the same way humans can try to make such robots that will not only be intelligent but also have ability to capture sovereignty of human beings.
Zeashan Zaidi
Arvind Mishra <arvind_drmishra@...> wrote:
In my previous post close has gone lose in last lines giving just an opposite meaning sorry it stands corrected now pl bear with me!
There are two school of thoughts on the subject i.e.Robot vs human.One is clearly an escapist one as depicted in R.U.R -Rossum's Universal Robots written in 1920by a Czech playwright Karel Capek,who in fact introduced this word to English and then to other languages and showed the frankenstenian possibilities of too much dependence of man on the intelligent machine. Another view, an optimistic one is advocated by ISSAC ASIMOV,the s.f. maestro himself which simply maintain that if the intelligent machines are kept in certain checks and bounds
they would be serving humanity in eternity.To put his points strongly he derived the laws of robotics now known to even a beginner in s.f. literature. I find there is nothing new in this discussion which is of any worth.This way or that way robots are going to be with us for all ages and time to come and we have to keep a lose vigil on them .That is all . And coming robots are not out fashioned metallic ones but are very similar to us even in flesh and blood-they are androids ! Of the same types referred in R.U.R. ARVIND Vishwa Mohan Tiwari <onevishwa@hotmail.com> wrote:
Dear Swapnil, What I meant by electromechanical robots was the traditional robots being made with mechanical, electrical and electronic devices, certainly not using the futuristic bio
devices. vmt ----------------------------------------> To: indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in> From: arnieswap@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 22:31:29 +0530> Subject: Re: [indiansciencefiction] Robots Vs Human>> Res Tiwari Ji,>> In that case I would apologize. Could you please elaborate> electromechanical. Coz I have little knowledge about that.> Pleasssssssssssssssssss. :-)>> Swapnil>> On 9/11/07, Vishwa Mohan Tiwari wrote:>>>> Swapnil jee,>> I never said that 'humans will always be smarter than robots, and therefore I never asked you to agree.>> Indeed I also foresee that robots will become 'smarter' than humans, and that is precisely the reason that humans would keep a tight control on them, or at least try their best to do so.Whether they would succeed in this is a billion dollars question, certainly worth exploring.>> I have been talking of
electromechanical including electronics etc, and not of Bio-robots, which are a different kettle of fish, and I did not talk about them, for my lnowledge about them is scanty. Yes, Life keeps breaking all the barriers, and electromechanical robots do not have flife.>> VMT>> ________________________________> To: indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in> From: arnieswap@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 11:12:25 +0000> Subject: [indiansciencefiction] Robots Vs Human>> Res Tiwari Ji,> Time and again, it has been noticed that life breaks all barriers. Intelligent beings/robots cannot be eternally controlled by some code of conduct, whatever they are. And here we need to see how robots will actually evolve in reality and not in the 'secure' world of Asimov. A simple example is nano bots working in a distributed intellegent environment. They follow some model to execute a task. Then these technologies will be
developed by independent companies and they would want their work to be done and many not focus more on future consequences or absolute control.> And I also disagree with the notion that human will always be smarter than robots.> For instance, Singularity Institute Research Fellow Eliezer Yudkowsky explained over the weekend at the Singularity Summit why many believe that machines will eventually be smarter than their makers. The stunning progress in packing more computation power onto silicon chips, married with software designers' increasing ability to take advantage of this power, virtually guarantees that machines are progressing faster than humans are. One day, machines will start building themselves, he predicted. And at that point, humans will certainly no longer be the smartest creatures in the room.> Professor Alan Turing's Turing Test may raise some questions, but that is still debatable.> As Nautiyal ji said that robots with intelligence of humans
will be huge in size is not actually correct. IBM and Intel many other companies are working on reducing the size of transistors, IBM recently came out with 3D chip staking tachnology, thus reducing the size and increasing processing speed manifold. Them Moore's Law is still holding fast. Look at the Apple Mini, it is much more powerful than any supercomputer of sixties, but 'mini' is just 6-inch large (or small). The computing capacity is increaing at space age. Supercomputer on chip is already a reality with IBM, Sony and Toshiba unveiled a supercomputer on chip microprocessor architecture two years ago.> Even the small form factor Nokia smartphones are more powerful than 486 computing machines.> So the bottom line is, humans will soon encounter beings more smarter than they are, and those will be the machines created by humans.> I reall a famous line from a SF movies.> A supercomputer says: "When I was a machine, I yearn to be human. Now I am better than
bother, the CREATED has become the CREATOR!"> :-)> Regards> Swapnil> NOTE: PLease discuss this topic under this Title Only!> --- In indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in, Vishwa Mohan Tiwari wrote:>>>>>> Swapnil jee>> Should humans let robots be free to do what they desire to do? This assumes that their desires are also not being controlled by any code of conduct given by humans.At best they develop their own code of conduct.If there is a code of conduct given to them by humans, then they are not free, and that is what humans would like to control, otherwise there would be conflicts between humans and robots. As it is we have more than enough conflicts within humans.>> If the robots are totally free then they may start controlling humans.>> VMT>>>> ________________________________> To: indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in From: arnieswap@... Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2007
07:47:19 +0000> Subject: [indiansciencefiction] Re: Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> Tiwari Ji,> Nautiyal Ji would answer that question in his own manner, I would just> like to add, when the machines become 'intelligent' and instead of> depending on set of rule, start learning from experiences especially> in "distributed intelligence", computers will not depend on how much> freedom we give them. If they are learning and evolving, they would> modify the set of instruction and will not be much in our control.> Another worrying area is 'nanobots', these will be working on various> models of distributed intelligence and it would almost impossible to> keep a tab on their behaviour patten. I think, once robots enter the> true AI environment, it would not be in our control to give them freedom.> They will be as free as we are.> Swapnil> --- In indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in, Vishwa Mohan Tiwari>
wrote:>>>>>> Dr. Nautial jee>> How much freedom would you give to a robot?>> I guess not more than you give to a loyal and intelligent subordinate.>> Here lies the difference between a most advanced robot and a human> being.>> VMT>> ________________________________> To:> indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in From: cmnautiyal@ Date:> Sat, 8 Sep 2007 13:12:12 +0100> Subject: Re: [indiansciencefiction]> Re: Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> The issue has come up because of> comparison with robots. If both are programmed, where are the> differences? Can robots feel depressed, joyed or sad? Can they committ> sucide and if yes, what would be the form?> CMN> "swapnil.bhartiya"> wrote:> Actually I was expecting that there would be no discussion> over> whether humans/all living being are programmed or not. That is a> fact> and all of us know that.
That's the basic. DNA carries the> instruction> that instructs cells how to develop and behave. So, yes> biologically> we are completely programmed and what its genetic> enginerring does but> reprgramme genes and create pervasive things> like BT cotton GM seeds.> They are playing with stem sells as well. I> should not have written> all this coz there are expert on the panel> who already know this, so> in the first place there shouldn't have> been ay discussion on the> issue but unanimous agreement.> And yes, we> do get programmed, if this word could be used there, in> day to day> life by our surroundings, experiences and the way we learn> things.>> So, we are well programmed.> Swapnil.> autonomus with In addition,---> In> indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in, CHANDRA MOHAN NAUTIYAL>> wrote:>>>> I wold say yes, we are being programmed. I wrote in the> previous
mail:>>>> "human beings (or advanced animals) are being> reprogrammed> continuously with experience.">>>> I feel Tiwari jee has> agreed with that. Our initially> programming, as Tiwari jee also> wrote, is with respect to our basic> needs. Thereafter it's> programming by society and its members. We> respond in a certain way> because that's what comes to us from (now)> built-in set of> instructions.>>>> So I feel we both agree.>>>> CMN>>>>>> Vishwa Mohan> Tiwari wrote:>>>> Are we programmed ? !>> I would suggest that we are> given a set of hardware and a structure> for programming.>> But we are> not programmed in a broad sense. In a narrow sense we are> programmed> for we all have needs pertaining to "Aahaar, Nidraa, Bhaya> and> Maithun'; these may be equivalent of energy requirements, cooling> and> production etc.; but
there is tremendous freedom even in this> regime.>> A child is being programmed by his parents and the entire> village,>> or is he really being programmed or learning to programme> ??!!>>>> We are entering into the field of ontology, and I do not> mind> entering, but others may consider it to be a field not> pertaining to> SF writing.>>>> VMT>> ________________________________>> To:> indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in From: cmnautiyal@> Date:>> Fri, 7 Sep 2007 13:51:06 +0100> Subject: Re: [indiansciencefiction]>> Re: Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> Actually the feelings of>> depression, sorrow or joy are also a result of programming. We are> all> programmed. One difference from computers at present is that> human> beings (or advanced animals) are being reprogrammed> continuously with> experience. The biochemocals
produced in our body> are also result of> programmes. These chemicals lead to our switching> temperament etc. The> signals, which are probably electro magnetic,> are sent to the brains> leading to perception of different feelings.> Or is it that these> signals lead to production of bio chemicals?>> CMN> Arvind Mishra> wrote:> Yes Zeashaan if there remains no> difference in man and robot> ,robots may very well adopt behavioural> aberrations like suicide etc> and also may indulge in surrealistic> activities .But a lot>> depends on us what way we are going to shape> and design our future> robots.They would be made on a optimistic> promise as opined by great> Asimov or on Mary Shelley's Frankenstein> pattern.> In wake of mobile> explosions your story suddenly attains a> remarkable significance.>> Great work dear! Go ahead dear, you have a> great writer within you!>> ARVIND>
zeashan zaidi wrote:> If computer> has power of imagination, as> well as sentiments. Then an external> cause may be depressed it to> commit suicide. Obviously in case of> computers this depressing cause> will be a virus like program.>> Zeashan Zaidi> "swapnil.bhartiya"> wrote:> Still, I am not convinced> that computers will commmit> "suiside" in> that manner that chips will> start to melt. And my> previous objections> remain that this could not> be done as every chips> development process> is very meticuous.>> Swapnil> --- In> indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in, Vishwa Mohan> Tiwari>> wrote:>>>>>> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari>> Surrealism is much more>>> than imagination!!>> Computers suicide in the story was a direct>> result of instructions> to that effect, aand not due to pain, misery> ,> sorrow or depression> etc, as I
understood from the story.>> VMT>>>> ________________________________> To:>>> indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in From: zeashanzaidi@> Date:>>> Wed, 5 Sep 2007 22:41:25 -0700> Subject: RE: [indiansciencefiction]>>> Re: Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> Surrealism is just associated>>> with level of imagination power of brain. Those brains having much>>> power in this sense have more sentiments also. And suicide is>>> obviously related to boom of sentiments.> Zeashan Zaidi> Vishwa> Mohan>> Tiwari wrote:> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari> The SF story is> interesting and>> good. hOWEVER THE CLAIM THAT THE COMPUTERS HAD THE> CAPABILITY TO USE>> IMAGINATION IS NOT VALID. The plot of the story> does not need the>> computers to use imagination, infact they blindly> followed the>> instruction to commit suicide.>
VMT>>>> ________________________________>> To:>> indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in From: zeashanzaidi@>> Date:>> Wed, 5 Sep 2007 10:15:35 -0700> Subject: Re:> [indiansciencefiction]>> Re: Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> In the> context of surrealism> in> robots/computers, I am presenting a sci-fi> `Computer Ki Maut'> where> it is shown a possibility of imagination in> computers. This> story had> been published in Vigyan Pragati in 1998.>> Zeashan Zaidi>>> "swapnil.bhartiya" wrote:> I agree with everything> Tiwari ji said>> except that Robots can't use> surrealism. How could we> be so sure?>> Robots can be for more advanced> and may have their own> form of>> surrealism. Surrealism is only obscure> thought, imagination> and>> interpretation of any being who is capable of> thinking
and>>> imagining. Thus, robots could also have their own suurealism.> On>>> question raised by Nautiyal ji.> 1. Yes our story is SF -- elements>>> that build the story are futuristic> and science is integral element>> of>> ths story.> 2. My basic understanding is: 'remove science from> a>> story and if the> story still sustains, its not science fiction. A> SF>> story should> collapse as soon as element of science is> removed!'> 3.>> Depends.> 4 I cant understand the last point, please> elaborate. " If>> Mays> needs supplementing, how about doing it? We> still have more> than> a> month let for it to be finalised."> Swapnil>> the e, as the---> In> indiansciencefiction@yahoogroups.co.in, CHANDRA>> MOHAN NAUTIYAL>> wrote:>>>> While some> .>> ________________________________> Shape>>
Yahoo! in your own image.> Join our Network Research Panel today!>>>>> __________________________________________________________>> Discover>> the new Windows Vista>>>> http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links> To visit your group on the web, go to:>>>> http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/> Your email>>> settings:> Individual Email | Traditional> To change settings> online>>> go to:>>> http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join>> (Yahoo!>> ID required)> To change settings via email:>>>> mailto:indiansciencefiction-digest@yahoogroups.co.in>>> mailto:indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.co.in To>>>
unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:>>>> indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.co.in Your use of>>> Yahoo! Groups is subject to:> http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>>>> ________________________________> Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha!>>>> Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at>>> Yahoo! Games.>>>>>>> __________________________________________________________>> Discover>> the new Windows Vista>>>> http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE>>>>> ________________________________> Luggage? GPS? Comic books?> Check>> out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search.>>> [http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif]arvind>>
mishra> ________________________________> 5, 50, 500, 5000>> - Store N> number of mails in your inbox. Click here.>>> ________________________________> 5, 50, 500, 5000 - Store N number> of> mails in your inbox. Click here.>>>>>> __________________________________________________________>> Gear up> for Halo(r) 3 with free downloads and an exclusive offer. It's> our way> of saying thanks for using Windows Live™.>>> http://gethalo3gear.com?ocid=SeptemberWLHalo3_WLHMTxt_2>>>>>> Yahoo!> Groups Links>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------->> 5, 50,> 500, 5000 - Store N number of mails in your inbox. Click here.>>>> ________________________________> Unlimited freedom, unlimited> storage. Get it
now>>>>> __________________________________________________________>> Capture your memories in an online journal!>> http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us>>>>>>> _________________________________________________________________>> Gear up for Halo(r) 3 with free downloads and an exclusive offer. It's our way of saying thanks for using Windows Live™.>> http://gethalo3gear.com?ocid=SeptemberWLHalo3_WLHMTxt_2>>>>>>> _________________________________________________________________>> Can you find the hidden words? Take a break and play Seekadoo!>> http://club.live.com/seekadoo.aspx?icid=seek_wlmailtextlink>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links>>>>>>>>>>> --> Swapnil Bhartiya>
Assistant Editor> EFYTimes.com>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links>> To visit your group on the web, go to:> http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/>> Your email settings:> Individual Email | Traditional>> To change settings online go to:> http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join> (Yahoo! ID required)>> To change settings via email:> mailto:indiansciencefiction-digest@yahoogroups.co.in> mailto:indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.co.in>> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:> indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.co.in>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:> http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
_________________________________________________________________ Capture your memories in an online
journal! http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/
<*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to: http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join (Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email: mailto:indiansciencefiction-digest@yahoogroups.co.in mailto:indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.co.in
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.co.in
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
arvind mishra Try the revolutionary next-gen Yahoo! Mail. Click here.
You snatched this opportunity from me Zeashaan ,its really very heartening that the young guy has accessed it and now he would be serving the cause of science communication in a more organized and broader way .We all join you in congratulating him on the big achievement. zeashan zaidi <zeashanzaidi@...> wrote:
I have heard that one of our
younger members of the group Mr. Manish Mohan Gore has been appointed as a Technical Officer in Vigyan Prasar, an apex autonomous organization based in Delhi. I myself on the behalf of all the group members extend heartiest congratulations to Mr. Manish Mohan Gore on his achievement.
Zeashan Zaidi.
Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo!
Autos.
To: indiansciencefiction@... From: zeashanzaidi@... Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 04:43:28 -0700 Subject: [indiansciencefiction] congrtulations to Mr. Manish Mohan Gore
I have heard that one of our younger members of the group Mr. Manish Mohan Gore has been appointed as a Technical Officer in Vigyan Prasar, an apex autonomous organization based in Delhi. I myself on the behalf of all the group members extend heartiest congratulations to Mr. Manish Mohan Gore on his achievement.
Zeashan Zaidi.
Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
Download the latest version of Windows Live Messenger NOW! Click here!
I have heard that one of our younger members of the group Mr. Manish Mohan Gore has been appointed as a Technical Officer in Vigyan Prasar, an apex autonomous organization based in Delhi. I myself on the behalf of all the group members extend heartiest congratulations to Mr. Manish Mohan Gore on his achievement.
Zeashan Zaidi.
Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
Res VMT ,
Please feel free to call it whatever you wish , it is such a
controversial issue.
Creationists also prefer to call it meta genome and hypothesize
it is a creative force against the little functional part of the
DNA. The creator would have definitely assigned some functions to it
but it is our folly to not have understood it properly.
They have this analogy-
"Information about information is called meta-information. We can see
how it works in making a cake. If you want to make a cake, you need a
recipe that contains: (a) a list of ingredients, and (b) instructions
on how to mix and cook the ingredients to produce the desired outcome.
The list of ingredients is the primary information, and the
instructions on what to do with the ingredients is the
meta-information"......
and by this interpretation junk DNA is nothing but meta info as Swapnil
also perhaps inadvertently reached the similar conclusion in a fit of
fury to contradict Zeashan[which seems to be his favourite wont, of
course a good gesture to run this show!!] Thanks and sorry Swapnil !
I really do not mean it .JUST A PUN. .
regards,
--- In indiansciencefiction@..., Vishwa Mohan Tiwari
<onevishwa@...> wrote:
>
>
> Arwind Mishra jee,
> You have elaborated the topic further with obvious advantages, Thanks.
>
> You have said "However, extrapolating each report that a given small
segment of DNA may be functional to mean that all non-coding DNA is
vital is as counterproductive as dismissing non-coding DNA as totally
non-functional. "
>
> Extrapolation is making an intelligent estimate about future knowing
the present trend. A linear trend would give best possible estimate,
but a nonlinear trend can give many estimates depending upon the
estimator's attitude, and persona.
> Then you have said, ". Genomes are complex, and there is little use
in approaching them from a simplistic point of view.
> Still I do not like the idea to give it a new name without fully
justifying the stand.No they are not metagenes either, at leastall of
the junk part since meta is info about info and there seems to be no
definite and conclusive knowledge what meta info junk dna
possesses".
>
> One should ofcourse be careful and not jump from one exteme to
another. Nature progresses by evolution and not by revolution.
Therefore it may not reject and discard something once it becomes
useless, and may modify it suitably to evolve, and thus it maintains a
continuity and therefore use. So it is more likely that most, if not
all, of noncoding DNA is useful. Only future would tell the facts.
