Farley proposed a few programming problems and I though I'd propose one
as well. So here we go.

-------------Physfit And The Mountain-----------------

In a sweet dream, Physfit, as he is typing away with his machine gun
fingers calling somebody in COLA "cro-magnon", and giving him the sage
advice of fingering himself, he notices through the window blinds, over
there, two blocks away from him, there is a strange mountain in an empty
field that he had never paid any attention to. In fact he had never seen
it before.

Calling it a mountain was just ridiculous of course, cause it was only
100 yards high. Physfit tells himself, "Today is my eating day, so after
eating, to relax a bit I'll climb it and sit there on top of it for a
few minutes."

So after he was done with eating the hearty soup he begins walking
towards the mountain, but as he gets closer, he realizes that its shape
is not that friendly for a quick climb, and in fact more likely he'll
need to have ropes and crampons and harnesses, and you name it to climb it.

So he walks back home and gets in the attic, brings down the dusty box
that had his old mountaineer's equipment (which he never had a use for
in Texas). Opens it up and takes what he thinks he'd need, and together
with some other supplies walks back to the mountain to get on top and
relax before coming back home.

The climb proves not easy. And this makes him even more eager to get it
done and conquer the damn strange thing.

At last, he had gone up no more than 11 yards when he notices the Sun is
already setting!... After all that effort, he thinks to himself,
"Getting back down will take too long and at best I'll make it home
several hours after my sleeping time, plus I'd have to start over
tomorrow from the ground level, making it to this height around the same
time as it is now, with no progress made after 24 hours."

So going back down would beat the purpose. He decides to camp at the
spot he is, for the night, and continue the climb next day. He gets his
sleeping bag in order and crawls inside and falls into a deep wonderful
sleep.

But during the night, as Physfit is snoring in his sleeping bag, this
strange mountain grows itself a hundred yards taller!... So Physfit's
distance to the top gets larger than before he even had begun climbing.
But fortunately, this growth didn't just add another 100 yards to the
height of the mountain, but was done proportionally, which means during
that night, Physfit's height from the ground has also increased
proportionally. So the shape of the mountain remained intact, only its
size got increased and thus added 100 more yards to the overall height.

Physfit wakes up in the morning and finds himself at the height of 22
yards on a mountain that was 200 yards high!... So in this new day, with
much effort and perseverance, he manages to climb another 11 yards up
before the Sun begins setting. And by the same logic he decides to sleep
at the spot he was and continue the climb the next day.

While asleep, the strange mountain grows itself proportionally to make
its height another 100 yards larger...

In the morning, Physfit wakes up and finds himself at the height of 49.5
yards on a mountain 300 yards tall.

While brewing his Walmart National Cup tea-bag (which amazingly after
all the recent inflation was still $1 for 100 tea-bags), he admits to
himself that conquering this summit will be harder than he expected.

Every day, from then on, he climbed another 11 yards, and every night
the mountain grew another 100 yards taller, taking him a bit higher with
it.

Did Physfit reach the summit? If he reached, why he could reach it, and
how many days total it took him to get there? And if he could not reach
it, prove why he couldn't reach the summit.

On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 02:25:22 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:

>
> Every day, from then on, he climbed another 11 yards, and every night
> the mountain grew another 100 yards taller, taking him a bit higher with
> it.
>
> Did Physfit reach the summit? If he reached, why he could reach it, and
> how many days total it took him to get there? And if he could not reach
> it, prove why he couldn't reach the summit.
>

Nice problem. But it falls easily to a mathematician.

He reached the summit on day 4983.

Let the day numbers be n. The following table shows the height of
climb and the height of mountain at the end of the day:

(Need mono-space font)

Day n height-of-climb height-of-mountain

1 11 100
2 33 200
3 60.5 300
4 91.67 400
....

At the end of the n-th day the height-of-mountain = 100*n
and the height-of-climb is:

n-1
====
\ n
( ( > --- ) + 1 ) * 11
/ i
====
i = 1

i.e. (summation (n/i, i, 1, n-1) + 1) * 11

This is just the harmonic series multiplied by n. It will
converge quickly.

At end of day 4983 we get:

Day n height-of-climb height-of-mountain

4983 498310.65 498300

But wait! That mutherfucker doesn't reach the top because
he would starve to death after 3-4 weeks.

