カテゴリー: English

Sustainable and Development. These sounds to me somewhat conflicting.
Developing something means generating entropy.
Therefore, sustainable means to throw the entropy that is generated through development away as distant as possible from us.
Herein, a self-proclaimed amateur scientist murmurs something that might have already been well stated by real specialists, in a way of pretending to know. But anyway, somewhat of a manner of ignorant yet eager to learn outlaw.
(But maybe reading this gives you a good distraction. )

Is everything necessary?

Everything which is presently available is really necessary? Is tobacco, as somewhat tangible example, necessary?
“But then tobacco makes up certain portion of economy and the tobacco economy supports people who need what is necessary therefore tobacco is necessary.”
Is this logic flawless? OK then,
what if tobacco is fully prohibited because it is considered unnecessary thereby people who are supported by tobacco economy are completely extinct? If those people are the consumer of modern communication network then having lost this considerable consumer block, the modern communication network, which might be one of necessary things, will be in the blink of extinction.
Is this scenario practical?
This kind of domino-effect is my very point in thinking of establishing a civilization in sophisticated balance. If minimizing CO2 emission needs to delete certain economic block, can other economic blocks be kept?

Feedback effect between each other; Technology, Economy, Manpower,

Of course, if energy or other industrialized system that are the source of CO2 emission are fully replaced with new system which CO2 emission is absolutely zero, then that sort of concern will be solved completely. But is that really possible?
The more sophisticated balance is sought the more manpower will be needed and thereby another phase of entropy growth might be caused.
The more streamlining of consumption is sought the further the vulnerability of economy might matter.
The above two could be in a feedback loop; The more manpower is mobilized, the further the vulnerability of balance will extend.
This could be a case in streamlining vs vulnerability of economy as well. Sophisticated is not synonymous to luxurious, of course. But can streamlined be really of innovation? After all, quantity matters, isn’t it? Otherwise, frugality overwhelms sophistication, civilization or innovation, maybe?
We all would be driven to return simply back to of primitive, obsolete and then rudimentary life if it were inevitable to resign innovation because of sustainability.

Quantity matters?

Does quantity matter? But knowledge is the vital tool for sophistication and civilization and knowledge is grown in an atmosphere of diversity. Diversity needs sufficient or say, large quantity. Is this true?

A specific work necessitates another specific work

Let’s Imagine, we are now enduring primitive life and then one of our kids is suffered from a kind of ailment which normally is easy to cure if it is modern world.
Although now we have knowledge on it, any facilities to cure it is no more available and therefore the kid died of it.

For Covid-19, vaccination was quite quickly developed as we have the knowledge on what is virus and how it can be mitigated and how to produce vaccination. Of course, not only the knowledge but also facilities, energies and manpower were necessary.
Then furthermore apparently, even during normal days when such things as Covid-19 does not emerge these things should be kept on waiting mode.
Could such industry as pharmaceutical be kept at a level that is always ready for such situation as Covid, while well minimized and shrunk as necessary for frugality the infrastructure and economy is kept?

Initially human started introducing agriculture which gave human surplus amount of food supply. The surplus further gave human opportunities for extending its activities to things other than purely food obtaining ones. That then further enhanced the human survival and at the same time generated quite a nuisance of anti-environmental byproducts.

Minimum condition of Population to Minimum Items to be in function

Returning to the theme today, let’s see how a well balanced civilization can be.
Enhanced survival needs knowledge. To practice the knowledge whenever it is required needs well stand-by facilities.
Well stand-by facilities need well grown economy which causes large amount of energy.
The energy generates entropy which causes anti-environmental emissions.
How can we minimize the anti-environmental emissions to a level that can be absolutely evaluated as no harm at the same time that the level of civilization is kept at higher level?
Structure of the system should be kept. Then the quantity should be reduced. putting it another the quality is kept while the quantity is reduced.
How?
How about our population?

Population matters most?