>
> I had named it as 'Metagene', using Meta prefix in the sense of a
controller or guide, and not in the sense of 'information'. But I had
also said that I am a fool to name it, thus it was a witty remark to
provoke thinking and laughter.
> 'Noncoding DNA is more important than the encoding DNA', is the
sense I wished to convey. The other sense I wanted to convey was to
say that genes have lost their 'independence' and royalty. Hence I
called it 'metagene' and not meta DNA.
>
>
> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari
> ________________________________> To:
indiansciencefiction@...> From: arvind_drmishra@...>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 02:46:21 +0100> Subject: RE:
[indiansciencefiction] (Meta is NOT Junk): Re: The Way We Are
Programmed!>> Respected Tiwari ji,> Thanks you have made things much
easy even for the benefit of an aam aadami.But I am tempted to add
something from my side and also to recapitulate certain points as
raised by your good self though truly speaking it seems redundant
now.Here it goes-> Susumo Ohno a renowned geneticist stated in 1972
that "at least 90% of our genomic DNA[the hereditary molecule] is
`junk' or `garbage' of various sorts. This is non-coding, non
functional DNA accumulated in the genome.> A new term "pseudogenes"
also emerged for the same functionless genes around 1977.> Common
sense suggests that anything that is completely useless would be
discarded. Since junk DNA is still intact with our genome it may not
be just a trash or garbage material. From the very beginning, the
concept of "junk DNA" has implied non-functionality with regards to
protein-coding, but left open the question of sequence-independent
impacts (perhaps even functions) at the cellular level. "Junk DNA" may
now be taken to imply total non-function and is rightly considered
problematic for that reason, but no such tacit assumption was present
in the term when it was coined.> Two groups of people have been driven
by a philosophical need to identify functions for all non-coding DNA.
The first includes strict adaptationists, among whom it was often
assumed that all non-coding DNA, by virtue of its very existence, must
be endowed with some as-yet-unknown function of critical importance.
It seems likely that most evolutionary biologists today could tolerate
a conclusion that a significant fraction of non-coding DNA is
functionless. This is not true of the second group in question,
compared to whom the passion for function is unrivaled. As Dawkins
(1999) suggested, "creationists might spend some earnest time
speculating on why the Creator should bother to litter genomes with
untranslated pseudogenes and junk tandem repeat DNA".> Creationist
authors (borrowing, of course, from the work of molecular biologists,
as they do no do such research themselves) simply equivocate the
various types of non-coding DNA, and mistakenly suggest that functions
discovered for a few examples of some types of non-coding sequences
indicate functions for all. [SWAPNIL commited the same mistake
inadvertently]> Again,does non-coding DNA have a function? Some of it
does, to be sure. Some of it is involved in chromosome structure and
cell division (e.g., telomeres, centromeres). Some of it is
undoubtedly regulatory in nature. Some of it is involved in
alternative splicing (Kondrashov et al. 2003). A fair portion of it in
various genomes shows signs of being evolutionarily conserved, which
may imply function. On the other hand, the largest fraction is
comprised of transposable elements -- some of which become co-opted by
the host genome, some of which play major role in generating genomic
variation, some of which may be involved in cellular stress response,
and yet others of which remain detrimental to host fitness. The upshot
is that some non-coding DNA is most certainly functional -- but when
it is, this usually makes sense only in an evolutionary context,
particularly through processes like co-option. More broadly, those who
would attribute a universal function for non-coding DNA must bear the
following in mind: any proposed function for all non-coding DNA must
explain why an onion or a grasshopper needs five times more of it than
anyone reading this sentence[Grasshoppers and Onions really have 5
times more junk dna than man] .> There is nothing wrong with a word
taking on a new meaning as knowledge changes – that is, unless
reference to an original (and outmoded) sense lingers as a source of
confusion, or the term expands so much as to lose contact with an
initially accurate definition."Junk DNA", which originally was coined
in reference to now-functionless gene duplicates (i.e., true
broken-down "junk"), is now used as "a catch-all phrase for
chromosomal sequences with no apparent function" (Moore 1996). Its
current usage also implies a lack of function which is accurate by
definition for pseudogenes in regard to protein-coding, but which does
not hold for all non-coding elements. The term has deviated from or
outgrown its original use, and its continued invocation is non-neutral
in its expression – and generation – of conceptual biases.> "Junk DNA"
is not the only offender. Non-coding DNA has been called by many names
that have had the same pejorative undertones (intentional or not)
implying uselessness, if not outright wastefulness. Examples include
excess DNA (Zuckerkandl 1976; Doolittle and Sapienza 1980), surplus or
nonessential or degenerate or silent DNA (Comings 1972; Gilbert 1978),
quiet DNA (Lefevre 1971), garbage DNA (Ohno 1970), non-informational
or nonsense DNA (Ohno 1972b), worthless DNA (Ohno 1973), trivial DNA
(Ohno 1974), vestigial DNA (Loomis 1973), redundant DNA (Vinogradov
1998), supplementary DNA (Hutchinson et al. 1980), secondary DNA
(Hinegardner 1976), and incidental DNA (Jain 1980).> As Gould (2002,
p.503) stated, "A rose may retain its fragrance under all vicissitudes
of human taxonomy, but never doubt the power of a name to shape and
direct our thoughts". Because it is generally no longer applied in its
original meaningful sense, because the type of DNA to which it
actually relates now has a more descriptive name (pseudogenes), and
because of its connotations of total phenotypic inertness, the term
"junk DNA" should probably be abandoned in favour of less subjective
terminology. "Non-coding DNA" serves this purpose quite well.>
Concluding remarks> It is an exciting time in genome biology. Aspects
of genomic form and function that were largely inconceivable only a
few decades ago are now being revealed on a daily basis. It should
come as no surprise (and indeed, it probably does not) that new roles
are being discovered for non-coding DNA and that some of catch
phrases/ buzzwords -- including "junk DNA" -- are destined for the
dustbin. However, extrapolating each report that a given small segment
of DNA may be functional to mean that all non-coding DNA is vital is
as counterproductive as dismissing non-coding DNA as totally
non-functional. Genomes are complex, and there is little use in
approaching them from a simplistic point of view.> Still I do not like
the idea to give it a new name without fully justifying the stand.No
they are not metagenes either, at leastall of the junk part since meta
is info about info and there seems to be no definite and conclusive
knowledge what meta info junk dna possesses.> May be the subject still
needs some elaboration ......> Is any one listening?[Of course other
than VMT,CMN.SWAPNIL AND ZEASHAAN !]> Arvind> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari
wrote:> Dear friends> I will be very brief as my long answer has been
just deleted by some wrong pressinf of a key.> I will give rtefernces
if somebody wants them.> There two important terms that need to be
understood properly.> Meta and ; Junk DNA'.> Junk DNA :> Non encoding
DNAs were called Junk, as it was thoght that encoding genes perform
all the necessary functions, and genes were considered independent,
one for each function.> I quote> "June 30, 1972, was a high point for
the lexicon of biology. That day, Susumu Ohno coined (or at least
publicly introduced) the term "junk DNA." In a talk titled "So Much
'Junk DNA' in our Genome," Ohno argued that the frequency of
deleterious mutations restricts the number of serviceable genes to
around 105 and that the great bulk of our DNA is merely the debris of
failed duplication. "The earth is full of extinct species," he said.
"Is it a wonder that our genome, too, is filled with the remains of
extinct genes?"> Now scientists know that 'Junk DNAs perform important
functions likke they control, modify and guide the functions of gene.>
So Junk DNAs ar anything but junk.> Postgenetics is a new branch which
treats the genes as not independent creators but one link in the chain
of various other genes, including the noncoding genes - the junk DNAs.
It is a network of all that functions.> Meta:> There are mountains of
data, information and knowledge. How to get the relevant info; is a
problem today in both traditional and digital libraries.> Therefore a
new concept of Metainfo i.e. info about info; it means that info which
helps us in getting us the desired info e.g. summary, index, kew words
etc. Our librarian. metaphorically speaking, can be called 'metainfo.>
Obviously metainfo is not an integral or essential part of info except
that it guides us to the desired portion as e.g. done by 'a key word.>
Therefore Metainfo is not the socalled junkDNAs.> The prefix 'meta'
has many meanings.> The particular meaning which comes closest to the
meaning used in 'Metainformation' i.e. symptoms leading to; e.g.
somewhat like 'meta arthritic - i.e. those symptoms which if untreated
would lead to arthritis but are not those of arthtitis.> The word Junk
DNA has been questiond forther last 25 years are so.> In 2006 it has
been officially declared dead in the First World Conference of 'Post
Gemetics', which is a new subject which treats the coding and
noncoding DNAs as part of chain.> I suggest a new word ( I am neither
a scientist nor a biologist to be more specific, and hence I dare to
tread where angels fear to enter) " metagene' for the socalled
JunkDNAs; meta in the sense of 'performing higher functions than mere
genes, as in the word 'meta biological'.> I hope it suffices.> VMT>
Vishwa Mohan Tiwari> ________________________________> To:
indiansciencefiction@...> From: dr_arvind3@...> Date:
Sun, 16 Sep 2007 01:48:41 +0000> Subject: Re: Re:
[indiansciencefiction] (Meta is NOT Junk): Re: The Way We Are
Programmed!>> Respected VMT,> Please come forward with all your
semantic wisdom to define what meta is in your own learned way
!Whether it denotes a change or shows some middle part of anything or
whatever and what is the aetiology of the word and whether it has
attained some new meanings lately what> all this fuss is about!>
REGARDS,> arvind> On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 Arvind Mishra wrote :>>Thanks
CMN for explaining the term meta in a very intelligible way.I was only
trying to put the lexical perspectives ! Words have their own history
and should be understood properly before using them in a new
context.>>Swapnil advocates that instead of using term junk for
apparently non functional part [more than 90%] of human genome we
should use the term meta for it.>>Only because the so called junk DNA
is not as much junk as it is presumed to be as certain recent reports
indicate.>>Now you have also explained the term in line with Mr.
Swapnil, especially in context to its meaning in web terminology and
also to boast the morale of younger fraternity.A very apt and genuine
deed indeed but have you cared to check the etymological and lexical
backgrounds of the word meta? Having the responsibility of
communicating science to lay people we are answerable to a question
like this and should not be hastily replacing the words in common uses
only to satiate our intellectual hunger and jump to erroneous
conclusions!!.>>I have checked the meaning of word meta in Oxford
advanced learner dictionary which very explicitly defines it in
following way->>1-higher ;beyond :metalanguage;METAPHYSICS,>>2- of
change ;metabolism,metamorphosis>>Now what is metalanguage? DICTIONARY
DEFINES that the words used in talking about or describing languages
or a language are metalanguage!>>Now please decide for yourself if we
could freely use the term meta for junk DNA part of the human
genome?>>I think if we try to describe the language of junk DNA[in
terms of its functional ,coding or non coding aspects which we still
do not know much!] the language which could be used might then be
called a metalanguage of junk part of the genome. So I do not think
'meta' should not be replaced for junk !>>REGARDS,>>arvind>> CHANDRA
MOHAN NAUTIYAL wrote:>>No, Arvind jee.>>>> Meta is what is responsible
for the difference in things which may otherwise look similar. If you
see the website content in html form, for instance, you'd see there
are may be 50 words and symbols before and after a short string of
words which (string) is visible in the website. These 50 words are not
visible to the reader of the website but contain the valuable info.
Without them the content would lose meaning/ appearance or will have
different meaning. I don't know if meta is the universal word but even
if Swapnil jee has coined it, I thing it's an apt term.>>>>
CMN>>>>Arvind Mishra wrote:>> "when you 'italicize' some text or make
it bold or>>increase its size in word file. " so says swapnil about
meta !>>Yes its making something bold,some sort of increase that is
what i meant,nothing else!>>Now we are entering the dragon of basic
genetics you guys and gals [if there remains any one] pl be
aware!>>"swapnil.bhartiya" wrote: Dear Arvind ji and all,>>>>There is
a lot of communication gap. In this context and in>>technological term
'meta' is NOT about "connotation of being something>>of a higher
degree-some sort of metaphysics" as you mentioned. 'Meta'>>means
'information about the information'. I am surprised to hear
that>>comment from you, as I clearly gave an example in my earlier
post as>>well, explaining what is meta.>>>>And as you wrote "I think
there is neither any rationale nor relevance>>to convert the easily
communicable word / term 'junk' into a hard to>>understand kind of
word 'meta' which has a connotation of being>>something of a higher
degree-some sort of metaphysics to a lay person>>like me.">>>>It is
not that sir, there is not only lot of rational behind the word>>meta,
but also need for us to use correct words/ improvise them as we>>learn
more.>>>>But since you have raised this, and if someone of your status
could>>have that doubt, I will haev to think twice what others must be
thinking.>>>>Let me explain meta.>>>>This Meta has nothing to do with
being something of a higher degree,>>or please dont try to connect it
to stuff like 'meta physics. Meta is>>data about the data, or
information that what a particular set of data>>does. For example when
you 'italicize' some text or make it bold or>>increase its size in
word file. On the front end, something that you>>can see is that
particular word/sentence becomes bold or italic etc,>>but in the
back-end, at the end of code line, it stores information>>which gives
instruction to make that word bold italic etc, This>>backend
infomation is known as meta.>>>>Same happens with gene/DNA, while a
DNA instructs cell to develop in>>particular manner, there is a set of
information which allows DNA to>>instruct cell. Now you call that
critical information junk, while we>>call it meta. How could such a
critical information be 'junk'>>>>Also in the light of above, meta is
in NO WAY ..'kabad se jugad'. Meta>>is very important
information.>>>>I hope I have cleared my
point.>>>>Regards>>Swapnil>>>>--- In
indiansciencefiction@..., "arvind mishra">> wrote:>>>>>>
I think there is neither any rationale nor relevance to convert
the>>easily>>> communicable word / term 'junk' into a hard to
understand kind of word>>> 'meta' which has a connotation of being
something of a higher>>degree-some>>> sort of metaphysics to a lay
person like me.Alternatively it also>>denotes>>> some kind of queer
change as in 'metamorphosis'. I am completely>>at loss>>> to
understand what inspires Mr. Swapnil to use this term in a genetic>>>
context.>>> Junk DNA is just like any other sort of junk-junk yard,
junk food>>-something>>> useless,a heap of garbage. But yes sometimes
it so happens that we>>derive>>> something of importance even from the
junk.KABAAD SE JUGAAD type of>>thing.>>> And this is the aspect which
could be exploited for s.f. as has>>rightly been>>> done in his said
story by dear ZEASHAN.>>> On 14/09/2007, Vishwa Mohan Tiwari
wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>> Ignorance made it to be called 'junk'. It is
desirable to chnge it to>>>> Meta, but it is difficult.>>>> The
electric current still flows from positive to negative, though>>we
know>>>> that electrons which carry the current, flow from negative
to>>positive.>>>> VMT>>>> ---------------------------------------->
To:>>>> indiansciencefiction@...> From: arnieswap@>
Date:>>>> Thu, 13 Sep 2007 23:37:02 +0530> Subject:
Re:>>[indiansciencefiction] The Way>>>> We Are Programmed!>> Junk
would be a derogatory word, its better>>we call it>>>> 'meta'
information.>> Swapnil>> On 9/13/07, Vishwa Mohan
Tiwari>>wrote:>>>>>>>> As far as I can remeber from the latest
researches, the scientists are>>>> finding that what they though was
junk in not really junk.>> vmt>>>>>> ________________________________>
To:>>>> indiansciencefiction@...> From:
arvind_drmishra@>>>>> Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 02:23:47 +0100> Subject:
RE:>>[indiansciencefiction]>>>> The Way We Are Programmed!>> Zeashan
is right insofar his>>knowledge of junk>>>> DNA is concerned,it is
known to be an useless vestigial part of>>the genome>>>> but making
certain fancied extrapolations about it in an sf is really>>>>
wonderfull !> Arvind Mishra wrote:> Strictly NO to God in this>>forum
VMT>>>> sir?The moderator being an agnostic is helpless to
moderate>>discussions on>>>> God !> Have mercy on me for heaven's sake
please!> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari>>>> wrote:> Should we have God in our
discussion?> Do we need Him?> vmt>>>>>
________________________________> To:>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...> From: zeashanzaidi@>>>>> Date:
Tue, 11 Sep 2007 04:34:48 -0700> Subject:
Re:>>[indiansciencefiction]>>>> The Way We Are Programmed!>> If we are
programmed by God then the>>program is>>>> very flexible and gives us
the freedom of choice. Environment, family>>>> background, financial
conditions and many more factors influence>>on our>>>> programming.>
And a part of our program is object oriented. If we>>want to>>>>
achieve a goal then our body sets in the manner to provide
more>>efforts to>>>> reaching the goal.> Our behaviors are controlled
by genes that are>>directed>>>> by information stored in the DNA.
Scientists presently found 3% of>>>> information stored in DNA is
useful. Then what about rest 97%?>>Scientists>>>> called it Junk. But
this may be their lack of knowledge. Can this>>Junk part>>>> gives
information about our all ancestors? This may be a topic of>>Sci-Fi.