Physfitfreak wrote:
> Farley proposed a few programming problems and I though I'd propose one
> as well. So here we go.
>
> -------------Physfit And The Mountain-----------------
>
> In a sweet dream, Physfit, as he is typing away with his machine gun
> fingers calling somebody in COLA "cro-magnon", and giving him the sage
> advice of fingering himself, he notices through the window blinds, over
> there, two blocks away from him, there is a strange mountain in an empty
> field that he had never paid any attention to. In fact he had never seen
> it before.
>
> Calling it a mountain was just ridiculous of course, cause it was only
> 100 yards high. Physfit tells himself, "Today is my eating day, so after
> eating, to relax a bit I'll climb it and sit there on top of it for a
> few minutes."
>
> So after he was done with eating the hearty soup he begins walking
> towards the mountain, but as he gets closer, he realizes that its shape
> is not that friendly for a quick climb, and in fact more likely he'll
> need to have ropes and crampons and harnesses, and you name it to climb it.
>
> So he walks back home and gets in the attic, brings down the dusty box
> that had his old mountaineer's equipment (which he never had a use for
> in Texas). Opens it up and takes what he thinks he'd need, and together
> with some other supplies walks back to the mountain to get on top and
> relax before coming back home.
>
> The climb proves not easy. And this makes him even more eager to get it
> done and conquer the damn strange thing.
>
> At last, he had gone up no more than 11 yards when he notices the Sun is
> already setting!... After all that effort, he thinks to himself,
> "Getting back down will take too long and at best I'll make it home
> several hours after my sleeping time, plus I'd have to start over
> tomorrow from the ground level, making it to this height around the same
> time as it is now, with no progress made after 24 hours."
>
> So going back down would beat the purpose. He decides to camp at the
> spot he is, for the night, and continue the climb next day. He gets his
> sleeping bag in order and crawls inside and falls into a deep wonderful
> sleep.
>
> But during the night, as Physfit is snoring in his sleeping bag, this
> strange mountain grows itself a hundred yards taller!... So Physfit's
> distance to the top gets larger than before he even had begun climbing.
> But fortunately, this growth didn't just add another 100 yards to the
> height of the mountain, but was done proportionally, which means during
> that night, Physfit's height from the ground has also increased
> proportionally. So the shape of the mountain remained intact, only its
> size got increased and thus added 100 more yards to the overall height.
>
> Physfit wakes up in the morning and finds himself at the height of 22
> yards on a mountain that was 200 yards high!... So in this new day, with
> much effort and perseverance, he manages to climb another 11 yards up
> before the Sun begins setting. And by the same logic he decides to sleep
> at the spot he was and continue the climb the next day.
>
> While asleep, the strange mountain grows itself proportionally to make
> its height another 100 yards larger...
>
> In the morning, Physfit wakes up and finds himself at the height of 49.5
> yards on a mountain 300 yards tall.
>
> While brewing his Walmart National Cup tea-bag (which amazingly after
> all the recent inflation was still $1 for 100 tea-bags), he admits to
> himself that conquering this summit will be harder than he expected.
>
> Every day, from then on, he climbed another 11 yards, and every night
> the mountain grew another 100 yards taller, taking him a bit higher with
> it.
>
> Did Physfit reach the summit? If he reached, why he could reach it, and
> how many days total it took him to get there? And if he could not reach
> it, prove why he couldn't reach the summit.
>
>
>
>
>
nothing did anything it was all a dream you said so at the start

On 1/20/2024 8:14 AM, Farley Flud wrote:
> But wait! That mutherfucker doesn't reach the top because
> he would starve to death after 3-4 weeks.

No, cause one day, very hungry, he looked at the sky and loudly said,
"Fuck that Pope The Penis X!" and suddenly the single sardine can that
he'd taken with him and had eaten as dinner in the first evening on the
mountain, reappeared intact in his backpack pocket. He further examined
the backpack and discovered the Walmart "National Cup" brand tea-bag as
well as the Walmart water bottle he'd taken with him on day one had all
reappeared inside it. So he kept repeating that statement anytime he
needed more of them.

Plus the little oxygen tank he had in the backpack (from days climbing
the Everest) never depleted!

Very magic, that mountain ...

