Specially by- by Cristen Conger
Do fish feel pain?
the August 2004 issue of Gourmet magazine, David Foster Wallace asked readers to "Co­nsider the Lobster." What started out as a routine assignment to Maine's annual lobster festival spiraled into a quest to understand the lobster's point of view from entrapment to the dinner table. After all, lobsters look rather pathetic in grocery store tanks, clobbering each other with banded pincers. Their reward for enduring uncomfortable quarters is death by being boiled alive. And to top it off, the sound of steam whistling through the dying lobsters' shells mimics that of a final farewell scream.
Setting aside any anthropomorphic sentiment, what's the truth? Are people who cook lobsters merciless murderers who inflict cruel and unusual punishment on their crusty captives? (Spoiler alert: Wallace doesn't give us a concrete answer.) Pain is a complex experience to measure -- especially when the subject can't self-report. Mammals, such as your dog or cat, display more obvious pain signals by breathing heavily, guarding the wounded area of their bodies and vocalizing distress. Fish, on the other hand, thrash about on the end of the line, but that's about it.
About a year before Wallace's lobster piece hit the stands, physiologist Lynne Sneddon hooked some major public attention. Sneddon published a study proposing that fish -- specifically rainbow trout -- can detect and feel pain. Previous research on whether fish feel pain focused solely on cartilaginous species like sharks. For the first time, Sneddon's work documented potential pain sensations in teleostic (bony) fish.

Seiya Kawamoto/Getty Images
Can lobsters feel the pain of that boiling water

­More precisely, Sneddon discovered the presen­ce of 58 pain receptors called nociceptors along the trout's lips. She did so by testing the effects of bee venom and acetic acid injections into the mouth area. The affected fish exhibited "anomalous behavior," such as rubbing their noses into gravel and shaking their bodies [source: Sneddon]. Since morphine appeared to ease the discomfort, Sneddon concluded that the trout's reactions weren't simply reflexive but genuine displays of pain response.
The study's reception among the fishing industry and other scientists wasn't entirely smooth sailing. One critique dismissed the findings, arguing that fish lack the brain complexity to feel pain. Others chalked it up to a natural physiological response to a threatening situation. Animal rights advocates, on the other hand, saw it as proof positive of the inhumanity of recreational and industrial fishing.
In a way, all parties were correct.

Fish Pain

Guy Crittenden/Getty Images
That trout's nociceptors are probably firing like crazy.

We know that pain is uncomfortable, but what exactly is going on in our bodies that causes us to wince and tear up? According to the International Association for the Study of Pain, pain is a twofold experience. First, you have the neurobio­logical process of our nerves communicating with the brain. Second, there's the emotional response to pain that varies from person to person. (For more details, you can read about humans' pain response in How Pain Works.)
Despite its bad reputation, pain can be a handy survival tool. Think about the sensory reaction of putting your hand on a hot stove, registering the burn and retracting your arm. In this way, pain protects us. It tells your body that you're in danger of tissue damage and need to get to safety. Nociceptor nerve cells in our bodies deliver that initial pain-related communiqué along a route through the central nervous system to the brain. Research has shown that other mammals, birds and fish also have nociceptors. The presence of those nerve cells implies that fish have the sensory capability to recognize when something is harming their bodies. Hence, fish can experience the neurological pain process.
One of the primary arguments against fish having a sense of pain is that their brains lack the structural elements, namely the neocortex, necessary for it. Although fish's brains are certainly less complex than ours, they aren't mindlessly floating around in the water. Akin to the fight-or-flight response, fish have chemicals in their bodies that are released when they're in danger [source: Chandroo, Duncan and Moccia]. Fish also possess pain nerve fiber tracts in their bodies that are similar to those that tetrapods (vertebrates with four limbs) have [source: Chandroo, Duncan and Moccia]. Overall, the scientific consensus is that fish have the anatomical requirements to demonstrate neurophysiologic and behavioral reactions to pain as a means of survival [source: Braithwaite and Huntingford].
However, little evidence exists to suggest that the fish also react emotionally to pain like humans. As another way of safeguarding our bodies, our pain response comes with a negative emotional reaction that excites the amygdala in our brains and forms a memory of the unpleasant effect of a particular stimulus. For that reason, most children will touch a hot stove only once. Fish brains do contain an amygdaloid complex, but it produces aggression rather than fear [source: Chandroo, Duncan and Moccia]. Nevertheless, fish are able to form sensory memories. For instance, trout can remember how to avoid getting caught in fishing nets months after the initial experience [source: Donkin]. So while it remains unclear whether fish genuinely suffer from pain, memories of it stick in their brains.
If fish can sense pain but don't necessarily feel it emotionally like humans, where does that leave us? The fishing industry has already instituted catch-and-release policies to reduce the number of purposeless fish deaths. Some fishermen use barbless hooks and necks that cut down a fish's struggle time before being reeled in. As for the lobster, chefs may kill them by striking them swiftly through the eyes rather than dropping them into the boiling water alive [source: Wallace].
Ether way, it's morally debatable. For some people, no amount of concrete proof of a fish's agony could tear them away from hooking a fresh bass or trout. To others, people who fish are detestable because they inflict pain onto another living being. Whichever side of the line you stand on, there's one thing easily agreed on: Whether fish, fowl or mammal, neurological pain happens to us all. It's the capacity for suffering that remains up for dispute.

amygdala· fish pain· neocortex

Do fish feel pain?

Specially by- by Cristen Conger
Do fish feel pain?
the August 2004 issue of Gourmet magazine, David Foster Wallace asked readers to "Co­nsider the Lobster." What started out as a routine assignment to Maine's annual lobster festival spiraled into a quest to understand the lobster's point of view from entrapment to the dinner table. After all, lobsters look rather pathetic in grocery store tanks, clobbering each other with banded pincers. Their reward for enduring uncomfortable quarters is death by being boiled alive. And to top it off, the sound of steam whistling through the dying lobsters' shells mimics that of a final farewell scream.
Setting aside any anthropomorphic sentiment, what's the truth? Are people who cook lobsters merciless murderers who inflict cruel and unusual punishment on their crusty captives? (Spoiler alert: Wallace doesn't give us a concrete answer.) Pain is a complex experience to measure -- especially when the subject can't self-report. Mammals, such as your dog or cat, display more obvious pain signals by breathing heavily, guarding the wounded area of their bodies and vocalizing distress. Fish, on the other hand, thrash about on the end of the line, but that's about it.
About a year before Wallace's lobster piece hit the stands, physiologist Lynne Sneddon hooked some major public attention. Sneddon published a study proposing that fish -- specifically rainbow trout -- can detect and feel pain. Previous research on whether fish feel pain focused solely on cartilaginous species like sharks. For the first time, Sneddon's work documented potential pain sensations in teleostic (bony) fish.

Seiya Kawamoto/Getty Images
Can lobsters feel the pain of that boiling water

­More precisely, Sneddon discovered the presen­ce of 58 pain receptors called nociceptors along the trout's lips. She did so by testing the effects of bee venom and acetic acid injections into the mouth area. The affected fish exhibited "anomalous behavior," such as rubbing their noses into gravel and shaking their bodies [source: Sneddon]. Since morphine appeared to ease the discomfort, Sneddon concluded that the trout's reactions weren't simply reflexive but genuine displays of pain response.
The study's reception among the fishing industry and other scientists wasn't entirely smooth sailing. One critique dismissed the findings, arguing that fish lack the brain complexity to feel pain. Others chalked it up to a natural physiological response to a threatening situation. Animal rights advocates, on the other hand, saw it as proof positive of the inhumanity of recreational and industrial fishing.
In a way, all parties were correct.

Fish Pain

Guy Crittenden/Getty Images
That trout's nociceptors are probably firing like crazy.

We know that pain is uncomfortable, but what exactly is going on in our bodies that causes us to wince and tear up? According to the International Association for the Study of Pain, pain is a twofold experience. First, you have the neurobio­logical process of our nerves communicating with the brain. Second, there's the emotional response to pain that varies from person to person. (For more details, you can read about humans' pain response in How Pain Works.)
Despite its bad reputation, pain can be a handy survival tool. Think about the sensory reaction of putting your hand on a hot stove, registering the burn and retracting your arm. In this way, pain protects us. It tells your body that you're in danger of tissue damage and need to get to safety. Nociceptor nerve cells in our bodies deliver that initial pain-related communiqué along a route through the central nervous system to the brain. Research has shown that other mammals, birds and fish also have nociceptors. The presence of those nerve cells implies that fish have the sensory capability to recognize when something is harming their bodies. Hence, fish can experience the neurological pain process.
One of the primary arguments against fish having a sense of pain is that their brains lack the structural elements, namely the neocortex, necessary for it. Although fish's brains are certainly less complex than ours, they aren't mindlessly floating around in the water. Akin to the fight-or-flight response, fish have chemicals in their bodies that are released when they're in danger [source: Chandroo, Duncan and Moccia]. Fish also possess pain nerve fiber tracts in their bodies that are similar to those that tetrapods (vertebrates with four limbs) have [source: Chandroo, Duncan and Moccia]. Overall, the scientific consensus is that fish have the anatomical requirements to demonstrate neurophysiologic and behavioral reactions to pain as a means of survival [source: Braithwaite and Huntingford].
However, little evidence exists to suggest that the fish also react emotionally to pain like humans. As another way of safeguarding our bodies, our pain response comes with a negative emotional reaction that excites the amygdala in our brains and forms a memory of the unpleasant effect of a particular stimulus. For that reason, most children will touch a hot stove only once. Fish brains do contain an amygdaloid complex, but it produces aggression rather than fear [source: Chandroo, Duncan and Moccia]. Nevertheless, fish are able to form sensory memories. For instance, trout can remember how to avoid getting caught in fishing nets months after the initial experience [source: Donkin]. So while it remains unclear whether fish genuinely suffer from pain, memories of it stick in their brains.
If fish can sense pain but don't necessarily feel it emotionally like humans, where does that leave us? The fishing industry has already instituted catch-and-release policies to reduce the number of purposeless fish deaths. Some fishermen use barbless hooks and necks that cut down a fish's struggle time before being reeled in. As for the lobster, chefs may kill them by striking them swiftly through the eyes rather than dropping them into the boiling water alive [source: Wallace].
Ether way, it's morally debatable. For some people, no amount of concrete proof of a fish's agony could tear them away from hooking a fresh bass or trout. To others, people who fish are detestable because they inflict pain onto another living being. Whichever side of the line you stand on, there's one thing easily agreed on: Whether fish, fowl or mammal, neurological pain happens to us all. It's the capacity for suffering that remains up for dispute.

INTRODUCTION

When the last time you gazed upward and marveled at the mysterious, life-giving force that is the sun?
If you believe the whole staring-at-the-sun-makes-you-go-blind thing (which is actually true), you’re probably not doing a whole lot of sun-gazing. But it’s a real marvel: The sun warms our planet every day, provides the light by which we see and is necessary for life on Earth. It can also cause cell death and make us blind. It could fit 1.3 million Earths inside its sphere [source: SpaceDaily]. It produces poem-worthy sunsets and as much energy as 1 trillion megaton bombs every second [source: Boston Globe].
All of this, and our sun is just a plain old average star, by universal standards. It’s really just proximity that makes it so special to Earth. We wouldn’t be here if the sun weren’t so close.
So, how close is the sun? And how much space does it take to hold 1.3 million Earths? And while we’re at it:

• If the sun is in the vacuum of space, how does it burn?
• What keeps all that gas from leaking into space?
• Why does the sun send out solar flares?
• Will the sun ever stop burning? (And if so, when? And what will happen to Earth and its inhabitants?)

Sunspot Image Gallery


Photo courtesy of NASA
The sun warms our planet, provides us with light and is crucial to all life on Earth. See more sunspot pictures.

In this article, we'll examine the fascinating world of our nearest star. We will look at the parts of the sun, find out how it makes light and heat, and explore its major features.
The sun has "burned" for more than 4.5 billion years. It's a massive collection of gas, mostly hydrogen and helium. Because it is so massive, it has immense gravity, enough gravitational force to hold all of that hydrogen and helium together (and to hold all of the planets in their orbits around the sun).
We say the sun burns, but it doesn’t burn like wood burns. Instead, the sun is a gigantic nuclear reactor.

 

 

The Parts of the Sun

­­

Photo courtesy SOHO consortium.
Figure 1. Basic overview of the parts of the sun. The flare, sunspots and the prominence are all clipped from actual SOHO images.

The sun is a star, just like the other stars we see at night. The difference is distance -- the other stars we see are light-years away, while our sun is only about 8 light minutes away -- many thousands of times closer.
­Officially, the sun is classified as a G2 type star, based on its temperature and the wavelengths or spectrum of light that it emits. There are lots of G2s out there, and Earth's sun is merely one of billions of st­ars that orbit the center of our galaxy, made up of the same substance and components.
T­he sun is composed of gas. It has no solid surface. However, it still has a defined structure. The three major structural areas of the sun are shown in the upper half of Figure 1. They include:

• Core -- The center of the sun, comprising 25 percent of its radius.
• Radiative zone --The section immediately surrounding the core, comprising 45 percent of its radius.
• Convective zone -- The outermost ring of the sun, comprising the 30 percent of its radius.

Above the surface of the sun is its atmosphere, which consists of three parts, shown in the lower half of Figure 1:

• Photosphere -- The innermost part of the sun's atmosphere and the only part we can see.
• Chromosphere -- The area between the photosphere and the corona; hotter than the photosphere.
• Corona -- The extremely hot outermost layer, extending outward several million miles from the chromosphere.

­All of the major features of the sun can be explained by the nuclear reactions that produce its energy, by the magnetic fields resulting from the movements of the gas and by its immense gravity.
It begins at the core.

 

 

The Sun's Interior: Core

The core starts from the center and extends outward to encompass 25 percent of the sun's radius. Its temperature is greater than 15 million degrees Kelvin [source: Montana]. At the core, gravity pulls all of the mass inward and creates an intense pressure. The pressure is high enough to force atoms of hydrogen to come together in nuclear fusion reactions -- something we try to emulate here on Earth. Two atoms of hydrogen are combined to create helium-4 and energy in several steps:

NASA/WireImage/Getty Images
A powerful solar flare erupted from Sunspot 486 on Oct. 28, 2003. The flare sent X-rays traveling at the speed of light toward Earth, causing a radio storm in the ionosphere.

1. Two protons combine to form a deuterium atom (hydrogen atom with one neutron and one proton), a positron (similar to electron, but with a positive charge) and a neutrino.
2. A proton and a deuterium atom combine to form a helium-3 atom (two protons with one neutron) and a gamma ray.
3. Two helium-3 atoms combine to form a helium-4 atom (two protons and two neutrons) and two protons.

These reactions account for 85 percent of the sun's energy. The remaining 15 percent comes from the following reactions:

1. A helium-3 atom and a helium-4 atom combine to form a beryllium-7 (four protons and three neutrons) and a gamma ray.
2. A beryllium-7 atom captures an electron to become lithium-7 atom (three protons and four neutrons) and a neutrino.
3. The lithium-7 combines with a proton to form two helium-4 atoms.

­The helium-4 atoms are less massive than the two hydrogen atoms that started the process, so the difference in mass is converted to energy as described by Einstein's theory of relativity (E=mc²). The energy is emitted in various forms of light: ultraviolet light, X-rays, visible light, infrared, microwaves and radio waves.
The sun also emits energized particles (neutrinos, protons) that make up the solar wind. This energy strikes Earth, where it warms the planet, drives our weather and provides energy for life. We aren't harmed by most of the radiation or solar wind because the Earth's atmosphere protects us.

The Sun's Interior: Radiative and Convective Zones

Sun Facts Average distance from Earth: 93 million miles (150 million kilometers) Radius: 418,000 miles (696,000 kilometers) Mass: 1.99 x 1030 kilograms (330,000 Earth masses) Makeup (by mass): 74 percent hydrogen, 25 percent helium, 1 percent other elements Average temperature: 5,800 degrees Kelvin (surface), 15.5 million degrees Kelvin (core) Average density: 1.41 grams per cm3 Volume: 1.4 x 1027 cubic meters Rotational period: 25 days (center) to 35 days (poles) Distance from center of Milky Way: 25,000 light years Orbital speed/period: 138 miles per second/200 million years

After covering the core, it's time to extend outward in the sun's structure. Next up are the radiative and convective zones.
The radiative zone extends outward from the core, accounting for 45 percent of the sun's radius. In this zone, the energy from the core is carried outward by photons, or light units. As one photon is made, it travels about 1 micron (1 millionth of a meter) before being absorbed by a gas molecule. Upon absorption, the gas molecule is heated and re-emits another photon of the same wavelength. The re-emitted photon travels another micron before being absorbed by another gas molecule and the cycle repeats itself; each interaction between photon and gas molecule takes time. Approximately 10²⁵ absorptions and re-emissions take place in this zone before a photon reaches the surface, so there is a significant time delay between a photon made in the core and one that reaches the surface.
The convective zone, which is the final 30 percent of the sun's radius, is dominated by convection currents that carry the energy outward to the surface. These convection currents are rising movements of hot gas next to falling movements of cool gas, and it looks kind of like glitter in a simmering pot of water. The convection currents carry photons outward to the surface faster than the radiative transfer that occurs in the core and radiative zone. With so many interactions occurring between photons and gas molecules in the radiative and convection zones, it takes a photon approximately 100,000 to 200,000 years to reach the surface.

