Let me refer to collected works of Kuttichathan and find a way out for myself :-)))
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Anil M <[email protected]> wrote: > Damodar, u estimate or not but u have to help him find out which is true... > * Everything is possible or Nothing is impossible.* (The Mumabi- Pune > route is tricky. In Bheja Fry, Vinay Pathak. travels in a bus in the same > route :))....Even Delhi philosophers couldn’t help him, since he is a non > believer, god also can't help him. > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 8:11 PM, damodar prasad > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> aayo..Funny Games changed my perception of the world. Hence, NO >> ESTIMATION. >> >> On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 7:59 PM, sreenivas v.p >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> if u want fun, help me clarifying one of my long standing doubt . >>> i was travelling in a bus from mumbai to pune . inside the bus , it is >>> written in a poster >>> like this " *Everything is possible*" . >>> >>> but even after reading that poster repeatedly , i could not convince >>> myself that everything is possible . everytime i say "everything is possible >>> ", the impossibility of something haunted me . >>> after reaching pune , i asked my friends . some people including me felt >>> that it is better to say " *nothing is impossible* " but some were of >>> the opinion that " everything is possible " gives more confidence . >>> we even discussed this with a professor of philosophy in delhi university >>> but nobody could reach an agreement . >>> this may see very silly to u but i am still confused . >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> --- On *Thu, 2/4/09, damodar prasad <[email protected]>* wrote: >>> >>> >>> From: damodar prasad <[email protected]> >>> Subject: [GreenYouth] Re: Was Einstein Wrong? >>> To: [email protected] >>> Date: Thursday, 2 April, 2009, 7:45 PM >>> >>> >>> sorry, over-estimate! >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 7:45 PM, damodar prasad >>> <[email protected]<http://in.mc87.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> I don't want to underestimate you, sreenivas. Have fun! >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 7:37 PM, sreenivas v.p < >>>> [email protected]<http://in.mc87.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> >>>> > wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Damodar , >>>>> >>>>> I wrote that as an introduction , I think three theories changed our >>>>> perception about ourselves and the universe . >>>>> 1. Theory of relativity >>>>> 2. Marxism >>>>> 3. darwin's theory of evolution . >>>>> the world before these men of genius has no singificance . >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> --- On *Thu, 2/4/09, damodar prasad >>>>> <[email protected]<http://in.mc87.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> >>>>> >* wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> From: damodar prasad >>>>> <[email protected]<http://in.mc87.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> >>>>> > >>>>> Subject: [GreenYouth] Re: Was Einstein Wrong? >>>>> To: >>>>> [email protected]<http://in.mc87.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> >>>>> Date: Thursday, 2 April, 2009, 7:16 PM >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Srinivas, >>>>> >>>>> *like Marxism , another theory that changed our perception about the >>>>> world was Einstein's theory of relativity . >>>>> >>>>> did you write the above sentence? or the sydney team.. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> * On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 6:57 PM, sreenivas v.p < >>>>> [email protected]<http://in.mc87.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]> >>>>> > wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> * It outhrown the newtonian conception of the world and lead >>>>>> to revolutionary discoveries in the study of the universe . But was >>>>>> Einstein wrong ? * >>>>>> *See the below report . * >>>>>> >>>>>> SYDNEY -- A team of Australian scientists has proposed that the speed >>>>>> of light may not be a constant, a revolutionary idea that could unseat >>>>>> one >>>>>> of the most cherished laws of modern physics -- Einstein's theory of >>>>>> relativity. >>>>>> The team, led by theoretical physicist Paul Davies of Sydney's >>>>>> Macquarie University, say it is possible that the speed of light has >>>>>> slowed >>>>>> over billions of years. >>>>>> If so, physicists will have to rethink many of their basic ideas about >>>>>> the laws of the universe. >>>>>> "That means giving up the theory of relativity and E-mc squared and >>>>>> all that sort of stuff," Davies told Reuters. >>>>>> "But of course it doesn't mean we just throw the books in the bin, >>>>>> because it's in the nature of scientific revolution that the old theories >>>>>> become incorporated in the new ones." >>>>>> Davies, and astrophysicists Tamara Davis and Charles Lineweaver from >>>>>> the University of New South Wales published the proposal in the August 8 >>>>>> edition of scientific journal *Nature.* (it also appeared in latest >>>>>> "Scientific american " magazine ). >>>>>> The suggestion that the speed of light can change is based on data >>>>>> collected by UNSW astronomer John Webb, who posed a conundrum when he >>>>>> found >>>>>> that light from a distant quasar, a star-like object, had absorbed the >>>>>> wrong >>>>>> type of photons from interstellar clouds on its 12 billion year journey >>>>>> to >>>>>> earth. >>>>>> Davies said fundamentally Webb's observations meant that the structure >>>>>> of atoms emitting quasar light was slightly but ever so significantly >>>>>> different to the structure of atoms in humans. >>>>>> The discrepancy could only be explained if either the electron charge, >>>>>> or the speed of light, had changed. >>>>>> "But two of the cherished laws of the universe are the law that >>>>>> electron charge shall not change and that the speed of light shall not >>>>>> change, so whichever way you look at it we're in trouble," Davies said. >>>>>> To establish which of the two constants might not be that constant >>>>>> after all, Davies' team resorted to the study of black holes, mysterious >>>>>> astronomical bodies that suck in stars and other galactic features. >>>>>> They also applied another dogma of physics, the second law of >>>>>> thermodynamics, which Davies summarizes as "you can't get something for >>>>>> nothing." >>>>>> After considering that a change in the electron charge over time would >>>>>> violate the sacrosanct second law of thermodynamics, they concluded that >>>>>> the >>>>>> only option was to challenge the constancy of the speed of light. >>>>>> More study of quasar light is needed in order to validate Webb's >>>>>> observations, and to back up the proposal that light speed may vary, a >>>>>> theory Davies stresses represents only the first chink in the armor of >>>>>> the >>>>>> theory of relativity. >>>>>> >>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>> Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Invite them now. >>>>>> >>>>>> <http://in.rd.yahoo.com/tagline_messenger_6/*http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>> Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Invite them now. >>>>> >>>>> <http://in.rd.yahoo.com/tagline_messenger_6/*http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Invite them now. >>> >>> <http://in.rd.yahoo.com/tagline_messenger_6/*http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/> >>> >>> >> >> >> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
