Why should I care about the future generations - what have they ever done for me?

Cycle of re-incarnation would have you believe that you will reap, as early as within next life, what you sow. While this is certainly a fancy notion, this isn’t truth by any notion of reasonableness. Hence even if you wouldn’t have enjoyed what you do now – for example, luxuries of material progress, benefits of freedom struggle, developments of modern technologies – there is hardly an obligation, let alone nagging sense of guilt, for doing something for future generation.

May be I am selfish but I’ve got only one life. Barely 40 years of pleasurable existence (excluding pre-puberty and senility). There is nothing wrong in me to want to live only life the way I like. I didn’t ask to born, so there isn’t any purpose I am supposed to fulfill. If I am dead tomorrow, why should I even care what happens to rest of the world and rest of the people (and ants, mosquitoes, etc. for that matter). I wouldn’t even know and feel ever.  Why should my narrow sense of kinship with fellow humans overshadow my sense of connectedness with the entire Universe? Should I feel depressed by falling of a star somewhere?

Admittedly, my progeny and kins will inhabit this planet after I’ve departed. Yet, what I do for future generation wouldn’t benefit them as much as what I do for my kids directly. If I think about it, I haven’t even met my descendants and I am not kind of person who gets worked up on what his bloodline is going to suffer in future. In that way, I am kind of a model citizen, beyond narrow interests of family and clan, equally indifferent to all.

Some will say that had this attitude been taken by our forefathers we wouldn’t have had what we do. But, who really knows? Could we have not been better? Did all those who worked on what they did do it for future generation i.e. us? What they did was their choice. My choice is to make optimal decision based on information in my hand at this juncture of my existence.

Assuredly, do what you like, and if it benefits next bunch of people in the world, well and good, but if it doesn’t, don’t worry. Want to buy plastic bags and drink water in paper cups? Be my guest (though you might want to check if it will start hurting you in this generation!) It’s a beauty of this big world that there will be some people who will disagree with even the best construed arguments. My role is to convince you that I (and you too) shouldn’t worry about future generation, with awareness that some of you wouldn’t get convinced, and end up doing (possibly) something good for future generation, which makes my not worrying not as troublesome as I could be. Ironically, success of my argument depends on the failure of my argument. But, either way, who gives a damn?

You are fired!

No other act has seen use of so many euphemism as corporate action of firing employee off. In quest to be as sweet as possible while doing the exact opposite, corporate HR should probably won some kind prize for coming up so many ways to not say what they want to. Not that I believe companies shouldn’t fire people, but it will be worth a bit honesty and ethics to not rub salt on it. Of course, honesty and ethics are kinds of things you wouldn’t associate with any big company anyway.

In the sprit of doublespeak, then, here is collection of what ‘you are fired’ may sound like:

assignment ended
assignment expired
best shoring
bought out
bounced out
career change opportunity
career transition
cashiered
contract not renewed
contracted out
decruitment
discharged
dismissed
down size
early retired
eased out
end of trial period
freed up for the future
going in different directions
headcount adjustment
headcount reduction
helped with exit
invited to be successful elsewhere
involuntary separation
laid off
let go
made available to industry
made redundant
make internal efficiencies
managed out
off shoring
optimized
outplaced
outsourced
personnel realignment
personnel surplus reduction
position has been eliminated
promoted to customer (retail workers)
pursue other opportunities
rationalize the workforce
reclined to extend
reduced headcount
reduction in force
re-engineered
regime change
released
released from the talent pool
relieved of duties
reorganized
re-prioritizing labor expenses
resource action
responsibilities have been reassigned
right size
separated
services no longer required
skill mix adjustment
smart size
stepped down
taking it for the team
terminated
unassigned
we really feel like we’re holding you back here
workforce efficiency initiative

You can’t deny

There are certain allegations that just cannot be denied. By very design, any denial supports the accusations. I can recollect two now:

• You are too defensive
• You always have to be correct

Consequently, any such accusation is conversation stopper. What does that say about accuser? What more can you think of?

Hindi count approximation number pair

This post is based on Hindi colloquial/conversational number pairs used in approximating a quantity. Knowledge of colloquial Hindi is requisite.

Hindi conversational numbering follows Hindu-Arabic Decimal Number System with Hindi pronunciations. One (1) becomes Ek, Two (2) becomes Do, Three (3) becomes Teen and so on. When asked to approximate a quantifiable noun viz. in response to “how many minutes before the dad comes home?”, Hindi speakers often speak in number pairs such as Ek-Do (1-2). Not all pairs are acceptable and feel “right” when you say them aloud. This post will try to discern if there is a mathematical pattern in acceptable set of pairings.