The Sun's Atmosphere

We've finally made our way to the surface. Let's trace through the atmosphere next. Just like Earth, the sun boasts an atmosphere. However, the sun's is composed of the photosphere, the chromosphere and the corona.
The photosphere is the lowest region of the sun's atmosphere and is the region that we can see. "The surface of the sun" typically refers to the photosphere, at least in lay terms. It is 180-240 miles (300-400 kilometers wide) and has an average temperature of 5,800 degrees Kelvin. It appears granulated or bubbly, much like the surface of a simmering pot of water. The bumps are the upper surfaces of the convection current cells beneath; each granulation can be 600 miles (1,000 kilometers) wide. As we pass up through the photosphere, the temperature drops and the gases, because they are cooler, do not emit as much light energy. This makes them less opaque to the human eye. Therefore, the outer edge of the photosphere looks dark, an effect called limb darkening that accounts for the clear crisp edge of the sun's surface.
The chromosphere extends above the photosphere to about 1,200 miles (2,000 kilometers). The temperature rises across the chromosphere from 4,500 degrees Kelvin to about 10,000 degrees Kelvin. The chromosphere is thought to be heated by convection within the underlying photosphere. As gases churn in the photosphere, they produce shock waves that heat the surrounding gas and send it piercing through the chromosphere in millions of tiny spikes of hot gas called spicules. Each spicule rises to approximately 3,000 miles (5,000 kilometers) above the photosphere and lasts only a few minutes. Spicules may also follow along magnetic field lines of the sun, which are made by the movements of gases inside the sun.
The corona is the final layer of the sun and extends several million miles or kilometers outward from the other spheres. It can be seen best during a solar eclipse and in X-ray images of the sun. The temperature of the corona averages 2 million degrees Kelvin. Although no one is sure why the corona is so hot, it is thought to be caused by the sun's magnetism. The corona has bright areas (hot) and dark areas called coronal holes. Coronal holes are relatively cool and are thought to be areas where particles of the solar wind escape.
T­hrough telescope images we can see several interesting features on the sun that can have effects here on Earth. Let's take a look at three of them: sunspots, solar prominences and solar flares.

The Sun's Features: Sunspots, Solar Prominences and Solar Flares

Photo courtesy of NASA
After many weeks of a blank sun with no sunspots, a small new sunspot emerged on Sept. 23, 2008, marking a new solar cycle.

Of course, the spheres are graced with interesting features and activity. We'll take a look at them here.
Dark, cool areas called sunspots appear on the photosphere. Sunspots always appear in pairs and are intense magnetic fields (about 5,000 times greater than the Earth's magnetic field) that break through the surface. Field lines leave through one sunspot and re-enter through the other one. The magnetic field is caused by movements of gases in the sun's interior.
Sunspot activity occurs as part of an 11-year cycle called the solar cycle where there are periods of maximum and minimum activity.
It is not known what causes this 11-year cycle, but two hypotheses have been proposed:

• Uneven rotation of the sun distorts and twists magnetic field lines in the interior. The twisted field lines break through the surface forming sunspot pairs. Eventually, the field lines break apart and sunspot activity decreases. The cycle starts again.
• Huge tubes of gas circle the sun's interior at high latitudes and begin to move toward the equator. When they roll against each other, they form spots. When they reach the equator, they break up and sunspots decline.

­Occasionally, clouds of gases from the chromosphere will rise and orient themselves along the magnetic lines from sunspot pairs. These arches of gas are called solar prominences.
Prominences can last two to three months and can extend 30,000 miles (50,000 kilometers) or more above the sun's surface. Up­on reaching this height, they can erupt for a few minutes to hours and send large amounts of material racing through the corona and outward into space at 600 miles per second (1,000 kilometers per second); these eruptions are called coronal mass ejections.
Sometimes in complex sunspot groups, abrupt, violent explosions from the sun occur. These are called solar flares.
Solar flares are thought to be caused by sudden magnetic field changes in areas where the sun's magnetic field is concentrated. They're accompanied by the release of gas, electrons, visible light, ultraviolet light and X-rays. When this radiation and these particles reach the Earth's magnetic field, they interact with it at the poles to produce the auroras (borealis and australis). Solar flares can also disrupt communications, satellites, navigation systems and even power grids. The radiation and particles ionize the atmosphere and prevent the movement of radio waves between satellites and the ground or between the ground and the ground. The ionized particles in the atmosphere can induce electric currents in power lines and cause power surges. These power surges can overload a power grid and cause blackouts. You can learn more about solar flares by reading Could an extremely powerful solar flare destroy all the electronics on Earth? All of this activity requires energy, which is in limited supply. Eventually, the sun will run out of fuel.

The Fate of the Sun

­T­he sun has been shining for about 4.5 billion years [source: Berkeley]. The size of the sun is a balance between the outward pressure made by the release of energy from nuclear fusion and the inward pull of gravity. Over its 4.5 billion years of life, the sun's radius has gotten about 6 percent bigger [source: Berkeley]. It has enough hydrogen fuel to "burn" for about 10 billion years, meaning it has a bit over 5 billion years left, and during this time it will continue to expand at the same rate [source: Berkeley].

Photo courtesy of NASA Sun-Earth Day 2010
When our sun becomes a red giant, its radius will be about 100 times what it is now. Planetary nebulae are the remains of sunlike stars that have reached the end of their red giant stage.

When the core runs out of hydrogen fuel, it will contract under the weight of gravity; however, some hydrogen fusion will occur in the upper layers. As the core contracts, it heats up and this heats the upper layers causing them to expand. As the outer layers expand, the radius of the sun will increase and it will become a red giant, an elderly star.

The radius of the red giant sun will be 100 times what it is now, lying just beyond the Earth's orbit, so the Earth will plunge into the core of the red giant sun and be vaporized [source: NASA]. At some point after this, the core will become hot enough to cause the helium to fuse into carbon.
When the helium fuel has exhausted, the core will expand and cool. The upper layers will expand and eject material.
Finally, the core will cool into a white dwarf.
Eventually, it will further cool into a nearly invisible black dwarf. This entire process will take a few billion years.
So for the next several billion years, humanity is safe -- in terms of the sun's existence, at least. Other debacles are anybody's guess.

chromosphere· coronal holesening· limb dark· sun· The Sun;s Atmosphere· The Sun;s Interior: Radiative and Convective Zones

How the Sun Works?

INTRODUCTION

When the last time you gazed upward and marveled at the mysterious, life-giving force that is the sun?
If you believe the whole staring-at-the-sun-makes-you-go-blind thing (which is actually true), you’re probably not doing a whole lot of sun-gazing. But it’s a real marvel: The sun warms our planet every day, provides the light by which we see and is necessary for life on Earth. It can also cause cell death and make us blind. It could fit 1.3 million Earths inside its sphere [source: SpaceDaily]. It produces poem-worthy sunsets and as much energy as 1 trillion megaton bombs every second [source: Boston Globe].
All of this, and our sun is just a plain old average star, by universal standards. It’s really just proximity that makes it so special to Earth. We wouldn’t be here if the sun weren’t so close.
So, how close is the sun? And how much space does it take to hold 1.3 million Earths? And while we’re at it:

• If the sun is in the vacuum of space, how does it burn?
• What keeps all that gas from leaking into space?
• Why does the sun send out solar flares?
• Will the sun ever stop burning? (And if so, when? And what will happen to Earth and its inhabitants?)

Sunspot Image Gallery


Photo courtesy of NASA
The sun warms our planet, provides us with light and is crucial to all life on Earth. See more sunspot pictures.

In this article, we'll examine the fascinating world of our nearest star. We will look at the parts of the sun, find out how it makes light and heat, and explore its major features.
The sun has "burned" for more than 4.5 billion years. It's a massive collection of gas, mostly hydrogen and helium. Because it is so massive, it has immense gravity, enough gravitational force to hold all of that hydrogen and helium together (and to hold all of the planets in their orbits around the sun).
We say the sun burns, but it doesn’t burn like wood burns. Instead, the sun is a gigantic nuclear reactor.

 

 

The Parts of the Sun

­­

Photo courtesy SOHO consortium.
Figure 1. Basic overview of the parts of the sun. The flare, sunspots and the prominence are all clipped from actual SOHO images.

The sun is a star, just like the other stars we see at night. The difference is distance -- the other stars we see are light-years away, while our sun is only about 8 light minutes away -- many thousands of times closer.
­Officially, the sun is classified as a G2 type star, based on its temperature and the wavelengths or spectrum of light that it emits. There are lots of G2s out there, and Earth's sun is merely one of billions of st­ars that orbit the center of our galaxy, made up of the same substance and components.
T­he sun is composed of gas. It has no solid surface. However, it still has a defined structure. The three major structural areas of the sun are shown in the upper half of Figure 1. They include:

• Core -- The center of the sun, comprising 25 percent of its radius.
• Radiative zone --The section immediately surrounding the core, comprising 45 percent of its radius.
• Convective zone -- The outermost ring of the sun, comprising the 30 percent of its radius.

Above the surface of the sun is its atmosphere, which consists of three parts, shown in the lower half of Figure 1:

• Photosphere -- The innermost part of the sun's atmosphere and the only part we can see.
• Chromosphere -- The area between the photosphere and the corona; hotter than the photosphere.
• Corona -- The extremely hot outermost layer, extending outward several million miles from the chromosphere.

­All of the major features of the sun can be explained by the nuclear reactions that produce its energy, by the magnetic fields resulting from the movements of the gas and by its immense gravity.
It begins at the core.

 

 

The Sun's Interior: Core

The core starts from the center and extends outward to encompass 25 percent of the sun's radius. Its temperature is greater than 15 million degrees Kelvin [source: Montana]. At the core, gravity pulls all of the mass inward and creates an intense pressure. The pressure is high enough to force atoms of hydrogen to come together in nuclear fusion reactions -- something we try to emulate here on Earth. Two atoms of hydrogen are combined to create helium-4 and energy in several steps:

NASA/WireImage/Getty Images
A powerful solar flare erupted from Sunspot 486 on Oct. 28, 2003. The flare sent X-rays traveling at the speed of light toward Earth, causing a radio storm in the ionosphere.

1. Two protons combine to form a deuterium atom (hydrogen atom with one neutron and one proton), a positron (similar to electron, but with a positive charge) and a neutrino.
2. A proton and a deuterium atom combine to form a helium-3 atom (two protons with one neutron) and a gamma ray.
3. Two helium-3 atoms combine to form a helium-4 atom (two protons and two neutrons) and two protons.

These reactions account for 85 percent of the sun's energy. The remaining 15 percent comes from the following reactions:

1. A helium-3 atom and a helium-4 atom combine to form a beryllium-7 (four protons and three neutrons) and a gamma ray.
2. A beryllium-7 atom captures an electron to become lithium-7 atom (three protons and four neutrons) and a neutrino.
3. The lithium-7 combines with a proton to form two helium-4 atoms.

­The helium-4 atoms are less massive than the two hydrogen atoms that started the process, so the difference in mass is converted to energy as described by Einstein's theory of relativity (E=mc²). The energy is emitted in various forms of light: ultraviolet light, X-rays, visible light, infrared, microwaves and radio waves.
The sun also emits energized particles (neutrinos, protons) that make up the solar wind. This energy strikes Earth, where it warms the planet, drives our weather and provides energy for life. We aren't harmed by most of the radiation or solar wind because the Earth's atmosphere protects us.

The Sun's Interior: Radiative and Convective Zones

Sun Facts Average distance from Earth: 93 million miles (150 million kilometers) Radius: 418,000 miles (696,000 kilometers) Mass: 1.99 x 1030 kilograms (330,000 Earth masses) Makeup (by mass): 74 percent hydrogen, 25 percent helium, 1 percent other elements Average temperature: 5,800 degrees Kelvin (surface), 15.5 million degrees Kelvin (core) Average density: 1.41 grams per cm3 Volume: 1.4 x 1027 cubic meters Rotational period: 25 days (center) to 35 days (poles) Distance from center of Milky Way: 25,000 light years Orbital speed/period: 138 miles per second/200 million years

After covering the core, it's time to extend outward in the sun's structure. Next up are the radiative and convective zones.
The radiative zone extends outward from the core, accounting for 45 percent of the sun's radius. In this zone, the energy from the core is carried outward by photons, or light units. As one photon is made, it travels about 1 micron (1 millionth of a meter) before being absorbed by a gas molecule. Upon absorption, the gas molecule is heated and re-emits another photon of the same wavelength. The re-emitted photon travels another micron before being absorbed by another gas molecule and the cycle repeats itself; each interaction between photon and gas molecule takes time. Approximately 10²⁵ absorptions and re-emissions take place in this zone before a photon reaches the surface, so there is a significant time delay between a photon made in the core and one that reaches the surface.
The convective zone, which is the final 30 percent of the sun's radius, is dominated by convection currents that carry the energy outward to the surface. These convection currents are rising movements of hot gas next to falling movements of cool gas, and it looks kind of like glitter in a simmering pot of water. The convection currents carry photons outward to the surface faster than the radiative transfer that occurs in the core and radiative zone. With so many interactions occurring between photons and gas molecules in the radiative and convection zones, it takes a photon approximately 100,000 to 200,000 years to reach the surface.

The Sun's Atmosphere

We've finally made our way to the surface. Let's trace through the atmosphere next. Just like Earth, the sun boasts an atmosphere. However, the sun's is composed of the photosphere, the chromosphere and the corona.
The photosphere is the lowest region of the sun's atmosphere and is the region that we can see. "The surface of the sun" typically refers to the photosphere, at least in lay terms. It is 180-240 miles (300-400 kilometers wide) and has an average temperature of 5,800 degrees Kelvin. It appears granulated or bubbly, much like the surface of a simmering pot of water. The bumps are the upper surfaces of the convection current cells beneath; each granulation can be 600 miles (1,000 kilometers) wide. As we pass up through the photosphere, the temperature drops and the gases, because they are cooler, do not emit as much light energy. This makes them less opaque to the human eye. Therefore, the outer edge of the photosphere looks dark, an effect called limb darkening that accounts for the clear crisp edge of the sun's surface.
The chromosphere extends above the photosphere to about 1,200 miles (2,000 kilometers). The temperature rises across the chromosphere from 4,500 degrees Kelvin to about 10,000 degrees Kelvin. The chromosphere is thought to be heated by convection within the underlying photosphere. As gases churn in the photosphere, they produce shock waves that heat the surrounding gas and send it piercing through the chromosphere in millions of tiny spikes of hot gas called spicules. Each spicule rises to approximately 3,000 miles (5,000 kilometers) above the photosphere and lasts only a few minutes. Spicules may also follow along magnetic field lines of the sun, which are made by the movements of gases inside the sun.
The corona is the final layer of the sun and extends several million miles or kilometers outward from the other spheres. It can be seen best during a solar eclipse and in X-ray images of the sun. The temperature of the corona averages 2 million degrees Kelvin. Although no one is sure why the corona is so hot, it is thought to be caused by the sun's magnetism. The corona has bright areas (hot) and dark areas called coronal holes. Coronal holes are relatively cool and are thought to be areas where particles of the solar wind escape.
T­hrough telescope images we can see several interesting features on the sun that can have effects here on Earth. Let's take a look at three of them: sunspots, solar prominences and solar flares.

The Sun's Features: Sunspots, Solar Prominences and Solar Flares

Photo courtesy of NASA
After many weeks of a blank sun with no sunspots, a small new sunspot emerged on Sept. 23, 2008, marking a new solar cycle.

Of course, the spheres are graced with interesting features and activity. We'll take a look at them here.
Dark, cool areas called sunspots appear on the photosphere. Sunspots always appear in pairs and are intense magnetic fields (about 5,000 times greater than the Earth's magnetic field) that break through the surface. Field lines leave through one sunspot and re-enter through the other one. The magnetic field is caused by movements of gases in the sun's interior.
Sunspot activity occurs as part of an 11-year cycle called the solar cycle where there are periods of maximum and minimum activity.
It is not known what causes this 11-year cycle, but two hypotheses have been proposed:

• Uneven rotation of the sun distorts and twists magnetic field lines in the interior. The twisted field lines break through the surface forming sunspot pairs. Eventually, the field lines break apart and sunspot activity decreases. The cycle starts again.
• Huge tubes of gas circle the sun's interior at high latitudes and begin to move toward the equator. When they roll against each other, they form spots. When they reach the equator, they break up and sunspots decline.

­Occasionally, clouds of gases from the chromosphere will rise and orient themselves along the magnetic lines from sunspot pairs. These arches of gas are called solar prominences.
Prominences can last two to three months and can extend 30,000 miles (50,000 kilometers) or more above the sun's surface. Up­on reaching this height, they can erupt for a few minutes to hours and send large amounts of material racing through the corona and outward into space at 600 miles per second (1,000 kilometers per second); these eruptions are called coronal mass ejections.
Sometimes in complex sunspot groups, abrupt, violent explosions from the sun occur. These are called solar flares.
Solar flares are thought to be caused by sudden magnetic field changes in areas where the sun's magnetic field is concentrated. They're accompanied by the release of gas, electrons, visible light, ultraviolet light and X-rays. When this radiation and these particles reach the Earth's magnetic field, they interact with it at the poles to produce the auroras (borealis and australis). Solar flares can also disrupt communications, satellites, navigation systems and even power grids. The radiation and particles ionize the atmosphere and prevent the movement of radio waves between satellites and the ground or between the ground and the ground. The ionized particles in the atmosphere can induce electric currents in power lines and cause power surges. These power surges can overload a power grid and cause blackouts. You can learn more about solar flares by reading Could an extremely powerful solar flare destroy all the electronics on Earth? All of this activity requires energy, which is in limited supply. Eventually, the sun will run out of fuel.

