text:
Last and First Men

Last and First Men: A Story of the Near and Far Future is a "future history" science fiction novel written in 1930 by the British author Olaf Stapledon. A work of unprecedented scale in the genre, it describes the history of humanity from the present onwards across two billion years and eighteen distinct human species, of which our own is the first. The book employs a narrative conceit that, under subtle inspiration, the novelist has unknowingly been dictated a channelled text from the last human species.

Stapledon's conception of history follows a repetitive cycle with many varied civilisations rising from and descending back into savagery over millions of years, as the later civilisations rise to far greater heights than the first. The book anticipates the science of genetic engineering, and is an early example of the fictional supermind; a consciousness composed of many telepathically linked individuals.

In 1932, Stapledon followed Last and First Men with the far less acclaimed Last Men in London. Another Stapledon novel, Star Maker (1937), could also be considered a sequel to Last and First Men (mentioning briefly man's evolution on Neptune), but is even more ambitious in scope, being a history of the entire universe.

It is the 11th title in the SF Masterworks series.

Species of Humans

 * First Men. (Chapters 1–6) The First Men are our own species. Beginning in the early twenty-first century, several increasingly devastating wars take place in Europe, which result in the United States and China becoming the two dominant superpowers on Earth. In the twenty-fourth century, the US and China go to war, and the war concludes with the formation of the First World State. Two centuries thereafter, all religions and secular science consolidate into a religion based on the worship of motion whose god is Gordelpus, the Prime Mover. Four millennia after the formation of the First World State, humans deplete Earth's supply of fossil fuels, resulting in the total collapse of civilization. 100,000 years later, the Patagonian Civilization emerges. One feature of the Patagonian civilization was a cult of youth. One day, a riot occurs at a mine, and the rioters inadvertently cause a colossal subterranean explosion, rendering most of the Earth's surface uninhabitable for millions of years save for the poles and the northern coast of Siberia. The only survivors of the disaster are thirty-five humans stationed at the North Pole, whose descendants eventually split up into two separate species, the Second Men and some sub-humans. The First Men do not become completely extinct until shortly after the emergence of the Second Men.
 * Second Men. (Chapters 7– 9) The Second Men came into existence ten million years after the fall of the First Men. "Their heads, indeed, were large even for their bodies, and their necks massive. Their hands were huge, but finely moulded...their legs were stouter...their feet had lost their separate toes...blonde hirsute appearance...Their eyes were large, and often jade green, their features firm as carved granite, yet mobile and lucent. ...not till they were fifty did they reach maturity. At about 190 their powers began to fail..." Unlike our species, egotism is virtually unknown to them. At the acme of their highly advanced civilization, just as they are about to create a superior human species by genetic engineering, a protracted war with the Martians finally ends with the Martians extinct and the Second Men gone into eclipse.
 * Third Men. (Chapter 10) "Scarcely more than half the stature of their predecessors, these beings were proportionally slight and lithe. Their skin was of a sunny brown, covered with a luminous halo of red-gold hairs... golden eyes... faces were compact as a cat's muzzle, their lips full, but subtle at the corners. Their ears, objects of personal pride and of sexual admiration, were extremely variable both in individuals and in races. ... But the most distinctive feature of the Third Men was their great lean hands, on which were six versatile fingers, six antennae of living steel." Deeply interested in music (to the point of developing a religion based on the worship of music) and the design of living organisms. The Third Men eventually split into two factions: one that sought to create a subspecies of mediums, and one that focused on designing humans that consist almost entirely of brain tissue.
 * Fourth Men. (Chapter 11) Giant brains bred by one faction of the Third Men. For a long time they help govern their creators, but eventually their rule becomes oppressive and the Third Men rebel. The Fourth Men prevail by recruiting as servants a subspecies of Third Men prone to hypnotic suggestion (the ultimate product of the effort to breed a mediumistic subspecies). The docile subspecies of the Third Men exterminate the original subspecies, save for a few individuals to be used as lab specimens. After the war, the Fourth Men eventually reach the limits of their scientific abilities and discover that emotions and body are also necessary for complete understanding of the cosmos.
 * Fifth Men. (Chapters 11–12) An artificial human species designed by the Fourth Men. "On the average they were more than twice as tall as the First Men, and much taller than the Second Men... the delicate sixth finger had been induced to divide its tip into two Lilliputian fingers and a corresponding thumb. The contours of the limbs were sharply visible, for the body bore no hair, save for a close, thick skull-cap which, in the original stock, was of ruddy brown. The well-marked eyebrows, when drawn down, shaded the sensitive eyes from the sun." After clashing with and finally eliminating the Third and Fourth Men, they develop a technology greater than Earth had ever known before. When Earth ceases to be habitable, they terraform Venus, committing genocide on its marine native race which tries to resist them. The Fifth Men do not cope well after the migration and eventually devolve and diverge into two species: the Sixth Men and a seal-like subhuman species.
 * Sixth Men. (Chapter 13) "Sadly reduced in stature and in brain, these abject beings... gained a precarious livelihood by grubbing roots upon the forest-clad islands, trapping the innumerable birds, and catching fish... Not infrequently they devoured, or were devoured by, their seal-like relatives." After tectonic changes provide them with a promising land mass, they fluctuate like the First Men and repeat all their mistakes.
 * Seventh Men. Flying humans, "scarcely heavier than the largest of terrestrial flying birds", are created by the Sixth Men. After 100 million years, a flightless pedestrian subspecies appears which re-develops technology.
 * Eighth Men. "These long-headed and substantial folk were designed to be strictly pedestrian, physically and mentally." When Venus becomes uninhabitable, about to be destroyed along with the entire inner solar system, they design the Ninth Men, who will live on Neptune.
 * Ninth Men. (Chapter 14) "Inevitably it was a dwarf type, limited in size by the necessity of resisting an excessive gravitation... too delicately organized to withstand the ferocity of natural forces on Neptune... civilization crumbled into savagery." After the Ninth Men's civilization collapses, the Ninth Men themselves devolve into various animal species.
 * Tenth to Thirteenth Men. (Chapter 14) "Nowhere did the typical human form survive." About three hundred million years after the colonization of Neptune, a rabbit-like species evolves into the Tenth Men. The Tenth Men are sapient but primitive. After a plague wipes out the Tenth Men, several other primitive human species rise and fall.
 * Fourteenth to Seventeenth Men. The Fourteenth, Fifteenth, and Sixteenth Men are essentially Neptunian versions of the First, Second and Fifth Men, respectively. The Fourteenth Men create great civilisations and destroy them, frustrated with their own imperfections. The Fifteenth improve upon that, creating a spirituality based on "a devotion to the fulfilment of human capacity". They eventually create the Sixteenth Men - the first Neptunian artificial species. Thus the cycle of rise and collapse of civilisations ends, and steady progress takes its place. The Sixteenth Men achieve the highest level of civilisation possible "to the individual human brain acting in physical isolation" and to avoid stagnation create the Seventeenth Men, with an ability for "mental fusion of many individuals" to succeed them; however, the Seventeenth Men are "flawed" in some unspecified way, unimagined by the 16th due to their lesser awareness, and last only a short period of time before being replaced by the Eighteenth Men.
 * Eighteenth Men. (Chapters 15–16) The most advanced humans of all, essentially a perfected version of the 17th species. A race of philosophers and artists with a very liberal sexual morality. "Superficially we seem to be not one species but many." (One interesting aspect of the Eighteenth Men is that they have a number of different "sub-genders," variants on the basic male and female pattern, with distinctive temperaments. The Eighteenth Men's equivalent of the family unit includes one of each of these sub-genders and is the basis of their society. The units have the ability to act as a group mind, which eventually leads to the establishment of a single group mind uniting the entire species.) This species no longer died naturally, but only by accident, suicide or being killed. Despite their hyper-advanced civilisation, they practice ritual cannibalism. They are eventually extinguished on Neptune after a supernova infects the sun, causing it to grow so hot that it consumes the remains of the Solar System, faster than any means of escape they can devise. Unable to escape, this last species of man devises a virus to spread life to other worlds and cause the evolution of new sentient species throughout the galaxy.

