tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-115564612024-03-05T14:24:39.557+05:30Figuring out life...a blog about solving the mysteries of life somehow...deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.comBlogger47125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-18446640138507399802016-09-13T15:25:00.000+05:302016-09-13T15:25:29.328+05:30the centroid of a triangle and why is it only just one point?This post is probably off beat. The themes I usually write about were either biology, evolution, and evolutionary psychology. This post is related to geometry. And it has captured my imagination for quite sometime, until I stumbled upon its proof.<br />
<br />
The underlying question was: <span style="font-size: large;"><i>Why do all medians meet at exactly one point?</i></span><br />
<br />
Before I link to the proof, take your time and see if you can actually prove it and understand why...For going through the proof, you have to have an understanding of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercept_theorem">basic proportionality theorem</a> of triangles, and a few parallelogram laws/theorems to tackle this problem.<br />
<br />
So here is the link from a website called <a href="http://www.urbanmythcafe.com/index.html">urbanmythcafe</a>: > <a href="http://www.urbanmythcafe.com/syntheticproof.ppt"><cite class="_Rm">www.urbanmythcafe.com/syntheticproof.ppt</cite></a> <br />
<br />
It isn't a big achievement, but I take pride in being able to explain someone <i>why it is so...</i><br />
<br />
<i><span style="font-size: x-small;">Ps: if at all the link is broken, please let me know, and I shall put it in writing myself...</span> </i>deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-40013148040234910612014-09-06T17:35:00.001+05:302014-09-06T17:39:06.550+05:30the arrow of time<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<object class="BLOGGER-youtube-video" classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/6mYGTWaN4_8/0.jpg" height="266" width="320"><param name="movie" value="https://www.youtube.com/v/6mYGTWaN4_8?version=3&f=user_uploads&c=google-webdrive-0&app=youtube_gdata" /><param name="bgcolor" value="#FFFFFF" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed width="320" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/v/6mYGTWaN4_8?version=3&f=user_uploads&c=google-webdrive-0&app=youtube_gdata" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object></div>
<br />
<br />
To know more about multiple universes visit:<br />
<b><a href="http://deostroll-thoughts.blogspot.in/2013/06/the-time-travel-we-really-want.html">the time travel we really want</a></b><br />
<br />
There is no direct mention of multiple universes or its significances. It explains how difficult time travel in one such world would be...deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-86944237344455567332013-12-20T20:22:00.001+05:302013-12-20T20:24:01.675+05:30why do the sloths come down to poop?<iframe src="https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1kmrQUUPFyjrMEQA8Wla01A4jlWm41E6qRYAuCUL6k4w/embed?start=false&loop=false&delayms=3000" frameborder="0" width="480" height="299" allowfullscreen="true" mozallowfullscreen="true" webkitallowfullscreen="true"></iframe>deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-18407525516988139682013-11-30T17:15:00.000+05:302013-11-30T17:17:45.152+05:30life goes on...Life goes on...<br />
<br />
[watch in full screen]<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="true" frameborder="0" height="299" mozallowfullscreen="true" src="https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1JkNimIfu_eJG6TRWs-BjPQYgHaqpK9Vm4dUCtmCZIs4/embed?start=false&loop=false&delayms=3000" webkitallowfullscreen="true" width="480"></iframe>
<br />
<br />
What I meant however, was to cease the thought that our (human) evolution has stopped...we are simply just in our niche right now...<br />
<br />
Take care. :)deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-89850354292645780292013-09-29T21:21:00.001+05:302013-09-29T21:21:25.468+05:30so why sleep?<a href="http://deostroll-thoughts.blogspot.com/2012/06/diurnal-cycles.html">Earlier</a> I thought it was because of the earth's rotation, and day-night cycle. But then I realized, the very first animals evolved in the deep oceans where sunlight was devoid.<br />
<br />
<i>What then could the reason be?</i><br />
<br />
Actually at this point of time its very difficult to theorize because we don't have a proper scientific understanding of how sleep happens to other species on earth. When we sleep we become immobile. We don't have a sense of touch or any normal audio that is going on around us. Its as if our brain shuts down its vital functioning.<br />
<br />
We know what lack of sleep can do to us. It can cause disorientation, make us less-responsive to normal auditory stimuli, and, many other cognitive problems. These patterns of problems can be observed on other species too. There are species of fruit flies which were subjected to experiments which disrupted their normal "rest cycle". It was found that fruit files which did sleep were able to locate food faster, whereas those that didn't get enough sleep couldn't find it fast enough.<br />
<br />
There is an evidence that sleep is necessary for proper development of the body as well as the brain. The brain tries to repair connections or even make new ones after it<i> </i>"shuts down". So I suppose this is why infants spend most of the time sleeping.<br />
<br />
<i>But how can we explain it in terms of evolution and natural selection?</i><br />
<br />
I suppose the answer to that can be formulated as follows:<br />
<br />
Growth or development in any life form is a natural process. But I suppose a "rest phase" is necessary here, because that ensures a healthy development. Any life form in its normal growth or development, if it does not have a "rest phase", its doomed to fail and will be less capable of surviving long enough. And being awake does need more energy, and more maintenance.<br />
<br />
So now you can bring natural selection into the solution. So those species which took to this pattern of growth and development survived and flourished.<br />
<br />
You may very well ask, <i>there are animals that don't have brains; do they require sleep?</i><br />
<br />
This is almost like suggesting that the brain is the organ responsible for sleep. If so why don't our brains go to sleep keeping all other functions working as necessary? I can't imagine how a human would be in such a condition. But the general understanding should be, if the brain "rests" so does the body. One or the other organs need functioning, others don't. For e.g. our muscles don't need to move so much so they are relaxed.<br />
<br />
To a degree this is a kind of symbiosis. This kind of a symbiosis is necessary for healthy living and also to minimize energy consumption.<br />
<br />
I really have quoted articles I've read, or videos I've seen on the subject. Research in sleep is still in a study and observe phase. Scientists have not extensively studies "sleep" in other species like they have done on their own species.<br />
<br />
However, often I do come across articles and they will be tied to this blog post, as and when I come across some interesting articles. You can find a list of artefacts tied to this article below:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://bitly.com/bundles/deostroll/x">http://bitly.com/bundles/deostroll/x</a><br />
<br />
You can keep track of interesting stuff over at my google+ <a href="https://plus.google.com/b/108659563218502614185/108659563218502614185/posts">page</a>. Please follow that page if you want regular updates. If you do have questions yourself, just drop in an email to <i><b>ask [dot] deostroll [at] gmail [dot] com</b></i>. You can also post a question directly at quora.com and let me know about it. Would be happy to answer or review answers.deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-84050529478920398492013-07-27T20:28:00.001+05:302013-07-27T20:32:55.370+05:30The explosive past...<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Attenborough" target="_blank">David Attenborough</a>'s documentaries are
“visionary”. The inspiration behind writing this post comes from
one of his documentary series called the Origins of Life. It kind of
attempts to explain some of the common features almost all the animal
species have. Most of these features stare at our faces; I mean, we
experience them everyday. But we are not there to appreciate it...we
just let it pass like an average ordinary day.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
But this post is not about the average
ordinary day either...Scientists, when they study fossils, theorize
with the little evidence they get. They try to imagine how that
particular species would have lived. Why they had the body plan that
they had. What kind of advantage did that body plan give them. Its
their theories which are truly illuminating. Much of life that is
today we owe to these species.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Fossil science may not be my niche.
However, facts you get to learn about various things when you
discover a fossil are great. We try to answer questions like:</div>
<ul>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
How come this fossil is perfectly
preserved?</div>
</li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
What sort of environmental
conditions lead to this?</div>
</li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
How the earth's terrain was at
that point of time? I.e. Its geology.</div>
</li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
What are the characteristics of
that particular geology which lead to the preservation?</div>
</li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
What period this fossil belonged
to? (Carbon dating, geological era).</div>
</li>
</ul>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Answering these questions give us a
clue as to how the earth's surrounding could have been. Such
evidences are corroborated with the other fossils they collect around
that area or site. These again are basically theories. Then using
these theories we try to figure so many other aspects of the fossil.
</div>
<ul>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
How it lived?</div>
</li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
The shape it had?</div>
</li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
The unique bizzare features it
had.</div>
</li>
<li><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Why those features where there in
the first place...? (natural selection).</div>
</li>
</ul>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
I'd normally want to type it all.