The Fate of the Sun

­T­he sun has been shining for about 4.5 billion years [source: Berkeley]. The size of the sun is a balance between the outward pressure made by the release of energy from nuclear fusion and the inward pull of gravity. Over its 4.5 billion years of life, the sun's radius has gotten about 6 percent bigger [source: Berkeley]. It has enough hydrogen fuel to "burn" for about 10 billion years, meaning it has a bit over 5 billion years left, and during this time it will continue to expand at the same rate [source: Berkeley].

Photo courtesy of NASA Sun-Earth Day 2010
When our sun becomes a red giant, its radius will be about 100 times what it is now. Planetary nebulae are the remains of sunlike stars that have reached the end of their red giant stage.

When the core runs out of hydrogen fuel, it will contract under the weight of gravity; however, some hydrogen fusion will occur in the upper layers. As the core contracts, it heats up and this heats the upper layers causing them to expand. As the outer layers expand, the radius of the sun will increase and it will become a red giant, an elderly star.

The radius of the red giant sun will be 100 times what it is now, lying just beyond the Earth's orbit, so the Earth will plunge into the core of the red giant sun and be vaporized [source: NASA]. At some point after this, the core will become hot enough to cause the helium to fuse into carbon.
When the helium fuel has exhausted, the core will expand and cool. The upper layers will expand and eject material.
Finally, the core will cool into a white dwarf.
Eventually, it will further cool into a nearly invisible black dwarf. This entire process will take a few billion years.
So for the next several billion years, humanity is safe -- in terms of the sun's existence, at least. Other debacles are anybody's guess.

Do you ever get the feeling that time is just dragging on? You might be working in the office, sitting at your desk at school during a long lecture or waiting for the doctor to see you, but when you look up at the clock, you could swear the 15 minutes it took for the long hand to move a quarter of an hour were really twice as long. No matter how much you squirm and fidget, time is taking its sweet time in getting to the future.

Evening Standard/Getty Images
A student at Enfield School in London wonders why time doesn't just pick up the pace. Is time a concrete, immutable concept, or does it actually change?

On the other hand, sometimes it can feel like time moves too quickly. Deep, engaging conversations with friends and loved ones can last for several hours but make you feel like time swept by in minutes. You can wake up right when the alarm goes off in the morning but somehow still end up running late for work. You're left throwing your hands up, wondering what happened to all of that lost time.
Time is a strangely contradictory concept. Many of us think of it as a concrete way of describing how long an event takes to unfold. And why wouldn't we, when we have fancy gadgets like watches? Modern technology has given us clocks, which help us measure time precisely. Atomic clocks, which measure the resonance frequencies of atoms, are even better at telling time. When someone standing still then walks 10 paces forward, we can easily measure with a stopwatch the number of seconds it took from the beginning of that short journey to its end.

But time doesn't always feel precise to us. When you bring two different people into the equation, especially if they don't have any watches, getting them to agree on their experience of time becomes increasingly difficult. So is time as simple as we think it is, or is it more fluid and relative? How is time connected to space?

Absolute Time and Relative Time

Daniel Berehulak/Getty Images
A copy of Newton's "Philosphiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica" at the Science Museum Library and Archives in Swindon, England.

When physicist and philosopher Isaac Newton completed his "Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica" in the late 17th century, he led a scientific revolution that changed the way people viewed the world. In the work, he laid out several concepts that would become the basis for classical physics. Among the important theories Newton introduced were the laws of motion that govern the way objects move through space, including the law of universal gravitation, and the foundation for calculus. In other words, most people consider Newton a genius, and scientists still apply his ideas to everyday circumstances.

Newton included in the "Principia Mathematica" a scholium, or an appendix of explanatory notes, and in it he defined several important principles, including the idea of absolute time. Although he understood that clocks weren't perfect and measuring time was subject to human error, Newton believed in an absolute time that was similar to a universal, omnipotent God-like time, one that was the same for everyone, everywhere. In other words, someone standing at the North Pole on Earth would experience time the same way as someone standing on Mars.
Newton's view on time kept it separate from space. When Albert Einstein introduced his Theory of Relativity in the early 20th century, however, he suggested that time wasn't separate from space but connected to it. Time and space combined to form space-time, and everyone measures his or her own experience in it differently because the speed of light (300,000 km per second) is the same for all observers. In other words, if all observers have to agree on the speed of light being 300,000 km per second, then they can't agree on the time it takes for other objects to travel relative to them.

Einstein also suggested that space-time wasn't flat, but curved or "warped" by the existence of matter and energy. Large bodies in space-time, like the Earth, aren't just floating in orbit. Instead, imagine an apple resting on a stretched out blanket -- the weight of the apple warps the sheet. If the Earth is an apple, then we can imagine the Earth's blanket as space-time.

This means that someone moving through space-time will experience it differently at various points. Time will actually appear to move slower near massive objects, because space-time is warped by the weight. These predictions have actually been proven. In 1962, scientists placed two atomic clocks at the bottom and top of a water tower. The clock at the bottom, the one closer to the massive center of the Earth, was running slower than the clock at the top. Einstein called this phenomenon time dilation.

A further explanation of the bending of space-time and time dilation came in the form of a thought experiment called the twin paradox, devised in 1911 by French physicist Paul Langevin. If one twin lives at the foot of a mountain and the other lives at the top, the twin closer to the Earth will age more slowly. He or she would turn out younger than the other twin, though by a very small amount. If you sent one twin in a spaceship accelerating close to the speed of light, however, he or she would return much younger than the other twin, because high acceleration and large gravitational masses are the same in relativity. Of course, no one's gone so far as to send somebody's twin into high-speed orbit, but scientists proved the hypothesis true in the '70s by sending an atomic clock into orbit. It returned to Earth having run much slower than grounded atomic clocks [source: Europhysics News].

Fox Photos/Getty Images
So you're telling me if you send me up there at high speeds, I'll appear younger than Jimmy when I come back down? Where do I sign up?!

So next time you're late for work or want the weekends to last longer, make sure you stay close to the ground and accelerate as much as possible. Boring lectures and waiting areas in doctor's offices, on the other hand, should be spent in the topmost room  of high towers. For lots more information on physics and the nature of time, see the next page in a timely fashion.

in future· time travelling

Does time change speed?

Do you ever get the feeling that time is just dragging on? You might be working in the office, sitting at your desk at school during a long lecture or waiting for the doctor to see you, but when you look up at the clock, you could swear the 15 minutes it took for the long hand to move a quarter of an hour were really twice as long. No matter how much you squirm and fidget, time is taking its sweet time in getting to the future.

Evening Standard/Getty Images
A student at Enfield School in London wonders why time doesn't just pick up the pace. Is time a concrete, immutable concept, or does it actually change?

On the other hand, sometimes it can feel like time moves too quickly. Deep, engaging conversations with friends and loved ones can last for several hours but make you feel like time swept by in minutes. You can wake up right when the alarm goes off in the morning but somehow still end up running late for work. You're left throwing your hands up, wondering what happened to all of that lost time.
Time is a strangely contradictory concept. Many of us think of it as a concrete way of describing how long an event takes to unfold. And why wouldn't we, when we have fancy gadgets like watches? Modern technology has given us clocks, which help us measure time precisely. Atomic clocks, which measure the resonance frequencies of atoms, are even better at telling time. When someone standing still then walks 10 paces forward, we can easily measure with a stopwatch the number of seconds it took from the beginning of that short journey to its end.

But time doesn't always feel precise to us. When you bring two different people into the equation, especially if they don't have any watches, getting them to agree on their experience of time becomes increasingly difficult. So is time as simple as we think it is, or is it more fluid and relative? How is time connected to space?

Absolute Time and Relative Time

Daniel Berehulak/Getty Images
A copy of Newton's "Philosphiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica" at the Science Museum Library and Archives in Swindon, England.

When physicist and philosopher Isaac Newton completed his "Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica" in the late 17th century, he led a scientific revolution that changed the way people viewed the world. In the work, he laid out several concepts that would become the basis for classical physics. Among the important theories Newton introduced were the laws of motion that govern the way objects move through space, including the law of universal gravitation, and the foundation for calculus. In other words, most people consider Newton a genius, and scientists still apply his ideas to everyday circumstances.

Newton included in the "Principia Mathematica" a scholium, or an appendix of explanatory notes, and in it he defined several important principles, including the idea of absolute time. Although he understood that clocks weren't perfect and measuring time was subject to human error, Newton believed in an absolute time that was similar to a universal, omnipotent God-like time, one that was the same for everyone, everywhere. In other words, someone standing at the North Pole on Earth would experience time the same way as someone standing on Mars.
Newton's view on time kept it separate from space. When Albert Einstein introduced his Theory of Relativity in the early 20th century, however, he suggested that time wasn't separate from space but connected to it. Time and space combined to form space-time, and everyone measures his or her own experience in it differently because the speed of light (300,000 km per second) is the same for all observers. In other words, if all observers have to agree on the speed of light being 300,000 km per second, then they can't agree on the time it takes for other objects to travel relative to them.

Einstein also suggested that space-time wasn't flat, but curved or "warped" by the existence of matter and energy. Large bodies in space-time, like the Earth, aren't just floating in orbit. Instead, imagine an apple resting on a stretched out blanket -- the weight of the apple warps the sheet. If the Earth is an apple, then we can imagine the Earth's blanket as space-time.

This means that someone moving through space-time will experience it differently at various points. Time will actually appear to move slower near massive objects, because space-time is warped by the weight. These predictions have actually been proven. In 1962, scientists placed two atomic clocks at the bottom and top of a water tower. The clock at the bottom, the one closer to the massive center of the Earth, was running slower than the clock at the top. Einstein called this phenomenon time dilation.

A further explanation of the bending of space-time and time dilation came in the form of a thought experiment called the twin paradox, devised in 1911 by French physicist Paul Langevin. If one twin lives at the foot of a mountain and the other lives at the top, the twin closer to the Earth will age more slowly. He or she would turn out younger than the other twin, though by a very small amount. If you sent one twin in a spaceship accelerating close to the speed of light, however, he or she would return much younger than the other twin, because high acceleration and large gravitational masses are the same in relativity. Of course, no one's gone so far as to send somebody's twin into high-speed orbit, but scientists proved the hypothesis true in the '70s by sending an atomic clock into orbit. It returned to Earth having run much slower than grounded atomic clocks [source: Europhysics News].

Fox Photos/Getty Images
So you're telling me if you send me up there at high speeds, I'll appear younger than Jimmy when I come back down? Where do I sign up?!

So next time you're late for work or want the weekends to last longer, make sure you stay close to the ground and accelerate as much as possible. Boring lectures and waiting areas in doctor's offices, on the other hand, should be spent in the topmost room  of high towers. For lots more information on physics and the nature of time, see the next page in a timely fashion.

Peter Macdiarmid/Getty ImagesIn the BBC TV series "Dr. Who," the Tardis -- the Doctor's machine for traveling through time and space -- is disguised as a blue police box. As a Time Lord, The Doctor lives outside of time -- his life has no clearly definable past, present and future.

Science fiction has thoroughly covered the topic of time travel, starting with H.G. Wells' "The Time Machine" in 1895 and continuing right up to modern movies like "Déjà Vu" starring Denzel Washington. But physicists have also explored the nature of time and the plausibility of time travel for more than century, beginning with Albert Einstein's theories of relativity. Thanks to Einstein, scientists know that time slows as moving objects approach the speed of light. Gravity also slows time. This means that, in one sense, all of us can already consider ourselves time travelers in a limited way because we experience a tiny time warp (a difference of only nanoseconds) when we, for example, take a flight on an airplane. But physicists who study time travel today search for plausible ways to create a time warp large enough to allow noticeable travel into the past or future.


In his book "How to Build a Time Machine," physicist Paul Davies writes, "The theory of relativity implies that a limited form of time travel is certainly possible, while unrestricted time travel -- to any epoch, past or future -- might just be possible, too." This astonishing statement begs an important question: If time travel did indeed become a reality, how would it affect our world as we currently experience it?

First, it's important to realize that building a time machine would likely involve enormous expense, and the sheer complexity of such an apparatus would mean only a limited group of time travelers would have access to it. But even a small group of "astronauts" traveling through time and space could conceivably have a tremendous impact on life as we know it today. The possibilities, in fact, seem almost infinite.

Let's begin by assuming that it's possible to create a complete loop in time travel -- that time travelers could travel back into the past and then return to the future (or vice versa). Although scientists view traveling to the future as a much less problematic proposition than traveling to the past, our daily lives wouldn't change much if we could only send time travelers backward or forward in time, unable to recall them to the present. If we could, in fact, complete this loop of time travel, we can conjure up an incredible array of possible effects

Possibilities and Paradoxes of Time Travel

Imagine sending a time traveling astronaut 100 years into the future. The time traveler could witness technological advancements that we can only dream of today, much as people at the turn of the 20th century likely couldn't imagine the items we take for granted in 2010, such as iPods or laptop computers. The time traveler could also gain insight into medical advancements, such as new medicines, treatments and surgical techniques. If the time traveler could bring this knowledge backward in time to the present, the time from which he or she came, society could effectively leap forward in terms of its technical and scientific knowledge.

The futuristic time traveler could also bring back knowledge of what lay ahead for the world. He or she could warn of natural disasters, geopolitical conflicts, epidemics and other events of worldwide importance. This knowledge could potentially change the very way we operate. For example, what if a time traveler journeyed into the future and literally saw the effects that automobiles would eventually have on our planet? What if the time traveler witnessed an environment so polluted and damaged that it's unrecognizable? How might that change our willingness to use alternative forms of transportation?

Imagine that time travel became less restricted and more available to a larger population. Perhaps travel into the future would be exploited for personal gain. A futuristic time traveler could draw on knowledge of the stock market to guide his or her investment decisions, effectively using the granddaddy of all insider information to amass a fortune. Militaries might rely on time travel to gain valuable knowledge about the enemy's positioning and resources in future battles. Terrorists could use time travel to scout out the scenes of future attacks, allowing them to carefully plan with precise knowledge of future conditions.

Consistent Versus Inconsistent Causal Loops Physicist Paul Davies gives a good example of a consistent causal loop in his book "How to Build a Time Machine." A mathematics professor uses a time machine to travel forward in time, where he discovers a new theorem. He returns back to the time he came from and gives one of his particularly gifted students the idea for that theorem. The student goes on to publish the theorem, and it turns out that it was this very student's work that the professor perused during his journey to the future. The narrative here is consistent. On the other hand, with the grandfather paradox, a time traveler goes back in time and kills his grandfather. But if the time traveler's grandfather dies before the time traveler is born, how can he or she exist at all? And if the time traveler doesn't exist, how could he or she travel back in time to kill granddad?

The potential effects seem equally limitless in terms of the less likely possibility of time travel into the past. History books would no longer be based solely on exhaustive research and interpretation of ancient materials. Time travelers could resolve historical debates and verify how things did or didn't happen in the past. Imagine how different our understanding of the world might be if we could say definitively, for example, whether Moses actually parted the Red Sea or whether Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in killing John F. Kennedy. A journey into the past could prove or disprove religious beliefs or result in face-to-face encounters with people such as Jesus, Buddha, Napoleon or Cleopatra -- or even the time traveler's former self. Perhaps time travelers could even bring back from the past things that had been lost, such as extinct species or dead and long-forgotten languages.

But here it's very important to raise the issue of self-consistent narratives and paradoxes. The concept of self-consistent narratives tells us that anything a time traveler would alter or affect in the past would have to remain consistent with the future from which he or she journeyed. Changing the past would effectively change the future, creating a causal loop. But such causal loops would only pose inherent problems if changes to the past resulted in a future different from the one the time traveler came from.

But perhaps the question of how time travel would affect life as we know it goes deeper than even a discussion of potential paradoxes and causal loops. Perhaps a discussion of specific effects of consequences on life as we know it makes little sense when faced with something that could change everything about the way in which we perceive our world.

Time Travel Turned Total Mayhem

As physicist Paul Davies describes it, unrestricted time travel -- meaning time travel that could form a complete loop to both the past and future -- would ultimately lead to total mayhem. In his words, "Time travel opens a view of the world that is a sort of madhouse where the rational order of things would no longer work. Under those circumstances, it's very hard to see how ordinary human life could continue."

In a world where the relationship between past, present and future is turned on its head, we would transcend the things that define our lives today. We would lose our notion of how time works, which could be so fundamentally damaging to our worldview that we would no longer care as much about the things that matter to us today: work, finances, making plans with friends and family, shopping -- you name it. These things just wouldn't be relevant in this crazy new world because we'd have a newfound preoccupation with simply making sense of a world without a set chronology -- we wouldn't know the order in which things occur.

It may be beside the point, then, to talk about resolving historical debates, saving endangered species or gaining technological, financial or military insight because those things might very likely fall by the wayside in the strange world that would follow the advent of unrestricted time travel.