I>>>> used this hypothesis in very minute form in my story 'Murde Ki
Awaz',>>>> published in the book Professor Monkey. Pl see the
story.>>>Regards> Zeashan>>>> Zaidi> Arvind Mishra wrote:> Friends
your surrealistic thoughts>>are now>>>> soliited under this new
caption!> On Sun, 09 Sep 2007 arvind>>mishra wrote>>>> :>>Thanks to
VMT for his intellectually satiating input.What I>>decipher>>>>
from>>the contents VMT and CMN both so eloquently submitted , we
are>>>> all>>programmed beings since our very childhood. Programming
by our>>>> parents>>,our society and our immediate surroundings.But on
the basis>>>> of>>information I have gathered on the issue I have
developed>>>> an>>understanding to believe that we are programmed not
since our>>>> childhood>>but even before to it ,even before our
birth.Our>>ancient wisdom>>>> also>>supports this point of view and
had given a very apt word for>>>> the>>phenomenon i.e.samskaar [a
sanskrit word quite akin to English>>>> word>>Sacrament] .It is
exactly the samskaar which carries the>>real meaning>>>>
and>>connotation of the programming in an organic/biological
context>>>> especially>>in we humans.>>This sanskaar begins at the
time of>>union of our>>>> parents contribution in>>form of their
own>>'Sanskaarit'[programmed] sperm>>>> and ovum with all
their>>genetic predispositions and a new being>>emerges>>>> hitherto
not in existence!>>Dr.Nautical and Mr. Swapnil may>>extrapolate>>>>
from this point or may take>>liberties to differ but its hard
to>>contradict>>>> this knowledge of human>>programming as it is very
well researched and>>>> documented. Our>>interpretations may only
differ!>>So whatever are>>we, all>>>> is predetermined much depending
on our 'sanskaar'>>and yes our>>childhood>>>> experiences also
contribute to it .Sanskaar may even>>be a>>procrastinated>>>> life
long phenomenon beginning well before our birth>>[which is
of>>course>>>> the main part of the process] till death ,a
preposition>>also>>confirmed by>>>> the age old saying
that-'Sanskaaret Dwij Uchchayet[Its>>only>>proper training>>>> and
sacraments that make/shape a man into an>>intelligent>>being]>>Are
we>>>> careful to give our Robots the same kind
of>>sanskaar/sacraments>>or to put>>>> it in another word-"The
programming!"And even if some>>aberrations>>occure>>>> who shall be
responsible? How we tackle with our own outlaws!>>A new>>>> discussion
begins!>>>>>>>>On 09/09/2007, swapnil.bhartiya wrote:>>>>>>>>>> Tiwari
Ji,>>>>>> Nautiyal Ji would answer that question in his own>>manner,
I>>>> would just>>> like to add, when the machines become
'intelligent' and>>>> instead of>>> depending on set of rule, start
learning from>>experiences>>>> especially>>> in "distributed
intelligence", computers will not>>depend on>>>> how much>>> freedom
we give them. If they are learning and>>evolving, they>>>> would>>>
modify the set of instruction and will not be much in our>>>>
control.>>>>>> Another worrying area is 'nanobots', these will
be>>working on>>>> various>>> models of distributed intelligence and
it would almost>>impossible>>>> to>>> keep a tab on their behaviour
patten. I think, once robots enter>>>> the>>> true AI environment, it
would not be in our control to give>>them>>>> freedom.>>>>>> They will
be as free as we are.>>>>>> Swapnil>>>>>>>>--- In>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...,>>> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari>>>>>>>
wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>> Dr. Nautial jee>>>> How much freedom would
you>>give to a>>>> robot?>>>> I guess not more than you give to a
loyal and intelligent>>>> subordinate.>>>> Here lies the difference
between a most advanced>>robot and>>>> a human>>> being.>>>> VMT>>>>
________________________________> To:>>>>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...>>>> From: cmnautiyal@>>>>>
Date:>>>>>> Sat, 8 Sep 2007 13:12:12 +0100> Subject: Re:>>>>
[indiansciencefiction]>>> Re: Surrealism and Science Fiction!>>>>The
issue>>>> has come up because of>>> comparison with robots. If both
are>>programmed,>>>> where are the>>> differences? Can robots feel
depressed, joyed or>>sad? Can>>>> they committ>>> sucide and if yes,
what would be the form?> CMN> ">>>> swapnil.bhartiya">>> wrote:>
Actually I was expecting that there>>would be>>>> no discussion>>>
over> whether humans/all living being are>>programmed or>>>> not. That
is a>>> fact> and all of us know that. That's the basic. DNA>>>>
carries the>>> instruction> that instructs cells how to develop>>and
behave.>>>> So, yes>>> biologically> we are completely programmed and
what its>>>> genetic>>> enginerring does but> reprgramme genes and
create pervasive>>>> things>>> like BT cotton GM seeds.> They are
playing with stem>>sells as>>>> well. I>>> should not have written>
all this coz there are expert>>on the>>>> panel>>> who already know
this, so> in the first place there shouldn't>>>> have>>> been ay
discussion on the> issue but unanimous agreement.>>>And yes,>>>> we>>>
do get programmed, if this word could be used there, in> day>>to
day>>>>>>> life by our surroundings, experiences and the way we
learn>>>things.>>>> So,>>>> we are well programmed.> Swapnil.>
autonomus with In>>addition,--->>> In>>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...,>>> CHANDRA MOHAN
NAUTIYAL>>>>>>>> wrote:>>>> I wold say yes, we are being programmed. I
wrote in the>>>>>>> previous mail:>>>> "human beings (or advanced
animals) are being>>>>>>> reprogrammed> continuously with
experience.">>>> I feel Tiwari jee>>has>>>>>>> agreed with that. Our
initially> programming, as Tiwari jee>>also>>> wrote,>>>> is with
respect to our basic> needs. Thereafter it's>>> programming by>>>>
society and its members. We> respond in a certain way>>>
because>>that's what>>>> comes to us from (now)> built-in set of>>>
instructions.>>>> So I>>feel we>>>> both agree.>>>> CMN>>>>>> Vishwa
Mohan>>> Tiwari wrote:>>>> Are we>>>> programmed ? !>> I would suggest
that we are>>> given a set of>>hardware and>>>> a structure> for
programming.>> But we are>>> not programmed in a>>broad>>>> sense. In
a narrow sense we are> programmed>>> for we all have needs>>>>
pertaining to "Aahaar, Nidraa, Bhaya> and>>> Maithun'; these may
be>>>> equivalent of energy requirements, cooling> and>>>
production>>etc.; but>>>> there is tremendous freedom even in this>>>
regime.>> A child is being>>>> programmed by his parents and the
entire>>> village,>> or is he>>really being>>>> programmed or learning
to programme>>> ??!!>>>> We are entering>>into the>>>> field of
ontology, and I do not>>> mind> entering, but others may>>consider>>>>
it to be a field not>>> pertaining to> SF writing.>>>> VMT>>>>>>
________________________________>>>> To:>>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...>>>> From:
cmnautiyal@>>>Date:>>>>>>>> Fri, 7 Sep 2007 13:51:06 +0100> Subject:
Re:>>[indiansciencefiction]>>>> Re:>>>> Surrealism and Science
Fiction!>> Actually the feelings of>>>>>>depression,>>>> sorrow or joy
are also a result of programming. We are>>> all>>>programmed.>>>> One
difference from computers at present is that>>> human> beings (or>>>>
advanced animals) are being reprogrammed>>> continuously
with>>>experience.>>>> The biochemocals produced in our body>>> are
also result of>>>programmes.>>>> These chemicals lead to our
switching>>> temperament etc. The>>>signals,>>>> which are probably
electro magnetic,>>> are sent to the brains>>>leading to>>>>
perception of different feelings.>>> Or is it that these>
signals>>lead to>>>> production of bio chemicals?>>>> CMN> Arvind
Mishra> wrote:> Yes>>Zeashaan if>>>> there remains no>>> difference in
man and robot> ,robots may very>>well adopt>>>> behavioural>>>
aberrations like suicide etc> and also may indulge in>>>>
surrealistic>>> activities .But a lot>> depends on us what way we>>are
going>>>> to shape>>> and design our future> robots.They would be made
on a>>>> optimistic>>> promise as opined by great> Asimov or on Mary
Shelley's>>>> Frankenstein>>> pattern.> In wake of mobile> explosions
your story>>suddenly>>>> attains a>>> remarkable significance.>> Great
work dear! Go ahead>>dear, you>>>> have a>>> great writer within
you!>> ARVIND> zeashan zaidi wrote:> If>>>> computer>>> has power of
imagination, as> well as sentiments. Then an>>>> external>>> cause may
be depressed it to> commit suicide.>>Obviously in case>>>> of>>>
computers this depressing cause> will be a virus
like>>program.>>>>>>>> Zeashan Zaidi> "swapnil.bhartiya"> wrote:>
Still, I am not>>convinced>>>>>>> that computers will commmit>
"suiside" in> that manner that chips>>will>>>>>>> start to melt. And
my> previous objections> remain that this could>>not>>> be>>>> done as
every chips> development process> is very meticuous.>>>>>>Swapnil>>>>>
--- In> indiansciencefiction@...,>>> Vishwa Mohan>>>>>>>
Tiwari>> wrote:>>>>>> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari>> Surrealism is
much>>more>>>>>>>>> than imagination!!>> Computers suicide in the
story was a>>direct>>>> result>>>> of instructions> to that effect,
aand not due to pain, misery>>>>>,> sorrow>>>> or depression> etc, as
I understood from the story.>> VMT>>>>>>>>>>
________________________________> To:>>>>>>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...>>>> From:
zeashanzaidi@>>>Date:>>>>>>>>> Wed, 5 Sep 2007 22:41:25 -0700>
Subject: RE:>>[indiansciencefiction]>>>>> Re:>>>> Surrealism and
Science Fiction!>> Surrealism is just>>associated>>>>> with>>>> level
of imagination power of brain. Those brains having much>>>>>>>power
in>>>> this sense have more sentiments also. And suicide
is>>>>>>>obviously related>>>> to boom of sentiments.> Zeashan Zaidi>
Vishwa>>> Mohan>> Tiwari>>wrote:>>>>> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari> The SF
story is>>> interesting and>> good.>>hOWEVER THE>>>> CLAIM THAT THE
COMPUTERS HAD THE>>> CAPABILITY TO USE>>>>IMAGINATION IS NOT>>>>
VALID. The plot of the story>>> does not need the>> computers to
use>>>> imagination, infact they blindly>>> followed the>> instruction
to>>commit>>>> suicide.> VMT>>>>>> ________________________________>>
To:>>>>>>>> indiansciencefiction@...>>>> From:
zeashanzaidi@>>>>Date:>>>>>>>> Wed, 5 Sep 2007 10:15:35 -0700>
Subject: Re:>>>[indiansciencefiction]>>>> Re:>>>> Surrealism and
Science Fiction!>> In the> context of surrealism>>> in>>>>>
robots/computers, I am presenting a sci-fi> `Computer Ki
Maut'>>>>>where> it>>>> is shown a possibility of imagination in>
computers. This>>> story>>had> been>>>> published in Vigyan Pragati in
1998.>> Zeashan Zaidi>>>>> ">>>> swapnil.bhartiya" wrote:> I agree
with everything> Tiwari ji said>>>>>>>> except that Robots can't use>
surrealism. How could we> be so>>sure?>>>>>>>> Robots can be for more
advanced> and may have their own> form of>>>>>>>> surrealism.
Surrealism is only obscure> thought, imagination> and>>>>>>>>
interpretation of any being who is capable of> thinking
and>>>>>>>imagining.>>>> Thus, robots could also have their own
suurealism.> On>>>>>>>question raised>>>> by Nautiyal ji.> 1. Yes our
story is SF -- elements>>>>> that>>build the>>>> story are futuristic>
and science is integral element>>>> of>> ths>>story.>>>>> 2. My basic
understanding is: 'remove science from>>> a>> story>>and if the>>>>>
story still sustains, its not science fiction. A>>> SF>> story
should>>>>> collapse as soon as element of science is>>> removed!'>
3.>>>>Depends.> 4 I>>>> cant understand the last point, please>>>
elaborate. " If>> Mays>>>needs>>>> supplementing, how about doing it?
We>>> still have more> than> a>>>month let>>>> for it to be
finalised."> Swapnil>>>> the e, as the---> In>>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...,>>> CHANDRA>>>>
MOHAN>>NAUTIYAL>>>>>> wrote:>>>> While some> .>>>>
________________________________> Shape>>>>>> Yahoo! in your own
image.>>> Join our Network Research Panel>>today!>>>>>>>>>>>
__________________________________________________________>>>>Discover>>>>>>>>
the new Windows
Vista>>>>>>>>>>>>http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&fo\
rm=QBRE>>>>>>>>>>
Yahoo! Groups Links> To visit your group on the web, go to:>>>>>>>>>>
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/>
Your>>email>>>>>>>>> settings:> Individual Email | Traditional> To
change settings>>>>>online>>>>>>> go
to:>>>>>>>http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join>>>>>>
(Yahoo!>>>> ID required)> To change settings via email:>>>>>>
mailto:>>>> indiansciencefiction-digest@...>>>>>>>>>
mailto:>>>> indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@...>>>>
To>>>>>>>>> unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:>>>>>>>>>>
indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@...>>>> Your
use>>of>>>>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups is subject
to:>>>http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>>>>>>>>>>
________________________________> Boardwalk for $500? In
2007?>>Ha!>>>>>>>>>> Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for
today's economy)>>at>>>>> Yahoo!>>>>
Games.>>>>>>>>>>>__________________________________________________________>>>>>\
>
Discover>>>> the new Windows
Vista>>>>>>>>>>>>http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&fo\
rm=QBRE>>>>>>>>>>>
________________________________> Luggage? GPS? Comic
books?>>>Check>>>> out>>>> fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo!
Search.>>>>> [>>>>
http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif]arvind>>>>>>>>
mishra> ________________________________> 5, 50, 500, 5000>> ->>Store
N>>>>>>> number of mails in your inbox. Click here.>>>>>>>>>
________________________________> 5, 50, 500, 5000 - Store
N>>number>>> of>>>>> mails in your inbox. Click here.>>>>>>>>>>>>
__________________________________________________________>>
Gear>>up>>> for>>>> Halo(r) 3 with free downloads and an exclusive
offer. It's> our>>way>>> of>>>> saying thanks for using Windows
Live™.>>>>>>>>>
http://gethalo3gear.com?ocid=SeptemberWLHalo3_WLHMTxt_2>>>>>>>>Yahoo!>>>>>>>
Groups Links>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------->>
5,>>50,>>>>>>> 500, 5000 - Store N number of mails in your inbox.
Click here.>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________> Unlimited
freedom, unlimited>>>>>storage.>>>> Get it now>>>>>>>>>>>>>
__________________________________________________________>>>>>>Capture
your>>>> memories in an online journal!>>>>>>>>
http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Thanks
to>>>> VMT for his intellectually satiating input.What I decipher from
the>>>> contents VMT and CMN both so eloquently submitted , we are
all>>programmed>>>> beings since our very childhood. Programming by
our parents ,our>>society and>>>> our immediate surroundings.But on
the basis of information I have>>gathered>>>> on the issue I have
developed an understanding to believe that we are>>>> programmed not
since our childhood but even before to it ,even>>before our>>>>
birth.Our ancient wisdom also supports this point of view and
had>>given a>>>> very apt word for the phenomenon i.e.samskaar [a
sanskrit word>>quite akin>>>> to English word Sacrament] .It is
exactly the samskaar which>>carries the>>>> real meaning and
connotation of the programming in an>>organic/biological>>>> context
especially in we humans.> This sanskaar begins at the time>>of
union>>>> of our parents contribution in form of their
own>>'Sanskaarit'[programmed]>>>> sperm and ovum with all their
genetic predispositions and a new being>>>> emerges hitherto not in
existence!> Dr.Nautical and Mr. Swapnil may>>>> extrapolate from this
point or may take liberties to differ but>>its hard to>>>> contradict
this knowledge of human programming as it is very well>>researched>>>>
and documented. Our interpretations may only differ!> So whatever>>are
we,>>>> all is predetermined much depending on our 'sanskaar' and yes
our>>childhood>>>> experiences also contribute to it .Sanskaar may
even be a>>procrastinated>>>> life long phenomenon beginning well
before our birth [which is of>>course the>>>> main part of the
process] till death ,a preposition also confirmed>>by the>>>> age old
saying that-'Sanskaaret Dwij Uchchayet[Its only proper>>training
and>>>> sacraments that make/shape a man into an intelligent being]>
Are>>we careful>>>> to give our Robots the same kind of
sanskaar/sacraments or to put>>it in>>>> another word-"The
programming!"And even if some aberrations occure>>who shall>>>> be
responsible? How we tackle with our own outlaws!> A new discussion>>>>
begins!> ________________________________> Shape Yahoo! in your>>own
image.>>>> Join our Network Research Panel
today!>>>________________________________> Be>>>> a better
Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who>>knows.>>>>>
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.>>>>>>
__________________________________________________________>>>Capture>>>>
your memories in an online journal!>>>>>
http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us> Yahoo!
Groups>>Links> To>>>> visit your group on the web, go to:>>>>>
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/> Your email>>>>
settings:> Individual Email | Traditional> To change settings>>online
go to:>>>>>
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join> (Yahoo!
ID>>>> required)> To change settings via email:> mailto:>>>>
indiansciencefiction-digest@...> mailto:>>>>
indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@...> To>>unsubscribe
from>>>> this group, send an email to:>>>>>
indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@...> Your use of
Yahoo!>>>> Groups is subject to:>
http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> [>>>>
http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif]arvind>>mishra>>>>>
________________________________> Download prohibited? No
problem.>>CHAT from>>>> any browser, without download.> [>>>>
http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif]arvind>>mishra>>>>>
________________________________> Why delete messages?
Unlimited>>storage is>>>> just a click
away.>>>>>>>>>>>__________________________________________________________>>>>Ca\
pture>>>>
your memories in an online journal!>>>>>>
http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us>>>>>> Yahoo!
Groups>>>> Links>>>>>>>>>>> --> Swapnil Bhartiya> Assistant
Editor>>>EFYTimes.com>>>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links>> To visit your
group on the web, go to:>>>>>
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/>> Your
email>>>> settings:> Individual Email | Traditional>> To change
settings>>online go>>>> to:>
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join>>>(Yahoo!>>>>
ID required)>> To change settings via email:> mailto:>>>>
indiansciencefiction-digest@...> mailto:>>>>
indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@...>> To>>unsubscribe
from>>>> this group, send an email to:>>>>>
indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@...>> Your use
of>>Yahoo!>>>> Groups is subject to:>
http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>>>>>>>>>
__________________________________________________________>>>> More
photos; more messages; more whatever – Get MORE with
Windows>>Live™>>>> Hotmail(r). NOW with 5GB
storage.>>>>>>>>>>http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_\
TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_5G_0907>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yahoo! Groups Links>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>arvind
mishra>>--------------------------------->> Flying to Bangalore or
Bhopal? Search for tickets
here.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>--------------------------------->> Did you know?
You can CHAT without downloading messenger. Click here>>>>>>>>>>arvind
mishra>>>>--------------------------------->> Get the freedom to save
as many mails as you wish. Click here to know how.>
[http://imadworks.rediff.com/cgi-bin/AdWorks/adimage.cgi/1436502_1429936/creativ\
e_1448236.gif]>>
=== message truncated ===>
[http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif]arvind
mishra> ________________________________> Get the freedom to save as
many mails as you wish. Click here to know how.>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Kick back and relax with hot games and cool activities at the
Messenger Café.
> http://www.cafemessenger.com?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_SeptWLtagline
>
Arwind Mishra jee,
You have elaborated the topic further with obvious advantages, Thanks.
You have said "However, extrapolating each report that a given small segment of
DNA may be functional to mean that all non-coding DNA is vital is as
counterproductive as dismissing non-coding DNA as totally non-functional. "
Extrapolation is making an intelligent estimate about future knowing the present
trend. A linear trend would give best possible estimate, but a nonlinear trend
can give many estimates depending upon the estimator's attitude, and persona.
Then you have said, ". Genomes are complex, and there is little use in
approaching them from a simplistic point of view.
Still I do not like the idea to give it a new name without fully justifying the
stand.No they are not metagenes either, at leastall of the junk part since meta
is info about info and there seems to be no definite and conclusive knowledge
what meta info junk dna possesses".