However, I think these best way to communicate the fascination is via
presentation slides.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
So enter the Cambrain era...</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<iframe src="https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1CBuqn_tBkCU5_eSyzmZMfK5p5jH1TsAIcrUyCh8nyEo/embed?start=false&loop=false&delayms=3000" frameborder="0" width="480" height="389" allowfullscreen="true" mozallowfullscreen="true" webkitallowfullscreen="true"></iframe>
</div>deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-5902031422338515542013-06-15T17:55:00.000+05:302013-06-15T17:57:07.194+05:30the time travel we really want...Almost everyone would have seen the movie series called "Back to the Future". In fact in the second part is where the hero, Marty, meets his <i>teenage</i> mother in the past, and she even falls in love with him. Very fascinating sci-fi movie. And it made the blockbusters too...<br />
<br />
...but it gave us the wrong idea.<br />
<br />
But why talk about time travel when this blog until now was talking about humans and the way of life, and other related but abstract things?<br />
<br />
The short version: although we may not want to admit it, we are eternally searching for meaning and purpose of our lives, our existence - the universe. This is humanity. You can take a look at all major religions in the world today and see what they preach if you are still not convinced.<br />
<br />
Time travel is possible. But it requires massive energy. Such scales of energy are only found near stars and black holes. Scientists equate the notion of time to that of a meandering river. There can be whirlpools inside it along the way; or the river itself can fork.<br />
<br />
Time that forks simply means that there can be an alternate reality. The alternate reality part can be best understood by looking up a famous thought experiment called <b>Schrodinger's cat</b>. You'd find a link to a collection of videos and other articles in the end - one of then explains this idea.<br />
<br />
So what is the future?<br />
<br />
You can say its an <b><i>event </i></b>which takes place at time which is ahead of the one you are in now. But, behind the scenes, there are always factors or related events, which must produce outcomes that support the possibility of that event being successfully observed. For e.g. a plane taking-off is an event. The weather in the airport is an influencing factor. If its favourable the plane can take-off. The plane can take-off during a bad weather also. That is also a possibility. There can be engine failure at a critical time, like when its on the runway and on the verge of take-off. This is also a possibility. But the plane doesn't take-off - the event in that sense is unsuccessful.<br />
<br />
But around that event there are many outcomes. The outcomes decide if we'd be able to successfully observe that event or not. These multitude of outcomes can be fit into a huge equation of probability, where the probability is simply computed as the probability of that specific sub-event happening successfully or not.<br />
<br />
This is extremely complex to model, and those sub-events can drill down to the quantum scale theoretically speaking. Here things are even more complex.<br />
<br />
So what does this all say?<br />
<br />
The future like all other events is an event. That event has a lot of sub-events associated with it. From the perspective of the event being successful, all those sub-events should have supporting outcomes. Its an astronomical number of combinations which has to be correctly supported. This is what I would call Fate. (I know that word is taken, but bear with me).<br />
<br />
And now time travel: everyone out there wish they'd want to go back in time, fix things and have a life changing future. The riddle is, how does one plan on getting to the exact same state of events as that of the desired point in the past. Isn't knowledge of all those events required?<br />
<br />
So well, time travel is possible, technologically impractical, and as of today, not really reliable. :)<br />
<br />
You can never change the past, but you can control your future, and have faith in the fact that you would.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Interesting links related to this post: <a href="http://bitly.com/bundles/deostroll/v">http://bitly.com/bundles/deostroll/v</a></span><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-41756172784574636412013-05-01T17:22:00.000+05:302013-05-01T21:52:09.116+05:30don't leave the grieved one behind...Originally derived inspiration to write this while I was creating my previous post.<br />
<br />
In almost all of the cultures today funerals are conducted when someone passes away. This is a phenomenon which is as old as humanity itself. They are conducted in different styles; each of them are closely connected to religious beliefs that that culture shares.<br />
<br />
I recommend that those who have lost someone dear recently not hang around to read the remainder of this post.<br />
<br />
Burial practices!<br />
<br />
Every popular human civilization that ever existed on earth had them. And because of cultural diversity, these practises were all different from other civilizations. For the human species almost all practices show a pattern wherein the body of the deceased individual is ornate with food, or, clothing, jewels, etc, and then disposed.<br />
<br />
The existence of such practices kind of proves the fact that the human species are aware of death. But other animals in the wild do exhibit such awareness!<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.newageselfhelp.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/bird5.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="191" src="http://www.newageselfhelp.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/bird5.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
However, the degree to which they exhibit awareness is somewhat confusing or misleading. The above picture shows a bird "mourning" the death of its mate. But the fact is we don't know if its really mourning, because mourning is what we "humans" would do. When "humans" try to empathize with the above picture, what we'd probably do is mourn.<br />
<br />
The psychological term for this behaviour is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia" target="_blank">pareidolia</a>. However, people might also call this as a side effect of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropomorphism" target="_blank">anthropomorphism</a>. This is one of the reasons why we'd always unconsciously associate an emotion with the following pic:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2c/Box-pareidolia-2011-01-30.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2c/Box-pareidolia-2011-01-30.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Getting back on track: imagine that the victim bird in the earlier pic was the victim of a stampede or an attack by a predator. Imagine that the threat that killed the bird still persists in some way; the predator is somewhat nearby, or the stampede hasn't ended. It is actually dangerous for the other bird to linger around. And staying around the deceased individual wouldn't help either - because it can decompose and increase the chances of the other bird contracting diseases.<br />
<br />
These arguments apply to our primitive evolutionary counterparts too. But then why do we still have such practices when, you objectively look at it, it is kind of <i>disadvantageous </i>to the survival of the individual?<br />
<br />
To answer this puzzle: you can draw references by observing what actually happens during funerals and figure it out. But fundamentally you'd need to understand the dynamics of group survival. In other words, what it means <i>surviving in a "pack"</i>.<br />
<br />
Pack formations had the distinct advantage of showing up in numbers. Hunting in numbers proved relatively better success rates in getting food. Similarly warding off threats also was relatively successful when there were more individuals to defend. So hence pack formations were a kind of behaviour that got naturally selected. But pack formations slowly lead to socialization between individuals. These kind of socializations kind of make it difficult to answer one question...why we mourn?<br />
<br />
Now imagine a small pack. Say that only two individuals know how to hunt; assume they were relatively successful at it too. Now what happens to one individual when the other one has met with some misfortune and passes away? For whatever reason he/she might mourn.<br />
<br />
<i>But what about the other surviving members in the group?</i><br />
<br />
Even they might mourn, but what they'd really need is the realization that they need to move on in order to survive. So one of them takes the call, tries to motivate the other to move on. Such sort of gestures are really crucial if the group's primary mode of survival was hunting. Previously two individuals were skilled at it; now one only of them remains. If the skilled individual was the one which was mourning, the whole group becomes challenged in one sense. Hence one of the members in the group takes the responsibility of bringing the grieved one out of shock, so that their chances of survival are relatively increased. Hence they may actually perform simple rituals to pay respect to the deceased individual. The primary focus of such an act was to make everyone move on with surviving.<br />
<br />
Over time these simple rituals became more complicated because the number of individuals in the group increased...the population exploded...people settled down with the discovery of agriculture...societies formed...politics emerged...and then history happened.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Interesting links associated with this post: <a href="http://bitly.com/bundles/deostroll/u">http://bitly.com/bundles/deostroll/u</a></span><br />
<br />
<br />deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-39325999360890029042013-04-29T23:36:00.000+05:302013-04-29T23:48:59.539+05:30the symbolism of tears<br />
<span style="font-size: large;">Why do we shed tears when we are sad?</span><br />
<br />
Our eyes fill with tears when we cut up onions, or, when exposed to dust, etc. The function of tears here is to protect the eye surface.<br />
<br />
<b>But why does our eyes fill up with tears when we are hurt, or, feel sad, etc?</b><br />
<br />
There is an emotional aspect to it, but before we go there, just get familiar with scenarios where our eyes actually fill up with tears.<br />
<br />
<b><span style="color: #76a5af;">1. While suffering from intense physical injury or a wound</span></b><br />
<br />
If you had a nascent mouth ulcer and you purposefully put a pinch of salt over it, your eyes with probably start to fill up with tears...<br />
<br />
Similarly any physical injury, like a hand fracture, etc could induce tears in the eyes.<br />
<br />
