When you think about the qualities found in a true "soul mate" relationship, what one word comes up most often on the top of your list?
Is it CHEMISTRY? Probably.
Just the mention of this term conjures up powerful feelings and images for anyone who has ever been in or seeking a love relationship. It is often described as a feeling that leaves you breathless, excited and weak in the knees. Palms sweat, the heart races and the body tingles with nervous anticipation.
It is believed by virtually everyone that true love cannot exist without chemistry. Therefore, the conclusion most would-be lovers come to is that if they experience these intense feelings towards someone, they have the basis for an ideal and lasting relationship.
Right? Maybe not. For this definition of chemistry is limited to one's physical response to another person. It lacks an entire dimension that resides in our values, beliefs, personalities and worldview.
In order to know you have the right connection with a potential (or existing) partner, it's important to have a basic knowledge of what real chemistry consists of, instead of embracing only the myths that surround it. This can be difficult to do. This intense, physical passion is the stuff that Oscar winning movies and best-selling books are made of. So, take a step back for a minute and see if you recognize yourself in the following.
Sarah is a thirty something, very attractive and successful, professional female. She has been in a relationship for over a year with a man who is unfaithful, disrespectful and incapable (unwilling) to make any commitment to her. Yet, when he makes late night "booty calls", forgets her birthday, or stands her up repeatedly - she remains available and willing, in spite of her general unhappiness and upset over their "relationship". Why? "I think I have mistaken great sex for love. I feel this intense chemistry and physical intimacy when we are having sex, even though he offers me nothing else. Over time, it has left me unhappy and feeling badly about myself."
John is an attractive, intelligent, 30 something male who owns his own successful business. He's dating a woman that he thinks he is in love with. He has knowledge that she has been out with other men. She cancels dates and is often critical and emotionally distant. She refuses to discuss commitment or taking the relationship to the next level. Yet, she turns to John for emotional, physical and financial help whenever she feels she needs it. Why does John continue to see her? "She's beautiful and the sex is great". We have such strong physical chemistry. It's almost like an addiction for me. My friends can't stand her and even I know she's not really a "keeper", but it's hard to walk away.
These vignettes are great examples of how physical chemistry can be mistaken for the real thing. The attraction on one level is strong, yet these are not relationships that have the right elements to grow into happy and satisfying partnerships.
So, what is missing?
Kahlil Gibran defines it as "spiritual affinity". It's the hidden element of chemistry. It's when two beings meet and connect on a deeper level. It can only be felt in the heart and soul. It's about friendship, respect, humor and the feelings of warmth and contentment that come when you are in his/her presence.
People often report finding one without the other. This is understandably a cause of great frustration and confusion about whom should we choose and why. In order to understand this better, it is helpful to know how and when each facet of chemistry occurs.
Physical attraction (or lust) generally begins during our first contact with someone. It can DEVELOP into something more over time, yet some pull is there from the beginning. The chemical that results from this attraction (and intensifies it) is phenyl ethylamine - or PEA. It is a naturally occurring substance in the brain. Essentially, it is a natural amphetamine. It stimulates us and increases both physical and emotional energy. The attraction causes us to produce more PEA, which results in those dizzying feelings associated with romantic love. Another substance that is released by PEA is dopamine. This chemical increases a desire to be physically close and intimately connected.
When these chemicals are being secreted in larger doses, they send signals from the brain to the other organs of the body. If you wonder why you or someone is attracted to the "wrong" person, it may be because you are high on the physical response to these substances, which overwhelm your ability to use your head and exercise "good judgment and common sense".
"Spiritual affinity" develops over time and repeated contact. When these feelings begin to emerge, the brain produces endorphins. These are more like morphine and result in an increased sense of calm that reduces anxiety and helps to build attachment. As relationships move into this phase they are characterized by more comfort, commitment and friendship.
Generally speaking, all "soul mate relationships" require at least some measure of each of these. The important thing to remember is that they come in stages, which is not to say that the physical attraction passes as one moves into a deeper connection. However, it changes. We cannot sustain those intense emotions as we travel down the road to commitment and a shared life. However, in healthy relationships those moments of intensity can and do occur for brief intervals at intermittent times.
Remember not to confuse great sex or deep friendship with romantic love. Instead, look for a measure of both of these in your feelings for another. For then you have the ingredients that lasting love is
About Me
Saturday, July 26, 2008
123 nuke deal
WASHINGTON: It took 300 working hours for Indian and American technical experts to put together a 30-page document that constitutes the so-called 123 Agreement which will bring into effect the U.S-India civilian nuclear deal.
As the Indian negotiating team caught a United Airlines flight out of Washington Dulles Airport - named after the architect of the Cold War John Foster Dulles - on Friday night, the warm glow and relief of a strategic breakthrough was evident even through such trivia they bandied about.
Technical experts, led by principally by India's S.Jaishankar and U.S' Richard Stratford, met in New Delhi, Washington, Pretoria, and London among other places to hammer out the complex document that is at the heart of the deal.
The quibbled over commas, footnotes, parentheses, and most famously, square brackets [which is diplomatic jargon for contentious portions of a text.]
But at all times, diplomats said, they were conscious of the political will on both sides to consummate the controversial deal that has critics on both sides.
