Search This Blog

Tuesday, April 12, 2016

Man from Earth (2007):-


Man from Earth (2007):-
Concept.

An amazing concept (also known as an idea) engages an audience.  If you engage an audience and deliver on that initial engagement, you build a larger audience thanks to word of mouth.     

There is a reason why the other Quora favorite sci-fi independent film, Primer, managed to become such a cult success.  The film tells the story of a couple average guys who accidentally discover time travel while working out of their garage.  That's an engaging concept.   
கதை??? அ…. படத்துல கதைன்னு ஒன்னு இல்ல.படமே ஒரு விடயம் பற்றி சில மனிதர்களுக்கு இடையில் நடக்கும் உரையாடல் தான். எப்படி சொல்றது?? ஓகே…இப்படித் தாங்க படம் ஆரம்பிக்குது.
PHILOSOPHICAL ISSUES: mortality, empirical evidence, religious faith.


CHARACTERS: John Oldman, Dan (black anthropologist), Harry (biologist, strange guy with glasses), Edith (older woman, devout Christian), Sandy (historian, John's girlfriend), Art (long blonde haired archeologist), Linda Murphy (Art's student), Will Gruber (old psychiatrist).

OTHER FILMS BY DIRECTOR RICHARD SCHENKMAN: And Then Came Love (2007)

SYNOPSIS: "An impromptu goodbye party for Professor John Oldman becomes a mysterious interrogation after the retiring scholar reveals to his colleagues he is an immortal who has walked the earth for 14,000 years. Acclaimed Sci-Fi writer Jerome Bixby conceived this story back in the early 1960's. It would come to be his last great work, finally completing it on his deathbed in April of 1998." – producer's website

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: 

1. Throughout the film, John’s friends search for ways to either confirm or disconfirm his story. What were some of their attempts, and what was John’s response?

2. Can you think of possible ways to confirm or disconfirm John’s story that hadn’t occurred to his friends?

3. John states that he once met someone that was like him, but when the two exchanged life stories, he couldn’t be sure that the other man was telling the truth, or just playing along. Is there anything that John and his friend could have said to each other that would have confirmed the truth of their stories?

4. Suppose that one of John’s friends was a linguist and asked John to prove his story by speaking in the many languages that he learned over the millennia. Suppose further that John was fluent in modern foreign languages, but only knew a few phrases of ancient ones. Would this hurt John’s claim?

5. Which of the friends’ reactions best (and least) reflects how you would have responded if you were in the room with John and the others that evening?

6. John states that he was the historical Jesus, and that early Christians embellished what actually happened to the point that it was no longer historically recognizable. Suppose this was true and, without John’s help, we tried to extract from the New Testament the portions that were historically true. What might we select and what might we reject?

7. What were John’s personal religious views, and if you lived 14,000 years like John, what might your religious views be?

8. From your perspective, what would be the most rewarding part about living 14,000 years, and what would be the least rewarding?

9. John said that he had a lot of money. How might he have accumulated it?

10. Suppose John wanted to bury something and dig it up centuries later, either for personal financial gain or historical benefit. What objects might he select, and what would guide his choice? 

11. John wasn’t capable of telling Sandy that he loved her. Granted, after 14,000 years of relationships, he would try to emotionally distance himself from people. But in view of the biological basis of romantic love, is that realistic for a 35 year old man? 

12. In an old Twilight Zone episode called “Long Live Walter Jameson”, a youthful-looking man is really 200 years old, and becomes engaged to a young woman. He is then shot by an old woman who was his wife from years earlier. In “The Man from Earth,” Sandy knows full well what her fate is with John, but is willing to go along with it anyway. Are either of these responses realistic?

13. John knew all along that Will was his son (as indicated in John’s facial response when he discovers that Will overheard him talking with Sandy about his Boston days). We might assume that John intentionally took a job at the college to be closer to his son. What kind of parental obligation did John have to Will throughout the years?


REVIEWS: 

The Man from Earth was a clever and intriguing movie. I really enjoyed the plot, because of the originality (to me at least) of it. First, positive points about the film: the scientific theorizing near the start as to how a man could live this long and what his or her body would be like worked well, but I thought it could have been drawn out a little more (the whole movie could have used a little more content in my opinion with such an interesting plot). It also raises some philosophical questions as to how a human mind that is, seemingly, so much like ours could not be worn out with life at this point and not just give up, staying at home all day watching TV until it croaked. A whole different philosophical point brought up is the conception of truth and proof. He continually claims he has no way of proving this to anyone, but what would count as proof anyway. If he did have scars or mementos, would those things really convince any of the people there. He could easily have falsified evidence for it with his knowledge, even more so if he had the knowledge of 14,000 years (but then his story at least would be true). The main thing that bothered me in this movie was brought up in class, and that was the denouncement of the story of Jesus. I agreed with whoever said it seems a little too easy to attack. Of course, the man who wrote this story, I sure, grew up around Christianity and he doubted it so it makes sense. I m not sure I believed (or would have believed, given I was told this) his story even after the revelation at the end. — T.E. 