One should ofcourse be careful and not jump from one exteme to another. Nature
progresses by evolution and not by revolution. Therefore it may not reject and
discard something once it becomes useless, and may modify it suitably to evolve,
and thus it maintains a continuity and therefore use. So it is more likely that
most, if not all, of noncoding DNA is useful. Only future would tell the facts.
I had named it as 'Metagene', using Meta prefix in the sense of a controller or
guide, and not in the sense of 'information'. But I had also said that I am a
fool to name it, thus it was a witty remark to provoke thinking and laughter.
'Noncoding DNA is more important than the encoding DNA', is the sense I wished
to convey. The other sense I wanted to convey was to say that genes have lost
their 'independence' and royalty. Hence I called it 'metagene' and not meta DNA.
Vishwa Mohan Tiwari
________________________________> To: indiansciencefiction@...>
From: arvind_drmishra@...> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 02:46:21 +0100>
Subject: RE: [indiansciencefiction] (Meta is NOT Junk): Re: The Way We Are
Programmed!>> Respected Tiwari ji,> Thanks you have made things much easy even
for the benefit of an aam aadami.But I am tempted to add something from my side
and also to recapitulate certain points as raised by your good self though truly
speaking it seems redundant now.Here it goes-> Susumo Ohno a renowned geneticist
stated in 1972 that “at least 90% of our genomic DNA[the hereditary molecule] is
‘junk’ or ‘garbage’ of various sorts. This is non-coding, non functional DNA
accumulated in the genome.> A new term “pseudogenes” also emerged for the same
functionless genes around 1977.> Common sense suggests that anything that is
completely useless would be discarded. Since junk DNA is still intact with our
genome it may not be just a trash or garbage material. From the very beginning,
the concept of “junk DNA” has implied non-functionality with regards to
protein-coding, but left open the question of sequence-independent impacts
(perhaps even functions) at the cellular level. "Junk DNA" may now be taken to
imply total non-function and is rightly considered problematic for that reason,
but no such tacit assumption was present in the term when it was coined.> Two
groups of people have been driven by a philosophical need to identify functions
for all non-coding DNA. The first includes strict adaptationists, among whom it
was often assumed that all non-coding DNA, by virtue of its very existence, must
be endowed with some as-yet-unknown function of critical importance. It seems
likely that most evolutionary biologists today could tolerate a conclusion that
a significant fraction of non-coding DNA is functionless. This is not true of
the second group in question, compared to whom the passion for function is
unrivaled. As Dawkins (1999) suggested, “creationists might spend some earnest
time speculating on why the Creator should bother to litter genomes with
untranslated pseudogenes and junk tandem repeat DNA”.> Creationist authors
(borrowing, of course, from the work of molecular biologists, as they do no do
such research themselves) simply equivocate the various types of non-coding DNA,
and mistakenly suggest that functions discovered for a few examples of some
types of non-coding sequences indicate functions for all. [SWAPNIL commited the
same mistake inadvertently]> Again,does non-coding DNA have a function? Some of
it does, to be sure. Some of it is involved in chromosome structure and cell
division (e.g., telomeres, centromeres). Some of it is undoubtedly regulatory in
nature. Some of it is involved in alternative splicing (Kondrashov et al. 2003).
A fair portion of it in various genomes shows signs of being evolutionarily
conserved, which may imply function. On the other hand, the largest fraction is
comprised of transposable elements -- some of which become co-opted by the host
genome, some of which play major role in generating genomic variation, some of
which may be involved in cellular stress response, and yet others of which
remain detrimental to host fitness. The upshot is that some non-coding DNA is
most certainly functional -- but when it is, this usually makes sense only in an
evolutionary context, particularly through processes like co-option. More
broadly, those who would attribute a universal function for non-coding DNA must
bear the following in mind: any proposed function for all non-coding DNA must
explain why an onion or a grasshopper needs five times more of it than anyone
reading this sentence[Grasshoppers and Onions really have 5 times more junk dna
than man] .> There is nothing wrong with a word taking on a new meaning as
knowledge changes – that is, unless reference to an original (and outmoded)
sense lingers as a source of confusion, or the term expands so much as to lose
contact with an initially accurate definition.“Junk DNA”, which originally was
coined in reference to now-functionless gene duplicates (i.e., true broken-down
“junk”), is now used as “a catch-all phrase for chromosomal sequences with no
apparent function” (Moore 1996). Its current usage also implies a lack of
function which is accurate by definition for pseudogenes in regard to
protein-coding, but which does not hold for all non-coding elements. The term
has deviated from or outgrown its original use, and its continued invocation is
non-neutral in its expression – and generation – of conceptual biases.> "Junk
DNA" is not the only offender. Non-coding DNA has been called by many names that
have had the same pejorative undertones (intentional or not) implying
uselessness, if not outright wastefulness. Examples include excess DNA
(Zuckerkandl 1976; Doolittle and Sapienza 1980), surplus or nonessential or
degenerate or silent DNA (Comings 1972; Gilbert 1978), quiet DNA (Lefevre 1971),
garbage DNA (Ohno 1970), non-informational or nonsense DNA (Ohno 1972b),
worthless DNA (Ohno 1973), trivial DNA (Ohno 1974), vestigial DNA (Loomis 1973),
redundant DNA (Vinogradov 1998), supplementary DNA (Hutchinson et al. 1980),
secondary DNA (Hinegardner 1976), and incidental DNA (Jain 1980).> As Gould
(2002, p.503) stated, “A rose may retain its fragrance under all vicissitudes of
human taxonomy, but never doubt the power of a name to shape and direct our
thoughts”. Because it is generally no longer applied in its original meaningful
sense, because the type of DNA to which it actually relates now has a more
descriptive name (pseudogenes), and because of its connotations of total
phenotypic inertness, the term “junk DNA” should probably be abandoned in favour
of less subjective terminology. "Non-coding DNA" serves this purpose quite
well.> Concluding remarks> It is an exciting time in genome biology. Aspects of
genomic form and function that were largely inconceivable only a few decades ago
are now being revealed on a daily basis. It should come as no surprise (and
indeed, it probably does not) that new roles are being discovered for non-coding
DNA and that some of catch phrases/ buzzwords -- including "junk DNA" -- are
destined for the dustbin. However, extrapolating each report that a given small
segment of DNA may be functional to mean that all non-coding DNA is vital is as
counterproductive as dismissing non-coding DNA as totally non-functional.
Genomes are complex, and there is little use in approaching them from a
simplistic point of view.> Still I do not like the idea to give it a new name
without fully justifying the stand.No they are not metagenes either, at leastall
of the junk part since meta is info about info and there seems to be no definite
and conclusive knowledge what meta info junk dna possesses.> May be the subject
still needs some elaboration ......> Is any one listening?[Of course other than
VMT,CMN.SWAPNIL AND ZEASHAAN !]> Arvind> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari wrote:> Dear
friends> I will be very brief as my long answer has been just deleted by some
wrong pressinf of a key.> I will give rtefernces if somebody wants them.> There
two important terms that need to be understood properly.> Meta and ; Junk DNA'.>
Junk DNA :> Non encoding DNAs were called Junk, as it was thoght that encoding
genes perform all the necessary functions, and genes were considered
independent, one for each function.> I quote> "June 30, 1972, was a high point
for the lexicon of biology. That day, Susumu Ohno coined (or at least publicly
introduced) the term "junk DNA." In a talk titled "So Much 'Junk DNA' in our
Genome," Ohno argued that the frequency of deleterious mutations restricts the
number of serviceable genes to around 105 and that the great bulk of our DNA is
merely the debris of failed duplication. "The earth is full of extinct species,"
he said. "Is it a wonder that our genome, too, is filled with the remains of
extinct genes?"> Now scientists know that 'Junk DNAs perform important functions
likke they control, modify and guide the functions of gene.> So Junk DNAs ar
anything but junk.> Postgenetics is a new branch which treats the genes as not
independent creators but one link in the chain of various other genes, including
the noncoding genes - the junk DNAs. It is a network of all that functions.>
Meta:> There are mountains of data, information and knowledge. How to get the
relevant info; is a problem today in both traditional and digital libraries.>
Therefore a new concept of Metainfo i.e. info about info; it means that info
which helps us in getting us the desired info e.g. summary, index, kew words
etc. Our librarian. metaphorically speaking, can be called 'metainfo.> Obviously
metainfo is not an integral or essential part of info except that it guides us
to the desired portion as e.g. done by 'a key word.> Therefore Metainfo is not
the socalled junkDNAs.> The prefix 'meta' has many meanings.> The particular
meaning which comes closest to the meaning used in 'Metainformation' i.e.
symptoms leading to; e.g. somewhat like 'meta arthritic - i.e. those symptoms
which if untreated would lead to arthritis but are not those of arthtitis.> The
word Junk DNA has been questiond forther last 25 years are so.> In 2006 it has
been officially declared dead in the First World Conference of 'Post Gemetics',
which is a new subject which treats the coding and noncoding DNAs as part of
chain.> I suggest a new word ( I am neither a scientist nor a biologist to be
more specific, and hence I dare to tread where angels fear to enter) " metagene'
for the socalled JunkDNAs; meta in the sense of 'performing higher functions
than mere genes, as in the word 'meta biological'.> I hope it suffices.> VMT>
Vishwa Mohan Tiwari> ________________________________> To:
indiansciencefiction@...> From: dr_arvind3@...> Date:
Sun, 16 Sep 2007 01:48:41 +0000> Subject: Re: Re: [indiansciencefiction] (Meta
is NOT Junk): Re: The Way We Are Programmed!>> Respected VMT,> Please come
forward with all your semantic wisdom to define what meta is in your own learned
way !Whether it denotes a change or shows some middle part of anything or
whatever and what is the aetiology of the word and whether it has attained some
new meanings lately what> all this fuss is about!> REGARDS,> arvind> On Sat, 15
Sep 2007 Arvind Mishra wrote :>>Thanks CMN for explaining the term meta in a
very intelligible way.I was only trying to put the lexical perspectives ! Words
have their own history and should be understood properly before using them in a
new context.>>Swapnil advocates that instead of using term junk for apparently
non functional part [more than 90%] of human genome we should use the term meta
for it.>>Only because the so called junk DNA is not as much junk as it is
presumed to be as certain recent reports indicate.>>Now you have also explained
the term in line with Mr. Swapnil, especially in context to its meaning in web
terminology and also to boast the morale of younger fraternity.A very apt and
genuine deed indeed but have you cared to check the etymological and lexical
backgrounds of the word meta? Having the responsibility of communicating science
to lay people we are answerable to a question like this and should not be
hastily replacing the words in common uses only to satiate our intellectual
hunger and jump to erroneous conclusions!!.>>I have checked the meaning of word
meta in Oxford advanced learner dictionary which very explicitly defines it in
following way->>1-higher ;beyond :metalanguage;METAPHYSICS,>>2- of change
;metabolism,metamorphosis>>Now what is metalanguage? DICTIONARY DEFINES that the
words used in talking about or describing languages or a language are
metalanguage!>>Now please decide for yourself if we could freely use the term
meta for junk DNA part of the human genome?>>I think if we try to describe the
language of junk DNA[in terms of its functional ,coding or non coding aspects
which we still do not know much!] the language which could be used might then be
called a metalanguage of junk part of the genome. So I do not think 'meta'
should not be replaced for junk !>>REGARDS,>>arvind>> CHANDRA MOHAN NAUTIYAL
wrote:>>No, Arvind jee.>>>> Meta is what is responsible for the difference in
things which may otherwise look similar. If you see the website content in html
form, for instance, you'd see there are may be 50 words and symbols before and
after a short string of words which (string) is visible in the website. These 50
words are not visible to the reader of the website but contain the valuable
info. Without them the content would lose meaning/ appearance or will have
different meaning. I don't know if meta is the universal word but even if
Swapnil jee has coined it, I thing it's an apt term.>>>> CMN>>>>Arvind Mishra
wrote:>> "when you 'italicize' some text or make it bold or>>increase its size
in word file. " so says swapnil about meta !>>Yes its making something bold,some
sort of increase that is what i meant,nothing else!>>Now we are entering the
dragon of basic genetics you guys and gals [if there remains any one] pl be
aware!>>"swapnil.bhartiya" wrote: Dear Arvind ji and all,>>>>There is a lot of
communication gap. In this context and in>>technological term 'meta' is NOT
about "connotation of being something>>of a higher degree-some sort of
metaphysics" as you mentioned. 'Meta'>>means 'information about the
information'. I am surprised to hear that>>comment from you, as I clearly gave
an example in my earlier post as>>well, explaining what is meta.>>>>And as you
wrote "I think there is neither any rationale nor relevance>>to convert the
easily communicable word / term 'junk' into a hard to>>understand kind of word
'meta' which has a connotation of being>>something of a higher degree-some sort
of metaphysics to a lay person>>like me.">>>>It is not that sir, there is not
only lot of rational behind the word>>meta, but also need for us to use correct
words/ improvise them as we>>learn more.>>>>But since you have raised this, and
if someone of your status could>>have that doubt, I will haev to think twice
what others must be thinking.>>>>Let me explain meta.>>>>This Meta has nothing
to do with being something of a higher degree,>>or please dont try to connect it
to stuff like 'meta physics. Meta is>>data about the data, or information that
what a particular set of data>>does. For example when you 'italicize' some text
or make it bold or>>increase its size in word file. On the front end, something
that you>>can see is that particular word/sentence becomes bold or italic
etc,>>but in the back-end, at the end of code line, it stores information>>which
gives instruction to make that word bold italic etc, This>>backend infomation is
known as meta.>>>>Same happens with gene/DNA, while a DNA instructs cell to
develop in>>particular manner, there is a set of information which allows DNA
to>>instruct cell. Now you call that critical information junk, while we>>call
it meta. How could such a critical information be 'junk'>>>>Also in the light of
above, meta is in NO WAY ..'kabad se jugad'. Meta>>is very important
information.>>>>I hope I have cleared my point.>>>>Regards>>Swapnil>>>>--- In
indiansciencefiction@..., "arvind mishra">> wrote:>>>>>> I think
there is neither any rationale nor relevance to convert the>>easily>>>
communicable word / term 'junk' into a hard to understand kind of word>>> 'meta'
which has a connotation of being something of a higher>>degree-some>>> sort of
metaphysics to a lay person like me.Alternatively it also>>denotes>>> some kind
of queer change as in 'metamorphosis'. I am completely>>at loss>>> to understand
what inspires Mr. Swapnil to use this term in a genetic>>> context.>>> Junk DNA
is just like any other sort of junk-junk yard, junk food>>-something>>>
useless,a heap of garbage. But yes sometimes it so happens that we>>derive>>>
something of importance even from the junk.KABAAD SE JUGAAD type of>>thing.>>>
And this is the aspect which could be exploited for s.f. as has>>rightly been>>>
done in his said story by dear ZEASHAN.>>> On 14/09/2007, Vishwa Mohan Tiwari
wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>> Ignorance made it to be called 'junk'. It is desirable to
chnge it to>>>> Meta, but it is difficult.>>>> The electric current still flows
from positive to negative, though>>we know>>>> that electrons which carry the
current, flow from negative to>>positive.>>>> VMT>>>>
----------------------------------------> To:>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...> From: arnieswap@...> Date:>>>> Thu, 13
Sep 2007 23:37:02 +0530> Subject: Re:>>[indiansciencefiction] The Way>>>> We Are
Programmed!>> Junk would be a derogatory word, its better>>we call it>>>> 'meta'
information.>> Swapnil>> On 9/13/07, Vishwa Mohan Tiwari>>wrote:>>>>>>>> As far
as I can remeber from the latest researches, the scientists are>>>> finding that
what they though was junk in not really junk.>> vmt>>>>>>
________________________________> To:>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...> From: arvind_drmishra@...>>>>> Date:
Wed, 12 Sep 2007 02:23:47 +0100> Subject: RE:>>[indiansciencefiction]>>>> The
Way We Are Programmed!>> Zeashan is right insofar his>>knowledge of junk>>>> DNA
is concerned,it is known to be an useless vestigial part of>>the genome>>>> but
making certain fancied extrapolations about it in an sf is really>>>> wonderfull
!> Arvind Mishra wrote:> Strictly NO to God in this>>forum VMT>>>> sir?The
moderator being an agnostic is helpless to moderate>>discussions on>>>> God !>
Have mercy on me for heaven's sake please!> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari>>>> wrote:>
Should we have God in our discussion?> Do we need Him?> vmt>>>>>
________________________________> To:>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...> From: zeashanzaidi@...>>>>> Date: Tue,
11 Sep 2007 04:34:48 -0700> Subject: Re:>>[indiansciencefiction]>>>> The Way We
Are Programmed!>> If we are programmed by God then the>>program is>>>> very
flexible and gives us the freedom of choice. Environment, family>>>> background,
financial conditions and many more factors influence>>on our>>>> programming.>
And a part of our program is object oriented. If we>>want to>>>> achieve a goal
then our body sets in the manner to provide more>>efforts to>>>> reaching the
goal.> Our behaviors are controlled by genes that are>>directed>>>> by
information stored in the DNA. Scientists presently found 3% of>>>> information
stored in DNA is useful. Then what about rest 97%?>>Scientists>>>> called it
Junk. But this may be their lack of knowledge. Can this>>Junk part>>>> gives
information about our all ancestors? This may be a topic of>>Sci-Fi. I>>>> used
this hypothesis in very minute form in my story 'Murde Ki Awaz',>>>> published
in the book Professor Monkey. Pl see the story.>>>Regards> Zeashan>>>> Zaidi>
Arvind Mishra wrote:> Friends your surrealistic thoughts>>are now>>>> soliited
under this new caption!> On Sun, 09 Sep 2007 arvind>>mishra wrote>>>> :>>Thanks
to VMT for his intellectually satiating input.What I>>decipher>>>> from>>the
contents VMT and CMN both so eloquently submitted , we are>>>> all>>programmed
beings since our very childhood. Programming by our>>>> parents>>,our society
and our immediate surroundings.But on the basis>>>> of>>information I have
gathered on the issue I have developed>>>> an>>understanding to believe that we
are programmed not since our>>>> childhood>>but even before to it ,even before
our birth.Our>>ancient wisdom>>>> also>>supports this point of view and had
given a very apt word for>>>> the>>phenomenon i.e.samskaar [a sanskrit word
quite akin to English>>>> word>>Sacrament] .It is exactly the samskaar which
carries the>>real meaning>>>> and>>connotation of the programming in an
organic/biological context>>>> especially>>in we humans.>>This sanskaar begins
at the time of>>union of our>>>> parents contribution in>>form of their
own>>'Sanskaarit'[programmed] sperm>>>> and ovum with all their>>genetic
predispositions and a new being>>emerges>>>> hitherto not in
existence!>>Dr.Nautical and Mr. Swapnil may>>extrapolate>>>> from this point or
may take>>liberties to differ but its hard to>>contradict>>>> this knowledge of
human>>programming as it is very well researched and>>>> documented.