On 1/20/2024 8:14 AM, Farley Flud wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 02:25:22 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:
>
>>
>> Every day, from then on, he climbed another 11 yards, and every night
>> the mountain grew another 100 yards taller, taking him a bit higher with
>> it.
>>
>> Did Physfit reach the summit? If he reached, why he could reach it, and
>> how many days total it took him to get there? And if he could not reach
>> it, prove why he couldn't reach the summit.
>>
>
> Nice problem. But it falls easily to a mathematician.
>
> He reached the summit on day 4983.
>
> Let the day numbers be n. The following table shows the height of
> climb and the height of mountain at the end of the day:
>
> (Need mono-space font)
>
> Day n height-of-climb height-of-mountain
>
> 1 11 100
> 2 33 200
> 3 60.5 300
> 4 91.67 400
> ...
>
> At the end of the n-th day the height-of-mountain = 100*n
> and the height-of-climb is:
>
> n-1
> ====
> \ n
> ( ( > --- ) + 1 ) * 11
> / i
> ====
> i = 1
>
>
> i.e. (summation (n/i, i, 1, n-1) + 1) * 11
>
> This is just the harmonic series multiplied by n. It will
> converge quickly.
>
> At end of day 4983 we get:
>
> Day n height-of-climb height-of-mountain
>
> 4983 498310.65 498300
>
>
> But wait! That mutherfucker doesn't reach the top because
> he would starve to death after 3-4 weeks.
>

Hehe :) You got the right answer.

Here is the simple qbasic code for it:

phys = 11
mount = 100
n = 2

do
Phys = (n/(n-1))*phys + 11
mount = mount + 100
if (mount - phys) < 0 then exit do
n = n + 1
loop

print, "days climbed = "; n
print, "Physfit's height = "; phys
print, "mountain's height = "; mount

Piece of cake really. But after carefully writing the math before
embarking on coding it, as usual.

The fact that nobody else answered this says a lot about the validity of
what you've been telling about them here :)

With my qbasic version 1 (on my S20 ThinkStation with Win10, using
DOSBox-X emulation) which is very slow, it takes 7 seconds for the
output to appear.

The rest of the story:

Needless to say, after more than 13.5 years of climbing, Physfit's age
had taken him to a stage in life that he could not even think of going
back down and going home. So he dropped his last National Cup tea-bag
into the hot water and began thinking to himself, "Now when I look down
I can only see the lower parts of this mountain; no sign of an Earth
underneath it; so I will spend the rest of my life here at the summit,
inside my sleeping bag, watching all these stars above me ..."

On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 16:47:40 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:

> Very magic, that mountain ...

Der Zauberberg or the one in LA?

On 1/20/2024 5:47 PM, rbowman wrote:
> Der Zauberberg

I think I remember I tried to read that book in Persian when I was
around 17. It belonged to one of my elder brothers. I forged through a
bit but failed to continue and never gave it another try.

Either the translation, or the original itself, wasn't that
reader-friendly. For a teenager with ADHD anyway.

On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:12:04 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:

>
> phys = 11
> mount = 100
> n = 2
>
> do
> Phys = (n/(n-1))*phys + 11
> mount = mount + 100
> if (mount - phys) < 0 then exit do
> n = n + 1
> loop
>

One has to be careful with using a loop like this because
convergence may not occur until n attains an astronomically
huge value. Then the program may take YEARS to terminate but
way before then the precision of the variables would be
exceeded. Multi-precision variables could handle it but,
again, it may YEARS to terminate.

It's best to establish bounds through a direct analysis.

In this problem, the equation to be solved is this:

n*log(n-1) + n*gamma = 100/11*n - 1

Here, we are using the summation formula for the harmonic
series:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonic_series_(mathematics)

This equation is impossible to solve analytically (at least
I can't see how). But we can plot each side to check for
an intersection:

https://postimg.cc/BPBp6rh8

https://postimg.cc/PNW22Dtt

The blue curve is the LHS and the red curve is the RHS.
The intersection occurs somewhere near 5000.

But we are lucky because, as I indicated, the intersection
could be at astronomically huge values.

We can solve numerically, however.

Using maxima/wxmaxima, the answer is easily found:

load(newton1)$

find_root(n*log(n-1)+577*n=100/11*n-1, n, 2, 10000);

4983.606531604496

On 1/21/2024 6:50 AM, Larry Pietraskiewicz wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:12:04 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:

> find_root(n*log(n-1)+577*n=100/11*n-1, n, 2, 10000);
>
> 4983.606531604496

the price of beer? climbing a mtn that magically grows each night?

Why don't you and Sand Chimp focus on something useful to science?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_computer_science

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_mathematics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_physics

Should be a piece of cake for a braggart like you:

* "The stuff I do on my GNU/Linux machine is on par with the cutting
edge in HPC."