The word “population” suddenly has come to my mind. To make population under control in order for it to be the best suits to balancing between creation and conservation, number of births control system will be an option.
Number of births control?
Yes number of births control!
But how!?
Oh don’t impose such a tough question!
Anyway, Ok how about this.
For instance, what if a government issues the right-of-giving-birth ticket to some people who were chosen in a way that can keep whole population almost constant. Calculation, of course, would be necessary taking into consideration on matters; quantity, knowledge, sophistication, innovation, civilization, diversity and minimum required volume of economy.
But, number of births control? Only chosen people?
Probably some people would oppose, insisting that everyone has the right to have their own children.
So, the government would introduce a measure against that opposition.
In the measure, all the babies born through that government birth program are raised and educated by a public organization so that no child belongs to any particular family. Immediately after being born, each and every baby is isolated from its parents with no traces left.
uuuuu, Is this correct in terms of humanity?
However rational its logic can be, it looks to me somewhat wrong.

Greta Thunberg, her yacht

Her yacht sailed to New York. The yacht was equipped with telecommunication and power generation device that had not been available in an era of sailing ships. I mean her yacht somehow is representing balance between creation and conservation in a way that minimizes the increase of entropy. Thanks to that telecommunication and power system on board she was able to safely navigate through once a dangerous ocean field at the same time then with minimum emission with such energy source as sun right, ocean tide and natural wind.
Anyway its very strengthened hull is made of, maybe, fiber reinforced plastic which might lead another and diverse technology, thereby may consume so much of energy, economy and therefore a considerable quantity of something.
Here then quantity matters again?
The idea of the yacht could highly be evaluated as message since I myself has also been inspired of an idea of balanced civilization anyway. Then at the same time, it implies the difficulty as well, I suppose.

What are necessary for making semiconductor? What are required for making medicines? What are essential for making food?

For semiconductors; silicon, and other metals, energy, chemicals, clean room, factory, people who design it, procure, fabricate etc. Medicine as well and then food.
Thinking of such a diversity of ingredients and facilities, I can’t help posing a question: After all, “Quantity matters most”, isn’t it?
Minimum required quantity is determined at the quality which human think necessary. If the quantity is put as the most prioritized factor then it represents quality.
Can the nature be in a best balance with civilization while human never give up “Fake Luxury”. Fake Luxury?!
No! True luxury is I think surrounded by beautiful nature peacefully.

Future, optimistic or pessimistic?

They say world population may turn in a decline in a future. If so, naturally quantity of civilization will be suppressed in a way that can keep things at a sustainable level while quality of civilization is best ever highly sophisticated.
But maybe that will be too late, comparing the speed of entropy which human is presently experiencing, with a decline rate of world population. Also to bear in mind is the way of seeking economic growth. I can’t describe it practically, but I think it should be of more spiritual.
Oh, I am scarily. I am not such specialist that can speak of such a difficult thing. Everyone in the world seeks happiness although the way of realizing happiness sometimes quite a bias, yet I want to trust in human.

Once I was a lazy ant.
No name nor ID was given but I was being fed with enough food.
They were working. I was not.
They were feeding me.
There were lots of ants like me.
How could I know the word “lazy”?
Because an ant who once fed me said “I know you are not working at all, you are so called lazy ant”.
One day, l was hit by sudden sensation of workaholic. I don’t know why but anyway I am working now and feeding another lazy ant.

Several years ago, I read a short article about “lazy ant” on some kind of news article.
Then, I came up with an idea of expressing it in a personification way as above.

Lazy ants make themselves useful in unexpected ways

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/09/170908205356.htm

In that article, being described was a fact that scientists found that lazy ants exist indeed, and they are being fed by other working (task holding) ants. After all, the scientists concluded that those lazy ants were as kind of reserve work force, that article stated.

So, if some amount of work force is lost somehow, then the lazy ants will turn into working ants immediately. Maybe some sort of secretion process is underway, the article had explained.

Sorry, this is just my unclear memory of that article and therefore if you want to know it precisely and to deepen it further, you should contact real specialist.

Anyway, let me continue.

Initially I thought that those lazy ants are for keeping diversity of DNA.
If ant’s population necessary for enough DNA diversity is larger than that for food hunter- gathering and furthermore working ants can collect food sufficient for feeding those idle ants as well, then the system can work.
Anyway, OK, they are reserve work force. Yes, it’s quite simple interpretation and consistent logic.

So, can this mechanism be applicable to human society? If so, I want to be the lazy side forever. (You would say; You! such a man!)
The point is the word “forever”. I know there is nothing being forever.
Also. worth notified is that mechanism; lazy ants quickly turn into substantial work force.