The Man from Earth is a thought-provoker and leads us to question our beliefs and wonder if we can really know anything for sure. The main character in the movie is Professor John Oldman who leads his fellow colleagues in an interesting tale which starts with pre-historic man and leads though the history of modern man. But what is most interesting and controversial is that he lived though it all, or so he claims. This is (according to John) due to a quirk in his immune system that produces perfect cells, and the theory of him living outside of time. However, none of his friends can refute his claims. They have to take him at his word, and his explanations do appear to be quite believable. So believable that it shakes some of the characters to tears. When it comes to the topic of religion John claims to be Jesus and merely taught Buddhist teachings of Universal brotherhood, kindness, tolerance and love to the people of Judea. The main theme of this movie is an epistemological question; can we know for sure? How can we disprove John’s claims? His answers are convincing. They are not irrational, and it is possible they could happen given the truth of John’s explanations. Merely look at the teachings of Buddha and that of Jesus. They are strikingly similar aren’t they? I cannot disprove John, so I would have to (like the others) take him at his word. Why would an educated college professor lie to his colleagues and friends? Especially claims that are as outrageous as Johns (unless of course it was an intellectual philosophical experiment). But the end of the movie leads us to believe that is not the case. — A.V. 


I thought that The Man From Earth was a very good film. The main character, John Oldman, reveals to his colleagues that he is really a caveman from the Neolithic Era. He never ages and he only stays in one place about a decade before moving on. A majority of the movie is spent with his friends trying to prove that he is lying. This movie gives the philosophically inclined a lot of food for thought. It opens the door for some very good discussion on things like learning, family, identity, and sentiment. For example, if you lived 14,000 years how much knowledge could you acquire, what would be the limitations of how much information your brain could hold, or how would your capacity for memory hold up? Also, what would your mental health be like living so long? Having to watch the people you loved wither and die while you were forced to live on? Would the act of living lose its appeal? This movie really left me with a lot of good questions to mull over. I think it also succeeded in showing that you don’t have to have nudity, sex, or violence in a movie in order for it to be compelling. This movie could not have been very expensive to make. It was all shot in one house with a handful of D list actors and they still managed to make a great movie. I would recommend this film to anyone. A great storyline with excellent points brought up throughout the movie put this one at the top of my list. — J.R. 


The movie A Man From Earth was a very intriguing movie that put a different spin on the immortal living among us movie. I enjoyed watching it more than most movies that have come across recently. I also thoroughly enjoyed trying to figure out if he was really who he claimed to be and playing with the possibility that John was in fact immortal or something similar. The single most important detail to me John gave was that his cells could be replacing themselves faster than normal humans do. This could explain the fact he wouldn’t age or grow old after he reached his peak of his physical growth. When I heard this I reacted the same way as Harry he biologist did, as if it were a game to try make it really believable or try to disprove it. When Harry asks John to come to his lab to do some test John declines and lives the reason that he is scared of labs and test. I think this is a legitimate fear for someone as unique as him. He could be taken to a facility and have tests run on him till the end of time. Also, who knows what would happen if the tests revealed John’s secret and we could make everybody live as long as John. It could be used wrongly and cause lots of problems that would otherwise be would not have happened with normal human morality. — D.H. 


Overall, I thought the theme of The Man From Earth was thought provoking but the scenery left something to be desired. The question of what would happen if a caveman somehow survived to present day sparks an interesting discussion. The first question the audience is forced to think about is the nature of knowledge. How do we know someone is telling the truth? In this scenario, it seems evident that there is no real way to prove that his story is true, although many valiant attempts are made. At first, it seems reasonable that if this man were as old as he claimed to be, he would have some memento from the past. Since John doesn’t have anything like that, the only evidence he can produce is from his memory, which the others start to doubt. The assertion by John that he was Jesus also forces the audience and other characters in the movie to question the legitimacy of the proof of Jesus existence. This, as one can imagine, ruffled a few Christian feathers. The possibility of Jesus not being the miracle-performing son of God would certainly upset them because that’s the basis of their entire religion. However, this is a good point to examine. The stories of Jesus life came from the fallible memories of man, much like John’s story. — D.O. 


The Man from Earth posed an interesting philosophical argument via its presentation and introduction of characters in the beginning, and the unraveling of certain events and the characters responses to those events. Specifically, the main character of the film, Prof. John Oldman, begins to convince his colleagues that he is a 14,000 year old man. He persuasively argues his case by having a reasonably logical answer for each of their questions, and by owning many interesting historical artifacts from a variety of eras. However, when some of his testimony conflicts with some of the present company’s religious convictions, emotions get high and John calls the thought argument off. He then apologizes for having made such ridiculous claims, and his guests eventually laugh it off. However, the last guest to leave his house, overhears John speaking with his lover about some of the punny fake names he has used in the past, and this eldest guest of the party realizes that John was his father, who had abandoned their family when he was young. At this point, the possibility of John’s story being valid is reinstated. I really enjoyed this film because it allowed for an interesting thought argument to be logically picked apart in a semi-open and entertaining forum. It also objectively argued a different version of history than is popularly believed, which inspired me to think more broadly about what might have happened in the past despite what I have been taught to believe. — J.D. 


