I don’t mind this post—or else, I will be a moral coward

I’ve had psychic attacks on me. Around 0n the heart region. In medical terms, it is called the angina pectoris.

Esp. for some time before the time that Yakoob Memon got hanged—and esp. when the legal proceedings were in place. Whether in the middle of the night, or for some 40+ hours before that.

And continuing through all that f***ing drama. Almost as if, say, the Pakis would love it.

All these hassles—I mean the psychic attacks—began in mid-1998. They continue. Sometimes with great intensity; at other times in a more subdued manner. There was a bit of a respite in the wake of India’s nuclear deal, but there was an agonizing decade in between 1998 and 2008. Many of you would know about what I went through, during those times.

Given their cowardly nature, the sources could only be one of the two (or both):

  1. Pakistanis
  2. Americans (including the White House, esp. the “Bricks Falling upon Indians” version of it)

As far as I can isolate, there is no third choice.

Putting the two together, the source has to be:

The White and Black B*****ds, including those in Pentagon, supporting Pakistanis in the Washington DC, with the chain of command possibly going up to the White House (even though after the nuclear deal, and considering the receded strength of the psychic attacks, I would suppose that it may no longer reach all that high up a place).

If I have erred about it, I will the first to correct it. Give me the evidence, will you?

But, no, I don’t think I have erred here in the first place. I do have a pretty good mind. (Call it the brains if you wish. And put it as: “God has given me a good mind,” if you wish. It doesn’t matter much here: The task remains the same: locating the source of these cowardly attacks.)

The day the stupid educated Indians and the learned Objectivists begin to acknowledge the existence of factors like these would be the day the means—psychic attacks—would begin losing their cutting edge. At least the direction of it.

* * * * *   * * * * *   * * * * *

Yes, the first version was written after having some drinks, late in the night [around 2:30 AM, on 2015.07.31 night i.e. 2015.08.01 very early morning, technically speaking]. Yes, I did consider deleting the entire post. No, I am not going to do that. I will let this post hang around, at least for a while. It is important—morally important—that I keep it around for at least some time. So, instead of outright deleting it, I have made its text as acceptable in the common social discourse as possible: I have inserted the stars in the spellings of the unacceptable words. Finally: no, I have never in my life entertained skeptics as such. They—their premises—make knowledge impossible. That’s why.

* * * * *   * * * * *   * * * * *

A bit further:

The attacks don’t occur every day, but that’s not important. What is important is the fact that they continue to occur.

The attacks always occur in concentrated doses. (That’s why they are not a matter of the victim’s Karma—only of the attacker’s.) They are always organized around the events and issues that the Americans think are important—whether the Pakis are involved or not (though, they did begin only in the mid-1998, and, at that time, the issues related to the Pakis were involved). But to tell you why I think it is the Americans (esp. the Californians) who are in the driving seat here: (i) the attacks began only after quite a few months I spent in the SF Bay Area. (ii) The last time there were these psychically influential waves—but in a more subdued manner, in a manner that cannot be considered as “attacks” as such—were those which were going on (on separate days or occasions) for a few weeks before the time of the recent US Supreme Court’s gay marriage decision. And the nature of these influence were summarily—nay, exclusively—only in the favor of supporting gay marriages. There was not even a shade of a psychic influence on the other side—at least I wasn’t made a victim for it. The source, thus, has to be leaning on to the “left,” at least in my case. Nuclear tests would get only the “left” agitated enough to launch such attacks on select individuals.

So, no, S.F. Bay Areans, esp. the Indian retards settled there, no: the attacks don’t originate from the Religious Right—at least, not always. And there is a reason for it. The “right” usually is under the influence of religion, and the Christian and Judaic traditions have got enough of The Enlightenment spirit—the pro-life in the pre-abortion debate sense—infused in them, that, just like a normal Hindu, attacking others using spiritual means is something they would find morally repelling—even if they could do it. Whether their philosophy of the mind includes the theses of reincarnation/rebirth and “karma” or not, whether they can explicitly justify their moral stance in a rational discourse or not, the fact is, their morality, in this matter, is sufficiently good. They at least have morality.

In contrast, the“left” in principle has none, and that’s why, say, a hippie in Santa Cruz or Jenner, wouldn’t hesitate picking up the spiritual techniques he learnt from Indian, Tibetan, Amazon etc. masters and using it against whoever he regards his enemies. And, by now, American politicians, too, have become retarded enough to go along those lines. You say Pentagon or Washington DC? What is the society from which they draw their members anyway?