Table: List (partial) of acceptable pairs

Pair	Type
1-2	Next
2-1	One
2-3	Next
2-4	Double, Next 2x
2-5	Plus 3
3-1	One
3-4	Next
4-1	One
4-5	Next
4-6	Next 2x
5-1	One
5-6	Next
5-10	Double, Next 5x
6-1	One
6-7	Next
7-1	One
7-8	Next
8-1	One
8-9	Next
8-10	Next 2x
9-1	One
9-10	Next
10-1	One
10-11	Next
10-12	Next 2x
10-15	Next 5x
10-20	Double, Next 10x
11-1	One
11-12	Next
12-1	One
12-13	Next
12-15	Plus 3
13-1	One
13-14	Next
14-1	One
14-15	Next
15-1	One
15-16	Next
15-20	Next 5x
16-1	One
16-17	Next
17-1	One
17-18	Next
18-1	One
18-19	Next
18-20	Next 2x
19-1	One
19-20	Next
20-1	One
20-21	Next
20-22	Next 2x
20-25	Next 5x
20-30	Next 10x
21-1	One
21-22	Next
22-1	One
22-23	Next
22-25	Plus 3
23-1	One
23-24	Next
24-1	One
24-25	Next
25-1	One
25-26	Next
25-30	Next 5x
25-50	Double
26-1	One
26-27	Next
27-1	One
27-28	Next
28-1	One
28-29	Next
28-30	Next 2x
29-1	One
29-30	Next
30-1	One
30-31	Next
30-32	Next 2x
30-35	Next 5x
30-40	Next 10x
31-1	One
31-32	Next
32-1	One
32-33	Next
32-35	Plus 3
33-1	One
33-34	Next
34-1	One
34-35	Next
35-1	One
35-36	Next
35-40	Next 5x
36-1	One
36-37	Next
37-1	One
37-38	Next
38-1	One
38-39	Next
39-1	One
39-40	Next
40-1	One
40-41	Next
40-42	Next 2x
40-45	Next 5x
40-50	Next 10x

After manual enumeration of all such pairs where first number is up to 40, we can observe following seven type of pairings:

1. Next: This is the most common type of pair in which each number is paired with next whole number following it.
2. One: This is the second most common type of pair in which each number is paired with number One, except, of course, number One itself.
3. Next 2x: Numbers 2, 4, 8, 10, 18, 20, 28, 30 and 40 pair with next number which is multiple of 2 i.e. next even number. Primarily, numbers ending in 0 seem to follow this pairing. There is temporary pairing of this type for numbers ending in 8 but this doesn’t continue long since after 38 this doesn’t work. 2 and 4 are obvious exceptions.
4. Plus 3: 2, 12, 22 and 32 seem to follow this type of pairing. Projecting further, it appears that all numbers ending in 2 would following this pairing.
5. Next 5x: 5, 10, 15, 20, 35 and 40 predictably follow pattern of paring with next number which is multiple of 5. These numbers themselves are multiple of 5 clearly following a pattern.
6. Next 10x: 10, 20, 30 and 40 again following pattern of pairing with next number which is multiple of 10 while themselves being multiple of 10.
7. Double: Numbers 2, 5, 10 and 25 pair with numbers twice them though 2, 5 and 10 be also be categorized to other pairing types which makes more sense. Projecting beyond 40, we see that while 50 doesn’t follow this pairing, 100, 150, 200, 500 do so. There doesn’t seem to be any identifiable pattern here.

I also tried to find pattern in sum, product and ratio of numbers in these pairs and in ratio of consecutive sums and consecutive products without success. Possibly, enumerating pairs after 40 may identify more types of pairings. What are your thoughts and observations?

(Peculiarity of such pairings have been in mind for quite many years but this post on Futility Closet — which, by the way, is a recommended read blog — propelled me to write this post.)

Thank-o-meter

Cultural differences between oriental and occidental societies are well known and expressing gratitude through explicit thanking is one such area of difference.