I may be the only English speaking person in the known world who found The Man From Earth a little lacking. Audio-visually it’s about as unimpressive as it gets. The score, if there was one, was unmemorable, and the camera work was basically just adequate to show who’s talking to who, and is unapologetically digital. Of course, that’s not what this movie is about. It’s a talking heads film, and so it’s generally acceptable that the majority of the action surrounds people talking to each other in an awkwardly lit cabin, especially given the extraordinary nature of the conversation to come. John, the main character, reveals that he’s a 14,000 year old cave man, one of the first Homo Sapiens to walk the earth, and that he as, as of yet, failed to die. After the initial proofs are asked for and dodged, the characters that make up Johns audience end up emotionally split, with some who wish to humor John and others who just wish he’d shut up. He continues on intermittently telling his story and answering further proofs, and eventually devolves in a tirade of endless historical name dropping which most prominently has him meet Buddha and become Jesus. This is where the film starts to become tiresome. As an early fan of fiction depicting immortals and exceptionally long lived characters, nothing struck me as particularly unique about any element of the story. The concept of Jesus having been influenced by Buddhist teachings was first discussed, I’d have to guess, some time around the first time literate Christians heard of Buddhism, or vice versa. The entire rest of the films plot content could have been lifted directly from the film and television versions of The Highlander, such as the difficulties and heartbreak of establishing new identities, early people’s views on the creepiness of immortality, and the difficulties of adapting to new technology. — J.E. 


The Man from Earth wonderful movie that kept me intrigued on a theory that a caveman could live for more than 14,000 years and still look young. He tells his friends that he has to move on because if he gets to attached to a particular area that he eventually makes people suspicious of his unnatural ability to never age. He leads them to believe that he is Jesus as history deemed him in those days. The theory of a man who cannot age is laughable to his friends until they see that he is serious and able to logically and chronologically layout this theory. He sees that his friends just cannot accept this theory; although some admire the scientific quality it has, so Professor John Oldman lets them stay skeptical or fundamentally contented. His description of possessions intrigued me because he points out it eventually becomes worthless and that he has nothing of significance to prove his worth in history, but he has an old Van Gogh in his possession; an original. He tells his friends about all the important people he knew and that he evolved to become an intelligent man over the years. For a movie that has no car chases and typical Hollywood action scenes, this movie captivated my imagination and the solidity the scientific and historical knowledge given. — D.M. 


The Man from Earth: The Man From Earth is the must-see sci-fi indie film of our time. The Man From Earth is a Neolithic man who, through some stroke of genetic luck perhaps, has lived to modern times. The movie is basically one big thought experiment and anyone interested in anthropology, history, science, philosophy or religion will thoroughly enjoy it. The downside to this set up is that it is a talking heads movie … so Tarentino fans should enjoy it too. John (our Neolithic protagonist) decides after thousands of years to tell his current professor friends about his condition. What ensues is the aforementioned thought experiment played out through interesting dialogue. At times, it could be a bit forced or contrived … but for such a dialogue-laden film, it was quite well done. For me, the most interesting part was the discussion of how early Neolithic humans lived, but for most, the most profound part will be John’s admission that he was the historical Jesus. He tells his friends that after studying under The Buddha, he decided to bring the teachings that changed his life to the Jews, but things went awry and those Jews, history and the church so greatly misconstrued his intention and the events that John no longer identifies with Christianity. The Man From Earth is a film not to be overlooked. — J.B. 


The Man from Earth, based on the novel by Jerome Bixby, starts out with the main character, John Oldman, who is celebrating his retirement with his colleagues. They start the night slow and start to ask him questions about his leaving. After a while, he starts to ask his guests their thoughts on if a man could have survived a certain amount of time. John starts to explain his past on how he was the caveman. He also tells of his adventures with Christopher Columbus. At a certain point, one of his colleagues calls another friend to come over and here John’s story. Once his friend gets there, they start to try to dispute by talking about the biological circumstances that would play into effect. Many people start to get upset by his claims. John then goes into telling his audience how he was Jesus and the techniques he used during his crucifixion to dodge the pain. He starts to continue with his religion tale until it starts to upset one of his colleagues and he is forced to “stop acting childish” and apologize. After a discussion of his colleagues thinking that he might be mentally ill, John claims to the group that it was “just a joke.” As everyone is starting to leave, John starts to give apologizes to each person as they leave. It almost seems like one of his colleagues actually believes his story as he is leaving. While almost everyone is leaving, John is talking to his girl, Sandy, about his pseudonyms that he used throughout the years. As he starts to explain to her one that he used almost 50 years ago, another colleague overhears and realizes that John is his father who left their family all those years ago. His friend ends up dying of a heart attack while John decides to stay with Sandy. — D.H. 


The Man from Earth: I really did like this movie. It was expected. It started of kind of dry and I just knew from the synopsis that flashbacks would be involved but they weren’t and surprisingly weren’t needed. And for good reason, the story that was told was very immersing. This is a movie that exists completely based off of characters, acting, and dialogue. This is a different sort of science fiction film, there are no special effects, no action sequences, and no futuristic technology. A very, low budget film that asks you to use your imagination. It is almost the movie equivalent of a book; the entire movie consists of a man telling a story to his friends. I thoroughly enjoyed it from the beginning to the end. I have seen many, many movies and this was truly unique. Great story. It definitely makes you think. With any good movie I watch online, I had Wiki it. I learned that it was written by Jerome Bixby, who wrote the screenplay on his deathbed. So the mortality and religious questions the movie summons makes perfectly well placed sense. The Jesus thing was a great interjection too. While watching the movie you know that the timeless man had some hand in the history of man, but Jesus, that was a big step by the writer. The best part overall is just the simple fact that the intellectual minds that the story is told to are so disrupted and afraid that they become fearful of their friend and threaten to commit him in a psych ward. This is a well thought out movie and intended to make you think. — B.C. 


