On Darwinism

As I understand- 

1. Evolution is not a directed phenomenon. It is a very random process. Fitness is determined not by the character in itself but by its usefulness in a given environment. Thus a character which gives maximum benefit today may become useless if there is change in environmental conditions. Changes in environment are very random and sometimes very drastic. Such sudden changes may lead to fixing of a given trait or removal of it from a population. Historically there have been many such drastic changes in environmental conditions- ice age for example. Earth's magnetic field direction also flips periodically. Creation of new geographical topologies has occurred time and again. Such changes lead to geographical isolation of populations which experience different micro and macro climates leading to speciation. 

2. Humans are not descendants of modern day monkeys. It is a simplified way of expressing a complex phenomenon. What it means is that modern day monkeys and humans had a common ancestor just like modern day amphibians and pisces had common ancestors. While drawing lineages in an evolutionary tree if the common ancestor is unknown it is represented as the 'last unknown common ancestor' and when known then they are called, Last Universal Common Ancestor (LUCA). 

If you study all the fishes in the world today (and the found fossils) then you will definitely see a gradation in use of gills, skin and lungs for breathing. Therefore it is possible that fishes that use lung like structures and animals that use lungs for breathing had a common ancestor. This ancestor population underwent different degrees of isolation and exposure to environmental conditions such that over a period of time its fragmented and segregated population started looking like different species. The populations could no longer interbreed even when put together. Some characters got fixed some eliminated. Remember the word Fixed. Characters are not becoming better. Fixing of characters may happen to different degrees. For instance, if the environmental constraints are severe and selective for fast running then only the fastest runners in a population will be able to survive. If the selective environmental forces are not severe then sub populations with varying running speeds will survive. If the selection pressure continues then the character gets hyper-selected for.

[If none of the sub populations have the running trait, then the species goes extinct. It does not matter at that point of time if they were excellent climbers. Thus it is the environment that selects!]

The surviving population is then considered to have adapted. Not because it suddenly started running fast, but because in its population there existed a variant in character that enabled it to survive the change in external conditions and therefore the continuation of the species. Therefore the term survival cannot be applied to an individual animal. It is the species that adapts and survives.

Lamarckism is different in the sense that it tries to say that characters are acquired in a lifetime. Experiments have failed in proving it to be the case.

3. How the variants exist in a population can be explained to a certain extent through breeding mechanisms employed (for instance sexual vs asexual) , genetic mutations, gene swapping , allele cross-overs during meiosis (egg and sperm formation) and so on.

4. An example of evolution happening in real time is the development of drug-resistance in microbes and pests such as mosquitoes. 

5. Some animals like cockroaches and horse shoe crabs are called living fossils. They have been able to survive all the environmental changes for millions of years without loss or fixing of any traits. Therefore not much change is seen between fossils and present day living creatures.

6. Evolution is often used as a positive word, as in to mean that traits become better. But I feel Darwin would have objected. Because he took on a world which believed in determinism- God created Man in his own image kind of thoughts. Or in other words he faced a lot of opposition not for saying that man and monkeys evolved. But because he questioned the very thought that Man was the best creature. I feel it is ironical and sad that his theories are now twisted to create a human-centric world view. He never said species evolve for the better. He just said species bred, adapted, survived and evolved. Darwinism can also be used to explain the existence of ethically accepted bad characters such as bullying, cowardice, cheating etc. 

Of Turing Machines, Universal Reproducing Constructors and the Soul!

It’s said that one does not learn anything new; it’s just the connecting of dots in the head! If one has to describe the experience of attending Sydney Brenner’s The ICTS Turing Centenary Lecture, it has to be described as learning!  