European and North American societies exhibit an all pervasive tendency to thank family, friends and strangers for the most trivial of the matters which grates Indians — or at least me — in two ways. One, it reduces act of thanking to mere perfunctory ritual rather than heartfelt recognition of gratitude received because it becomes difficult to recognize true thanking to courtesy thanking. Two, it embarrasses me to receive profuse thanking for task which I don’t consider worthy of gushing praise bestowed on me. One English colleague at my firm, for instance, once asked me for “a very very big favour” by asking me to explain her how many thousands were in a lakh. I am often at loss to even respond to such overwhelmed dose of expressed thanking.

Asian societies, on the contrary, are more cautious in thanking and when done, it is almost always to strangers. In fact, a good yardstick to measure how close one is in personal circle of thank-er is to notice for what and how often one is thanked. A close friend or family member never expects to be thanked and some even take offence at thanking. Even strangers are thanked for things more substantial than mere getting out of the way on footpath. This, naturally, comes out to West as rude and ungrateful behaviour.

Those of us educated and exposed to Western culture are pushing thanking in Indian social interaction to same extent. While thanking someone for efforts he put into helping you is desirable social mannerism, anything done in excess loses its meaning as happens on the other side of the Earth. What we need is moderate amount of thanking and thanking from heart for things for which thank-er is really thankful about. What we need is thank-o-meter™!

Thank-o-meter is each individual’s personal cumulative counter of thanks he received and thanks he gave throughout his life. Because thanking someone will decrement thank-o-meter reading, one would do so only when meant genuinely and when other’s effort are substantial enough and worthy of a thank. This will obviously increase value of thank to receiver as well. Because one will be able to thank only when he has positive balance of thanks, he will have to earn thanks through efforts before he can spend them.

Implementation of this scheme can only be undertaken by God for He only has such scalability and omniscience required for this project. Implementation details such as initial stock of thanks can be worked out. What may happen is that some miser may stop handing out thanks or some other start hoarding them. Thanking in return of cash gift would be equivalent to selling thank-o-meter readings. Humankind may end up deciding price of a efforts in units of thanks which will be function of demand (low during natural disaster) and supply (high during charity event) and may work much like today’s forex market (and can possibly be traded).

Anticipatory pleasures

Among the things I like to eat, there are some things I start missing if I’ve not had them for many days. Rich chocolate cake, pizza, turai sabzi, daal-baati and Subway™ sandwich are some such examples. When faced with opportunity of consuming them, I develop irresistible urge to savour the object of desire. I often succumb to my urge. What is surprising to me is the fact that I end up enjoying them mere okay and not become as ecstatic as I thought I would be after eating them. Even more surprising fact that despite my less than extraordinary experience this time, I will once again start missing same things and cycle will continue.

Why does my mind plays such tricks on me? Do my expectations always overshadow my real experiences? If so, why don’t my expectations decrease next time? Am I tough nut to please? Am I subconsciously enjoying them? Is there such thing as subconscious enjoyment of eatables?

It seems that only way for me to enjoy what I enjoy is not to really enjoy it but only anticipate the enjoyment the enjoyable object will bring.

An instance of happiness (or disappointment)

Those four digits have knack of making me slightly happy or unhappy every single time, even if for an instance only.

When I am done talking over my mobile and see call summary notice pop-up, I get instantaneously elated for a fraction of a second if number of minutes of use is **:5*. That I extracted most of my money’s worth of last minute is reason enough. Not surprisingly, I get marginally disappointed if that number is **:0*.

Penny for your thought

You probably have heard about this joke puzzle:

When it’s a penny for your thoughts and you put two cents in, who gets the other penny?

Having recently incurred substantial cost in exchanging INR to GBP, answer dawned on me suddenly while walking to work today. 2 cents corresponds to about 1.25 pennies. 0.25 penny is simply transaction cost of currency exchange. I feel pretty good now.

Double entendre Oxymoron

“Practice makes a man perfect”, so goes the saying. So what makes a woman perfect? Perhaps she already is. Alright, that was lame. But that’s not the point of this post.

Consider the sentence: “No practice makes a man perfect”. Does it mean that not doing any practice makes a man perfect (and practice ruins perfection), or that, no amount of practice will make a man perfect? Is there any grammatical mistake in this sentence or does it convey two contrasting but legitimate meanings? Does this phenomenon has a linguistic definition? What are other examples of such kind?

