What makes it all the more unfair is the universal derision which greeted his assertion that ' CCTV will

*I did nothing wrong in the lift' (i.e. the elevator- you say tomato, we say*

**prove***tamattar)*because, as he well knew, there was no camera there.

Surely, as responsible Secularists, we have a duty to find a more charitable interpretation of Tejpal's enigmatic statement?

But how are we to proceed?

The answer, of course, as so often happens on this blog, is by taking recourse to the theory of computational complexity.

Briefly, the character string 'CT,' in Tejpal's reference to CCTV, refers to the Church Turing Thesis- i.e. Tejpal was giving an informal proof of a purely mathematical, not empirical type. Thus, the absence of a camera in the lift is

*germane.*

**NOT AT ALL**The fact is, as Wikipedia says (hat tip to ex Chief Justice Katju)

*'Proofs in computability theory often invoke*

^{[43]}the Church–Turing thesis in an informal way to establish the computability of functions while avoiding the (often very long) details which would be involved in a rigorous, formal proof. To establish that a function is computable by Turing machine, it is usually considered sufficient to give an informal English description of how the function can be effectively computed, and then conclude "By the Church–Turing thesis" that the function is Turing computable (equivalently partial recursive).Now, it is a well known axiom of Modern Indglish Secular Socialistic Mathematics, that Narendra Modi is constantly prowling around raping everybody and then slitting open their bellies to tear a fetus out of their womb so as to rape that fetus and slit its belly open etc, OBVIOUSLY that's what happened to Tejpal by Church Turing, at least once you take into account the underlying Lyapunov candidate function-

**conventionally represented as 'V'**(Lyapunov functions are useful because they make a Schelling focal point (like Modi's endlessly increasing degree of guilt) a stable solution to the underlying Co-ordination problem in a manner that is robust to empirical refutation). Thus, Tejpal is saying 'See, by Church Turing, the existence conditions for a Lyapunov candidate function

**I was raped by a Feminist Taliban/Hindutva Hooligan of a Madhu Kishwar type**

*proves*

*ACTING ON ORDERS OF NARENDRA MODI.*"BTW & FYKI all this is explained on page 2 of my 'Alchemy of Desire'-

*which isn't a totally crap book by a worthless needle-dick rug-muncher at all*- but you didn't bother to read it, did you? Just skipped through to the dirty bits except you didn't even persevere with those sections coz the only purple and engorged thing that therein arises is my own insufferable ego plowing my spinchterless colon of prose.

' But enough literary chit-chat. Look, just fucking face facts why don't you?

*Either*Narendra Modi is a Machiavellian monster orchestrating every verifiable Evil

*or else*everything us Indglish 'intellectuals' have been banging on about post Godhra has been just meretricious, mendacious shite.

'Now, by Razborov-Rudich, we know that, since we can't prove Modi's guilt (because the psuedorandom generators used by Modi to cloak his Satanic conspiracy are indistinguishable from the real thing) it follows that our 'natural proofs' of Modi's guilt can't decide PvNP. This is important because, though bilaterality (as for example between me and my rapist in the lift) is in complexity class P, the 'alchemy of Desire' is not. Why? Alchemy is not algorithmically verifiable. This is shown by the fact that whereas what actually happened was Modi's minions totally ass raped me, still I go down in history as a creepy Uncleji type going down on all and sundry whereas, since my English and Punjabi and Inglish novels are way better than Vivek Iyer's, I am

*the least cunning linguist ever. Also I've made a lot of money peddling my trash. Iyer is just*

**not**

*sad.*'**Q.E.D**