Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Visiter zone





Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Yahoo Online.

Thursday, October 15, 2009

Diwali Aarti,Aartis for Diwali,Maa Lakshmi Aarti,Shree Ganesha Aarti,Om Jaya Jagadheesha Hare,Hindu Diwali Aartis

Diwali Aarti,Aartis for Diwali,Maa Lakshmi Aarti,Shree Ganesha
Aarti,Om Jaya Jagadheesha Hare,Hindu Diwali Aartis


Shared via AddThis
Send this eCard !

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

France_da_vinci_discovery.

 
Posted by Picasa

This undated photo provided Wednesday Oct. 14, 2009 by Lumiere Technology in Paris shows a painting that art experts believe they have identified a new Leonardo da Vinci. Peter Paul Biro, a Montreal-based forensic art expert, said Tuesday that a fingerprint on what was presumed to be a 19th-century German painting of a young woman has convinced art experts that it's actually a da Vinci.

Gandhi tops list of who should have won Nobel Peace Prize.

Washington: Mahatma Gandhi tops the list of seven people who never won the Nobel Peace Prize "but should have" in the opinion of prestigious Foreign Policy magazine.

Noting that from Henry Kissinger to Yasser Arafat, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has made some controversial picks over the years, the magazine listed Eleanor Roosevelt, Vaclav Havel, Ken Saro-Wiwa, Sari Nusseibeh, Corazon Aquino and Liu Xiaobo as the other six deserving but deprived ones.


Gandhi, the magazine noted "was the spiritual and political leader of the Indian independence movement and an advocate of non-violent resistance as a means to effect social change".

"History's most famous pacifist is probably the peace prize's most famous omission, and the Nobel Foundation has even a web page explaining its side of the story," it noted.

"Gandhi made the Nobel short list three times: in 1937, 1947, and then posthumously in 1948. In 1937, the committee's advisor criticised Gandhi's dual role as a peace activist and political leader of an independence movement, writing that 'he is frequently a Christ, but then, suddenly, an ordinary politician'."

As India and Pakistan achieved independence in 1947, Gandhi's crowning triumph was tempered by the violence and dislocation that resulted.

"With tensions growing in the summer of 1947, the Nobel committee hesitated to award the peace prize to someone so closely identified with one of the combatants," the magazine said.

The committee also seems to have been affected by regional and racial biases; most of the prior awards had been given to white European men, it said.

Although the committee considered awarding Gandhi the prize in 1948, following his assassination, Alfred Nobel's will clearly required that the award be given to a living person.

However, the decision to not dispense any award that year because "there was no suitable living candidate" appears to be an implicit admission that the committee missed its opportunity to recognise Gandhi's accomplishments, Foreign Policy said.

Sunday, October 11, 2009

Srinivasa Ramanujan.

Srinivasa Ramanujan

It is one of the most romantic stories in the history of mathematics: in 1913, the English mathematician G. H. Hardy received a strange letter from an unknown clerk in Madras, India. The ten-page letter contained about 120 statements of theorems on infinite series, improper integrals, continued fractions, and number theory . Every prominent mathematician gets letters from cranks, and at first glance Hardy no doubt put this letter in that class. But something about the formulas made him take a second look, and show it to his collaborator J. E. Littlewood. After a few hours, they concluded that the results "must be true because, if they were not true, no one would have had the imagination to invent them".

Thus was Srinivasa Ramanujan (1887-1920) introduced to the mathematical world. Born in South India, Ramanujan was a promising student, winning academic prizes in high school. But at age 16 his life took a decisive turn after he obtained a book titled A Synopsis of Elementary Results in Pure and Applied Mathematics. The book was simply a compilation of thousands of mathematical results, most set down with little or no indication of proof. It was in no sense a mathematical classic; rather, it was written as an aid to coaching English mathematics students facing the notoriously difficult Tripos examination, which involved a great deal of wholesale memorization. But in Ramanujan it inspired a burst of feverish mathematical activity, as he worked through the book's results and beyond. Unfortunately, his total immersion in mathematics was disastrous for Ramanujan's academic career: ignoring all his other subjects, he repeatedly failed his college exams.

As a college dropout from a poor family, Ramanujan's position was precarious. He lived off the charity of friends, filling notebooks with mathematical discoveries and seeking patrons to support his work. Finally he met with modest success when the Indian mathematician Ramachandra Rao provided him with first a modest subsidy, and later a clerkship at the Madras Port Trust. During this period Ramanujan had his first paper published, a 17-page work on Bernoulli numbers that appeared in 1911 in the Journal of the Indian Mathematical Society. Still no one was quite sure if Ramanujan was a real genius or a crank. With the encouragement of friends, he wrote to mathematicians in Cambridge seeking validation of his work. Twice he wrote with no response; on the third try, he found Hardy.

Hardy wrote enthusiastically back to Ramanujan, and Hardy's stamp of approval improved Ramanujan's status almost immediately. Ramanujan was named a research scholar at the University of Madras, receiving double his clerk's salary and required only to submit quarterly reports on his work. But Hardy was determined that Ramanujan be brought to England. Ramanujan's mother resisted at first--high-caste Indians shunned travel to foreign lands--but finally gave in, ostensibly after a vision. In March 1914, Ramanujan boarded a steamer for England.

Ramanujan's arrival at Cambridge was the beginning of a very successful five-year collaboration with Hardy. In some ways the two made an odd pair: Hardy was a great exponent of rigor in analysis, while Ramanujan's results were (as Hardy put it) "arrived at by a process of mingled argument, intuition, and induction, of which he was entirely unable to give any coherent account". Hardy did his best to fill in the gaps in Ramanujan's education without discouraging him. He was amazed by Ramanujan's uncanny formal intuition in manipulating infinite series, continued fractions, and the like: "I have never met his equal, and can compare him only with Euler or Jacobi."

One remarkable result of the Hardy-Ramanujan collaboration was a formula for the number p(n) of partitions of a number n. A partition of a positive integer n is just an expression for n as a sum of positive integers, regardless of order. Thus p(4) = 5 because 4 can be written as 1+1+1+1, 1+1+2, 2+2, 1+3, or 4. The problem of finding p(n) was studied by Euler, who found a formula for the generating function of p(n) (that is, for the infinite series whose nth term is p(n)xn). While this allows one to calculate p(n) recursively, it doesn't lead to an explicit formula. Hardy and Ramanujan came up with such a formula (though they only proved it works asymptotically; Rademacher proved it gives the exact value of p(n)).

Ramanujan's years in England were mathematically productive, and he gained the recognition he hoped for. Cambridge granted him a Bachelor of Science degree "by research" in 1916, and he was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society (the first Indian to be so honored) in 1918. But the alien climate and culture took a toll on his health. Ramanujan had always lived in a tropical climate and had his mother (later his wife) to cook for him: now he faced the English winter, and he had to do all his own cooking to adhere to his caste's strict dietary rules. Wartime shortages only made things worse. In 1917 he was hospitalized, his doctors fearing for his life. By late 1918 his health had improved; he returned to India in 1919. But his health failed again, and he died the next year.

Besides his published work, Ramanujan left behind several notebooks, which have been the object of much study. The English mathematician G. N. Watson wrote a long series of papers about them. More recently the American mathematician Bruce C. Berndt has written a multi-volume study of the notebooks. In 1997 The Ramanujan Journal was launched to publish work "in areas of mathematics influenced by Ramanujan".

Monday, October 5, 2009