As Davies makes clear, none of this fallout would occur from one-way travel. Hitching a one-way ride to the future or even the past (assuming we stick with self-consistent narratives) wouldn't cause this kind of profound reordering of the world as we currently experience it. But closing that loop of travel could be, in a word, disastrous.

Davies points out that science fiction normally focuses on the novelty aspect of time travel. But according to him, "It's not a novelty or a curiosity, it's something that strikes at the very rational basis of how we live and function. It's really hard to imagine that anything could be the same again." In his view, unrestricted time travel could change life as we know it so dramatically that we wouldn't even recognize it. Because chronology would have no meaning, we couldn't easily tell if something happened before or after, was a cause or an effect, and we would lose the ability to predict rationally the outcomes of our actions. In essence, it would be as though we had all gone insane.

These sobering potential effects of time travel have caused some scientists to wonder whether a principle exists in nature that would actually prevent unrestricted time travel, such as Stephen Hawking's "chronology protection hypothesis." This type of "theory of everything" might provide a scientific explanation as to why we could never unhinge the universe as we know it by making unrestricted time travel a reality. Scientists have yet to discover such a theory, but hearing Davies' take on the frightening effects of time travel makes one hope that they find it soon -- even if it means that we won't ever know for sure who killed JFK.

in future· time travelling

How would time travel affect life as we know it?

Peter Macdiarmid/Getty ImagesIn the BBC TV series "Dr. Who," the Tardis -- the Doctor's machine for traveling through time and space -- is disguised as a blue police box. As a Time Lord, The Doctor lives outside of time -- his life has no clearly definable past, present and future.

Science fiction has thoroughly covered the topic of time travel, starting with H.G. Wells' "The Time Machine" in 1895 and continuing right up to modern movies like "Déjà Vu" starring Denzel Washington. But physicists have also explored the nature of time and the plausibility of time travel for more than century, beginning with Albert Einstein's theories of relativity. Thanks to Einstein, scientists know that time slows as moving objects approach the speed of light. Gravity also slows time. This means that, in one sense, all of us can already consider ourselves time travelers in a limited way because we experience a tiny time warp (a difference of only nanoseconds) when we, for example, take a flight on an airplane. But physicists who study time travel today search for plausible ways to create a time warp large enough to allow noticeable travel into the past or future.


In his book "How to Build a Time Machine," physicist Paul Davies writes, "The theory of relativity implies that a limited form of time travel is certainly possible, while unrestricted time travel -- to any epoch, past or future -- might just be possible, too." This astonishing statement begs an important question: If time travel did indeed become a reality, how would it affect our world as we currently experience it?

First, it's important to realize that building a time machine would likely involve enormous expense, and the sheer complexity of such an apparatus would mean only a limited group of time travelers would have access to it. But even a small group of "astronauts" traveling through time and space could conceivably have a tremendous impact on life as we know it today. The possibilities, in fact, seem almost infinite.

Let's begin by assuming that it's possible to create a complete loop in time travel -- that time travelers could travel back into the past and then return to the future (or vice versa). Although scientists view traveling to the future as a much less problematic proposition than traveling to the past, our daily lives wouldn't change much if we could only send time travelers backward or forward in time, unable to recall them to the present. If we could, in fact, complete this loop of time travel, we can conjure up an incredible array of possible effects

Possibilities and Paradoxes of Time Travel

Imagine sending a time traveling astronaut 100 years into the future. The time traveler could witness technological advancements that we can only dream of today, much as people at the turn of the 20th century likely couldn't imagine the items we take for granted in 2010, such as iPods or laptop computers. The time traveler could also gain insight into medical advancements, such as new medicines, treatments and surgical techniques. If the time traveler could bring this knowledge backward in time to the present, the time from which he or she came, society could effectively leap forward in terms of its technical and scientific knowledge.

The futuristic time traveler could also bring back knowledge of what lay ahead for the world. He or she could warn of natural disasters, geopolitical conflicts, epidemics and other events of worldwide importance. This knowledge could potentially change the very way we operate. For example, what if a time traveler journeyed into the future and literally saw the effects that automobiles would eventually have on our planet? What if the time traveler witnessed an environment so polluted and damaged that it's unrecognizable? How might that change our willingness to use alternative forms of transportation?

Imagine that time travel became less restricted and more available to a larger population. Perhaps travel into the future would be exploited for personal gain. A futuristic time traveler could draw on knowledge of the stock market to guide his or her investment decisions, effectively using the granddaddy of all insider information to amass a fortune. Militaries might rely on time travel to gain valuable knowledge about the enemy's positioning and resources in future battles. Terrorists could use time travel to scout out the scenes of future attacks, allowing them to carefully plan with precise knowledge of future conditions.

Consistent Versus Inconsistent Causal Loops Physicist Paul Davies gives a good example of a consistent causal loop in his book "How to Build a Time Machine." A mathematics professor uses a time machine to travel forward in time, where he discovers a new theorem. He returns back to the time he came from and gives one of his particularly gifted students the idea for that theorem. The student goes on to publish the theorem, and it turns out that it was this very student's work that the professor perused during his journey to the future. The narrative here is consistent. On the other hand, with the grandfather paradox, a time traveler goes back in time and kills his grandfather. But if the time traveler's grandfather dies before the time traveler is born, how can he or she exist at all? And if the time traveler doesn't exist, how could he or she travel back in time to kill granddad?

The potential effects seem equally limitless in terms of the less likely possibility of time travel into the past. History books would no longer be based solely on exhaustive research and interpretation of ancient materials. Time travelers could resolve historical debates and verify how things did or didn't happen in the past. Imagine how different our understanding of the world might be if we could say definitively, for example, whether Moses actually parted the Red Sea or whether Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in killing John F. Kennedy. A journey into the past could prove or disprove religious beliefs or result in face-to-face encounters with people such as Jesus, Buddha, Napoleon or Cleopatra -- or even the time traveler's former self. Perhaps time travelers could even bring back from the past things that had been lost, such as extinct species or dead and long-forgotten languages.

But here it's very important to raise the issue of self-consistent narratives and paradoxes. The concept of self-consistent narratives tells us that anything a time traveler would alter or affect in the past would have to remain consistent with the future from which he or she journeyed. Changing the past would effectively change the future, creating a causal loop. But such causal loops would only pose inherent problems if changes to the past resulted in a future different from the one the time traveler came from.

But perhaps the question of how time travel would affect life as we know it goes deeper than even a discussion of potential paradoxes and causal loops. Perhaps a discussion of specific effects of consequences on life as we know it makes little sense when faced with something that could change everything about the way in which we perceive our world.

Time Travel Turned Total Mayhem

As physicist Paul Davies describes it, unrestricted time travel -- meaning time travel that could form a complete loop to both the past and future -- would ultimately lead to total mayhem. In his words, "Time travel opens a view of the world that is a sort of madhouse where the rational order of things would no longer work. Under those circumstances, it's very hard to see how ordinary human life could continue."

In a world where the relationship between past, present and future is turned on its head, we would transcend the things that define our lives today. We would lose our notion of how time works, which could be so fundamentally damaging to our worldview that we would no longer care as much about the things that matter to us today: work, finances, making plans with friends and family, shopping -- you name it. These things just wouldn't be relevant in this crazy new world because we'd have a newfound preoccupation with simply making sense of a world without a set chronology -- we wouldn't know the order in which things occur.

It may be beside the point, then, to talk about resolving historical debates, saving endangered species or gaining technological, financial or military insight because those things might very likely fall by the wayside in the strange world that would follow the advent of unrestricted time travel.

As Davies makes clear, none of this fallout would occur from one-way travel. Hitching a one-way ride to the future or even the past (assuming we stick with self-consistent narratives) wouldn't cause this kind of profound reordering of the world as we currently experience it. But closing that loop of travel could be, in a word, disastrous.

Davies points out that science fiction normally focuses on the novelty aspect of time travel. But according to him, "It's not a novelty or a curiosity, it's something that strikes at the very rational basis of how we live and function. It's really hard to imagine that anything could be the same again." In his view, unrestricted time travel could change life as we know it so dramatically that we wouldn't even recognize it. Because chronology would have no meaning, we couldn't easily tell if something happened before or after, was a cause or an effect, and we would lose the ability to predict rationally the outcomes of our actions. In essence, it would be as though we had all gone insane.

These sobering potential effects of time travel have caused some scientists to wonder whether a principle exists in nature that would actually prevent unrestricted time travel, such as Stephen Hawking's "chronology protection hypothesis." This type of "theory of everything" might provide a scientific explanation as to why we could never unhinge the universe as we know it by making unrestricted time travel a reality. Scientists have yet to discover such a theory, but hearing Davies' take on the frightening effects of time travel makes one hope that they find it soon -- even if it means that we won't ever know for sure who killed JFK.

What if you fell into a black hole?

When Alice falls into the rabbit hole, she experiences a host of "curiouser and curiouser" phenomena. She gets smaller, she gets bigger, she almost drowns in a sea of her own tears and she meets an assembly of strange creatures. As it turns out, falling into a black hole may rival the strange experiences described by Lewis Carroll in his classic fantasy. Unlike Alice, however, who emerges from her adventures no worse for the wear, a person who journeys into one of the universe's most mysterious objects is not likely to fare so well. To understand why, it will help to define what a black hole is and how it interacts with the universe around it.

The Unfolding Universe: Supermassive Black Holes

Astronomers have only observed black holes indirectly, yet they can paint a clear picture, albeit one based on circumstantial evidence. They feel certain, for example, that black holes indicate regions where matter has been compressed into an infinite density. The gravity of such a region is so strong that nothing can escape its inexorable pull, not even light. As matter and light fall into the superdense region, X-rays and other forms of electromagnetic energy get blasted into space. It's this cosmic ejecta that alerts astronomers to the existence of these mysterious monsters.
Like monsters we can see, black holes come in different sizes. Astronomers measure this using something known as the Schwarzschild radius. That radius describes the size of the event horizon, the spherical boundary of a black hole. The greater the object's mass, the larger its event horizon and the larger its radius. Regardless of how massive it is, a black hole's center point is what astronomers call a singularity -- a place where matter is infinitely dense.
Of course, you'll have to find one of these objects if you're going to fall into it. We'll search for one next.

 

 

Back in Black

Astronomers now believe black holes lie at the centers of most galaxies. They classify these beasts as supermassive black holes because each one may have a maximum mass equivalent to billions of suns. Stellar black holes are the remains of dying stars that have collapsed upon themselves. They're smaller than their supermassive cousins -- the smallest is about 12 miles (19 kilometers) across -- and may be quite common in any galaxy [source: Wethington]. The closest stellar black hole to our solar system is Cygnus X-1, which is about 6,000 light-years away.

This illustration shows a galaxy with a supermassive black hole at its core. That galactic bad boy at the center is shooting out jets of radio waves.
NASA/JPL-Caltech

Let's say you go to your travel agent and book a one-way flight to an exotic, five-star black hole. You check your luggage, board the rocket and enjoy the ride, trying hard to ignore the screaming kid in the seat behind you. What you see as you approach your final destination depends on what's around the black hole. A companion star located nearby could have its light and gases stripped away and drawn into the neighboring gravity well. Black holes in this situation will often be encircled by an accretion disk, a ring of hot, luminous gas with transitory bright spots similar to solar flares. Even if a black hole resides by itself in a dark corner of the universe, it gives off strong bursts of radiation that your ship's sensors will be able to detect. The bottom line: You'll know exactly when you're getting close.
The captain knows, too, so he or she stops the spacecraft just beyond the black hole's gravitational pull. You'll make the rest of the trip using the jet packs mounted on your spacesuit. You don the suit, exit the vessel and start zipping toward your destiny. Eventually, the black hole's gravity seizes you and begins to reel you in. As you get closer, you orient yourself so you're falling feet-first toward the event horizon.
Brace yourself. On the next, things get really interesting on our black hole journey.

Falling to Pieces

Here's where it starts to get bad. Tidal forces -- so named because similar gravitational forces between the moon and the Earth cause ocean tides -- increase dramatically as the distance between you and the black hole shrinks. This means the gravity acting on your feet is much stronger than the gravity acting on your head. As a result, your feet begin to accelerate much faster than your head. Your body stretches out, not uncomfortably at first, but over time, the stretching will become more severe. Astronomers call this spaghettification because the intense gravitational field pulls you into a long, thin piece of spaghetti.

{Yeah, spaghetti is all fun and games until you're the spaghetti.
Ableimages/Lifesize/Thinkstock}

When you start feeling pain depends on the size of the black hole. If you're falling into a supermassive black hole, you'll begin to notice the tidal forces within about 600,000 kilometers (372,822 miles) of the center -- after you've already crossed the event horizon [source: Bunn]. If you're falling into a stellar black hole, you'll start feeling uncomfortable within 6,000 kilometers (3,728 miles) of the center, long before you cross the horizon [source: Bunn].
Either way, spaghettification leads to a painful conclusion. When the tidal forces exceed the elastic limits of your body, you'll snap apart at the weakest point, probably just above the hips. You'll see your lower half floating next to you, and you'll see it begin to stretch anew as tidal forces latch onto it. The same thing happens to your torso, of course, until each half snaps a second time. In a matter of seconds, you're a goner, reduced to a string of disconnected atoms that march into the black hole's singularity like ants disappearing into a colony.
It's not a great way to die, but there's one consolation: In space, no one can hear you scream.

Sources

• Broderick, Avery E. and Abraham Loeb. "Portrait of a Black Hole." Scientific American. December 2009.
• Bunn, Ted. "What would happen to me if I fell into a black hole?" Berkeley Cosmology. September 1995. (July 20, 2011) http://cosmology.berkeley.edu/Education/BHfaq.html#q3
• Cain, Fraser. "Maximizing Survival Time Inside the Event Horizon of a Black Hole." Universe Today. May 10, 2007. (July 20, 2011) http://www.universetoday.com/1605/maximizing-survival-time-inside-the-event-horizon-of-a-black-hole/
• HubbleSite Special Feature. "Black Holes: Gravity's Relentless Pull." 2005. (July 20, 2011) http://hubblesite.org/explore_astronomy/black_holes/encyc_mod3_q16.html
• Malone, Noreen. "What happens if you fall into a black hole?" Slate. (July 20, 2011) http://www.slate.com/id/2199664/
• Plait, Phil. "Tyson spaghettifies!" Bad Astronomy. Jan. 13, 2009. (July 20, 2011) http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/01/13/tyson-spaghettifies/
• Rees, Martin. “Universe: The Definitive Visual Guide.” Dorling Kindersley Limited. 2008.
• Wethington, Nicholos. "Black Hole on Earth." Universe Today. Aug. 29, 2009. (July 20, 2011) http://www.universetoday.com/38434/black-hole-on-earth/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

black hole· what is balck hole

What if you fell into a black hole?

What if you fell into a black hole?

When Alice falls into the rabbit hole, she experiences a host of "curiouser and curiouser" phenomena. She gets smaller, she gets bigger, she almost drowns in a sea of her own tears and she meets an assembly of strange creatures. As it turns out, falling into a black hole may rival the strange experiences described by Lewis Carroll in his classic fantasy. Unlike Alice, however, who emerges from her adventures no worse for the wear, a person who journeys into one of the universe's most mysterious objects is not likely to fare so well. To understand why, it will help to define what a black hole is and how it interacts with the universe around it.

The Unfolding Universe: Supermassive Black Holes

Astronomers have only observed black holes indirectly, yet they can paint a clear picture, albeit one based on circumstantial evidence. They feel certain, for example, that black holes indicate regions where matter has been compressed into an infinite density. The gravity of such a region is so strong that nothing can escape its inexorable pull, not even light. As matter and light fall into the superdense region, X-rays and other forms of electromagnetic energy get blasted into space. It's this cosmic ejecta that alerts astronomers to the existence of these mysterious monsters.
Like monsters we can see, black holes come in different sizes. Astronomers measure this using something known as the Schwarzschild radius. That radius describes the size of the event horizon, the spherical boundary of a black hole. The greater the object's mass, the larger its event horizon and the larger its radius. Regardless of how massive it is, a black hole's center point is what astronomers call a singularity -- a place where matter is infinitely dense.
Of course, you'll have to find one of these objects if you're going to fall into it. We'll search for one next.

 

 

Back in Black

Astronomers now believe black holes lie at the centers of most galaxies. They classify these beasts as supermassive black holes because each one may have a maximum mass equivalent to billions of suns. Stellar black holes are the remains of dying stars that have collapsed upon themselves. They're smaller than their supermassive cousins -- the smallest is about 12 miles (19 kilometers) across -- and may be quite common in any galaxy [source: Wethington]. The closest stellar black hole to our solar system is Cygnus X-1, which is about 6,000 light-years away.

This illustration shows a galaxy with a supermassive black hole at its core. That galactic bad boy at the center is shooting out jets of radio waves.
NASA/JPL-Caltech

Let's say you go to your travel agent and book a one-way flight to an exotic, five-star black hole. You check your luggage, board the rocket and enjoy the ride, trying hard to ignore the screaming kid in the seat behind you. What you see as you approach your final destination depends on what's around the black hole. A companion star located nearby could have its light and gases stripped away and drawn into the neighboring gravity well. Black holes in this situation will often be encircled by an accretion disk, a ring of hot, luminous gas with transitory bright spots similar to solar flares. Even if a black hole resides by itself in a dark corner of the universe, it gives off strong bursts of radiation that your ship's sensors will be able to detect. The bottom line: You'll know exactly when you're getting close.
The captain knows, too, so he or she stops the spacecraft just beyond the black hole's gravitational pull. You'll make the rest of the trip using the jet packs mounted on your spacesuit. You don the suit, exit the vessel and start zipping toward your destiny. Eventually, the black hole's gravity seizes you and begins to reel you in. As you get closer, you orient yourself so you're falling feet-first toward the event horizon.
Brace yourself. On the next, things get really interesting on our black hole journey.