“We swim in the sea of information thirsting for knowledge!”  in Sydney’s words- present day study of biology cannot be described any better. So what do we do? How do we proceed further?  Study under a theoretical framework! What should the frame work be? How will it look like? Think of biological systems as a Turing machine he said! A universal machine, to be precise it is a universal constructing machine. A universal machine is a machine which when given a description can carry out all the basic functions the model machine it is designed after does. Computers are the implementation of this concept. A universal constructor (proposed by von Neumann) is also a machine which has a description about building machines in its self image.  And if one wants a reproducing universal constructor one has to put in a description which makes it pass on the entire description it has to the machine it has constructed! It’s a concept, and according to Sydney, it fits biological systems very well. So, biological systems behave as universal reproducing constructors. The description that they carry exists in the form of the genetic material. Since storage is not a limiting factor in these systems, life has over years of evolution by trial and error found solutions in the form of combinations of proteins, variations in proteins and stored all these in its genetic material. It looks up the appropriate solution when faced with a problem. Just like looking up a logarithmic table.  And just like in the logarithmic table the data is huge and needs to be stored and is stored! Adding much to the chagrine of biologists! For this means that all proteins must be looked up, all its variations known, their interaction with substrates understood with respect to the subtle differences that each one has with the substrate, their interactions partners studied in all kinds of situations possible and all variations included. These have to be meticulously done and the data must be precise, no mistakes allowed. For all these will go into making a table, a matrix let’s say, so that one just has to look up the solution, just like a biological system does!  When such a table is drawn, one expects to see modules of interaction emerging which will simplify the picture a bit. For, he says that the complexity of biological systems is built using simple modules. So, how is the study that is conducted these days different from what is expected by Sydney. It is, he says, that the goal of constructing a matrix is lost upon people. A framework is missing! The information churned out is also not dependable for it contains a lot of errors. It is his belief that having a framework will help weed out the useless data and useful data will emerge out adding to knowledge. He also thinks that biological systems do not work in defined pathways, rather every molecule acts as a messenger and a receiver. Its next step defined on the go rather than being predetermined. So, rather than building defined pathways, which forms the thrust of most biological studies these days, it is best to look for the important interaction partners and the condition in which they interacted.

So life forms are, according to Sydney, Turing machines, but unlike any other machine built by humans, for they are the only machines around which carry in them a description of how to build themselves! And unlike machines which are built for durability, they are built to carry on!  They work with satisfactory solutions and are not optimised for best functioning! For if one got destroyed another could be built!

It was a truly befitting talk to commemorate the birth centenary of Alan Turing who laid the mathematical foundations of the computation field. Subjectively speaking, it joined a lot of dots in my head. Some biological and some not so biological! For I remembered the concept of soul remaining undestroyed, passing on from body to body! What Sydney calls the ‘description’ could it be called the soul? I am sure Sydney would disagree for he thinks that life is a process of evolving modules giving rise to complex phenomenon, a culmination of random trial and errors. Soul has a purpose, to find and understand itself! In this direction it moves! Sydney would vehemently disagree but I cannot help compare the two! For are we not a reflection of our souls, trying to understand the where from to where forth of our existence?

(I have reproduced the examples that Sydney Brenner used during the lecture in the way that I understood them. I thought that his ideas were best conveyed by his examples!) 

Arjuna

"Arjun- The Warrior Prince" is a good movie. However it ends abruptly, would have loved to watch Arjuna dispel his attachments and turn into a real warrior just as the MahaBharata war is about to begin, amidst the blow of conches, neighs of horses and bellows of elephants! The movie is about his transformation into one but sadly leaves out one of the greatest event in his life which gave him courage to stand up and fight for the righteous things in life!

Animation in some parts of the movie is really brilliant, and in some parts leaves much to be asked (emotions are not captured well, may be that's the limitation of  2D animation). The story could have been handled a little better. The basic flaw in narration that I felt was the pointed attempt to show Arjuna in the best light.  Many happenings in MahaBharata where others play a significant role are left out, many events are shown but the other characters are given secondary importance (infact have no role to play). Such an attempt was uncalled for, because, MahaBharata in its original form gives each character its due importance. A carefull selection of events would have taken care of  highlighting the character of Arjuna. 

Nevertheless its a good movie! Keeps you engaged till its end!

Musings of a peaceful mind

Today, the evening was a peaceful one. The inner turmoils seemed quite, a result of the cooling rain or the pre-evening short nap, I shall never know. Got up and went to mess for tea, saw a notice about a talk and attended it. The talk was on Shankaracharya a saint of yester years- known to have rekindled the dying faith in Hinduism. Also the proponent of Advaita philosophy. At a time when Hinduism had deteriorated, become ritualistic and rather inhuman in practices to  certain sections of Indians he revived the faith, released the followers from the clutches of rituals and asked them to head along in the search of truth, showed them their lost path.

