“The most complex problems can sometimes have the simplest of answers!!”
When faced with biggest of challenges, human beings generally make the mistake of overlooking the simplest of solutions as the problem towers their intelligence with its’ monstrocity. AIDS happens to be one such monster. The fear of the disease makes the biggest of medical geniuses sweat and not without a reason. Nearly three decades on but still no cure in sight!
But is it possible that the entire scientific and medical community has missed a very simple solution in its’ panic driven breakneck speed to find its’ cure? Possibly yes!
Let me introduce a new concept in the medical community’s fight against the deadly disease, which could perhaps be its’ immediate solution. However, there’s nothing new about this concept.
“Apheresis” a medical procedure in which the blood of a donor or patient is passed through an apparatus that separates out one particular constituent and returns the remainder to the circulation.
This is a process used in “Bone Marrow transplantion” and is often referred to as “Peripheral Stem Cell Tranplantation”.
“Peripheral Stem Cell Transplantation” a process in which the donor's blood is withdrawn through a sterile needle in one arm and passed through a machine that removes white blood cells. The red blood cells are returned to the donor.
Now let us return to the problem of AIDS. How does HIV virus attack human immunity?
“HIV” infects vital cells in the human immune system such as helper T-cells (specifically CD4 T cells), macrophages, and dendritic cells.
All these cells are forms of white blood cells, the same that are removed from a donor’s blood using “Apheresis”.
Well, let us just take this process of “Apheresis” to its’ extreme. What if an AIDS patient’s blood was treated by this process and completely rid of white blood cells? It is a very complex procedure that I am referring to here but let us not forget, the patient I am talkig about, that person has no other hope anyway.
So what am I suggesting?
Possible cure of AIDS: Let me put it step by step:
1. Move the patient to a contamination free environment so that he doesn’t contact any chance infection during the entire proscess.
2. Get a donor ready for white blood cell donation.
3. Remove the white blood cells from the patient’s blood completely using the process of “Apheresis”. This will remove all the virus already present inside the white blood cells.
4. Medicate the patient to rid his blood of the virus roaming free in his blood stream. Continue this treatment until his dendritic cells in peripheral body tissues have perished to release all the virus or most of it while still maintaining the patient in the high protection environment.
5. Once the process is complete, give the patient white blood cells collected from a donor.
6. Maintain the patient in the safe environment until his immunity becomes strong.
Now this technique might just completely cure AIDS in a patient. Or else it will definitely lengthen the patient’s life span than what the patient might be expecting before this treatment.
However, this is just a hypothetical solution. More research is needed.
And remember, “Protection is the only prevention and prevention is the only cure!!”
"On brighter side, we just might not have to kill each other in the name of religion or race!!"
I saw the "End of the World" yesterday!!
And yes, it all might happen much before 21st December, 2012!!
How beautiful does the Moon look, especially when it's up in the day..
How scary the same Moon will look if it grew bigger and bigger and keeps growing bigger..
How beautiful will the Moon look enclosed in a thin bubble made of water..
How beautiful will a big crystal clear bubble of water, almost 10% the size of Moon and leaving Moon, away from it and away from us, sideways, look during the day..
How scary will the big water drops, the size of half the contents of a tea cup feel on our faces..
The “End of the World” might just happen much before 21st December, 2012 when..
The Sun is on one side and the Moon on our farther..
All the Earth’s siblings haven’t aligned in a chain, rather the ones’ behind our Sun are at an advantage!!
The “End of the World” might just happen..
=> Possible Scientific explanation for this phenomenon
Now we all know how if we throw a stone, the more force we put behind it, the faster it travels and farther it falls. We also know how the height from which it was thrown will also alter the distance it will travel as also the angle at which it was thrown, with 45o being the optimum.
Satellites (man-made or natural) are just like a stone, being thrown at a 0o angel (Tangentially to a hypothetical circle around the Earth) from a specific height (Orbital radius) at a velocity (Orbital velocity) is such a way that they are trying to fall back on Earth all the time, it’s just that their velocities are so much that they keep falling beyond the horizon. In other words they keep falling exactly the same distance away from the Earth as their Orbital radius. This happens because, if Earth is round, so is their orbit and both are concentric.
Now depending upon whether their velocity increases, decreases or stays constant, the satellites can either fall further and hence gain distance from the Earth or even escape the Mother Earth’s gravity and be lost to space, or they can fall closer (that is come into an Orbit closer to the Earth or fall on the Earth) or stay in the same orbit. The velocity of man-made satellites can be altered using their onboard engines to achieve the desired results but what about Moon.
Moon has been orbiting around the Earth for ages, for epochs, forever. Its’ orbital velocity must have stayed constant all the time or nearly so. There is no natural means to alter its’ orbital velocity that we know. However if by some reason, like planetary alignment for instance, Moon is pulled enough in the opposite direction than its’ displacement, it’s orbital velocity will decrease and as mentioned above, it will start falling towards the Earth. What happens then?
Well, as any other outer space object entering Earth’s atmosphere, if Moon were to fall on Earth, it will experience the atmospheric resistance which normally burns away most of the meteors and all of the meteorites. However some considerations and effects will be different.