Falling to Pieces

Here's where it starts to get bad. Tidal forces -- so named because similar gravitational forces between the moon and the Earth cause ocean tides -- increase dramatically as the distance between you and the black hole shrinks. This means the gravity acting on your feet is much stronger than the gravity acting on your head. As a result, your feet begin to accelerate much faster than your head. Your body stretches out, not uncomfortably at first, but over time, the stretching will become more severe. Astronomers call this spaghettification because the intense gravitational field pulls you into a long, thin piece of spaghetti.

{Yeah, spaghetti is all fun and games until you're the spaghetti.
Ableimages/Lifesize/Thinkstock}

When you start feeling pain depends on the size of the black hole. If you're falling into a supermassive black hole, you'll begin to notice the tidal forces within about 600,000 kilometers (372,822 miles) of the center -- after you've already crossed the event horizon [source: Bunn]. If you're falling into a stellar black hole, you'll start feeling uncomfortable within 6,000 kilometers (3,728 miles) of the center, long before you cross the horizon [source: Bunn].
Either way, spaghettification leads to a painful conclusion. When the tidal forces exceed the elastic limits of your body, you'll snap apart at the weakest point, probably just above the hips. You'll see your lower half floating next to you, and you'll see it begin to stretch anew as tidal forces latch onto it. The same thing happens to your torso, of course, until each half snaps a second time. In a matter of seconds, you're a goner, reduced to a string of disconnected atoms that march into the black hole's singularity like ants disappearing into a colony.
It's not a great way to die, but there's one consolation: In space, no one can hear you scream.

Sources

• Broderick, Avery E. and Abraham Loeb. "Portrait of a Black Hole." Scientific American. December 2009.
• Bunn, Ted. "What would happen to me if I fell into a black hole?" Berkeley Cosmology. September 1995. (July 20, 2011) http://cosmology.berkeley.edu/Education/BHfaq.html#q3
• Cain, Fraser. "Maximizing Survival Time Inside the Event Horizon of a Black Hole." Universe Today. May 10, 2007. (July 20, 2011) http://www.universetoday.com/1605/maximizing-survival-time-inside-the-event-horizon-of-a-black-hole/
• HubbleSite Special Feature. "Black Holes: Gravity's Relentless Pull." 2005. (July 20, 2011) http://hubblesite.org/explore_astronomy/black_holes/encyc_mod3_q16.html
• Malone, Noreen. "What happens if you fall into a black hole?" Slate. (July 20, 2011) http://www.slate.com/id/2199664/
• Plait, Phil. "Tyson spaghettifies!" Bad Astronomy. Jan. 13, 2009. (July 20, 2011) http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/01/13/tyson-spaghettifies/
• Rees, Martin. “Universe: The Definitive Visual Guide.” Dorling Kindersley Limited. 2008.
• Wethington, Nicholos. "Black Hole on Earth." Universe Today. Aug. 29, 2009. (July 20, 2011) http://www.universetoday.com/38434/black-hole-on-earth/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Want to know a fantastic way to sabotage your performance?
Be dependent on success. Attach everything to the success of your performance. Say, “If I don’t come through here, I’m a failure. I suck. I’m not good at what I do.”
If you do that, watch yourself tense up. Watch your performance go downhill. Watch yourself get even more tense as you try to save yourself from failure.
More often than not, your tension will end up being your downfall. At the end of your performance, you’ll look at yourself and think, “Well, I lost. I failed. Now I’m not good at anything, and I’m just a failure,” and so on, until you end up shredding your self-concept into a million pieces and think of yourself as the most incompetent human being to ever walk the earth.
Attachment to the outcome – staking your self-esteem on your performance – did you in.

Unhealthy Attachment

When we attach ourselves to the outcome and stake our self-worth to our performance during a certain event, we tense up because of the burden of our own expectations. We can’t relax because we think that, in order to still have some self-esteem after this event, we need to perform at our best. The prospect of living a life without any self-esteem or sense of self-worth (at least temporarily) makes our minds feel under pressure – because they are.
Think about it this way: what if the person you loved the most told you that, unless you came got a very lucrative, prestigious job that you applied to, they wouldn’t loved you anymore? Their love would be tied to your performance in securing a job. How ridiculous does that sound? Isn’t it inane to think that anyone could tie their love to something as arbitrary as getting a high-level job?
Want to know what you call those kinds of relationships? Unhealthy. (Readers, if the person you love the most would stop loving you over something similar, I’d reevaluate your relationship with that person and ask yourself whether you actually love them or even if you want them in your life)
Well, every single time you get attached to the outcome, you’re doing exactly that to yourself.
You’re saying, “Okay, self, if you don’t get an A on this paper, I won’t love you anymore, and I certainly won’t treat you with respect. If you screw this up, I’ll never trust you again to do anything. I won’t want anything to do with you, but I guess I’ll endure the pain of being stuck with you forever because you’re all I’ve got. But I won’t like it.”
Which puts a ton of psychological pressure on your mind. You are, with this paper (in my example) fighting for your own self-esteem. While that’s a tremendous motivator – that’s why we attach ourselves to the outcome in the first place; we think high risk = high reward – it’s also very unhealthy.

Relaxation, Not Tension, Leads to Better Performance

The lesson to be learned here is that relaxation, not tension, creates better performance. 

Making your body tense up by being attached to the outcome is a good way in the short term to improve energy levels, but, in the end, the stress ends up compromising your ability to perform.
By relaxing, on the other hand, and not caring much about the outcome, you can let yourself perform to the best of your ability. Your movements become effortless instead of being tense. Your relaxation response kicks in, leading to better decision-making.
If you stay in the moment, breathe deeply, and care little about the outcome, you’ll end up triggering your relaxation response (google it to learn more). The relaxation response nullifies most of the harmful effects of tension, like fatigue, irritability, muscle soreness, and lack of focus.
In order to trigger the relaxation response in the moment, you need to do exactly that: relax. Breathe deeply. Let go of the tension that you feel in your body. Feel free of the burden of expectations, instead of trying to stake your self-worth on them.
By doing that, you’ll actually perform at your best, instead of sabotaging yourself.
If you enjoyed this post, I would appreciate if you share it on

attachment kills· relax instead

Outcome Attachment Kills Performance: Relax Instead

Want to know a fantastic way to sabotage your performance?
Be dependent on success. Attach everything to the success of your performance. Say, “If I don’t come through here, I’m a failure. I suck. I’m not good at what I do.”
If you do that, watch yourself tense up. Watch your performance go downhill. Watch yourself get even more tense as you try to save yourself from failure.
More often than not, your tension will end up being your downfall. At the end of your performance, you’ll look at yourself and think, “Well, I lost. I failed. Now I’m not good at anything, and I’m just a failure,” and so on, until you end up shredding your self-concept into a million pieces and think of yourself as the most incompetent human being to ever walk the earth.
Attachment to the outcome – staking your self-esteem on your performance – did you in.

Unhealthy Attachment

When we attach ourselves to the outcome and stake our self-worth to our performance during a certain event, we tense up because of the burden of our own expectations. We can’t relax because we think that, in order to still have some self-esteem after this event, we need to perform at our best. The prospect of living a life without any self-esteem or sense of self-worth (at least temporarily) makes our minds feel under pressure – because they are.
Think about it this way: what if the person you loved the most told you that, unless you came got a very lucrative, prestigious job that you applied to, they wouldn’t loved you anymore? Their love would be tied to your performance in securing a job. How ridiculous does that sound? Isn’t it inane to think that anyone could tie their love to something as arbitrary as getting a high-level job?
Want to know what you call those kinds of relationships? Unhealthy. (Readers, if the person you love the most would stop loving you over something similar, I’d reevaluate your relationship with that person and ask yourself whether you actually love them or even if you want them in your life)
Well, every single time you get attached to the outcome, you’re doing exactly that to yourself.
You’re saying, “Okay, self, if you don’t get an A on this paper, I won’t love you anymore, and I certainly won’t treat you with respect. If you screw this up, I’ll never trust you again to do anything. I won’t want anything to do with you, but I guess I’ll endure the pain of being stuck with you forever because you’re all I’ve got. But I won’t like it.”
Which puts a ton of psychological pressure on your mind. You are, with this paper (in my example) fighting for your own self-esteem. While that’s a tremendous motivator – that’s why we attach ourselves to the outcome in the first place; we think high risk = high reward – it’s also very unhealthy.

Relaxation, Not Tension, Leads to Better Performance

The lesson to be learned here is that relaxation, not tension, creates better performance. 

Making your body tense up by being attached to the outcome is a good way in the short term to improve energy levels, but, in the end, the stress ends up compromising your ability to perform.
By relaxing, on the other hand, and not caring much about the outcome, you can let yourself perform to the best of your ability. Your movements become effortless instead of being tense. Your relaxation response kicks in, leading to better decision-making.
If you stay in the moment, breathe deeply, and care little about the outcome, you’ll end up triggering your relaxation response (google it to learn more). The relaxation response nullifies most of the harmful effects of tension, like fatigue, irritability, muscle soreness, and lack of focus.
In order to trigger the relaxation response in the moment, you need to do exactly that: relax. Breathe deeply. Let go of the tension that you feel in your body. Feel free of the burden of expectations, instead of trying to stake your self-worth on them.
By doing that, you’ll actually perform at your best, instead of sabotaging yourself.
If you enjoyed this post, I would appreciate if you share it on

1. Introduction to How Disc Brakes Work.

Most modern cars have disc brakes on the front wheels, and some have disc brakes on all four wheels. This is the part of the brake system that does the actual work of stopping the car.
The most common type of disc brake on modern cars is the single-piston floating caliper. In this article, we will learn all about this type of disc brake design

Disc Brake Basics

Here is the location of the disc brakes in a car:

Disc brake location

The main components of a disc brake are:

• The brake pads
• The caliper, which contains a piston
• The rotor, which is mounted to the hub

Parts of a disc brake

The disc brake is a lot like the brakes on a bicycle. Bicycle brakes have a caliper, which squeezes the brake pads against the wheel. In a disc brake, the brake pads squeeze the rotor instead of the wheel, and the force is transmitted hydraulically instead of through a cable. Friction between the pads and the disc slows the disc down.
A moving car has a certain amount of kinetic energy, and the brakes have to remove this energy from the car in order to stop it. How do the brakes do this? Each time you stop your car, your brakes convert the kinetic energy to heat generated by the friction between the pads and the disc. Most car disc brakes are vented.

Disc brake vents

Vented disc brakes have a set of vanes, between the two sides of the disc, that pumps air through the disc to provide cooling.

Self-Adjusting Brakes

­­The single-piston floating-caliper disc brake is self-centering and self-adjusting. The caliper is able to slide from side to side so it will move to the center each time the brakes are applied. Also, since there is no spring to pull the pads away from the disc, the pads always stay in light contact with the rotor (the rubber piston seal and any wobble in the rotor may actually pull the pads a small distance away from the rotor). This is important because the pistons in the brakes are much larger in diameter than the ones in the master cylinder. If the brake pistons retracted into their cylinders, it might take several applications of the brake pedal to pump enough fluid into the brake cylinder to engage the brake pads.


Self-adjusting disc brake
Older cars had dual or four-piston fixed-caliper designs. A piston (or two) on each side of the rotor pushed the pad on that side. This design has been largely eliminated because single-piston designs are cheaper and more reliable.

Emergency Brakes

­ ­In cars with disc brakes on all four wheels, an emergency brake has to be actuated by a separate mechanism than the primary brakes in case of a total primary brake failure. Most cars use a cable to actuate the emergency brake.

Disc brake with parking brake

Some cars with four-wheel disc brakes have a separate drum brake integrated into the hub of the rear wheels. This drum brake is only for the emergency brake system, and it is actuated only by the cable; it has no hydraulics.
Other cars have a lever that turns a screw, or actuates a cam, which presses the piston of the disc brake.

Servicing Your Brakes

­ ­The most common type of service required for brakes is changing the pads. Disc brake pads usually have a piece of metal on them called a wear indicator.

Photo courtesy of a local Autozone store Disc brake pad

When enough of the friction material is worn away, the wear indicator will contact the disc and make a squealing sound. This means it is time for new brake pads.
There is also an inspection opening in the caliper so you can see how much friction material is left on your brake pads.

Disc brake inspection opening

Sometimes, deep scores get worn into brake rotors. This can happen if a worn-out brake pad is left on the car for too long. Brake rotors can also warp; that is, lose their flatness. If this happens, the brakes may shudder or vibrate when you stop. Both of these problems can sometimes be fixed by refinishing (also called turning or machining) the rotors. Some material is removed from both sides of the rotors to restore the flat, smooth surface.
Refinishing is not required every time your brake shoes are replaced. You need it only if they are warped or badly scored. In fact, refinishing the rotors more often than is necessary will reduce their life. Because the process removes material, brake rotors get thinner every time they are refinished. All brake rotors have a specification for the minimum allowable thickness before they need to be replaced. This spec can be found in the shop manual .

Disc Brake Diagram

Now let's put the parts together to see how disc brakes work as a whole. This diagram shows the basic parts that make up a disc brake system.

­Disc brake components

workin of a disc brakes

How Disc Brakes Work?

1. Introduction to How Disc Brakes Work.

Most modern cars have disc brakes on the front wheels, and some have disc brakes on all four wheels. This is the part of the brake system that does the actual work of stopping the car.
The most common type of disc brake on modern cars is the single-piston floating caliper. In this article, we will learn all about this type of disc brake design

Disc Brake Basics

Here is the location of the disc brakes in a car:

Disc brake location

The main components of a disc brake are:

• The brake pads
• The caliper, which contains a piston
• The rotor, which is mounted to the hub

Parts of a disc brake

The disc brake is a lot like the brakes on a bicycle. Bicycle brakes have a caliper, which squeezes the brake pads against the wheel. In a disc brake, the brake pads squeeze the rotor instead of the wheel, and the force is transmitted hydraulically instead of through a cable. Friction between the pads and the disc slows the disc down.
A moving car has a certain amount of kinetic energy, and the brakes have to remove this energy from the car in order to stop it. How do the brakes do this? Each time you stop your car, your brakes convert the kinetic energy to heat generated by the friction between the pads and the disc. Most car disc brakes are vented.

Disc brake vents

Vented disc brakes have a set of vanes, between the two sides of the disc, that pumps air through the disc to provide cooling.

Self-Adjusting Brakes

­­The single-piston floating-caliper disc brake is self-centering and self-adjusting. The caliper is able to slide from side to side so it will move to the center each time the brakes are applied. Also, since there is no spring to pull the pads away from the disc, the pads always stay in light contact with the rotor (the rubber piston seal and any wobble in the rotor may actually pull the pads a small distance away from the rotor). This is important because the pistons in the brakes are much larger in diameter than the ones in the master cylinder. If the brake pistons retracted into their cylinders, it might take several applications of the brake pedal to pump enough fluid into the brake cylinder to engage the brake pads.


Self-adjusting disc brake
Older cars had dual or four-piston fixed-caliper designs. A piston (or two) on each side of the rotor pushed the pad on that side. This design has been largely eliminated because single-piston designs are cheaper and more reliable.

Emergency Brakes

­ ­In cars with disc brakes on all four wheels, an emergency brake has to be actuated by a separate mechanism than the primary brakes in case of a total primary brake failure. Most cars use a cable to actuate the emergency brake.

Disc brake with parking brake

Some cars with four-wheel disc brakes have a separate drum brake integrated into the hub of the rear wheels. This drum brake is only for the emergency brake system, and it is actuated only by the cable; it has no hydraulics.
Other cars have a lever that turns a screw, or actuates a cam, which presses the piston of the disc brake.

Servicing Your Brakes

­ ­The most common type of service required for brakes is changing the pads. Disc brake pads usually have a piece of metal on them called a wear indicator.

Photo courtesy of a local Autozone store Disc brake pad

When enough of the friction material is worn away, the wear indicator will contact the disc and make a squealing sound. This means it is time for new brake pads.
There is also an inspection opening in the caliper so you can see how much friction material is left on your brake pads.

Disc brake inspection opening

Sometimes, deep scores get worn into brake rotors. This can happen if a worn-out brake pad is left on the car for too long. Brake rotors can also warp; that is, lose their flatness. If this happens, the brakes may shudder or vibrate when you stop. Both of these problems can sometimes be fixed by refinishing (also called turning or machining) the rotors. Some material is removed from both sides of the rotors to restore the flat, smooth surface.
Refinishing is not required every time your brake shoes are replaced. You need it only if they are warped or badly scored. In fact, refinishing the rotors more often than is necessary will reduce their life. Because the process removes material, brake rotors get thinner every time they are refinished. All brake rotors have a specification for the minimum allowable thickness before they need to be replaced. This spec can be found in the shop manual .

Disc Brake Diagram

Now let's put the parts together to see how disc brakes work as a whole. This diagram shows the basic parts that make up a disc brake system.