Few of his teachings that are worth pondering on-

 “The atman resides not in the body, not in the intellect. The only way one can find it is by dispelling the ignorance. Ignorance can be dispelled only through the single minded pursuit of truth, through pure concentration and perseverance”

In a way he was reinstating the lost values of the religion- Hinduism is not about rituals. It’s the search of truth. Thus the Hindu mind is constantly grappling with these concepts- what is atman, what is truth, what is ignorance. The fun of being a Hindu is that there are no dictates; nobody will tell you that this is the truth and this is the ignorance. But it extols one to find the truth. It understands that everybody has their own perceptions which they believe to be the truth. It extols one to rise above perceptions, to question ones own truths. It guarantees only one thing that when you find the truth you will find peace of mind. It helps you by setting the criteria for truth- Impersonal, Impartial, Eternal and Constant. That’s it, from here on you are on your own. Some hints are thrown along- The thoughts are held captive by the emotions, emotions are held captive by the five senses. Free yourself from these and you shall find the truth and most probably the promised ever lasting peace of mind. Your only Messiah out there is inside you! There are some other rules such as, when in doubt about the truth or the right decision chose the path which will not harm others or the path of least harm. For one and everyone here has equal rights to live (be it an animal or human being). Ignorance leads to bad actions and knowledge to good actions. If you fail in the search for truth or are not interested in its pursuit, do not worry nothing bad will happen.

Does all this make sense? I guess it does. Some days back I lost two new bottles of liquid hand wash. I am sure they were lifted by someone. I was angry I was upset. It had caused a lot of inconvenience not to mention the money lost.  I had every right to be angry, anybody would have been upset. But were these emotions of any use- I did not know who had done it and I would not get my bottle back. I was left nursing my own anger. Then it occurred to me the loss of the bottles was not entirely that other person’s fault. I had left it unattended for long or so it seemed. And I was aware of the fact that there were people around to whom an unattended new bottle of liquid hand wash may seem enticing. I did not give this too much of a thought when deciding to leave my precious bottles out (not even after the first one was lost). Then something struck me- there was a person out there who needed my bottle so badly that stealing seemed a good enough option. What might the person be like and what might be the conditions. What benefit the bottle held for her I will never know, may have resold it or may be she could not afford one for herself so felt enticed into taking mine. Was she to be blamed for it- yes but only partly, she could have controlled her urges but was it entirely her fault that she was stuck in such a situation? I may love to become the richest person on earth. I am ready to do the hard work. Will I make it there- may or may not. Whichever the case, the credit of the accomplishment or the responsibility of the failure would not belong entirely to me—things should fall in place synergizing my efforts. Well the explaination holds good for her too. We both exist in a system wherein we are responsible for somethings and somethings are not in our hands. She had no personal grudge against me.  

So what did I learn, things happen; sometimes good and sometimes bad. The bad that happens (we don’t seek explainations for the good that happens) to us happens through a man/woman/animals/objects. That person/thing may or may not be entirely at fault and we might not be the chosen victims. Yes, they could have chosen not to do that action that harmed us. Similarly we have to decide upon actions that are least harmful and most beneficial. When one rises above the emotions attached to the incident- one sees clearly the choices at hand and their consequences and is therefore able to choose the action that will maximize benefits and minimize the harms

I now keep my hand wash in an unattractive bottle. Nobody has touched it since and its there near the sink ready to be used whenever needed. And pray that the lady also rises above such situations

(Hindu prayer, Sanskrit)

Om Lokah Samastah Sukhino Bhavantu
Om sarveshaam swastir bhavatu
Sarveshaam shantir bhavatu
Sarveshaam poornam bhavatu
Sarveshaam mangalam bhavatu
Sarve bhavantu sukhinah
Sarve santu niraamayaah
Sarve bhadraani pashyantu
Maakaschit duhkha bhaag bhavet

Meaning:
May Eternal Peace & Goodwill Prevail in the Whole World,
Auspiciousness (swasti) be unto all;
Peace (shanti) be unto all;
Fullness (poornam) be unto all;
prosperity (mangalam) be unto all.
May all be happy! (sukhinah)
May all be free from disabilities! (niraamayaah)
May all look (pashyantu)to the good of others!
May none suffer from sorrow! (duhkha)

(the prayer and its meaning copied from this site:  http://teck.in/om-lokah-samastah-sukhino-bhavantu.html)

Journey Of The Magi

It is Christmas and I cannot help remembering this poem. Although written in context of Nativity, the thoughts are relevant to anyone who takes his religion seriously. How often do we think of renaissance, how often do religions and traditions undergo this process? How often should they undergo this process? In my opinion it should happen more often then it happens now.