Assuming that there are a lot of lazy employees in a company in which only a few people are working indeed in a productive way and then suddenly those working people have moved to another company, can those lazy people turn immediately into productive work force?

It is impossible of course! They don’t have well nurtured skill which normally is attained through out rigorous work life. In Ants case, the skill is in their DNA, perhaps.

So, how can such risk as losing skilled workers be hedged?
No reserve, no spare, no standby.
You! company top brass bastards! Why don’t you do things on your own!

Oh I should not use such a coarse language.
Anyway, you see. The point is the spirit for work. Person who has strong spilites toward contributing a certain company, well determined in devotion, will not leave the company.

Ants do not have work spirit, maybe anyway. Spirit is not a part of system. DNA is part of system. And in ant’s case, those working ants and lazy ants are both a kind of consumable, I suppose.

Communism, capitalism, socialism, corruption-izm any -izms may contain spirit.

What is really “Working”?
Imagine, a man who has long endured such hard work as pumping up groundwater from coal mine by driving the pumping device with his own muscle, then one day he invented steam engine to drive the pumping device.
So, somewhat in this short story, the point is a question; did he come up with the idea of steam engine in order to escape from such backbreaking hard work and then to be lazy?

Probably, he would further make tremendous effort to invent another new machine that is more energy efficient and more powerful than those initial models.
Or maybe he would be really lazy like nobles in corrupted dynasty who are sedentary on his success.

Imagine again, here we see a girl who wants to be a pianist.
She then told her lover who is a computer scientist that she wants to be a pianist and therefore she is “working hard” to practice playing the piano.
Then, the lover said; My sweetheart, you don’t need to make such “inefficient effort”. I can build a piano control program with a computerized system so any music can be played in piano sound whether or not it is composed by you or others. You do not need to endure hard lessons to play the piano.
Frowned, she then murmured, “You don’t really understand what my desire is all about.”
……. She left from him forever. “Good Bye!”

What she wants is simple.
She wants to make something embodied within a time and space where she and her audiences can share the feeling powered with the music. And the fact that she is now really and directly playing the piano by her body, nerves, intelligence, consciousness, and memory of tremendous hard work so far etc. further enhance that feeling, a kind of ecstasy state.

Oh, what was the theme today?
So, lazy ant.
The pianist, she doesn’t want to be a greedy company top-brass nor corrupted noble rather she needs hard work only. Her hard work is not for becoming lazy person. Hard work itself is the aim.

Then, could that lazy ant feel such extasy in being lazy?
Or for lazy ants, is it possible that there is nothing like ecstasy even after getting transformed into workaholic ants, I wonder. And then, do only the queen and prince gain a sensation of ecstasy when they feel their group of ants thriving?
At this moment, I do not know it nor even could imagine it.
In case of human, there may be nothing like spares as any idling human can never be replacement in such a quick manner, like ants, as each has its own personality.

For ants, such expression of “lazy” will never fit. For human, ecstasy may fit to the discussion in Knowledge Argument.

Knowledge Argument

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_argument

Plague is survival? Is this what you really mean?
Hello ——-, anybody home——????, are you OK?

I am OK. (Perhaps)
When it comes to the word Plague, there are several meanings and here being talked about is that deadly disease, also known as “Black Death”.

It has given human so many ordeals, which were resulted in, anyway, the sort of admirations such as, resilience, perseverance, or, simply expressed, a strength.

The Oldest Historical Record

Traces of the pathogen of plague was found in some Bronze Age human remains from some 5000 years ago. But it is not the sort that can be called Historical Record because those Bronze Age humans might have not been aware of recording their history and the traces were just detected in the human remains by modern science.

Then, some historical records were found in so called Amarna letters, some cuneiform text of Hittite king Mursili II or Books of Samuel in Old Testament.
All of them were in BC era and written in the language being used at that time.
——– Some thousand years old sufferings of human being.

Nevertheless, those plagues all had come to end always and eventually leaving human precious lessons learned and “creation”. Creation from what they learned.

In England, 1655, a small village “Eyam”

The village, called “Eyam” was hit by plague. Anyway, later on found was the remarkable difference in numbers of survivors, compared against other villages.
Some scientists finally concluded that certain genetic mutation called Delta32 is responsible for that remarkable numbers of survivors.
There are some stories about the villager’s fight against plague. The most impressed for me is story of a wife whose family members were all died of plague but the wife herself was not infected with plague even though she had been exposed to all her family members. She was giving them any cares as she could think of as possible. Hundreds of years later, found are holders of a specific DNA pattern among her bloodlines. Her devotion to her family conveyed the knowledge to future scientists.