Population trading

Most of you will be familiar with ‘carbon trading’ and attempt of various countries and organizations to become ‘carbon neutral’ by certain time in future. By fixing quota of permitted pollution, attempt is made to reduce/prevent/stop Global Warming. Those that cannot control pollution to the permitted extent are allowed to buy additional quota from those that can control more than required. Idea of ‘population trading’ and ‘population neutral’ emanates from this and this post can be understood as an intellectual fantasy if this were followed…

Rapidly expanding population of Earth is increasing danger to rapidly vanishing Earth’s resources, and has direct impact on human welfare and lifestyle. It is also the most important contributor to Global Warming. Naturally, it helps if attempt is made to reduce world’s population. However, no such attempt is in offing and most efforts, if any, are at country level. At one hand poor countries of Asia and Africa, India included, are trying to reduce population growth, on the other hand, few highly developed countries (viz. Japan, Australia) are incentivizing their reluctant population to grow faster. Unfortunately, both are failing to some extent.

If future population quota is fixed based on country’s habitable area, then countries growing faster can buy ‘population credits’ from those growing slower. Unpalatable part of this scheme will be that mostly poor countries will be required to pay to mostly rich countries, and that is unlikely to happen. If such quotas were permitted at couple level then parents trying to produce more than allocated children will have to buy quota from those who are producing less or not marrying. Again, poor families will have to cough up money to pay to rich families, as usually educated (and mostly rich) couples desire fewer children than usually uneducated (and mostly poor) couples. Involvement of government authorities in licensing quotas can open floodgates of misallocation and corruption.

At personal level, a couple can try to be ‘population neutral’ by limiting their progeny to two. If neutrality is carried over generations than compensating actions is permitted where fewer or no children in one generation can allow additional in next or so generation. Such practice can be followed at community or social level and will require careful auditing and population enumeration.

In extreme case, wholesale population migration can be attempted, where select couples from populous countries can be moved to countries with negative population growth. This, of course, has to be tried by later country and will have significant effect on its social, cultural and political environment. Some indirect efforts are already underway in this realm where some countries are luring students to study, work and settle in it, though these are primarily aimed at economic growth at not at population decline.

Lot of it may not make any sense and may be poorly thought of but it was merely an idea, I thought novel, carried to a limited extent.

Point of contention

I realized something today. It will be bone of contention in my life.

With regret I have come to realize that my mother’s culinary skills are unparalleled, incomparable, beyond par so much so that this is going to be cause domestic feud between me and my potential wife when I am going to say to her that her cooking is nothing like my mom’s.

I’ve been told that this (missing mum's food) happens largely to men and not to women. Is it true?

I had never thought of this before. I must learn to keep my mouth shut. Sigh.

Though of course

Warning: Muddled verbiage. Read slowly.

If you have followed my writings on this blog closely then you must have noticed my tendency to use “of course” in abundance. I don’t, though, use so much of it in conversation. “Of course”, of course, stands for “obviously” which suggests that I believe that what follows after “of course” must necessarily follow based on preceding statement and that this fact has been taken into account by astute reader. Yet, my need to mention specifically what must obviously follow for me — and if I am right then for you too — implies either that (1) I don’t trust at least one of you to ascertain that fact automatically, or that (2) I feel need to state the obvious which me as writer and you as reader anyway know.

If it’s former then either (1.1) use of “of course” is not valid completely since it’s not obvious to at least one of you as per my inherent assumption, or (1.2) I must be presumptuous for making that assumption and am indicating limitation in someone’s ability to comprehend written text. If it’s later, though, where I am repeating the obvious, then either (2.1) I am introducing redundancy in the text thus making it verbose and in process consuming more of my time, your time, electricity and internet real estate thus accelerating our way to global warning however marginally, or (2.2) I may have been repeating the text to emphasize point made earlier. Of course, assuming the later automatically implies that (2.2.1) I don’t trust you to understand text when written only once and feel need to elucidate more thus casting doubt on your general intelligence.

Of course, there is third reason as well, (3) which simply means that my written communication is improper and my use is grammatically incorrect. Clearly, there is no way I can get out this mess which my use of “of course” has shoved all of us into, though, of course, I never intended such.

Another thing that I’ve noticed and want to point out here is generous use of “though”, though, again not so much in oral communication. Use of “though” is much simpler to explain because it highlights impending twist in the thought process and indicates that next sentences goes contrary to just stated opinion notwithstanding any fact which just has been mentioned. This could be to (1) point out exceptions to the rule or to (2) rule out generation of possible follow-up thoughts in your mind based on presented statement which I don’t want to imply to concur with. While both are valid uses, I really need to find more synonyms for “though”.