Digressing a bit: infants know only one thing to do when they want something, or, when they know something is wrong – cry. And when they do, even their eyes also fill up with tears sometimes. Of course for the case of infants, the pitch with which they cry, the tone, etc are features that got naturally selected to evoke empathy in the person attending the infant. They actually call out for the person's help. The help that the infant receives will again be dependent on how fit that person is to provide to the child. (But that is a subject of another matter).<br />
<br />
Say when the infant is grown up a bit and able to see and react to the surroundings; what would it do when it is approached by a predator, but the predator has not seen it yet. The infant can cry, but that would defeat the infant's chances of survival. So the infant eyes starts to fill up with tears first. Now for the mother/father, this is a sign that the infant is probably in danger, and hence the mother will take some actions to save her offspring.<br />
<br />
Another theory (which is called the white flag theory) kind of says that in a fight, if one person happens to cry, its a sign of surrender or helplessness. The tears which the loser shed in this scenario is again to invoke empathy in the aggressor, so that the aggressor doesn't kill/punish the other individual.<br />
<br />
In all these examples the function of tears are merely <b><i>symbolic </i></b>– they point to the fact that the individual is suffering from something, and its intended purpose here is to evoke empathy, and expect help from the other individual so that the subject's chances of survival relatively increases.<br />
<br />
So in these situations relative success is only there when there are other individuals there capable of feeling empathy – in short people/individuals should be around the victim and should be willing to help.<br />
<br />
<b><span style="color: #76a5af;">2. While experiencing sadness</span></b><br />
<br />
This is mainly a phenomenon common with the human species. As before tears symbolize suffering, but the suffering is something hard to understand in the case of sadness – it depends on the situation. When a child loses his parent he/she cries because of various reasons:<br />
a) the parent's affection to the child that the child has gotten accustomed to...when the parent has expired the loss of affection is something of a shock for the child. This is purely psychological because it matters to what degree the child is aware of the affection, mental maturity, etc.<br />
b) sometimes its just a gloomy outlook of the child's chances of survival itself since the protecting member has passed away. (But in this context, the child should again be mature enough to understand it).<br />
<br />
There can be many reasons; it depends on the situation. The “suffering” is not exactly loneliness, but we shall call it so – since loneliness is something which reduces the chances of the individual's survival. The usage of the word loneliness encompasses a much larger scope that what is actually defined in the English language in this context.<br />
<br />
It is a common pattern in most of the mammalian species which used to hunt or forage for food. Living in groups helped survival of the individual and the group collectively.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #76a5af;"><b>3. Tears appear when we feel empathy sometimes</b></span><br />
<br />
Our eyes fill with tears when we've watched a tragic movie or read about a tragic love story. Sometimes when we hear some exceptional piece of musical composition, or an inspirational speech, our eyes fill with tears. The function of tears where is more of an empathetic symbolism – it is sometimes equivalent to saying I know because I feel the same way...<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #8e7cc3;"><i><b>Last but not least...</b></i></span><br />
<br />
The reason I write this post is because someone tweeted about it. I read the article and found my inspiration. Tears have a symbolic meaning usually. But for it to be symbolic there must be people to observe it and be able to take action on it; else the purpose of tears is lost. With this fact, please bear that when you happen to cry while all alone, it doesn't help at all, because the tear-ing incidentally happens to have evolved for a kind of social purpose meant to increase the individual's survival.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">You can find links related to this post here: <a href="http://bitly.com/bundles/deostroll/t">http://bitly.com/bundles/deostroll/t</a></span>deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-83458291541076708682013-03-23T20:47:00.000+05:302013-03-24T02:09:25.627+05:30the reason for enjoying music<div dir="ltr">
<br />
The inspiration for this post comes from an interesting question on Quora.com. I am only mentioning it here to give you an idea how to think "evolutionary psychology".<br />
<br />
<i>Does listening to music enhance our survival?</i><br />
<i>Does it help us pass on our genes to the next generation?</i><br />
<i>Does it help in avoiding immediate threats?</i><br />
<br />
The answer to all 3 questions are <b><span style="font-size: large;">No</span></b>!<br />
<br />
For the humans music is a form of expression and a way to communicate. It is an art. For birds its a mating ritual. Most species on earth has evolved a sense of hearing - they can listen to sounds and take an action; but they evolved for the purpose of keeping the individual alive.<br />
<br />
For e.g. when we walk alone through a woody forest and we hear some rumbling in the bushes our first impulse is to get startled and flee. Suppose you are thirsty and stuck in a forest and you hear a stream of flowing water, you get a bit excited and advanced to the source of sound with the hope of quenching your thirst.<br />
<br />
<i>But what can we conclude about how our brain works from the above two scenarios?</i><br />
<br />
The brain has so many rules already wired. They are only there to keep us ticking.<br />
<br />
This "pre-wiring" is a very ubiquitous. It is present in almost every specie living today on earth. We can explain in terms of the need for a species or an individual in a specie to survive. But what about <i>why we enjoy music</i>? It is currently a very popular phenomenon. But we've just established that we can't explain it in terms of survival. <i><span style="font-size: large;">Then why is it popular?</span></i><br />
<br />
Not everything can be explained with the idea of survival. Sometimes certain behavior simply exist because such "rules" exist in our brains or in a more general sense in our living systems. And when the species attains some level of evolutionary stability or maturity they flaunt with it; they simply use these behaviors to maximize their chances of reproductive success. These behaviors are in a sense "naturally selected".<br />
<br />
This does not mean people who play musical instruments are constantly on the lookout for partners. This does not mean that people who go to rock concerts or an opera are looking out for suitable partners to mate with. Some go to enjoy the art form. Some go to have a good time with friends. Of course some do go out for seeking partners to mate with. Some don't go. Some have even more vile intents. All of this simply says our species is increasingly selective for the better or worse. That's all.<br />
<br />
Well, this is all I have today. But I hope you are at least a bit inspired to think evolution (if not evolutionary psychology). <b><span style="font-size: large;">Happy figuring out life...</span></b><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">You can find interesting links related to this blog <a href="http://bitly.com/bundles/deostroll/s" target="_blank">here</a></span><br />
</div>
deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-71058459254009255532013-03-18T23:44:00.000+05:302013-08-03T13:39:04.771+05:30The odd clean upIn any blog, a post like this might seem odd. Because I am writing this post to clean up stuff lying around this web page. There are link rolls, text saying how you should read my blogs, history of posts, etc etc. I just decided to go with minimal stuff. Hence all those content which used to be the right side will now appear as part of this post. While I am doing that, why not I share some few bits about this blog too...<br />
<h2>
<i>So why am I doing this blog?</i></h2>
I am no biology student or any active academic scholar of biological or evolutionary sciences. But I am still discovering so many facets of human life, and all life on earth. I share as I learn with the hope that someday we all could have a better sense of life on earth.<br />
<h2>
<i>How long have I been blogging here?</i></h2>
Well, pretty long enough. In fact the very first post of this blog says that I have kind of revived this blog. So I suppose you have to take it back to probably 1 or 1.5 years before 2005. Even I can't remember exactly when I started. However, I began taking an active interest into human evolution way back in my school days - 11th or 12th std.<br />
<h2>
<i>For how long do I plan to keep writing/blogging?</i></h2>
I am actively looking at other ways to reach out. Blogging is just one way, but not the ideal way. The best mode of sharing what I discover is through conferences, conventions, group gatherings, or, interviews where I can get to interact with people real-time. So I'll blog or do whatever I have to as long as I want to.<br />
<h2>
<i>Why don't I just write a book or something?</i></h2>
It simply doesn't seem like a monetarily sound idea. Yes I'd want income out of selling copies, but with all the piracy going on I rather not do it. However I would love to write. I do not view this piracy as an evil thing; to some degree the society does benefit from it.<br />
<br />
So, if its not writing books, blogging is the next best thing.<br />
<h2>
<i><span style="color: #e06666;">So what stuff do I share around here?</span></i></h2>
Primarily my thoughts on life on earth in general. Most of the time its about our species. Honestly (and in good probability) there is no other species "our species" can relate to (living or extinct). The questions I am fascinated with are simple but hard to scientifically or evolutionarily explain: <br />
<ul>
<li>What is love? Why is it our species show an abundance of exhibiting this phenomenon? Why do we do the things we do when we are actually in love? </li>
<li>Religion? Why is it so common? </li>
<li>Why would a crawling infant, who has never seen a snake be afraid when he/she actually saw one? </li>
</ul>
These kind of questions are bizarre. They are not meant to help you figure out your problems with life, the way you feel, or, how others feel about various things connected to your own life or otherwise...but if you are in a sort of mental block with life...the stuff here, or the way I try to answer stuff here would definitely help you move on with life...at least in a relatively better way.<br />
<h2>
<i><span style="color: #8e7cc3;">How to find stuff thats already here?</span></i></h2>
<div>
Search!</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Most of the posts are tagged with keywords. They will help you locate posts out here. If you are looking for a particular article I would have linked to in one or more of my posts keep a tab on my delicious link rolls.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Any interesting article I read which is related to the interest I share our here I tag it with the word evolution...so my delicious links can be accessed as follows:<br />