No, you can’t say that I am just a “radio” catching these things. Nope. It’s very easy to distinguish between these attacks, and your usual everyday “experiential sphere”—which does include some psychic waves, for anyone. The psychic experience here is the abnormal one. My point is: something far more acute and directed goes on here. You can’t say that this guy (i.e. me) just has become one of those noosphere eggs. For one thing, a noosphere egg is a machine, not a living individual. For another thing, I don’t register every thing that these eggs do—though I was almost daily being attacked during the late 90s and the early naughties, I didn’t at all catch the 9/11, even if they—the noosphere eggs—did. Neither did I catch the killing of Osama bin Laden. So, I am not too abnormal; left on my own, I mostly don’t catch these things—unless there is someone doing a very well intentioned and well-directed attack on me, for whatever it is “worth” to them. (Really speaking, concepts like “worth” don’t apply here; the standard of values is the principle of life, not that of the anti-life.)




Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Errors in my CFD notes for the lecture no. 3

I have taken off the slides for the Lecture # 3 of my introductory course on CFD, because it contained some serious errors. (….Yes, those were the serious errors—not just typos.)

I had caught the errors right the next day after posting it (about 10 days ago), but it so happened that in the meanwhile, I ended up (literally) wasting my time (and money) attending to certain highly promising promises of interviews for a professor’s job, as well as also actually attending a couple of highly promising interviews for promising positions of a professor, and subsequently, also trying to interact with the  “management”s of these colleges.

I therefore couldn’t find the frame of the mind (and in fact also the necessary time at one stretch) to write down those lengthy equations in LaTeX, by way of rectifying the mistakes. I in fact was also traveling for these job-related matters. During these last 10 days, I visited some 4 places out of town, with two of them being more than a hundred km away. … No, I haven’t landed a professor’s job yet.

Anyway, back to the mistakes in the uploaded notes.

The mistakes in particular were concerned with the tensor calculus part of the slides. I caught the mistakes when I went a bit further in my notes, to the point of preparing the slides for the next couple of lectures—which would be: on the Navier-Stokes equations.

I had never worked out the full derivation of the Navier-Stokes equations in this way, i.e., for an infinitesimal CV, but using the Eulerian approach right from the beginning. … In the past, I had always relied on books, and never worked out my own derivations without referring to the proofs given in them. Many of these books are excellent. However, for the infinitesmal CV, they all always derive it only in the Lagrangian frame, and only later on do they use the vector calculus manipulations (or identities) to map the end-result to the Eulerian frame. Every one proceeds only that way. None does what I had unwittingly ended up attempting. …

… In fact, most of them use only the Reynolds’ Transport Theorem or RTT for short. (BTW, Reynolds had never himself stated this theorem in his entire life-time; the entire RTT movement was started only later, by an MIT professor.) Now, RTT is an integral approach, not differential. Usually, the books do the derivation using the RTT, and then proceed to get the differential form from this initial integral form. In the rare cases that they at all try to use an infinitesimal CV in an ab initio manner, they invariably use only the Lagrangian i.e. the non-conservative form.

Indeed, see the unanswered query on the Physics StackExchange here: [^]. … The first part of the question has gone unanswered for 3.5 years by now, after 10,000+ views. So, you know what I was getting at, here. And how, my errors, caught by me before engaging a single class based on these notes, therefore, might perhaps be excusable.

Anyway, what is more important is to note down the references which I found useful in working out this entire issue. These are the following two. (No, they of course don’t give you the derivation; they just deal with the basics of tensors and their calculus):

  • “A brief introduction to tensors and their properties,” by Prof. Allan Bower of Brown (a fellow iMechanician!) [^]
  • “Tensor derivative (continuum mechanics,” Wiki, section on divergence of a tensor [^] (and Prof. Piaras Kelly’s notes that it refers to, here [ (.PDF) ^] )

I then worked out the tensors appearing in the Navier-Stokes equations, in fully expanded components form. In this way, my path-way to the final Navier-Stokes equations now seems OK.

In other words, yes, I am now getting ready to answer that Physics StackExchange question, in my upcoming notes. … Give me a few days’ time, and both the components-wise worked out results, as well as the relevant portion excerpted for the slides of the Lecture # 3 of my CFD course, should be online.

