Symmetry in Physical Laws

Recently, while I was going through the Feynman Lectures on Physics, I read (and heard the audio) of his session on symmetry in physical laws. Here I've (for the benefit of those who've not heard him) reproduced a part of his lecture.

"...so our problem really is to explain where this symmetry comes from. Why nature is so nearly symmetric....let's put it the other way, instead of saying why is she so nearly antisymmetric, say why is she so nearly symmetric? ...'cos it isn't absolutely symmetric, it's nearly so....the question is why it is nearly so.

Nobody has any idea. The only thing I might suggest is something that I...just as aaa....point there's an interesting point...there's a gate in Japan, a gate in Nikko, which is sometimes called by the Japanese the most beautiful gate in all Japan, but it was built at a time when there was great influence in(of) the Chinese art. It's the Youmeimon Gate, and um it a very elaborate Gate, with lots of gabels, elaborate and beautiful carvings all over and lots of columns which have dragonheads here, and dragonheads there and it's a beautiful thing; marvelous gate with figures of princesses carved into the pillars and so on.

But then.... when you look closer, you'll see...that in the elaborate and complex design along one of the pillars,one of the design elements, one of the small design elements...is carved upside down on one of the pillars. Otherwise the thing is completely symmetrical - left and right - but this one thing is turned upside down.......and if you ask why is this, then the story is this:
It's carved upside down, so that the Gods will not be jealous of the perfection of man...that man is so perfect, so they purposely put an error in there, so that the Gods would not be jealous and be angry at human beings.

So I'd like to turn the idea around, and claim that the true explanation to the near symmetry is this......that God made the laws only nearly symmetrical so that we shouldn't be jealous of His perfection...Thank You! "

(applause)

Future Shock

Ok so this has nothing to do with Shaunak's post by the same title nor with the book by Alvin Toffler. It's just that I couldn't think of a better (and original ;) ) title for this post.

The "future shock" I'm referring to has got to do with engineers.

Have you ever pondered about the future of engineering? I mean have you ever given it a thought as to whether say 20 years down the line, what an engineer's role would be?

Well here are some of my thoughts.
Actually I'd been thinking on these lines for some time now. It started off with an article I read in the IEEE Spectrum. Those thoughts precipitated to this blog, with an article I read today in The Indian Express: The Mother Of All Softwares.

The article in IEEE Spectrum spoke of a time in the engineering industry, when engineers would be relaced by software packages. Not too difficult to imagine actually, considering the fact that almost 50-60% of today's practicing engineers are only sort of consultants, tweaking long established designs to suit the conditions. Imagine a software package that'll take in specifications, and lay out the entire detailed design! What better than a package (a one time investment) like this, rather than a costly, time consuming and error prone human engineer? Critics may comment that one would still need "the human touch", but while I don't agree with that (nor do I want to get into an argument - maybe I'll write another post), even in such a (grossly optimistic) senario, one has to admit that the requirement for engineers would dwindle. In any case, such an engineering job would definitely be boring, frustraing offering virtually no creativity.

I'd say that an engineer who's doing such things is basically going to be obsolete - jobless. Move over to software, and the article in the Indian Express will confirm your worst fears - there's already a software out there to automate programming. Be assured that in the next 20 years or so, we'll have a really well done package to handle even the most complex of coding tasks.

In essence, if you're an engineer doing mundane things, working up old designs, without any creativity or originality, then the future's your highway to extinction.

Methinks that the future engineer (aka an engineer who's not extinct - not jobless) is going to fall under these 3 major categories:

1. The "human touch" engineer (arguable but I'm willing to yield for the moment)
2. The research engineer.
3. The manager engineer.

The first guy is definitely going to be one bored (but perhaps well paid) dude.

The second one, is definely going to be well paid, but a rare creature. He'll be the one who devises new technology, the guy who makes new, pathbreaking designs. I guess the guy who writes The Engineer Softwares would also fall under this category. He'll have to be smart, in touch with the latest research a continuous learner, and above all, a creative and broadminded, thinking person. Most likely, he'll be the invisible force of the new era.

The third guy is gonna be the most common engineer. He's gonna be either the one who takes care of the broad engineering - business related decisions (it's hyphenated for a good reason) or an entrepreneur in the engineering business. He'll be a person who is constantly in touch with technology, creative, and having all the important traits of a good manager. He'll be the palpable, human force.

Well that's my prediction anyway!

Tell me what you think!

Mistakes of the Past

A few days back, I was reading a book which unraveled some startling facts about India.

• The income tax prevalent in India post Independence was as high as 97%! This was mainly during the Nehru - Indira Gandhi era.
• A one point of time in India, and honest businessman like J.R.D. Tata was being taxed greater than 100% of his income. He paid for them and his everyday expenses by selling off some part of his property every year.
• The Government of India had the sole right to decide what the quantity of goods that could be produced by a particular private sector company
• Not just that, the Government of India had the supreme authority in deciding what the produce would be, where it would be produced, and at what price it would be produced & sold.
• The Government Of India had the sole right to decide (on parameters which they were not liable to discuss with the public) to what extent a businessman could expand his business. This was widely incorporated under the MRTP (Monopoly Restricted Trade Practice).