I did not enjoy The Man from Earth. The premise that a man could live that long and experience so much is interesting but I did not see the point of making a whole film about it. The “twist” at the end that he was Dr. Gruber’s father was a little too much. The idea that he was 14,000 years old was strange enough; the coincidence that he was a co-worker’s father was unbelievable even if he really had lived for that long. The heart attack Dr. Gruber suffers at the end just didn’t feel right to me. Instead of having time to interact with his “father” and realize the consequences of the bizarre situation, he dies. It feels like a cop-out. I thought the idea that John was Jesus was also too much to stomach. I would have preferred to hear how an “everyman” lived for that long instead of a man who claims to be Jesus, a Sumerian, and a follower of Buddha. After all, the normal folks from these eras are the ones that get the least amount of study and attention. To the filmmakers’ credits, I did like John/Jesus’s explanation of the origins of his messages. Seeing John alive and well refutes the idea of a crucifixion and resurrection, and I can’t help but appreciate any film that does that. The script was bad and bland. The actors were not that great, either. — C.R. 


The movie “The Man from Earth” takes place in a small multi-room cabin; which allows the film to focus on the intellectual banter between the characters. This was great, especially the way it was done both, because the film was a lower budget movie, and doing it any other way would have hindered the flow of the movie. The idea that there was no way of proving John’s story enthralled me, I tried asking myself how his age could be disproven and grew more involved with the story. I must admit the idea of Buddha teaching John and John attempting to re-teach the lessons really was the best part. The timing was a little “forced” plot wise but it shows how even the best ideas can be messed up by another person trying to re-teach them in a different environment. It shows that sometimes the material does not translate as well. I also enjoyed the way the movie has philosophical undertones, in two ways. First, the film asks some philosophical questions about time, belief, perception and shows both sides. Secondly, the film itself has the overarching question of believing, namely John’s entire story. But I have to take issue with the entire concept of this “revelation” during which John has invited his son, whom he has worked with for a decade (? What?) and knowing he has a bad heart, let it slip that he was his father. John had to have known that even speaking about those events that Will would put it together. I was left wondering if John and Sandy might go kill Dan in case he actually believed. — L.T. 


John Oldman() ங்கற ஒரு ப்ரொஃபெசர் வேலையிருந்து விலகுகிறார். வீட்டைக் காலி பண்ணிவிட்டு போறதுக்கு முன்னாடி, ஒரு வரலாற்று நிபுணர், ஒரு உயிரியலாளர், ஒரு மானிடவியலாளர் மற்றும் இன்னும் இரு “லாளர்கள்” என தனது நெருங்கிய சில நண்பர்களை ஒரு ஃபெயார்வெல் பார்ட்டிக்கு அழைக்கிறார். ஜானி வாக்கர் பெக்குடன் ஆரம்பிக்கும் சாவகாசமான உரையாடல் மெது மெதுவாக தடம் மாறி, ஜானின் வாழ்க்கையைப் பற்றி மாறுகிறது. அப்போது கதையோடு கதையாக ஜானும் தன்னைப் பற்றிய ஒரு ரகசியத்தை வெளியிட, அதை நம்புவதா இல்லையா என்று பைத்தியம் பிடிக்காத குறையாக ரூமில் உள்ள மற்றவர்கள். உண்மையைக் கண்டுபிடிக்க ஒவ்வொருவரும் அவங்கவங்க துறையில் ஜானிடம் கேள்விகளைத் தொடுக்க, எல்லாக் கேள்விகளுக்கும் ஃபிங்கர் டிப்ஸில் ஜானிடம் விடை இருக்கிறது. அது போதாதென்று ஜான் ஒரு பெரிய சர்ச்சைக்குரிய மேட்டரை போட்டு உடைக்க…மீண்டும் மற்றவர்கள் மண்டையைப் பிய்த்துக் கொள்ள…சூடான விவாதங்களுடன் இப்படியே கதை நகர்கிறது.
நீங்க ஒரு ஜாலியான என்டர்டெயினர் எதிர்பார்த்திங்கன்னா இந்தப் படம் பக்கம் திரும்பிக் கூட பார்க்காதீங்க. கொஞ்சம் மண்டைய யூஸ் பண்ணி தலைமுடியை பிச்சுக் கொண்டு பார்க்க பிடிக்கும்னா இப்பவே டவுன்லோட் போடுங்க. படம் முழுவதும் ஒரு ஐடியாவைச் சுற்றி வட்டமடிக்கும் டயலாக் டயலாக் டயலாக் தான். பேசும் விஷயமும் நிச்சயமா நம்ப முடியாத மேட்டர். ஆனாப் “பேசியே கொல்றாங்களே……”ன்னு சொல்ல முடியாது. ஒவ்வொரு வசனமும் ஒரு சூடான விவாதம்.
நடிப்பு எல்லாம் தேறுகிற ரகமில்லை. ஆகவே படத்தைத் நூறு வீதம் தாங்கி நிற்பதும் இந்த வசனங்கள் தான். படத்தின் மொத்த பட்ஜெட் வெறும் ரெண்டு லட்சம் டாலர். தயாரிப்பு செலவுன்னுட்டு பல கோடிகளைக் விழுங்கி கடைசியில் ஐந்து பைசாக்கு பெறாத வெறும் குப்பைகளை மெகாஹிட் படங்களென்று கூறிக்கொண்டு வெளியேற்றும் இயக்குனர்களுக்கு வெறும் ஐந்து லட்சம் செலவில் ஒரு சுவாரஸ்யமான படத்தை எவ்வாறு தயாரிப்பது இப்படித் தான் என்று போட்டுக் காட்ட வேண்டும்.
ஜெரோமி பிக்ஸ்பி – படத்தின் கதையை எழுதியவர். இவரது கடைசி படைப்பு, மாஸ்டர்பீஸ் எல்லாம் இந்தப் படம் தான். 1960களிலேயே கதைக்கான ஐடியாவை உருவாக்கிவிட்டு, கடைசிக் காலத்தில், அதாவது 1998ம் ஆண்டு இறக்கும் தறுவாயில் தான் கதையை முடித்தாராம்.
திரும்பவும் …. எல்லாருக்குமான படமல்ல இது. சயின்ஸ், மனித வாழ்க்கை, வரலாறு, சமயம் போன்றவை சம்பந்தப்பட்ட விஷயங்களில் உங்களுக்கு ஆர்வம் இருந்துச்சுன்னா, வித்தியாசமான அட்டெம்ட்களில் ஆர்வம் இருந்துச்சுன்னா நிச்சயம் எடுத்துப் பாருங்க. அட்லீஸ் ஒரு ரெண்டு நாளைக்கு யோசிச்சிட்டு இருப்பீங்க…..
ஆங் … நான் கடைசி வரைக்கும் அந்த சீக்ரெட் என்னன்னு சொல்லவே இல்லயே … கதை செக்ஷன்ல க்ளூ இருக்கு. கண்டுபிடிச்சிக்கோங்க. ஹேப்பி Hunt for Hint.
கா.அருண் பாண்டியன்.

