Beijing Olympics 2008

It's been an amazing 2 weeks of competition in Beijing, and though I'm disappointed that I wasn't in Beijing to experience all the triumphs and the tribulations, it was just as amazing watching it on television and reading the press coverage online. I was listening to BBC news late last evening and they did a short montage on ground breaking moments for smaller nations who came to the Olympics to win a medal, and some did for the first time in Olympic history, Togo won a bronze medal in Kayaking, Afghanistan won a bronze medal in Tae Kwon Do, and Sudan won their first silver medal in the 800 meter race. My country of birth, India, also won it's first ever gold medal in men's 10m rifle. But I think most people will probably remember the history making event of Michael Phelps, wining 8 gold medals in World Record time, besting the previous record of Mark Spitz's 7 gold's, as well as being the first Olympian to ever win 8 medals in a single Olympic. But outside of sports competition, I think it was monumental for the games to be held in Beijing, China, which was in the news quite a bit leading up to the games due to the political veil that surrounded the Chinese govt. And I'm actually surprised that there was barely a single news story outside of the 1 or 2 minor protests throughout the entire 2 weeks of competition. What I am glad about is the people in China, who may not have known much outside of their nation, for a few weeks had the opportunity to watch and learn about athletic ambassadors from around the world which I hope will bring about a change in the host nation regarding many of their policies. I'm also hoping the next summer Olympic games in London will have just as stunning of an opening ceremonies as the ones in Beijing, though I don't know if the 2008 opening ceremonies will be topped by many nations in the future, but atleast for a few weeks all nations will be in friendly non-violent competition, where the results are mere medals and tears, rather then human suffering and destruction.

Pangea Day

Alright perhaps my previous post was a bit of venting of emotions that had been bottled up for a little while now... on a lighter note, I am quite excited about the events that took place this past weekend, particularly the Pangea Day Event I attended. Is it possibly to have a worldwide event that can set aside creed, borders, beliefs, differences, conflicts, and bring together all of humanity as one soul helping everyone see others within themselves and do it through film? Well that was the idea behind Pangea Day, an idea or rather a dream turned into reality for film-maker Jehane Noujaim. Her wish was to change the world, to create a day of peace and understanding and do it in a way that everyone can understand, by using the common language of film. It took a couple of years of planning to finally organize a day that shows the world as one soul. The films that were showcased were quite moving and eye opening, films about a change of heart from people that once were at front line of creating conflict to being at the forefront of change and understanding hoping to alleviate the differences though speech. There was a film about a son returning to his home in Cuba after spending many years in America only to be thought of as a foreigner by his own brother. There were films about love, the yearning for love that many who continue to wait for never see, and when they think they have the chance to experience it, it ends up being only a skit on a Parisian metro. There were films of hope, and laughter, the International Laughing Club that was started in India and is expanding throughout the world. There were films of sorrow, and films that left the ending open to interpretation. There was music and commentary from well known scientists and visionaries and other individuals as well. So how did I feel about the event, well I think it was phenomenal, I think that much of what I saw touched me in a way that made me feel in a way that I haven't felt before, it allowed me to see that change is possible and I'm glad there are people out there who are willing to search for and take the initiative to make it happen, even if it's with an idea.

Ode to an Orange

So I was eating and orange and had the itch to write a poem, and came up with this:

O great orange, such a citrusy fruit
you have great flavor, to tame this brute
how you bring a tear to my eye every time I peel you
you help me fight my colds,
but some scientists say that may not be true
but you still find a way to appease my appetite
even if I drink your nectar like a juice
tropicana and minute maid may have tamed you
squeezed, and squashed you
in the many forms you may exist
may you also satisfy the cravings of the rest
and may you live in my memories of feasts in the past

Of Polar Bears and Penguins

Today I was speaking with someone and they showed me a book that they had been using to teach their kids for a class project, this book was a Magic School Bus' Arctic Adventure', and so I casually mentioned if they knew that Polar Bears and and Penguins don't live in the same region. And they were surprised to hear that comment because they believed that the two did infact live in the same region and did come in contact with each other from time to time. Now I have brought this up many times and have run into other friends that also didn't realize that Polar Bears and Penguins live in different regions.... Polar bears primarily existing near the North Pole or the Arctic region and Penguins primary existing in the South Pole, or the Antarctic region. But I guess I can understand where the misconception was formed... these days we see marketing ads from big name companies that show cuddly polar bears and penguins coexisting, sharing a refreshing drink and we see images of the 2 in pictures and sometimes in cartoons. So the question is should factual data be compromised for entertainment value? Does it really matter if we go through thinking that the 2 coexist on the same continent? Who knows... Maybe it's more important that people push "Of Pandas and People" because it makes more sense (me trying to be sarcastic here...).

how effective is non-violent diplomacy in the modern world?