* "Intellectully, I am superior to 99.9999999% of the human
population and I use Linux nearly exclusivley."

(I'll conveniently ignore the 2 self-nukes in that last drool)

Now grab Sand Chimp by the gonads and get to it and leave a legacy
befitting a GuhNoo mama's boy.

On 1/21/2024 5:50 AM, Farley Flud wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 17:12:04 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:
>
>>
>> phys = 11
>> mount = 100
>> n = 2
>>
>> do
>> Phys = (n/(n-1))*phys + 11
>> mount = mount + 100
>> if (mount - phys) < 0 then exit do
>> n = n + 1
>> loop
>>
>
> One has to be careful with using a loop like this because
> convergence may not occur until n attains an astronomically
> huge value. Then the program may take YEARS to terminate but
> way before then the precision of the variables would be
> exceeded. Multi-precision variables could handle it but,
> again, it may YEARS to terminate.
>
> It's best to establish bounds through a direct analysis.
>
> In this problem, the equation to be solved is this:
>
> n*log(n-1) + n*gamma = 100/11*n - 1
>
> Here, we are using the summation formula for the harmonic
> series:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonic_series_(mathematics)
>
> This equation is impossible to solve analytically (at least
> I can't see how). But we can plot each side to check for
> an intersection:
>
> https://postimg.cc/BPBp6rh8
>
> https://postimg.cc/PNW22Dtt
>
> The blue curve is the LHS and the red curve is the RHS.
> The intersection occurs somewhere near 5000.
>
> But we are lucky because, as I indicated, the intersection
> could be at astronomically huge values.
>
> We can solve numerically, however.
>
> Using maxima/wxmaxima, the answer is easily found:
>
> load(newton1)$
>
> find_root(n*log(n-1)+577*n=100/11*n-1, n, 2, 10000);
>
> 4983.606531604496
>

Thanks for the nice treatment of it. I was keeping the task at the level
of this audience. Plus, it's not the first time I've proposed this
problem :-) So I knew it didn't pose that danger.

Back in the early 1980s, I wrote a letter to one of my cousins in Iran
who was studying mechanical engineering; and I used another story for
this problem; one of my elder brothers instead of Physfit, and the
location of the plant my brother and the cousin were employed at in
those years, instead of my house here, and so on. I used same numbers
though to avoid the dangers you were pointing at.

So I knew it had a solution easily obtainable by a simple tiny program
before writing that letter. The cousin was trying me with some
particularly difficult problems to check my physics abilities, all via
letters and snail mail, and that problem was one of the many that I
teased him with in response.

I think I got that idea by stumbling on something someone said in
Scientific American magazine.

Is that magazine still around? Nice math problems it had around end
pages of the magazine.

And speaking of the cousin, the last problem I wrote to him to solve was
a cruel one, and he never responded to that. It was our last
communication via letters too. The problem was seemingly an easy
geometry one, but unbeknownst to him, it was a historic one from an
Iranian master whose works even Newton had benefitted immensely from
(one of the four or five "giants" that he pointed at but never mentioned
their names).

I knew it was cruel, but the purpose was just teasing him, not dragging
him over the rugged ground. But unfortunately the latter proved to be
the case. And he stopped writing letters to me.

This simple problem that I sent here could be quickly checked to avoid
dangers in simpler ways as well (but not as definitive). One can measure
the first few days' climbing and see that the combined effect of the
daily 11 yard climbing and getting lifted up by the mountain for each
day is larger than for the day before it. So the effective climbing is
getting faster and faster in the future, and of course the effective
relative increase of the height of the summit is getting slower and
slower in the future (n/(n-1)). So with one getting larger and the
competing one getting smaller one can at least see that Physfit _will_
reach the summit before coding begins.

On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 23:39:32 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:

> Either the translation, or the original itself, wasn't that
> reader-friendly. For a teenager with ADHD anyway.

I doubt translating it to Persian added much. It's satirical but builds on
German culture from Goethe, Wagner, the Brothers Grimm, and contemporary
Weimar politics. Zauberberg is what Nietzsche called Mt. Olympus in 'The
Birth of Tragedy'.

I don't think any literature that references a particular culture
translates well. The superficial meaning comes through but much is lost.
As a trivial example I watched The Separation a few years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Separation

I enjoyed the movie but I'm sure I missed many of the subtexts. One I
remember is when the father corrects his daughter who used an Arabic
phrase, telling her they are Persians and don't use that. That simple
dialog may be the distillation of centuries of conflict.