Sentient Technologies is using artificial intelligence (AI) to tackle deadly diseases


In 2008, Antoine Blondeau co-founded artificial intelligence (AI) startup Sentient Technologies, with a team that had worked on laying the foundations of the technology that would become Apple's Siri. The 60-employee company has raised $143 million, making it the world's most funded AI company. Its goal? Using AI to solve any problem - from financial trading to deadly diseases.
Sentient's core technology is a deep-learning algorithm running on a network of more than two million computers worldwide. On such a wide computational platform, multiple AI systems constantly vie to pick the best choice, evolving over time as the worst performers are culled out. According to Blondeau, scalability and evolution are key to AI's future. For the time being, Sentient's applications are mainly in the financial field. The company already provides automated financial services that become gradually more effective at placing investments. More recently, the company partnered with e-commerce website Shoes.com, reinventing its system to advise shoppers by learning their fashion tastes.
Sentient is also working on an AI nurse, a system that would monitor a patient's vital signs to predict when they might get a certain condition or disease. The idea has already been tested in a joint trial that Sentient carried out with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology: the AI nurse managed to predict within 30 minutes if a patient would get sepsis by looking only at their blood pressure. WIRED caught up with Blondeau to discover what AI has in store for us.
WIRED: You say one of Sentient's advantages is the ability to scale. What does that mean in an AI context?
Antoine Blondeau: For us, scalability means the ability to take our AI construct and extend it within many computers - two million computers, in fact1. If you are tackling a large problem, you need more computational power, that's the basic assumption. That's why you want to be sure that the AI layer at the top of the computers can scale. And a lot of our talent resides in the ability to architect the AI system and deconstruct any problem in a way that allows you to send jobs everywhere. Another critical skill is aggregating the plural outcomes into one, meaningful, whole solution.
Sentient relies on this firepower to make AI systems evolve. How does the evolution process play out, concretely?
OK, let's say you want to create AI financial traders. So in the very first phase of evolution that you create, you generate an enormous amount of random traders. They'll look at all the data points in the universe and they'll start to construct rules, very simple rules in the beginning. Something like: "If I see this and that, and if something else happens, then I'll do this."
You can use scale, your enormous computer network, in order to create trillions and trillions of such traders. And, as those traders are created totally randomly, and the rules are created randomly too, at first they are all going to be rather crappy. But some of them will be better than others. So you take the ones that achieve the best results, which make the best predictions, and you use their "DNA", their rules, in order to create a second generation of traders. Even then, though, you inject some randomness… and so forth. This process goes on all the time. And it is very robust because you create species that are inherently very apt, as they have seen an enormous amount of things and their "DNA" has been tested. But you also get diversity, as there are many possible solutions.
What is the critical technology that allows you to make this?
There are at least three. First, we've developed an architecture that enables us to identify online underutilised or unused computers: this enables us to talk to game centres, universities, call centres and enterprises, so they give us their spare computers. On the evolution side we have relied on evolutionary algorithms. Third, we created an online learning platform to teach AI systems to recursively reiterate processes and learn to recognise images, pictures, stock-market graphs and so on.
You say that over time AI systems would learn what the best rules to deal with a problem are. Can these systems, when they are evolved, teach us how to solve problems?
Well, one of the good things about evolutionary AI is that - if you know how to read it - you can actually see the rule sets2. In the case of traders, or of AI nurses (on which we are working, too), they are fairly complex beings: a trader may have up to 128 rules, each with up to 64 conditions. Same thing for an AI nurse. So, they are pretty complex systems and the interplay among these rules is not always linear. But if you spend some time on it, you can still understand what this thing is doing, because it's declaratory - it says what it is doing, in other words. So we can certainly take this and learn from this what works and what doesn't work when it comes to solving a certain problem. AI can teach people to make better decisions.
1. "It takes a lot of horsepower to do what we do," says Blondeau. Sentient's network uses 5,000 GPU cards in 4,000 sites.
2. Sentient is working with the Oxford Genomics Centre to understand why some people develop genetic diseases. "We're using simulated evolution, which takes days, to understand our own biological evolution, which took billions of years."
http://www.wired.co.uk/…/sentient-technologies-ai-nurses-ba…
 Cecile G. Tamura