Is this a joke or what? How incredulous could policy making get?

It all started with Jawaharlal Nehru's idealogy that India would be a socialist democracy. He believed in the Utopian idea that the industry existed only for the welfare of people. It existed only so that it could provide a means of employment. Nowhere in that idealogical process did he feel that industry also existed to make a profit. In fact, it has been on record, that Nehru was not eager to see the Indian industry make profit. He felt that profit making was akin to bilking the commoner.

I cannot understand this point at all. Let us for the moment assume that the whole point in industry is to generate employment. It is plain common sense, that in order to improve the employee's life, the industry would need to make money. In order to generate employment, the industry would need to grow. But how could that happen when the policies within the public service utilities (PSUs) were not designed to ensure effciency.In many PSUs, the policies were made by people who were in no way qualified to make decisions for that particular industry, but only did so because they belonged to the "experts committee" appointed by the Government. How could the private industry grow, when the government policies were tailored to stifle it? And then what quality of employment did one generate?

Today though, the picture is different. At least no one decides for you what, when, where and how much of material (or ideas) you should generate. And the results are there for everyone to see.

The irony of this whole thing is, the very government which freed us from this economic bondage, didn't get re-elected, while we still speak of Jawharlal Nehru, and his daughter with great pride.

Disclaimer: I'm a politically neutral (they're all thieves anyway attitude) person. The above references to Nehru and Indira Gandhi are not politically motivated. In fact I appreciated their very political party for having freed us of the economic gravedigging that was prevalent till then, and that stands evidence to my statement - this post has nothing to do with politics, rather with economics and economic policy making.

I'll search for my cheese

Somebody moved my cheese!

Yes, somebody moved my cheese, and I can either sit here and wait for the cheese to come, or make a decision and search for cheese before it's too late.

I'm actually referring to an unhappy state of affairs with my present job. I'm not happy about it. It's not what I want. It isn't giving me my cheese; not giving me any challenge, any creativity, nor any connection with the most important thing - science and nature.

Some of you may be surprised, some may be saying "yeah, well I saw it coming ", and well some would say "Yeah? Are you kidding me or something?" Well whatever! Point is I'm not amused!

Let's put things in prespective in here.
I have a job which is perhaps in one of the better firms in here. As of now, it's okay. Not something that will buy me the château Versailles or something, but definitely one that would allow a decent life. A few years down the line perhaps, and I would be definitely doing well. Um, lets add a dash of extravagant success (yeah, yeah..... I'll attach hypothetical to the extravagant, but let's not argue over that right now ;-) ), and it's definitely a good life I guess!

A lot of people seem to want to tell me, "So what's to lose? All you've to do is stick to it for some more time. That's all! The good times will flow! "

The problem is that I don't see my cheese, and I don't believe that it would come here. So before it's too late I need to make a decision, and seek my cheese.

On one hand is the fact that I don't see my cheese, but my position is definitely comfortable. I don't have to risk too much, and the money will come. And on the other hand is the fact that before it's too late, I need to seek out my cheese - and face the inherent risks that will come with it.

So the million dollar question essentially is: Should I be taking a RISK???? ( hey it really is a million dollar question, Dhirubhai might help you answer it ;-) ).

I think yes.

A small anecdote before we go on. I had the opportunity to meet a certain Dr. Shreenivas Kulkarni when I was in my junior college. He was (and perhaps is) the Head Of Dept. Astrophysics at Caltech. One of my friend's father had arranged our meeting, and we essentially spoke about what we'd like to be doing in our lives. We had the usual stuff: "We'd like to do this and this, but we don't know if it's a good idea. Perhaps it might not work out. So it's better we do what most others do. It's safer that way!"
What he told us next has stuck in my mind since that day. He said "Guys, I've seen a lot of smart, really smart people out there in Caltech. All of them are good, intelligent and hardworking students. Yet I see, year after year, that only some of them do well later on in their life. Do you know why?". It was plain we didn't know why. "It's because those guys seek to do something that's not been done before. Sometimes they go bust, but sometimes it works out great. If it goes bust, some try again and some accept defeat. Well essentially they take a risk. But there are those who don't, but then they don't stand out either! The essential point is, if you take a risk, you are giving yourself the extra opportunity to stand out and succeed!".

Again, I guess Dhirubhai would attest that.

I decided to pursue engineering because I liked physics and maths, and thought it would be fun to be creaative and use the two. But currently I've lost that connection. So before it's too late, I'm going change this state of affairs, and make a big, risky decision. I'm going to do what makes me happy. I'm going to go to whoever allows me to be happy, going to go wherever I can be happy. I'm going to go search for my cheese!