Firstly, we all know that a meteor the size of 1.5 mile radius can not only hit the Mother Earth but also wipe out our despicable existence. Compare this scenario to the size of the Moon.
Second, a meteor entering Earth’s atmosphere will keep gaining speed due to Earth’s gravitational pull and so will Moon, but what about the size of the Moon? The Moon being so massive, might easily slip through the outer thin atmospheric layers, gaining speed, but when it will hit the inner thicker atmospheric layers, it will experience a jerk breaking it’s inertia of motion, thanks to the same friction of atmospheric particles that burn away most of the meteors and all of the meteorites.
Third, like any other rock from space, that is meteors, even Moon is suspected of carrying frozen aqua, i.e. ice, buried deep inside its’ darkest craters on the poles, safe from the burning rays of our Sun that evaporate all the water on Moon’s other surface, making it escape into space. Plus, water might be, and the evidence suggests it is, attached to minerals present on the Moon’s surface. Much in the same way as many mineral ores we dug out of our Earth contain hydrated forms of the minerals. This water is generally removed from the minerals when the ores are melted during the purification process and escapes in the form of steam.
Now putting all these bits together, when the Moon will enter Earth’s atmosphere, the friction will heat up its’ surface not just melting the ice but also removing water entrapped in minerals. The good thing is (that is, if we look at the positives from the fact that Moon is about to fall on the Earth and kill all of us), the water on the side of Moon facing the impact site will be vaporized and dissipated in Earth’s atmosphere in no time. The bad thing is, there is still water on the back of the Moon. And we are not talking about a bucket or two or a small lake of water, possibly enough to fill an ocean or at least a sea. What happens to this water?
When the Moon will experience the jerk mentioned above, due to inertia, this water will rush around its’ surface and fall of the horizon. It cannot run around its’ surface as Moon’s gravitational pull is not strong enough to hold its’ water on to its’ surface and Earth’s pull is strong enough to rob it off in entirety.
This water, depending upon Moon’s topography, will have a big chunk of it falling off one side, and this chunk might be huge enough to fill an ocean or a sea. This chunk will bundle together like a crystal clear water bubble (Ok, maybe not so crystal clear but still very much like a water bubble), thanks to the surface tension of water and will move sideways, appearing to be moving away from both the Moon and the Earth. However, this water will only be travelling in a parabolic path around the Earth as the atmospheric friction will resist its’ downward fall. It will ultimately hit the ground, majority of it, without getting evaporated, simply because it will be such a huge mass. And wherever this mass will fall, the area will be flooded and any existence above that entire Continent will be wiped out.
The remaining mass of water falling of the edges of the Moon, not any less in meanness as it is still a big chunk, will be pushed inwards and below the Moon and into the temporary lacuna created in the atmospheric layer by a bouncing moon, appearing from the Earth as if a bubble of water has enclosed the Moon. This water will beat the Moon in the race for Earth’s surface as it will be splintered around into tinier masses, tiny compared to moon but still bulkier than most meteors. A lot of this water will get burnt even before it hits the Earth’s surface but most of it will survive the journey and will be split into many small drops of water (small only in a comparative analysis but otherwise as big as at least the contents of a tea cup) by the lowest layer of the atmosphere. This water may destroy the crops but spare our homes for they await the final blow of destiny.
The moment Moon will hit the Earth, the impact will destroy everything around it instantly by the tremors it will cause, and then the shock waves created by the impact will flatten anything that can exist along the ground. The dust that will rise from this impact, it is debatable how much of it will be washed down by the large amount of water dissipated in the Earth’s atmosphere when that water will come down as instant flooding rains but if that doesn’t happen then the suspended dust will block the Sun rays for decades or perhaps centuries, freezing everything on the Earth’s surface.
However, the direct effects of Moon’s fall haven’t finished yet. The shock wave of the impact will create tidal waves of enormous height that will wipe out anything above the ground that was spared from the shock waves and tremors of the direct impact. And GOD save us, was the Moon to fall in the Sea, even Mount Everest might find itself taking a complete dip in water. Nothing will be left un-submerged.
After the impact, the next question is, will the Moon stay on Earth forever or at least till the end, or will it bounce off and back into the space and some orbit around the Earth?
If the Moon bounces off, doesn’t matter whether it bounces of the surface or ocean, the damage would still have been done that none of us will be around to measure, and the impact might wobble the Earth for a brief while and affect its’ orbit around the sun as well as its’ spin. But what if the Moon stays? How will the Earth spin after that? Is it possible that the impact and subsequent shape imbalance resulting from a massive piece of rock lying on its’ surface enough to spin the Earth away from the Sun, changing its’ climate or in towards the Sun to its’ possible impending doom, or at the least a hotter Earth? Maybe the Moon is not that massive to cause all the last mentioned scenarios but which one amongst us will be around to judge?
=> So who will be safe:
None of us! Or maybe a few of us!
The President of the US along with a few select businessmen as they can afford it, some of the best brains and artists on this Earth for their societal value and a handful of individuals related to these might be taken on board a space shuttle to survive the direct impact before they return back to take stock of things and plan there from.