The Top Five Tips For Diabetes Patients :::

1. Lose weight if you need to. About 80% to 90% of people with type 2 diabetes are overweight. Losing the excess weight helps control blood sugars.
2. Pay attention to your carbohydrate intake. Keep track of how many carbohydrates you eat, and how often. Managing your carbs can help keep blood sugar under control. Aim for high-fiber, complex carbs such as green vegetables, fruit, legumes, and whole grains.
3. Get sufficient sleep. When you are sleep deprived, you tend to eat more, and you can put on weight, setting you up for complications. People with diabetes who get enough sleep often have healthier eating habits and improvement of blood sugar.
4. Monitor your blood sugar closely. Check glucose levels two or more times a day. Keep your blood sugar levels as close to normal as possible or within the range advised by your doctor. It helps to keep a log so you can track progress and determine the effect of diet and activity on your levels.Know that high blood sugar levels can wreak much damage, including damaging the blood vessels that feed the eye's retina, leading to diabetic retinopathy, which can result in blurred vision and eventually blindness. High blood sugar levels can damage the kidneys, too. Get regular tests, called A1C, to find out your average blood sugar for the past two to three months. Most people with type 2 diabetes should aim for an A1C of 7% or lower. Ask your doctor how often you need to get an A1C test.
5. Manage stress. Stress and diabetes don't mix. Excess stress can elevate blood sugar. Learn stress reduction techniques that work for you. Among them: Sitting quietly for 15 minutes, meditating, practicing yoga.