For the not so religious minded---is this process not an essential part of living. How often in our life do we take a stock of our philosophies----discard the inaccurate and replace them with new found realities. Should we also not take stock of how far we have wandered from our principles? Is this not a process of death and birth? How attached are we to our Gods, do we not sometimes cling to our worn out philosophies as if they were Gods. Is it not painful to let go of them in search of the unknown new? Is it not painful to accept our follies; admit our mistakes to ourselves? No wonder we dislike change, even if it is for the better. But then we do change, don’t we? The process of stagnation and decay is equally painful. 

The more I think of it the more dimensions it attains. 

 The first time I read this poem I abhorred it.  It made no difference to me that it was written by T S Elliot (at that time I did not know who he was. I do not know much about him even now except for the fact that he has written this poem. I am sure I will read his poems more carefully now). My hatred towards it was made more acute by the fact that I had to answer questions about it in the impending final exam which we had to pass in order to get into the next class. Although English was not our main subject, passing it was crucial, we could not fail. Our English lecturer had made no attempts to explain the poem (this one or others)………and so we were left to our fate. Thankfully enough I grumbled about this predicament to my father. He showed no interest in the poem until I mentioned Eliot’s name. With the mention of the name my father sprang into action--------read the poem twice and then explained it to me. The meaning of the last stanza is what makes this poem my favourite. May be it was the explanation my dad gave………….for I have read many other explanations -------many of them take away the magic in the poem. 

Through this poem Nativity to me has become a symbol of a journey - a journey which will take us closer to the truth. So every Christmas I remember this journey and pray that this cycle of death and birth never leaves me.........

'A cold coming we had of it,
Just the worst time of the year
For a journey, and such a journey:
The ways deep and the weather sharp,
The very dead of winter.'
And the camels galled, sore-footed,
refractory,
Lying down in the melting snow.
There were times we regretted
The summer palaces on slopes, the
terraces,
And the silken girls bringing sherbet.

Then the camel men cursing and
grumbling
And running away, and wanting their
liquor and women,
And the night-fires going out, and the
lack of shelters,
And the cities hostile and the towns
unfriendly
And the villages dirty and charging high
prices:
A hard time we had of it.
At the end we preferred to travel all
night,
Sleeping in snatches,
With the voices singing in our ears,
saying
That this was all folly.

Then at dawn we came down to a
temperate valley,
Wet, below the snow line, smelling of
vegetation;
With a running stream and a water-mill
beating the darkness,
And three trees on the low sky,
And an old white horse galloped in
away in the meadow.
Then we came to a tavern with
vine-leaves over the lintel,
Six hands at an open door dicing for
pieces of silver,
And feet kicking the empty wine-skins.
But there was no information, and so
we continued
And arrived at evening, not a moment
too soon
Finding the place; it was (you may say)
satisfactory.

All this was a long time ago, I
remember,
And I would do it again, but set down
This set down
This: were we led all that way for
Birth or Death? There was a Birth,
certainly,
We had evidence and no doubt. I had
seen birth and death,
But had thought they were different;
this Birth was
Hard and bitter agony for us, like
Death, our death.
We returned to our places, these
Kingdoms,
But no longer at ease here, in the old
dispensation,
With an alien people clutching their
gods.
I should be glad of another death

-----------T.S. Eliot

This Deepavali: From Mythology to Reality and Back Again

Today is Deepavali! It is celebrated all over the country but the reasons associated with it are different in different regions of the country (Ram’s return to Ayodhya, Killing of the evil by Kali among others). But the reason for celebration remains unchanged------like most festivals in India—it is once again time to celebrate the victory of good over evil!

Back home, Deepavali celebrations start with arrival of King Balivendra (King Bali) on earth on the eve of Naraka Chaturdashi (in Kerala, King Bali arrives around Onam, a month or so ago). Naraka chaturdashi (the day Narakasur was killed) is followed by Lakshmi puja,the celebration of prosperity(the cattle are also worshipped on this day. In our community the cattle are loved like pets and represent prosperity). On the evening of the last day- Balipadyami- King Bali leaves earth and returns to his kingdom down below!