On 1/21/2024 4:37 PM, rbowman wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 23:39:32 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:
>
>> Either the translation, or the original itself, wasn't that
>> reader-friendly. For a teenager with ADHD anyway.
>
> I doubt translating it to Persian added much. It's satirical but builds on
> German culture from Goethe, Wagner, the Brothers Grimm, and contemporary
> Weimar politics. Zauberberg is what Nietzsche called Mt. Olympus in 'The
> Birth of Tragedy'.
>
> I don't think any literature that references a particular culture
> translates well. The superficial meaning comes through but much is lost.
> As a trivial example I watched The Separation a few years ago.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Separation
>
> I enjoyed the movie but I'm sure I missed many of the subtexts. One I
> remember is when the father corrects his daughter who used an Arabic
> phrase, telling her they are Persians and don't use that. That simple
> dialog may be the distillation of centuries of conflict.

An ardent translator can make up for some of the stuff that's lost via
translation. The little twist and turns don't have to be in the
original, but should create an equivalent thought or feeling that's
understood by the reader and what the latter is familiar with; and the
closer it is to the original, the better. A lot of thoughts and feelings
between people of different languages are either the same or very
similar to each other. But only the top translators can do that; the
ones who are masters of both cultures and languages.

On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 00:10:29 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:

> An ardent translator can make up for some of the stuff that's lost via
> translation. The little twist and turns don't have to be in the
> original, but should create an equivalent thought or feeling that's
> understood by the reader and what the latter is familiar with; and the
> closer it is to the original, the better. A lot of thoughts and feelings
> between people of different languages are either the same or very
> similar to each other. But only the top translators can do that; the
> ones who are masters of both cultures and languages.

It might work with contemporary literature. Heidegger wrote on the
difficulty of translating the early Greek philosophers. Sure, you could
translate them into English, German, or whatever but what were they really
thinking?

Much of his work was concerned with what happened to the pre-Socratic
'physis' when Plato got his hands on it.

rbowman wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 00:10:29 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:
>
>> An ardent translator can make up for some of the stuff that's lost via
>> translation. The little twist and turns don't have to be in the
>> original, but should create an equivalent thought or feeling that's
>> understood by the reader and what the latter is familiar with; and the
>> closer it is to the original, the better. A lot of thoughts and feelings
>> between people of different languages are either the same or very
>> similar to each other. But only the top translators can do that; the
>> ones who are masters of both cultures and languages.
>
> It might work with contemporary literature. Heidegger wrote on the
> difficulty of translating the early Greek philosophers. Sure, you could
> translate them into English, German, or whatever but what were they really
> thinking?
>
> Much of his work was concerned with what happened to the pre-Socratic
> 'physis' when Plato got his hands on it.

You need Naom Chomsky's "deep structure".

A simple example of it is how one can get confused by what someone else says
because they don't have the right context. Quite common in hearing what a
spouse says :-D

--
You will be a winner today. Pick a fight with a four-year-old.

On 1/20/2024 5:12 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:
> The rest of the story:
>
> Needless to say, after more than 13.5 years of climbing, Physfit's age
> had taken him to a stage in life that he could not even think of going
> back down and going home. So he dropped his last National Cup tea-bag
> into the hot water and began thinking to himself, "Now when I look down
> I can only see the lower parts of this mountain; no sign of an Earth
> underneath it; so I will spend the rest of my life here at the summit,
> inside my sleeping bag, watching all these stars above me ..."

Thus the story continues...:

Soon after such thoughts, Physfit got comfortable inside his sleeping
bag and began watching the amazing stars. He gradually fell into sleep,
dreaming that ... dreaming what? Things got confusing, then settled and
he found himself not at the summit of the magic mountain but inside a
strange structure of some sort, with high ceiling and a large narrow
slot across it. A facility of some sort. Before he began slowly walking
around, he noticed his shoes and dress looked weird, like belonging to
centuries back in Iran. Then he noticed the large device inside, which
pointed towards stars from that opening in the high ceiling. Rapidly,
his mind opened up, and he remembered where he was and who he was!

He was no Physfit.

From the magic mountain, he had stepped straight into the 13th century
Maragheh Observatory in northwest Iran, run by Nasiredding Tusi, right
inside the rein of Holaku Khan, the grandson of Chengiz!...

