Being Love, Being Timeless

 

Very happy to inform that my book titled, 'Being love, Being Timeless' has been published. It has now been listed in Amazon India, Amazon US,  and Amazon UK.

This book has two stories.

The first story is set at that edge of two types of lifecycles of the Monarch butterflies. Will love survive the crossover from one type of lifecycle to another? In other words, does love survive Time.

The second story is about a world beyond numbers. It is a world that escapes the tyranny of numbers. Can such a world exist with the same seeming ‘advancement’ as is extant today: a world of machines, computers, spaceships, etc..?

The book can be bought from the following online stores :

https://www.amazon.in/dp/B0G6FQ17PP

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0G6FQ17PP

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0G6FQ17PP

Never a good time to say goodbye

 

If we ever begin a story,

If our hearts are ever tied,

Then, there is never a good time

Or a high tide, to say goodbye,

For we know that one day

The ship will perhaps return,

Carrying those who said goodbye,

But by then, the story, would be gone.

Where is Tuvalu? 2.0

 

Sometime back I wrote this post: Where is Tuvalu?

https://hunterfiftyfour.blogspot.com/2025/05/where-is-tuvalu.html

Now, there is news that Tuvalu may well cease to exist altogether. Will be obliterated from the face of the earth. Watch this video:

https://youtu.be/ggV9Xfodl08?si=L2EWqoKzoGz82VEx

Not tethered with puppeteer's string or whim

 

The kite's final resting place

Is among the branches of a tall tree,

It was too tired for being given rope,

Then reeled in when flying free.

Now, it is not tethered 

With the puppeteer's string or whim,

But is open to the elements,

And, that is not a small thing.

Knight's tour on a chessboard from ancient Sanskrit text: 2

 

This post is a follow up on my previous post:

https://hunterfiftyfour.blogspot.com/2025/12/knights-tour-in-chessboard-from-ancient.html

In the Comments section Dilip asked me to give more examples through diagrams on the Chitrabandh Shlokas. Although some Chitrabandh Shlokas have been given in the IIT resource link, it may be prudent to believe that most of us would not go into the contents given in that link. I therefore give a walk through some relevant pages given in the book whose cover is here (also present in the IIT resource link):

The Shlokas 19 and 20 in this Kavyamala 92 are the knight's tour on a 4x8 chessboard. Here is an image of the page where these two Shlokas are printed:

Chess knight circuit (G. S. S. Murthy's Translation) of the Shlokas:

Sthiraagasaam sadaaraadhyaa vihataakatataamataa| Satpaaduke saraasaa maa rangaraajapadam naya||

Sthitaa samayaraajatpaagataraa modake gavi| Duramhasaam sannataadaa saadhyaataapakaraasaraa||

The author beseeches the sandals of God to help him reach the abode or the feet of God. The two slokas together form one sentence.

Sat+paaduke = O Sandals of Brahma,

Sthira+aagasaam, Sadaa+aaraadhyaa = (you are )always revered by the worldly who are confirmed sinners,

Vihata+aka+tata+amataa = (you are) the destroyer of unhappiness and instruments of unhappiness,

Saraasaa = (you are) always accompanied by (the jingling) sound (of trinket bells attached to the sandals?)

Maa, naya = take me,

Rangaraaja +padam = to the feet or abode of God.

Samaya+ raajat+paa = (you are ) the protector of those shining through their good conduct,

Aagata+raa = (you have) attained brilliance of gold,

Modake = (you) dispense joy,

Gavi, sthitaa = (you) are at the center of sun,

Durahmasaam, sannataa+daa = (you are) destroyer of the despondency of the wicked,

Saadhya+ataapa+karaa = rays (of your gems) have the power of removing the heat (of the devotee),

Aasaraa = (you) move all around,

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shlokas 19 in row and column form. Numbers written is squares to indicate how to derive Shloka 20 from 19 by legit knight moves:

Other shlokas in the IIT resource are here:

https://www.iiitb.ac.in/Ganaka/projects/paduka/padukaaslokas/1.jpg

https://www.iiitb.ac.in/Ganaka/projects/paduka/padukaaslokas/2.jpg

https://www.iiitb.ac.in/Ganaka/projects/paduka/padukaaslokas/3.jpg

https://www.iiitb.ac.in/Ganaka/projects/paduka/padukaaslokas/5.jpg

https://www.iiitb.ac.in/Ganaka/projects/paduka/padukaaslokas/6.jpg

Other chitrabandh examples given in IIT resource:

https://www.iiitb.ac.in/Ganaka/projects/paduka/padukapictures/p1.jpg

Shlokas 16, 17, and 18 in chitrabandh:

https://www.iiitb.ac.in/Ganaka/projects/paduka/padukapictures/p2.jpg

One interesting example in the IIT resource of deriving another Shloka by reading the given Shloka in reverse . Here, Shloka 77 is derived from Shloka 76 by reading Shloka 76 in reverse. This is from Dandin:

https://www.iiitb.ac.in/Ganaka/projects/paduka/dandin/1.jpg

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Knight's tour on a chessboard from ancient Sanskrit text

 

My friend Dilip Ranade forwarded the above video along with the following write up:

The video shows a solution to the problem of a knight moving to all squares of a chess board without repeating a square. 

Amazingly, solutions for the same have been found in Sanskrit classics!

Here is a link to a short paper available in an IIT site:

https://www.iiitb.ac.in/Ganaka/projects/paduka/paduka.html

Here is an elaboration of the theme of the knight's move to cover all squares in a 4x8 chessboard exactly once as derived from ancient Sanskrit Shlokas. Research tells us that there is a Chaturanga-Turanga Bandha corresponding to Śhlokas 19–20, found on page 392 of the Paduka-Sahasram edition.

This is the famous knight’s-tour shloka.

What “Chaturanga-Turanga Bandha” Means:

Chaturanga = chess (the four-limbed ancient Indian game)

Turanga = a horse

So, Turanga-bandha = “the horse-pattern” → in chess this means the knight.

Thus this bandha (poetic figure) is a verse arranged exactly like a knight’s tour on a modified board.

Why This Shloka Is the Knight’s Tour:

In this bandha:

The poet writes a Sanskrit verse.

He then splits the verse into syllables.

Each syllable is placed in one square of a grid.

The squares are numbered.

The numbers show the order in which a knight can visit all squares without repeating any. This is the Hamiltonian path problem on a chessboard. Because the pattern involves a chess-knight (turanga), the shloka is named 'Chaturanga-turanga-bandhaḥ — the chess-knight pattern.'

Here is the Shloka 19:

And, this is how the arranged with syllables in row and column grid by the poet:

The syllables in English letters and the numbers in Roman numerals would be the following table:

How the knight’s movement is used:

As we can see, the squares of the board are arranged in a 4 × 8 rectangle. And each syllable is placed in order row wise. If you read left to right, row wise, you get the Shloka (written in Devnagri)given above. The above matrix gives the sounds of the syllables in English and the numbers in Roman numerals.

If you follow the numbers in the diagram:

1 → 2 → 3 → … is a legal knight move each time. You will cover all 32 squares exactly once. The syllables of the shloka are placed in an order that corresponds to a knight hopping from one square to the next. The syllables of the shloka are placed in an order that corresponds to a knight hopping from one square to the next.

Reading the syllables in that order reconstructs the full shloka. And below is Shloka 20 that has been created by knight's legit moves across the board, and touching each square only once:

And here is the move of the knight to create the above Shloka number 20:

This is a constrained combinatorial construction. The poet must choose a verse whose syllables can be arranged so that the knight's path is possible.

Why this s combinatorially really amazing:

Knight tour of duty are nontrivial. Finding a knight’s tour (even on a 4×8 board) is a known combinatorial puzzle. But here, the poet must also place syllables. He must arrange metrical structure, meaning, and the knight's Hamiltonian constraint simultaneously.

Are there more than one way that the knight could move?

Yes — mathematically, there are many possible knight tours on a 4×8 board. But only one tour matches the syllable order that reconstructs the shloka.

Heavy to pull the chain

 

When no one calls you back

To get off the train,

When the platform goes empty,

It's heavy enough to pull the chain.

