How did we invent sex.

Something just occurs to me. We often do stuff so that we could get some pleasure remembering it. We don’t have to do stuff that are too hard. Thats what makes us human. Thinking about it thats how we invented secs. My x key is not working so I used a cs instead. We invented sex because it was the easiest thing to do and remember for pleasure for a long time. I mean its definitely easier than hunting. Where do you get an armory and chase an animal through all the wilder things. Easier done than even said, sex. The fact that we didn’t even invent clothes, yet, just made it easier. The ancient people lived without a dress code of conduct for a really long time, till the hard working folks who hunted convinced the politicians to implement some sort of casual code of conduct. (pun) Because those who worked so hard, hunted and gathered leather, that leather

read more How did we invent sex.

How does the word saturnine derives !

How does the word saturnine derives ! if you care why words derive ! Saturnine might have had originated in the fact that Saturn’s Equinoxes are month long darkness (lack of sunshine for weeks altogether) as Saturn tilts away from sun (and toward sun) for 90 degree (Earth’s 23.44 degree only) ! Thats means parts of sun will get no sun-light for several weeks in the culmination of these Saturnine equinoxes. So saturnine means a person who is gloomy or melancholic. ( — perhaps at-least for longer duration.) I learned this because I was playing with words when grammar of my computer showed the word and I checked its meaning, I was although writing about equinox of Saturn, I came to learn this, cool is it?

Mathew and anti Mathew effect.

I wanted to write this article, separately, as I didn’t want to break the flow of Physics arguments in the article, where this point came up.

This point was originally raised by Feynman; as far as I know. If David Mermin comes, he will stick his cotton buds, and wipe this out, and claim he said it, there is no lack of such incredible people. All he does say in that article, linked here, is so typical of plagiarists that you wouldn’t believe how murkily he dismisses Feynman as the original fellow who might have said so, “he is a great mind calculator, so nobody would ask him to shut up and calculate”.

How about nobody would think “Madonna” is a slut. A beautiful lady in the corner, well nobody would be harsh to her, such harshness would only be toward me, only I would be one to whom such a treatment can be mated, and that would be David Mermin’s famous and infamous proof and evidence of Mathew Effect of which he is apparently a victim.
If, anything, even I knew of “shut up and calculate” in my grad days, as a phrase ascribed to Feynman, in my privacy of studies, in other words never discussed with anyone, but knew of it, and grew in associating this behavioral treatment towards myself, going as far idiosyncratically, even to compare the thickness of my own hair, with Feynman’s, I can’t be Feynman, or can I be? Can “shut up and calculate” be used on any grad student or similarly placed researcher? Yes, it can be and thats the whole message, not the interpretation by the name of the city of Copenhagen.

read more Mathew and anti Mathew effect.

My idiosyncrasies with symmetry and force.

This is a true observation of my youth. It was maddeningly lengthy, it was there with me for years, or shall I say close to decade or more. Spitting on my right hand if I spit on my left, accidentally.   Saturday, March 30, 2013 at 2:02 am UTC + 05:30 “One of my idiosyncrasies !! When I was about 8 or 9 years old, hardly, if I hit something, inadvertently, with my left hand or leg, I would take my right hand or leg, and hit it, with purpose. If I spit in one place, I would certainly spit on an adjacent region, to bring some kind of symmetry; as if I lost my balance and I have to restore. If I spit on my left hand, I would soon do that on right hand, on purpose. If I stared at something, I would twist my neck and stare at the opposite side. (I still do that with style,

read more My idiosyncrasies with symmetry and force.

सत्य कि बिबिधता सिमित हैं, यद्यपि सिर्फ एक में सीमित नहीं।

बिज्ञान अक्सर परिभाषाओं के दायरे में सिमित रह जाती है क्यों कि इस से ऊपर उठना अल्बर्ट आइनस्टीन के भाषा में “बिज्ञान चमत्कार है अगर इसे कमाने कि एक पन्था से दुरी से देखा जाये तो” जैसे “पूर्ब सोम कि सत्य” जैसा प्रतीत है. यह अलग बिचारों से अलग हो जाती है, पर सत्य एक मात्र उपलब्धि न होने पर भी बहत सारे उपलब्धि भी नहीं हैं, कुछ और सीमित उपलब्धियां सत्य कि भरमाई करते हैं।

चेतन भगत के बिकने के कारण भी ढेर सारे हैं जो बिज्ञान से तालुक नहीं रखते, इसके परिभाषाओं के दायरे में, लेकिन क्या हम कह सकते हैं वो कामशास्त्र से ज्यादा महत्व रखता है? चेतन एक जातीय आशा कि कयामत से परिबंधित है, पर कामशास्त्र एक प्राचीन अतः अंतराष्ट्रीय, तथा एक कोमल भाबना कि महिमा जैसे परिकल्पनिया है. यह चेतन कि महनीयता के ऊपर प्रश्न नहीं, बल्कि सत्य कि बिबिधता के ऊपर आलोकित करने की चेष्टा है।

सत्य कि बिबिधता सिमित हैं, यद्यपि सिर्फ एक में सीमित नहीं।

सत्य अनिर्बचनिया है. यह सुन्दर भी है, शील भी है …

read more सत्य कि बिबिधता सिमित हैं, यद्यपि सिर्फ एक में सीमित नहीं।