Who are Narakasura and King Balivendra? Well the mythology tells us the following-

Narakasura was a evil king (a contemporary of Lord Krishna). Well he was very powerful too. He had conquered the earth and the Indra Loka. He had created hell everywhere. He had to be vanquished. But there was a problem………he could only be killed by his mother (that was the boon granted to him). And his mother was already dead and gone. So he ruled without fear of death! When Narakasura’s despotic rule was at its height, Lord Krishna happened upon a flower (the Parijata, it’s a very beautiful flower, white with a orange pedicel). He took it home and gave it to his wife Rukmini! This angered Satyabhama (his other wife)……she was a very jealous and egoistic lady! She fought with Krishna. Krishna in order to calm her down said that he had given only one flower to Rukmini, for Satyabhama he planned to gift the whole plant. So, off they went to get the plant. Now, the plant was in Indra Loka, which was under Narakasura’s rule. So, when they went to get the plant, Krishna had to fight Narakasura. However since Narakasura was unvanquishable Krishna almost lost, Satyabhama had to enter to save her husband! And in the fight killed Narakasura! (Narkasura’s mother had taken birth as Satyabhama). So, the Evil was destroyed!

But the story of Parijata does not end here……….Satyabhama’s ego was still not vanquished! They brought home the plant; the plant grew……..it bore few flowers! With these flowers in hand, Satyabhama went to Rukmini’s quarters to show off! But something strange had happened……she saw that the branches of the plant which had entered Rukmini’s quarters had borne more flowers than the ones on her side (some say that Krishna had planted it such a way that the most branches went into Rukmini’s quarters). An act born out of ego is never rewarded! Well, Satyabhama crushed the flowers in her hand out of dismay! The Parijata flower although very beautiful withers very quickly……

Now King Bali was a very good demon king, a very able king at that! His kingdom was the most prosperous one! Having made his kingdom prosperous, he wished to attain the seat of power and luxury; he wanted to become head of Indra Loka, the Indra. So, he did many things needed of him to attain this, through social service and what not! He almost succeeded in this endeavour! To stop him from upsetting the power balance in the Indra Loka in this unprecedented manner and to teach him the vanity of material wealth, Lord Vishnu took his fifth avatara—that of the Vamana. Vamana was a puny brahmin. He was very short (slightly over 4 feet)! He went to King Bali, during the last of his endeavours which among other things included donating generously. The King in his pride (he was also a very generous king) said he could ask for anything and it would be granted. So, Vamana said he needed land as much as his three steps could cover. The King laughed and granted the wish! So, Vamana took his steps------with one he covered the entire earth, with the second he covered the heavens above and then where was he to put his third step? He asked the King so! Now the King was in trouble, what was he to do? All that he had was already taken. Nothing left to give! King Bali did not lose heart though and realized that Lord stood before him in the guise of Vamana! So he knelt down, and said…….Oh, Lord! You can place your third step on my head!

And thus King Bali learnt his lesson of humility!

With the third step on Bali’s head, the Lord sent him down into the underworld! Patala! With a word of advice……….a person as able as you must wish for more than power and luxury! He must wish to be one with God!

The Lord was touched by the King Bali’s determination to keep his word even in the face of dire consequence! So, he proclaimed Bali the king of Patala Loka and in the form of Vamana stands as a guard at the gate of King Bali’s Patala! From then on King Bali visits earth once every year to make sure everybody is fine in his kingdom above! And so that he is not disappointed, he is invited at the most prosperous time on earth…….during harvest!

I guess, our ancestors had recognized the evil on earth lay within the hearts of man-----ego, jealousy, envy, arrogance, anger, hatred so on and so forth. So many stories, so many different ways; each telling us, reminding us to do away with these evils! Without these negative elements man could create paradise on earth!

So, this Deepavali-------let us try to vanquish the evil within us - our hatred, jealousy, ego and pride! To lead a simple happy and prosperous life beneficial to one and all, and tame the greed for material wealth!

Easier Said than Done! ;)

THE GOD CONCEPT

Its difficult to actually decide whether He is born out of fear, for there are many concepts about God around us. Different people think of Him at different levels.

After all, for all that we can comprehend, God is just a concept, a concept that is very hard to give up. You may question it, fight it, but it will cling on to you. An atheist is a person who questions the existence of God but not somebody who is not aware of the concept in the first place. The fact that an atheist spends so much time on it is maybe his mind likes the idea but is not totally convinced. May be if somebody gave him a description of God that convinced him, something he could relate to and also help him understand the world better then maybe he will turn into a believer.

I feel when such a concept finds several takers, it turns into a sect and then a religion. New religions were born when somebody did not like the existing God Concept and went ahead and formed his own. Hebrews- Jews- Christianity/Islam. Hinduism-Buddhism-Jainism-Lingayat, you name it. Many many examples if you look for it.

For me what is interesting is, why is the God concept so essential to our lives. That we spend so much time making sense of it points to the fact that a) it definitely has some value in our life

b) it is the outcome (by product) of evolution, the mind can work best in a given way and in that design that hardwiring includes thoughts about god.