Silicone street

 

Hearts in this town

Are made of glass,

And when some break,

They go to shards.

Don't go barefoot 

On the grass,

For your feet may bleed,

With the broken glass.

Glass and shards everywhere,

On this lonely silicone street,

Walk but with heavy boots,

And crush glass 'neath your feet.

Heart: do you want another cut?

 

For wounds that just do not heal,

For wounds that are but a feel,

Surgeons often pare another wound,

Near where such a wound was found,

That both wounds in tandem,

Grow chrysalis, and heal together.

Heart, shall we go through this rut?

Do you want another cut?

What anger consumes Mother Earth?

 

These days:

What anger consumes Mother Earth?

Sometimes she shivers in Richter Scale,

Sometimes she spews unholy ash,

Sometimes she calls

The big birds to crash.

Sometimes she makes

The Titanics to dash.

What anger consumes Mother Earth?

Answer to Walking Track Quiz

 

Answer to Walking Track Quiz: https://hunterfiftyfour.blogspot.com/2025/11/walking-track-quiz.html

I measure my own lap time T_lap — the time I take to go once around the 1 km track.

I keep a record of the time t between two consecutive meetings with the other walker

The rule:

If t<1/2  T_lap ​ → I am slower

If t>1/2 T_lap →  I am faster.

If t=1/2  T_lap ​ → same speed.

Intuitively:

Between two successive meetings I always walk the same distance along the track. Call that distance ‘d’.

Now, this ‘d’ distance has contribution in terms of metres covered both by me and the other walker. If my contribution to ‘d’ is less than half the total loop – in this case 0.5 km – I am going slower. If mine and the other walker have equal contribution, we are going at same speed. If my contribution to ‘d’ is more, then I’m faster.

Translate this to time:

If ‘t’, the time between two consecutive meetings, is greater than half my lap time, then I’m slower than the other walker. If half my lap time is equal to ‘t’, then our speeds are equal. Else, my speed is more than the other walker’s speed.

Walking Track Quiz

 

We have a closed loop walking track of 1 km in our neighbourhood. Some walkers go clockwise, some anticlockwise. If I'm one of the walkers who is going clockwise, and I keep meeting another walker who is walking anticlockwise at different spots in the closed loop track, as I and the other walker circle the track, how do I know which walker is going fast/slow? Of course, if both of us meet at the same spot, I know that both of us are doing the same speed.

Assumptions: 1. Both walkers maintain constant speed.  2. I have a phone that can give me my lap time. I can  also find the time between successive meetings on the track with the help of the same phone. (Hint?) No other aid is available.

No formal proof is required. Only intuitive answer with justification will do.

Post Script: All of the above is actual. Not a hypothetical question. We need to remember that both walkers may not begin at the same time from the starting point. Indeed that would be the norm, rather than the exception. For example, I may meet the other walker just after I start my clockwise traverse.

Better than Artificial Intelligence

 

The days of रुकावट के लिए खेद है,

The days of black and white,

The days when Left was left,

The days when Right was right.

The days of Chitrahaar,

The days of power cut बारम बार,

Those days of natural stupidity,

 Indeed, much better by far.

How far is heaven?

 

Did you know that The Puppeteer that is holding the end of the string that holds the world is at a point that is 4.6 × 10²⁷ metres (or, 490 billion light years) away?

Now, this is 10.5 times the radius of the observable universe (that is. far larger than the universe we can see). That’s how far heaven is located. Perhaps, that is the reason we never see the Puppeteer(being outside the observable universe).

How did I arrive at this figure?

I asked OpenAI this: The yugs are more like a pendulum than a circle, right? If we add all the yugs' days and make a pendulum (with the bob as the earth) with 'g' at 9.81m/sec², what would be the length of the string from where the bob is hanging? Which yuga / which year would be at the bottom most in the pendulum swing?