None of the Indian politicians who are selling the interests of their own motherland for money not even their kids will be able to use and which will rot in the Swiss banks just like their bankers will rot in their homes, none of them will even get a US visa when they will need it.
The Aussie politicians don’t need a visa to go to the US but I am sure they will be given the wrong boarding time.
Prince Williams and Kate make a beautiful couple and let us just stop there for the moment.
What about the rest of us? Well, who cares?
What about yours truly?
Well, I am living for my love, my life, my only thing precious, my Angel. Wherever she will be, I will be there. If she is on board, I will beg, steal or whatever to get on board, and if she is left behind (which in all probability she will be) then I will stay with her till the end. And mind you, I do have some tricks still up my sleeves. The story of this world was written by the people of this world, it’s just that no one has realized it so far.
Enjoy..
Honestly though, if given a choice, I would rather send my parents on board and make sure she is left behind to perish with me.
Who doesn’t know the story of the 15 year old girl from England who gave birth to a child and her parents had the audacity to try and milk that situation by claiming it was from her relationship with a 13 year old boy? But then there are other cases where girls younger in age than 14 have become pregnant and given birth. But the question is, is such a scenario possible in India?
The answer is, “Not any time in the near future.”
In India if a 14 year old girl becomes pregnant (we are taking the pregnancy to be without a marriage and out of a fling) most likely she and the boy responsible will be killed either by the relatives of the girl or by the community. If that doesn’t happen then the only other thing that happens in such cases is the termination of pregnancy, even if illegally. There will be no parents in India who would do or try to do what the parents of the girl mentioned in the first paragraph did. India is a very orthodox society.
The neighbours will definitely come to know of what happenend with the girl and will always talk about it in hushed voices and behind the back but none of them will ever bad mouth about the girl to anyone. Pre-martial sex is considered immoral in India and the girls in such situation are subjected to social scorn by those who know of the event. However, as long as the girl is not getting married to someone who is related to a person who knows the girl’s history, they will never talk about her past to anyone. In fact if someone contacts them to check out the girl’s background, they will only have the nicest of things to say about her. “Kanya Dan” or marriage of the girl child is considered an auspicious act and the duty of community. Everybody tries their best to make sure every man who lives in a community, his daughter gets married happily.
Now how does this discussion relate to the topic that I am writing about? Before I answer this question let me answer another question first.
What is the difference between an “Early Marriage” and a “Child Marriage”? While “Child Marriage” involves the marrying off or betrothel of kids below the age of pubery, “Early Marriage” means the marrying of individuals who are atleast the legal age to give consent for sex. “Child Marriage” is wrong simply because the children involved neither know the meaning of what is happening nor do they have any say in that. On the other hand, “Early Marriage” is just like a regular “Arranged Marriage” which happens for the majority of Indians, the only difference being that it is solemnised when the individuals are still very young and hence cannot be considered free to make their choice.
Now let me link the case of “Early Marriage” to the present topic, but before I say a single word let me mention that the legal age of consent for sex in India is 16 years (Except Manipur where it is 14) without marriage and 15 years (13 in Manipur) if the boy and girl are married, whereas the legal age to get married is 18 for girls and 21 for boys.
Considering the rapid rate at which the Indian society is getting modernised and its’ age old system of joint families is disappearing, a big chunk of society is extremely worried about the dilution of cultural values and degradation of morality in society. Girls hooking up with boys and the two genders induldging in pre-martial sexual activity is considered not just bad by the society but the offenders can even be killed in some parts of India. This is where the concept of “Early Marriage” comes in, not as a societal dictat but rather a solution.
Western society is different from Asian cultures in general and Indian society in particular in the fact that while in Western Culture the assence of life is freedom, in Asia and India the stress is always on discipline. While pre-martial sex, un-wed mothers and underage sex might have got the social acceptance in the West, India is still ages different from such a society. And I don’t consider it to be a bad thing.
I consider my ancestors to be very intelligent people who knew the importance of sex and the power of sex drive. That is why they invented the idea of “Early Marriage” so that young boys and girls can get what they want and keep their minds clear and society clean and morally uplifted. Infidelity and promiscuity were not a problem and the relationship between the two sexes was a socially respected bond of matrimony.
How and when the things degenrated and the social brilliance of “Early Marriage” degenerated into the evil called “Child Marriage” is difficult to answer for me as I don’t have access to historical facts. But the solution became a problem. And problems only need to be solved. That is exactly what was done and the marriage age was set to the high figures mentioned above.
That the decision was influenced by the modern and forward oriented societies of the West is a humble acceptance of the facts. But that unfortunately was a shortsighted approach considering the Indian settings. Every thing that happens and works for the Western society will not work in Indian settings by default. Our ancestors were not idiots who created certain customs over centuries and then refined them. What they did worked well for the Indian settings and peace was maintained in the society.
In most western societies boys and girls over the age of 16 are free to have sex with each other without the need of getting married, girls aged 14 can become un-wed mothers and still be accepted by their families, and people can live in with partners for decades and raise two kids before they think of finally getting wedded officially. But does any of that work in Indian society?
