ABSTRACT CONCEPTS AND THEORY OF IITianism

A lot of researchers (read IIT students on interns abroad) all around the world are busy now-a-days trying to provide a theoretical foundation to the concept of IITianism which presumably is the next big thing after INTERNET. I would like to put forth an axiomatic description (DISH) of the same incorporating the basic fundamentals of completeness, transitivity and determinism of complex models defining the same.

AXIOM 1 (AXIOM OF DRINK)

Probably the simplest to understand and apply, drinks are meant to be drank.

AXIOM 2 (AXIOM OF I-WATCH)

Your respect in intellectual circuits is directly proportional to the number of late night movies you have seen while in non-intellectual ones, it is a complex function of scrap count and DC sharing.

AXIOM 3 (AXIOM OF SLEEP)

a) Sleeping is a complete waste of time. It is meant only for the lesser mortals and with twelve fresh episodes of Prison Break available on LAN, it may well be considered a sin.

b) However in emergency circumstances like lectures, it can be used as a deadly defence.

AXIOM 4 (AXIOM OF HOSTELISM)

Bumps are essential so that an individual is not too pissed over the 500 rupees he just spent on the treat. It gives him something else to be pissed with.

It is worth noting that though Newton mechanics has been superceded by Quantum mechanics, these axioms have stood the test of time. Let us now prove a few theorems which directly follow from these axioms.

THEOREM 1 (Fundamental Theorem of IITianism)

Let A_i represent the partition of IIT students such that {a belongs to A_i : a is a student of i^th year}. Then the average number of hours spent by a on various things are given by

a) Sleep: 8/i i<=3

10 i=4

b) Movies (per week): 3 i=1

7*i 1<i<5

c) Mess (no. of helpings a day): 3 i<0.5

1 0.5<i<1.5

0.33 1.5<i<2.5

iota else

PROOF:

The first part follows dirctly from Axiom of Sleep. First yearites having no computer can’t play AOE/CS, so they have no choice but to sleep 8 hours a day. As the student moves to third year, he has to spend some extra time on writing false resumes, as such the sleep hours further reduce. However in fourth year, the student being placed in a good company, the axiom of drink takes over and the time is almost equally divided among movies, drink and folooooooowing hangover sleep.

The second and third part are left to the reader as an exercise.

THEOREM 2 (The Law of averages)

The rate of change of sum total of ur scrap count(per week), Dc sharing, and CGPA is zero.

PROOF

We know that

ds = 0 => s=constant. ([KOP 95])

dt

Suppose if possible, let s be variable. Three cases arise.

CASE 1: Suppose scrap count and DC sharing being constant, ur CGPA increases.

There exists two possibilities, either you attended the lectures carefully or else you put in some extra time studying after orkutting. The first case violates the Axiom of Sleep(b) while the second one is in contradiction to Axiom of Sleep(a).

Similarly we can show that the other two cases (scrap count or DC sharing increases) are in contradiction with Axiom Of Sleep.

HENCE PROVED.

THEOREM 3 ( THEOREM OF INERTIA)

An individual in state of silence will continue to get bumps. Similarly an individual in state of shouting will continue to get bumps till he futs his shucking mouth.

PROOF:

Let us first sate a theorem which you probably studied in ur Acoustic Models ([PKL 90]) course (yes, in violation of Axiom of Sleep).

Let f: Decibels à Natural Numbers

be a one to one mapping sending decibel levels to level of despair and resentment and x₀ be the initial decibel level. Then

f(x)= f(x₀) |x-x₀|<50

f(x₀)+10 else

Now the result follows directly from the Axiom of Hostelism.

THEOREM 4

Let X be the set of all the couples( I mean banda-bandi) in IITD and Y be the set of the students going to Ex-Hall/ RR for studying during exams. Then X is a proper subset of Y.

PROOF:

Let {a,b} belong to X where without loss of generality we assume a is a male.

Then his scrap count is more or less constant as he doesn’t chat wid b in open and having a bandi is no longer frust for making new friends on Orkut. By similar arguments, we can say his Dc sharing decreases. Applying Theorem 2, we have

ds =0
dt

But s=scrap count+Dc sharing+CGPA.

=>CGPA increases.

Now according to Axiom of Sleep, a couldn’t have attended the lectures. So it can only happen if a puts in some extra hours studying. So he goes to Ex-Hall/RR.

This implies {a,b} belong to Y.

Thus X is a subset of Y.

X is not equal to Y as the Ph.D. guys are always present there with their newspapers.

THEOREM 5 (LAW OF INVERSES)

The attendance in Tutorial classes is inversely proportional to age and waist of Tut teacher.

Proof:

Suppose the attendance in a tutorial is m and it increases by 1. According to axiom of I-Watch and the micro-economic theory of demand, the utility of such an action should be more than Orkutting/Salma hayek movie and as such the tutorial teacher should be aged less. So age is inversely proportional to attendance. The waist part follows similarly.

Remark: This law was first observed in Mal 124 tutorials(2005-06).

THEOREM 6 (LAW OF REGISRATION)

The probability that u wud register a Slot C course in even semester is inversely proportional to ur CGPA and the probability that u wud withdraw is unity.

Proof:

The key to the problm is the even semester. The placement season starting in december, you get to know that ppl with CG as low as urs are not getting placed. So u resolve to mend ur ways and pick up good MAL courses(generally in Slot C). By the end of Minor I, all guys are placed. So, you withdraw.