Carl Friedrich Gauss

Reply to GT

GT << I shall now assume that the law says nothing about choices between `c` and any other alternative. The reason I do so is because no law can be complete >>

GT what is wrong with you man? Why are you deliberately trying to obfuscate the issues without responding to any reply I have posted. If the law says not about something and the choice is free for all where did the grievance that led to the social movement arise from? The choices are not what is being debated. The discussion is not about `the law` which by itself is a tool of the elite, it is about social movement structure. Address my points and how they are inadequate. You mentioned there was a ``lot of work`` required in that article and now from that you reduce it to a point the size of an ant- come on man what`s the purpose behind this obfuscation?

#106 okhla, you don`t belong in the light, shove your face where the light don`t shine, teeming colonies of your friends, the e-coli already reside there, you`ll have plenty of company...

Re: # 105

Masadi,

You don`t belong on this board. Either stick to Gauss or go away to Lululand.

GT <<< The point therefore is, let us not make utopian suggestions which are not possible. Instead let us concentrate on realistic organizations with the `least` (but not `no`) amount of hierarchy. >>>

No, it is not a utopian suggestion when the structure of a social movement is getting formed, it is either none or the universal law of oligarchy kicks in. When you say we will have to exclude some given point #3, then you are ignoring point #1, those that are excluded are ``soldiers`` of the status quo, they have no place in a social movement that is going against the antagonizer`s system. Further it is not utopian because when collective identity is not based on status hierarchy any attempts at that, would be considered individual moral failure, I say this psychological conditioning can occur through a rational/religious system like the Quran, Marx arrived at it through another avenue, which given the psychological conditioning of the antagonizer can never occur as we saw with the Soviet Union`s quasi state capitalism, what both seek is basically the same, an end to the conflict dialectic, the Quran`s route is more sound and based on greater empirical evidence....like it or not

I just stumbled upon this magnificent work of mathematical genius that Gauss and his other German henchmen would be rightly proud of. For example, (and this is the part that blew me away):

1.There are 114 chapters in the Quran, or 19 x 6.

2.The total number of verses in the Quran is 6346, or 19 x 334.

3.Then you add the 30 different numbers which are mentioned in the Quran`s text (i.e. one God, two brothers, etc.), the total is 162146 or 19 x 8534.

4.The first statement in Quran, ``In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful`` consists of 19 Arabic letters. Known as the `Basmalah`, it prefaces every chapter except Chapter 9.

5.Though missing from Chapter 9, exactly 19 chapters later the Basmalah occurs twice. Chapter 27 has this statement at its beginning and in verse 30. This makes the total number of times the Basmalah occurs in the Quran 114, or 19 x 6.

and on it goes. I mean, is god trying to teach us a lesson, or what? I mean, this is unbelievably miraculous. I am humbled, and in awe.

Gauss, Newton, Euler, and all the other crazies whose theorems that I had to study in school are village idiots compared to the above profound findings.

Correction:

Hopefully, both gentlemen, and others who know about such things, will be able to devote time to this exceptionally instructive discussion.

This dialogue between masadi sahib and GT bhai is excellent in every way. It will be helpful to see where the two lines converge or diverge, if anywhere.

Hopefully, both gentlemen will be able to devote some time to this exceptionally instructive discussion.

(Most likely, Gauss too would have approved. :)).

GT mian I read your comments on the SM structure piece. You write

<<< You want the organization to be without hierarchies so let the organization choose democratically. Note that no matter what they vote over. The organizational preferences would be c>b, a>b, c>a. One can never get a
But you need EXCLUSION, as you rightly point out. But what you are saying is that you will not allow society TO BE DEMOCTRATIC. Otherwise, you will have a collapse of your basic ideology. >>>

GT man you are complicating things beyond need.

Point 1. The social movement gets formed because people have some grievance/ common cause that is directed against the wider system in which they operate. Thus that grievance is EXCLUSIVE. It does not include those that are happy with the status quo

Point 2. Within that paramenter of exclusivity, there can be a democratic organization

Point 3. In order to prevent fragmentation, the antagonizer`s system and its proponenets must be excluded

Point 4. In order to bring congruence between individual identity frames and the collective identity of the movement, the collective identity when not framed on ``equity based on justice`` will result in hierarchy

Point 5. Hierarchy results in bureaucracy and then fragmentation.

Point 6. If the collective identity is framed on ``equity based on justice``, and gets institutionalized, as the Quran`s purpose is, then going against that and following selfish desire- fragmentation technique of the antagonizer- is considered individual moral failure because your ``psychological`` conscience kicks in.

This was the kind of movement that Jesus and Muhammed developed and later after them it fragmented by incorporating things from the ``antagonizers`` that the original movement developed against and thus became quite ineffective as justice producing instruments...

Masadi, I think you need to visit this famous quote :


``Anyone who cannot cope with mathematics is not fully human. At best he
is a tolerable subhuman who has learned to wear shoes, bathe and not
make a mess in the house.``

In your case, dear Masadi, it is doubtful that the sixth word in the second sentence of this quote would apply.

Learn to count. Learn some maths. Have some fun. Get a life. Come to Karachi. Meet up with Chowk friends. Friendly hugs can dissolve the animosity in your heart.


More about Gauss and his sense of humour.
Gauss was once asked how soon he expected to reach certain mathematical
conclusions. With a smile, Gauss replied that he had them long ago, all he was worrying about was how to reach them!

Re: # 98

tahmed sahib:

To continue....

Actually we give a damn to the `person` called Gauss. What we remember are his theorems. Futhermore, if Gauss had not got those theorems someone else would have ... just because these theorems are there to be picked in a certain (narrow) linguistic framework .... and that person`s name could well have been md. ghaus :)

Re: # 97 by tahmed32:

tahmed sahib:

I found your post in bad taste. Since I respect you let me explain. I believe that Gauss, or anyone for that matter, is no more or no less than any other random person. Some people are interested in politics, some in music and yet some others, like me, in chowk. We do what we like the best we can. All of a sudden society takes note and makes some `great` and others `small`. But not all in society do so ... this is the domain of those who see the movie on Nash and claim to know Game Theory, or that stupid book on chaos and claim to know `chaos` theory. You sir, are beyond that and I am being serious when I say so. Therefore, sir, could it not be likely that a person does not know multiplications of 9 (that being very linear) but have a deep perception of social (complicated) dynamics. I am not saying that masadi is a genius ... at least not yet. But, sir, given my experience I would not be surprised if I am to be proven wrong. I hope you do not mind my writing this post.

Alphanull: #79
The correction in Gauss`s name has now been made. Thanks for pointing out my oversight. Be well,
Mohammad Gill

What is Gauss compared to Masadi??!! Masadi can recite the 9 ka pahara with only a few mistakes!!!

#94 that is eggjactly my fascination..that these guys had a system in place where they could get their peers to review stuff.

Re: # 87
Jang, we injuns had done some of this a bit before...... For example the Kerala school of mathematicians had folks like Madhava (who discovered the Maclaurins expansion of cos, sin etc about a couple of hundred years before the Europeans discovered it....Neelakantha who discovered the series for pi , tan inverse etc before Leibniz...

Some people like Jagannatha were doing stuff in the 1700`s but eventually when there is an absence of formal universities and patronage you are going to have problems.

Re: # 89 by masadi:

(With apologies to Gill).

Masadi:

Following your rebuke: ``Sit down and do some writing...``, I have written something for you in my ilog. If you want to continue then time permitting, I would be glad to do so. But not here. Somewhere else .... maybe UP or maybe we can stick to out ilogs.

Regards