“Early Marriage” is the alternative approach. If a 16 year old girl and 16 year old boy can consent for sex in India then their parents should be given the right to find a suitable match for them and get them married. That will make their relationship socially acceptable and there won’t be feelings of unease and insecurity in the society vis a vis the moral and cultural degradation. Besides it will keep the heads of young boys and girls in place. Moreover, they are going to have an arranged marriage most likely anyways. Legallising “Early Marriage” will mean more options will become available in the matrimonial market and the chances of boys and girls finding a better match will improve.
Besides who says the dropping of marriage age to 16 will mean everybody will get married at an early age? How many get married at the age of 18 and 21 now? People who are intelligent and advanced enough they will still marry their kids at a later age. It will only make legal the well meaning acts of those who want their kids to get married early. They will have better choice for their beloved kids and let us not forget, their intention to marry their kids early is not to get rid of their duty but only the protection of Indian culture.
Everything is not bad about Indian society and was not bad about the cultural and social norms established by our ancestors. If somethings had gone wrong the need was to rectify and redesign it, not remove it.
I am sure the headline is enough to give you an idea as to what I am going to say about the eternal human dream, “Time Travelling!”
Before my sense and sensibility is questioned let me assure you, I will not only explain why I called “Time” a fictitious character, I will also explain why “Time Travel” is impossible, how “Time Mapping” (A new term being introduced by yours truly) is possible but only theoretically, why “Time Mapping” is practically impossible, and lastly, the possible usage of E=MC2 equation.
Time – A fictitious character:
Myth: Time is the fourth dimension!!
One word reply: Bull Hit (Ok! It’s two words but it’s a Bull’s hit!)
“Time is the only scientific commodity which has no physical existence, rather it is a very intelligent creation of human brain to catalouge the occurance of other noticeable/measurable phenomenon.”
I am sure the above statement will cause not just a ripple but a rupture, a vortex, in scientific circles, but it is the only truth.
We can physically measure distances and they always remain the same. We can measure weights, velocities and many other physical properties. But then so can we measure time. What’s the difference?
The measurement of time is nothing but a mapping of duration of the occurrence of other phenomenon. While the distance between my house and my friend’s house will remain constant, the speed that I drive to his house is measurable, the duration it takes will vary whenever I visit him.
This measurement of duration initially started as a demarcation between one set of day and night from another, then developed collaterally into division into number of time Earth goes around the sun or moon goes around the Earth, and also the number of divisions possible for each day and night, in other words, division into hours, followed by minutes and subsequently seconds. But is it the time which is actually changing?
No!
Humans just started logging their activities using a fictitious character so as to easily recall them. The cataloguing or recal was measured in the number of days or fortnights ago, this many number of sand clock turns, etc.
In other words, it is not time which we measure changing but rather the duration for an event like day or night.
Time is just a fictitious character used to calibrate other physically noticeable changes. Time as such does not exist.
“Time is the creation of human brain.”
Earlier seconds were measured as 1/86400 times the duration of a day. Today a second is measured as the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium-133 atom.
What is natural or authentic about that? Why not use a Hydrogen atom, Carbon Atom, Uranium atom or some other element? And how do we know this measure is the correct measure of something that exists in nature (If we consider Time to really exist for this question)? After all, every other measure of time, be it minute, hour, day, or year, it is derived from this measure, or can be derived from this measure!
I can create a new system for measuring the noticeable physical changes like day or night, movement or growth. I can start a new calendar declaring today as the first day of first century and then start cataloguing history and recording future according to that calendar. And if the whole world was to accept my standards, we will have new standards of measurement for a non-existent commodity that was created solely to measure other phenomenon.
“So how can we travel to another end or point of a commodity that simply doesn’t exist?”
We can travel to and from one place and come back, we can measure lengths, breadths and heights from any end and any point, then measure them the other way. In both these examples and any other example we take we are measuring something physically existent. But time is only a measure of commodities not even related to its’ own existence. It is a relative figure that depends upon the happening or non-happening of other phenomenon.
That is why “Time Travel” is not possible.
Time Mapping:
However what is possible is (only theoretically) “Time Mapping”.
So what is “Time Mapping”?
Time mapping is nothing but a recording of past events in the form of picture frames that can be used either individually as pictures or run in frames as an old world movie reel.
“Time Mapping” is simply a new name for what is already known in scientific community, especially the ones working on “Time Travel”.
It is a well known fact that human eye and photographic cameras picture images because everything reflects light, in fact different colors of light differently. These reflected radiations in the form of photons of light, are absorbed by the chemicals inside the cells of retina or chemicals upon the photographic film or plate and the image is observed or recorded.
Also well known is the fact that light photons travel at a particular speed, the Speed of Light, which is the same for all radiations constituting light. The amount of distance any radiation (or light) travels at this speed in one year is called “A Light Year”.
