mangal which also means welfare. Because again, 2ndary, all nouns have primary meaning sun, 2ndary and therefore 2ndary to 2ndary and so on, anything; tree, place, life forms, action, people, law, … thats how language developed, according to sun as central theory, and I think it was known far deeper into humanity’s history, the most primate civilizations, so heliocentrism in philosophy and religion might have predated the modern science, OR modern science as in Galileo, might have been the recent successful renaissance after Religious bigotry over ruled all forms of heliocentrism to run its covert practices, by subverting the actual sun to various forms of regional and national cultural Gods, thats is Budha, Jesus, Shiva, Bishnu they all might simply have been derived by subverting the humanist helio-centric philosophies. The nasty politics we see today is a result of much ancient practice of elaborate forms of bullying; religious subversion. And in-fact they are. There is enough attributes in all these provincial and religious gods from the philosophical and universally humanistic God: Sun.
Mindscape and evolution
What we conveniently forget is what I just parenthesized as “Ethereal Relativism”. Before Einstein’s work, the ether was taken to be something that gives motion a sense of absoluteness. Ether was the absolute measure or reference of motion, therefore all motion seemed to be known as absolute. But its widely silent that Galileo and Newton worked in a frame-work of Physics or laws of nature where a frame of reference keeps motion relative, and not absolute: a concept known as Galilean Relativity.
In other words, if there is an object falling under gravity, in telling our story, we almost forgot that, there can also be a situation where, the relative motion of the falling object, can be studied; with or without the gravity acting on the object. In other words, still, the central question is to ask; did this single object fall faster or slower w.r.t. a situation when there is no gravity? Was it known or not, to Galileo, that, this object can be tested; to be falling faster in presence of the gravity causing object.
As we know today: Gravity causes objects to fall faster, it does not cause them to fall in the first place, between heavier and lighter objects it does not make any one of them to fall faster than the other and this is a force of central attraction to the proportion of; strength being as higher as the square of separation is, less.
So when we add asa+koro its still close to usa+kaala. That is to higher conjugated level of phonetic elements (read super-syllable-level) different language can retain the exactness of linguistic objects. A fact which makes it much more interesting to study to know exactly how different are our languages, perhaps they simply sprang from each other. That is if Japanese originated from various tracts of Chinese,so did Indian languages. The underlying conceptual pinning as exist today may be offset in this way or that way but most similarities are preserved by the nature of parentage. Also the external attributes could be offset because of place holder rules being evolved in present context but all this can be studied quite effectively.
Why sex is often used against opponents? There are two most competitive and perhaps the most leading behavior of us human beings. 1. Intimacy, which in its most nonsensical form is sex. 2. Creating and harboring opponents to prove our OWN supremacy.
Is it needful to say that our nonsensical intimacy has procreated and sustained us but our innate desire to kill or vanquish others has nonetheless kept us competitive because lest it only the one that hatches a conspiracy first will have an edge. We strike back not only at our extra-species opponents but at our own species in order to savior ourselves against nature’s odds.
In my case therefore you see, 0 publications in 2001. The year I joined my PhD, I was learning more about snow-fall, JC Peney and Bus rides. 2002 I have hardly 1 or 2, that was the year when in the later half I was given the privilege of being able to sign for science papers. The next year I am already acquainted quite a bit, so signing more than 1 paper a month is no irksome involvement. I already know what I am signing it for. 20 papers a year. Then it grows to 60 papers the next year, thats papers a month, my team of 400 was producing where I have a legit share of expert contributions, through weeks of data-collection, analysis and data-mining etc. (There would be papers where I won’t have legit share, .. ) The next year 2005-2006 was my peak, 70 papers, You can check my pictures from 05-06 (on f-b) and see how much I was involved in the literally tons of ways experimentalists contribute ;) No kidding not everything is visible outside the vacuum pipe, its risky)
Then you can see I am gradually climbing down, but its hard enough to climb down faster because you already have a history. Becoming celebrity is a one way affair, no return. With years my direct contribution goes down but history has that which is yet to come and that shows up as bigger share in contribution. (Just like the electron’s history-of-all-path must contribute towards its momenta for future)
I think thats a good connection, like the electrons the Physicists are lost, they are picking on different things and survive and their history makes it bigger.