­Disc brake components

Do you want to or trying to GET ACCESS to someone's FACEBOOK ACCOUNT, then read this post carefully!!

You will be surprised to know that .......... you will ask "what?".
Now do these things... 1) type similar meaning keystrokes " facebook hacking", "facebook password hacking"

| now instead of clicking SEARCH click I'M FEELING LUCKY,  this will return the similar sites that is one above.
« ***** Please don't trust these sites...................neither you will be cheated, either they will demand you to do surveys, or they will demand money. these are just the fake sites created to earn profits only. these site will never tell you the passwords, if you will proceed after theirs demand. It's sure dat ultimately you will see some error "password can't be retrived" "try again" "server busy" "maintainance time" and many more.

So guyz wot are the real things to hack facebook account?????
1st of all you should have moderate knowledge of internet and URL, ............................Let's see how is it done...
Click Here

facebook hacking truth

Truth of Hacking the facebook passord !! Do you want to or trying to GET ACCESS to someone's FACEBOOK ACCOUNT, then read this post carefully!!

Do you want to or trying to GET ACCESS to someone's FACEBOOK ACCOUNT, then read this post carefully!!

You will be surprised to know that .......... you will ask "what?".
Now do these things... 1) type similar meaning keystrokes " facebook hacking", "facebook password hacking"

| now instead of clicking SEARCH click I'M FEELING LUCKY,  this will return the similar sites that is one above.
« ***** Please don't trust these sites...................neither you will be cheated, either they will demand you to do surveys, or they will demand money. these are just the fake sites created to earn profits only. these site will never tell you the passwords, if you will proceed after theirs demand. It's sure dat ultimately you will see some error "password can't be retrived" "try again" "server busy" "maintainance time" and many more.

So guyz wot are the real things to hack facebook account?????
1st of all you should have moderate knowledge of internet and URL, ............................Let's see how is it done...
Click Here

<>Break-Up Advice: Top 10 Ways to Recover from a Break-Up<><><>By Stephany Alexander

Ðḯḓ ƴ◎ʊ ʝʊṧ☂ ♭ґεαк υ℘ ẘ☤⊥ℌ @ ღ@ᾔ⁇ ℉їηⅾ ◎ʊ⊥ ☂ℌ℮ ßℯṧ⊥ ♭яεαк υρ @ⅾ√☤¢ε @ᾔ∂ тø℘ 10 ẘα¥ṧ ⊥ø ґℯ¢◎√ℯґ ḟґøм α ßґ℮αḱ üρ▣

Bʀᴇᴀᴋ-Uᴘ Aᴅᴠɪᴄᴇ: Tᴏᴘ 10 Wᴀʏs ᴛᴏ Rᴇᴄᴏᴠᴇʀ ғʀᴏᴍ ᴀ Bʀᴇᴀᴋ-Uᴘ
Bʏ Sᴛᴇᴘʜᴀɴʏ Aʟᴇxᴀɴᴅᴇʀ   

Dɪᴅ ʏᴏᴜ ᴊᴜsᴛ ʙʀᴇᴀᴋ ᴜᴘ ᴡɪᴛʜ ᴀ ᴍᴀɴ? Fɪɴᴅ ᴏᴜᴛ ᴛʜᴇ ʙᴇsᴛ ʙʀᴇᴀᴋ ᴜᴘ ᴀᴅᴠɪᴄᴇ ᴀɴᴅ ᴛᴏᴘ 10 ᴡᴀʏs ᴛᴏ ʀᴇᴄᴏᴠᴇʀ ғʀᴏᴍ ᴀ ʙʀᴇᴀᴋ ᴜᴘ.

Bʀᴇᴀᴋ-ᴜᴘs sᴇᴇᴍ ᴛᴏ ʙᴇ, ᴜɴғᴏʀᴛᴜɴᴀᴛᴇʟʏ ᴀ ɴᴏʀᴍᴀʟ ᴘᴀʀᴛ ᴏғ ᴛʜᴇ ᴍᴏᴅᴇʀɴ ᴅᴀʏ ʟɪғᴇ. Hᴇᴀʟɪɴɢ ғʀᴏᴍ ʀᴇʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴsʜɪᴘ ʙʀᴇᴀᴋ-ᴜᴘs ᴀɴᴅ ᴅɪᴠᴏʀᴄᴇ ᴀʀᴇ ᴀ ᴅɪғғɪᴄᴜʟᴛ ᴛᴀsᴋ ᴀᴛ ʙᴇsᴛ. Sᴏᴍᴇ ᴘᴇᴏᴘʟᴇ ɴᴇᴠᴇʀ ᴄᴏᴍᴘʟᴇᴛᴇʟʏ ʀᴇᴄᴏᴠᴇʀ, ᴄᴀʀʀʏɪɴɢ ᴡɪᴛʜ ᴛʜᴇᴍ ᴛʜᴇ ᴘᴀɪɴ ᴏғ ᴛʜᴇ ʙʀᴇᴀᴋ ᴜᴘ ᴛʜʀᴏᴜɢʜ ʟɪғᴇ. Oᴛʜᴇʀs ʙᴇᴄᴏᴍᴇ ɪᴍᴍᴏʙɪʟɪᴢᴇᴅ ғʀᴏᴍ ᴛʜᴇ ғᴇᴀʀ ᴏғ ɢᴇᴛᴛɪɴɢ ᴄʟᴏsᴇ ᴛᴏ ᴀ ᴘᴀʀᴛɴᴇʀ ᴀɢᴀɪɴ. Eᴠᴇɴ ᴄᴇʟᴇʙʀɪᴛɪᴇs ʜᴀᴠᴇ ʙʀᴇᴀᴋ-ᴜᴘs; Bʀᴀᴅ Pɪᴛᴛ ᴀɴᴅ Jᴇɴɴɪғᴇʀ Aɴɪsᴛᴏɴ ᴛᴏ ʙᴇ sᴀɪᴅ ᴛʜᴇ ᴍᴏsᴛ ғᴀᴍᴏᴜs ᴏɴᴇ.Sᴏᴍᴇ ᴡᴏᴍᴇɴ ᴛʀʏ ᴛᴏ sᴘᴇᴇᴅ ᴜᴘ ᴛʜᴇɪʀ ʀᴇᴄᴏᴠᴇʀʏ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ʙʏ ʀᴇᴘʟᴀᴄɪɴɢ ᴛʜᴇ ᴠᴏɪᴅ ᴡɪᴛʜ ᴀɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀ ᴍᴀɴ ᴏʀ ᴡᴏᴍᴀɴ ɪᴍᴍᴇᴅɪᴀᴛᴇʟʏ.
Aᴄᴄᴏʀᴅɪɴɢ ᴛᴏ ᴀ ʀᴇʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴsʜɪᴘ ᴘᴏʟʟ ᴏғ ᴏᴠᴇʀ 8,000 ᴡᴏᴍᴇɴ ᴄᴏɴᴅᴜᴄᴛᴇᴅ ʙʏ WᴏᴍᴀɴSᴀᴠᴇʀs.ᴄᴏᴍ, ᴏᴠᴇʀ 57% ᴏғ ᴡᴏᴍᴇɴ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ᴛʜᴏᴜɢʜᴛ ᴏғ ʜᴀᴠɪɴɢ ᴀ sᴀᴍᴇ sᴇx ᴀғғᴀɪʀ. Jᴜᴍᴘɪɴɢ ɪɴᴛᴏ ᴀɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀ ʀᴇʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴsʜɪᴘ ᴡɪᴛʜᴏᴜᴛ ᴘʀᴏᴘᴇʀ ʜᴇᴀʟɪɴɢ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ɪs ᴏɴᴇ ᴏғ ᴛʜᴇ ᴡᴏʀsᴛ ᴛʜɪɴɢs ʏᴏᴜ ᴄᴀɴ ᴅᴏ. Wᴏᴍᴇɴ ᴡʜᴏ ᴀʀᴇ ɢᴜɪʟᴛʏ ᴏғ ᴛʜɪs ғʀᴇǫᴜᴇɴᴛʟʏ sᴜғғᴇʀ ғʀᴏᴍ ᴄᴏᴅᴇᴘᴇɴᴅᴇɴᴄᴇ ᴀɴᴅ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ɴᴇᴠᴇʀ ʟᴇᴀʀɴᴇᴅ ʜᴏᴡ ᴛᴏ ʙᴇ ʜᴀᴘᴘʏ ᴀʟᴏɴᴇ. Hᴏᴡᴇᴠᴇʀ, ᴜɴᴛɪʟ ᴀ ᴡᴏᴍᴀɴ ʟᴇᴀʀɴs ʜᴏᴡ ᴛᴏ ʙᴇ ʜᴀᴘᴘʏ ᴏɴ ʜᴇʀ ᴏᴡɴ, sʜᴇ ᴄᴀɴ ɴᴇᴠᴇʀ ʙᴇ ʜᴀᴘᴘʏ ᴡɪᴛʜ ᴀ ᴍᴀɴ ᴏʀ ᴡᴏᴍᴀɴ.
Eᴠᴇɴ ɪғ ʏᴏᴜ ᴀʀᴇ ᴛʜᴇ ᴏɴᴇ ᴡʜᴏ ɪɴɪᴛɪᴀᴛᴇᴅ ᴛʜᴇ ʙʀᴇᴀᴋᴜᴘ, ᴛʜᴇ ғᴇᴇʟɪɴɢ ᴏғ ʟᴏss ᴀɴᴅ sᴇᴘᴀʀᴀᴛɪᴏɴ ᴄᴀɴ ʙᴇ ᴅɪsᴛʀᴇssɪɴɢ. Tʜᴇʀᴇ ɪs ᴀ ᴍᴇɴᴛᴀʟ sᴛᴀᴛᴇ ᴄᴀʟʟᴇᴅ “sᴇᴘᴀʀᴀᴛɪᴏɴ ᴀɴxɪᴇᴛʏ”, ᴡʜɪᴄʜ ᴅᴇsᴄʀɪʙᴇs ᴛʜᴇ ғᴇᴇʟɪɴɢs ʏᴏᴜ ᴍᴀʏ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ɴᴏᴡ ᴛʜᴀᴛ ʏᴏᴜʀ ᴘᴀʀᴛɴᴇʀ ɪs ɴᴏ ʟᴏɴɢᴇʀ ᴀ ᴘᴀʀᴛ ᴏғ ʏᴏᴜʀ ʟɪғᴇ, ʏᴏᴜʀ ᴛʜᴏᴜɢʜᴛs, ᴀɴᴅ ʏᴏᴜʀ ᴇᴍᴏᴛɪᴏɴs. Tʜᴇ ɪᴍᴘᴏʀᴛᴀɴᴛ ᴛʜɪɴɢ ɪs ᴛᴏ ғɪɢᴜʀᴇ ᴏᴜᴛ ᴛʜᴇ ʙᴇsᴛ ᴡᴀʏ ᴛᴏ ɢᴇᴛ ᴘᴀsᴛ ᴛʜɪs ᴀɴᴅ ɢᴇᴛ ᴛʜᴇ ʙʀᴇᴀᴋᴜᴘ ᴏᴜᴛ ᴏғ ʏᴏᴜʀ sʏsᴛᴇᴍ.
Tʜᴇ ғᴏʟʟᴏᴡɪɴɢ ᴀʀᴇ ᴛʜᴇ ᴛᴏᴘ 10 ᴡᴀʏs ᴛᴏ ʀᴇᴄᴏᴠᴇʀ ғʀᴏᴍ ᴀ ʙʀᴇᴀᴋ ᴜᴘ ᴀɴᴅ sᴘᴇᴇᴅ ᴜᴘ ᴛʜᴇ ʜᴇᴀʟɪɴɢ ᴘʀᴏᴄᴇss.

1. Aʟʟᴏᴡ ʏᴏᴜʀsᴇʟғ ᴘʟᴇɴᴛʏ ᴏғ ʜᴇᴀʟɪɴɢ ᴛɪᴍᴇ. Dɪғғᴇʀᴇɴᴛ ᴘᴇᴏᴘʟᴇ ʜᴇᴀʟ ᴀᴛ ᴅɪғғᴇʀᴇɴᴛ ʀᴀᴛᴇs sᴏ ʙᴇ ᴘᴀᴛɪᴇɴᴛ ᴡɪᴛʜ ʏᴏᴜʀsᴇʟғ. Iᴛ’s ᴏᴋᴀʏ ᴛᴏ ɢʀɪᴇᴠᴇ ᴀɴᴅ ᴄʀʏ, ᴊᴜsᴛ ᴍᴀᴋᴇ sᴜʀᴇ ʏᴏᴜ ᴍᴀᴋᴇ ᴀɴ ᴇғғᴏʀᴛ ᴛᴏ ɴᴏᴛ ᴜsᴇ ᴛʜɪs ᴀs ᴀɴ ᴇxᴄᴜsᴇ ғᴏʀ ʙᴇɪɴɢ ᴀ ʜᴇʀᴍɪᴛ ᴍᴀɴʏ ᴍᴏɴᴛʜs ʟᴀᴛᴇʀ.

2. Sᴛᴀʏ ʙᴜsʏ. Dᴏɴ’ᴛ ᴀʟʟᴏᴡ ʏᴏᴜʀsᴇʟғ ᴀɴʏ “ᴅᴀʏᴅʀᴇᴀᴍɪɴɢ” ᴛɪᴍᴇ. Iғ ʏᴏᴜ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ғᴏʀ ᴀ ᴘᴀʀᴛ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ᴊᴏʙ, ɢᴇᴛ ᴏɴᴇ. Iғ ʏᴏᴜ ᴅᴏɴ’ᴛ ᴡᴀɴᴛ ᴀ ᴊᴏʙ, ᴛᴀᴋᴇ ᴜᴘ sᴏᴍᴇ ᴠᴏʟᴜɴᴛᴇᴇʀ ᴡᴏʀᴋ. Tᴀᴋᴇ ᴜᴘ ᴀ ʜᴏʙʙʏ. Fᴏᴄᴜs ᴏɴ ᴀɴʏᴛʜɪɴɢ ʏᴏᴜ ᴇɴᴊᴏʏ.

3. Exᴇʀᴄɪsᴇ ᴀɴᴅ ɪᴍᴘʀᴏᴠᴇ ʏᴏᴜʀ ᴅɪᴇᴛ. Bᴇsɪᴅᴇs ɢɪᴠɪɴɢ ʏᴏᴜ ᴀ ᴘᴏsɪᴛɪᴠᴇ ᴇɴᴅᴏʀᴘʜɪɴ ʀᴜsʜ, ᴊᴏɪɴɪɴɢ ᴀ ɢʏᴍ ᴄᴀɴ ᴘᴜᴛ ʏᴏᴜ ɪɴᴛᴏ sᴏᴄɪᴀʟ ᴄɪʀᴄᴜᴍsᴛᴀɴᴄᴇs. Tʜʀᴏᴜɢʜ ᴇxᴇʀᴄɪsɪɴɢ ᴀɴᴅ ɪᴍᴘʀᴏᴠɪɴɢ ʏᴏᴜʀ ᴅɪᴇᴛ, ʏᴏᴜ’ʟʟ ɴᴏᴛ ᴏɴʟʏ ʙᴇ ᴛᴀᴋɪɴɢ ᴄᴀʀᴇ ᴏғ ʏᴏᴜʀ ʙᴏᴅʏ ᴀɴᴅ ʏᴏᴜʀ ʜᴇᴀʟᴛʜ, ʏᴏᴜ’ʟʟ ɪᴍᴘʀᴏᴠᴇ ʏᴏᴜʀ sᴇʟғ-ᴇsᴛᴇᴇᴍ ᴀs ᴡᴇʟʟ.

4. Mᴀᴋᴇ ᴀɴ ᴇғғᴏʀᴛ ᴛᴏ ᴍᴇᴇᴛ ɴᴇᴡ ᴘᴇᴏᴘʟᴇ. Jᴏɪɴ ᴀ ᴄʟᴜʙ, ᴛᴀᴋᴇ ᴀ ᴄʟᴀss, ᴠᴏʟᴜɴᴛᴇᴇʀ, ɢᴏ ᴛʜᴇ ᴘᴀʀᴋ, ᴀᴛᴛᴇɴᴅ ᴀ ᴄᴏɴᴄᴇʀᴛ. Aʟʟᴏᴡ ᴛʜᴇsᴇ ʟᴀʀɢᴇʀ sᴏᴄɪᴀʟ ɢʀᴏᴜᴘs ᴛᴏ ʀᴇᴘʟᴀᴄᴇ ᴛʜᴇ ᴄᴏɴɴᴇᴄᴛɪᴏɴs ʏᴏᴜ ʜᴀᴅ ᴡɪᴛʜ ʏᴏᴜʀ ʟᴏᴠᴇʀ ғᴏʀ ᴀ ᴡʜɪʟᴇ. Tᴀᴋᴇ ᴀᴄᴛɪᴏɴ ᴀɴᴅ ᴊᴜsᴛ ᴅᴏ ɪᴛ.