Delta32, the protection shield given to some people but not to all

So, a question is posed.
Why do not all people have Delta32?
In army organization, infantries are rationed with handheld guns and some personal protection devices while armored division is given mechanical equipment such as heavy tanks, cannons and missile launchers.
Never be forgotten is unarmed civilians whose protection is quite weak.
Nature does things in a way somewhat similar to what army organization does.
Even nature, something of holy and divine (my personal opinion), is undertaking such a harsh human discrimination, it seems to me.

Delta32 to AIDS

There is an experiential knowledge; a person who has Delta32 is never infected with AIDS. A set of knowledge from a lesson has just been found to be linked with another, further enhancing the effort of human to survive. That kind of process can be seen as creation.
The creation, or the effort of human to survive looks somehow trying to eliminate all such discrimination that look like a given ordeal by an intention of something divine.

Human, at least we can say, is not perfect even after the completion of its form. As like Personal Computers, which continuously are evolving, human has also been in evolutionally process.

In this regard, such sequence of events, ordeal-recovery-review and try to do, can be considered driving force to reach a point that is as perfect as possible but never at complete perfection. It’s like an infinite series (mathematical) that converges continuously into a certain figure that is conditioned with some mathematical relations, and it never stops the converging process. For instance, actual value of “Pi”; 3.14159 26535 ——————– to be continued forever.

Why had it not been given to all, from the very beginning of human appearance on the earth?

However, I can’t help thinking why such protection was not given to all human at the very beginning of human.

If there is a kind of existence that intended to create human, it seems that that existence cannot create something perfect from the very beginning in almost instantly. Instead, it gives human harsh lesson as part of its creation process. If human were intended to be created by such mysterious existence, then the process of that creation is still underway.

By giving such harsh lesson, something that is converged into something strengthened from diversity is created, maybe or may not be, I am not sure ——. Just feeling it quite vaguely. Diversity may also be important where everything is uncertain.

We are well aware of the usefulness of scientific approach. And facing at Covid-19, we made tremendous effort such as large scale of virus detection like PCR, development of the method of treatment specific to Covid-19 and development of vaccination.

Now returning to the introduction of this short talk;
“Plague, long time driving force for survival”,
Something necessary is not always something positive. Anything positive maybe is created by human after an ordeal is overcome.

So, that lady in that village “Eyam”, Her story will never be positive. But thanks to her remarkable determination in taking care of her family, we can now be aware of Delta32.

Now a days, there are lots of negative stories such as war. Would all those give strength to human in future, even if it is caused by the very human not by nature? “War, long time driving force for survival?” The very survival by killing enemy not by taking care of suffered.

Entropy, the destiny of Energy

Eventually, it dies out. (More precisely no usable energy). Nothing can retain it. Creation, if it means “energy”, will fundamentally be of nihility. So saying the theory of Entropy is. (Maybe). Oh! Really? I don’t think so.

Sorrow, is it the destiny of Happiness?

There are certain people who are trying to signify the value of life and then seeking a way to convince people that life is worth enough to endure so that nobody opts for suicide. One person exemplified it as something of punishment by God but nevertheless as also something that gives human dignity. Mr. Boltzmann, if you had met the person then had exchanged conversation, would you have opted for that? I am wondering.
Person like you (maybe I think) who reached a point of consideration where the destiny of energy is being reflected on human destiny, might often be lost because scientifically speaking everything is destinated to nothing because of entropy. That means any and every instant of happiness always ends up nihilation. But is that true?

Science, such a good thing to play with

I am just a science story freak and not an academic nor specialist. And recent days for me are of my 2nd boom of Entropy. The 1st was when I was in university more than 30 years ago. So, I have read several books on Entropy and always found there your name, Mr. Boltzmann. I know that person who provided the beginning was Nicolas Léonard Sadi Carnot. And Rudolf Julius Emanuel Clausius farther developed it. Anyhow all the books symbolize you as founder of Entropy. After reading those books, I come to a thought that because of your reflection of Entropy on human life (Maybe I think you did it), you took that quite a sad path. Nevertheless, for me, exploring on science in my “selfish way” is always a good device to mitigate, to some degrees, negative thought such as how stupid I have been so far.