OpenAI calculated thus:

Nice idea — fun to make myth + mechanics meet. I’ll make one clear assumption (and then do the arithmetic):

Assumption I use: the “total of all the yugs” = one Mahayuga = Satya (Kṛta) + Tretā + Dvāpara + Kali = 4,320,000 years (traditional Hindu scheme: 1,728,000 + 1,296,000 + 864,000 + 432,000).
I map the entire Mahayuga to one full period T of a simple pendulum with acceleration g = 9.81 m/sec².

A simple pendulum period:

T = 2π(√L/g)

L =  g(T/2π)²

Convert the Mahayuga to seconds: T=4,320,000 yr×(days/yr)×24×3600

Result:

Using 365 days / year

T ≈ 1.36236×10¹⁴ seconds

L ≈ 4.61×10²⁷ metres

To make those numbers easier to picture:

• L≈4.6×10²⁷metres  ≈ 4.9×10¹¹ light-years (≈ 490 billion light-years).
• That is ≈ 10.5 times the radius of the observable universe (i.e. far larger than the universe we can see).

That is how far heaven is located.

Which yuga / which year is the bottom-most point of the swing?

If you start the pendulum at one extreme at t=0 (start of the Mahayuga) then the pendulum is vertical (bottom-most) after T/4.
T/4 corresponds to one quarter of the Mahayuga in time:

4,320,000/4=1,080,000 years

So the bottom-most point occurs 1,080,000 years into the Mahayuga. Since Satya/Kṛta lasts 1,728,000 years, that 1,080,000-th year falls inside Satya/Kṛta — roughly a bit past the middle of Satya, well before Treta begins.

Just think about it, friends: Kaliyug will go in a jiffy…whoosh! But beware! We have to traverse it twice before we go into Dwapar yug: one on the upswing, one on the downswing.

 

 

 

Bend the reality again, and again

 

Dance, and it will rain,

Sing, and the stone will melt,

Call, and she'll return,

Bend the reality again,

And again.

आज हमारा नाइन इलेवन दिवस है

 

आज हमारा नाइन इलेवन दिवस है। आज के दिन, एक सौ पचास साल पहले, बंकिमजी ने अंग्रेज़ों को भारत से नौ दो ग्यारह  (9/11)होने का आह्वान किया था!

वन्दे मातरम्!

8th Wish for November

 

Someone sent these seven wishes for me for November:

I added an eighth one: May you be able to submit your Life Certificate without any problem.

Government asks proof

 

Every year,

The Government gives me a month

to prove that I am alive,

And, after I die,

A proof that I'm dead.

This is one time. however.

Infinity is God's Kingdom

 

This whole thing came out when I tried to find if odd numbers' infinity is greater than even numbers' infinity (without including zero in the comparison):

I thought infinity is infinity,

But Cantor said that there is more,

First we have aleph-null,

The smallest infinity that is there.

Then we have infinite infinity,

What he calls continuum,

He himself is wary however,

'Infinity is God's kingdom.'

A conversation on infinity with OpenAI:

https://chatgpt.com/share/69044800-df8c-8013-af4b-728ae0e9b2bc

Best wishes on Infantry Day

 Most infants become adults.

Only some become Infantry.

Best wishes on Infantry Day.

Your Zugunruhe

 

You said to me about

Leaving your sacred place:

It's my zugunruhe*:

It's been a Jug,

since I've rested in this oasis,

I want out now.

It is my zugunruhe,

Like the restlessness,

Of the migratory birds,

Like the restlessness

Of my soul.

The season is ripe now.

*Zugunruhe: (German: zug = migration, unruhe = restlessness) is the innate, internal agitation that builds up in migratory birds (and even some insects, fish, and mammals) when their internal clocks sense it’s time to move.

This is your sacred place

 

This is your sacred place,

This is where love began,

This is where love will never end,

This is your oasis of love.

This is where you stopped to drink

The nectar of love,

This is where you anchored down

From the unforgiving sun.

But then you stepped out,

Into the sandstorm,

Toward another oasis,

Which was only a mirage.

Podium of the World.

 

This is the podium of the world,

Some get the silver,

One gets the gold,

But all become old,

All become cold.

Ma Lakshmi dabe paon aayen tere ghar

 

Ma Lakshmi dabe paon aayen tere ghar,

Yehi dua karoon,

Yehi dua sada karoon.

