Story of two Brothers

I learnt this story, perhaps when I was in my 3rd standard.

There were two brothers Ramu and Shyamu. Their Dad in his will had mentioned that all his wealth, which comprised of a coconut tree, a cow and a blanket, will be shared equally by both the brothers after his death. He never really specified what equality was. Shyamu, the intelligent of the two devised an equal sharing algorithm, which stated that the bottom part of coconut tree will be Ramu's property, where as the top part will be his. Similarly the front portion of the cow will be Ramu's and the back portion will be his; and Ramu can use the blanket in the morning- Shyamu will use it in the night.

Ramu respected the brothers decision for sometime, but sooner realized that this algorithm of 'equality' is a flawed one. He negotiated this with Shaymu when the deal finally compromised at - once in a week, Ramu being able to use the blanket during the nights

All this time, while Ramu was buying grass and feeding the cow, Shyamu was making money by selling its milk. In Shyamu's defence, yes- he did some hard work too, in the form of cleaning up the cow shit! While Ramu was manuring the coconut tree, Shyamu was drinking the coconut water. Blanket, let me not speak about it!

Ramu tried once more but then quickly, in his time scale, realized that Shyamu is going to no longer relax his claims on his fathers wealth. The story then takes a different turn. Ramu teaches Shyamu a lesson. But let me modify it a bit here. Teaching lessons donot generally occur in reality. They are just restricted to class rooms or stories. So what happened next was as follows:

Ramu wanted to split with Shyamu, perhaps rightfully claiming whatever he deserved to get. In that unfortunate world, he needed Shyamu's permission to do that. Shyamu, by this time, who was already a lot benefited by Ramus resources, ofcourse did not accept for the split.

Ever since, Ramu continued to fight for a split. But again, Ramu's world was unfortunate. Shyamu never agreed for it. Some people are just born to be on the receiving end of injustice, may be!

My question: Why does Ramu need Shyamu's permission, which is certainly not possible to have, for the split ?

If an ill treated house-wife files for a divorce because she feels her hubby's not treating her well, and more importantly, not letting her work; she better get it. She should not not get it, because husband does not want her to get! Ofcourse, he is concerned about his fat belly thinning down because he needs to cook for himself following the divorce.


I guess, the point is made!

Likes, Unlikes, Attraction, Repulsion!

One of the arguments I hear most of the times against the issue of gay marriages is morality. Well, different people have their own definitions of morality. So if something is right in one reference frame, it could be wrong in the other. I have no issues what-so-ever, with it.

But certain arguments tend to appeal to the science inside us. One of them is, like poles should repel as a law of nature. Hence do not fiddle with this law. Without taking names, let me just tell the readers that I personally heard several 'sane', 'respected' people talking this way. I have the following comments about this:

a. Lame !
b. Like poles repel, alright. In solution thermodynamics, like solutions attract. You could choose to use which ever statement suits your side of the argument to make it sound scientifically convincing
c. Why do you want to wrongly explain something using psuedo-science (infact nonscience or nonsense) and claim that there is a scientific explanation for it ? Some sense of insecurity or something, that morality arguments are not good enough?



There are infact several instances where people try to give scientific explanations to some well established practices. While some of them carry merit, I do not see any science in constructing a house with bathroom on the north eastern side, and facing terrible consequences with my life if it is not done so.