<h4>
<i><span style="color: #3d85c6;">https://delicious.com/deostroll/evolution</span></i></h4>
</div>
<div>
<h2>
<i><span style="color: #8e7cc3;">For new readers: how to read this blog</span></i></h2>
Expecting people who land here to read everything I've ever written is farce. In fact you don't have to read everything. Here are some posts which I think you might find interesting...<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li><a href="http://deostroll-thoughts.blogspot.in/2005/10/people-dont-often-die.html" target="_blank">People don't often die...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://deostroll-thoughts.blogspot.in/2006/04/perfection.html" target="_blank">Perfection?!</a></li>
<li><a href="http://deostroll-thoughts.blogspot.com/2008/04/monogamy-demystified.html" target="_blank">Monogamy Demystified</a></li>
</ul>
<div>
The better way to get you up-to-speed with this blog is to have some sort of an interactive session - a conference, meet up, gathering, etc. If you feel interested in the blog after reading the above posts I have linked to, then I think its safe to meet up. :)</div>
</div>
<div>
<br />
<h2>
<i><span style="color: #8e7cc3;">Okay, now I do have a question...how do I ask?</span></i></h2>
If you are still reading all this I gotta give you credit. But I am not the expert at finding answers to all kinds of questions. Its not about finding an answer; its about sharing what you learn in a diplomatic way. So having said all that I'd advise you to follow these steps:<br />
<ol>
<li><b>Google</b>. Because you may be surprised with whats out there...</li>
<li>Try searching or joining discussion groups which would relate to your topic. I used to regularly discuss at <a href="http://www.biology-online.org/biology-forum/">http://www.biology-online.org/biology-forum/</a></li>
<li>Post your question on <b>Quora</b>. Someone out there will definitely answer. But be polite and clear with what you are trying to ask.</li>
<li>If none of the above work, ask me. Quora has a feature by which you can ask other people to answer a question - use it...if you feel your question needs a much less publicity then email me at:<br /><i>ask</i> <span style="color: magenta;">[dot]</span> <i>deostroll</i> <span style="color: magenta;">[at]</span> <i>gmail</i> <span style="color: magenta;">[dot]</span> <i>com</i></li>
</ol>
</div>
deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-63593546311085167652013-03-16T21:18:00.000+05:302013-03-16T21:21:18.645+05:30Fate<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
I am a somewhat inspired to write today
because of what my folks at home think about the concept. But in
reality probably everyone has the same notion. <span style="color: magenta;"><i>We
only live in the boundaries of what our fate defines</i></span>. Some
believe its written, and belief in that fact provides sense and
purpose to life. However, many religious/cultural beliefs say that it
is our responsibility to understand what is the purpose of life –
or more precisely what is the purpose of <i>your existence</i> in
life?</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Not all cultures/religions share the
same idea of fate – and even if they do its not in the same
fashion. Hinduism and Buddhism attaches importance to this idea
through a term called karma – the sum of all actions –
what the individual has done, what he/she is currently doing, and
what he/she is will do. Christianity and Islam does recognize fate
but links everything to a supreme being – God. <span style="color: magenta;"><i>Whatever
happens its</i></span><span style="color: magenta;"><i> all according to the
</i></span><span style="color: magenta;"><i>Divine Plan or in accordance with
the Will</i></span><span style="color: magenta;"><i> of God </i></span><span style="color: magenta;"><i>(</i></span><span style="color: magenta;"><i>or
Allah</i></span><span style="color: magenta;"><i>)</i></span><span style="color: magenta;"><i>.</i></span>
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
The more I think about popular
religions the more I see a cause, a purpose why a particular belief
is there. It somewhat paints a picture of an ancient society.
Sometimes the reasons may be very prosaic; other times it may be
controversial. Whatever the nature of that reason be, in a
socio-evolutionary sense, <i>why do we “have” some notion
about "fate"?</i> Was it something useful to a group and hence survival?</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Well, yes!!!
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
The answer to the last bit is not
something you want to have tea with...but to a degree it relates to
our species just “carrying on with their lives”...getting on with it...</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Now why is “carrying on”
part important?
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Well, its not really important –
its just that you would not be reading this post otherwise, and I
would not have even written it! :)</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
And before I conclude this blog post, I
have my own idea of fate, but I rather choose not to express it in
words. Instead I'll share a video about a very common phenomenon
associated with the way we human beings reproduce –
fertilization – it should give you an idea.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<object class="BLOGGER-youtube-video" classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0" data-thumbnail-src="http://img.youtube.com/vi/_5OvgQW6FG4/0.jpg" height="266" width="320"><param name="movie" value="http://youtube.googleapis.com/v/_5OvgQW6FG4&source=uds" /><param name="bgcolor" value="#FFFFFF" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed width="320" height="266" src="http://youtube.googleapis.com/v/_5OvgQW6FG4&source=uds" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Links to articles related with this post: <a href="http://bitly.com/bundles/deostroll/r">http://bitly.com/bundles/deostroll/r</a></span><br />
<br /></div>
deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-19812166271033016452013-03-10T21:52:00.000+05:302013-03-10T23:34:07.030+05:30Rituals<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: black;"><i>What are the most
celebrated events all over the world?</i></span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: black;">If I were to ask
you this the answers I'd expect are: New Year, Christmas, and
probably a host of national holidays. But you do know every second
you breathe someone dies, and someone is born. Perhaps I would have
misguided you by using the word “celebrated”. There is
always some “sense” with which I use words out here. In
my defense, other popular personalities use it too – like
Shakespear, Hemingway, or Tennyson. Else English Literature would
have been extinct a long time ago.</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: black;">Childbirth and
Death are really old phenomenons; older than marriage. Many cultures
hold rituals to commemorate both. Scientifically speaking people are
born in the same manner, and they die in the same manner (more or
less) (biologically speaking). Then why would different cultures have
different rituals for each of these?</span></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<span style="color: black;">The fact we must
importantly observe here is that a “culture” almost
always “has” a ritual. Why?! What is the necessity?
Scientists who have observed animals say that they do exhibit some crude form ritual
practice. This may also be a basic answer as to why "we" have these ritual
practices. But most importantly this sheds light to the fact that we
are an emotional species. Some scientists today quote this as one of the reasons to explain why religions, cultures, and all those sacred
religious practices exist. </span>Its hard to
imagine what would have happened if we were not emotional beings.
This was a necessary part in our survival saga.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://bitly.com/bundles/deostroll/q" target="_blank">Here</a> are a bundle of links to articles related to this article.</span></div>
deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-57594750864931050702012-11-17T10:49:00.001+05:302012-11-17T10:49:27.460+05:30There are no facts; only interpretations <p style="margin-bottom:0in">This is a quote by a famous person<font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"> - <font color="#000000">Friedrich Nietzsche - a german philosopher.</font></font></p> <p style="margin-bottom:0in">Every word is a thought. So essentially when we speak we are communicating thoughts and ideas around. This is fundamental to any language – written or verbal. This is fundamental to how human beings communicate.</p> <p style="margin-bottom:0in">Now follow me closely.</p><p style="margin-bottom:0in"><font size="4">So what is a rock?</font></p> <p style="margin-bottom:0in">You are probably imagining a lump of stone in your head right now. <b>It is a rock</b>. Someone told you its a rock; you might have learned it somewhere; saw it on tv, etc etc; irrespective of how you have come to learn – you know it is a rock you are thinking about.</p> <p style="margin-bottom:0in">All words have an origin; essentially every word is a thought. So when people first observed a rock – surely they didn't have a name for it. In fact at that stage it is similar to saying that it looks <i>alien</i>. Then what is it?</p> <p style="margin-bottom:0in">Well, the human beings that lived at the time never really cared to dissect a rock. Their survival goals never really demanded that they find the exact name of the object. However, they assigned a name, associated it with the pattern such objects portray, spread that idea to many generations, and thus that is how we have finally come to know that such an object is a rock.</p> <p style="margin-bottom:0in">But the fact is that pattern is never really supposed to be called a rock...and we can never really know what to absolutely call it.</p> deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-13316341932536893402012-09-09T11:29:00.000+05:302012-09-09T12:02:31.890+05:30Open to answer your curious questions about life...I've just been hanging around a new Question & Answer website phenomenon on the internet - <a href="http://www.quora.com/">Quora</a>. Before this I used to, well, ask many questions about biology, evolution, etc over at Biology Forums Online.<br />
<br />
I follow many topics related to evolution: evolutionary biology, evolutionary psychology, natural selection, animals, etc. The kind of questions out there are intriguing. Some of the questions which I am about to show you are simply because people have "just" observed them or heard of them through some source:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.quora.com/Mammals/Why-do-lemmings-jump-off-cliffs">Why do lemmings jump off cliffs?</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.quora.com/Human-Biology/Is-the-biological-purpose-of-males-simply-to-spread-seed">Is the biological purpose of males simply to spread the seed?</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.quora.com/Bees/Do-bees-know-they-will-die-if-they-sting-you-or-is-it-a-moment-of-painful-realisation">Do bees know they will die if they string you...?</a></li>