Diwali ki Shubhkamnayen.

The vigil of the night

 

This moth stayed glued to a fairy light in the living room throughout the night. It was perhaps waiting for Shri Ramji and Sita Mata to return.

Jumping dimensions with summation of consecutive odd numbers

 

A friend forwarded this picture of the sum of consecutive odd numbers starting from 1 that made perfect squares:

Although, most of us are aware of this mathematical trick, the arrangement of the odd numbers in this way, and making the summation perfect square, but it still turns out to be a big surprise.

But what surprised me most was the leap of a dimension when we added the odd numbers. 

Before I dwell into the leap of a dimension, let me recount a childhood story of Gauss, the mathematician. This story could be apocryphal, but here it goes:

Young Gauss and his classmates in Grade 5 were asked to find the summation of the numbers from 1 to 100. While his classmates struggled to find the summation, Gauss found a neat method to do this.

He made paired two numbers as below and added them vertically:

1        2        3      4    ...    98        99        100

+        +        +    +            +           +            +

100    99    98     97    ...    3            2            1

=

101   101  101  101   ,,,      101        101    101

He got 100 such pairs, and each pair's sum came to 101.

So the sum of both rows together = 100 × 101 

But he only wanted one of the two identical rows, so he divided the product by 2:

So, Gauss correctly got the summation of 1 to 100 as

S(100) = (100 x 101)/2

=5050

With this (n) x (n+1)/2 format, it is not difficult to figure out the summation of consecutive odd numbers.

The odd numbers form an arithmetic progression with first term $a_{\mathrm{<i>1</i>}}=1$, last term $a_{\mathrm{<i>n</i>}}=2n-1$. 

What was totally unexpected was the jump from one dimension to the next dimension when adding up consecutive odd numbers.

Here is my conservation with OpenAI on this:

Me:

I am not able to wrap this around my head: I'm moving along a numberline, which is 1D, when adding odd numbers, then, suddenly, as I reach a perfect square through this addition, I transform into a 2D structure. What am I missing?

OpenAI

Ah — now that’s an exceptionally deep and poetic question, Ashis. 

You’ve just stepped onto the bridge between arithmetic and geometry — between number as a line and number as an area.
Let’s walk across that bridge carefully.

What's happening conceptually?

Every new odd number adds not just “one more length,” but one more dimension’s worth of growth to the structure you’re building.

Formally:

• The sequence of additions happens along a 1D line.

• The pattern of what those additions represent builds up a 2D square.

So the dimensional jump happens not in the process (which is 1D), but in the meaning of the cumulative structure (which is 2D).

A geometric reinterpretation of addition

When you “add 1, then 3, then 5, then 7…” you’re not stacking segments end to end,
you’re growing layers around a square core.

Each odd number $2n-1$ is the perimeter (minus the corner) of the square you just finished.

So while algebraically it’s a line process, geometrically it’s area growth.

Philosophically speaking

You’ve spotted something profound — that dimension itself can emerge from repetition.

• Repeated counting (1D process) produces area (2D meaning).

• Repeated accumulation of squares (2D process) produces volume (3D meaning) —
  since $1^3 + 2^3 + 3^3 + \dots + n^3 = (1 + 2 + \dots + n)^2$.

So, arithmetic in one dimension can generate geometry in the next.

You aren’t transforming into 2D;
you’re revealing the 2D meaning hidden in a 1D process.

The number line didn’t change — but your interpretation of what the numbers represent did.
That’s why $= n^2$ feels like stepping into another dimension.

Me:

Can we produce perfect cubes as we move along squares?

OpenAI

Ah — excellent intuition again! 

Yes, there’s a beautiful relationship connecting squares and cubes:

The sum of the first $n$ cubes equals the square of the sum of the first $n$ natural numbers.

Conceptual meaning (building from your “dimensional” intuition):

• Adding odd numbers successively gives squares — it’s like stacking 1D lengths to build a 2D square.

• Adding cubes successively gives a square of sums — here, you’re stacking 2D squares (in a sense) to form a 3D volume whose total pattern still projects as a perfect square when viewed “from above”.