Our>>interpretations may only differ!>>So whatever are>>we, all>>>> is
predetermined much depending on our 'sanskaar'>>and yes our>>childhood>>>>
experiences also contribute to it .Sanskaar may even>>be a>>procrastinated>>>>
life long phenomenon beginning well before our birth>>[which is of>>course>>>>
the main part of the process] till death ,a preposition>>also>>confirmed by>>>>
the age old saying that-'Sanskaaret Dwij Uchchayet[Its>>only>>proper
training>>>> and sacraments that make/shape a man into
an>>intelligent>>being]>>Are we>>>> careful to give our Robots the same kind
of>>sanskaar/sacraments>>or to put>>>> it in another word-"The programming!"And
even if some>>aberrations>>occure>>>> who shall be responsible? How we tackle
with our own outlaws!>>A new>>>> discussion begins!>>>>>>>>On 09/09/2007,
swapnil.bhartiya wrote:>>>>>>>>>> Tiwari Ji,>>>>>> Nautiyal Ji would answer that
question in his own>>manner, I>>>> would just>>> like to add, when the machines
become 'intelligent' and>>>> instead of>>> depending on set of rule, start
learning from>>experiences>>>> especially>>> in "distributed intelligence",
computers will not>>depend on>>>> how much>>> freedom we give them. If they are
learning and>>evolving, they>>>> would>>> modify the set of instruction and will
not be much in our>>>> control.>>>>>> Another worrying area is 'nanobots', these
will be>>working on>>>> various>>> models of distributed intelligence and it
would almost>>impossible>>>> to>>> keep a tab on their behaviour patten. I
think, once robots enter>>>> the>>> true AI environment, it would not be in our
control to give>>them>>>> freedom.>>>>>> They will be as free as we are.>>>>>>
Swapnil>>>>>>>>--- In>>>> indiansciencefiction@...,>>> Vishwa
Mohan Tiwari>>>>>>> wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>> Dr. Nautial jee>>>> How much freedom
would you>>give to a>>>> robot?>>>> I guess not more than you give to a loyal
and intelligent>>>> subordinate.>>>> Here lies the difference between a most
advanced>>robot and>>>> a human>>> being.>>>> VMT>>>>
________________________________> To:>>>>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...>>>> From: cmnautiyal@>>>>> Date:>>>>>>
Sat, 8 Sep 2007 13:12:12 +0100> Subject: Re:>>>> [indiansciencefiction]>>> Re:
Surrealism and Science Fiction!>>>>The issue>>>> has come up because of>>>
comparison with robots. If both are>>programmed,>>>> where are the>>>
differences? Can robots feel depressed, joyed or>>sad? Can>>>> they committ>>>
sucide and if yes, what would be the form?> CMN> ">>>> swapnil.bhartiya">>>
wrote:> Actually I was expecting that there>>would be>>>> no discussion>>> over>
whether humans/all living being are>>programmed or>>>> not. That is a>>> fact>
and all of us know that. That's the basic. DNA>>>> carries the>>> instruction>
that instructs cells how to develop>>and behave.>>>> So, yes>>> biologically> we
are completely programmed and what its>>>> genetic>>> enginerring does but>
reprgramme genes and create pervasive>>>> things>>> like BT cotton GM seeds.>
They are playing with stem>>sells as>>>> well. I>>> should not have written> all
this coz there are expert>>on the>>>> panel>>> who already know this, so> in the
first place there shouldn't>>>> have>>> been ay discussion on the> issue but
unanimous agreement.>>>And yes,>>>> we>>> do get programmed, if this word could
be used there, in> day>>to day>>>>>>> life by our surroundings, experiences and
the way we learn>>>things.>>>> So,>>>> we are well programmed.> Swapnil.>
autonomus with In>>addition,--->>> In>>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...,>>> CHANDRA MOHAN NAUTIYAL>>>>>>>>
wrote:>>>> I wold say yes, we are being programmed. I wrote in the>>>>>>>
previous mail:>>>> "human beings (or advanced animals) are being>>>>>>>
reprogrammed> continuously with experience.">>>> I feel Tiwari jee>>has>>>>>>>
agreed with that. Our initially> programming, as Tiwari jee>>also>>> wrote,>>>>
is with respect to our basic> needs. Thereafter it's>>> programming by>>>>
society and its members. We> respond in a certain way>>> because>>that's
what>>>> comes to us from (now)> built-in set of>>> instructions.>>>> So I>>feel
we>>>> both agree.>>>> CMN>>>>>> Vishwa Mohan>>> Tiwari wrote:>>>> Are we>>>>
programmed ? !>> I would suggest that we are>>> given a set of>>hardware and>>>>
a structure> for programming.>> But we are>>> not programmed in a>>broad>>>>
sense. In a narrow sense we are> programmed>>> for we all have needs>>>>
pertaining to "Aahaar, Nidraa, Bhaya> and>>> Maithun'; these may be>>>>
equivalent of energy requirements, cooling> and>>> production>>etc.; but>>>>
there is tremendous freedom even in this>>> regime.>> A child is being>>>>
programmed by his parents and the entire>>> village,>> or is he>>really
being>>>> programmed or learning to programme>>> ??!!>>>> We are entering>>into
the>>>> field of ontology, and I do not>>> mind> entering, but others
may>>consider>>>> it to be a field not>>> pertaining to> SF writing.>>>>
VMT>>>>>> ________________________________>>>> To:>>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...>>>> From: cmnautiyal@>>>Date:>>>>>>>>
Fri, 7 Sep 2007 13:51:06 +0100> Subject: Re:>>[indiansciencefiction]>>>> Re:>>>>
Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> Actually the feelings of>>>>>>depression,>>>>
sorrow or joy are also a result of programming. We are>>> all>>>programmed.>>>>
One difference from computers at present is that>>> human> beings (or>>>>
advanced animals) are being reprogrammed>>> continuously with>>>experience.>>>>
The biochemocals produced in our body>>> are also result of>>>programmes.>>>>
These chemicals lead to our switching>>> temperament etc. The>>>signals,>>>>
which are probably electro magnetic,>>> are sent to the brains>>>leading to>>>>
perception of different feelings.>>> Or is it that these> signals>>lead to>>>>
production of bio chemicals?>>>> CMN> Arvind Mishra> wrote:> Yes>>Zeashaan
if>>>> there remains no>>> difference in man and robot> ,robots may very>>well
adopt>>>> behavioural>>> aberrations like suicide etc> and also may indulge
in>>>> surrealistic>>> activities .But a lot>> depends on us what way we>>are
going>>>> to shape>>> and design our future> robots.They would be made on a>>>>
optimistic>>> promise as opined by great> Asimov or on Mary Shelley's>>>>
Frankenstein>>> pattern.> In wake of mobile> explosions your story>>suddenly>>>>
attains a>>> remarkable significance.>> Great work dear! Go ahead>>dear, you>>>>
have a>>> great writer within you!>> ARVIND> zeashan zaidi wrote:> If>>>>
computer>>> has power of imagination, as> well as sentiments. Then an>>>>
external>>> cause may be depressed it to> commit suicide.>>Obviously in case>>>>
of>>> computers this depressing cause> will be a virus like>>program.>>>>>>>>
Zeashan Zaidi> "swapnil.bhartiya"> wrote:> Still, I am not>>convinced>>>>>>>
that computers will commmit> "suiside" in> that manner that chips>>will>>>>>>>
start to melt. And my> previous objections> remain that this could>>not>>>
be>>>> done as every chips> development process> is very
meticuous.>>>>>>Swapnil>>>>> --- In> indiansciencefiction@...,>>>
Vishwa Mohan>>>>>>> Tiwari>> wrote:>>>>>> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari>> Surrealism is
much>>more>>>>>>>>> than imagination!!>> Computers suicide in the story was
a>>direct>>>> result>>>> of instructions> to that effect, aand not due to pain,
misery>>>>>,> sorrow>>>> or depression> etc, as I understood from the story.>>
VMT>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________> To:>>>>>>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...>>>> From: zeashanzaidi@>>>Date:>>>>>>>>>
Wed, 5 Sep 2007 22:41:25 -0700> Subject: RE:>>[indiansciencefiction]>>>>>
Re:>>>> Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> Surrealism is just>>associated>>>>>
with>>>> level of imagination power of brain. Those brains having
much>>>>>>>power in>>>> this sense have more sentiments also. And suicide
is>>>>>>>obviously related>>>> to boom of sentiments.> Zeashan Zaidi> Vishwa>>>
Mohan>> Tiwari>>wrote:>>>>> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari> The SF story is>>> interesting
and>> good.>>hOWEVER THE>>>> CLAIM THAT THE COMPUTERS HAD THE>>> CAPABILITY TO
USE>>>>IMAGINATION IS NOT>>>> VALID. The plot of the story>>> does not need
the>> computers to use>>>> imagination, infact they blindly>>> followed the>>
instruction to>>commit>>>> suicide.> VMT>>>>>>
________________________________>> To:>>>>>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...>>>> From: zeashanzaidi@>>>>Date:>>>>>>>>
Wed, 5 Sep 2007 10:15:35 -0700> Subject: Re:>>>[indiansciencefiction]>>>>
Re:>>>> Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> In the> context of surrealism>>>
in>>>>> robots/computers, I am presenting a sci-fi> `Computer Ki
Maut'>>>>>where> it>>>> is shown a possibility of imagination in> computers.
This>>> story>>had> been>>>> published in Vigyan Pragati in 1998.>> Zeashan
Zaidi>>>>> ">>>> swapnil.bhartiya" wrote:> I agree with everything> Tiwari ji
said>>>>>>>> except that Robots can't use> surrealism. How could we> be
so>>sure?>>>>>>>> Robots can be for more advanced> and may have their own> form
of>>>>>>>> surrealism. Surrealism is only obscure> thought, imagination>
and>>>>>>>> interpretation of any being who is capable of> thinking
and>>>>>>>imagining.>>>> Thus, robots could also have their own suurealism.>
On>>>>>>>question raised>>>> by Nautiyal ji.> 1. Yes our story is SF --
elements>>>>> that>>build the>>>> story are futuristic> and science is integral
element>>>> of>> ths>>story.>>>>> 2. My basic understanding is: 'remove science
from>>> a>> story>>and if the>>>>> story still sustains, its not science
fiction. A>>> SF>> story should>>>>> collapse as soon as element of science
is>>> removed!'> 3.>>>>Depends.> 4 I>>>> cant understand the last point,
please>>> elaborate. " If>> Mays>>>needs>>>> supplementing, how about doing it?
We>>> still have more> than> a>>>month let>>>> for it to be finalised.">
Swapnil>>>> the e, as the---> In>>>>> indiansciencefiction@...,>>>
CHANDRA>>>> MOHAN>>NAUTIYAL>>>>>> wrote:>>>> While some> .>>>>
________________________________> Shape>>>>>> Yahoo! in your own image.>>> Join
our Network Research Panel>>today!>>>>>>>>>>>
__________________________________________________________>>>>Discover>>>>>>>>
the new Windows
Vista>>>>>>>>>>>>http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&fo\
rm=QBRE>>>>>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links> To visit your group on the web, go
to:>>>>>>>>>> http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/>
Your>>email>>>>>>>>> settings:> Individual Email | Traditional> To change
settings>>>>>online>>>>>>> go
to:>>>>>>>http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join>>>>>>
(Yahoo!>>>> ID required)> To change settings via email:>>>>>> mailto:>>>>
indiansciencefiction-digest@...>>>>>>>>> mailto:>>>>
indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@...>>>> To>>>>>>>>> unsubscribe
from this group, send an email to:>>>>>>>>>>
indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@...>>>> Your use>>of>>>>>>>>>
Yahoo! Groups is subject to:>>>http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>>>>>>>>>>
________________________________> Boardwalk for $500? In 2007?>>Ha!>>>>>>>>>>
Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy)>>at>>>>>
Yahoo!>>>>
Games.>>>>>>>>>>>__________________________________________________________>>>>>\
> Discover>>>> the new Windows
Vista>>>>>>>>>>>>http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&fo\
rm=QBRE>>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________> Luggage? GPS? Comic
books?>>>Check>>>> out>>>> fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search.>>>>> [>>>>
http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif]arvind>>>>>>>> mishra>
________________________________> 5, 50, 500, 5000>> ->>Store N>>>>>>> number of
mails in your inbox. Click here.>>>>>>>>> ________________________________> 5,
50, 500, 5000 - Store N>>number>>> of>>>>> mails in your inbox. Click
here.>>>>>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________________>>
Gear>>up>>> for>>>> Halo(r) 3 with free downloads and an exclusive offer. It's>
our>>way>>> of>>>> saying thanks for using Windows Live™.>>>>>>>>>
http://gethalo3gear.com?ocid=SeptemberWLHalo3_WLHMTxt_2>>>>>>>>Yahoo!>>>>>>>
Groups Links>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------->> 5,>>50,>>>>>>>
500, 5000 - Store N number of mails in your inbox. Click here.>>>>>>>>>>
________________________________> Unlimited freedom, unlimited>>>>>storage.>>>>
Get it now>>>>>>>>>>>>>
__________________________________________________________>>>>>>Capture your>>>>
memories in an online journal!>>>>>>>>
http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Thanks to>>>>
VMT for his intellectually satiating input.What I decipher from the>>>> contents
VMT and CMN both so eloquently submitted , we are all>>programmed>>>> beings
since our very childhood. Programming by our parents ,our>>society and>>>> our
immediate surroundings.But on the basis of information I have>>gathered>>>> on
the issue I have developed an understanding to believe that we are>>>>
programmed not since our childhood but even before to it ,even>>before our>>>>
birth.Our ancient wisdom also supports this point of view and had>>given a>>>>
very apt word for the phenomenon i.e.samskaar [a sanskrit word>>quite akin>>>>
to English word Sacrament] .It is exactly the samskaar which>>carries the>>>>
real meaning and connotation of the programming in an>>organic/biological>>>>
context especially in we humans.> This sanskaar begins at the time>>of union>>>>
of our parents contribution in form of their own>>'Sanskaarit'[programmed]>>>>
sperm and ovum with all their genetic predispositions and a new being>>>>
emerges hitherto not in existence!> Dr.Nautical and Mr. Swapnil may>>>>
extrapolate from this point or may take liberties to differ but>>its hard to>>>>
contradict this knowledge of human programming as it is very
well>>researched>>>> and documented. Our interpretations may only differ!> So
whatever>>are we,>>>> all is predetermined much depending on our 'sanskaar' and
yes our>>childhood>>>> experiences also contribute to it .Sanskaar may even be
a>>procrastinated>>>> life long phenomenon beginning well before our birth
[which is of>>course the>>>> main part of the process] till death ,a preposition
also confirmed>>by the>>>> age old saying that-'Sanskaaret Dwij Uchchayet[Its
only proper>>training and>>>> sacraments that make/shape a man into an
intelligent being]> Are>>we careful>>>> to give our Robots the same kind of
sanskaar/sacraments or to put>>it in>>>> another word-"The programming!"And even
if some aberrations occure>>who shall>>>> be responsible? How we tackle with our
own outlaws!> A new discussion>>>> begins!> ________________________________>
Shape Yahoo! in your>>own image.>>>> Join our Network Research Panel
today!>>>________________________________> Be>>>> a better Globetrotter. Get
better travel answers from someone who>>knows.>>>>> Yahoo! Answers - Check it
out.>>>>>>
__________________________________________________________>>>Capture>>>> your
memories in an online journal!>>>>>
http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us> Yahoo! Groups>>Links> To>>>>
visit your group on the web, go to:>>>>>
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/> Your email>>>>
settings:> Individual Email | Traditional> To change settings>>online go
to:>>>>> http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join> (Yahoo!
ID>>>> required)> To change settings via email:> mailto:>>>>
indiansciencefiction-digest@...> mailto:>>>>
indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@...> To>>unsubscribe from>>>>
this group, send an email to:>>>>>
indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@...> Your use of Yahoo!>>>>
Groups is subject to:> http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> [>>>>
http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif]arvind>>mishra>>>>>
________________________________> Download prohibited? No problem.>>CHAT
from>>>> any browser, without download.> [>>>>
http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif]arvind>>mishra>>>>>
________________________________> Why delete messages? Unlimited>>storage is>>>>
just a click
away.>>>>>>>>>>>__________________________________________________________>>>>Ca\
pture>>>> your memories in an online journal!>>>>>>
http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups>>>>
Links>>>>>>>>>>> --> Swapnil Bhartiya> Assistant Editor>>>EFYTimes.com>>>>>>>>
Yahoo! Groups Links>> To visit your group on the web, go to:>>>>>
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/>> Your email>>>>
settings:> Individual Email | Traditional>> To change settings>>online go>>>>
to:> http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join>>>(Yahoo!>>>> ID
required)>> To change settings via email:> mailto:>>>>
indiansciencefiction-digest@...> mailto:>>>>
indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@...>> To>>unsubscribe from>>>>
this group, send an email to:>>>>>
indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@...>> Your use of>>Yahoo!>>>>
Groups is subject to:> http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>>>>>>>>>
__________________________________________________________>>>> More photos; more
messages; more whatever – Get MORE with Windows>>Live™>>>> Hotmail(r). NOW with
5GB
storage.>>>>>>>>>>http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_\
TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_5G_0907>>>>>>>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups
Links>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>arvind
mishra>>--------------------------------->> Flying to Bangalore or Bhopal?
Search for tickets here.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>--------------------------------->> Did
you know? You can CHAT without downloading messenger. Click here>>>>>>>>>>arvind
mishra>>>>--------------------------------->> Get the freedom to save as many
mails as you wish. Click here to know how.>
[http://imadworks.rediff.com/cgi-bin/AdWorks/adimage.cgi/1436502_1429936/creativ\
e_1448236.gif]>> === message truncated ===>
[http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif]arvind mishra>
________________________________> Get the freedom to save as many mails as you
wish. Click here to know how.>
_________________________________________________________________
Kick back and relax with hot games and cool activities at the Messenger Café.
http://www.cafemessenger.com?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_SeptWLtagline
Thanks you have made things much easy even for the benefit of an aam aadami.But I am tempted to add something from my side and also to recapitulate certain points as raised by your good self though truly speaking it seems redundant now.Here it goes-
Susumo Ohnoa renowned geneticist stated in 1972 that “at least 90% of our genomic DNA[the hereditary molecule] is ‘junk’ or ‘garbage’ of various sorts. This is non-coding, non functional DNA accumulated in the genome. A new term “pseudogenes” also emerged for the same functionless genes around 1977. Common sense
suggests that anything that is completely useless would be discarded. Since junk DNA is still intact with our genome it may not be just a trash or garbage material. From the very beginning, the concept of “junk DNA” has implied non-functionality with regards to protein-coding, but left open the question of sequence-independent impacts (perhaps even functions) at the cellular level. "Junk DNA" may now be taken to imply total non-function and is rightly considered problematic for that reason, but no such tacit assumption was present in the term when it was coined. Two groups of people have been driven by a philosophical need to identify functions for all non-coding DNA. The first includes strict adaptationists, among whom it was often assumed that all non-coding DNA, by virtue of its very existence, must be endowed with some as-yet-unknown function of critical importance. It seems likely that most evolutionary
biologists today could tolerate a conclusion that a significant fraction of non-coding DNA is functionless. This is not true of the second group in question, compared to whom the passion for function is unrivaled. As Dawkins (1999) suggested, “creationists might spend some earnest time speculating on why the Creator should bother to litter genomes with untranslated pseudogenes and junk tandem repeat DNA”.