5. Sᴇᴇᴋ ᴘʀᴏғᴇssɪᴏɴᴀʟ ᴛʜᴇʀᴀᴘʏ. Tʜᴇʀᴇ ɪs ɴᴏ sʜᴀᴍᴇ ɪɴ sᴇᴇᴋɪɴɢ ᴏᴜᴛsɪᴅᴇ ʜᴇʟᴘ. Iғ ʏᴏᴜ ᴄᴀɴ’ᴛ ᴀғғᴏʀᴅ ᴛʜᴇʀᴀᴘʏ, sᴇᴇᴋ ᴏᴜᴛ ᴀ sᴜᴘᴘᴏʀᴛ ғʀᴏᴍ ᴀ ʀᴇʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴsʜɪᴘ ʀᴇᴄᴏᴠᴇʀʏ ᴍᴇssᴀɢᴇ ʙᴏᴀʀᴅ.

6. Sᴜʀʀᴏᴜɴᴅ ʏᴏᴜʀsᴇʟғ ᴡɪᴛʜ ᴀs ᴍᴀɴʏ ғᴀᴍɪʟʏ ᴀɴᴅ ғʀɪᴇɴᴅs ᴀs ᴘᴏssɪʙʟᴇ. Iғ ʏᴏᴜʀ ʀᴇʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴsʜɪᴘ ᴡɪᴛʜ ʏᴏᴜʀ ғʀɪᴇɴᴅs ᴀɴᴅ ғᴀᴍɪʟʏ sᴜғғᴇʀᴇᴅ ʙᴇᴄᴀᴜsᴇ ᴏғ ᴛʜᴇ ʜᴜɢᴇ ᴀᴍᴏᴜɴᴛ ᴏғ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ʏᴏᴜ sᴘᴇɴᴛ ᴡɪᴛʜ ʏᴏᴜʀ sᴡᴇᴇᴛʜᴇᴀʀᴛ, ɴᴏᴡ ɪs ᴛʜᴇ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ᴛᴏ ᴘᴀᴛᴄʜ ᴜᴘ ᴏʟᴅ ʀᴇʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴsʜɪᴘs.

7. Fᴏᴄᴜs ᴏɴ ʏᴏᴜʀsᴇʟғ. Mᴜᴄʜ ᴏғ ʏᴏᴜʀ ᴇɴᴇʀɢʏ ᴡᴇɴᴛ ɪɴᴛᴏ ʏᴏᴜʀ ʀᴇʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴsʜɪᴘ ᴀɴᴅ ɴᴏᴡ ʏᴏᴜ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ᴛᴏ ᴘᴀᴍᴘᴇʀ ʏᴏᴜʀsᴇʟғ. Tᴀᴋᴇ ᴛʜᴏsᴇ ʟᴏɴɢ ʙᴀᴛʜs ʏᴏᴜ ɴᴇᴠᴇʀ ʜᴀᴅ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ғᴏʀ, ʀᴇᴀᴅ ᴛʜᴀᴛ sᴀᴜᴄʏ ɴᴏᴠᴇʟ ᴛʜᴀᴛ ʜᴀs ᴅᴜsᴛ ᴏɴ ɪᴛ, sᴏ ɴᴏᴡ ɪs ᴛʜᴇ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ᴛᴏ ᴡᴏʀᴋ ᴏɴ ʏᴏᴜʀsᴇʟғ.

8. Sᴛʀᴇɴɢᴛʜᴇɴ ʏᴏᴜʀ sᴘɪʀɪᴛᴜᴀʟ sɪᴅᴇ. Gᴏ ᴛᴏ ᴄʜᴜʀᴄʜ, ʟᴇᴀʀɴ ғʀᴏᴍ ᴀ ʏᴏɢɪ, ᴏʀ ᴘʀᴀʏ. Iᴛ’s ᴀᴍᴀᴢɪɴɢ ʜᴏᴡ ᴛʜᴇsᴇ ᴛʜɪɴɢs ᴄᴀɴ ʜᴇʟᴘ ʀᴇ-ᴄᴇɴᴛᴇʀ ʏᴏᴜ.

9. Gɪᴠᴇ ᴀᴅᴠɪᴄᴇ ᴛᴏ ᴏᴛʜᴇʀ ᴡᴏᴍᴇɴ ᴡʜᴏ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ɪᴛ ᴍᴜᴄʜ ᴡᴏʀsᴇ ᴛʜᴀɴ ʏᴏᴜ. Iᴛ ᴡɪʟʟ ᴘᴜᴛ ᴛʜɪɴɢs ɪɴ ᴘᴇʀsᴘᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ ᴀɴᴅ ᴀʟʟᴏᴡ ʏᴏᴜ ᴛᴏ sᴛᴏᴘ ғᴇᴇʟɪɴɢ sᴏʀʀʏ ғᴏʀ ʏᴏᴜʀsᴇʟғ. Tʜᴇʀᴇ ᴀʀᴇ ʟᴏᴛs ᴏғ ᴘᴇᴏᴘʟᴇ ᴡɪᴛʜ ᴘʀᴏʙʟᴇᴍs ғᴀʀ ᴡᴏʀsᴇ ᴛʜᴀɴ ʏᴏᴜʀs. Hᴇʟᴘ ᴛʜᴇᴍ.

10. Aᴅᴏᴘᴛ ᴀ ᴘᴇᴛ. Sᴛᴜᴅɪᴇs sʜᴏᴡ ᴛʜᴀᴛ ᴘᴇᴏᴘʟᴇ ᴡɪᴛʜ ᴘᴇᴛs ᴀʀᴇ ᴏᴠᴇʀᴀʟʟ ʜᴀᴘᴘɪᴇʀ ᴀɴᴅ ʟɪᴠᴇ ʟᴏɴɢᴇʀ. Gᴏ ᴛᴏ ʏᴏᴜʀ ʟᴏᴄᴀʟ ᴀɴɪᴍᴀʟ sʜᴇʟᴛᴇʀ ᴀɴᴅ ᴀᴅᴏᴘᴛ ᴀ ᴘᴇᴛ ɪɴ ɴᴇᴇᴅ. Jᴜsᴛ ᴍᴀᴋᴇ sᴜʀᴇ ʏᴏᴜ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ᴛʜᴇ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ᴛᴏ ᴛᴀᴋᴇ ᴄᴀʀᴇ ᴏғ ʏᴏᴜʀ ɴᴇᴡ ғʀɪᴇɴᴅ ᴘʀᴏᴘᴇʀʟʏ.Pʀɪɴᴛ ᴏᴜᴛ ᴛʜɪs ʙʀᴇᴀᴋ-ᴜᴘ ᴀᴅᴠɪᴄᴇ ᴀɴᴅ ᴘʟᴀᴄᴇ ɪᴛ sᴏᴍᴇᴡʜᴇʀᴇ ᴡʜᴇʀᴇ ʏᴏᴜ ᴄᴀɴ sᴇᴇ ɪᴛ ᴇᴠᴇʀʏ ᴅᴀʏ. Uᴛɪʟɪᴢɪɴɢ ᴛʜᴇ ᴀʙᴏᴠᴇ 10 ᴡᴀʏs ᴛᴏ sᴘᴇᴇᴅ ᴜᴘ ʀᴇᴄᴏᴠᴇʀɪɴɢ ғʀᴏᴍ ᴀ ʙʀᴇᴀᴋ-ᴜᴘ ᴡᴏɴ’ᴛ ᴛᴀᴋᴇ ᴀᴡᴀʏ ᴛʜᴇ ᴘᴀɪɴ, ʙᴜᴛ ɪᴛ ᴡɪʟʟ ᴅᴇғɪɴɪᴛᴇʟʏ ʜᴇʟᴘ ᴇᴀsᴇ ɪᴛ.

 

break up advie

Break-Up Advice: Top 10 Ways to Recover from a Break-Up

<>Break-Up Advice: Top 10 Ways to Recover from a Break-Up<><><>By Stephany Alexander

Ðḯḓ ƴ◎ʊ ʝʊṧ☂ ♭ґεαк υ℘ ẘ☤⊥ℌ @ ღ@ᾔ⁇ ℉їηⅾ ◎ʊ⊥ ☂ℌ℮ ßℯṧ⊥ ♭яεαк υρ @ⅾ√☤¢ε @ᾔ∂ тø℘ 10 ẘα¥ṧ ⊥ø ґℯ¢◎√ℯґ ḟґøм α ßґ℮αḱ üρ▣

Bʀᴇᴀᴋ-Uᴘ Aᴅᴠɪᴄᴇ: Tᴏᴘ 10 Wᴀʏs ᴛᴏ Rᴇᴄᴏᴠᴇʀ ғʀᴏᴍ ᴀ Bʀᴇᴀᴋ-Uᴘ
Bʏ Sᴛᴇᴘʜᴀɴʏ Aʟᴇxᴀɴᴅᴇʀ   

Dɪᴅ ʏᴏᴜ ᴊᴜsᴛ ʙʀᴇᴀᴋ ᴜᴘ ᴡɪᴛʜ ᴀ ᴍᴀɴ? Fɪɴᴅ ᴏᴜᴛ ᴛʜᴇ ʙᴇsᴛ ʙʀᴇᴀᴋ ᴜᴘ ᴀᴅᴠɪᴄᴇ ᴀɴᴅ ᴛᴏᴘ 10 ᴡᴀʏs ᴛᴏ ʀᴇᴄᴏᴠᴇʀ ғʀᴏᴍ ᴀ ʙʀᴇᴀᴋ ᴜᴘ.

Bʀᴇᴀᴋ-ᴜᴘs sᴇᴇᴍ ᴛᴏ ʙᴇ, ᴜɴғᴏʀᴛᴜɴᴀᴛᴇʟʏ ᴀ ɴᴏʀᴍᴀʟ ᴘᴀʀᴛ ᴏғ ᴛʜᴇ ᴍᴏᴅᴇʀɴ ᴅᴀʏ ʟɪғᴇ. Hᴇᴀʟɪɴɢ ғʀᴏᴍ ʀᴇʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴsʜɪᴘ ʙʀᴇᴀᴋ-ᴜᴘs ᴀɴᴅ ᴅɪᴠᴏʀᴄᴇ ᴀʀᴇ ᴀ ᴅɪғғɪᴄᴜʟᴛ ᴛᴀsᴋ ᴀᴛ ʙᴇsᴛ. Sᴏᴍᴇ ᴘᴇᴏᴘʟᴇ ɴᴇᴠᴇʀ ᴄᴏᴍᴘʟᴇᴛᴇʟʏ ʀᴇᴄᴏᴠᴇʀ, ᴄᴀʀʀʏɪɴɢ ᴡɪᴛʜ ᴛʜᴇᴍ ᴛʜᴇ ᴘᴀɪɴ ᴏғ ᴛʜᴇ ʙʀᴇᴀᴋ ᴜᴘ ᴛʜʀᴏᴜɢʜ ʟɪғᴇ. Oᴛʜᴇʀs ʙᴇᴄᴏᴍᴇ ɪᴍᴍᴏʙɪʟɪᴢᴇᴅ ғʀᴏᴍ ᴛʜᴇ ғᴇᴀʀ ᴏғ ɢᴇᴛᴛɪɴɢ ᴄʟᴏsᴇ ᴛᴏ ᴀ ᴘᴀʀᴛɴᴇʀ ᴀɢᴀɪɴ. Eᴠᴇɴ ᴄᴇʟᴇʙʀɪᴛɪᴇs ʜᴀᴠᴇ ʙʀᴇᴀᴋ-ᴜᴘs; Bʀᴀᴅ Pɪᴛᴛ ᴀɴᴅ Jᴇɴɴɪғᴇʀ Aɴɪsᴛᴏɴ ᴛᴏ ʙᴇ sᴀɪᴅ ᴛʜᴇ ᴍᴏsᴛ ғᴀᴍᴏᴜs ᴏɴᴇ.Sᴏᴍᴇ ᴡᴏᴍᴇɴ ᴛʀʏ ᴛᴏ sᴘᴇᴇᴅ ᴜᴘ ᴛʜᴇɪʀ ʀᴇᴄᴏᴠᴇʀʏ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ʙʏ ʀᴇᴘʟᴀᴄɪɴɢ ᴛʜᴇ ᴠᴏɪᴅ ᴡɪᴛʜ ᴀɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀ ᴍᴀɴ ᴏʀ ᴡᴏᴍᴀɴ ɪᴍᴍᴇᴅɪᴀᴛᴇʟʏ.
Aᴄᴄᴏʀᴅɪɴɢ ᴛᴏ ᴀ ʀᴇʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴsʜɪᴘ ᴘᴏʟʟ ᴏғ ᴏᴠᴇʀ 8,000 ᴡᴏᴍᴇɴ ᴄᴏɴᴅᴜᴄᴛᴇᴅ ʙʏ WᴏᴍᴀɴSᴀᴠᴇʀs.ᴄᴏᴍ, ᴏᴠᴇʀ 57% ᴏғ ᴡᴏᴍᴇɴ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ᴛʜᴏᴜɢʜᴛ ᴏғ ʜᴀᴠɪɴɢ ᴀ sᴀᴍᴇ sᴇx ᴀғғᴀɪʀ. Jᴜᴍᴘɪɴɢ ɪɴᴛᴏ ᴀɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀ ʀᴇʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴsʜɪᴘ ᴡɪᴛʜᴏᴜᴛ ᴘʀᴏᴘᴇʀ ʜᴇᴀʟɪɴɢ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ɪs ᴏɴᴇ ᴏғ ᴛʜᴇ ᴡᴏʀsᴛ ᴛʜɪɴɢs ʏᴏᴜ ᴄᴀɴ ᴅᴏ. Wᴏᴍᴇɴ ᴡʜᴏ ᴀʀᴇ ɢᴜɪʟᴛʏ ᴏғ ᴛʜɪs ғʀᴇǫᴜᴇɴᴛʟʏ sᴜғғᴇʀ ғʀᴏᴍ ᴄᴏᴅᴇᴘᴇɴᴅᴇɴᴄᴇ ᴀɴᴅ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ɴᴇᴠᴇʀ ʟᴇᴀʀɴᴇᴅ ʜᴏᴡ ᴛᴏ ʙᴇ ʜᴀᴘᴘʏ ᴀʟᴏɴᴇ. Hᴏᴡᴇᴠᴇʀ, ᴜɴᴛɪʟ ᴀ ᴡᴏᴍᴀɴ ʟᴇᴀʀɴs ʜᴏᴡ ᴛᴏ ʙᴇ ʜᴀᴘᴘʏ ᴏɴ ʜᴇʀ ᴏᴡɴ, sʜᴇ ᴄᴀɴ ɴᴇᴠᴇʀ ʙᴇ ʜᴀᴘᴘʏ ᴡɪᴛʜ ᴀ ᴍᴀɴ ᴏʀ ᴡᴏᴍᴀɴ.
Eᴠᴇɴ ɪғ ʏᴏᴜ ᴀʀᴇ ᴛʜᴇ ᴏɴᴇ ᴡʜᴏ ɪɴɪᴛɪᴀᴛᴇᴅ ᴛʜᴇ ʙʀᴇᴀᴋᴜᴘ, ᴛʜᴇ ғᴇᴇʟɪɴɢ ᴏғ ʟᴏss ᴀɴᴅ sᴇᴘᴀʀᴀᴛɪᴏɴ ᴄᴀɴ ʙᴇ ᴅɪsᴛʀᴇssɪɴɢ. Tʜᴇʀᴇ ɪs ᴀ ᴍᴇɴᴛᴀʟ sᴛᴀᴛᴇ ᴄᴀʟʟᴇᴅ “sᴇᴘᴀʀᴀᴛɪᴏɴ ᴀɴxɪᴇᴛʏ”, ᴡʜɪᴄʜ ᴅᴇsᴄʀɪʙᴇs ᴛʜᴇ ғᴇᴇʟɪɴɢs ʏᴏᴜ ᴍᴀʏ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ɴᴏᴡ ᴛʜᴀᴛ ʏᴏᴜʀ ᴘᴀʀᴛɴᴇʀ ɪs ɴᴏ ʟᴏɴɢᴇʀ ᴀ ᴘᴀʀᴛ ᴏғ ʏᴏᴜʀ ʟɪғᴇ, ʏᴏᴜʀ ᴛʜᴏᴜɢʜᴛs, ᴀɴᴅ ʏᴏᴜʀ ᴇᴍᴏᴛɪᴏɴs. Tʜᴇ ɪᴍᴘᴏʀᴛᴀɴᴛ ᴛʜɪɴɢ ɪs ᴛᴏ ғɪɢᴜʀᴇ ᴏᴜᴛ ᴛʜᴇ ʙᴇsᴛ ᴡᴀʏ ᴛᴏ ɢᴇᴛ ᴘᴀsᴛ ᴛʜɪs ᴀɴᴅ ɢᴇᴛ ᴛʜᴇ ʙʀᴇᴀᴋᴜᴘ ᴏᴜᴛ ᴏғ ʏᴏᴜʀ sʏsᴛᴇᴍ.
Tʜᴇ ғᴏʟʟᴏᴡɪɴɢ ᴀʀᴇ ᴛʜᴇ ᴛᴏᴘ 10 ᴡᴀʏs ᴛᴏ ʀᴇᴄᴏᴠᴇʀ ғʀᴏᴍ ᴀ ʙʀᴇᴀᴋ ᴜᴘ ᴀɴᴅ sᴘᴇᴇᴅ ᴜᴘ ᴛʜᴇ ʜᴇᴀʟɪɴɢ ᴘʀᴏᴄᴇss.

