Mistakes i make in mathematics

Look at the derivation for the roots of a quadratic equation.
Here the roots have been derived by differentiating the equation!!!.
From the roots, the equation is got back by complimentary operation.
But the roots so got by differentiation is not the same as the roots as got using sridhara's formula.
There is a severe fundamental error in the derivation shown above; its simple but serious. Find out.

Confusion in the Election commission

The chief election commissioner has hit the headlines recently for more than one reason. Apart from the general elections, there has been much talk about the powers of the commissioner vis-à-vis the other commissioners.

Unfortunately or fortunately, so far as the latter is concerned, much of the opinions in the media and academic circles have gone against the CEC. Given the opinions expressed, it may be apposite now to dispassionately analyze the position of CEC in the light of the arguments put against him.

The correct legal position of the CEC as laid down by the supreme court of India in T.N.Seshan Vs union of India(1995) is as follows” “The provision that the ECs and the RCs once appointed cannot be removed from office before the expiry of their tenure except on the recommendations of the CEC ensures their independence. Of course, the recommendation for removal must be based on intelligible and cogent considerations, which would have relation to efficient functioning of the Election Commission. That is so because this privilege has been conferred on the CEC to ensure that the ECs as well as the RCs are not at the mercy of political or executive bosses of the day. This check on the executive’s power to remove is built into the second proviso to clause (5) to safeguard the independence of not only these functionaries but the election Commission as a body [emphasis added].”

The second proviso to Article 324(5) states categorically that the ECs shall not be removed from office except on the recommendation of the CEC.

In the same case, the supreme court goes on to add that “While is it true that under the scheme of Article 324 the conditions of service and tenure of office of all the functionaries of the Election Commission have to be determined by the President unless determined by law made by Parliament, it is only in the case of the CEC that the first proviso to clause (5) lays down that they cannot be varied to the disadvantage of the CEC after his appointment.” Such a protection is not extended to the ECs. But it must be remembered that by virtue of the Ordinance the CEC and the ECs are placed on a par in the matter of salary etc.

“The second ground relates to removability. In the case of the CEC he can be removed from office in like manner and on the like ground as a Judge of the Supreme Court whereas the ECs can be removed on the recommendation of the CEC”.

Recently, these issues have under arguments and discussions. The overwhelming opinion is that the CEC cannot recommend the removal of EC suo motu. The argument put forward is that, the CEC cannot exercise his power suo motu because the members of the commission and the CEC are of equal status. Further if such powers are conferred to CEC, he will himself be an instrument of oppression. The election commissioners will have to function under the fear of removal if they voice their opinion against the CEC. Further, some scholars have argued that suo motu powers to CEC would nullify the independent functioning of the election commission.

Assuming for a moment the above arguments are correct and CEC does not have the powers to recommend the removal of EC suo motu, then who can ask the CEC to give his recommendations? It is obviously the president under the advice of the cabinet.

This puts the EC in a difficult position vis-à-vis the CEC. The law says that the CEC and EC are equal but insulates the CEC from removal on advice of the cabinet. But the EC does not enjoy similar privileges. He can be removed on the recommendations of the CEC (case being referred by the president on advice of the cabinet). There seems to be some confusion here.

If the CEC can be an instrument of oppression on the EC, so can be the cabinet. The EC has to work under the threat of CEC if the latter enjoys suo motu powers. Otherwise if the union cabinet has the powers to advice president on removal of the EC, EC will have to work under the threat of the cabinet. (We must note here that EC does not have to be removed in the manner in which a Supreme Court judge is removed.). In the era of coalition politics, it makes more sense to insulate the election commissioners from the cabinet rather than the CEC.

If all the election commissioners have to be treated on par and equally, then all of them must enjoy similar privileges and similar insulation from political and executive bosses and from each other.

In the present case, the CEC has recommended the removal of an EC suo motu. It is still not clear if he enjoys such powers and the repercussions of the same if he really enjoys such powers. However if the recommendations for removal are to be based on intelligible and cogent considerations, which will have relation to efficient functioning of the Election Commission, then the CEC has defended himself by outlining the basis for his recommendations.

Relation between matter and motion?

Why do people grow old? Why is graying of hair or weakening of muscles attributed to age? What is this age? Why do people become weak at old age. Below, i put a theory to relate motion to time and time to matter.
I am 26 years old now and am healthy and all the organs are perfectly alright. Mr. Atal Bihari Vajpayee is today 86 years old and suffering from multiple problems. If both of us were born healthy, why is that Mr Vajpayee is suffering today. Age is a straight forward answer.