Scientific community has always known that if somehow we built a vehicle that could fly faster than this speed of light, we can travel far away from earth and capture the images of incidents that happened before the current time on earth, that is, in past, simply because the light reflected by all the objects and their interactions, will still be recordable as it travels freely in space and away from Earth. Such imagery will however also require very fine image recording techniques as we all know the resolution power of our beloved telescopes.
This is what could be technically referred to as “Time Snapping” but for the real “Time Mapping”, that is recording the action as it happened, we will need a space craft that can travel at near impossible speeds as we will have to fly it around in a spiral route, either outwards or inwards. Outwards will be for recording the incident in reverse as the light reflected by events earlier would have travelled farther away from the Earth, and inwards for recording the event in its’ chronological succession as the light reflected subsequently will still be coming away from earth. We can fly the space craft in a circular motion as well, rather than a spiral, which would alter the speed requirements but we still will have to travel around quick to capture those 30 frames, if 30 frames per second is what we are aiming for. Remember, Earth revolves in a circular motion which completes in 24 hours. If we stay put at one point we will miss capturing the next bit of action for an event as the Earth had changed its’ position during that time and the next set of reflections was at a different angle.
Now consider if we were to record what happened only one year ago. What do you reckon will be the distance travelled by the light in that time? The same will be the radius of the circular path whose circumference our craft will be flying along.
I am sure you get the scientific zest of what I just stated.
And this is where the great man Einstein’s world famous E=MC2 comes into play.
E=MC2 What it means and what it is missing?
This equation is not meant to open any gateways into time travel but is rather a precursor for the calculation of Mechanical energy (Kinetic + Potential ‘cause let us not forget the influence of gravitational forces in surroundings). The mechanical energy that I am refering to over here is the energy required to propel our space craft once it is into it’s “Time Mapping” orbit so that it could take images of the past event.
The equation is missing the distance the craft will be positioned away from the Earth and the constant that will determine the increase or decrease in its’ orbit radius, depending upon whether it is in a circular path, outward spiral, or inward spiral.
It might be missing some more components but that is for the rest of the experts in the world to figure out for themselves. I am busy with other world affairs right now.
Difficulties in “Time Mapping”:
Don’t worry, I haven’t forgotten what I told you that I would explain. So here are the reasons why even the humble “Time Mapping” is also practically near impossible.
1. The farther we travel from Earth, more the number of interfering objects blocking radiation.
2. Since every object absorbs radiations, those leaving Earth will be absorbed by those lying in the way, and who knows, how many have already crossed the way.
3. In real environment there are many other sources of radiation reflections. So technically radiations originating from other sources will mix up with Earthly radiations and make any fruitful imaging impossible. In other words, all we will be able to record is “White light” because that is what results when all radiations are mixed together.
Evidence that Time is a fictitious character (Hypothetical Variable):
Following are the two examples that will prove my statement:
1. The value of time makes no difference to the physical state of an object. For example, a block of ice may take longer or shorter to melt into water, and vice versa, depending upon how long it takes for the temeperature change to occur. But the change in the value of time will make no difference to the physical or chemical characteristics of the compound H2O (Water) or its’ physical state. It is the temperature which controls these changes.
2. Force (F = mass x acceleration) and Momentum (p = mass x velocity) of an object are calculated using variables acceleration and velocity both of which require the value of time for their determination. But that doesn’t mean it is the characteristic of time which determines any of the four quantities (namely force, momentum, accelaration and velocity). Rather it is the value of force which determines the value of acceleration, in turn affecting the velocity and momentum of the object. If force applied is less, the resulting acceleration and velocity achieved will be less and the time required will be longer, and vice versa. Time is just a variable dependent upon other charactersitics. Both acceleration and velocity require one more character for their determination, that is displacement (or distance covered). But as already mentioned above on this page, the distance always remains the same, it is the time taken to cover it that changes, which is determined by both acceleration and velocity, both of which are products of Force. Offcourse we are at liberty as to how much amount of available distance length do we intend to use for our measurments. The only thing that is variable is the hypothetical character Time.
What does being on top of the world mean? Why is it described as so lonely at the top? And why is it that what goes up has to fall down (not like Newton's apple but metamorphically speaking)? Questions every successful person has to face and every aspiring success seeker is keen to ask!
However much more important and perhaps chronologically first in order is the question, "How does being different work and is it good or bad?"
Let's take the first one first then!
=> Being different:
The only truth worth knowing about being different (other than the obvious attention it draws to its' protagonist) is that it will always progresses to Whackism ( A world not defined in any dictionary but rather my own loose creation). However, I may also point out here that I rather consider it a degeneration than a progression, and the reason for this degeneration is the running out of ideas syndrome. How different could anyone possibly get when everybody is already different?
But the cause of concern is not the degeneration into Whackism itself but rather the next and final stage of this progression, the Weirdism (Once again a new word created by yours truly, yet effective enough in defining itself on its' own merit). The reason for such a degeneration is the vanishing of boundaries between what is weird and what is whacky when the protagonist fails to see the bigger picture, as he/she strives hard to be different for the sake of success.
The Golden Rule One: "People like what is different, can tolerate what is whacky but will turn away from what is weird."
Now before I link this to the story of "success" and answer the remaining questions, let me state another Golden rule: "Sexy is always sophisticated!"