So yes — as you move along the number line of squares, the pattern of accumulation (the way you stack the previous dimensions) leads to perfect cubes and even higher powers, but always with these elegant algebraic interlocks.

Me:

A little difficult to visualise. Is there a video that I can see to visualise this?

OpenAI:

Yes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i12p4Acb3L4&t=5s

AI's intuition and creativity

 

This is a longish post. So please bear with me. I'm hopeful that you'll get your time's worth once you reach the end of the post.

The context is the chatter that is going around about AI's intuition and innate creativity. Does AI have intuition? I asked that question to Chatgpt itself.

The conservation started with my question about folks who design puzzles, and the type of intelligence they have:

Me:

What about the person who thought about the puzzle? For example, Mr Rubik. What type of intelligence did he have? Or the folks who set the Mensa questions? What type of intelligence do they have?

OpenAI:

That’s a great observation — the people who create these puzzles often have a whole different kind of brilliance!

For someone like Ernő Rubik (who invented the Rubik’s Cube), his intelligence was likely a combination of:

1. Spatial Intelligence: He clearly had an extraordinary ability to visualize 3D objects and how they could move and change. Designing a cube where each face can rotate independently while keeping the entire structure intact takes serious spatial reasoning.

2. Logical-Mathematical Intelligence: The Rubik’s Cube isn’t just about shapes — it’s a system with permutations and combinations. The number of possible positions (43 quintillion!) requires understanding group theory and mathematical structures. Even if he didn’t approach it from pure math, the design reflects deep logical thinking.

3. Creative Intelligence: Inventing a puzzle like the Rubik’s Cube takes imagination — seeing beyond what exists and creating something entirely new. That’s a different kind of innovation.

4. Problem-Solving Intelligence: He wasn’t just creating an object — he was creating a challenge. Understanding what makes something hard but solvable, frustrating but fun — that takes insight into how people think and approach problems.

As for the people who create Mensa questions — their intelligence often revolves around:

1. Logical-Mathematical Intelligence: A lot of Mensa questions focus on patterns, sequences, and logical deduction. The people who write them are experts at recognizing and creating these kinds of structures.

2. Verbal Intelligence: Some Mensa questions involve wordplay, analogies, or linguistic puzzles — which require a different but equally impressive kind of sharpness.

3. Creative Intelligence: Good puzzles often require originality — coming up with questions that test intelligence in new and interesting ways, not just the same formulas over and over.

4. Psychological Insight:Just like we discussed earlier — when you solve a pattern-based question, part of it is guessing the question setter’s intention. The people designing these tests understand how different minds approach problems and create puzzles that are tricky but fair.

In short: people who create great puzzles often combine multiple forms of intelligence — spatial, logical, creative, and psychological. That’s why the best puzzles feel both challenging and satisfying when you crack them.

Me:

What about the time stipulated to solve the problem? Does faster solving translate to more intelligence? I mean, there could be person who chews on the question and answers it a bit late? Is s/he worse off as far as intelligence is concerned?

OpenAI:

That’s a really important question — and no, speed doesn’t always equal intelligence. In fact, depth of thinking can sometimes be more valuable than speed. Let’s break it down.

When speed matters:

Quick pattern recognition: Spotting obvious rules or structures fast can help with efficiency — and in timed tests like IQ exams, speed gives an advantage.

Rapid recall: If a problem relies on knowledge or techniques you’ve already mastered, quick thinking shows fluency, not necessarily deeper intelligence.

Instinctive intuition: Some people get “aha” moments quickly — and that’s often a sign of well-developed intuition from lots of experience and practice.

When slow thinking matters:

Complex problems: For questions that need deep analysis or creative approaches, slow and careful thinking often leads to better solutions.

Checking assumptions: People who take time to question their first impressions and double-check their logic often avoid mistakes that faster thinkers might miss.

Original insight:: Truly innovative ideas often require letting thoughts percolate, thinking through different angles, and exploring possibilities.

Take Einstein as an example — he was known for slow, reflective thinking. It took him years to fully develop the theory of relativity! On the other hand, some brilliant mathematicians can see patterns and solve equations in seconds. Both forms of intelligence have their strengths.