Now he knew who he was; in fact, who he'd always been. The sole pupil of
the master Tusi, Ghotbeddin Shirazi, who also worked in the observatory.
Not even a faint single memory of the magic mountain had left in him.

On that early morning hour, close to sunrise, Nasireddin Tusi and
Ghotbeddin Shirazi had called it a day an hour earlier, and had wrapped
up their works and were ready to leave.

Ghotbeddin turned to Tusi who was still at his large, long desk and with
a smile and a confident tone told him:

"Tonight I found two unique and special integers! They're in a
marvelous and unique way related to the date of Holaku's most beautiful
daughter's birthday :)"

Tusi who knew the date of that birthday from Ghotbeddin's previous
episodes of similar wishful and foolish mushy talk, without even lifting
his head answered,

"In what way?"

Ghotbeddin said,

"Each integer is made of three non-repeating digits and when you
divide the integers by the products of their own digits they give
exactly the month and the day of birthday of Holaku's beautiful
daughter, respectively! :)"

Tusi stayed silent for a few moments, then stood up and got ready to
leave. By the time the two made it to the gate of the observatory
compound to leave the premises and go home, Tusi turned to Ghotbeddin
and in a mildly teasing tone said,

"Sorry to disappoint you Shirazi, but there's nothing unique about
those three-digit integers of yours :)"

Ghotbeddin who knew Tusi enough to get a little nervous by such comments
quickly asked,

"What do you mean?"

Tusi right away gave him two other three-digit numbers that had exactly
the same properties! One would lead to the month (like Farvardin = 1,
Ordibehesht = 2, etc) and the other would lead to the day of the month
corresponding to the daughter's birthday by the same rules Ghotbeddin
had described a few minutes back. So the little personal party that
Ghotbeddin / Physfit had imagined for himself that night was, so soon,
over :)

What was the date of Holaku's daughter's birthday?

(sci.physics added)

On 1/27/2024 2:22 PM, rbowman wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 00:10:29 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:
>
>> An ardent translator can make up for some of the stuff that's lost via
>> translation. The little twist and turns don't have to be in the
>> original, but should create an equivalent thought or feeling that's
>> understood by the reader and what the latter is familiar with; and the
>> closer it is to the original, the better. A lot of thoughts and feelings
>> between people of different languages are either the same or very
>> similar to each other. But only the top translators can do that; the
>> ones who are masters of both cultures and languages.
>
> It might work with contemporary literature. Heidegger wrote on the
> difficulty of translating the early Greek philosophers. Sure, you could
> translate them into English, German, or whatever but what were they really
> thinking?
>
> Much of his work was concerned with what happened to the pre-Socratic
> 'physis' when Plato got his hands on it.

I think the more one goes back in history, the more limited one's choice
of subjects to translate well, becomes. Eventually, one's probably left
with logic, or math, or physics, to translate at that level of accuracy
because their use is universal among humans, past and present.

But then, again, that level of accuracy isn't actually needed if the
work is not math or physics or logic. An ardent translator, can try the
same ways I described, and come up with a valuable work, close to what
the original was for its own people, but understandable by people
speaking the language it was translated in.

An example comes to my mind. There was this Ukrainian guy who became a
physician in France and wrote several works of fiction in French, some
of them heavily drawing from his own personal experiences of the mess
before and during and after WWII. One of his works (came out in mid
1950s) is a little fiction titled, "La Rouille" which translates to
"Rust" in English. But the ardent translator who turned it into Persian
(Shamloo) even changed its title! Yet, the book became a jewel among
Iranians and it is hard to find one who's not read the book. In its
Persian form, it is titled (direct translation into English) as, "Moss."
It is in fact the most popular book of the author (Herbert Le Porrier)
in Iran.

Now my point. In French _or_ English language, this book is next to
unknown. Even your AIs don't know about it. Your Wikipedia is as good as
a donkey about this work. Only French Wikipedia gives the basic information.

Europe, the Americas, Australia, and more, are clueless about this work.
If you dig it, you find that they at most know just the title, nothing
more. I don't think you can find any review on it. Yes, your entire "New
York" turns into a monkey in presenting a review of this work. Anna's
Archive is clueless about this particular work of this author.

But just about _every_ Iranian has read this work and has immensely
enjoyed it, all and all, for the first rate translation which that
master of literature had made. This is my point. A translator can do
more than the author in fact! But not every translator. It requires the
guy who can do stuff like that.