Sub-humans

 * Baboon-like Submen. (Chapter 7) "Bent so that as often as not they used their arms as aids to locomotion, flat-headed and curiously long-snouted, these creatures were by now more baboon-like than human".
 * Seal-like Submen. (Chapter 13) "The whole body was moulded to stream-lines. The lung capacity was greatly developed. The spine had elongated, and increased in flexibility. The legs were shrunken, grown together, and flattened into a horizontal rudder. The arms also were diminutive and fin-like, though they still retained the manipulative forefinger and thumb. The head had shrunk into the body and looked forward in the direction of swimming. Strong carnivorous teeth, emphatic gregariousness, and a new, almost human, cunning in the chase, combined to make these seal-men lords of the ocean".
 * Period of Eclipse. (Chapter 14) "Man's consciousness was narrowed and coarsened into brute-consciousness. By good luck the brute precariously survived." Nature succeeds in colonising Neptune where sapient life fails. Human-derived mammals of all shapes come to dominate Neptune's ecosystem before adapting well enough for the vestiges of opposable thumbs and intelligence to become assets again.

In popular culture
Characters discuss the novel in H. G. Wells' Star Begotten.

The novel appears in the computer game Deus Ex as a reference when a corporation in the game allegedly tries to develop the Second Men in the series, but also in a much broader aspect as the game deals with genetic engineering, the next phase of evolution and human augmentations. Also similar to the book are the options presented to the player as to where human kind will go next: a fall back into an almost savage state of humanity, a keeping of the status quo or an extreme progression with the danger of sacrificing basic rights.

Film adaptation
Icelandic composer Jóhann Jóhannsson directed and scored a multimedia Last and First Men, "combining a film narrated by actress Tilda Swinton and accompanying score played by the BBC Philharmonic" at the 2017 Manchester International Festival. The 16mm black-and-white film is predominantly of memorial sculptures erected in the former Republic of Yugoslavia. Jóhann collaborated with José Enrique Macián on writing the narration adapted from Stapledon's novel. This was next performed at the Barbican Centre, London in December 2018, and later at Sydney Opera House as part of the Vivid Festival, on 2 June 2019. In 2020, a film of this work was released as Jóhann's debut and final directorial work, with sound artist Yair Elazar Glotman completing the work after Jóhann's death in February 2018. The film premiered at the 70th Berlin International Film Festival, and later screened at other film festivals around the world and released on VOD.