Famous scientists who (probably I think) tried to reverse Entropy such as Albert Einstein and Erwin Schrödinger

Mr. Albert Einstein once tried to make a mathematical model of the destiny of space. His initial model represented that the space finally be nullified! But, later, he modified the equation so that space exists active forever.
Mr. Erwin Schrödinger proposed the concept of negentropy in his book titled “What is Life?”. Negentropy; “negative entropy”. I think he tried to challenge against that sad interpretation on Entropy.
Once one of my science teachers said that entropy continuously increasing and that means the more energy is used, the less usable energy is available.
Also, cosmology argue that the space may finally be of a state of nihilation.
Destiny of death looks to some person, who are too keen, a philosophical parallel to the theory of entropy, I suppose. Now gradually, I am getting confused, and I am also getting somewhat positive.

Is Creation the key to reversing Entropy?

We have not yet reached the destination and, who can tell we reached it?
I can’t help feeling how meaningful one’s life must be. I don’t have any logic though, purely I am feeling because I can feel something in Information Theory and Mandelbrot Set in Fractal. Information, I think that once it is created it will never disappear though its scale and format may shift. Of course, noise should always be the Entropy but if a kind of feedback effect is a very result of innovation as some people once stated then – – – -.
And if self-similarity is the basic structure of things, then the shift of entropy i.e., transfer from order to disorder may have also self-similarity therefore if things fundamentally are contained in infinity, that single directed and irreversible process may emerge one after the other. Finally, the processes continue to emerge forever. Is that the very meaning of infinity and then of life, furthermore the true meaning of Entropy, Mr. Boltzmann?

Note:

The above context is just a monologue of nobody and there is no credibility at all but anyway here I express my utmost respect to Mr. Boltzmann.
Basically, human is able to be happy, and it is not necessary for anyone to be logical with the meaning of life rather just feel it by simply gulping down a pint of beer.
OK, guys cheers!

When I was an elementary school student, I learned it on science encyclopedia. Mr. Robert Brown, a botanist, born 1773, found the phenomena.
He observed through microscope a strange movement of pollen on the surface of water. He, then, verified that it is not driven by something of biological.

Several scientists or academics have attempted to build a theory and mathematical model of this strange phenomena, namely Thorvald N. Thiele, Louis Bachelier, Albert Einstein and Marian Smoluchowski.

For something looks like random, a theory and mathematical model, is it possible?
Yes! Possible!

One of our teachers (I call him so on my own selfishly) Mr. Einstein, applied “probability density function”. Probability! Once I had an impression of ambiguous with it but actually having grown through a life of an engineer, I can somewhat share a degree of rationality in applying probability.

To my surprise, by Mr. Einstein’s theory determined are the size of atoms, and how many atoms there are in a mole, or the molecular weight in grams, of a gas. Mr. Einstein once stated that God doesn’t play dice. But then what about Brownian Motion?

If such process as calculation of the size of atoms etc. works properly even with probability, then there is nothing like “dice” in the process. Hereunder being put is the reference to an equation on Brownian motion from the famous Wikipedia

That famous discussion on quantum theory was won by Copenhagen. Then the concept of probability in quantum physics has been “temporally” accepted though many academics are still thinking of it as an issue, saying that maybe another further sophisticated way rather than relying on probability can never be ruled out.

In the above reference equation, you see symbol Φ as probability density function, which was also the main focal point in that discussion on quantum theory. In Schrödinger equation, Φ symbolizes wave functions of the electron and it does not say exactly the location of an electron rather describes what can be observed. In this regard, introducing probability gives us a degree of rationality.

So, let’s return to the topic “Brownian Motion”. In the phenomena, atoms intermittently hit the pollen. So many patterns of hit and run. At that time, when I found it on scientific encyclopedia I thought that it might be possible of air flow rather than movement of atom.
Also I was wondering that how Mr. Robert Brown was getting aware of it as something worth enough to consider. Anybody may even not notice it!

Indeed, I have forgotten about “Brownian Motion” until I have recently surfed websites about Fractal for my blog. https://rinotaka84.com/2022/06/17/fractal-geometry-everywhere-nowhere-whenever-but-obscured/
Now, knowing it as rational problem-solving-process and his marvelous sense of exploration, I will add Mr. Brown as one of my teachers selfishly.