</ul>
<div>
There are just so many things in life that our species does not "see". </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I was just about looking for inspiration to blog about stuff these days and then I stumbled onto the Quora Q&A website. Cool thing about this website is you can ask people to answer questions. They could be your question or anyone else's question. I do enjoy trying to answer questions about the many curious things about life. Hence I would encourage people to follow my Quora <a href="http://www.quora.com/Arun-Jayapal">profile</a>. If you do find a curious question, just ask me to answer. Someday if I do find something really interesting I would post out here.<br />
<br />
I am actually thinking of taking this interest of mine to the next level. Thinking of actually going places and delivering talks. I want to address small corporate audiences, or a small group of university students and faculties, etc. I haven't established enough contacts for this kind of ambition yet. There are a lot of factors I have to consider like how comfortable I am doing this, how reactive my audience would probably turn out to be etc. Nothing is concrete as for a plan at this moment. For starts, if people are interested in listening to such talks, I will ask them to setup up an informal meeting where I'd show them a demo of what I intend to talk. Lets see this how this idea rolls...</div>
deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-32038299034670119922012-06-27T20:18:00.001+05:302013-09-14T09:49:03.238+05:30Diurnal CyclesWe sleep everyday. Its is our body’s way to rejuvenating itself so we can face the next day. The fascinating fact about this is that almost all living things on the earth exhibits this phenomenon. It is this mere fact that has prompted me to write this blog.<br />
<br />
So why do living things sleep?<br />
<br />
The simple answer: rejuvenation. But if you think of rejuvenation in terms of biology it is enormously complex. You should rather focus on why is sleep such a common phenomenon.<br />
<br />
If you think evolutionary science then you’d use natural selection as your first method of arguing and then come to a road block. Because sleep is a maladjusted trait. There is no immediate survival significance to it. It is not like the fight/flight response which most living things have which tries to keep them alive in situations of stress. Sleep, with this analogy, accomplishes the exact opposite. Imagine being hunted while your body aches to find some rest.<br />
<br />
So the nearest answer that comes to me now is photosynthesis.<br />
<br />
Sounds Weird?!<br />
<br />
We get most of our energy from consumption of food. But the cells in our body derive the energy from carbohydrates and proteins, which comes as a result of the intake of food. Food is broken down into such simpler substances that our body cells can consume. <br />
<br />
So why photosynthesis? <br />
<br />
It is not photosynthesis per se, but the phenomenon is an integral part of understanding the riddle. Plants derive their energy by a process called photosynthesis. But plants only happened later on. You’ve all studied photosynthesis while studying about plants probably; and you probably associate it that way too. But photosynthesis was one of the ways those primitive life forms actually lived. It is simply the conversion of the energy of sunlight to simple sugars like carbohydrates. <br />
<br />
In plants, such cells consume these carbohydrates for energy at a later time. It is just that during sunlight specific cells on the plants are involved in the creation of carbohydrates. The cells consume these carbohydrates to do various functions (repair, reproduce, etc). Well when the sun’s not out there and these cells go out on doing what they do, there would be no carbohydrates to provide energy for other cells to carry out cellular functions. This could result in an whole imbalance to the living system – death.<br />
So ultimately what do the cells do? They simply lower their activity. In terms of natural selection, one can argue it is this trait of cellular behavior which enabled the plants to survive.<br />
<br />
But why do those cells lower in activity during night time?<br />
<br />
Simple. Perhaps there is another more precise theoretical explanation, but, in simple words, it is simply how their ancestors would have survived!<br />
<br />
But I am not meaning to say that we evolved from cells that make the tree/flower in your garden. Sunlight was an ever prevailing source of energy; it is also one of the most ancient. For any organism – be it cellular or more complex – finding food/hunting during the hours of the sunlight, was much easier. Energy wise, it was more efficient to look for food during sunlight, rather than during the night. <br />
<br />
But you must understand these were how some of the prehistoric and ancient of living organisms on earth survived. The rest of the story is all about how evolution and natural selection made it all the way.<br />
<br />
Update (14th Sep 2013): <i>Photosynthesis</i> could be a wrong idea all together to explain why we all sleep. Because I recently read about the Ediacaran and Cambrian biota. Most of the insects have their genealogical trails way back to the Cambrian era. Most animals which lived during that time were sea creatures; they lived close to the sea bed. This rules out sunlight being a prevalent source of energy for them. At least I think that is so...so there must be another explanation...deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-14243661877760369022011-06-12T13:06:00.000+05:302011-06-12T13:06:17.445+05:30Variation in the speciesFrankly there isn’t nothing much to type here. Pretty much everything was mentioned in the last post which highlights the fact that <a href="http://bit.ly/ieTD64">sexual reproduction is a very inefficient form of reproduction</a>.<br />
<br />
But then this begs the question: <i>why does it exist even now?</i><br />
<br />
I had linked to the <a href="http://bit.ly/maphB6">article</a> which was my original inspiration. There are actually four theories which explain the phenomenon. What most caught me was the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reproduction#Lottery_principle">Lottery Principle</a>. In essence it says variation in a specie of cells is good. Usually the cells have to protect themselves from invading colonies of viruses or bacteria. If all the cells had the same makeup their defense strategies would most probably be the same. And if this is something that the invading colony can conquer then what mostly happens here is the extinction of the whole species. But with variation some individuals are equipped more “gifts” to better obviate the attack.<br />
<br />
There are two things that can happen here. Either the fit individual is able to ward off the attack and destroy the individuals of the invading colony; thereby allowing the weaker individuals to survive. Or the fit individuals flee the scene leaving the weaker ones as bait. Whatever be the case, from the invading colony perspective, it simply means that one tactic alone is not enough to attack and obliterate the other species. This results in the other species having a chance to survive.<br />
<br />
So that is the gist of a cell’s reproductive life.<br />
<br />
<b>But what has happened over the years because of this <i>variation</i>?</b><br />
<br />
You ended up being different from your siblings, parents, friends at school, work, or, play, etc. So obviously no one is born equal. Everyone has their own gifts and curses within them. But lets not interpret this universal fact politically and fight with everyone.<br />
<br />
<b>The history of life on earth is replete with irony</b><br />
<br />
How many wars have we fought just because one race of people are different from the other? How many of these wars were fought completely ignorant of this universal fact of life: we are all simply different. There has undoubtedly been instances where individuals of the same specie (not just in the human species) fought with each other because they were “different”. There has been instances where a group of individuals fought with another group of individuals because they were “different”.<br />
<br />
The amazing fact in all of this “difference” is that, at a time when the whole specie was in threat (due to attack, or natural calamity, etc) all differences simply vanish. Sometimes even the warring individuals have to unite, setting aside their differences, to save their own species from being extinct.<br />
<br />
I do realize that this “uniting” or “coming together” is a prehistoric phenomenon; a very very old one. But it is also something that symbolises life of earth.deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-19473405623678926562011-05-22T15:40:00.000+05:302011-06-12T13:16:47.251+05:30The sexual reproduction paradoxLife at the cellular level is hard to imagine. Some might say its TOO MUCH BIOLOGY. I am of the same kind. I was looking into why there are two varieties in most of the mammalian species, but instead, stumbled into a bit of cell biology. And if you thought cell biology was tough, try applying the theory of evolution to that!<br />
<br />
But (and this is no joke) Darwinian principles apply to cells too! There is a form of cellular reproduction which is quite successful, but in actuality, (or in straight-forward natural selection sense), should not have evolved. And because that method of reproduction was quite successful, it has caused variation of traits in our species and in others.<br />
<br />
I’d suggest now is a good time to catch up with some preliminary biology (if you require it). Following are links to a group of videos on Mitosis & Meiosis - the two forms of cellular reproduction. I’d suggest you go to the first link (shorter videos), and then resume with reading the rest of this post:<br />
<ul><li><a href="http://bit.ly/mA5CeL">Mitosis and Meiosis animations</a> (with narration)</li>
<li><a href="http://bit.ly/jP0WuT">Mitosis and Meiosis lecture</a></li>
</ul><br />
The video simply explains the processes in brief. Each phase in the cell reproduction is actually very dense to describe. For e.g. consider the metaphase in mitosis of a cell.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://php.med.unsw.edu.au/embryology/images/e/ea/Mitosis_-_Metaphase.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://php.med.unsw.edu.au/embryology/images/e/ea/Mitosis_-_Metaphase.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />
<br />
The centrosomes move to two extremes of a cell from which we have spindles orginating. Some of these spindles attach themselves to the centromeres. It is still not fully understood how the centrosomes are able to exactly locate these points. Its also said that mitosis won’t happen if these connections fail.<b> </b><br />
<br />
<b>Some common facts of mitosis:</b><br />
<ul><li>When the cell divides we have 2n number of chromosomes - this is the genetic deck of a cell. </li>
<li>The daughter cells which result have the same trait as that of the mother cell.</li>