Creationist authors (borrowing, of course, from the work of molecular biologists, as they do no do such research themselves) simply equivocate the various types of non-coding DNA, and mistakenly suggest that functions discovered for a few examples of some types of non-coding sequences indicate functions for all. [SWAPNIL commited the same mistake inadvertently] Again,does non-coding DNA have a function? Some of it does, to be sure. Some of it is involved in chromosome structure and cell division (e.g.,
telomeres, centromeres). Some of it is undoubtedly regulatory in nature. Some of it is involved in alternative splicing (Kondrashov et al. 2003). A fair portion of it in various genomes shows signs of being evolutionarily conserved, which may imply function. On the other hand, the largest fraction is comprised of transposable elements -- some of which become co-opted by the host genome, some of which play major role in generating genomic variation, some of which may be involved in cellular stress response, and yet others of which remain detrimental to host fitness. The upshot is that some non-coding DNA is most certainly functional -- but when it is, this usually makes sense only in an evolutionary context, particularly through processes like co-option. More broadly, those who would attribute a universal function for non-coding DNA must bear the following in mind: any proposed function for all non-coding DNA must explain why an onion or a grasshopper needs five
times more of it than anyone reading this sentence[Grasshoppers and Onions really have 5 times more junk dna than man] . There is nothing wrong with a word taking on a new meaning as knowledge changes – that is, unless reference to an original (and outmoded) sense lingers as a source of confusion, or the term expands so much as to lose contact with an initially accurate definition.“Junk DNA”, which originally was coined in reference to now-functionless gene duplicates (i.e., true broken-down “junk”), is now used as “a catch-all phrase for chromosomal sequences with no apparent function” (Moore 1996). Its current usage also implies a lack of function which is accurate by definition for pseudogenes in regard to protein-coding, but which does not hold for all non-coding elements. The term has deviated from or outgrown its original use, and its continued invocation is non-neutral in its expression – and
generation – of conceptual biases.
"Junk DNA" is not the only offender. Non-coding DNA has been called by many names that have had the same pejorative undertones (intentional or not) implying uselessness, if not outright wastefulness. Examples include excess DNA (Zuckerkandl 1976; Doolittle and Sapienza 1980), surplus or nonessential or degenerate or silent DNA (Comings 1972; Gilbert 1978), quiet DNA (Lefevre 1971), garbage DNA (Ohno 1970), non-informational or nonsense DNA (Ohno 1972b), worthless DNA (Ohno 1973), trivial DNA (Ohno 1974), vestigial DNA (Loomis 1973), redundant DNA (Vinogradov 1998), supplementary DNA (Hutchinson et al. 1980), secondary DNA (Hinegardner 1976), and incidental DNA (Jain 1980).
As Gould (2002, p.503) stated, “A rose may retain its fragrance under all vicissitudes of human taxonomy, but never doubt the power of a
name to shape and direct our thoughts”. Because it is generally no longer applied in its original meaningful sense, because the type of DNA to which it actually relates now has a more descriptive name (pseudogenes), and because of its connotations of total phenotypic inertness, the term “junk DNA” should probably be abandoned in favour of less subjective terminology. "Non-coding DNA" serves this purpose quite well.
Concluding remarks
It is an exciting time in genome biology. Aspects of genomic form and function that were largely inconceivable only a few decades ago are now being revealed on a daily basis. It should come as no surprise (and indeed, it probably does not) that new roles are being discovered for non-coding DNA and that some of catch phrases/ buzzwords -- including "junk DNA" -- are destined for the dustbin. However, extrapolating each report that a given
small segment of DNA may be functional to mean that all non-coding DNA is vital is as counterproductive as dismissing non-coding DNA as totally non-functional. Genomes are complex, and there is little use in approaching them from a simplistic point of view.
Still I do not like the idea to give it a new name without fully justifying the stand.No they are not metagenes either, at leastall of the junk part since meta is info about info and there seems to be no definite and conclusive knowledge what meta info junk dna possesses.
May be the subject still needs some elaboration ......
Is any one listening?[Of course other than VMT,CMN.SWAPNIL AND
ZEASHAAN !]
Arvind
Vishwa Mohan Tiwari <onevishwa@...> wrote:
Dear friends I will be very brief as my long answer has been just deleted by some wrong pressinf of a key. I will give rtefernces if somebody wants them. There two important terms that need to be understood properly. Meta and ; Junk DNA'.
Junk DNA : Non encoding DNAs were called Junk, as it was thoght that encoding genes perform all the necessary functions, and genes were considered independent, one for each function.
I quote "June 30, 1972, was a high point for the lexicon of biology. That day, Susumu Ohno coined (or at least publicly introduced) the term "junk DNA." In a talk titled "So Much 'Junk DNA' in our
Genome," Ohno argued that the frequency of deleterious mutations restricts the number of serviceable genes to around 105 and that the great bulk of our DNA is merely the debris of failed duplication. "The earth is full of extinct species," he said. "Is it a wonder that our genome, too, is filled with the remains of extinct genes?" Now scientists know that 'Junk DNAs perform important functions likke they control, modify and guide the functions of gene. So Junk DNAs ar anything but junk. Postgenetics is a new branch which treats the genes as not independent creators but one link in the chain of various other genes, including the noncoding genes - the junk DNAs. It is a network of all that functions.
Meta: There are mountains of data, information and knowledge. How to get the relevant info; is a problem today in both traditional and digital libraries. Therefore a new concept of Metainfo i.e. info about info; it means that info which helps us in getting
us the desired info e.g. summary, index, kew words etc. Our librarian. metaphorically speaking, can be called 'metainfo. Obviously metainfo is not an integral or essential part of info except that it guides us to the desired portion as e.g. done by 'a key word. Therefore Metainfo is not the socalled junkDNAs.
The prefix 'meta' has many meanings. The particular meaning which comes closest to the meaning used in 'Metainformation' i.e. symptoms leading to; e.g. somewhat like 'meta arthritic - i.e. those symptoms which if untreated would lead to arthritis but are not those of arthtitis.
The word Junk DNA has been questiond forther last 25 years are so. In 2006 it has been officially declared dead in the First World Conference of 'Post Gemetics', which is a new subject which treats the coding and noncoding DNAs as part of chain. I suggest a new word ( I am neither a scientist nor a biologist to be more specific, and hence I dare to tread where
angels fear to enter) " metagene' for the socalled JunkDNAs; meta in the sense of 'performing higher functions than mere genes, as in the word 'meta biological'. I hope it suffices. VMT
Vishwa Mohan Tiwari ________________________________> To: indiansciencefiction@...> From: dr_arvind3@...> Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 01:48:41 +0000> Subject: Re: Re: [indiansciencefiction] (Meta is NOT Junk): Re: The Way We Are Programmed!>> Respected VMT,> Please come forward with all your semantic wisdom to define what meta is in your own learned way !Whether it denotes a change or shows some middle part of anything or whatever and what is the aetiology of the word and whether it has attained some new meanings lately what> all this fuss is about!> REGARDS,> arvind> On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 Arvind Mishra wrote :>>Thanks CMN for explaining the term meta in a very intelligible way.I was only trying to
put the lexical perspectives ! Words have their own history and should be understood properly before using them in a new context.>>Swapnil advocates that instead of using term junk for apparently non functional part [more than 90%] of human genome we should use the term meta for it.>>Only because the so called junk DNA is not as much junk as it is presumed to be as certain recent reports indicate.>>Now you have also explained the term in line with Mr. Swapnil, especially in context to its meaning in web terminology and also to boast the morale of younger fraternity.A very apt and genuine deed indeed but have you cared to check the etymological and lexical backgrounds of the word meta? Having the responsibility of communicating science to lay people we are answerable to a question like this and should not be hastily replacing the words in common uses only to satiate our intellectual hunger and jump to erroneous conclusions!!.>>I have checked the
meaning of word meta in Oxford advanced learner dictionary which very explicitly defines it in following way->>1-higher ;beyond :metalanguage;METAPHYSICS,>>2- of change ;metabolism,metamorphosis>>Now what is metalanguage? DICTIONARY DEFINES that the words used in talking about or describing languages or a language are metalanguage!>>Now please decide for yourself if we could freely use the term meta for junk DNA part of the human genome?>>I think if we try to describe the language of junk DNA[in terms of its functional ,coding or non coding aspects which we still do not know much!] the language which could be used might then be called a metalanguage of junk part of the genome. So I do not think 'meta' should not be replaced for junk !>>REGARDS,>>arvind>> CHANDRA MOHAN NAUTIYAL wrote:>>No, Arvind jee.>>>> Meta is what is responsible for the difference in things which may otherwise look similar. If you see the
website content in html form, for instance, you'd see there are may be 50 words and symbols before and after a short string of words which (string) is visible in the website. These 50 words are not visible to the reader of the website but contain the valuable info. Without them the content would lose meaning/ appearance or will have different meaning. I don't know if meta is the universal word but even if Swapnil jee has coined it, I thing it's an apt term.>>>> CMN>>>>Arvind Mishra wrote:>> "when you 'italicize' some text or make it bold or>>increase its size in word file. " so says swapnil about meta !>>Yes its making something bold,some sort of increase that is what i meant,nothing else!>>Now we are entering the dragon of basic genetics you guys and gals [if there remains any one] pl be aware!>>"swapnil.bhartiya" wrote: Dear Arvind ji and all,>>>>There is a lot of communication gap. In this context and
in>>technological term 'meta' is NOT about "connotation of being something>>of a higher degree-some sort of metaphysics" as you mentioned. 'Meta'>>means 'information about the information'. I am surprised to hear that>>comment from you, as I clearly gave an example in my earlier post as>>well, explaining what is meta.>>>>And as you wrote "I think there is neither any rationale nor relevance>>to convert the easily communicable word / term 'junk' into a hard to>>understand kind of word 'meta' which has a connotation of being>>something of a higher degree-some sort of metaphysics to a lay person>>like me.">>>>It is not that sir, there is not only lot of rational behind the word>>meta, but also need for us to use correct words/ improvise them as we>>learn more.>>>>But since you have raised this, and if someone of your status could>>have that doubt, I will haev to think
twice what others must be thinking.>>>>Let me explain meta.>>>>This Meta has nothing to do with being something of a higher degree,>>or please dont try to connect it to stuff like 'meta physics. Meta is>>data about the data, or information that what a particular set of data>>does. For example when you 'italicize' some text or make it bold or>>increase its size in word file. On the front end, something that you>>can see is that particular word/sentence becomes bold or italic etc,>>but in the back-end, at the end of code line, it stores information>>which gives instruction to make that word bold italic etc, This>>backend infomation is known as meta.>>>>Same happens with gene/DNA, while a DNA instructs cell to develop in>>particular manner, there is a set of information which allows DNA to>>instruct cell. Now you call that critical information junk, while we>>call it meta.
How could such a critical information be 'junk'>>>>Also in the light of above, meta is in NO WAY ..'kabad se jugad'. Meta>>is very important information.>>>>I hope I have cleared my point.>>>>Regards>>Swapnil>>>>--- In indiansciencefiction@..., "arvind mishra">> wrote:>>>>>> I think there is neither any rationale nor relevance to convert the>>easily>>> communicable word / term 'junk' into a hard to understand kind of word>>> 'meta' which has a connotation of being something of a higher>>degree-some>>> sort of metaphysics to a lay person like me.Alternatively it also>>denotes>>> some kind of queer change as in 'metamorphosis'. I am completely>>at loss>>> to understand what inspires Mr. Swapnil to use this term in a genetic>>> context.>>> Junk DNA is just like any other sort of junk-junk yard,
junk food>>-something>>> useless,a heap of garbage. But yes sometimes it so happens that we>>derive>>> something of importance even from the junk.KABAAD SE JUGAAD type of>>thing.>>> And this is the aspect which could be exploited for s.f. as has>>rightly been>>> done in his said story by dear ZEASHAN.>>> On 14/09/2007, Vishwa Mohan Tiwari wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>> Ignorance made it to be called 'junk'. It is desirable to chnge it to>>>> Meta, but it is difficult.>>>> The electric current still flows from positive to negative, though>>we know>>>> that electrons which carry the current, flow from negative to>>positive.>>>> VMT>>>> ----------------------------------------> To:>>>> indiansciencefiction@...> From: arnieswap@...> Date:>>>> Thu, 13 Sep 2007 23:37:02
+0530> Subject: Re:>>[indiansciencefiction] The Way>>>> We Are Programmed!>> Junk would be a derogatory word, its better>>we call it>>>> 'meta' information.>> Swapnil>> On 9/13/07, Vishwa Mohan Tiwari>>wrote:>>>>>>>> As far as I can remeber from the latest researches, the scientists are>>>> finding that what they though was junk in not really junk.>> vmt>>>>>> ________________________________> To:>>>> indiansciencefiction@...> From: arvind_drmishra@...>>>>> Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 02:23:47 +0100> Subject: RE:>>[indiansciencefiction]>>>> The Way We Are Programmed!>> Zeashan is right insofar his>>knowledge of junk>>>> DNA is concerned,it is known to be an useless vestigial part of>>the genome>>>> but making certain fancied extrapolations about it
in an sf is really>>>> wonderfull !> Arvind Mishra wrote:> Strictly NO to God in this>>forum VMT>>>> sir?The moderator being an agnostic is helpless to moderate>>discussions on>>>> God !> Have mercy on me for heaven's sake please!> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari>>>> wrote:> Should we have God in our discussion?> Do we need Him?> vmt>>>>> ________________________________> To:>>>> indiansciencefiction@...> From: zeashanzaidi@...>>>>> Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 04:34:48 -0700> Subject: Re:>>[indiansciencefiction]>>>> The Way We Are Programmed!>> If we are programmed by God then the>>program is>>>> very flexible and gives us the freedom of choice. Environment, family>>>> background, financial conditions and many more factors influence>>on our>>>> programming.> And a part of
our program is object oriented. If we>>want to>>>> achieve a goal then our body sets in the manner to provide more>>efforts to>>>> reaching the goal.> Our behaviors are controlled by genes that are>>directed>>>> by information stored in the DNA. Scientists presently found 3% of>>>> information stored in DNA is useful. Then what about rest 97%?>>Scientists>>>> called it Junk. But this may be their lack of knowledge. Can this>>Junk part>>>> gives information about our all ancestors? This may be a topic of>>Sci-Fi. I>>>> used this hypothesis in very minute form in my story 'Murde Ki Awaz',>>>> published in the book Professor Monkey. Pl see the story.>>>Regards> Zeashan>>>> Zaidi> Arvind Mishra wrote:> Friends your surrealistic thoughts>>are now>>>> soliited under this new caption!> On Sun, 09
Sep 2007 arvind>>mishra wrote>>>> :>>Thanks to VMT for his intellectually satiating input.What I>>decipher>>>> from>>the contents VMT and CMN both so eloquently submitted , we are>>>> all>>programmed beings since our very childhood. Programming by our>>>> parents>>,our society and our immediate surroundings.But on the basis>>>> of>>information I have gathered on the issue I have developed>>>> an>>understanding to believe that we are programmed not since our>>>> childhood>>but even before to it ,even before our birth.Our>>ancient wisdom>>>> also>>supports this point of view and had given a very apt word for>>>> the>>phenomenon i.e.samskaar [a sanskrit word quite akin to English>>>> word>>Sacrament] .It is exactly the samskaar which carries the>>real meaning>>>>
and>>connotation of the programming in an organic/biological context>>>> especially>>in we humans.>>This sanskaar begins at the time of>>union of our>>>> parents contribution in>>form of their own>>'Sanskaarit'[programmed] sperm>>>> and ovum with all their>>genetic predispositions and a new being>>emerges>>>> hitherto not in existence!>>Dr.Nautical and Mr. Swapnil may>>extrapolate>>>> from this point or may take>>liberties to differ but its hard to>>contradict>>>> this knowledge of human>>programming as it is very well researched and>>>> documented. Our>>interpretations may only differ!>>So whatever are>>we, all>>>> is predetermined much depending on our 'sanskaar'>>and yes our>>childhood>>>> experiences also contribute to it .Sanskaar may even>>be
a>>procrastinated>>>> life long phenomenon beginning well before our birth>>[which is of>>course>>>> the main part of the process] till death ,a preposition>>also>>confirmed by>>>> the age old saying that-'Sanskaaret Dwij Uchchayet[Its>>only>>proper training>>>> and sacraments that make/shape a man into an>>intelligent>>being]>>Are we>>>> careful to give our Robots the same kind of>>sanskaar/sacraments>>or to put>>>> it in another word-"The programming!"And even if some>>aberrations>>occure>>>> who shall be responsible? How we tackle with our own outlaws!>>A new>>>> discussion begins!>>>>>>>>On 09/09/2007, swapnil.bhartiya wrote:>>>>>>>>>> Tiwari Ji,>>>>>> Nautiyal Ji would answer that question in his own>>manner,
I>>>> would just>>> like to add, when the machines become 'intelligent' and>>>> instead of>>> depending on set of rule, start learning from>>experiences>>>> especially>>> in "distributed intelligence", computers will not>>depend on>>>> how much>>> freedom we give them. If they are learning and>>evolving, they>>>> would>>> modify the set of instruction and will not be much in our>>>> control.>>>>>> Another worrying area is 'nanobots', these will be>>working on>>>> various>>> models of distributed intelligence and it would almost>>impossible>>>> to>>> keep a tab on their behaviour patten. I think, once robots enter>>>> the>>> true AI environment, it would not be in our control to give>>them>>>> freedom.>>>>>> They