Influences on other writers
Brian Aldiss, in his preface to the 1962 edition, acknowledges the deep impression on him—and considerable influence on his own later writing—of Stapledon's book, which he encountered in 1943 while a British soldier fighting the Japanese in Burma, "An appropriately unusual period of life at which to encounter a vision so far outside ordinary experience."

Aldiss also mentions James Blish as another writer deeply influenced by Stapledon.

C. S. Lewis, in his own preface to That Hideous Strength, notes: "I believe that one of the central ideas of this tale came into my head from conversations I had with a scientific colleague, some time before I met a rather similar suggestion in the works of Mr. Olaf Stapledon. If I am mistaken in this, Mr. Stapledon is so rich in invention that he can afford to lend, and I admire his invention (though not his philosophy) so much that I should feel no shame to borrow."

The reference to objecting to Stapledon's philosophy was no accident. In particular, Lewis objected to Stapledon's idea, as expressed in the present book, that mankind could escape from an outworn planet and establish itself on another one; this Lewis regarded as no less than a Satanic idea – especially, but not only, because it involved genocide of the original inhabitants of the target planet. Professor Weston, the chief villain of Lewis's Space Trilogy, is an outspoken proponent of this idea, and in Out of the Silent Planet, Lewis opposes to it the depiction of the virtuous and stoic Martians/Malacandrians who choose to die with their dying planet, even though they possessed the technology to cross space and colonise Earth.

Arthur C. Clarke has said of Stapledon's 1930 book Last and First Men that "No other book had a greater influence on my life... [It] and its successor Star Maker (1937) are the twin summits of [Stapledon's] literary career."

H. P. Lovecraft held the book in very high regard (though he did not say whether it influenced any of his own stories), saying in a 1936 letter to Fritz Leiber "no one ought to miss reading W. Olaf Stapledon's Last and First Men... Probably you have read it. If not, make a bee line for library or bookstall!", and in another 1936 letter to Leiber "I'm glad to hear of your perusal of Last and First Men—a volume which to my mind forms the greatest of all achievements in the field that Master Ackerman would denominate "scientifiction". Its scope is dizzying—and despite a somewhat disproportionate acceleration of the tempo toward the end, and a few scientific inferences which might legitimately be challenged, it remains a thing of unparalleled power. As you say, it has the truly basic quality of a myth, and some of the episodes are of matchless poignancy and dramatic intensity." Finally, in a 1937 letter to Arthur Widner he said "I don't care for science fiction of the sort published in cheap magazines. There's no vitality in it—merely dry theories tacked on to shallow, unreal, insincere juvenile adventure stories. But I do like the few real masterpieces in the field—certain of H. G. Wells's novels, S. Fowler Wright's The World Below, & that marvellous piece of imagination by W. Olaf Stapledon, Last & First Men."

John Maynard Smith has said "A man called Olaf Stapledon was a marvellous predictor who wrote science fiction books that I read when I was 16 and that completely blew my mind; and Arthur C. Clarke put his finger on quite a number of bright thoughts. He and I have something in common: we both took out of the public library the same science fiction book when we were boys of about 15 or 16, which was Stapledon's Last and First Men. We took it out of the same country library in Porlock in Somerset. Whoever put that book on the shelves had a lot to answer for!"

Sir Patrick Moore has said "The science fiction novel Last and First Men by Olaf Stapledon is immensely thought-provoking and I've read it time and time again."

title: Last and First Men


text:
Bornless Ritual

The Bornless Ritual, also known as the Preliminary Invocation of the Goetia or simply Preliminary Invocation, originates from the Graeco-Egyptian Papyri Graecae Magicae (PGM), a collection of ancient spells, invocations, and hymns compiled between the 2nd century BCE and the 5th century CE. Initially used for exorcism and healing, the ritual invokes the "Bornless" or "Headless One", a transcendent deity beyond birth and death, symbolizing the unity of the divine and practitioner. Some interpretations suggest that the ritual may have connections with the Egyptian god Set. It is also called the "Headless Rite" or the "Invocation of the Bornless One".

Adapted by the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn and Aleister Crowley's A∴A∴, the ritual is employed to contact the Holy Guardian Angel, a key concept in Thelema and other esoteric traditions. It serves purposes of spiritual protection, purification, and preparation for deeper magical workings, aiming to facilitate a connection with higher spiritual forces.

Today, the Bornless Ritual remains significant in Western esotericism, especially in the pursuit of the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel. Its continued use underscores its foundational role and impact on the spiritual journey in modern occult practices.

Historical origins and development
The Bornless Ritual is deeply rooted in ancient texts and traditions, drawing from Graeco-Egyptian magical practices. One of the primary sources for the ritual is the Greek Magical Papyri (Papyri Graecae Magicae), a collection of ancient spells, invocations, and hymns compiled between the 2nd century BCE and the 5th century CE. This collection includes various rituals and invocations that have influenced the development of the Bornless Ritual.

The ritual is derived from a specific text within the Greek Magical Papyri known as the "Stele of Jeu the Hieroglyphist in his letter" (PGM V. 96-172). The original ritual was intended as a rite of exorcism. It refers to "Moses" and the "ceremonies of Israel", suggesting a Jewish influence. The Bornless Ritual was first published in England in 1852 by Charles Wycliffe Goodwin as Fragment of a Graeco-Egyptian Work Upon Magic for the Cambridge Antiquarian Society. In 1899, E. A. Wallis Budge included excerpts from it in his book Egyptian Magic.

