For once, we were there early...

History was made yesterday...

Since we were moving all weekend and wouldn't have got the time to cook dinner, Vidhya and Srini were kind enough to invite us for dinner yesterday at their place... We didn't take too much time thinking and readily accepted... Time of 7.30 PM was agreed upon mutually...

When we actually went to their place and knocked at the door, we were invited with curious looks with the odd "Hi!"... After 15 minutes of deliberate conversation Vidhya asked "Do you guys know that daylight savings period has ended?"

Lakshmi and I exchanged shocked (O-My-God-How-Did-I-Forget) looks. In all the hoopla about moving, we had forgotten that the clock was set back by an hour.

The mystery of how-on-earth-could-these-guys-arrive-early was also solved for Vidhya... For the first time in the history of our married life, we were there for a get-together earlier than expected...

Not by intent, I should add...

RE: Puzzle : Old one..

-----Original Message-----
From: Ganesan, Swaminathan
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 8:57 AM
To: All of them
Subject: RE: Puzzle : Old one..

How come no one here questioned this...

I have a related problem for which I would love to know the answer...

Many a time, we employ what is called "inductive reasoning" in finding out patterns in sequences like this... But as you know, such reasoning is not accurate, or should I say definite... Sundu's problem is one example... My question is how good inductive reasoning is... How far can we rely on this...

For instance, there can be more than one plausible reasoning that can be given for such sequences and series.. That is, they fit into more than one pattern (upto the finite number of terms that they have been expressed)

In fact, I have seen puzzles where usually everyone agrees on a particular pattern and says that is the "right answer"... Until later, when some crooked brain gives an equally plausible alternative answer... I am pondering on how good such questions are to go into aptitude tests (be it for a company or for a university) when the answers are not accurate... It follows rather immediately that people who set such question papers better say, "give a next number for this sequence and a plausible reasoning" and value the answers based on that rather than saying "give THE next number for this sequence"...

Hmm.. This is probably worth a blog post... Will do when I have time...

-----Original Message-----
From: Sundar Ramakrishnan [mailto:sundar.ramakrishnan@somewhere.com]
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 9:04 PM
To: All of us
Subject: Re: Puzzle : Old one..


the correct answer is 3..
reasoning:
12 - Twelve - 6 letters
6 - Six - 3 letters
10 - Ten - 3 letters

On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 09:36:31 -0700, Ganesan, Swaminathan wrote:
> No. of divisors other than the number itself for 12 = 5 (isnt it?)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lavanya Kannan [mailto:lavanya.kannan@somewhere.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 1:29 AM
> To: All of us
> Subject: Re: Puzzle : Old one..
>
> is it 3? : number of divisors other than the number itself ?
>
> Why is this a puzzle?
>
> On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 13:18:26 +0530, Sundar Ramakrishnan
>
>
> wrote:
> > No. Wrong answer.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Sundu
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 09:19:03 +0200, Jose, Ann Catherine
> > wrote:
> > > Is it 2?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Ann Catherine Jose.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Sundar Ramakrishnan [mailto:sundar@somewhere.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 12:14 PM
> > > To: All of us
> > > Subject: Puzzle : Old one..
> > >
> > > A man wanted to enter an exclusive club but did not know the
> > > password that was required. He waited by the door and listened. A
> > > club member knocked on the door and the doorman said, "12." The
> > > member replied, "6 " and was let in. A second member came to the
> > > door and the doorman said, "6". The member replied "3", and was
> > > let in. The man thought he had heard enough and walked up to the
> > > door. The doorman said ,"10" and the man replied, "5." But he was
> > > not let in. What should have he said?
> > >
> >
>

Why I hate drive-thru's

(Outside a Mexican food joint, in the drive-thru area)
...
I(shouting out): I want a bean chalupa and...
She: A bee? chalupa, okay, anything else...
I(not sure what she heard): No, a beannnn chalupa, not beefff...
She: Bean or Beef?
I: Beannnnnnnnn-uh.... not beeffffffffffff-uh... (louder) No beeffff... No beefffffffff... Only beannnnnnnsssss...
...
...