Yes, I have just found it wonderful the science is. In Japanese “Omoroy-yan”.

I know that there are some people who attempt to apply the theory of Brownian Motion to economy. Do they want to make a lot of money? In physics, it is utilized of course with other law of physics as basic conditions, such as conservation law. Do they put such condition on theory of economy? If an individual gains tremendous amount of money, then others cannot even get an amount sufficient for daily life. That is conservation law in economy, don’t you think? If Brownian Motion is applied to economy, then the system of economy should be equipped with conservation law. I am not communist rather supporting capitalism as driving force for human development, but at the same time, putting importance on equality and healthy wealth concentration and distribution.

Because of its nature, “random”, it would not allow any extreme wealth disparity, if it were a part of mechanism of economy, I just imagine.
Brownian Motion in this regard gives us an idea of how human should behave. Kind of , you know, “Freedom”, I suppose. Now getting drunk, my statement is getting like Brownian Motion, it seems.

Lactose, a substance that is contained in milk. It provides nourishment with human and it is easy to obtain through domesticating mammals like cows or horses. However, it is not always a perfect thing for human.

Some people is tolerant to it, some are not. So called lactose intolerant is a typical issue for human eating habits. This lactose intolerance shows certain characteristic with geographical or human race distribution. In some areas, lactose intolerance is rare, in others it is frequent.

This focus on nutrition winds around to what is the most nutritious food that would have been available to modern humans over the past five or ten thousand years. We finally come to the conclusion that milk is a well-balanced food that provides all three critical macromolecules—protein,

https://blog.education.nationalgeographic.org/2017/11/07/talking-evolution-are-we-still-evolving/comment-page-1/

Typical state of lactose intolerance is stomach pain, diarrhea etc. A person who is intolerant to lactose experiences problem with digestion when the person takes milk.
The mechanism; the person does not have enzyme lactase that plays a role of breaking down it into glucose and galactose.

Anyway, there are certain people who is tolerant to lactose indeed. Why they can be ?Yes, on a whole, human became tolerant to lactose out of necessity throughout its evolution. Human attained the capability from their eating habit. For instance, some nomadic tribes take milk from their livestock. So, they naturally were able to adapt to lactose because milk was one of rare source of vital nutrition due to its relatively stable availability. If the tribes people cannot adapt it, they will lose a chance of survival.

How human body got aware that it is necessary to be tolerant? This function is basically programmed in human DNA, it seems. However, this DNA function have not always existed rather sometime in a past DNA mutated into such form somehow. Maybe some kind of signal was being transmitted to DNA so that DNA could sense the necessity of mutate it self, academics are still seeking the answer though.

In the footsteps of my lactose-intolerant ancestors

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/in-the-footsteps-of-my-lactose-intolerant-ancestors

So, for modern humans, that mechanism of “let DNA learn” is still working?

What if present food becomes not available anymore? Can we be adapted to another food which are not considered as food presently?

This kind of function might be of lessons-learned System of Lifeforms. This could be one of the key element of “Survival of Fittest”.
Is it involved by brain? How human brain can work with DNA in such a stabilized and rigorous manner?

Now a days, environment is rapidly changing. So, in a future, human might face a situation in which daily normal food is no more available and then a new type of food is sought nevertheless though DNA mutation for human to adapt to it is necessary.
Then new chemical substance will be developed, a kind of vaccination that can mutate DNA in a way that it can attain new function; “tolerant to a new type of food”.
Assuming that, in such a terrible era of food crisis, only available source of food is human droppings! Oh my god! Then special vaccination is developed ————-.
Can you eat it? Or else you choose the destiny of extinction?

Ok, let’s flee from such an extreme. DNA is learning it, means everyone is learning it. Therefore, By only evaluating an individual on the academic score or amount of income or family roots etc. can surely be of loss of possibility of the very survival of human being because nobody knows whose DNA can have it. Oh therefore, me myself maybe a special VIP for all human being like the fox in “The Little Prince” by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry. Or else, if DNA eventually becomes driving force for human discriminations,
I will stand against it. I think lactose tells us that being individual is human freedom. It has given a person what has been necessary respectively for a long period of time.