<li>Mitosis is the method to reproduce when cells need to replace other cells which has worn out or become dysfunctional. For e.g. a small cut on your hand will heal; after a few days you notice that that spot where you cut is similar to the surrounding. What has happened here is a mitotic reproduction where the dysfunctional cells are replaced.</li>
</ul><b>Some common facts about meiosis:</b><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgd_-1yEEQG8PFiYP2eesIkobyo1VoVoxqi_U9-nTY-LY9txlPIaurYuypR-El36zNtAH8rHwiHXzbGjOJgRnkl-xAlJCYooELjRxqRv1ZoPr9CZSdL3kgMVspxgedIw7oFfUUinw/s200/crossing_over.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgd_-1yEEQG8PFiYP2eesIkobyo1VoVoxqi_U9-nTY-LY9txlPIaurYuypR-El36zNtAH8rHwiHXzbGjOJgRnkl-xAlJCYooELjRxqRv1ZoPr9CZSdL3kgMVspxgedIw7oFfUUinw/s200/crossing_over.jpg" /></a></div><br />
<br />
<ul><li>At the end of the cell division we have 4 haploid cells, each with half the number of chromosomes (n) when compared to mother cell.</li>
<li>The cells that participate in meiosis are called gametes. It could be either the ovum or the sperm cell.</li>
<li>There is recombination or crossing over of chromosomes. This shuffles the genetic deck. This is what solely responsible for genetic variability.</li>
</ul><br />
<b>And now to the Natural Selection mode of arguments</b><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
The crossing over process is very complex. The chromosomes have to align themselves properly. The cross-linkages should happen successfully. The structure of the DNA should be intact. There are a host of other physical/chemical conditions (temperature, pressure, pH level, etc) which must be conducive for successful meiosis.<br />
<br />
There are numerous factors. There are times where all these factors or some of them might not be conducive. Sometimes the meiosis fails. But sometimes these environmental factors can alter the genetic deck. There is a level of variation due cross-over of chromosomes, but there may be variations which may not be due to the cross-over alone. These are what we call <b>mutations</b>.<i> </i><br />
<br />
<i>So what are the results of these mutations (or even variations)?</i><br />
<br />
It is simply what natural selection dictates it to be. Sometimes the result may be a successful offspring; sometimes it may not. But that is simply how life of any germ cell is...(it is also the case with mitosis). The idea of natural selection is to select those processes which maximize chances of survival.<br />
<br />
It is inappropriate at this juncture to explain how meiosis (or mitosis) came about. (The easiest answer to that is natural selection). In essence mitosis creates copies of itself. Meiosis creates variations (or mutations). But some of these offspring might die. How they die? They depend upon the rules of natural selection. This is the case with mitosis too! If the rules of natural selection are unfavourable for the cell (which is the product of mitosis) even that cell dies. But that cell is a copy of another cell, and all cells have the similar characteristics. The whole species might go extinct because of this. But lets not digress...<br />
<br />
<i>Meiosis is a very inefficient form of reproduction</i>. You can come to this conclusion after you simply analyze all the processes that go into meiosis. The offspring is subject to variation (due to crossing-over of the chromosomes). It is also subject to changes in the physical/chemical environment which results into mutation. So what we must profoundly ask ourselves is:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><div style="color: #6aa84f;"><i><b>Why has this imperfect process become so successful and flourished all these millions of millions of years?</b></i></div></blockquote><br />
The simple answer is NATURAL SELECTION. But, it abstracts so many things about what has actually happened. It has abstracted so many things about some aspects of life on earth itself.<br />
<br />
So I think I have provided context enough for my <a href="http://goo.gl/PmWdS">next</a> post. I hope people appreciate that post better. There are other means that let you know about the (evolutionary) stuff that I’m interested in.<br />
<br />
<br />
You can follow me on twitter (<a href="http://bit.ly/acZNra">@deostroll</a>).<br />
<br />
I bookmark articles about evolution on <a href="http://bit.ly/j1p5Q1">delicious</a>.<br />
<br />
And you can subscribe to the <a href="http://bit.ly/j4dfl7">rss</a> of this blog.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Ps: My inspiration for this post was <a href="http://bit.ly/maphB6">this</a>.</span>deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-46831309732277057892011-04-16T14:10:00.000+05:302011-05-08T17:10:10.352+05:30Hating twitterIts been a while since I last posted. Its not like I've got my thing back, but I haven't lost it like you imagine I have. I now realize that I can post in multiple places about evolution, it needn't be only on this blog alone. But I only do mention about minor stuff in the other places. So lately I have created a post about a social networking site. I feel I have blogged something to take note about human existence and all. Just click on the title of this blog post to browse to that page.<br />
PS: you won't be able to view the page if you are seeing this post through some third party service like readers, etc. You have to visit this post manually, and then click on the title.deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-24651047049821420272009-05-10T15:20:00.000+05:302009-05-11T16:01:46.387+05:30Non-vegetarianismI frankly don't know what life would have been if we had persisted with a vegetarian diet through out our evolutionary history. Nowadays people say being a vegetarian increases our life expectancy and stuff. There is no denying these facts. But we cannot also deny the way in which we became...<br /><br />First, a twist in the tale: the shape of our jaws and teeth suggest that we were not designed for eating meat.<br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.theistic-evolution.com/pages5455.jpg" title="Click to view an enlarged image"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 35%; height: 55%;" src="http://www.theistic-evolution.com/pages5455.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br /><br />This is true. If we examine the shape of the jaws and teeth of early humans, there is nothing to tear flesh. We need inch-long canines to tear flesh if we were persistent meat eaters (carnivores). But this does not mean that we did not eat meat. I'd suggest humans first started as vegetarians. There were times in earth's history when the climate was too unbearable; something like a small period of rain, followed by a longer period of draught. This could have forced the species to migrate to new lands in search of food. This could have either lead to two consequences - the species forced to eat their own in order to keep themselves alive, or, the species would have consumed other inferior species (mostly herbivores) after killing it.<br /><br />Then it became a play of natural selection. Those humans who remained to be only herbivores perished slowly; the others survived. This selection would have driven the species to have a omnivorous diet. But humans were not primarily carnivores. If they were carnivores, we would have in time developed sharper canines. So well, the omnivorous argument could be one reason we don't have canines.<br /><br />Now I'll be using the above argument and coming to a different conclusion which is more interesting to note...Raw meat takes time to digest. Breaking down the proteins and fat in meat would have taken straight 5-6 hrs of digestion alone. If this was the rate food assimilated in the body, then we would have definitely become undernourished. We have to note the primitiveness of our digestive systems; there were designed for a vegetarian diet.<br /><br />So consuming meat would have "slowed" the species. They had to take long hours of rest to complete their digestion. This meant they were more susceptible to being prey by other carnivores. They would not have been in a position to flee if they were faced with a threat. This on the one hand could have brought down the population, and this could have resulted into extinction.<br /><br />But fortunately we were intelligent enough to know how to scare out predators away. On the one hand we did have tools to hunt, and butcher our dinners. They had also provided a means to defend ourselves against threats. On the other had we had <span style="font-weight: bold;">fire</span>.<br /><br />Many historians agree that fire and hunting tools were discovered during a period referred to as the Early Stone Age or the <a href="http://archaeology.about.com/od/lterms/qt/lower_paleolith.htm">Lower Paleolithic</a> age. I googled to find out how exactly our primitive species looked like around the time. The result - fairly primitive enough.<br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://archaeology.about.com/od/lterms/qt/lower_paleolith.htm"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 168px; height: 117px;" src="http://z.about.com/d/archaeology/1/G/9/t/lucy_sculpted.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br />Their jaws and teeth were similar to ours - they had no sharp and long canines. So what did happen eventually.<br /><br />They say meat eating has impacted our evolution. But this would have not made sense if we disregard the discovery of being able to tame fire. Fire lead to another discovery - cooking. Cooking processed the food we consumed. Now what actually took 5-6 hrs to digest hardly took an hour or two. We were sufficiently nourished. We had the energy to hunt more, etc. And we were top performers at what we did. This fostered a small change in us. You could say it was the breeding ground for a much more powerful version of ourselves.<br /><br />The most notable evolutionary change the discovery of fire and cooking brought in was an increase in brain mass. <span style="font-style: italic;"></span>Our brains evolved tremendously. This is partially because of the meaty diet we grew fond of. Now since we had cooked food, we only needed a small time to chew. Hence we didn't need extraordinary canines to chew our food. Plus, we started to consume more meat (proteins), and this lead to many startling changes in the entire body. Here is a small contrast of the times:<br /><blockquote>Initially primitive humans spent most of their time sitting idle and chewing their food. Now they were sitting idle and perfecting their tools.</blockquote><br />Anthropologists would interpret this and remark this was something that indeed revolutionized the human species.<br /><br />Really there is no meaningful purpose in sitting and perfecting our tools, when they are actually good at whatever their purpose was. But now they actually put their thought into it, and perfected their tools with a view to improve their hunting capabilities. Though they did not actually realize the ballistics of a sharper spear at the time, they observed that sharpers spears were more accurate and effective tools for securing their baits. And tools and hunting were not only the stuff they invested their thought processes in; they actually thought of many other things - constructing sheds so that they avoided rain and the sun, polishing stones to make them sparkle, etc.