Mother’s dilemma

This is a hypothetical dilemma and thought experiment I made up. It's not simple and may be heart-wrenching for some, so proceed with caution. What were you do if you were mother in the question below?

You are mother of four children and part of a happily family. One day a crazy man breaks into your house to steal while your husband and three children are away. You are alone along with one of the children. Somehow, circumstances lead to such that life of your child is endangered. You have two options. (1) If you don’t act, you survive and your child dies. (2) If you fight, you get killed but child is spared. Culprit escapes in either case. For purpose of this hypothetical question, ignore outside help such as police or neighbours and ignore third option of both surviving. These are not drastic assumptions and very plausible in most circumstances.

Without exception mother will always scarifies herself for her child. So question is not really difficult since there is only one practical answer. Tricky part is whether that decision is best-for-all optimal decision? If you die, then your four children are raised motherless, and will suffer incomplete childhood, with potential fallout in adulthood development and mental trauma. If you survive, then you will have to live with the guilt of letting your child die, along with any blame that may arise from husband or other children. One side is a family of three children with both parents and lifetime of guilt for mother, other side is a family of four children with one parent and some sadness which will typically last until adulthood of children. Which loss is lesser?

As neutral third party, I’d find first option optimal, though that’s not likely to happen unless mother is under full use of her brain and faculty at time of tragedy. Second option is instantaneous emotional response. What is your take?

Consider following independent variations of this problem and see if your answer changes.

• If there is no father?
• If father is drunkard and lousy dad?
• If child under threat of life is youngest of all? Oldest of all?
• If one of surviving children needs special attention?
• If all four children are in their late teens or older? Below age of twelve?
• If there are three children? Two children? Five children?
• If instead of mother there is father in the original scenario and in each of subsequent variations?

Bathroom singing

Bathroom singing refers to amateur singing and in that way almost everybody has sung or sings in bathroom. What is so special in bathrooms that it has been inducing people to sing for centuries and warrants special phrase “bathroom singing”?

Could it be solitary private confine? But then one would be singing in car or elevator when opportunity presents. It couldn’t be effect of morning because one doesn’t sing in morning if not taking bath. Could it be boredom of act of bath which is tried to be eliminated with melodious ululations? Or could it have to do something with water on the body? Does one sing in swimming pool, even if in private? Does bathroom singing occurs more proportionately in morning baths than bath at any other time of the day? Can moisture in the ambience induce one to hum? Does it has to do something with optimism for the next day, as person who takes bath unhappily typically doesn’t sing? Do people burst into song whenever they are happy?

Answer to all of the above questions will be ‘yes’ sometime but what is so different in bathroom singing that holds all the time? Is it a learned behaviour where child learns to sing hearing his parents or peers singing in bathroom? Do aboriginal tribes sing when taking bath or is it mere modern phenomenon after invention of bathrooms? Does presence of another person singing in bathroom nearby hinders or enhances chances of you singing? Would that depend on whether you know the person or not? Does bathroom singing depend on how cold the water is compared to desirable temperature? Does one sing more when taking bath in freezing cold compared to scalding hot or comfortably warm? What is volume of singing function of? Level of happiness, cold, amount of soap on body? At what age does the bathroom singing starts, and stops? Is there any cultural implications or differences? What types of songs are more amenable to bathroom mouthing? Soft or upbeat?

So many questions and no answer. How little we understand about even small things in daily life. Need a researcher for Ph.D. in Bathroom Singing pronto!

“An eye for an eye…

…makes the whole world blind”, so said a well known guy. How would it work?

Say there are two people in the world who each have 20/20 visions in both eyes. For some reason — and it's not important what it is and without loss of generality, as they say in mathematics, can be assumed anything — first man punctures second man’s one eye. Why one eye and not both, you may legitimately ask? But you wouldn’t have been paying attention to quote then, would you? So if well known guy is correct then second man will take revenge by puncturing first’s one eye. That will leave world half-blind, but that’s not the idea really. So, of course, first will take vendetta by blinding second one completely by hurting his second eye too. Now, if world were to be blind, as predicted, then second man must blind first one too. However, and this is where we must pause and think, when second is completely blind and first is half-blind, what reasonable chance second man has of chasing, catching and blinding first one?

Clearly the well known guy didn’t think it through in his hurry to get quotable quote out. In reality, an eye for an eye makes half the world blind and half the world half-blind, or, whole world three-quarter blind, if we average out.