Keyhole

After experimenting a bit of 3-D animation with a trial version of Keyhole's technology on a computer that did not have the recommended hardware support, I am amazed and astounded.

The spread of the salwar

Very interesting!.

Not just South India, I am able to see a few Americans adapt to this dress.

Sandalwood smuggler Veerappan shot dead

Apart from other things, this also means that Tamil Nadu has lost a future chief minister (atleast MLA) and TN history will not be as colourful as it could have been...

:`(

More Cricket Etc...

@Cricinfo:A number of players walked today, and Michael Kasprowicz did so even though it appeared that David Shepherd, the umpire who must have been hopping all through the lunch break because the score was 111, would not have given him out. Is that dissent? Should he be fined?

@Rediff:And while you are pondering the nuances, here is something else to think about: a Gilchrist, say, has now an established reputation for honesty, for fair play. If, tomorrow, he does not walk when there is an appeal (and there is no suggestion of dishonesty here -- he could genuinely think he was not out, though evidence indicates otherwise), will umpires tend to automatically give him the benefit, even when none exists?

None of the three batsmen who walked yesterday would have imagined in their wildest dreams that such a spin could be given to a straightforward voluntary act on the field.

Objectivity has never been the cricket writer's forte. After all they don't get to report politics or cinema. All they get to talk about is a slow traditional game played wearing white clothes for over a period of five days. So, maybe it is understandable that they try to liven up proceedings by indulging in such imaginary logic puzzles.

I see that the writer's name in Rediff is "Deepti Patwardhan". I would just go as far to ask if this can be called the "Mandira Bedi Effect"?

And stop :-)

Cricket Etc...

Ram Guha has written about laurels given by foreign cricketers to their Indian counterparts and vice versa through the years. He has restricted himself to off-the-field compliments. But one great compliment I can remember was on-field.

The utter bewilderment that Shane Warne showed when he was foxed by a Tendulkar googly in a recent test in Chepauk is probably the best compliment Tendulkar can ever get for his bowling skills! Ian Chappell iced the cake by adding "If there was anyone in the world that you would hope to pick a wrong 'un it should be Warne. This time he couldn't!"

While talking about cricket followers, he rues the fact that today's Indian cricket fans are more fanatics than fans in the way they sometimes abuse cricketers of other nations. As weird counter examples to this we can point out how Javed Miandad made his team do a victory lap in Chennai during their last tour and the team was given a standing ovation at the end of one of the most gripping games in recent times. And a banner that cried out "Kill Azhar!" shown when Azhar was returning to the pavilion in the infamous 1996 world cup semi-final against Srilanka.

By the way, these are not counter examples to the fact that fans today are fanatics. Only that their eccentricity and chauvinism does not have a definite orientation.

The award for giving the "oddest of all compliments" should go to Tendulkar himself. As captain, when he was asked to comment on Jayasurya's 340 on a dead wicket, Tendulkar said he hadn't seen Bradman bat but has seen Jayasurya. He went on to explain why Jayasurya was simply the best batsman that he has seen in his life. Not that Jayasurya doesn't deserve such praise, but I just thought it was too odd in this particular case. To compare Jayasurya with Bradman for making 300-odd on the flattest of wickets against an Indian bowling that can't in anyway be called a "bowling attack" just seemed a little out of place.

Parthale Paravasam

I saw half of Balachander's movie "Parthale Paravasam" today and dozed off under the impression that something seriously damaging has happened with Balachander's brain.

When I woke up, Lakshmi had seen it in full and she confirmed my doubts.

Apart from giving us this piece of information, the movie didn't do much else.

Gandhi-Nehru Abuse Watch

As was mentioned earlier, the trend continues...