<br /><br />We started using our brains. We started becoming creative at what we were already doing.<br /><br />The increase in brain mass suggests that there were several inter-neural connections within the brain which never existed before. Even at present we are trying to learn more about that. Because it is probably after this we started "settling", forming societies, etc. You'd be truly amazed how far we've come from there...From that small creativity spark to how advanced our civilization has become; truly amazing.<br /><br />Most of this discourse, was taken from a two-hour documentary from NatGeo. I had seen it a long time ago; when I was in college. I would have rightly titled this post The Story of Fire, but my motive was to make you understand that we owe a part of ourselves to being the meat eaters we once were. We would have been different if we were vegetarians. So I don't think a vegetarian lifestyle is the only one to adopt. Of course it has its advantages. But I don't know what vegetarian life style alone would have resulted our species to become. We have gone through a phase of being meat eaters. We could evolve better in future if we maintained that status. But I don't suggest you have to take a complete carnivorous diet. A balanced diet would do fine.<br /><br />And what is a balanced diet? I mean you'd have to go to a nutritionist and tell him/her that these are the things I do everyday. He/she would, ideally, do the math, and tell you how many calories you need, and how you can achieve it. So I hope you get the idea of a balanced diet.<br /><br />So happy eating, and healty living...<br /><br />PS: there is an enclosure link pointing to a national geographic news article about the same subject. Not that insightful though, but I guess you'd find more if you dig the site further...deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-5417675913866317722009-03-30T15:53:00.000+05:302009-03-30T16:11:46.788+05:30Life on MarsI was watching a show on discovery channel; people were discussing if life could have first started on Mars and then "landed" on earth...(watch Into the Unknown with Josh Bernstein)<br /><br />The scientific community only started to really look into this issue after president Bill Clinton in 1996 said there was such a possibility. This was probably after they were able to retrieve a Martian rock sample. (It has a very strange name. It was a combination of words and numbers. I think its <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALH84001">this</a> one).<br /><br />The documentary then went on to actually reveal various researches that would actually prove life was indeed possible on Mars, and it could have originated from there. All of these researches could not have been triggered without a discovery on Mars. There was a discovery by one of those Mars missions which showed the possibility of ice formations under Mar's rocky surface. If life was ever observed by someone to thrive underground, you could rule out such life forms relying on sunlight for their energy needs. But then again, that is against our 1st and most important criteria for the existence of life - sunlight. (Anyway this is what I studied in my school).<br /><br />But people have gone to extreme depths, and discovered that life does exist, here on earth. I can't remember what they called that particular organism, but they had classified it to be an extremophile. It seems that this particular specie gets its energy by some chemical reaction, (which is not fully understood as of present). It was an entirely new specie that had never been catalogued before. It was found in a remote undisclosed cave located in New Mexico, USA. Those scientists did not disclose the location as they fear contamination with foreign life forms - the ones we are exposed to all the time. So now you get the picture of how extreme this specie is...<br /><br />Another Martian discovery was the evidence of frozen river beds of high salt concentration. Of which salt(s)? I don't know. But generally the assumption is that these beds are salty. This does show the possibility that the Martian surface had rivers very long time ago. Life was actually present on the surface of Mars! But the focus here is on those salty beds. This leads us to assume that there were river/lake beds that were highly saline. So people, here on earth, tried to investigate if life could survive in these high saline conditions. Since these river beds were on the surface, they were exposed to sunlight and hence this led to the possibility of photosynthesis being one of the ways organisms actually produced food for their energy needs. But even photosynthesis needs water. A highly saline environment would actually strip a cellular body of its water content. So how do such bodies live?<br /><br />Well, here on earth, scientists discovered organisms that lived in similar environments. These organisms have special cell membranes. They are hard and virtually immune of reverse osmosis. So salt does not enter their system and disrupt it. Studies have also showed that the concentration of such organisms were high when sunlight was peak.<br /><br />So there; all these are seemingly proof that life could have existed on mars. We don't see diversity in life forms on mars like that on earth because at present the conditions on mars do not support a very rich and diverse earth-like ecosystem. But one should guess how does life on mars reach earth?<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;">Asteroids could have brought them in</span><br /><br />Yes, and it is not something new. People have looked into the possibility of asteroids and/or comets bringing life to earth before. Here is a possibility of a foreign body from another planet being introduced into earth. There is evidence of craters on the mars surface suggesting that it was bombarded by asteroids before. The collision would have been so enormous that some Martian rocks escaped Mar's gravitational field and got caught in earth's gravitational field. This could have possibly made life "flourish".<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;">So where does this leave Panspermia?</span><br /><br />Panspermia suggests that life on earth could have originated because of seeds planted by other alien civilizations/life forms. We may never really know if this was how life was indeed started. Even if it was we would even go the depth of understanding how that life form came to existence. What’s accepted currently is the Theory of Chemical Evolution: life could have started due to numerous chemical reactions between stable/unstable compounds over time, and under some highly improbable conditions. The results of such reactions could have fortunately become stable. And even these stable compounds could have could have participated in more such reactions over time. Experiments have been done in this area - a popular example we learn through out text books at school is <a href="http://www.chem.duke.edu/%7Ejds/cruise_chem/Exobiology/miller.html">Miller's Experiment</a>.deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-26130302943694079872008-08-19T21:37:00.000+05:302008-08-19T21:47:17.071+05:30Intoxication, Addiction and the birth of Addiction<span style="color: rgb(192, 192, 192);font-size:78%;" >Foreward (written after the post): This article is very vague in what it tries to explain - the evolutionary insight into addiction. It actually relies on evolutionary theory.</span><br /><br />This post is a little about what happens in the brain when we get intoxicated or addicted to a substance. I suppose this post will highlight a little about the neurobiology of the brain. I don’t consider everyone to be an addict in any way; but I believe people are more susceptible to be a victim of addiction in general. The only way to understand ‘why this is so’ is to understand the biochemistry of the brain, and a little evolutionary history about it. Before I move on, I just want to clarify the two terms – intoxication and addiction:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Intoxication</span> is the state of being affected by psychoactive drugs. It may also refer to the effects of consuming poison or excess amounts of harmless substances. Since I am not talking about intoxicating substances which are lethal or cause instant death I am ruling out the second definition. Intoxication may result in relative euphoria, feeling of pleasantness, etc. These are common symptoms. However not everyone experiences the same symptoms the same way. For some the relative euphoria is a sign of panic, and hence they develop a hate toward these substances. However the general trend is that people rather enjoy the feeling. <span style="font-weight: bold;">Addiction</span> is the next level of intoxication. It is much more serious. It is the physical dependence on a psychoactive substance which, when suddenly stopped, causes what is known as withdrawal symptoms. Some common withdrawal symptoms are anger, lethargy, depression, anxiety, etc.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Brain Evolution</span><br />Sometimes our brain can be considered to be a huge response system. It responds to various stimuli. And to get these signals or messages across to various regions for processing, the brain relies on its intricate mesh of <span style="font-style: italic;">neurons</span> and <span style="font-style: italic;">neural network</span>. There are some signals that can trigger panic, or readiness to attack, etc. These particular signals are ‘wired’ for the primary reason of survival. We perceive panic or the readiness to attack through a phenomenon called <span style="font-style: italic;">emotion</span>. Neurologically, this is how we would behave when there are certain levels of chemicals (neuro-transmitters) present, taking a particular emotional phenomenon in context; for e.g. when feeling sad or suffering from anxiety, we can observe high amounts of a neurotransmitter called serotonin. (Serotonin has other function like regulating sleep, the cardio-vascular system, etc).<br /><br />There are two kinds of emotion – <span style="font-style: italic;">positive emotion</span> and <span style="font-style: italic;">negative emotion</span>. Positive emotion works in a scenario where the brain (or the organ called the brain) has realized that there is something positive. For e.g. edible fruits on a tree. If we come to know that we are able to eat fruits from a tree, and that they are abundant, we would naturally be happy. This is a positive emotion which would make us want to consume more fruits from that tree. You can derive a corresponding case for a negative emotion too. Hence as a conclusion you can say that the brain seeks positive or rewarding scenarios most of the time for the simple reason called survival.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The reward system</span><br />Now that you know that the brain seeks for positive signals, you should also know that there exists neural pathways or channels and/or reactions which would generally come under the an umbrella the reward circuitry system. In the days of prehistory, the reward system in humans was relatively undeveloped. Perhaps early humans who primarily relied on hunting/gathering for survival did not require one. They were not exposed to intoxicating substances like modern humans. Reward for them was being a successful hunter and acquiring lots of food. Or being reproductively successful, etc. But as food became scarce they became physically unfit for hunting; they discovered that these intoxicating substances could boost their hunting stamina, or even sometimes their reproductive success. However, these substances were not administered in amounts that would cause chronic addiction.<br /><br />As we became more civilized and started to settle our urge to hunt and feel superior etc, still remained. These <span style="font-style: italic;">programs</span> were still running inside their brains. And consuming intoxicating substances was the only way out. Thus we see the evolutionary birth of addiction.deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-12682329086916481012008-04-13T12:27:00.000+05:302013-09-12T23:45:45.729+05:30Monogamy DemystifiedMy previous <a href="http://deostroll-thoughts.blogspot.in/2008/04/institution-of-marriage-and-monogamy.html">post</a> would form the proper context for this post, however for the googlers and other curious people who ended up here, the question I am trying to answer is simply:<br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