PM and his guests

If your boss comes to your house, you and your family dresses to receive him. If your junior does the same, you may ask servant or kid to seat him until you join. We do behave differently towards people based on their status relative to our. Treating rich friend differently than poor is perhaps mean and hurtful but also reality. On individual level, some good people will probably not differentiate and be equally respectful to both. On official level, this hardly happens. This is what is diplomatic protocol.

When Chief of large and influential country (say US/UK/China) visits India on official visit, Prime Minister of India receives him at airport along with few ministers of his cabinet and welcomes him. When Chief of small country (say Cambodia/Sri Lanka/Chez Republic) visits, a Minister or Minister of State receives him. If anyone less than Chief visits then rank of person receiving is equal or smaller depending on whether visitor if from big (not in size) country or small country. While it is sign of power balance between nations how strange it must feel for Ghana’s President to be received by Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, for example. Someday someone will promise to make his country so developed that PM comes to pick him up — a comic revenge plot masala indeed.

For those who are deemed important, streets are lined with school children dressed in starched uniform holding flags of guest nation. In smiling faces lies hidden the pain (I imagine) of young innocents of being herded and lined up by school teachers and being made to stand in Sun waiving flags at someone they don’t know or care about. I don’t have exact idea how it happens but I guess a directive must be given by some official to government schools in vicinity. Or may be school volunteer for such and it is considered prestigious to be invited.

Would it will place us on moral high ground — and may be result in better international relations and long-run tangible benefits — if PM goes to receive Chief of every nation? Or will it eat into his already busy schedule?

Conundrum of Love

If a vegetarian and non-vegetarian marry each other, do they brush each time before kissing?

It (2/2)

...<< PREVIOUS (Part 1)

World it lived in was very colourful. It eyed with envy lots of other matters around it. Everyone with different capabilities, doing different things, being in different form. How lovely it would be to form alliance with some of them, though that was hardly its own choice. Lots of things have to be right at the same time, plus other matter should also give importance to the proposal. As rock on Earth, it couldn’t have asked for better life. Born around merely 4.5 billion years ago, it found company from loneliness of space it was thrust upon, and found a home on this land.

As it went round the Sun about 4.5 billionth time, it noticed again that Moon was further away from it. Every year, it seemed, that Moon moved about an inch away from it. Have I offended it lately, it wondered. Nothing really came to mind though, because, first, Moon has been drifting away anyway since they were together long time ago, and second, their brotherly-sisterly love is well documented in a country called India. Ah well, it’s only so much you can do when all you can do in life is go round and round around Sun and dance around your own axis. In last century or so, it also noticed some wobbling in her dance. May be I am forgetting it, it rationalized. But how could it, if it’s doing that everyday, literally, since its birth? Has mass at polar regions shifting toward center, making it fatter? Why would anyone not want it to dance, though it could definitely use some rest.

In southern thinly populated spiral arm of Milky Way galaxy, solar system went on to its routine running at 200km per second. It didn’t have a choice though, cause someone or something has always been pulling and pushing, and that others around it ran too. Perhaps that’s the way it is, it thought. At least that gave it variety of things to see and company of other solar systems. Being average guy in this place wasn’t much fun because everybody and their uncle kept pushing and hitting it, though it smiled knowingly that it got to live longer, five more billion years indeed. It just wished a little more warmth around it. Nearest friend being 4 light years away was not really best deal in galaxy, though it was proud of having possessed only known intelligent life in among its colleagues.

As it rotated on its center once every quarter billion years, it was very pleased with the work of its billions of stars. Complacency has not been its motto though. It knew what fate lies ahead as a galaxy. Indeed mere few billion years were between it and its impending collision of Andromeda cluster of galaxies. It didn’t want to run away, it just have to be prepared to die or reborn, and do it’s best to save as many of its solar systems as it can. Meanwhile it had to rush away from original point of Big Bang because no one knows why but there seems some mystical thing everyone is trying to outrun others for.

No one knows courage of stepping into unknown better than it. From the very first instant it’s been stepping into unknown, fast and faster as it got confidence. Unknown it really was for there was no space and time where it marched, it carried them there. Vaguely aware that some destiny awaited it there somewhere, it rushed and pulled everything inside it, which was not really much work with mere weight of one hydrogen atom per cubic meter of space.