But, also, please note, I haven’t run my work by anyone so far. So, it’s still an easy possibility that there are some elementary mistakes in it, too. At least, it would be easy enough for some unwarranted assumptions to creep in. (For instance, it was only during this recent phase of working out these things that I gathered for the first time in my life that there are some subtle pre-suppositions going into the Helmholtz decomposition theorem for the vector fields, too—assumptions like the field having to approach zero as distance tends to infinity—assumptions that I wasn’t at all aware of….) Therefore, I do plan to privately run my notes through a few mechanician friends/blogging acquaintances—even as I simultaneously post them here, within a few days’ time.

BTW, no, coming to those earlier errors in the Lecture #3 slides, even if someone had caught my errors (IMO, a low probability), none had pointed it out to me. None. I found it on my own. But only after publishing something else, in the first place!!

* * * * *   * * * * *   * * * * *

A Song I Like:

You are (or at least should be) well-familiar with the well-worn out story by now.


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

An introductory course on CFD—3

The Beamer slides for Lecture # 3 are uploaded; see here [^].

This lecture is not directly concerned with CFD, or for that matter, even with fluid dynamics proper. It instead concerns itself with some material that is pre-requisite to both. Namely, the topic of tensors. However, Indian universities don’t cover this topic very well during the earlier, pre-requisite courses—esp. at the UG level. So, I decided to throw in some formulae and a few points concerning vectors and tensors, that’s all.

The material for this lecture, thus, is totally “extra” (at least in a course on CFD). The treatment here is, therefore, very cursory. The idea was to give students at least some background into these topics, by way of a rapid review.

As usual, feel free to point out errors and offer criticism.

Further, this topic being challenging to present to a newcomer in a brief manner, this lecture is the one where I am confident in the least. (At least, it’s the first lecture of this kind.) So, any suggestions for a better presentation would be highly appreciated (though, given my experience of this blog, really speaking, I don’t expect any comments to come in, anyway.)

All the same, I am happy that so much of typing in of these equations is, finally, out of the way!


* * * * *   * * * * *   * * * * *

A Song I Like:

I still have not yet reviewed and taken a decision as to the song I like, also for this time round.

So, this section will continue to remain suspended.



Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

An introductory course on CFD—2

The Beamer slides for Lecture # 2 are uploaded, here [^].

As usual, feel free to point out errors and offer criticism.

[I did spot a few typos in the Lecture # 1 (see previous post). These are being corrected, and an improved version will be uploaded some time later.]

Update on 2015.07.16:

For the convenience in updating, I have created a separate page at my personal Web site; it holds all the links to the material for this CFD course.

* * * * *   * * * * *   * * * * *

A Song I Like:

I have not yet reviewed and taken a decision as to the song I like.

So, this section will remain suspended, for the time being.


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

An introductory course on CFD—1

I have uploaded the Beamer slides for the Lecture # 1 of an introductory course on CFD, here [^]. [Note: contents (and the specific link) may change anytime without notice.]

Feel free to download/browse. Also feel free to point out any typos, errors, or even mistakes, if any, of basic understanding. Also feel free to suggest any additions or changes. [But note, figures won’t figure in, in the near future.]

The last post in this series [^] was made when my old HDD was still intact. As you know, the HDD had a crash, and I lost most of my recent 1.5 years’ data. That certainly included my earlier notes on CFD. (I was more than half-way through, when the HDD crashed.)

The present notes (slides) represent my new effort. The notes are being written, once again, starting from the scratch. [No, not using the scratches on the surface of the conked up HDD, but, you know, starting from the scratch.]

I have not yet been engaged to give these lectures anywhere. I am just writing these notes on my own, with the anticipation that I would get a job in which I would be able to teach the course.

Hope that this material entices them, helps convince them… and they give me a job soon.

Update on 2015.07.16:

For the convenience in updating, I have created a separate page at my personal Web site; it holds all the links to the material for this CFD course.

* * * * *   * * * * *   * * * * *

A Song I Like:

(Marathi) “de malaa ge chandrike preetee tujhee”
Music: Hridaynath Mangeshkar
Singer: Lata Mangeshkar
Lyrics: Raja Badhe
[Additions to/editing of this post is not likely, though, the slides document may change.]



Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment