ek shyam zindagi ke
dubo jane vali barsat,
garajte chamkte badal hazar,
halki barish ke phuar,
kahi urdte badal char,
saf kula nila asman,
uspe chamakti kirne beshumar,
dhimi hawa lati kushboo unjaan,
dhondne use badhte kadam char,
ujagar hota phuloo ka rang tamam,
khamoshi ko jagati panchiyo ke awaz,
dhime dhime pattiya gungunati koi raag,
dhalte suraj ki aakh micholi sab ke saath,
phir sitaro bhare aachal me sab samoti raat.
ye zindigi ki ek shyam aur sang hota tumara saath.
Nov 13, 2005
anonymuncule
Nov 12, 2005
Just a note.... for the few and far readers
If u are seeing this entry as the top entry of my blog then I am still in the writting mode(and this mode may just change by the time I finish this note). That is my blog will be more of what I write than what I read.... so it can be safely avoided :) You won't be missing much!
Nov 11, 2005
anonymuncule
kushi ka pal, aachnak aata hai aur bina kuch kahe chala jata hai.
gum ka ek lamha, rukh sa jaata hai aur her ehasas per apne nishan chod jata hai.
anonymuncule
Aajnabi
Jab zindagi main andhera chane lage,
Jab kisi modh per dil thanha lage,
Jab shyam asuoome dhalne lage,
Jab rahien manzillo se door jane lage,
Jab manzil per khushiyon ke talash ho,
Jab naaye humraaz samajhne me tumko naakaam ho,
Jab vo thakne lage jo thame thumara haath ho,
Tab...
us andhare main,
un aasuoo main,
us modh pe,
us manjil pe,
Tum aapne saath ek aajnabi ko paaoge.
anonymuncule
Words!!!!
shatter dreams,
build hope,
bring you close,
tear you apart,
strengthen relationships,
weaken trusts,
spin lies,
hide truth,
comfort you,
hurt you,
express thoughts,
confuse feelings,
start a war,
end in peace,
destroy characters,
save lives.
Oh words just so many words...
can we live without them?
are we bound to them?
can we see above them?
are we limited by them?
can we feel beyond them?
Nov 10, 2005
anonymuncule
Swikar
Pyar, parivar,
Niradhar swikar.
Dosti, mohabath,
Vichar swikar.
Mehaman, vidwaan,
Achar swikar.
Guru, bhagavan,
Vishwas swikar.
hhhmmmmm
A pope for our times: why Darwin is back on the agenda at the Vatican from Times Online
"He argued that the real message of Genesis was that the Universe did not make itself, and had a creator. “Science and theology act in different fields, each in its own.” In Rome, the immediate reaction was that this was a Vatican rejection of the fundamentalist American doctrine of “intelligent design”. No doubt the Vatican does want to separate itself from American creationists, but the significance surely goes further than that. This is not another Galileo case; the teachings of the Church have never imposed a literal interpretation of the language of the Bible; that was a Protestant mistake. Nor did the Church condemn the theory of evolution, though it did and does reject neo-Darwinism when that is made specifically atheist.
Indeed, one can go back nearly 1,500 years before Darwin and find St Augustine of Hippo, the most commanding intellect of all the early doctors of the Church, teaching a doctrine of evolution in the early 5th century. In one of his greatest works, De Genesi ad Litteram, he stated that God did not create an organised Universe as we see it now, but in the beginning created all the elements of the world in a confused and “nebulous” mass. In this mass were the mysterious seeds of the creatures who were to come into existence.
Augustine’s thought does therefore contain the elements of a theory of evolution, and even a genetic theory, but does not have natural selection. St Augustine has always been orthodox. He did not foresee modern science in AD410, but he did have an extraordinary grasp of the potential evolution of scientific thought. Cardinal Poupard’s address to the journalists should not be seen as a matter of the Roman Church changing its mind and accepting Darwin after 145 years."
One win one loss
Evolution Slate Outpolls Rivals from NYTimes
"The vote counts were close, but of the 16 candidates the one with the fewest votes was Mr. Bonsell, the driving force behind the intelligent design policy. Testimony at the trial revealed that Mr. Bonsell had initially insisted that creationism get equal time in the classroom with evolution.
One incumbent, James Cashman, said he would contest the vote because a voting machine in one precinct recorded no votes for him, while others recorded hundreds."
Nov 9, 2005
What to say!!!! Redefinition of science???
Kansas Board Approves Challenges to Evolution from NYTimes
"The standards move beyond the broad mandate for critical analysis of evolution that four other states have established in recent years, by recommending that schools teach specific points that doubters of evolution use to undermine its primacy in science education.
Among the most controversial changes was a redefinition of science itself, so that it would not be explicitly limited to natural explanations.
The vote was a watershed victory for the emerging movement of intelligent design, which posits that nature alone cannot explain life's complexity. John G. West of the Discovery Institute, a conservative research organization that promotes intelligent design, said Kansas now had "the best science standards in the nation.""
I have a simple question how can a board of some people decide what is to be taught in science when the majority of scientific community has little or no doubt abt evolution?
What is taught in science classrooms should not be decided on what majority thinks...
Software's real bugs!
History's Worst Software Bugs from wired.com
My fav...
"With that recall, the Prius joined the ranks of the buggy computer -- a club that began in 1947 when engineers found a moth in Panel F, Relay #70 of the Harvard Mark 1 system. The computer was running a test of its multiplier and adder when the engineers noticed something was wrong. The moth was trapped, removed and taped into the computer's logbook with the words: "first actual case of a bug being found.""
However, there is a list of software bugs as we know of it today.
Nov 7, 2005
I did not know such a thing existed
The Literary Darwinists from NYTimes
"Jane Austen first published "Pride and Prejudice" in 1813. She had misgivings about the book, complaining in a letter to her sister that it was "rather too light, and bright, and sparkling." But these qualities may be what make it the most popular of her novels. It tells the story of Elizabeth Bennet, a young woman from a shabby genteel family, who meets Mr. Darcy, an aristocrat. At first, the two dislike each other. Mr. Darcy is arrogant; Elizabeth, clever and cutting. But through a series of encounters that show one to the other in a more appealing light - as well as Mr. Darcy's intervention when an officer named Wickham runs away with Elizabeth's younger sister Lydia (Darcy bribes the cad to marry Lydia) - Elizabeth and Darcy come to love each other, to marry and, it is strongly suggested at book's end, to live happily ever after.
For the common reader, "Pride and Prejudice" is a romantic comedy. His or her pleasure comes from the vividness of Austen's characters and how familiar they still seem: it's as if we know Elizabeth and Darcy. On a more literary level, we enjoy Austen's pointed dialogue and admire her expert way with humor. For similar reasons, critics have long called "Pride and Prejudic" a classic - their ultimate (if not well defined) expression of approval.
But for an emerging school of literary criticism known as Literary Darwinism, the novel is significant for different reasons. Just as Charles Darwin studied animals to discover the patterns behind their development, Literary Darwinists read books in search of innate patterns of human behavior: child bearing and rearing, efforts to acquire resources (money, property, influence) and competition and cooperation within families and communities. They say that it's impossible to fully appreciate and understand a literary text unless you keep in mind that humans behave in certain universal ways and do so because those behaviors are hard-wired into us. For them, the most effective and truest works of literature are those that reference or exemplify these basic facts.
From the first words of the first chapter ("It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife") to the first words of the last ("Happy for all her maternal feelings was the day on which Mrs. Bennet got rid of her two most deserving daughters"), the novel is stocked with the sort of life's-passage moments that resonate with meaning for Literary Darwinists. (One calls the novel their "fruit fly.") The women in the book mostly compete to marry high-status men, consistent with the Darwinian idea that females try to find mates whose status will assure the success of their offspring. At the same time, the men are typically competing to marry the most attractive women, consistent with the Darwinian idea that males look for youth and beauty in females as signs of reproductive fitness. Darcy and Elizabeth's flips and flops illustrate the effort mammals put into distinguishing between short-term appeal (a pert step, a handsome coxcomb) and long-term appropriateness (stability, commitment, wealth, underlying good health). Meanwhile, Wickham - the penniless officer who tries to make off first with Darcy's sister and then carries off Lydia - serves as an example of the mating behavior evolutionary biologists call (I'm using a milder euphemism than they do) "the sneaky fornicator theory.""
A different scrutiny on one of the books I really like. I wouldn't think of it this way!!!!!!! The entire atricle is rather long but good read.
Blog regulations
Most blogs are terrible [from The Examined Life] [via IndiaUncut]
This is a write up on blogging (good and bad) and how will regulating blogs will effect.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