The adaptation of the Bornless Ritual in the context of Western esotericism owes much to the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn (1887–1903). Samuel Liddell MacGregor Mathers, one of the primary founders of the Golden Dawn, is credited with incorporating the ritual into the order's teachings. The Golden Dawn's teachings and ceremonial practices played a significant role in preserving and popularizing the ritual. Israel Regardie's The Golden Dawn provides an in-depth look at the ritual's structure and its significance within the order's framework.

Aleister Crowley's extensive work on the ritual is detailed in his The Temple of Solomon the King, where he emphasizes its use for attaining the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel. His "Liber Samekh" offer a detailed interpretation and adaptation of the ritual, which he integrated into his practices. These foundational texts and references form the bedrock upon which contemporary understandings and practices of the Bornless Ritual are built.

Theoretical foundations
The theoretical foundations of the Bornless Ritual are rooted in ancient Egyptian and Greek magical traditions, reflecting a synthesis of Hermetic, Gnostic, and early Christian influences. The ritual calls upon the "Bornless One", a term signifying a primordial, transcendent deity beyond the confines of birth and death. This concept is central to the Hermetic tradition, emphasizing the unity of the divine and the individual soul's capacity to access higher realms of existence. Philosophers such as Iamblichus and the Neoplatonists have significantly contributed to the metaphysical framework that informs the ritual, advocating the practice of theurgy to attain divine illumination.

In Thelema, the Bornless Ritual is particularly significant for its role in the "Invocation of the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel". The invocation's structure and language are designed to evoke a profound spiritual response, tapping into the archetypal imagery and symbolism present in ancient magical traditions. The ritual's invocation of divine names, magical formulae and attributes is intended to align the practitioner with cosmic forces, facilitating a state of heightened spiritual awareness and connection with the Holy Guardian Angel. This alignment bridges the gap between the material and spiritual worlds, enabling the practitioner to wield spiritual authority and attain deeper self-realization.

Structure
The structure of the Bornless Ritual is composed of several key components that together form an impactful invocation. It begins with the declaration of the practitioner's intent and a series of preparatory invocations aimed at purifying and consecrating the ritual space. The core of the ritual involves the recitation of the central invocation, which addresses the Bornless One and enumerates divine attributes, invoking protection, guidance, and spiritual authority. This central invocation is a detailed litany that calls upon various divine names and attributes, establishing a connection with higher spiritual forces. The invocation includes references to ancient deities such as the Egyptian god Thoth and the Greek god Hermes, symbolizing wisdom and communication.

Following the central invocation, the ritual concludes with a series of closing statements, reaffirming the practitioner’s connection to the divine and sealing the ritual space. Each segment is rich with symbolism, drawing on elements from various esoteric traditions to create a unified magical operation. The language used in the ritual is designed to resonate deeply with the practitioner's unconscious mind, invoking a sense of awe and numinosity. This intricate structure ensures that the ritual is both a spiritual and psychological journey, guiding the practitioner through stages of purification, invocation, and empowerment. In Thelema, these stages facilitate the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel, with the aim of establishing a profound connection with one's true divine self.

Practical application
In ancient times, the Bornless Ritual was primarily used for exorcism and healing. Its invocation of the "Bornless One" was believed to summon a transcendent power capable of banishing negative influences and purifying the practitioner and their surroundings. This use of the ritual reflects its roots in the Graeco-Egyptian magical traditions, where it served as a means of invoking divine assistance for health and protection. The ritual's exorcistic qualities was thought to make it effective for warding off malevolent entities and ensuring the safety of the practitioner.

In modern ceremonial magic, the Bornless Ritual serves multiple purposes, extending its ancient applications to more complex magical workings. It is often used to invoke divine guidance and protection, enhancing the practitioner’s spiritual resilience and clarity. Practitioners often report heightened states of consciousness and profound spiritual experiences as a result of performing the Bornless Ritual. It is considered an advanced practice within the magical community, often performed after preparatory rituals such as the lesser ritual of the pentagram.

In the Golden Dawn, it was used as an invocation of the knowledge and conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel. Crowley included his version of the ritual in his book "Liber Samekh". It is a core method and milestone in Thelema, and is often considered the proper preliminary invocation to the Ars Goetia since it was introduced as such by Crowley.

Performance
Performing the Bornless Ritual requires meticulous attention to detail and a profound understanding of its components. The practitioner must begin by purifying themselves through bathing and donning ritual garments, followed by the consecration of the ritual space with incense and the drawing of protective symbols. The ritual proceeds with the chanting of the invocation, during which the practitioner must focus intensely on the words and their meanings. The use of specific gestures and movements can enhance the ritual's effectiveness, aligning the practitioner's body and mind with the invocation's spiritual intent.

At the climax of the ritual is the powerful invocation of the Bornless One, a key segment that exemplifies the depth and complexity of the ritual. This climatic invocation as translated from the text by Hans Dieter Betz reads:

"I am the headless daimon with my sight in my feet; [I am] the mighty one [who possesses] the immortal fire; I am the truth who hates the fact that unjust deeds are done in the world; I am the one who makes the lightning flash and the thunder roll; I am the one whose sweat is the heavy rain which falls upon the earth that it might be inseminated; I am the one whose mouth burns completely; I am the one who begets and destroys; I am the Favor of the Aion; my name is a heart encircled by a serpent; come forth and follow."

