syncronization is a problem, is it not?

[Harvinder Singh]

Saturday, February 14, 2004
I wrote this code to prove
“In the synchronized block of statements,If instead of a this reference, the expression yielded a reference to another object, the lock associated with that object would be acquired before the thread continued.”
psedocode:
--create a thread in which pass a runnable object of the Funda() class
--run() method calls the synchOther() method which will get the lock on a object of Harry class(har) and goes to sleep for 10 seconds.
--Inside the main() thread now call the name method of the harry() class which should not run since the Thread is holding the lock on har object.

class Harry{
void name(){
System.out.println("Inside the name method");
}
}
class Funda extends Thread{
static Harry har=new Harry();
public void syncOther(){
synchronized(har){
System.out.println("Obtained lock on har...");
try{
Thread.sleep(10000);
}catch(InterruptedException e){}
    }
}
public void run(){
System.out.println("Inside the run....");
syncOther();
}
public static void main(String args[]){
Thread t=new Thread(new Funda());
t.start();
try{Thread.sleep(2000);}catch(InterruptedException e){}
System.out.println("\nCall made to print name");
har.name();
}
}

My problem is that in the main method as soon as I call the name() it runs. I hope that I am not making any basic mistakes.Plz make the necessary changes so that the code proves the aforesaid objective.