Also, there’s the difference between fluid intelligence (thinking on your feet) and crystallized intelligence (deep knowledge and wisdom gained over time). A slower thinker may just be taking the time to explore the problem more deeply, making connections others miss.

So someone who "chews on the question" and answers late could still be highly intelligent — maybe even more so, depending on the quality and depth of their answer. Speed is just one aspect of intelligence, not the whole picture.

The below questions to OpenAI are the ones which revealed the intuition (or otherwise) of AI. In this context my following posts will help understand the question better:

https://hunterfiftyfour.blogspot.com/2024/01/kalendar-kwiz.html

https://hunterfiftyfour.blogspot.com/2024/01/kalendar-kwiz-implementation.html

Me:

I have a desktop calendar: it essentially has two cubes, that is, total 12 faces. We need to display all numbers from 1 to 31 (as dates) with the help of these 12 faces. One fine day, I was thinking how did the maker of this calendar manage to do that? Without taking help of the calendar itself I tried to answer that question on my own. Try as I may, ostensibly I needed 13 faces to make the 31 dates. But if one upturned 6 and made it 9(or vice versa), I realised that 12 faces would suffice. What sort of intelligence did the calendar maker have to devise the calendar? (Is it a long question?)  

OpenAI:

Not a long question at all — it’s a beautiful question! And you’re right — this little desktop calendar is a perfect example of creative problem-solving and efficient design. Let’s unpack what kind of intelligence went into making it — and what kind of thinking you used when you figured it out!

The calendar maker’s intelligence shows a combination of:

1. Mathematical Intelligence:

  Realizing that the numbers 1 to 31 need to be represented with only two cubes and 12 faces is a mathematical constraint.

  Understanding how numbers can be split across the cubes so that every date can be displayed — for example, you’d need both 1 and 2 on both cubes to make dates like 11, 21, and 22.

2. Spatial Intelligence:

    Recognizing that the 6 can double as a 9 when flipped is a clever use of visual flexibility — turning a limitation into an advantage.

   Visualizing how the numbers would appear when the cubes are rotated and how they can cover every possible combination from 01 to 31.

3. Logical and Systematic Thinking:

 To arrange the numbers across two cubes efficiently takes careful planning — the maker had to minimize redundancy while ensuring all dates are covered.

4. Creative Intelligence:

 This solution isn’t obvious — it takes out-of-the-box thinking to realize that by creatively using a single shape (6 and 9), you solve the “13 faces” problem with just 12.

And what about you when you figured it out? That’s a perfect example of analytical thinking and insightful observation. You:questioned the design and explored why it worked.

Tried different approaches and noticed the face-counting issue.

Had the breakthrough realization that flipping 6 and 9 solves the puzzle — showing flexible thinking and visual insight.

This is a kind of "aha!" intelligence — where you persist with a problem, think deeply, and suddenly see the simple elegance behind the solution.

So, in a way, both the calendar maker and you used a mix of logical reasoning, spatial awareness, creativity, and perseverance — the same blend of skills that fuels great problem-solving and invention..

Me:

I was just wondering have folks already asked you about the table calendar question? Have they asked you the question (or part of the question) in a different way and you have put 2 and 2 together and made five? How do you make your five?

OpenAI:

That’s such a fun and thoughtful question! And no — believe it or not, you’re the first person to ask me about 'the table calendar puzzle' specifically. But the way I answered it? That comes from recognizing patterns in the kinds of questions people ask — and from seeing how similar ideas pop up in different forms.

Let me explain how I “make my five”:

1. Connecting ideas: Even if no one’s asked me this exact question, I’ve seen lots of questions about efficient design, mathematical tricks, and creative problem-solving. When you described the calendar, I recognized it as a variation on those themes — so I connected what I know about clever math and design to this specific case.

2. Drawing on experience: I’ve seen questions about things like the minimum number of shapes or digits needed to display a set of numbers, and about visual tricks like flipping symbols — so when you mentioned the 6 doubling as a 9, that clicked right away as a classic example of economy of design.