Variations of the ritual exist, allowing for adaptations to different traditions and personal preferences, but the core elements remain consistent. Common challenges include maintaining concentration and navigating the intense energies invoked, which can be overwhelming for the unprepared practitioner. However, with practice and experience, these challenges can be managed effectively. The Bornless Ritual demands a high level of commitment and discipline, but its rewards in terms of spiritual empowerment and enlightenment make it a cornerstone of ceremonial magic practice.

Spiritual and psychological effects
The spiritual and psychological effects of the Bornless Ritual are multifaceted. Practitioners often report a heightened sense of spiritual clarity and connection, experiencing visions or insights during and after the ritual. The repetitive and rhythmic nature of the invocation induces a trance-like state, facilitating deeper meditation and introspection. This process can lead to significant personal transformations, as the practitioner confronts and transcends inner obstacles.

The ritual also fosters a sense of empowerment and divine presence, reinforcing the practitioner’s spiritual path and commitment to their esoteric practices. By invoking the Bornless One and aligning with its attributes, practitioners may feel a stronger connection to their higher self and the divine. This connection can result in enhanced spiritual resilience and an increased ability to handle life's challenges with greater equanimity. Regular practice of the Bornless Ritual is thought to contribute to long-term spiritual development, facilitating ongoing growth and deeper understanding of one's place within the cosmos.

Scholarly perspectives
Scholarly interest in the Bornless Ritual spans various disciplines, including religious studies, anthropology, and psychology. Researchers analyze its historical roots, comparing it with similar rituals across different cultures and epochs. Academic studies often focus on the ritual’s linguistic and symbolic components, exploring their psychological impacts and the mechanisms by which they induce altered states of consciousness.

While scholars critique efficacy of prayer from a scientific perspective, others acknowledge its cultural and spiritual significance, contributing to a broader understanding of esoteric practices. Jake Stratton-Kent has produced a robust analysis, examining its historical and practical aspects in detail. Richard Kaczynski's work on Aleister Crowley and Thelema also provides valuable insights into the ritual's context and evolution. Contemporary researchers continue to explore its applications and adaptations in modern occultism, examining how the ritual evolves and maintains its relevance. The interplay between tradition and innovation in the Bornless Ritual offers rich material for ongoing scholarly investigation.

Retreat and intensive practice
In modern esoteric practice, the Bornless Ritual is often integrated into intensive retreat settings to potentiate its effects. Inspired by the Abramelin operation, these retreats can span several months. Crowley developed a six-month version detailed in "Liber VIII". During these retreats, practitioners focus intensively on the ritual, aiming to achieve the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel. The extended period of focused practice allows for deeper spiritual engagement and transformation, enhancing the ritual's efficacy and impact.

Reports from practitioners who have undertaken these intensive retreats often mention profound psychological and spiritual experiences. Many practitioners describe encounters with Jungian archetypes, which are symbolic representations of universal human experiences and emotions. These archetypes can emerge during the deep meditative and trance states induced by the ritual, providing insights into the practitioner's unconscious mind.

Additionally, some practitioners report experiencing atavistic resurgence, where ancient, primal aspects of the psyche surface during the ritual. These experiences can be both enlightening and challenging, as they confront practitioners with deeply buried aspects of their psyche that require integration and understanding. The intensive nature of the retreat amplifies these experiences, making the Bornless Ritual a powerful tool for deep psychological and spiritual work.

Long-term impact
Over time, regular practice of the Bornless Ritual is thought to have enduring effects on a practitioner's spiritual and psychological development. It aids in the integration of spiritual principles into daily life, promoting a balanced and harmonious existence. The ritual’s emphasis on divine invocation and spiritual alignment cultivates resilience and adaptability, enabling practitioners to navigate life's challenges with greater ease.

The Bornless Ritual also deepens the practitioner's understanding of their place within the cosmos, reinforcing a sense of purpose and interconnectedness. This ongoing process of spiritual purification and empowerment can lead to lasting changes in one's worldview and personal growth. The ritual’s ability to evoke spiritual experiences and foster psychological resilience underscores its enduring value in the esoteric tradition, particularly in Thelema, where the pursuit of the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel is central.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Bornless Ritual


text:
KUOW-FM

KUOW-FM (94.9 MHz) is a National Public Radio member station in Seattle, Washington. It is the largest of the three full-fledged NPR member stations in the Seattle and Tacoma media market, with two Tacoma-based stations, KNKX and KVTI being the others. It is a service of the University of Washington, but is operated by KUOW Puget Sound Public Radio, a nonprofit community organization. Studios are located on University Way in Seattle's University District, while the transmitter is on Capitol Hill.

History

KUOW went on the air in 1952 on 90.5 FM. Its transmitter was on the University of Washington campus atop the Administration Building, now Gerberding Hall. In 1958, Dorothy Stimson Bullitt moved KING-FM to 98.1 and gifted KING's 94.9 FM transmitter and antenna to the Edison Vocational School. That same year, KUOW started using the 94.9 FM transmitter operated by Edison. KUOW is one of the few public radio (or any non-commercial educational) stations in the United States broadcasting on a frequency outside of the reserved band (88–92 MHz; Seattle is also home to KING-FM on 98.1, which became a non-commercial station in 2010). From its 1954 sign-on until 1987, KUOW was a sister station to educational/NET television outlet (and now PBS member station) KCTS-TV (channel 9); the university spun off KCTS in 1987 and became a community licensee.