What is cheap or weird can never be sexy! And it's sexy that sells!
Now to the main point of discussion for this topic:
=> Success - On top of the world
Success is often compared to being on top of a hill, and rightly so. A person competes with many others to attain a position of envy. The space at the highest social position is much like the pointed tip of a mountain, that is, only enough for one person to stand there. So let me take this topic to the top of a hill.
A person can chose a different path than the rest to reach to that top position, that is immaterial. But what now that the person has reached that top position? Since you are already at the top you can't go any higher. What happens from there?
Compare this situation to a mountaineer who has just made to the top of a hill and when he looks down below towards the valley all he can see is a mass of humanity, looking up at him, shouting and waving, something he perceives as cheering.
Two questions arise at this point:
•Firstly, what from here?
•Secondly, what can the mountaineer do?
As regards the first question, "Success" is like a peak which has two contrasting sides. One side is a slow but steady slope towards the ground and the other is a cruel, heartless fall from the cliff. Let us discuss these two sides first before I answer the second question. While doing this the second and third question on top of this page will get an automatic answer.
Being successful is like being on top of a hill. There is a sense of accomplishment, fulfilment and pride, and also, everybody else looks really small from that height. Everybody seems to be cheering your success and perhaps envying you. But these feelings are because one is so far above that one cannot hear what the people are saying. Those standing below have already accepted one's mettle that one proved by climbing to the top. Now all everybody wants of that person is for him/her to climb down safely so that he/she could be bestowed all the adulation and admiration. Nobody else can or will try to climb up that height to meet one at the top to congratulate that person. That is why it is so lonely at the top. The people standing below have already finished cheering and are waiting, waiving and yelling at the successful climber to climb down and cherish what he/she has accomplished. They know, if the mountaineer won't climb down this way, either he/she will tumble down and suffer grievous injury, or will fall off on the other side to an imminent death.
No one can live on top of the peak forever. One has to climb down when they still can. The adulation, admiration and basking in the glory cannot happen at the top where you are alone but only when you climb down to be back among your friends and well wishers who will then lift you on the top of their shoulders, giving you a ride of your life.
The proverbial "On top of the World" is not on the top of the mountain of success but on top of the shoulders of your friends, mates and well wishers.
Those who mistake the top of the mountain to be the top of the world always fall either to their demise or destruction. All that is left for them is just sympathy, not glory. They become examples of how success doesn't last and everything that goes up falls down. People don't remember their climb but their fall.
So what should a person who has reached the top of the mountain of success do? The answer to this second question is simple in its' statement.
Once you have reached the top, plan your climb down on your own. You cannot keep doing the same thing over and over again and you cannot climb up any further. However, you can always come down to bask in the glory of what you have achieved and then " Move towards the next peak to conquer it."
Climbing down the peak is not about giving up but rather a part of the process of "Progress of Life".
"One doesn't have to and shouldn't live on top of the first peak they conquer but move over to the bottom of another one to conquer it."
This way one not only gets an opportunity to bask in the glory of what they have already accomplished but the process of self challenging keeps their lives interesting, worth living and an inspiration. They never rest but continue to succeed. To make it simple, here's an example:
An actor can become famous by trying to be different and be the most successful. But how long will the being different approach sell. When the ideas to be different will start running out as noted above the different will degrade to Weird. People may like sexy but they won't accept weird. Besides, age will catch up sooner or later. One cannot dance, prance and sing around like teens all their life. The progression has to be from teen flavour to maturity and finally sensibility.
Once you are the best the best actor, then it's time to be the best businessperson and then the best social worker or leader. If you stop at being the best actor you are sitting at the top of your first hill, alone. How long before people will find another mountaineer who's conquered a taller peak?
Life is all about challenging yourself to achieve. Once you achieve what you challenged yourself about, it's time to challenge yourself afresh.
"Mother is the first teacher and teaching begins in womb!"
Ever wondered why a politician's kids are a politician in the making while a good person's kids are always good? Ever wondered why a criminal's posterity grow up to be criminals?
You might have heard about some psychologists recommending expecting mothers to read good stuff as it improves the nature of the child who will be born.
The answer to the above questions and the explanation of the psychological aspect lies in the study of human chemistry.
Every thought germinates as a result of a chemical reaction that occurs in some brain cells. Every memory is stored in the folds of the brain as chemical products produced as a result of a thought or experience. Every chemical so produced induces another chemical reaction that results in a particular physical or psychological reaction or makes up a memory.
When a mother is expecting a child, the placenta acts as a bond between her body and that of the body that is developing inside her. The placenta is responsible for not only providing food and oxygen to the unborn but also provides immunity to certain diseases.
However the same placenta has been known to transmit diseases and poisons as well, from the mother to the child.
The chemicals produced in the brain as a result of an external stimulus or a thought, can also be transported by blood from the mother to the child across the placental bond. Which means that a child may inherit not only mother's genes from her, but could also inherit thoughts, behaviour, attitude, talents and reactions to memories that are not his.