Breaking-UFO Attack Video Caught on Camera Over Iraq | UFO Sightings 2016

Five ways to travel through time


Travel to the past is probably impossible. But to the future? That’s a different story. Cathal O'Connell considers the feasibility of physics.
In 2009 the British physicist Stephen Hawking held a party for time travellers - the twist was he sent out the invites a year later. (No guests showed up).
Travel into the past is probably impossible. Even if it were possible, Hawking and others have argued that you could never travel back before the moment your time machine was built.
But travel to the future? That’s a different story.
Of course, we are all time travellers as we are swept along in the current of time, from past to future, at a rate of one hour per hour.
But, as with a river, the current flows at different speeds in different places. Science as we know it allows for several methods to take the fast-track into the future.
Here’s a rundown.
1. Speed
This is the easiest and most practical way to get to the far future - go really fast.
According to Einstein’s theory of special relativity, when you travel at speeds approaching the speed of light, time slows down for you relative to the outside world.
This is not a just a conjecture or thought experiment - it’s been measured. Using twin atomic clocks (one flown in a jet aircraft, the other stationary on Earth) physicists have shown that a flying clock ticks slower, because of its speed.
In the case of the aircraft, the effect is minuscule. But If you were in a spaceship travelling at 90% of the speed of light, you’d experience time passing about 2.6 times slower than it was back on Earth.
And the closer you get to the speed of light, the more extreme the time-travel.
The highest speeds achieved through any human technology are probably the protons whizzing around the Large Hadron Collider at 99.9999991% of the speed of light. Using special relativity we can calculate one second for the proton is equivalent to 27,777,778 seconds, or about 11 months, for us.
Amazingly, particle physicists have to take this time dilation into account when they are dealing with particles that decay. In the lab, muon particles typically decay in 2.2 microseconds. But fast moving muons, such as those created when cosmic rays strike the upper atmosphere, take 10 times longer to disintegrate.
2. Gravity
The next method is also inspired by Einstein. According to his theory of general relativity, the stronger the gravity you feel, the slower time moves.
As you get closer to the centre of the Earth, for example, the strength of gravity increases. Time runs slower for your feet than your head.
Again, this effect has been measured. In 2010, physicists at the US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) placed two atomic clocks on shelves, one 33 centimetres above the other, and measured the difference in their rate of ticking. The lower one ticked slower because it feels a slightly stronger gravity.
To travel to the far future, all we need is a region of extremely strong gravity, such as a black hole. The closer you get to the event horizon, the slower time moves - but it’s risky business, cross the boundary and you can never escape.
And anyway, the effect is not that strong so it’s probably not worth the trip.
Assuming you had the technology to travel the vast distances to reach a black hole (the nearest is about 3,000 light years away), the time dilation through travelling would be far greater than any time dilation through orbiting the black hole itself.
(The situation described in the movie Interstellar, where one hour on a planet near a black hole is the equivalent of seven years back on Earth, is so extreme as to be impossible in our Universe, according to Kip Thorne, the movie’s scientific advisor.)
The most mindblowing thing, perhaps, is that GPS systems have to account for time dilation effects (due to both the speed of the satellites and gravity they feel) in order to work. Without these corrections, your phones GPS capability wouldn’t be able to pinpoint your location on Earth to within even a few kilometres.
3. Suspended animation
Another way to travel to the future may be to slow your perception of time by slowing down, or stopping, your bodily processes and then restarting them later.
Bacterial spores can live for millions of years in a state of suspended animation, until the right conditions of temperature, moisture, food kick start their metabolisms again. Some mammals, such as bears and squirrels, can slow down their metabolism during hibernation, dramatically reducing their cells’ requirement for food and oxygen.
Could humans ever do the same?
Though completely stopping your metabolism is probably far beyond our current technology, some scientists are working towards achieving inducing a short-term hibernation state lasting at least a few hours. This might be just enough time to get a person through a medical emergency, such as a cardiac arrest, before they can reach the hospital.
In 2005, American scientists demonstrated a way to slow the metabolism of mice (which do not hibernate) by exposing them to minute doses of hydrogen sulphide, which binds to the same cell receptors as oxygen. The core body temperature of the mice dropped to 13 °C and metabolism decreased 10-fold. After six hours the mice could be reanimated without ill effects.
Unfortunately, similar experiments on sheep and pigs were not successful, suggesting the method might not work for larger animals.
Another method, which induces a hypothermic hibernation by replacing the blood with a cold saline solution, has worked on pigs and is currently undergoing human clinical trials in Pittsburgh.
4. Wormholes
General relativity also allows for the possibility for shortcuts through spacetime, known as wormholes, which might be able to bridge distances of a billion light years or more, or different points in time.
Many physicists, including Stephen Hawking, believe wormholes are constantly popping in and out of existence at the quantum scale, far smaller than atoms. The trick would be to capture one, and inflate it to human scales - a feat that would require a huge amount of energy, but which might just be possible, in theory.
Attempts to prove this either way have failed, ultimately because of the incompatibility between general relativity and quantum mechanics.
5. Using light
Another idea, put forward by the American physicist Ron Mallet, is to use a rotating cylinder of light to twist spacetime. Anything dropped inside the swirling cylinder could theoretically be dragged around in space and in time, in a similar way to how a bubble runs around on top your coffee after you swirl it with a spoon.
According to Mallet, the right geometry could lead to time travel into either the past and the future.

Since publishing his theory in 2000, Mallet has been trying to raise the funds to pay for a proof of concept experiment, which involves dropping neutrons through a circular arrangement of spinning lasers.
His ideas have not grabbed the rest of the physics community however, with others arguing that one of the assumptions of his basic model is plagued by a singularity, which is physics-speak for “it's impossible”.
https://cosmosmagazine.com/ph…/five-ways-travel-through-time
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Mallett
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/…/stephen-hawking-time-trav…
http://www.emc2-explained.info/Time-Dilation/#.VwudOVt961t
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation
http://edition.cnn.com/…/innova…/suspended-animation-trials/
http://www.space.com/20881-wormholes.html

Monday, April 11, 2016

உண்மையில் நாங்களும் ரை பண்ணலாமா?


INTERESTING STORY OF CAR WIPERS


Just imagine yourself driving a car without wipers in a heavy rain! Is it easy to drive?!
At the dawn of the 20th century, Mary Anderson went to New York City for the first time. She saw a much different New York City than the one tourists see today. There were no cabs honking, nor were there thousands of cars vying for position in afternoon traffic. Cars had not yet captured the American imagination and were quite rare when Anderson took that trip, but the woman from Alabama would end up inventing something that has become standard on every automobile. During her trip, Anderson took a tram through the snow-covered city.
She noticed that the driver had to stop the tram every few minutes to wipe the snow off his front window. At the time, all drivers had to do so; rain and snow were thought to be things drivers had to deal with, even though they resulted in poor visibility. When she returned home, Anderson developed a squeegee on a spindle that was attached to a handle on the inside of the vehicle. When the driver needed to clear the glass, he simply pulled on the handle and the squeegee wiped the precipitation from the windshield.
Anderson received the patent for her device in 1903; just 10 years later, thousands of Americans owned a car with her invention.
"So, if there exists a problem, there exists an opportunity if you can see it...!"
More interesting stories to come, just engage with my posts (or follow me if you have not followed yet) if you want to see the inspirational stories you love on your timeline.

One of the best perfectly preserved mummies of the world


Rosalia Lombardo,an Italian child mummy, She had died in the year 1920 at the age of two. She's almost perfectly preserved even though she's been dead for 93 years. She still has all her internal organs, skin, and even eyes remarkably intact.