will be as free as we are.>>>>>> Swapnil>>>>>>>>--- In>>>> indiansciencefiction@...,>>> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari>>>>>>> wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>> Dr. Nautial jee>>>> How much freedom would you>>give to a>>>> robot?>>>> I guess not more than you give to a loyal and intelligent>>>> subordinate.>>>> Here lies the difference between a most advanced>>robot and>>>> a human>>> being.>>>> VMT>>>> ________________________________> To:>>>>>>> indiansciencefiction@...>>>> From: cmnautiyal@>>>>> Date:>>>>>> Sat, 8 Sep 2007 13:12:12 +0100> Subject: Re:>>>> [indiansciencefiction]>>> Re: Surrealism and Science Fiction!>>>>The
issue>>>> has come up because of>>> comparison with robots. If both are>>programmed,>>>> where are the>>> differences? Can robots feel depressed, joyed or>>sad? Can>>>> they committ>>> sucide and if yes, what would be the form?> CMN> ">>>> swapnil.bhartiya">>> wrote:> Actually I was expecting that there>>would be>>>> no discussion>>> over> whether humans/all living being are>>programmed or>>>> not. That is a>>> fact> and all of us know that. That's the basic. DNA>>>> carries the>>> instruction> that instructs cells how to develop>>and behave.>>>> So, yes>>> biologically> we are completely programmed and what its>>>> genetic>>> enginerring does but> reprgramme genes and create pervasive>>>> things>>> like BT cotton
GM seeds.> They are playing with stem>>sells as>>>> well. I>>> should not have written> all this coz there are expert>>on the>>>> panel>>> who already know this, so> in the first place there shouldn't>>>> have>>> been ay discussion on the> issue but unanimous agreement.>>>And yes,>>>> we>>> do get programmed, if this word could be used there, in> day>>to day>>>>>>> life by our surroundings, experiences and the way we learn>>>things.>>>> So,>>>> we are well programmed.> Swapnil.> autonomus with In>>addition,--->>> In>>>>> indiansciencefiction@...,>>> CHANDRA MOHAN NAUTIYAL>>>>>>>> wrote:>>>> I wold say yes, we are being programmed. I wrote in the>>>>>>> previous mail:>>>>
"human beings (or advanced animals) are being>>>>>>> reprogrammed> continuously with experience.">>>> I feel Tiwari jee>>has>>>>>>> agreed with that. Our initially> programming, as Tiwari jee>>also>>> wrote,>>>> is with respect to our basic> needs. Thereafter it's>>> programming by>>>> society and its members. We> respond in a certain way>>> because>>that's what>>>> comes to us from (now)> built-in set of>>> instructions.>>>> So I>>feel we>>>> both agree.>>>> CMN>>>>>> Vishwa Mohan>>> Tiwari wrote:>>>> Are we>>>> programmed ? !>> I would suggest that we are>>> given a set of>>hardware and>>>> a structure> for programming.>> But we are>>> not programmed in
a>>broad>>>> sense. In a narrow sense we are> programmed>>> for we all have needs>>>> pertaining to "Aahaar, Nidraa, Bhaya> and>>> Maithun'; these may be>>>> equivalent of energy requirements, cooling> and>>> production>>etc.; but>>>> there is tremendous freedom even in this>>> regime.>> A child is being>>>> programmed by his parents and the entire>>> village,>> or is he>>really being>>>> programmed or learning to programme>>> ??!!>>>> We are entering>>into the>>>> field of ontology, and I do not>>> mind> entering, but others may>>consider>>>> it to be a field not>>> pertaining to> SF writing.>>>> VMT>>>>>> ________________________________>>>> To:>>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...>>>> From: cmnautiyal@>>>Date:>>>>>>>> Fri, 7 Sep 2007 13:51:06 +0100> Subject: Re:>>[indiansciencefiction]>>>> Re:>>>> Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> Actually the feelings of>>>>>>depression,>>>> sorrow or joy are also a result of programming. We are>>> all>>>programmed.>>>> One difference from computers at present is that>>> human> beings (or>>>> advanced animals) are being reprogrammed>>> continuously with>>>experience.>>>> The biochemocals produced in our body>>> are also result of>>>programmes.>>>> These chemicals lead to our switching>>> temperament etc. The>>>signals,>>>> which are probably electro magnetic,>>> are sent to the brains>>>leading
to>>>> perception of different feelings.>>> Or is it that these> signals>>lead to>>>> production of bio chemicals?>>>> CMN> Arvind Mishra> wrote:> Yes>>Zeashaan if>>>> there remains no>>> difference in man and robot> ,robots may very>>well adopt>>>> behavioural>>> aberrations like suicide etc> and also may indulge in>>>> surrealistic>>> activities .But a lot>> depends on us what way we>>are going>>>> to shape>>> and design our future> robots.They would be made on a>>>> optimistic>>> promise as opined by great> Asimov or on Mary Shelley's>>>> Frankenstein>>> pattern.> In wake of mobile> explosions your story>>suddenly>>>> attains a>>> remarkable significance.>> Great work dear! Go ahead>>dear,
you>>>> have a>>> great writer within you!>> ARVIND> zeashan zaidi wrote:> If>>>> computer>>> has power of imagination, as> well as sentiments. Then an>>>> external>>> cause may be depressed it to> commit suicide.>>Obviously in case>>>> of>>> computers this depressing cause> will be a virus like>>program.>>>>>>>> Zeashan Zaidi> "swapnil.bhartiya"> wrote:> Still, I am not>>convinced>>>>>>> that computers will commmit> "suiside" in> that manner that chips>>will>>>>>>> start to melt. And my> previous objections> remain that this could>>not>>> be>>>> done as every chips> development process> is very meticuous.>>>>>>Swapnil>>>>> --- In> indiansciencefiction@...,>>> Vishwa
Mohan>>>>>>> Tiwari>> wrote:>>>>>> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari>> Surrealism is much>>more>>>>>>>>> than imagination!!>> Computers suicide in the story was a>>direct>>>> result>>>> of instructions> to that effect, aand not due to pain, misery>>>>>,> sorrow>>>> or depression> etc, as I understood from the story.>> VMT>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________> To:>>>>>>>>> indiansciencefiction@...>>>> From: zeashanzaidi@>>>Date:>>>>>>>>> Wed, 5 Sep 2007 22:41:25 -0700> Subject: RE:>>[indiansciencefiction]>>>>> Re:>>>> Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> Surrealism is just>>associated>>>>> with>>>> level of imagination power of
brain. Those brains having much>>>>>>>power in>>>> this sense have more sentiments also. And suicide is>>>>>>>obviously related>>>> to boom of sentiments.> Zeashan Zaidi> Vishwa>>> Mohan>> Tiwari>>wrote:>>>>> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari> The SF story is>>> interesting and>> good.>>hOWEVER THE>>>> CLAIM THAT THE COMPUTERS HAD THE>>> CAPABILITY TO USE>>>>IMAGINATION IS NOT>>>> VALID. The plot of the story>>> does not need the>> computers to use>>>> imagination, infact they blindly>>> followed the>> instruction to>>commit>>>> suicide.> VMT>>>>>> ________________________________>> To:>>>>>>>> indiansciencefiction@...>>>> From:
zeashanzaidi@>>>>Date:>>>>>>>> Wed, 5 Sep 2007 10:15:35 -0700> Subject: Re:>>>[indiansciencefiction]>>>> Re:>>>> Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> In the> context of surrealism>>> in>>>>> robots/computers, I am presenting a sci-fi> `Computer Ki Maut'>>>>>where> it>>>> is shown a possibility of imagination in> computers. This>>> story>>had> been>>>> published in Vigyan Pragati in 1998.>> Zeashan Zaidi>>>>> ">>>> swapnil.bhartiya" wrote:> I agree with everything> Tiwari ji said>>>>>>>> except that Robots can't use> surrealism. How could we> be so>>sure?>>>>>>>> Robots can be for more advanced> and may have their own> form of>>>>>>>> surrealism. Surrealism is only obscure>
thought, imagination> and>>>>>>>> interpretation of any being who is capable of> thinking and>>>>>>>imagining.>>>> Thus, robots could also have their own suurealism.> On>>>>>>>question raised>>>> by Nautiyal ji.> 1. Yes our story is SF -- elements>>>>> that>>build the>>>> story are futuristic> and science is integral element>>>> of>> ths>>story.>>>>> 2. My basic understanding is: 'remove science from>>> a>> story>>and if the>>>>> story still sustains, its not science fiction. A>>> SF>> story should>>>>> collapse as soon as element of science is>>> removed!'> 3.>>>>Depends.> 4 I>>>> cant understand the last point, please>>> elaborate. " If>> Mays>>>needs>>>>
supplementing, how about doing it? We>>> still have more> than> a>>>month let>>>> for it to be finalised."> Swapnil>>>> the e, as the---> In>>>>> indiansciencefiction@...,>>> CHANDRA>>>> MOHAN>>NAUTIYAL>>>>>> wrote:>>>> While some> .>>>> ________________________________> Shape>>>>>> Yahoo! in your own image.>>> Join our Network Research Panel>>today!>>>>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________________>>>>Discover>>>>>>>> the new Windows Vista>>>>>>>>>>>>http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE>>>>>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links> To visit your group on the web, go
to:>>>>>>>>>> http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/> Your>>email>>>>>>>>> settings:> Individual Email | Traditional> To change settings>>>>>online>>>>>>> go to:>>>>>>>http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join>>>>>> (Yahoo!>>>> ID required)> To change settings via email:>>>>>> mailto:>>>> indiansciencefiction-digest@...>>>>>>>>> mailto:>>>> indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@...>>>> To>>>>>>>>> unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:>>>>>>>>>> indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@...>>>> Your use>>of>>>>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups is subject
to:>>>http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________> Boardwalk for $500? In 2007?>>Ha!>>>>>>>>>> Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy)>>at>>>>> Yahoo!>>>> Games.>>>>>>>>>>>__________________________________________________________>>>>>> Discover>>>> the new Windows Vista>>>>>>>>>>>>http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=windows+vista&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE>>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________> Luggage? GPS? Comic books?>>>Check>>>> out>>>> fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search.>>>>> [>>>> http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif]arvind>>>>>>>> mishra>
________________________________> 5, 50, 500, 5000>> ->>Store N>>>>>>> number of mails in your inbox. Click here.>>>>>>>>> ________________________________> 5, 50, 500, 5000 - Store N>>number>>> of>>>>> mails in your inbox. Click here.>>>>>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________________>> Gear>>up>>> for>>>> Halo(r) 3 with free downloads and an exclusive offer. It's> our>>way>>> of>>>> saying thanks for using Windows Live™.>>>>>>>>> http://gethalo3gear.com?ocid=SeptemberWLHalo3_WLHMTxt_2>>>>>>>>Yahoo!>>>>>>> Groups Links>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------->> 5,>>50,>>>>>>> 500, 5000 - Store N number of
mails in your inbox. Click here.>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________> Unlimited freedom, unlimited>>>>>storage.>>>> Get it now>>>>>>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________________>>>>>>Capture your>>>> memories in an online journal!>>>>>>>> http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Thanks to>>>> VMT for his intellectually satiating input.What I decipher from the>>>> contents VMT and CMN both so eloquently submitted , we are all>>programmed>>>> beings since our very childhood. Programming by our parents ,our>>society and>>>> our immediate surroundings.But on the basis of information I have>>gathered>>>> on the issue I have developed an
understanding to believe that we are>>>> programmed not since our childhood but even before to it ,even>>before our>>>> birth.Our ancient wisdom also supports this point of view and had>>given a>>>> very apt word for the phenomenon i.e.samskaar [a sanskrit word>>quite akin>>>> to English word Sacrament] .It is exactly the samskaar which>>carries the>>>> real meaning and connotation of the programming in an>>organic/biological>>>> context especially in we humans.> This sanskaar begins at the time>>of union>>>> of our parents contribution in form of their own>>'Sanskaarit'[programmed]>>>> sperm and ovum with all their genetic predispositions and a new being>>>> emerges hitherto not in existence!> Dr.Nautical and Mr. Swapnil may>>>> extrapolate from this point or may take liberties to differ but>>its hard
to>>>> contradict this knowledge of human programming as it is very well>>researched>>>> and documented. Our interpretations may only differ!> So whatever>>are we,>>>> all is predetermined much depending on our 'sanskaar' and yes our>>childhood>>>> experiences also contribute to it .Sanskaar may even be a>>procrastinated>>>> life long phenomenon beginning well before our birth [which is of>>course the>>>> main part of the process] till death ,a preposition also confirmed>>by the>>>> age old saying that-'Sanskaaret Dwij Uchchayet[Its only proper>>training and>>>> sacraments that make/shape a man into an intelligent being]> Are>>we careful>>>> to give our Robots the same kind of sanskaar/sacraments or to put>>it in>>>> another word-"The programming!"And even if some aberrations occure>>who
shall>>>> be responsible? How we tackle with our own outlaws!> A new discussion>>>> begins!> ________________________________> Shape Yahoo! in your>>own image.>>>> Join our Network Research Panel today!>>>________________________________> Be>>>> a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who>>knows.>>>>> Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.>>>>>> __________________________________________________________>>>Capture>>>> your memories in an online journal!>>>>> http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us> Yahoo! Groups>>Links> To>>>> visit your group on the web, go to:>>>>> http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/> Your email>>>> settings:> Individual Email | Traditional> To change settings>>online go to:>>>>>
http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join> (Yahoo! ID>>>> required)> To change settings via email:> mailto:>>>> indiansciencefiction-digest@...> mailto:>>>> indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@...> To>>unsubscribe from>>>> this group, send an email to:>>>>> indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@...> Your use of Yahoo!>>>> Groups is subject to:> http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> [>>>> http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif]arvind>>mishra>>>>> ________________________________> Download prohibited? No problem.>>CHAT from>>>> any browser, without download.> [>>>> http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/01.gif]arvind>>mishra>>>>> ________________________________> Why delete messages?
Unlimited>>storage is>>>> just a click away.>>>>>>>>>>>__________________________________________________________>>>>Capture>>>> your memories in an online journal!>>>>>> http://www.reallivemoms.com?ocid=TXT_TAGHM&loc=us>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups>>>> Links>>>>>>>>>>> --> Swapnil Bhartiya> Assistant Editor>>>EFYTimes.com>>>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links>> To visit your group on the web, go to:>>>>> http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/>> Your email>>>> settings:> Individual Email | Traditional>> To change settings>>online go>>>> to:> http://in.groups.yahoo.com/group/indiansciencefiction/join>>>(Yahoo!>>>> ID required)>> To change settings via email:> mailto:>>>>
indiansciencefiction-digest@...> mailto:>>>> indiansciencefiction-fullfeatured@...>> To>>unsubscribe from>>>> this group, send an email to:>>>>> indiansciencefiction-unsubscribe@...>> Your use of>>Yahoo!>>>> Groups is subject to:> http://in.docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________________>>>> More photos; more messages; more whatever – Get MORE with Windows>>Live™>>>> Hotmail(r). NOW with 5GB storage.>>>>>>>>>>http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_5G_0907>>>>>>>>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>arvind
mishra>>--------------------------------->> Flying to Bangalore or Bhopal? Search for tickets here.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>--------------------------------->> Did you know? You can CHAT without downloading messenger. Click here>>>>>>>>>>arvind mishra>>>>--------------------------------->> Get the freedom to save as many mails as you wish. Click here to know how.> [http://imadworks.rediff.com/cgi-bin/AdWorks/adimage.cgi/1436502_1429936/creative_1448236.gif]>
Dear friends
I will be very brief as my long answer has been just deleted by some wrong
pressinf of a key.
I will give rtefernces if somebody wants them.
There two important terms that need to be understood properly.
Meta and ; Junk DNA'.
Junk DNA :
Non encoding DNAs were called Junk, as it was thoght that encoding genes perform
all the necessary functions, and genes were considered independent, one for each
function.
I quote
"June 30, 1972, was a high point for the lexicon of biology. That day, Susumu
Ohno coined (or at least publicly introduced) the term "junk DNA." In a talk
titled "So Much 'Junk DNA' in our Genome," Ohno argued that the frequency of
deleterious mutations restricts the number of serviceable genes to around 105
and that the great bulk of our DNA is merely the debris of failed duplication.
"The earth is full of extinct species," he said. "Is it a wonder that our
genome, too, is filled with the remains of extinct genes?"
Now scientists know that 'Junk DNAs perform important functions likke they
control, modify and guide the functions of gene.
So Junk DNAs ar anything but junk.
Postgenetics is a new branch which treats the genes as not independent creators
but one link in the chain of various other genes, including the noncoding genes
- the junk DNAs. It is a network of all that functions.
Meta:
There are mountains of data, information and knowledge. How to get the relevant
info; is a problem today in both traditional and digital libraries.
Therefore a new concept of Metainfo i.e. info about info; it means that info
which helps us in getting us the desired info e.g. summary, index, kew words
etc. Our librarian. metaphorically speaking, can be called 'metainfo.
Obviously metainfo is not an integral or essential part of info except that it
guides us to the desired portion as e.g. done by 'a key word.
Therefore Metainfo is not the socalled junkDNAs.
The prefix 'meta' has many meanings.
The particular meaning which comes closest to the meaning used in
'Metainformation' i.e. symptoms leading to; e.g. somewhat like 'meta arthritic
- i.e. those symptoms which if untreated would lead to arthritis but are not
those of arthtitis.
The word Junk DNA has been questiond forther last 25 years are so.
In 2006 it has been officially declared dead in the First World Conference of
'Post Gemetics', which is a new subject which treats the coding and noncoding
DNAs as part of chain.
I suggest a new word ( I am neither a scientist nor a biologist to be more
specific, and hence I dare to tread where angels fear to enter) " metagene' for
the socalled JunkDNAs; meta in the sense of 'performing higher functions than
mere genes, as in the word 'meta biological'.
I hope it suffices.