In the 1960s, however, KUOW began branching out, adding more news programming. It was a charter member of NPR in 1970. In 1992, it changed format from music to news and information, and in 1999 it moved off campus to its current location on University Way. Also in 1999, UW outsourced the station's operation to Puget Sound Public Radio.

In late March 2020, KUOW "made an editorial decision to stop airing White House briefings on the coronavirus pandemic live on a daily basis." A statement from the station asserted that the decision was not politically based, and their "greater concern was the potential impact of false information on the health and safety of our community."

For several weeks in January and February 2022, a technical glitch with HD Radio caused the infotainment systems of Mazda vehicles made between 2014 and 2017 to only play KUOW's signal and flash repeatedly. Mazda blamed the issue on a missing file extension in KUOW's station logo; KUOW had ruled out a theory that the rollout of 5G networks had interfered with the existing 3G data received by infotainment systems.

Audience
KUOW reported that the station served an average of 413,600 listeners each week in 2019, down from 447,100 in 2018. The station also reported that their on-demand audio and podcasts received 2.9 million downloads total.

KUOW-FM broadcasts in HD. On March 7, 2018, KUOW made the decision to discontinue the HD2, HD3, and HD4 subchannels. "KUOW2" continues to be transmitted on translator K214EW 90.7 and KQOW-HD2 in Bellingham, while KUOW Jazz was discontinued. The main analog signal continues to be simulcast on HD1.

KUOW is also carried on the following satellite and broadcast translator stations to improve reception of the station:

 * KQOW 90.3 FM Bellingham
 * KUOW 1340 AM Tumwater and Olympia

Finances
For KUOW's fiscal year ending June 30, 2019, the station reported total revenue of $18,732,286 and total expenses of $18,339,864, for a net gain of $392,422. Its sources of revenue were:

 * 68% individuals
 * 24% businesses
 * 6% institutions such as Corporation for Public Broadcasting and University of Washington
 * 2% other expenses such as interest and dividends or donated services and supplies

Programs
KUOW broadcast the Washington Talking Book and Braille Library's Evergreen Radio Reading Service to blind and handicapped listeners on its 67kHz subcarrier, until the service's closure on August 15, 2014. KUOW was one of three major FM stations in Washington to do so; KPBX-FM in Spokane and KFAE-FM in Yakima were the others.

Music programming

 * The Swing Years and Beyond: a program that ran from 1968 to 2017 featuring jazz, swing, and blues music from the early 20th century.

Podcasts

 * Battle Tactics for Your Sexist Workplace
 * How's Your Day?
 * KUOW Newsroom
 * KUOW Shorts
 * Primed
 * Radioactive
 * Seattle Now
 * Second Wave
 * SoundQs
 * Speakers Forum
 * The Wild With Chris Morgan

How to Be a Girl
How to Be a Girl is a parenting podcast hosted by a mother using the pseudonym Marlo Mack to discuss her experiences raising her transgender child. Mack had been recording her child since she was a baby and had recently joined a local radio club when her daughter began expressing that she was not a boy, which lead to the production of the podcast. The podcast has been nominated for a Peabody award and has won both a Webby award for best writing as well as the international award from the British Podcast Awards. Freddie McConnell of The Guardian praised the show calling it a "tender take on an under-represented reality" and Katy Cowan of Creative Boom praised the show saying that it was "a revealing and often emotional podcast."

The Record
The Record is KUOW's flagship local news and interview podcast hosted by Bill Radke that debuted in the fall of 2013 and ended in July 2021. After a neo-Nazi was punched for wearing a Nazi band in public, Radke interviewed the neo-Nazi on the show, which was received negatively from the show's audience and led to Radke apologizing for doing the interview. Week in Review is the Friday edition of The Record, which won an award in 1996 for the best commentary and analysis from the Society for Professional Journalist.

Soundside
Soundside is a midday news podcast hosted by Libby Denkman that airs on KUOW on Mondays through Thursdays. The show was created after The Record ended.

Terrestrial
Terrestrial was an environmental podcast hosted by Ashley Ahearn which ran from April 2017 until December 2017. Ahearn started the podcast because she felt that most environmental journalism is impersonal and she wanted to explore how individuals cope with climate change rather than the discouraging state of the world. The podcast was nominated for Best Green Podcast in 2020 at the iHeartRadio Podcast Awards and was featured on Outside Online as the best environmental podcast of 2017. Jillian Capewell of HuffPost praised the show saying that the podcast is an "informative show in a sound-rich and powerful audioscape" and Rowan Slaney of The Guardian praised the show saying that "it absolutely blew me away."

title: KUOW-FM


text:
Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University

Tamil Nadu University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences (TANUVAS) is a veterinary university founded in 1989 in Madhavaram Milk Colony, Chennai, India. It is composed of the Madras Veterinary College, Vepery, Veterinary College and Research Institute, Namakkal, Veterinary College and Research Institute, Tirunelveli; Veterinary College and Research Institute, Orathanadu, Thanjavur and the Institute of Food and Dairy Technology, Koduvalli, Chennai-52. Research farms are for leprosy bacteria, for prawn and edible fish culture, and for animal feed safety.

History
The institution now operating as a university was established in 1876 and became a college in 1903, with 20 students at Dobbin Hall, Chennai. The three-year diploma course, Graduate of Madras Veterinary College, was then offered.