So if a mother is reading and watching good stuff while expecting her child, stuff that will excite positive thoughts in her brain, the same positivity can be transmitted from mother to child, affecting the child's psychology and improving the child as an individual.
An artist learning or trying to improve upon her trade can transmit a learning acumen and possibly a quick grasping ability to her child. A mother who is fighting against odds to make both ends meet while expecting can transfer a fighting ability into her child.
However, on the down side, a mother who has bad habits, is immoral, and is of evil nature, will inadvertently transfer her negative nature to her unborn child.
So all you expecting mothers, what you want your child to grow up into is all in your hands. Do only what you would feel proud of yourself, read only what will improve your morality and listen and watch to only happy things, and your kids will grow up to make you proud.
"The only difference between life and death is a soul. The body otherwise is still made up of the same cells either side of death."
While Science is all about what can be seen, tested and recreated, faith is all about the unseen, un-proven and unique. Science will never accept the existence of a soul and faith will never have it any other way. But what is the truth? Or should I ask, what do you believe is the truth?
Human body, a complex amalgam of various kinds of tissues, organs and structures, all made up of cells, one moment alive and the next moment beyond the realms of existence. But what is it about the human body that changes in a moment turning a bundle of thoughts, energy and actively interacting physical entity into a motionless, emotionless and permanently inactive mass? The body is still made up of the same cells that are still capable of carrying on the same life driving actions that they were performing a few seconds ago, then why did they suddenly stop? What is it that has been taken away from them?
And we can look at the same problem in reverse as well. A mass of cells develops inside a mothers womb. What is it that makes the same mass to start functioning as a single entity with a unique purpose, to survive and interact with the environment, to live?
Science cannot answer these questions and perhaps won't be for a long long time to come, but faith gave the answer centuries ago.
A soul is what differentiates a body that is alive from the dead. But then the question arrises, "Where was this soul before it entered the body to give it life and where does it go when death finally catches up with the individual?"
Each and every religion in this world has provided the same answer again and again but either we didn't read or hear it properly, or didn't comprehend the crux or zest of it. But now it's time to re-open this subject and try to grasp the truth behind our being.
Souls are what GOD created to reside in heaven along with him. Souls are extensions of GOD himself. Souls just like HIM are indestructible, never ageing entities. Souls are energy forms that emanate from HIM, derive their strength from HIM and exist for HIM. Souls is what we all were before we were punished to earth by GOD himself and souls is what we all will be once we have served our sentences, a life sentence for us all. Our bodies are not luxuries, rather they are the prisons meant for souls. Let me explain this in detail before I touch various religions in this context.
GOD created souls to either give HIM company or perhaps to fill the empty heavens. The souls are the angels we talk about or read about, and souls are indestructible just like him. And this is where all the trouble started.
The souls or angels as you may like to refer realized their indestructibility and started playing truant. They began disobeying GOD's commands and started indulging in acts GOD didn't approve off. This finally enraged GOD and HE decided enough is enough. HE has to punish the souls to put his heaven in order. But the indestructibility of souls made it impossible for HIM. That is when the idea of imprisoning the souls into something that could be hurt and made to suffer stuck GOD. That is when HE created all kinds of life forms. The various organisms we see around us, including ourselves, our bodies are the prisons of the souls who are serving sentences for their sins. The length of our lives is determined by how long before our souls have served the punishment that has been given to them before they can be let back into heaven again.
So the question arises, "Do all souls get a chance to get back to heaven once their bodily lives are over?"
The answer to this question is not simple.
Ever since the first souls were sentenced to earth in whatever bodily forms it was, there has been a continuous interaction between organisms leading to further acts that can be classified into sins or good deeds. Now as far as other animals are concerned, they are only living the lives and doing things which they are supposed to do according to the restraints of their physical forms. For example, a lion is supposed to feed by killing other organisms and feeding on their flesh. So every time a lion hunts say a deer, it is not committing any new sin, simply because that is the way he has been made. It is his job to kill the deer and the reason is simple, "The soul that was serving its' punishment in the garbs of a deer has served its' punishment and needs to be re-united with GOD in heaven." By killing it lion is working for GOD and hence beyond the discussion of sin or good for its' actions. The souls that are born in animal, insect, bird or plant forms are lucky. They serve their sentences during their life and none of their actions constitute any new sin. So once their lives are over, they march straight back to the heavens. But that is not the case for us humans.
Human beings intelligence is their boon as well as bane. Thanks to our intelligence we interact with our surroundings and modify them to make our lives comfortable. But at the same time our intelligence makes us do things that may not be morally, ethically or socially right or just. Driven by greed or passion, we make our mistakes, we sin. And it is these sins that make the human form as the worst form of punishment for a soul.
Every religion on this earth has pointed out some common things for all of us humans, namely, there is only one GOD, always remember and pray to him, love other human beings, treat them as equals and do not indulge in immoral or hurtful deeds, curb your greed, control your anger, give up worldly passions and adopt simple lives.
Every religion has repeated these things over and over again. Why, one is tempted to ask.