1. Aʟʟᴏᴡ ʏᴏᴜʀsᴇʟғ ᴘʟᴇɴᴛʏ ᴏғ ʜᴇᴀʟɪɴɢ ᴛɪᴍᴇ. Dɪғғᴇʀᴇɴᴛ ᴘᴇᴏᴘʟᴇ ʜᴇᴀʟ ᴀᴛ ᴅɪғғᴇʀᴇɴᴛ ʀᴀᴛᴇs sᴏ ʙᴇ ᴘᴀᴛɪᴇɴᴛ ᴡɪᴛʜ ʏᴏᴜʀsᴇʟғ. Iᴛ’s ᴏᴋᴀʏ ᴛᴏ ɢʀɪᴇᴠᴇ ᴀɴᴅ ᴄʀʏ, ᴊᴜsᴛ ᴍᴀᴋᴇ sᴜʀᴇ ʏᴏᴜ ᴍᴀᴋᴇ ᴀɴ ᴇғғᴏʀᴛ ᴛᴏ ɴᴏᴛ ᴜsᴇ ᴛʜɪs ᴀs ᴀɴ ᴇxᴄᴜsᴇ ғᴏʀ ʙᴇɪɴɢ ᴀ ʜᴇʀᴍɪᴛ ᴍᴀɴʏ ᴍᴏɴᴛʜs ʟᴀᴛᴇʀ.

2. Sᴛᴀʏ ʙᴜsʏ. Dᴏɴ’ᴛ ᴀʟʟᴏᴡ ʏᴏᴜʀsᴇʟғ ᴀɴʏ “ᴅᴀʏᴅʀᴇᴀᴍɪɴɢ” ᴛɪᴍᴇ. Iғ ʏᴏᴜ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ғᴏʀ ᴀ ᴘᴀʀᴛ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ᴊᴏʙ, ɢᴇᴛ ᴏɴᴇ. Iғ ʏᴏᴜ ᴅᴏɴ’ᴛ ᴡᴀɴᴛ ᴀ ᴊᴏʙ, ᴛᴀᴋᴇ ᴜᴘ sᴏᴍᴇ ᴠᴏʟᴜɴᴛᴇᴇʀ ᴡᴏʀᴋ. Tᴀᴋᴇ ᴜᴘ ᴀ ʜᴏʙʙʏ. Fᴏᴄᴜs ᴏɴ ᴀɴʏᴛʜɪɴɢ ʏᴏᴜ ᴇɴᴊᴏʏ.

3. Exᴇʀᴄɪsᴇ ᴀɴᴅ ɪᴍᴘʀᴏᴠᴇ ʏᴏᴜʀ ᴅɪᴇᴛ. Bᴇsɪᴅᴇs ɢɪᴠɪɴɢ ʏᴏᴜ ᴀ ᴘᴏsɪᴛɪᴠᴇ ᴇɴᴅᴏʀᴘʜɪɴ ʀᴜsʜ, ᴊᴏɪɴɪɴɢ ᴀ ɢʏᴍ ᴄᴀɴ ᴘᴜᴛ ʏᴏᴜ ɪɴᴛᴏ sᴏᴄɪᴀʟ ᴄɪʀᴄᴜᴍsᴛᴀɴᴄᴇs. Tʜʀᴏᴜɢʜ ᴇxᴇʀᴄɪsɪɴɢ ᴀɴᴅ ɪᴍᴘʀᴏᴠɪɴɢ ʏᴏᴜʀ ᴅɪᴇᴛ, ʏᴏᴜ’ʟʟ ɴᴏᴛ ᴏɴʟʏ ʙᴇ ᴛᴀᴋɪɴɢ ᴄᴀʀᴇ ᴏғ ʏᴏᴜʀ ʙᴏᴅʏ ᴀɴᴅ ʏᴏᴜʀ ʜᴇᴀʟᴛʜ, ʏᴏᴜ’ʟʟ ɪᴍᴘʀᴏᴠᴇ ʏᴏᴜʀ sᴇʟғ-ᴇsᴛᴇᴇᴍ ᴀs ᴡᴇʟʟ.

4. Mᴀᴋᴇ ᴀɴ ᴇғғᴏʀᴛ ᴛᴏ ᴍᴇᴇᴛ ɴᴇᴡ ᴘᴇᴏᴘʟᴇ. Jᴏɪɴ ᴀ ᴄʟᴜʙ, ᴛᴀᴋᴇ ᴀ ᴄʟᴀss, ᴠᴏʟᴜɴᴛᴇᴇʀ, ɢᴏ ᴛʜᴇ ᴘᴀʀᴋ, ᴀᴛᴛᴇɴᴅ ᴀ ᴄᴏɴᴄᴇʀᴛ. Aʟʟᴏᴡ ᴛʜᴇsᴇ ʟᴀʀɢᴇʀ sᴏᴄɪᴀʟ ɢʀᴏᴜᴘs ᴛᴏ ʀᴇᴘʟᴀᴄᴇ ᴛʜᴇ ᴄᴏɴɴᴇᴄᴛɪᴏɴs ʏᴏᴜ ʜᴀᴅ ᴡɪᴛʜ ʏᴏᴜʀ ʟᴏᴠᴇʀ ғᴏʀ ᴀ ᴡʜɪʟᴇ. Tᴀᴋᴇ ᴀᴄᴛɪᴏɴ ᴀɴᴅ ᴊᴜsᴛ ᴅᴏ ɪᴛ.

5. Sᴇᴇᴋ ᴘʀᴏғᴇssɪᴏɴᴀʟ ᴛʜᴇʀᴀᴘʏ. Tʜᴇʀᴇ ɪs ɴᴏ sʜᴀᴍᴇ ɪɴ sᴇᴇᴋɪɴɢ ᴏᴜᴛsɪᴅᴇ ʜᴇʟᴘ. Iғ ʏᴏᴜ ᴄᴀɴ’ᴛ ᴀғғᴏʀᴅ ᴛʜᴇʀᴀᴘʏ, sᴇᴇᴋ ᴏᴜᴛ ᴀ sᴜᴘᴘᴏʀᴛ ғʀᴏᴍ ᴀ ʀᴇʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴsʜɪᴘ ʀᴇᴄᴏᴠᴇʀʏ ᴍᴇssᴀɢᴇ ʙᴏᴀʀᴅ.

6. Sᴜʀʀᴏᴜɴᴅ ʏᴏᴜʀsᴇʟғ ᴡɪᴛʜ ᴀs ᴍᴀɴʏ ғᴀᴍɪʟʏ ᴀɴᴅ ғʀɪᴇɴᴅs ᴀs ᴘᴏssɪʙʟᴇ. Iғ ʏᴏᴜʀ ʀᴇʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴsʜɪᴘ ᴡɪᴛʜ ʏᴏᴜʀ ғʀɪᴇɴᴅs ᴀɴᴅ ғᴀᴍɪʟʏ sᴜғғᴇʀᴇᴅ ʙᴇᴄᴀᴜsᴇ ᴏғ ᴛʜᴇ ʜᴜɢᴇ ᴀᴍᴏᴜɴᴛ ᴏғ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ʏᴏᴜ sᴘᴇɴᴛ ᴡɪᴛʜ ʏᴏᴜʀ sᴡᴇᴇᴛʜᴇᴀʀᴛ, ɴᴏᴡ ɪs ᴛʜᴇ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ᴛᴏ ᴘᴀᴛᴄʜ ᴜᴘ ᴏʟᴅ ʀᴇʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴsʜɪᴘs.

7. Fᴏᴄᴜs ᴏɴ ʏᴏᴜʀsᴇʟғ. Mᴜᴄʜ ᴏғ ʏᴏᴜʀ ᴇɴᴇʀɢʏ ᴡᴇɴᴛ ɪɴᴛᴏ ʏᴏᴜʀ ʀᴇʟᴀᴛɪᴏɴsʜɪᴘ ᴀɴᴅ ɴᴏᴡ ʏᴏᴜ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ᴛᴏ ᴘᴀᴍᴘᴇʀ ʏᴏᴜʀsᴇʟғ. Tᴀᴋᴇ ᴛʜᴏsᴇ ʟᴏɴɢ ʙᴀᴛʜs ʏᴏᴜ ɴᴇᴠᴇʀ ʜᴀᴅ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ғᴏʀ, ʀᴇᴀᴅ ᴛʜᴀᴛ sᴀᴜᴄʏ ɴᴏᴠᴇʟ ᴛʜᴀᴛ ʜᴀs ᴅᴜsᴛ ᴏɴ ɪᴛ, sᴏ ɴᴏᴡ ɪs ᴛʜᴇ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ᴛᴏ ᴡᴏʀᴋ ᴏɴ ʏᴏᴜʀsᴇʟғ.

8. Sᴛʀᴇɴɢᴛʜᴇɴ ʏᴏᴜʀ sᴘɪʀɪᴛᴜᴀʟ sɪᴅᴇ. Gᴏ ᴛᴏ ᴄʜᴜʀᴄʜ, ʟᴇᴀʀɴ ғʀᴏᴍ ᴀ ʏᴏɢɪ, ᴏʀ ᴘʀᴀʏ. Iᴛ’s ᴀᴍᴀᴢɪɴɢ ʜᴏᴡ ᴛʜᴇsᴇ ᴛʜɪɴɢs ᴄᴀɴ ʜᴇʟᴘ ʀᴇ-ᴄᴇɴᴛᴇʀ ʏᴏᴜ.

9. Gɪᴠᴇ ᴀᴅᴠɪᴄᴇ ᴛᴏ ᴏᴛʜᴇʀ ᴡᴏᴍᴇɴ ᴡʜᴏ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ɪᴛ ᴍᴜᴄʜ ᴡᴏʀsᴇ ᴛʜᴀɴ ʏᴏᴜ. Iᴛ ᴡɪʟʟ ᴘᴜᴛ ᴛʜɪɴɢs ɪɴ ᴘᴇʀsᴘᴇᴄᴛɪᴠᴇ ᴀɴᴅ ᴀʟʟᴏᴡ ʏᴏᴜ ᴛᴏ sᴛᴏᴘ ғᴇᴇʟɪɴɢ sᴏʀʀʏ ғᴏʀ ʏᴏᴜʀsᴇʟғ. Tʜᴇʀᴇ ᴀʀᴇ ʟᴏᴛs ᴏғ ᴘᴇᴏᴘʟᴇ ᴡɪᴛʜ ᴘʀᴏʙʟᴇᴍs ғᴀʀ ᴡᴏʀsᴇ ᴛʜᴀɴ ʏᴏᴜʀs. Hᴇʟᴘ ᴛʜᴇᴍ.

10. Aᴅᴏᴘᴛ ᴀ ᴘᴇᴛ. Sᴛᴜᴅɪᴇs sʜᴏᴡ ᴛʜᴀᴛ ᴘᴇᴏᴘʟᴇ ᴡɪᴛʜ ᴘᴇᴛs ᴀʀᴇ ᴏᴠᴇʀᴀʟʟ ʜᴀᴘᴘɪᴇʀ ᴀɴᴅ ʟɪᴠᴇ ʟᴏɴɢᴇʀ. Gᴏ ᴛᴏ ʏᴏᴜʀ ʟᴏᴄᴀʟ ᴀɴɪᴍᴀʟ sʜᴇʟᴛᴇʀ ᴀɴᴅ ᴀᴅᴏᴘᴛ ᴀ ᴘᴇᴛ ɪɴ ɴᴇᴇᴅ. Jᴜsᴛ ᴍᴀᴋᴇ sᴜʀᴇ ʏᴏᴜ ʜᴀᴠᴇ ᴛʜᴇ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ᴛᴏ ᴛᴀᴋᴇ ᴄᴀʀᴇ ᴏғ ʏᴏᴜʀ ɴᴇᴡ ғʀɪᴇɴᴅ ᴘʀᴏᴘᴇʀʟʏ.Pʀɪɴᴛ ᴏᴜᴛ ᴛʜɪs ʙʀᴇᴀᴋ-ᴜᴘ ᴀᴅᴠɪᴄᴇ ᴀɴᴅ ᴘʟᴀᴄᴇ ɪᴛ sᴏᴍᴇᴡʜᴇʀᴇ ᴡʜᴇʀᴇ ʏᴏᴜ ᴄᴀɴ sᴇᴇ ɪᴛ ᴇᴠᴇʀʏ ᴅᴀʏ. Uᴛɪʟɪᴢɪɴɢ ᴛʜᴇ ᴀʙᴏᴠᴇ 10 ᴡᴀʏs ᴛᴏ sᴘᴇᴇᴅ ᴜᴘ ʀᴇᴄᴏᴠᴇʀɪɴɢ ғʀᴏᴍ ᴀ ʙʀᴇᴀᴋ-ᴜᴘ ᴡᴏɴ’ᴛ ᴛᴀᴋᴇ ᴀᴡᴀʏ ᴛʜᴇ ᴘᴀɪɴ, ʙᴜᴛ ɪᴛ ᴡɪʟʟ ᴅᴇғɪɴɪᴛᴇʟʏ ʜᴇʟᴘ ᴇᴀsᴇ ɪᴛ.

 

Some romantically call it "unrequited love," while others prefer the term "emotional hell." Either way, it is no fun to love someone who doesn't love you back. Don't go into stalker mode. Your best move now is to separate from the individual and address any self esteem issues that developed from the situation. Don't waste your time trying to "fix" the relationship. Move forward

Difficulty:

Moderate

Instructions

1. • 1
     Grieve the end of the relationship as you would any other. Cry. Write in your journal. Throw yourself a pity party. In the end, realize that the relationship you felt existed was not real. You're mourning the loss of an idea, not a reality. Allow this to comfort you.
   • 2
     Assess your self-esteem. You've taken a hit. This is the time to treat yourself especially well. Get out and see people and talk with your BFFs. Don't wallow in pity alone in the dark.
   • 3
     Ditch the romantic notions. The sooner you face facts and accept the situation, the easier and sooner you'll be able to move on. Going through breakups is part of life.
   • 4
     Look to the future. So, you're in the stink right now -- fair enough. However, look down the line. See yourself happy, healthy and with a partner who loves you for you. Know that this future exists and is within your grasp. In the meantime, plan a sweet vacation to an island somewhere with a friend.
   • 5
     Avoid the person. If you are honest with yourself, you realize you cannot be friends with this person, at least not right now. For your own mental health, give yourself some breathing room. This means no phone calls, no social media, no checking on the ex through mutual friends. It's cold turkey, baby. Break the addiction. It'll be good for you in the long run.
   • 6
     Picture yourself as someone else. What would you say to a friend in your position? "Get up!" "Forget about that jerk!" "Why are you putting yourself through this misery?" Listen to your own advice.
   • 7
     Dig deep. Figure out why you loved someone who didn't love you back. If this is a pattern, it is a huge red flag for you to explore. Therapists are here for a reason. If you need help, set up an appointment.
   • 8
     Get your groove on. Go explore your world. Join up for a new class -- maybe photography or the martial arts. Meet new people. Whatever it takes, get out of your old routine and see how big the world really is.
   • 9
     The best revenge is living well. Move on and move forward; don't look back. Create your own happiness. Exercise. Take care of yourself. Reward yourself and accept only those relationships that make you a better person.

deal with a lover· forgetting someone

How to Deal With Someone Who Doesn't Love You Back?

Some romantically call it "unrequited love," while others prefer the term "emotional hell." Either way, it is no fun to love someone who doesn't love you back. Don't go into stalker mode. Your best move now is to separate from the individual and address any self esteem issues that developed from the situation. Don't waste your time trying to "fix" the relationship. Move forward

Difficulty:

Moderate

Instructions

1. • 1
     Grieve the end of the relationship as you would any other. Cry. Write in your journal. Throw yourself a pity party. In the end, realize that the relationship you felt existed was not real. You're mourning the loss of an idea, not a reality. Allow this to comfort you.
   • 2
     Assess your self-esteem. You've taken a hit. This is the time to treat yourself especially well. Get out and see people and talk with your BFFs. Don't wallow in pity alone in the dark.
   • 3
     Ditch the romantic notions. The sooner you face facts and accept the situation, the easier and sooner you'll be able to move on. Going through breakups is part of life.
   • 4
     Look to the future. So, you're in the stink right now -- fair enough. However, look down the line. See yourself happy, healthy and with a partner who loves you for you. Know that this future exists and is within your grasp. In the meantime, plan a sweet vacation to an island somewhere with a friend.
   • 5
     Avoid the person. If you are honest with yourself, you realize you cannot be friends with this person, at least not right now. For your own mental health, give yourself some breathing room. This means no phone calls, no social media, no checking on the ex through mutual friends. It's cold turkey, baby. Break the addiction. It'll be good for you in the long run.
   • 6
     Picture yourself as someone else. What would you say to a friend in your position? "Get up!" "Forget about that jerk!" "Why are you putting yourself through this misery?" Listen to your own advice.
   • 7
     Dig deep. Figure out why you loved someone who didn't love you back. If this is a pattern, it is a huge red flag for you to explore. Therapists are here for a reason. If you need help, set up an appointment.
   • 8
     Get your groove on. Go explore your world. Join up for a new class -- maybe photography or the martial arts. Meet new people. Whatever it takes, get out of your old routine and see how big the world really is.
   • 9
     The best revenge is living well. Move on and move forward; don't look back. Create your own happiness. Exercise. Take care of yourself. Reward yourself and accept only those relationships that make you a better person.