VMT
Vishwa Mohan Tiwari
________________________________> To: indiansciencefiction@...>
From: dr_arvind3@...> Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 01:48:41 +0000> Subject:
Re: Re: [indiansciencefiction] (Meta is NOT Junk): Re: The Way We Are
Programmed!>> Respected VMT,> Please come forward with all your semantic wisdom
to define what meta is in your own learned way !Whether it denotes a change or
shows some middle part of anything or whatever and what is the aetiology of the
word and whether it has attained some new meanings lately what> all this fuss is
about!> REGARDS,> arvind> On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 Arvind Mishra wrote :>>Thanks CMN
for explaining the term meta in a very intelligible way.I was only trying to put
the lexical perspectives ! Words have their own history and should be understood
properly before using them in a new context.>>Swapnil advocates that instead of
using term junk for apparently non functional part [more than 90%] of human
genome we should use the term meta for it.>>Only because the so called junk DNA
is not as much junk as it is presumed to be as certain recent reports
indicate.>>Now you have also explained the term in line with Mr. Swapnil,
especially in context to its meaning in web terminology and also to boast the
morale of younger fraternity.A very apt and genuine deed indeed but have you
cared to check the etymological and lexical backgrounds of the word meta? Having
the responsibility of communicating science to lay people we are answerable to a
question like this and should not be hastily replacing the words in common uses
only to satiate our intellectual hunger and jump to erroneous conclusions!!.>>I
have checked the meaning of word meta in Oxford advanced learner dictionary
which very explicitly defines it in following way->>1-higher ;beyond
:metalanguage;METAPHYSICS,>>2- of change ;metabolism,metamorphosis>>Now what is
metalanguage? DICTIONARY DEFINES that the words used in talking about or
describing languages or a language are metalanguage!>>Now please decide for
yourself if we could freely use the term meta for junk DNA part of the human
genome?>>I think if we try to describe the language of junk DNA[in terms of its
functional ,coding or non coding aspects which we still do not know much!] the
language which could be used might then be called a metalanguage of junk part of
the genome. So I do not think 'meta' should not be replaced for junk
!>>REGARDS,>>arvind>> CHANDRA MOHAN NAUTIYAL wrote:>>No, Arvind jee.>>>> Meta is
what is responsible for the difference in things which may otherwise look
similar. If you see the website content in html form, for instance, you'd see
there are may be 50 words and symbols before and after a short string of words
which (string) is visible in the website. These 50 words are not visible to the
reader of the website but contain the valuable info. Without them the content
would lose meaning/ appearance or will have different meaning. I don't know if
meta is the universal word but even if Swapnil jee has coined it, I thing it's
an apt term.>>>> CMN>>>>Arvind Mishra wrote:>> "when you 'italicize' some text
or make it bold or>>increase its size in word file. " so says swapnil about meta
!>>Yes its making something bold,some sort of increase that is what i
meant,nothing else!>>Now we are entering the dragon of basic genetics you guys
and gals [if there remains any one] pl be aware!>>"swapnil.bhartiya" wrote: Dear
Arvind ji and all,>>>>There is a lot of communication gap. In this context and
in>>technological term 'meta' is NOT about "connotation of being something>>of a
higher degree-some sort of metaphysics" as you mentioned. 'Meta'>>means
'information about the information'. I am surprised to hear that>>comment from
you, as I clearly gave an example in my earlier post as>>well, explaining what
is meta.>>>>And as you wrote "I think there is neither any rationale nor
relevance>>to convert the easily communicable word / term 'junk' into a hard
to>>understand kind of word 'meta' which has a connotation of being>>something
of a higher degree-some sort of metaphysics to a lay person>>like me.">>>>It is
not that sir, there is not only lot of rational behind the word>>meta, but also
need for us to use correct words/ improvise them as we>>learn more.>>>>But since
you have raised this, and if someone of your status could>>have that doubt, I
will haev to think twice what others must be thinking.>>>>Let me explain
meta.>>>>This Meta has nothing to do with being something of a higher
degree,>>or please dont try to connect it to stuff like 'meta physics. Meta
is>>data about the data, or information that what a particular set of
data>>does. For example when you 'italicize' some text or make it bold
or>>increase its size in word file. On the front end, something that you>>can
see is that particular word/sentence becomes bold or italic etc,>>but in the
back-end, at the end of code line, it stores information>>which gives
instruction to make that word bold italic etc, This>>backend infomation is known
as meta.>>>>Same happens with gene/DNA, while a DNA instructs cell to develop
in>>particular manner, there is a set of information which allows DNA
to>>instruct cell. Now you call that critical information junk, while we>>call
it meta. How could such a critical information be 'junk'>>>>Also in the light of
above, meta is in NO WAY ..'kabad se jugad'. Meta>>is very important
information.>>>>I hope I have cleared my point.>>>>Regards>>Swapnil>>>>--- In
indiansciencefiction@..., "arvind mishra">> wrote:>>>>>> I think
there is neither any rationale nor relevance to convert the>>easily>>>
communicable word / term 'junk' into a hard to understand kind of word>>> 'meta'
which has a connotation of being something of a higher>>degree-some>>> sort of
metaphysics to a lay person like me.Alternatively it also>>denotes>>> some kind
of queer change as in 'metamorphosis'. I am completely>>at loss>>> to understand
what inspires Mr. Swapnil to use this term in a genetic>>> context.>>> Junk DNA
is just like any other sort of junk-junk yard, junk food>>-something>>>
useless,a heap of garbage. But yes sometimes it so happens that we>>derive>>>
something of importance even from the junk.KABAAD SE JUGAAD type of>>thing.>>>
And this is the aspect which could be exploited for s.f. as has>>rightly been>>>
done in his said story by dear ZEASHAN.>>> On 14/09/2007, Vishwa Mohan Tiwari
wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>> Ignorance made it to be called 'junk'. It is desirable to
chnge it to>>>> Meta, but it is difficult.>>>> The electric current still flows
from positive to negative, though>>we know>>>> that electrons which carry the
current, flow from negative to>>positive.>>>> VMT>>>>
----------------------------------------> To:>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...> From: arnieswap@...> Date:>>>> Thu, 13
Sep 2007 23:37:02 +0530> Subject: Re:>>[indiansciencefiction] The Way>>>> We Are
Programmed!>> Junk would be a derogatory word, its better>>we call it>>>> 'meta'
information.>> Swapnil>> On 9/13/07, Vishwa Mohan Tiwari>>wrote:>>>>>>>> As far
as I can remeber from the latest researches, the scientists are>>>> finding that
what they though was junk in not really junk.>> vmt>>>>>>
________________________________> To:>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...> From: arvind_drmishra@...>>>>> Date:
Wed, 12 Sep 2007 02:23:47 +0100> Subject: RE:>>[indiansciencefiction]>>>> The
Way We Are Programmed!>> Zeashan is right insofar his>>knowledge of junk>>>> DNA
is concerned,it is known to be an useless vestigial part of>>the genome>>>> but
making certain fancied extrapolations about it in an sf is really>>>> wonderfull
!> Arvind Mishra wrote:> Strictly NO to God in this>>forum VMT>>>> sir?The
moderator being an agnostic is helpless to moderate>>discussions on>>>> God !>
Have mercy on me for heaven's sake please!> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari>>>> wrote:>
Should we have God in our discussion?> Do we need Him?> vmt>>>>>
________________________________> To:>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...> From: zeashanzaidi@...>>>>> Date: Tue,
11 Sep 2007 04:34:48 -0700> Subject: Re:>>[indiansciencefiction]>>>> The Way We
Are Programmed!>> If we are programmed by God then the>>program is>>>> very
flexible and gives us the freedom of choice. Environment, family>>>> background,
financial conditions and many more factors influence>>on our>>>> programming.>
And a part of our program is object oriented. If we>>want to>>>> achieve a goal
then our body sets in the manner to provide more>>efforts to>>>> reaching the
goal.> Our behaviors are controlled by genes that are>>directed>>>> by
information stored in the DNA. Scientists presently found 3% of>>>> information
stored in DNA is useful. Then what about rest 97%?>>Scientists>>>> called it
Junk. But this may be their lack of knowledge. Can this>>Junk part>>>> gives
information about our all ancestors? This may be a topic of>>Sci-Fi. I>>>> used
this hypothesis in very minute form in my story 'Murde Ki Awaz',>>>> published
in the book Professor Monkey. Pl see the story.>>>Regards> Zeashan>>>> Zaidi>
Arvind Mishra wrote:> Friends your surrealistic thoughts>>are now>>>> soliited
under this new caption!> On Sun, 09 Sep 2007 arvind>>mishra wrote>>>> :>>Thanks
to VMT for his intellectually satiating input.What I>>decipher>>>> from>>the
contents VMT and CMN both so eloquently submitted , we are>>>> all>>programmed
beings since our very childhood. Programming by our>>>> parents>>,our society
and our immediate surroundings.But on the basis>>>> of>>information I have
gathered on the issue I have developed>>>> an>>understanding to believe that we
are programmed not since our>>>> childhood>>but even before to it ,even before
our birth.Our>>ancient wisdom>>>> also>>supports this point of view and had
given a very apt word for>>>> the>>phenomenon i.e.samskaar [a sanskrit word
quite akin to English>>>> word>>Sacrament] .It is exactly the samskaar which
carries the>>real meaning>>>> and>>connotation of the programming in an
organic/biological context>>>> especially>>in we humans.>>This sanskaar begins
at the time of>>union of our>>>> parents contribution in>>form of their
own>>'Sanskaarit'[programmed] sperm>>>> and ovum with all their>>genetic
predispositions and a new being>>emerges>>>> hitherto not in
existence!>>Dr.Nautical and Mr. Swapnil may>>extrapolate>>>> from this point or
may take>>liberties to differ but its hard to>>contradict>>>> this knowledge of
human>>programming as it is very well researched and>>>> documented.
Our>>interpretations may only differ!>>So whatever are>>we, all>>>> is
predetermined much depending on our 'sanskaar'>>and yes our>>childhood>>>>
experiences also contribute to it .Sanskaar may even>>be a>>procrastinated>>>>
life long phenomenon beginning well before our birth>>[which is of>>course>>>>
the main part of the process] till death ,a preposition>>also>>confirmed by>>>>
the age old saying that-'Sanskaaret Dwij Uchchayet[Its>>only>>proper
training>>>> and sacraments that make/shape a man into
an>>intelligent>>being]>>Are we>>>> careful to give our Robots the same kind
of>>sanskaar/sacraments>>or to put>>>> it in another word-"The programming!"And
even if some>>aberrations>>occure>>>> who shall be responsible? How we tackle
with our own outlaws!>>A new>>>> discussion begins!>>>>>>>>On 09/09/2007,
swapnil.bhartiya wrote:>>>>>>>>>> Tiwari Ji,>>>>>> Nautiyal Ji would answer that
question in his own>>manner, I>>>> would just>>> like to add, when the machines
become 'intelligent' and>>>> instead of>>> depending on set of rule, start
learning from>>experiences>>>> especially>>> in "distributed intelligence",
computers will not>>depend on>>>> how much>>> freedom we give them. If they are
learning and>>evolving, they>>>> would>>> modify the set of instruction and will
not be much in our>>>> control.>>>>>> Another worrying area is 'nanobots', these
will be>>working on>>>> various>>> models of distributed intelligence and it
would almost>>impossible>>>> to>>> keep a tab on their behaviour patten. I
think, once robots enter>>>> the>>> true AI environment, it would not be in our
control to give>>them>>>> freedom.>>>>>> They will be as free as we are.>>>>>>
Swapnil>>>>>>>>--- In>>>> indiansciencefiction@...,>>> Vishwa
Mohan Tiwari>>>>>>> wrote:>>>>>>>>>>>> Dr. Nautial jee>>>> How much freedom
would you>>give to a>>>> robot?>>>> I guess not more than you give to a loyal
and intelligent>>>> subordinate.>>>> Here lies the difference between a most
advanced>>robot and>>>> a human>>> being.>>>> VMT>>>>
________________________________> To:>>>>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...>>>> From: cmnautiyal@>>>>> Date:>>>>>>
Sat, 8 Sep 2007 13:12:12 +0100> Subject: Re:>>>> [indiansciencefiction]>>> Re:
Surrealism and Science Fiction!>>>>The issue>>>> has come up because of>>>
comparison with robots. If both are>>programmed,>>>> where are the>>>
differences? Can robots feel depressed, joyed or>>sad? Can>>>> they committ>>>
sucide and if yes, what would be the form?> CMN> ">>>> swapnil.bhartiya">>>
wrote:> Actually I was expecting that there>>would be>>>> no discussion>>> over>
whether humans/all living being are>>programmed or>>>> not. That is a>>> fact>
and all of us know that. That's the basic. DNA>>>> carries the>>> instruction>
that instructs cells how to develop>>and behave.>>>> So, yes>>> biologically> we
are completely programmed and what its>>>> genetic>>> enginerring does but>
reprgramme genes and create pervasive>>>> things>>> like BT cotton GM seeds.>
They are playing with stem>>sells as>>>> well. I>>> should not have written> all
this coz there are expert>>on the>>>> panel>>> who already know this, so> in the
first place there shouldn't>>>> have>>> been ay discussion on the> issue but
unanimous agreement.>>>And yes,>>>> we>>> do get programmed, if this word could
be used there, in> day>>to day>>>>>>> life by our surroundings, experiences and
the way we learn>>>things.>>>> So,>>>> we are well programmed.> Swapnil.>
autonomus with In>>addition,--->>> In>>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...,>>> CHANDRA MOHAN NAUTIYAL>>>>>>>>
wrote:>>>> I wold say yes, we are being programmed. I wrote in the>>>>>>>
previous mail:>>>> "human beings (or advanced animals) are being>>>>>>>
reprogrammed> continuously with experience.">>>> I feel Tiwari jee>>has>>>>>>>
agreed with that. Our initially> programming, as Tiwari jee>>also>>> wrote,>>>>
is with respect to our basic> needs. Thereafter it's>>> programming by>>>>
society and its members. We> respond in a certain way>>> because>>that's
what>>>> comes to us from (now)> built-in set of>>> instructions.>>>> So I>>feel
we>>>> both agree.>>>> CMN>>>>>> Vishwa Mohan>>> Tiwari wrote:>>>> Are we>>>>
programmed ? !>> I would suggest that we are>>> given a set of>>hardware and>>>>
a structure> for programming.>> But we are>>> not programmed in a>>broad>>>>
sense. In a narrow sense we are> programmed>>> for we all have needs>>>>
pertaining to "Aahaar, Nidraa, Bhaya> and>>> Maithun'; these may be>>>>
equivalent of energy requirements, cooling> and>>> production>>etc.; but>>>>
there is tremendous freedom even in this>>> regime.>> A child is being>>>>
programmed by his parents and the entire>>> village,>> or is he>>really
being>>>> programmed or learning to programme>>> ??!!>>>> We are entering>>into
the>>>> field of ontology, and I do not>>> mind> entering, but others
may>>consider>>>> it to be a field not>>> pertaining to> SF writing.>>>>
VMT>>>>>> ________________________________>>>> To:>>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...>>>> From: cmnautiyal@>>>Date:>>>>>>>>
Fri, 7 Sep 2007 13:51:06 +0100> Subject: Re:>>[indiansciencefiction]>>>> Re:>>>>
Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> Actually the feelings of>>>>>>depression,>>>>
sorrow or joy are also a result of programming. We are>>> all>>>programmed.>>>>
One difference from computers at present is that>>> human> beings (or>>>>
advanced animals) are being reprogrammed>>> continuously with>>>experience.>>>>
The biochemocals produced in our body>>> are also result of>>>programmes.>>>>
These chemicals lead to our switching>>> temperament etc. The>>>signals,>>>>
which are probably electro magnetic,>>> are sent to the brains>>>leading to>>>>
perception of different feelings.>>> Or is it that these> signals>>lead to>>>>
production of bio chemicals?>>>> CMN> Arvind Mishra> wrote:> Yes>>Zeashaan
if>>>> there remains no>>> difference in man and robot> ,robots may very>>well
adopt>>>> behavioural>>> aberrations like suicide etc> and also may indulge
in>>>> surrealistic>>> activities .But a lot>> depends on us what way we>>are
going>>>> to shape>>> and design our future> robots.They would be made on a>>>>
optimistic>>> promise as opined by great> Asimov or on Mary Shelley's>>>>
Frankenstein>>> pattern.> In wake of mobile> explosions your story>>suddenly>>>>
attains a>>> remarkable significance.>> Great work dear! Go ahead>>dear, you>>>>
have a>>> great writer within you!>> ARVIND> zeashan zaidi wrote:> If>>>>
computer>>> has power of imagination, as> well as sentiments. Then an>>>>
external>>> cause may be depressed it to> commit suicide.>>Obviously in case>>>>
of>>> computers this depressing cause> will be a virus like>>program.>>>>>>>>
Zeashan Zaidi> "swapnil.bhartiya"> wrote:> Still, I am not>>convinced>>>>>>>
that computers will commmit> "suiside" in> that manner that chips>>will>>>>>>>
start to melt. And my> previous objections> remain that this could>>not>>>
be>>>> done as every chips> development process> is very
meticuous.>>>>>>Swapnil>>>>> --- In> indiansciencefiction@...,>>>
Vishwa Mohan>>>>>>> Tiwari>> wrote:>>>>>> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari>> Surrealism is
much>>more>>>>>>>>> than imagination!!>> Computers suicide in the story was
a>>direct>>>> result>>>> of instructions> to that effect, aand not due to pain,
misery>>>>>,> sorrow>>>> or depression> etc, as I understood from the story.>>
VMT>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________> To:>>>>>>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...>>>> From: zeashanzaidi@>>>Date:>>>>>>>>>
Wed, 5 Sep 2007 22:41:25 -0700> Subject: RE:>>[indiansciencefiction]>>>>>
Re:>>>> Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> Surrealism is just>>associated>>>>>
with>>>> level of imagination power of brain. Those brains having
much>>>>>>>power in>>>> this sense have more sentiments also. And suicide
is>>>>>>>obviously related>>>> to boom of sentiments.> Zeashan Zaidi> Vishwa>>>
Mohan>> Tiwari>>wrote:>>>>> Vishwa Mohan Tiwari> The SF story is>>> interesting
and>> good.>>hOWEVER THE>>>> CLAIM THAT THE COMPUTERS HAD THE>>> CAPABILITY TO
USE>>>>IMAGINATION IS NOT>>>> VALID. The plot of the story>>> does not need
the>> computers to use>>>> imagination, infact they blindly>>> followed the>>
instruction to>>commit>>>> suicide.> VMT>>>>>>
________________________________>> To:>>>>>>>>
indiansciencefiction@...>>>> From: zeashanzaidi@>>>>Date:>>>>>>>>
Wed, 5 Sep 2007 10:15:35 -0700> Subject: Re:>>>[indiansciencefiction]>>>>
Re:>>>> Surrealism and Science Fiction!>> In the> context of surrealism>>>
in>>>>> robots/computers, I am presenting a sci-fi> `Computer Ki
Maut'>>>>>where> it>>>> is shown a possibility of imagination in> computers.
This>>> story>>had> been>>>> published in Vigyan Pragati in 1998.>> Zeashan
Zaidi>>>>> ">>>> swapnil.bhartiya" wrote:> I agree with everything> Tiwari ji
said>>>>>>>> except that Robots can't use> surrealism. How could we> be
so>>sure?>>>>>>>> Robots can be for more advanced> and may have their own> form
of>>>>>>>> surrealism. Surrealism is only obscure> thought, imagination>
and>>>>>>>> interpretation of any being who is capable of> thinking
and>>>>>>>imagining.>>>> Thus, robots could also have their own suurealism.>
On>>>>>>>question raised>>>> by Nautiyal ji.> 1. Yes our story is SF --
elements>>>>> that>>build the>>>> story are futuristic> and science is integral
element>>>> of>> ths>>story.>>>>> 2. My basic understanding is: 'remove science
from>>> a>> story>>and if the>>>>> story still sustains, its not science
fiction. A>>> SF>> story should>>>>> collapse as soon as element of science
is>>> removed!'> 3.>>>>Depends.> 4 I>>>> cant understand the last point,
please>>> elaborate. " If>> Mays>>>needs>>>> supplementing, how about doing it?
We>>> still have more> than> a>>>month let>>>> for it to be finalised.">
Swapnil>>>> the e, as the---> In>>>>>
Offline 
Send Email
arvind mishra