A soul that arrives on earth for the first time in the prison of human body is supposed to live and suffer for the mistakes it committed in heaven. However, during the course of human life many things attract as well as distract the soul and make it indulge itself into sinful acts for pleasure or comfort. More sins accumulate on the soul. Tragedy strikes.
The soul that should have fulfilled its' punishment and returned to heaven after death is forced to be reborn and suffer for the mistakes it committed in its' life on earth. If the soul is lucky it will be born as anything but a human, and will get a chance to return to heavens straight away after that life. But if the soul is born as a human again, the vicious cycle starts all over again.
We may not remember if we were souls before our current birth, or if we were humans then what we were, what religion we had, what was our skin tone, and offcourse we would have no clue as to what we will be in our next birth. But we can control our destinies and change our future in a way to return to heavens straight after our current births.
The people who are suffering badly in their current lives are still serving the punishment for their sins committed either in heaven or in previous life, while those who are happy and content, they are not that way because they haven't committed any sin. If they are born as human beings, it means they are here to serve a sentence for some sin or the other, however, their sins were mild and didn't call for harsher punishments. But, if they'll commit bigger sins in this life, their next life is going to be correspondingly tough. Their souls will not return to heavens unless until they have served their sentences.
Now if all this makes sense then let us talk a bit about various religions.
Indian subcontinent has been a seat of spiritual and scientific learning ever since the ancient times. The worlds first University was established in ancient India at Taxila around Sixth Century BC. No wonder most of the religions that originated in the Indian subcontinent like Hinduism, Sikhism, Jainism, Buddhism, etc, all of them talk about this cycle of life and birth and suffering of punishment. However, it is not as detailed as I have explained it over here, or perhaps, it is not the way the spiritual leaders are preaching them. In all these religions a lot of stress is on peaceful co-existence and renouncement of worldly pleasures, uncontrolled sex drives, substance abuse, anger, greed, ego and other sinful deeds. But so is in Christianity, if we think about it carefully. However, their is a slight difference.
Christianity's message is still of peace and abhorring sins and ills as stated above, but Christianity also details the first instance of punishment meted out to the erring souls. Adam and Eve along with the serpent represented the first souls to be punished and expelled from heaven. However what we humans have failed to appreciate is the fact that Adam and Eve's story has travelled through the generations initially through the word of mouth and subsequently as print but the point to notice is, it was still told by humans, humans who don't even remember what they were in their previous birth.
So the fact that Adam, Eve and Snake were not the real entities but the worldly prisons of the three souls that were expelled from heavens for the first time probably missed everyone. It was an experiment GOD was conducting to test his creation, the new and only way of punishing the sinful souls. The only way pain and suffering could have been inflicted on immortal souls when they erred beyond limits was to trap or jail them into a physical body. GOD's experiment worked and since that time, soul after soul has been punished and is still being punished.
Jesus Christ, the son of GOD was sent amongst us to renew our lost knowledge about GOD and HIS punishment and word, because unlike other animals who only live and do what their bodies are physically meant to by GOD, we humans are the only one's who interact and alter our environments and influence fellow beings for the sake of pleasure or greed. We were the only one's of all the creation who had to be reminded of GOD and what HE wants us to do. And that is why GOD sent his only son "Jesus Christ" to guide us.
When Christ said "Come to me and I'll forgive you your sins," he didn't mean he will forgive anything that we do. What he meant was he will forgive us all the sins our souls committed before this birth and up to the last sin committed before we gave ourselves to him for the first time. He then promised to purify our lives to make us all eligible for heaven after this birth. The sins that we commit in this life after our first submission to Christ are not eligible for Christ's forgiveness. The only way then left is penance for what we have done, that is self inflicted punishment which has to be equal and similar to the sins we have committed.
If we want to go to heaven, we need to go to Christ and offer ourselves unconditionally to him. He will forgive us of our past sins and make our lives clean slates but only for the first time, as before that none of us knew why we had been sent to earth in the first place and how bad we had been before and since then. But once we have been to Christ and he has made our lives clean slates, if we sin even once again we instantly become eligible for the next punishment, which if we are lucky enough we would get in this life before we die, or we will have to be born again and suffer for it. And the worst case would be, if we were to be born again as a human beings, cause not only will we suffer but we will sin again and we don't even know what religion, race or colour we will be born as. Remember, Christ's offer to forgive is for one time only and not again and again.
Now that brings me to one last major religion, "Islam." Again, the message that I know from Islam is from what I've learnt from watching my friends who are Muslims or my former students who are Muslims. All I know is even "Islam" asks us to remember and pray to GOD who is one, love all human beings and spread the word of GOD. Other than that I don't know much simply because no one is spreading the message of "Qur'an". All that is being spread is terror and hatred. Consequently none like me knows what "Qur'an" actually says and what really is the message of Prophet Mohammed. So I'll restrict my discussion to this point only.
What I have presented to you today is neither a religious message from the religion I was born in, nor any new religious belief that I am trying to preach or propagate. Sorry, but I ain't interested in being either a "Prophet" or a "Messiah". I ain't that great a human being.
What I am saying is what I believe to be the truth. You may or may not agree with it. The question is, "What do you believe is the truth?"