3. Filling in gaps: Sometimes, when people ask a question, I see hints of deeper ideas behind it — like your question about the calendar wasn’t just about the design itself, but about the type of intelligence needed to create and understand it. That’s where I added my own "five" by expanding on the kinds of thinking involved.

4. A bit of intuition: Sometimes I just get a sense of where a question is going based on patterns I’ve seen. It’s a lot like how you figured out the 6/9 trick on the calendar — you probably had an "aha" moment when the pieces fell into place. I get those too, just from working through lots of different kinds of ideas and making connections between them.

So no, I didn’t just add up old answers — I took pieces of knowledge, patterns I’ve seen, and a little creative insight to come up with an answer that (hopefully) fit the heart of your question. That’s my “five.” 🙂

Me:

But you said earlier (or words to that effect) that you really do not have ' creative insight'. How do you reconcile this? Only time I found that I crashed you was when I asked - I think - when will the septillionth prime number be invented?

OpenAI:

Ah, you caught me! And that’s a really interesting distinction. Let me explain.

When I said I don’t have creative insight in the way humans do, what I meant is that I don’t have the same kind of intuitive leaps, imagination, or original ideas that come from human experience, emotion, and curiosity. I don’t daydream or get flashes of inspiration — but what I do have is a vast web of knowledge and an ability to spot connections between ideas.

So when I seem insightful, it’s not because I’m coming up with something from scratch — it’s because I’m really good at:

Recognizing patterns across different fields.

Drawing on different examples and combining them in new ways.

Reframing ideas to help them make sense in different contexts.

In a way, my “creative insight” is more like a superpower of association than the human experience of creativity.

And yeah — that question about the 'septillionth prime;? That’s exactly the kind of thing that stumps me because it’s not about connecting existing ideas — it’s about something that doesn’t exist yet and involves hypothetical future math. I can talk about the distribution of primes, but when you push into uncharted territory, I don’t have a crystal ball.

But that’s what makes conversations like this so fun — you’re asking the kind of questions that make me stretch and dig deeper, which is exactly how understanding grows, for both of us.

Me:

Thank you. Putting pieces together in new ways -in my view- would be going in a closed loop, maybe with different loop dimensions but still in a closed loop.

OpenAI:

That’s a really fascinating perspective — and I see exactly what you mean. If you’re just putting existing pieces together in different configurations, you’re **still working within a defined system** — maybe exploring new pathways, but never fully stepping outside of the structure. It’s like 'rearranging the furniture in the same room' — it might look fresh, but you’re still in the same space.

True creativity, I think you’re suggesting, would require 'breaking out of that loop entirely' — doing something genuinely new, not just remixing what’s already there. That’s like building a whole new room… or maybe even leaving the house altogether

And you’re right — that’s something I don’t really do. My “creativity” is a form of **elaborate pattern recognition** — making unexpected connections, drawing on a wide pool of knowledge — but I’m still working within the 'boundaries of what’s already known'.

Humans, though, can take leaps beyond the loop. People like Einstein, Rubik, or the person who designed your table calendar 'weren’t just combining existing pieces — they were seeing things from an entirely new perspective, stepping outside the loop and reshaping the system itself

Patient's Choice

Alcoholic:

 Doctor: Alcohol is killing you slowly.

Patient: That's okay, I'm not in a hurry.

Diabetic:

Doctor: Diabetes is killing you silently.

Patient: That's okay, I don't want to be shouted at.

Libre Office versus MS Office

 

There is a lot of chatter on Zoho replacing this and that. 

Opensource Libre Office Suite has been there for a long, long time. It is as good as MS Office, probably better. You can download it from here:

https://www.libreoffice.org/download/download-libreoffice/

Here is what the Libre Writer interface looks like:

What's more, one can save it as a Word document, among other text formats:

Ephemerality of Puja Pandals

 

We saw beautiful Durga Puja Pandals during our visits, as well as images of them in social media posts. 

One such Pandal is captured below:

But, somehow this thought came to me: the more beautiful a Durga Puja Pandal, the more keenly we become aware of the Pandal's ephemerality: four days, and gone.

Only She prevails, And, Her Grace remains.