<span style="font-size: large;"><i>...why monogamy?</i></span></div>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Our ancestors (the evolutionary one, not social one) were primates. Primates, even today indulge in polygamy. Hence its not surprising if I told you polygamy is practised in some human cultures in one form or the other. So this means polygamy <i><b>was</b></i> a good part of our evolution. </blockquote>
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Then why is it not as popular today like it was before...?</blockquote>
<br />
Right now I believe monogamy is more of a social construct rather than pure natural evolution. In other words I say it is social evolution. It kind of forms the basis for humans to be able to live in a society. There could have been a time, in the nomadic or in the agrarian days, where the males actually decided to invest in reproduction.<br />
<br />
Investing is good thing for the offspring. There is more guarantee that the offspring can reach adulthood; by then he or she would have also learned necessary skills to go about life. The group of people had an idea of the skills they needed to impart to the next generation. So on one part it was about training the generation.<br />
<br />
There was another socio-evolutionary aspect of this kind of investment. It was that the group needed more of these trained generation to advance their society. Indirectly, we can conclude that the law of survival is still obeyed. And so is the gene expansion program being obeyed in a restricted sense. These two factors could have led to the group's survival.<br />
<br />
The males didn't have to fight wars over trying to possess a female anymore. This meant fewer injuries. Plus, their investment into parenting, training the child, etc play an important process in social evolution.<br />
<br />
From the reasons I've stated here I believe monogamy is about being able to live in a society. Monogamy gets all the advantage of a nuclear family too. But one should not think that monogamy was the definite reason why the society is a lot stable today than erstwhile. In fact we have no proof that monogamy really leads to a stable peaceful society. But considering the graph so far I think this is what it appears to “be”. But don't be deceived.<br />
<br />
But we still see violence happening in society due to many reasons. Tensions of war, crime, etc all plague society. Monogamy has done its part, and is probably still doing it. These problems are rather lack of resources to counter the rising human population. Imagine those little fights we had over a territory or a person, or on anything you are very much dependent on. The only difference is that they are now on mass scale.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Update (12th Sep 2013) : added some bundles about monogamy - <a href="http://bitly.com/bundles/deostroll/w">http://bitly.com/bundles/deostroll/w</a></span>deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-21604229621545817292008-04-08T20:21:00.003+05:302013-03-10T21:59:43.830+05:30The institution of marriage, and monogamy...I certainly don't want my marriage prospects don't go down because I am writing all of this...<br />
<br />
In fact I was only wondering about the term. I always thought that an institution was a place of study. Well guess what! That is not the true meaning. It is an organization with a specific goal. To me it means something has happened a long time ago. Some society's thought process changed, I don't know why this happened, or what was their inference. I don't even know what society “that” was...to be specific. But however the idea of marriage is not unique to any one culture or society. I know it shows some idea with relevance to the human civilization but I don't know what it is or how to explain it.<br />
<br />
I looked at the word institution (an organization with a specific purpose) and marriage, and asked myself, what the hell is the purpose of marriage. Being an ideologist of the so non-popular idea of survival, I knew this fact was obvious. But it is not merely survival this “organization” is up to. It is also about mutual survival. Concepts like altruism, family, etc enter the scene here, but I don't really intend to discuss them at this point. If you study this particular phenomenon (marriage) it is about the unit (called a family) that procreates, supports itself and its offspring. In this unit there is always a male and a female; both are adults and are fertile enough to produce offspring.<br />
<br />
In most of the cultures the idea here is that both the male and the female “agree” to living like this. They enter a monogamous relationship or sort of sign a contract for it. This has nothing to do with their natural way of being (primitive) human beings, but it denotes a change in some sociological aspect. I don't know what that is or how to explain that. I also believe that this may have some evolutionary psychological backing. However the eternal question still is open...why was polygamy dropped and why is monogamy deemed to be a prominent phenomenon these days?<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: 130%;">Monogamy is not monogamy in a true sense</span><br />
<br />
Most of the human cultures around the world 'force' its people to have a monogamous relationship. I say “force” because it is against our normal evolutionary psychology. We were designed to be polygamous. However saying this does not mean I encourage polygamy. On the contrary I rather want to encourage the curiosity behind why monogamy is gaining momentum at present and polygamy is not...? Surely it must let us know the inherent problems with polygamy.<br />
<br />
If monogamy was the basic rule of natural human life then some things don't get explained that easily. Like for e.g. in almost all civilized modern cultures we have a system of marriage where in a male and female vow to live with each other. Mostly this is something legal and the event is a public one. As far as the role of evolution is concerned between the two, both of them should mate, have children, support themselves as well as the children.<br />
<br />
If everything was fine then we can assume that there is no upper limit to how much times the female can give birth provided her maturity and health are capable of doing so – i.e. producing offspring. Assume that there is also no upper limit as to how many times the male can impregnate the female, provided the same rule for health and maturity follow. If it is a strictly monogamous society we are talking about we see that, for e.g., if the male dies due to some unexpected reason, the female is still very much very much fertile to produce offspring.<br />
<br />
But fortunately, some modern societies “do” allow her to satisfy her evolutionary role. However the focus in not on the society which allows her, or why that society thinks that way; it is about the idea of leading a truly monogamous life being corrupted or not followed. Because a truly monogamous life we would not choose to mate with any other prospective partner. But there are a lot of prospective partners out there, and if we did mate with them we could have made successful children too...! This...is not monogamy in a true sense. However the principle fact of monogamy is still preserved. We only mate with one partner and maintain one intimate relationship. This is called serial monogamy.<br />
<br />
I know that the institution of marriage has something to do with monogamy these days. But I still haven't actually figured out the monogamy part. I have set a discussion over at biology-online.org. You can visit the thread by visiting this <a href="http://http//www.biology-online.org/biology-forum/forum-14.html">link</a>.deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11556461.post-28361320743231221552008-02-28T20:45:00.000+05:302008-02-28T21:29:28.519+05:30Flirting & SequesteringI was looking for clues as to why humans became monogamous. But it seems I latched on to another seeming subtle subject. I guess this involves a lot to do with mating rituals, but have you ever wondered why people rather have sex in private where as other animals usually have it in public?<br /><br />These days the entries are increasingly related to the three letter word that some might feel offended even just thinking about it. But it is better not to stop thinking about it however, because it tells a lot about us - our macro social self. The male species had to copulate with the females in order to survive. The more number of females it copulated with the more chances that his trait and characteristics prevailed in the group. But this was also a time when polygamy was the norm, and it must have also been a pre-hunter gatherer society. Usually one male would have 5 or 6 females under his control. This also meant that he had to defend other males from stealing his females.<br /><br />Sometimes this meant that the only way that those other males had to become reproductively successful was to lure those fertile females away from that group and mate. This way they sequestered the females to a seemingly private location and mated. This probably explains the psychology behind having sex privately in most human beings. Flirting was one tactic most males resorted to in order to lure the females. However I do not know the psychological origins of this phenomenon at the moment.<br /><br />But this analogy does not explain why most people feel disgusted when they happen to see a couple in the process of mating in first person? I guess this is probably due to another type of evolution called cultural evolution. The type of evolution that I am more interested in the moment is natural evolution.deostrollhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02445597059149292139noreply@blogger.com0