But what the hell is this age? Is age time? Is time linear motion? Is it rotation? Is it revolution? Look at this, the earth has gone round the sun 86 times since Ataljee's birth and 26 times since my birth. So there has been more motion of earth since his birth. Can this motion be attributed to age? Is weakening of body organs, graying of hair attributed to age which in turn is attributed to motion (Not necessarily motion of earth).


So matter (graying of hair or weakening of heart) is dependent on motion (motion of earth). If they are related, it must be is some relation. How about their dimensions? are they equal on both sides.?At the outset No, since the LHS is angular motion and the right handside????(change in colour of hair, weakening of lungs etc). What happens when we die?? matter disappears(or does it?) and motion continues.


Moving ahead, What is responsible for motion? Let us treat motion as an independent variable (or is it?). Surely there are other bodies keeping the earth in its position and responsible for its motion. May be gravitational force of sun, other planets,.What is responsible for other planets to be in their respective position? May be Other planets and sun. What is responsible for the solar system to be in its position and its motion, the galaxy. What is responsible for the galaxy to be in its position and motion? influences of other galaxies.


At the instant of birth (or conception), there are a fixed set of coordinates (time and space)(Does time and space merge somewhere?). These coordinates are unique to every birth (highly debatable and questionable). So the instant we are born , there is a set of planetary and galaxial influences on us (Influence in terms of force, magnitude of which is dependent on space(location)).To substantiate, the planetary or galaxial influences on every point of the earth is not uniform. (think of g, earth's own gravity is not uniform). So at any instant of birth, there is a set of influences which are unique. Every change in location(space) brings with it a change in influence, the magnitude of change is a function of original influence or force. So the change in matter is not only dependent on motion but also space dependent in turn on motion.


As an example, two people born at the same instant of time only 1 M apart or 1 mm apart may grow world apart in attitude, intelligence and physiology.Because distances magnify with space and time so does forces of influence.

Civil Service Recruitment.

The recommendations given by administrative reforms commission (ARC)regarding the recruitment process for civil service suggested that the age of recruitment to be reduced to a band of 21-25 years.

Keeping in view that the best talent should come to civil services; the above recommendations are ill conceived.

The average age at which one finishes their post graduation is about 24 years. The average age at one finishes his or her medicine is 24 years. The above recommendations completely bars post graduates and doctors from entering civil services.

Many people would like to join the civil services after they realize that corporate sector though more lucrative will not fulfill their aspirations of serving their country. There are many examples of people who were gainfully employed in the private sector after their MBA from IIMs who quit their corporate jobs to serve their country. The recommendations of civil service reforms would bar them also and the country will also loose talent who are coming from prestigious IIMs with rich experience in corporate world.

Further, the recommendations if accepted will act as a deterrent for people in group C and D posts who are motivated to go up the hierarchy very quickly seeing the apathy in their organizations.

Semi urban and rural people will be hit the hardest who for various reasons cannot complete their graduation by 24.

Civil services being a generalist domain must give opportunity to everyone. Post graduates and medical students will miss the bus forever if such ill conceived recommendations are accepted.

ARC must on the other and must take a serious look at working of UPSC.

UPSC must look at making the process of recruitment more scientific by cutting number of optional subjects, giving more weightage to general studies and testing candidates to reason, argue, defend and analyze the burning subjects rather than testing a candidate's mere memory.

ARC must question the UPSC about the rationale for evaluation. How is that the UPSC is evaluating mathematics, physics one one hand and philosophy and sociology on the other hand for the same marks. How can this be done scientifically? how can philosophy be weighed with mathematics?

UPSC being a constitutional body cannot be questioned. But a time frame of one year to complete the recruitment process for coveted IAS,IPS and other group A posts is truly obnoxious and unthinkable.One year is too long a time and too precious. UPSC should first cut the duration it takes to recuit personnel to coveted posts.

Age must never be a constraint for talented individuals for entering civil services. The criteria must be the depth of understanding, width of knowledge and sharpness in logic and reason.

Nuclear Deal

This is the article i wrote for the The Hindu Business Line, an abridged version of which was published on September 22, 2008. 

The recent waiver to India in the NSG has created euphoria in certain sections of the society and a mood of contemplation in certain other sections. While some people have hailed Dr Manmohan singh for championing the deal and have even termed it "historic" comparable to the economic reforms of 1991, few other experts have expressed their reservations.

 

Whatever the case may be, the waiver definitely marks a watershed in the country's history. The waiver speaks volumes for the status of India in world affairs. It is another matter if the deal really materializes, but the very fact that India is waived from the obligations that other countries have to fulfill for getting into nuclear commerce speaks for itself the status of India vis-a-vis other nations. There are many reasons for this. We may today be recognized as an economic world power, but our commitment to non proliferation is impeccable. If the world trusts us for our non proliferation and our voluntary moratorium on nuclear testing, it is because of our history and the people who made them. It is not only economics that Indian today is recognized for but for its moral and ethical values.