Delivery Truck in Knoxville/1909


Sunday, April 10, 2016

Robotic farming..is it going to be the futuristic technology considering the labor shortages


Robotic farming..is it going to be the futuristic technology considering the labor shortages..experiments are on for another revolution in the agriculture sector!!


Robotic farms may be the future of crop production, and Japan is on its way to launching the first of its kind. Spread, a vegetable producer based in Kyoto, promises that pesticide-free lettuce will pack more nutrients, cost less to produce than current conventional farming techniques, and will increase output incomparably faster.

"Seed planting will still be done by people, but the rest of the process, including harvesting, will be done by  industrial robots," company official Koji Morisada told AFP. Morisada added that the robot labor would cut personnel costs by roughly half and reduce energy expenses down by nearly one third thanks to the LED lighting they plan on implementing.
In 2012, the Japanese-based firm announced they would be the first company in the world to launch a fully automated farm with robots in charge of nearly every step in the process. But now the promise has finally come to fruition — the company’s begun growing the lettuce plants operated by robots that resemble human arms. The “indoor grow house” will begin operation by mid-2017, with the plan to produce 30,000 heads of lettuce a day. Their goal is to increase production to half a million heads a day within five years of opening. 
This futuristic lettuce plant is an advanced type of hydroponic indoor vegetable growing operation, which allows the farming process to move indoors where the sun never shines.Sunless farming relies on darkened rooms illuminated by blue and red LED lights.

These smart farms are climate-controlled farming units that allow growers to profit indoors, a system that was created out of tragedy. The Shigeharu Shimamura farming company opened in 2004 after a nuclear disaster led to food shortages. An abandoned factory was transformed into the world’s biggest indoor farm with 25,000 square feet, currently producing up to 10,000 heads of lettuce a day—100 times more per square foot than current farming methods. The plants grew twice as fast using 40 percent less power, 80 percent less food waste, and 99 percent less water usage than outdoor farm fields.
The robot-run farm is predicted to outdo Shimamura’s indoor farms using less space with increased production. The automated innovation will increase the company’s lettuce production from 21,000 heads a day to 50,000. The farm measured about 4,400 square meters with floor-to-ceiling shelves for the produce to grow from. The entirely automated agricultural system is an effort to compensate for labor shortages elsewhere in the country’s economy. The company plans to build more robotic plant farms throughout Japan, with the long-term goal of tapping into overseas markets. 

Ravi Shankar directing the host of Giants This video will take your breath away

This video will take your breath away . It is 1969-70. Pt Ravi Shankar directing the host of Giants . Alla Rakhha , HARI Prasad , Shivkumar Sharma , Kartik Kumar and host of others . Enjoy . These things are rare to come by

Who was Ravi Shankar?
Pandit Ravi Shankar, was the virtuoso sitar maestro who introduced Indian classical music to the world and inspired the Sixties 'psychedelic' sound through his collaboration with the Beatles.
Shankar was born Robindro Shaunkor Chowdhury in Benares (a.k.a. Varanasi, or Kashi), Uttar Pradesh, on April 7 1920 and raised by his mother in a Bengali brahmin community.








Pandit Ravi Shankar
Pandit Ravi Shankar CREDIT: AP
His father, Pandit Dr Shyam Shankar Chowdhury, a wealthy landowner and minister in a maharaja’s court, left his family in poverty and went to Calcutta and then London to practise law. 
The youngest of five surviving brothers (two other children had died, at birth and in early childhood), Shankar was nicknamed Ravi, meaning “the sun”.
He met his father for the first time when he was eight years old.

Ravi Shankar and George Harrison collaborate

In 1966, Harrison befriended Shankar and began to take lessons from him and the latter's protégé Shambhu Das.
This association catapulted Shankar to international fame.  The Beatles’ guitarist then went to India for six weeks.
During the 1970s he distanced himself from his hippie associations and began to refocus on cementing his status as a classical Indian musician but his friendship with Harrison endured.
“It is a beautiful relationship,” Shankar said. “Guru and disciple and friend at the same time and father and son as well.”
Harrison collaborated with him on two Concert for Bangladesh benefit performances in 1971, co-produced a four-CD album for Shankar’s 75th birthday, and produced Shankar’s album Chants of India (1997), in which classical Indian forms (mantras and chants based on Sanskrit prayers) were combined with a choir and Western instrumentation including vibraphone, harps, violins and cellos.
Harrison also edited Shankar’s autobiography, Raga Mala (Garland of Ragas, 1999), and once dubbed him “the Godfather of world music”.
He is also to a lesser extent, known for his association with Yehudi Menuhin the violinist, who he performed frequently with.
Shankar inspired the composer Phillip Glass and collaborated with him on the album album Passages in 1990 He also composed a concerto with sitar for the London Symphony Orchestra. 
 Shankar died in December 2012 aged 92. 
pundit is applied to experts and intellectuals who appear in the media.

What is a Pandit?

  • A Pandit, also spelled pundit, is a wise or learned man in India, particularly one skilled in the Sanskrit language, who has mastered the four Vedic scriptures, Hindu rituals, Hindu law, religion, music, and/or philosophy.
  • The term is often used as an honorary title.
  • In English, the word has been used more broadly, to refer to any of the following: Siddhas, Siddhars, Naths, Ascetics, Sadhus, or Yogis, and the loan word

Thanks http://www.telegraph.co.uk/