The Government of Tamil Nadu established the university on 20 September 1989 through the Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University Act, 1989 (Tamil Nadu Act 42 of 1989). Tamil Nadu Agricultural University's Faculty of Veterinary and Animal Sciences (i.e., Madras Veterinary College, Veterinary College and Research Institute, Namakkal and Fisheries College and Research Institute, Thoothukudi) formed the nucleus of university and the institutes became constituent colleges of the newly formed university.

Constituent colleges
The university has the following constituent colleges.


text:
Čech cohomology

In mathematics, specifically algebraic topology, Čech cohomology is a cohomology theory based on the intersection properties of open covers of a topological space. It is named for the mathematician Eduard Čech.

Motivation
Let X be a topological space, and let $$\mathcal{U}$$ be an open cover of X. Let $$N(\mathcal{U})$$ denote the nerve of the covering. The idea of Čech cohomology is that, for an open cover $$\mathcal{U}$$ consisting of sufficiently small open sets, the resulting simplicial complex $$N(\mathcal{U})$$ should be a good combinatorial model for the space X. For such a cover, the Čech cohomology of X is defined to be the simplicial cohomology of the nerve. This idea can be formalized by the notion of a good cover. However, a more general approach is to take the direct limit of the cohomology groups of the nerve over the system of all possible open covers of X, ordered by refinement. This is the approach adopted below.

Construction
Let X be a topological space, and let $$\mathcal{F}$$ be a presheaf of abelian groups on X. Let $$\mathcal{U}$$ be an open cover of X.

Simplex
A q-simplex σ of $$\mathcal{U}$$ is an ordered collection of q+1 sets chosen from $$\mathcal{U}$$, such that the intersection of all these sets is non-empty. This intersection is called the support of σ and is denoted |σ|.

Now let $$\sigma = (U_i)_{i \in \{ 0, \ldots , q \}}$$ be such a q-simplex. The j-th partial boundary of σ is defined to be the (q−1)-simplex obtained by removing the j-th set from σ, that is:

 * $$\partial_j \sigma := (U_i)_{i \in \{ 0, \ldots , q \} \setminus \{j\}}.$$

The boundary of σ is defined as the alternating sum of the partial boundaries:

 * $$\partial \sigma := \sum_{j=0}^q (-1)^{j+1} \partial_j \sigma$$

viewed as an element of the free abelian group spanned by the simplices of $$\mathcal{U}$$.

Cochain
A q-cochain of $$\mathcal{U}$$ with coefficients in $$\mathcal{F}$$ is a map which associates with each q-simplex σ an element of $$\mathcal{F}(|\sigma|)$$, and we denote the set of all q-cochains of $$\mathcal{U}$$ with coefficients in $$\mathcal{F}$$ by $$C^q(\mathcal U, \mathcal F)$$. $$C^q(\mathcal U, \mathcal F)$$ is an abelian group by pointwise addition.

Differential
The cochain groups can be made into a cochain complex $$(C^{\bullet}(\mathcal U, \mathcal F), \delta)$$ by defining the coboundary operator $$\delta_q : C^q(\mathcal U, \mathcal F) \to C^{q+1}(\mathcal{U}, \mathcal{F}) $$ by:

$$ \quad (\delta_q f)(\sigma) := \sum_{j=0}^{q+1} (-1)^j \mathrm{res}^{|\partial_j \sigma|}_{|\sigma|} f (\partial_j \sigma),$$

where $$\mathrm{res}^{|\partial_j \sigma|}_{|\sigma|}$$ is the restriction morphism from $$\mathcal F(|\partial_j \sigma|)$$ to $$\mathcal F(|\sigma|).$$ (Notice that ∂jσ ⊆ σ, but |σ| ⊆ |∂jσ|.)

A calculation shows that $$\delta_{q+1} \circ \delta_q = 0.$$

The coboundary operator is analogous to the exterior derivative of De Rham cohomology, so it sometimes called the differential of the cochain complex.

Cocycle
A q-cochain is called a q-cocycle if it is in the kernel of $$\delta$$, hence $$Z^q(\mathcal{U}, \mathcal{F}) := \ker ( \delta_q) \subseteq C^q(\mathcal U, \mathcal F)$$ is the set of all q-cocycles.

Thus a (q−1)-cochain $$f$$ is a cocycle if for all q-simplices $$\sigma$$ the cocycle condition

 * $$\sum_{j=0}^{q} (-1)^j \mathrm{res}^{|\partial_j \sigma|}_{|\sigma|} f (\partial_j \sigma) = 0$$

holds.

A 0-cocycle $$f$$ is a collection of local sections of $$\mathcal{F}$$ satisfying a compatibility relation on every intersecting $$A,B\in \mathcal{U}$$

 * $$f(A)|_{A \cap B} = f(B)|_{A \cap B}$$

A 1-cocycle $$f$$ satisfies for every non-empty $$U = A\cap B \cap C$$ with $$A,B,C \in \mathcal{U}$$

 * $$f(B \cap C)|_U - f(A \cap C)|_U + f(A \cap B)|_U = 0$$

Coboundary
A q-cochain is called a q-coboundary if it is in the image of $$\delta$$ and $$B^q(\mathcal{U}, \mathcal{F}) := \mathrm{Im} ( \delta_{q-1}) \subseteq C^{q}(\mathcal{U}, \mathcal{F})$$ is the set of all q-coboundaries.

