9 Seconds.

A click, a shot,

Bang, Pang!

Smoke.

Recoil, shear,

Sigh. Period.

Math !

How to have fun while travelling in a jam packed local train.

1) Stand at the door. Let the breeze hit your face.

2) Hum your favorite song.

3) Take the most fundamental mathematical formulae ( MF2 ), dress them up into some hypothetical situation and see if it stands.

So (+) * (+) = (+) , (+) * ( - ) = ( - ) and ( - ) * ( - ) = ( + ), eh? Fundamental indeed. For dressing them up into a neat hypothetical something, I introduce a buyer, (B) and a seller (S). BullShit? *Grin* I know. *Grin* . Anyways, a ( + ) for a buyer or a seller would be a profit in terms of money, good product or the outcome of the business, nai? And the ( - ) for both B & S would be a loss in terms of all those above mentioned. Suppose B & S does this business one day and someone ( L ) with no life at all but armed with all those mighty formulae ( conventions ? ) sits between them, picking teeth, and applying them to their dealings. B is a nice, old, honest B and sells goods exactly worth the money he gets. So far so good, the picking continues and the formulae rests. Then B gives S x amount of money to buy y kg of some good and the picking stops. Since B gave S x Rs, it could either be a ( - ) for B or a ( + ) for S considering that the good has not been exchanged yet. But the moment the good is exchanged, it is a ( + ) for B in terms of a good product ( and ofcourse ( - ) in terms of the money and hence considering only either one of the possibilities ) and a corresponding ( + ) for S in terms of the money he gained for the exchange. Thats the LHS. ( + ) and ( + ). The RHS or the outcome of the dealing would be a satisfied B for the good ( + ? ) and a satisfied S for the business he got ( + ? ) and hence a ( + ) eitherways on the RHS.
Very simple, straightwforward and non-revolting. So damn far and still so good.
So now, L , the guy with no life at all decides to try something which he then didn't realize would drive revolt up his ass. He very simply goes to S and buys a product which comes with a free something, F. S, honest and ambitious as he is, sells F alongwith the product with a logical expectation that the outcome of the dealing would be a ( + ) even if that amounts to a ( - ) in the actual dealing which is in the LHS. For L, the LHS is an obvious ( + ) and so is the outcome or the RHS. This means that when the LHS is a certain ( + ) * ( - ), the RHS can be ( - ) but according to business logic, it has a high possibility of being ( + ) too. Which then disproves MF2 atleast in one microcase and blows off L because he had read somewhere ( Zen and the art of Motorcycle Maintenance ? ) that even if a formula stands in a million cases but fails in just one, it is a failed formula.
Ok, so I am L and I'm of course wrong. What I'd love is an argument good enough to disprove the disproved and re-prove the original convention.

Talking about conventions, conventions of orthography says that a curved anything would appear as a straight line in the front view. Does that apply for a person with a squint?

Cricket !

THERE IS a certain element of nostalgia associated with watching an old cricket match. The scorecard with the names of men who seem like old friends who disappeared into an oblivion without a farewell, the voice of commentators who taught you the basics of the game which you so loved, even a certain indescribable quality of the crowd which all defined a cricket match of your childhood. Its like watching an old favorite movie. You know the story and the dialogue. You even remember the parts where you got the bumps when you watched it the first time - 7, 8, 10 years back and still watch it with an air of suspense and awe.

You look at people whose future you already know - a captain who would be a nobody in a few years, a prodigy who remained untouched after eversomany matches, the commentators who became coaches and the coaches who went on awfully big adventures. Its fascinating, emotional even. Because when you watch these matches, along with all your good old friends; the people whom you 'grew up with', you also see the kid you were some years back. You are his future and you are not sure if you are what he dreamt of when he daydreamed during those matches. You feel an urge to walk back a few years and hug that little kid and apologize to him for not looking after his dreams as you were supposed to and you hope he forgives you and even says a few good things about you and at the back of your mind you know he will. He was not so bad.