The first case would be interesting to study, if important for survival, at what level-individual/ society. When a man’s dependency on society is to such an extent, can we in any way dissect out the two? One of the outcomes of the second instance is that one could survive without this concept. But how can one test this? From the moment a individual is born he is exposed to this concept. Can we create a situation wherein a child is kept oblivious to this concept and see how it would develop? It would be unethical.

But then lets say, this concept was created by man himself, then at some point in the history of man the concept would have been absent. Then may be study of history and the present day evolution of the concept could be give us indirect answers.

What is my take on it? God Concept has definite survival value—both at the individual level and society level. The quality of an individuals life depends on the quality of the society—the quality of the society depends on the quality of life of the individual. Since the knowledge of right and wrong are inherent in the God Concept, belief in existence of God leads an individual to stick to the right path in adverse situations. This act leads to the betterment of the society (of course at the cost of the individual). It’s the con of living in a herd, the probability that anyone deer would be the prey of the hunting lions is lowered when living in a herd. The chances however that the deer gets killed is never zero. So it comes to be that an individual decides to take this chance hoping that other individuals are also equally willing to make the sacrifice when required and thus increase his chances of living in a better society. This is easier to follow when you have belief in God- the protector of the right! The species survival is the driving force.

Secondly life is not easy----in society or wild and one would die (that’s inevitable). Would one like to take the pains knowing that the death is certain( its amazing that we are quite aware of this fact, do other animals know? If they do, how do they deal with it?)? Believing that our lives are not in vain—believing that we are here for a purpose---makes life worth while, does not it?

Well I have stopped questioning the existence of God! I have accepted the fact that man has not conquered the Nature. We are still in its captivity…………….Can we beat the urge to survive, to reproduce to keep going on inspite of all the hurdles we face? No………we just try to find better ways of doing it………the SPECIES MUST SURVIVE!

I do whatever is necessary for that------The traditional way or the modern way---Virtue is Wisdom (Aristotle)!

I believe in GOD at times when its difficult for me to comprehend the on goings in life, when nothing makes sense—I do it because it helps me survive, because I cannot beat the urge to SURVIVE!

All this writing and I could cover only one aspect of believing in GOD! Beliefs out there force us to think that this is not the END!

!! EuReKa !!

Eureka, I cried, the World is Saved! (if only everybody followed it!)

I was thinking of all the harm human’s are doing to this planet. Then thought of all the things that human’s were doing to save planet earth. I don’t know how expensive the latter way will turn out to be but I know what the former way will cost…….we will have to pay with our lives!

That makes the other way, that of saving our planet sound more feasible. Don’t you think so?

Anyways, saving mother earth can be made very cost effective. There is one very simple way of doing it and it does not require any technology. The way is that of MODERATION. Moderation in almost anything we do! For instance, can we reduce the amount of water we use for one bath? Let’s not use shower. Minimize on the number of mugs of water used. Or let’s take the instance of brushing teeth……..can we just turn off the tap at times we are not washing our mouth or the brush and staring into the infinity behind the mirrors? Better still, can we hold water in a mug and use the same for washing? You will be surprised how much water runs out of the tap in just one minute! These are small things to begin with.

Let’s move on, we can stop taking more than we need in our plates. And let’s say we sign out of mess for times when we do not eat in mess. Even the in-between meals or snacks that we miss (ok, let’s leave out the ones which were not planned, but we do for sure give a miss to mess when we know what’s on the menu). We know that we will eat the ‘Someday’s lunch’ elsewhere but we do not sign off. The reason, we do not get bill deduction unless we sign out for 2 days. So we do not save, right? But if one gives it a little thought, then one realizes that in addition to reducing the burden on the planet’s resources, we are saving money too. "How?" you may ask. Let me explain. You are counted among the boarders for the lunch and the food is cooked. Now that food gets wasted. Let’s say you had signed out; in this case you are not counted and the food is not wasted. Now multiply it by the n number of boarders who were sure they would give lunch a miss. Now we have saved that much raw materials from getting wasted; so that much less material will have to be bought for the mess next time. Meaning we have ended up reducing the mess bill. So have we not saved in the long run both planet earth and our own money?

We can reduce using so many different things without in the least affecting our comforts. A little thought here and a little thought there that’s all that’s needed! The thoughts- that of MODERATION in everything we do- to survive, to enjoy and celebrate