On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 17:54:51 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> You need Naom Chomsky's "deep structure".

Somewhat related Chomsky getting testy about ChatGPT

https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/noam-chomsky-on-chatgpt

On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 18:48:52 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:

> In its Persian form, it is titled (direct translation into English) as,
> "Moss."
> It is in fact the most popular book of the author (Herbert Le Porrier)
> in Iran.

https://www.goodreads.com/author/list/44577.Herbert_Le_Porrier
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/237562._

I assume that's the book since Persian script is opaque to me. What makes
it so popular?

I see the same thing with the genre known as Schweden Krimi in German.
Some of the authors like Stieg Larsson or Henning Mankell have become
relatively popular in English but the lesser known authors are translated
to German and that's where it ends. Fortunately the German versions are
usually available on Kindle.

On 1/27/2024 9:45 PM, rbowman wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 18:48:52 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:
>
>> In its Persian form, it is titled (direct translation into English) as,
>> "Moss."
>> It is in fact the most popular book of the author (Herbert Le Porrier)
>> in Iran.
>
> https://www.goodreads.com/author/list/44577.Herbert_Le_Porrier
> https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/237562._
>
> I assume that's the book since Persian script is opaque to me. What makes
> it so popular?
>
> I see the same thing with the genre known as Schweden Krimi in German.
> Some of the authors like Stieg Larsson or Henning Mankell have become
> relatively popular in English but the lesser known authors are translated
> to German and that's where it ends. Fortunately the German versions are
> usually available on Kindle.
>

Yes, that's the book I was talking about. As you see, there's no sign of
it in English. There's only the Persian translation that's been popular
enough to make it to that site.

The reason for its popularity is that it is a rather unique work that
could tell you everything about what happened to the occupied France,
even as a fiction. It was totally based on personal experiences of the
author, and expressed with no regards for what it implied for Europeans
and the French both. A work of art, really. I think a French author
would not write a work like that about France. To the French; i.e., even
to the French, some stuff should best be untold. But the author was
originally Ukrainian, so he treated the subject much more objectively.
Then this literature expert, Shamlou, noticed it and made a powerful
translation of it into Persian.

Shamlou's translations, as well as his own prose and poems, are among
the best in Iran. His grave is as often visited by Iranians as that of
Hafez. The two were closely of the same caliber as far as Persian
literature is concerned.

Sure, the original is always the best. But Iranians of my generation do
not know French. Shamlou's generation knew it. My father's French was
always better than his English, although his English was pretty good.

But as I said before, it is not just a matter of knowing the language.
It takes much more to translate the original into another language. It
is an art of its own.

On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 17:22:47 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:

>
> Tusi right away gave him two other three-digit numbers that had exactly
> the same properties! One would lead to the month (like Farvardin = 1,
> Ordibehesht = 2, etc) and the other would lead to the day of the month
> corresponding to the daughter's birthday
>
> What was the date of Holaku's daughter's birthday?
>

Month = 8 (Aban)

Day = 18

The corresponding integer pairs:

128, 672 --> 8

216, 432 --> 18

Physfitfreak wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 1/20/2024 5:12 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:
>
> < beaucoup snippage >
>
> What was the date of Holaku's daughter's birthday?
>
> (sci.physics added)

(sci.physics removed)

Accidental discovery (was going to use the 'ls' command):

% vim -RF
E27: Farsi support has been removed

Heh heh, and the Lie is Big, too:

--
One of the most striking differences between a cat and a lie is that a cat has
only nine lives.
-- Mark Twain, "Pudd'nhead Wilson's Calendar"

On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 22:51:59 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:

> The reason for its popularity is that it is a rather unique work that
> could tell you everything about what happened to the occupied France,
> even as a fiction. It was totally based on personal experiences of the
> author, and expressed with no regards for what it implied for Europeans
> and the French both.

Was Louis-Ferdinand Céline translated? His famous one is 'Journey to the
End of the Night' but the trilogy of 'Castle to Castle', Rigadoon', and
'North' are about his WWII experience. When the Allies landed he moved to
Germany and eventually to Denmark. The French tried to extradite him and
he was briefly in a Danish prison. The French eventually granted him
amnesty and he returned to France.

All three books are written in his unique style but it is a glimpse of a
different wartime experience.

