Voices from Cyberspace

"Of  course,  it is so when my wife is in on the other  side",  I conceded. "Yes, you do not do the talking then. That is  what  I have  been trying to impress upon you all along -- on the telephone line the speech is one way, invariably!", Ramanujan  said. He  is a wizard not only in Mathematics but also in the complex riddles involving telecom.

His argument was plain and simple. Despite a voice channel being circuit-switched exclusively, in real time, for a dialogue, at  any given instant there is only a monologue. That did not appear as anything abnormal -- to me. But Ramanujan, known for his tenacity, would not not give up.

When you send a telegram, the other party cannot oblige you  with a reply immediately. "Yes, it is so" I said, "that is why I  use the phone". While the telegram can be called as a simplex protocol, the  telephone is a duplex machine. " It certainly is.  They  also charge me double", I let him become aware of my discovery.

Using a duplex channel in simplex mode, you are wasting half the capacity. It is like deploying just one side of a double carriage highway. "Then you pause between words. And more, between sentences" Ramanujan continued to explain. "I have to, otherwise you would not understand," I said. "Half the time you pause and you waste yet another half of the what is left. Already the inefficiency is seventy five percent."

"I  know,  talking itself is so unproductive. I shall  revert  to writing letters hereafter"

"Do  not throw the towel yet. You can now take to E-Mail,  fortunately. But coming to the issue again, have you wondered how much of the bandwidth you squander on linking sentences ..by way of those -- I mean.. that is to say.. ok and other punctuations..?"

"Ok, I get it, what are you aiming ?"

"That is to say, I mean, the purpose of my argument is that, the channel efficiency trickles down to a mere six percent, ultimately"

"Ok.  Baba, we shall grant that to you. It is a price for  redundancy, so others may understand you right. And now, may I go  and  watch the idiot box ?", I asked.

Ramanujan would not want to relieve me. He said, "We waste energy, we waste water, we also fritter unpolluted air  and  sustainable environment. And now? We are not bothered of littering the precious bandwidth -- for nobody's benefit"

"Ok, let us then save that for a rainy day. May I then have  your permission to vanish?"

"No not yet, I want you to write what all can we do with  that freedom of bandwidth. And for God's sake shout at the top of your  voice and be heard"

"Look here, Ramanujan, I write of what I am convinced of. Already we are reusing the bandwidth in the cellular, in paging, then  in the CDMA, in the satellite.."

"Bus,  bus",  Ramanujan hurried "pray permit me to  talk  of  the canalised bandwidths. Not of that public domain stuff. You do not care to read what I wish to say.."

"Then  tell me quickly, I have a date with a Crorepati"

"I demonstrated, already, the bandwidth efficiency in a telephone channel, is a measly six percent. It signifies that you can carry sixteen conversations on the same channel, with a bit of technology thrown in. More importantly, if there are three hundred channels to the US of A, we may be able to carry six thousand calls simultaneously, maybe. In other words we may choose to compromise to buy the  calls  at one tenth the present rate, even now. That is to say at two rupees a minute, or at a tariff less expensive than the by-now-famous airtime. Like the fuel efficient cars !"

"Come  again, that sure looks interesting. Do you mean to say  -- you are hoping to get your calls to Uncle Sam, one day, at  the price of a local call?"

"Possible, do you consider you are convinced now?"

"Yes, no, maybe -- I guess I have not made up my opinion. Do tell me what will you call this suggestion of yours, if and when it is given a practical shape?"

"Voice-on-Internet, what else?"

The line got disconnected. There was busy tone. I did not  bother to redial, because it was Ramanujan's call that was disrupted and not mine.