That hard-fought 123 Agreement, still under wraps except for broad outlines, will now be presented before India's Cabinet Committee on Security for a final seal of approval and to the U.S Congress for a yes-no vote before things start rolling.
Officials declined to speak on record about the details of the 123 agreement, but the broad picture sources offered suggests both sides made important concessions to arrive at a mutually acceptable text sans square brackets.
From India's side, there was never any doubt that it would win the right to reprocess spent fuel from the moment it made the offer – a concession - of setting up a dedicated safeguards facility.
The more contentious portion of the agreement related to sanctions and the 'right of return' of materiel and technology in the event of India conducting a nuclear test – a congressionally mandated law that Washington said it could not overwrite.
Instead, sources suggested without getting into details, the agreement included language to work around this situation. The language, which Indian negotiators ensured would preclude a repeat of the Tarapur episode, when US invoked sanctions despite guarantees, is to New Delhi's satisfaction.
One key element in the negotiations that finalised the deal was the direct involvement of representatives from India's scientific establishment. Dr R.B.Grover, Director of Strategic Planning Group in the Department of Atomic Energy, participated in the technical talks and ran the developments by Dr Anil Kakodkar, Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission.
Kakodkar did not take part in the talks directly, but was a major backroom presence. While the political establishment hopes that this show of consensus will mollify dissenters in the scientific community, the government itself faces the tough task of getting its allies and the opposition on board.
That is why, sources said, it was decided that 123 Agreement would not be released before the CCS had discussed it and the government had briefed allies and key opposition leaders.
In Washington, administration officials are expected to brief key law-makers and their aides on the agreement and bring it up for a final vote soon.
The country's vocal non-proliferation community is expected to raise hell as usual about concessions to India. But the vote in Congress will be a straight up-down, yes-no vote with no amendments allowed, so the administration expects to get it done without too much trouble.
The U.S-India deal ends more than three decades of nuclear isolation for New Delhi, during which time sanctions forced it to develop its own indigenous nuclear industry but also prevented it from tapping into technological advances and exchanges with the rest of the world. With this agreement, India becomes the only country in the world which has not signed the NPT, but can still conduct nuclear trade with the world while retaining its nuclear weapons program.
As the Indian negotiating team caught a United Airlines flight out of Washington Dulles Airport - named after the architect of the Cold War John Foster Dulles - on Friday night, the warm glow and relief of a strategic breakthrough was evident even through such trivia they bandied about.
Technical experts, led by principally by India's S.Jaishankar and U.S' Richard Stratford, met in New Delhi, Washington, Pretoria, and London among other places to hammer out the complex document that is at the heart of the deal.
The quibbled over commas, footnotes, parentheses, and most famously, square brackets [which is diplomatic jargon for contentious portions of a text.]
But at all times, diplomats said, they were conscious of the political will on both sides to consummate the controversial deal that has critics on both sides.
That hard-fought 123 Agreement, still under wraps except for broad outlines, will now be presented before India's Cabinet Committee on Security for a final seal of approval and to the U.S Congress for a yes-no vote before things start rolling.
Officials declined to speak on record about the details of the 123 agreement, but the broad picture sources offered suggests both sides made important concessions to arrive at a mutually acceptable text sans square brackets.
From India's side, there was never any doubt that it would win the right to reprocess spent fuel from the moment it made the offer – a concession - of setting up a dedicated safeguards facility.
The more contentious portion of the agreement related to sanctions and the 'right of return' of materiel and technology in the event of India conducting a nuclear test – a congressionally mandated law that Washington said it could not overwrite.
Instead, sources suggested without getting into details, the agreement included language to work around this situation. The language, which Indian negotiators ensured would preclude a repeat of the Tarapur episode, when US invoked sanctions despite guarantees, is to New Delhi's satisfaction.
One key element in the negotiations that finalised the deal was the direct involvement of representatives from India's scientific establishment. Dr R.B.Grover, Director of Strategic Planning Group in the Department of Atomic Energy, participated in the technical talks and ran the developments by Dr Anil Kakodkar, Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission.
Kakodkar did not take part in the talks directly, but was a major backroom presence. While the political establishment hopes that this show of consensus will mollify dissenters in the scientific community, the government itself faces the tough task of getting its allies and the opposition on board.
That is why, sources said, it was decided that 123 Agreement would not be released before the CCS had discussed it and the government had briefed allies and key opposition leaders.
In Washington, administration officials are expected to brief key law-makers and their aides on the agreement and bring it up for a final vote soon.
The country's vocal non-proliferation community is expected to raise hell as usual about concessions to India. But the vote in Congress will be a straight up-down, yes-no vote with no amendments allowed, so the administration expects to get it done without too much trouble.
The U.S-India deal ends more than three decades of nuclear isolation for New Delhi, during which time sanctions forced it to develop its own indigenous nuclear industry but also prevented it from tapping into technological advances and exchanges with the rest of the world. With this agreement, India becomes the only country in the world which has not signed the NPT, but can still conduct nuclear trade with the world while retaining its nuclear weapons program.
Sunday, June 1, 2008
I ME AND MYSELF
hai friends i am abhilash a.s doing b tech at university college of enggineering karyavattom..watch out for some interesting stuffs from me soon
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