 

India must really put this new found ground to good effect. There are many international issues that we can now turn to our advantage. For instance climate change, IMF voting rights, questions on Iran and Afghanistan. More important of all is the question of terror. It is high time that the government takes some harsh steps towards the terrorists. We must all hang our heads in shame to the fact that our country which commands majority opinion in world politics has to witness a bomb blast every two months. People in power must go beyond only condemning the blasts to taking some concrete steps in fighting terror. It is frustrating for every Indian to see a bomb blast every other month.

 

Coming to the core issue of nuclear deal, many political parties have blamed UPA for the deal. BJP in particular is accusing UPA for parking national sovereignty as hostage to the US. These are very irresponsible statements by such a big national party. The real benefits of the nuclear trade go beyond just nuclear fuel supply. It creates employment, brings electricity, brings expertise and technology for our engineers to complete the nuclear cycle fast. More than anything it helps fight climate change.  Technology that accompanies trade will put India into a higher trajectory of growth.

 

Another controversial issue is that of nuclear weapon testing. Independent of the nuke deal, another test will have negative economic and political ramifications. Coming to the issue of testing vis-a-vis nuke deal, one question we must answer at this juncture is, Do we really need to test another weapon in future?  We are a peace loving country heavily influenced by Gandhian philosophy. Philosophy apart, is there a real need to test in future? Most of the opinion is concentrated around the argument that what if China or Pakistan test tomorrow?  One simple answer is that "so what"? Even today, all the three countries have weapons to destroy each other and even the whole world. Possession of nuclear weapon is a deterrent for all the countries in question to use them. In the event of a first attack from Pakistan or china, India has enough nuclear weapon to retaliate. Any new technology can only bring about a catastrophe faster. Given the fact that all the countries have enough arsenal to destroy each other, what is the need for future testing. Existing technology can end humanity in few minutes, is there a need to scale this?

Fiscal vs Monetary policies to contain inflation

The first quarter review of the monetary policy by the RBI makes the priorities of central bank very clear. It has Inflation control on high priority and rightly so.

Inflation is affecting millions of people across the length and breadth of the nation and has to be tackled on priority. Growth definitely will be hurt over the short term but it is the price one has to pay.

But the latest hike in CRR and Repo rates has attracted criticisms from the champions of industry and also by certain academicians. let us look at the options available with RBI and try to see what else RBI could have done.

Central banks around the world use interest rates as the single biggest tool to affect changes in the money supply and hope to control inflation through this. However, though inflation is not only a monetary phenomenon. In the context of recent inflation experiences in India, fiscal solutions would do greater help. Waivers of farm loans, reduction of income taxes, and implementation of 6 pay commission report would do more harm than good so far as inflation control is concerned. States are doing no better by giving free power to farmers and giving heavy subsidy on fertilizers. The bill for all such fiscal programmes and incentives offsets the measures by RBI to contain money supply. In fact the monetary and fiscal policies are moving mutually contradicting directions. The former is sucking liquidity and the latter is indirectly injecting it by subsidies, loan waivers etc.

Therefore RBI is using its limited tools to its best from the monetary angle to contain inflation.

It is true that higher interest rates will affect growth. But one must realize that that this would be over the short term. The cash parked at the RBI by banks (CRR) would be liberalized once the inflation will come under control. This is unlike loan waivers and pay increases which are a permanent invoice to the treasury. The CRR parked would become capital over the medium term.

Beyond Horrad and Domar model, one school of economics defines growth as difference between money supply and inflation. (Growth=Money supply-inflation). Looking at the equation, money supply can be increased to increase growth, but one cannot do it without inflation increase. But one can reduce inflation by keeping money supply constant by fiscal policies and thereby increase growth. As far as monetary policy is concerned, RBI has just reduced money supply in the hope of reducing inflation thereby sustaining the left hand side around 8 percent. This is at best what it can do.

Arguing from the horrad and domar perspective, high CRR and repo rates would also augment savings(because of higher interest rates on deposits), which will turn into investment over the medium term and increase growth provided the capital output ratio remains constant.

Monetary policy can only affect growth (as well as inflation) over short terms. Once inflation is under control, monetary loosening will have to start. Sound fiscal policies should back monetary loosening if growth should sustain without intermissions.

Given the limited scope of monetary policy, RBI would continue to tighten the money supply till it feels that the tightening has had some appreciable outcome.