In light of recent events taking place around China and India, specifically with the clash between the Tibetans and the Chinese. The original intent was to march peacefully from Dharamsala, India to Lahasa, Tibet and possible begin talks about a compromise to allow exiled Tibetans to return to their homeland that was taken from them and commercialized by the Chinese government, but more recently it seems that many of the Tibetans have started to clash with the Chinese military in the area because the Tibetans feel that the Dalai Lama's message of trying to reach a consensus towards autonomy is not progressing as well as the displaced Tibetans would like, and feel that by clashing with gov't officials it will resonate a louder message, not only to the world but to the gov't of China as well. Looking back in time, the non-violent protests in Tienanmen square held by students and countless other Chinese citizens hoping for more democratic policies in the PRC's gov't let to a violent response by the military that killed many protesters. Just recently the peaceful anti-government protests in Burma also elicited a violent response from the Junta, that led to the deaths of hundreds of monks. In India, a peaceful protest against the British rule was led by Mahatma Ghandi, the most popular of which was the Salt March that caused a retaliation by the British gov't towards the peaceful marchers, and this retaliation involved violence towards the marchers. I'm sure there are many many other references that I don't want to continue to list, but what I'm getting to is... is it feasible to hold non-violent diplomatic talks in an age of weapons and the need to show force to get ones standpoint across? I like to be optimistic and think it is possible, that if the nations of the world would want to sit down and talk about possible reducing the amount of bloodshed, that the civility of humans can be displayed, I'm one to believe that we live in a time that is at peace with moments of war, instead of the belief that we live in a world that is filled with war with moments of peace. So why not extend the period of peace even further, why not find a way to compromise without greed. I don't know what do other people think about this question?

Infinity?

What is Infinity? It's a question that we learn about when we take calculus or when we talk about physics or spirituality but what is infinity? I had been listening to a radio show and on it one of the hosts defined infinity as something that is not finite, but that only really tell you what infinity isn't not what infinity is, and one interesting example they gave was that if you were to change the question and ask what is green? Then by the same notion from the previous answer you can say that green is not blue, well that tells you what green isn't but it doesn't tell you what green is, we can define green or rather any color, as what our eyes perceive through the reflection of light on an object, depending on the type of material or color that object is bounced off of, how much of the light gets absorbed and how much gets reflected... that forms the color that we perceive, so that is a definition of the color green. But back to the question of infinity, what is it?? Well according to the mathematician Cantor he stated that a collection is infinite if some of it's parts are as big as the whole. That you can find a 1-1 mapping of parts of a set to another set, so take for example the idea of walking to the door but you start by going half way then going half way from your current point and so on, in this way there are infinite possibilities but there is a final goal. A better understanding if your read the "Infinite Hotel". But Cantor also stated that all infinities are not the same, so 2 * infinity is not the same as 3 * infinity. Now to speak a little bit outside of set theory, people consider the universe to be infinite, or that time is infinite, and on a spiritual sense, god is infinite, in that god has infinite wisdom and that god is incomprehensible since god is infinite, but if we take that notion and we can find and can define what infinite is then the idea of god no longer exists because understanding God is supposed to be outside of the scope of our understanding, the supreme being, if we now understand or know what infinity is then we understand god, and if we understand god then god is something we can all understand and thus god really doesn't exist because we all understand the infinite and thus understand god. So infinity is a concept of set theory, but there are still quite a number of paradox's that need to be explored and this is quite an interesting concept and definately worth exploring more, but I will leave it here for now.

Ethics of Reciprocity

It's a very simple concept, better know as "The Golden Rule", or more better understood with the well know quote, "Do Onto Others as you would with them to do onto you", it's such a basic idea that applies to humanity and the right that we all humans are born with, and which I would also include all living creatures. I think in this day and age with all this news of genocide and war and poverty and corruption and violence we've forgotten what rights we should all try to convey in our daily life, all religions have this concept inherent within it, I present some quotes I found on Wikipedia here:
Buddhism: Putting oneself in the place of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill.

Baha'i Faith: "Ascribe not to any soul that which thou wouldst not have ascribed to thee, and say not that which thou doest not." -Baha'u'llah

Christianity: "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets." -Matthew 7:12

Confucinism: "Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself." -Analects XV.24, tr. David Hinton

Hinduism: "That one I love who is incapable of ill will, And returns love for hatred." -Bhagavad Gita

Islam: "Hurt no one so that no one may hurt you." part of the Last Sermon of the Prophet Muhammad

... And the list goes on, it can be found in all religions that exist in the know world. So why is it that we've come to live in a world where this simple principle is no longer practiced? Why do people find other reasons to justify violence and ignore the right that every human should have. I don't know what has happened to this world, all I know is if we continue to ignore this principle we will learn to grow even more distant as a species and eventually no one will remain to defend their beliefs. Here's to the hope of a more peaceful world...