It (1/2)

It was really lonely and depressed. Even though it had others around it in very close vicinity, it felt alone. It wondered what would be world like outside? Life as gluon was not fun. All it did was to help keep quarks together with other gluons. And there were many of them doing exactly the same thing. It wondered about the purpose of existence. For as far back as it can remember, and far away memories can be very vague, but from as early as 14 billions years ago it’s been doing the same thing. Just lying with other gluons so that quarks stick together. One cannot call them really memories but it has vague feeling that moment of birth was very exciting time. It was lot hotter then, way hotter in fact, but life was happening then, unlike never ending monotonity of its current existence. There were many more type of elements all rushing fast and faster, as if they were running away from something. It was fun for a while until they got so far that it lost sight of them. Meanwhile it came along with its neighbours and has been with them since. It is not even sure now that these are its memories or imaginations of bored mind. It wondered if this has an end?

Being surrounded by these sticky gluons was hardly its idea of existence but poor quark couldn’t do much. From as far back as it remembers, it’s been there with same set of gluons along with other quarks of its own kind closely packed in a small proton. It could sense that proton was important, and by analogy, there must be other protons around that, but what are they doing there and what’s point of all this anyway? It wondered where exactly is there in the first place? Its birth was in hot soup of early times and it’s been so cold and boring since then.

“For the quintillionth time I say move out”, it shouted to its neighbour. It was miserable. What a life, to being shoved from and to keep shoving each side forever. It seems forever though it thought that it might have been about 10 billion years or so ago when it was ripped apart from its cousins in Hydrogen and Helium in a hot furnace soup in some far away star and forced to cohabit its current neighbours. It was cozy there, lonely but cozy. Since the very first moment it cannot seem to be at friendly terms with its neighbours. Though all of them had same history, that didn’t help in building rapport any more. All were pushovers but some were worse. It was ashamed that it’s own kind were worse actually. It could manage with neutrons somehow but it just repelled other protons. If not for weak and strong nuclear force of nature which kept it together, it would have escaped right away. What a pathetic life, indeed.

“It must be heavenly up there”, it thought. That’s all it could do anyway, being lone nucleus in wide expanse forever, there was no one to talk to. Since its birth in that violent fusion event about 10 billions ago, it’s been alone ever. Except, of course, for continuous rumbling in its stomach. What on empty space is going on there? Still it gazed at those rapidly flying electrons in far horizon. They were never close to it, in fact, they were so far that it couldn’t even see them properly let alone talk to them. Yet, it felt a strong attraction to them, as if they are made for each other, each one perfectly complementing another. Dreams of romantic reunion were only thing that kept into it from going insane.

Exhausted, it sat and sighed. Trillionth time since its birth 6 billion years ago in some supernova. Another of those everyday ordeals, where some foreign atoms would come for merger proposal. Sometimes they would be nice, and it and its colleagues in molecule would happily collaborate and form new molecule altogether. It was fun to move since as different group they had different roles and different strengths and got to do different things. Other times, it would not be nice. Then it would fight to keep them at bay and maintain its own little molecule community. Thankfully for it, there was no provision for dying in its world. Though what was nice or not depended lot on mood it and its neighbours were in. And being forced to occupy a fixed position with respect to its neighbour, it knew them well by now. Mood depended on lots of thing like how hot the temperature is or how acidic the environment is, and somebody always seems to be tinkering with it, as if playing with them and observing their alliances. Today’s battle is won, but who knows who will be its molecule tomorrow? Only thing that was constant company was buzzing electrons and heavy lump of nucleus in its stomach.

...NEXT (Part 2) >>

If you find 10 crore one day…

Don’t ask me how. Assume that you did. Maybe you found diamond treasure in your backyard, or your long lost relative left you all his wealth, or may be one of those Nigerian scams actually paid. Also assume that you don’t have to be bothered about taxes, government share, your safety and money’s theft. You are rich and all is well with the world. With 10 crore rupees, you can live quite luxurious life at interest income of crore or so a year. Would you still want to work?

It seems everyone I ask this question says they would : having money is alright but life without work is just too much bore. All rich business tycoons also work despite there being no need for it. Why can’t Bill Gate sell his share in Microsoft and retire? In fact, one of the requirement of earning lots of money seems to be relatively less need to spend it and more need to earn still more. I guess not doing anything will bore the person to death. Of course, not doing means not doing productive work. People can still become couch potato, or travel the world, or buy all kinds of things that only money can buy. But that doesn’t count as work. Perhaps there is a need for having higher purpose to existence.

Problem is I think I could easily not do anything and be happy.