On 1/28/2024 1:38 PM, rbowman wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 22:51:59 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:
>
>> The reason for its popularity is that it is a rather unique work that
>> could tell you everything about what happened to the occupied France,
>> even as a fiction. It was totally based on personal experiences of the
>> author, and expressed with no regards for what it implied for Europeans
>> and the French both.
>
> Was Louis-Ferdinand Céline translated? His famous one is 'Journey to the
> End of the Night' but the trilogy of 'Castle to Castle', Rigadoon', and
> 'North' are about his WWII experience. When the Allies landed he moved to
> Germany and eventually to Denmark. The French tried to extradite him and
> he was briefly in a Danish prison. The French eventually granted him
> amnesty and he returned to France.
>
> All three books are written in his unique style but it is a glimpse of a
> different wartime experience.

No, Celine's works had a similar story to that of Le Porrier in Iran.
I'm glad you brought that up. Are you Iranian? Hehe :)

Another master of literature in Iran translated a work by Celine, titled
in its English translation as, "Death On Credit", and that's the one
among his works that became most popular in Iran. Celine's other works,
especially the first above that you mentioned, are also popular there,
but in my opinion not as much as this one for my generation. The
original came out in mid 1930s, a fiction. It is a work better known by
Europeans and in Americas compared to La Rouille which is simply
forgotten; at least for that one there is an English translation of it
available.

This other master, the translator (Sahabi), also, changed the title a
bit to make it work better for Iranians. The direct English translation
of its title in persian is, "Death In Payments." And I think it conveys
its meaning, even in the English language, better than the title in the
English translation. The Persian title is _exactly_ what Celine meant by
it. The title in the English translation is just the direct translation
of its title in French (Mort à crédit) which is not as good as what
Sahabi chose to use.

Sahabi, also, enjoyed many other masteries throughout his life.
Translating was just a side work for him, just like Shamloo, but with
the difference that Sahabi was a master artist while Shamloo was a
master in literature alone, a top word-smith, but all forms of it. The
latter even has a dictionary of "street-Persian" among many other odd
works. An amazing compilation without which much of the culture of
recent Iran would've gone to oblivion.

And this translation is one in which the readers would find many, many,
occasions of expressing stuff, and using words for doing that, which
were totally "No! No!" among publishers and authorities in Iran. And
yet, nobody dared stopping the work from coming out. Government or
non-government censurers, both yielded to it, because Sahabi had built
the story in a way that it couldn't be messed with. It was just a work
of art. Again, a work that some say was done better than the original by
Celine.

So going back to the subject, a translator may lose a lot of stuff in
the process of translating from the original, but also can add to it in
some ways permissible. It is not always a one-way process of
deterioration of the original. It can even get better than the original
:) But it all depends on who it is that's doing the translation.

On 1/28/2024 3:49 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:
>
> So going back to the subject, a translator may lose a lot of stuff in
> the process of translating from the original, but also can add to it in
> some ways permissible. It is not always a one-way process of
> deterioration of the original. It can even get better than the original
> :) But it all depends on who it is that's doing the translation.

A stark historic example of this fact is the work, "Almagest" that
kharazmi translated from Greek into Arabic (language of science of his
time). Kharazmi made many attempts to explain better the concepts that
Ptolemy either had not explained enough, or had made small mistakes in.
For this reason, the translation of Almagest from Arabic to Latin was
used among scientists and astronomers more often than the original Greek
one by Ptolemy when it was discovered at last. This original had been
lost for like a thousand years. But when discovered and read by experts,
it did not quite match the quality of Kharazmi's translation of it :)

Because the "translator" was not some dork who knew Greek. He was a
master of its own, and translating was just a side activity for him.

On 1/28/2024 6:31 AM, Farley Flud wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 17:22:47 -0600, Physfitfreak wrote:
>
>>
>> Tusi right away gave him two other three-digit numbers that had exactly
>> the same properties! One would lead to the month (like Farvardin = 1,
>> Ordibehesht = 2, etc) and the other would lead to the day of the month
>> corresponding to the daughter's birthday
>>
>> What was the date of Holaku's daughter's birthday?
>>
>
> Month = 8 (Aban)
>
> Day = 18
>
>
> The corresponding integer pairs:
>
> 128, 672 --> 8
>
> 216, 432 --> 18
>

Damn you. Dont' give the codes yet :) Give others a chance.

You didn't solve it by hands, did you!... I think a program will do that
much faster, at least for me. For doing it by hand I'd have to go back
to my college algebra again :-)

But do at least tell us you did it by hand or by a program.