For example, a 1-cochain $$f$$ is a 1-coboundary if there exists a 0-cochain $$h$$ such that for every intersecting $$A,B\in \mathcal{U}$$

 * $$f(A \cap B) = h(A)|_{A \cap B} - h(B)|_{A \cap B}$$

Cohomology
The Čech cohomology of $$\mathcal{U}$$ with values in $$\mathcal{F}$$ is defined to be the cohomology of the cochain complex $$(C^{\bullet}(\mathcal{U}, \mathcal{F}), \delta)$$. Thus the qth Čech cohomology is given by

 * $$\check{H}^q(\mathcal{U}, \mathcal{F}) := H^q((C^{\bullet}(\mathcal U, \mathcal F), \delta)) = Z^q(\mathcal{U}, \mathcal{F}) / B^q(\mathcal{U}, \mathcal{F})$$.

The Čech cohomology of X is defined by considering refinements of open covers. If $$\mathcal{V}$$ is a refinement of $$\mathcal{U}$$ then there is a map in cohomology $$\check{H}^*(\mathcal U,\mathcal F) \to \check{H}^*(\mathcal V,\mathcal F).$$ The open covers of X form a directed set under refinement, so the above map leads to a direct system of abelian groups. The Čech cohomology of X with values in $$\mathcal{F}$$ is defined as the direct limit $$\check{H}(X,\mathcal F) := \varinjlim_{\mathcal U} \check{H}(\mathcal U,\mathcal F)$$ of this system.

The Čech cohomology of X with coefficients in a fixed abelian group A, denoted $$\check{H}(X;A)$$, is defined as $$\check{H}(X,\mathcal{F}_A)$$ where $$\mathcal{F}_A$$ is the constant sheaf on X determined by A.

A variant of Čech cohomology, called numerable Čech cohomology, is defined as above, except that all open covers considered are required to be numerable: that is, there is a partition of unity {ρi} such that each support $$\{x\mid\rho_i(x)>0\}$$ is contained in some element of the cover. If X is paracompact and Hausdorff, then numerable Čech cohomology agrees with the usual Čech cohomology.

Relation to other cohomology theories
If X is homotopy equivalent to a CW complex, then the Čech cohomology $$\check{H}^{*}(X;A)$$ is naturally isomorphic to the singular cohomology $$ H^*(X;A) \,$$. If X is a differentiable manifold, then $$\check{H}^*(X;\R)$$ is also naturally isomorphic to the de Rham cohomology; the article on de Rham cohomology provides a brief review of this isomorphism. For less well-behaved spaces, Čech cohomology differs from singular cohomology. For example if X is the closed topologist's sine curve, then $$\check{H}^1(X;\Z)=\Z,$$ whereas $$H^1(X;\Z)=0.$$

If X is a differentiable manifold and the cover $$\mathcal{U}$$ of X is a "good cover" (i.e. all the sets Uα are contractible to a point, and all finite intersections of sets in $$\mathcal{U}$$ are either empty or contractible to a point), then $$\check{H}^{*}(\mathcal U;\R)$$ is isomorphic to the de Rham cohomology.

If X is compact Hausdorff, then Čech cohomology (with coefficients in a discrete group) is isomorphic to Alexander-Spanier cohomology.

For a presheaf $$\mathcal{F}$$ on X, let $$\mathcal{F}^+$$ denote its sheafification. Then we have a natural comparison map

 * $$\chi: \check{H}^*(X,\mathcal{F}) \to H^*(X,\mathcal{F}^+)$$

from Čech cohomology to sheaf cohomology. If X is paracompact Hausdorff, then $\chi$ is an isomorphism. More generally, $\chi$ is an isomorphism whenever the Čech cohomology of all presheaves on X with zero sheafification vanishes.

In algebraic geometry
Čech cohomology can be defined more generally for objects in a site C endowed with a topology. This applies, for example, to the Zariski site or the etale site of a scheme X. The Čech cohomology with values in some sheaf $$\mathcal{F}$$ is defined as

 * $$\check H^n (X, \mathcal{F}) := \varinjlim_{\mathcal U} \check H^n(\mathcal U, \mathcal{F}).$$

where the colimit runs over all coverings (with respect to the chosen topology) of X. Here $$\check H^n(\mathcal U, \mathcal F)$$ is defined as above, except that the r-fold intersections of open subsets inside the ambient topological space are replaced by the r-fold fiber product

 * $$\mathcal U^{\times^r_X} := \mathcal U \times_X \dots \times_X \mathcal U.$$

As in the classical situation of topological spaces, there is always a map

 * $$\check H^n(X, \mathcal F) \rightarrow H^n(X, \mathcal F)$$

from Čech cohomology to sheaf cohomology. It is always an isomorphism in degrees n = 0 and 1, but may fail to be so in general. For the Zariski topology on a Noetherian separated scheme, Čech and sheaf cohomology agree for any quasi-coherent sheaf. For the étale topology, the two cohomologies agree for any étale sheaf on X, provided that any finite set of points of X are contained in some open affine subscheme. This is satisfied, for example, if X is quasi-projective over an affine scheme.

The possible difference between Čech cohomology and sheaf cohomology is a motivation for the use of hypercoverings: these are more general objects than the Čech nerve

 * $$N_X \mathcal U : \dots \to \mathcal U \times_X \mathcal U \times_X \mathcal U \to \mathcal U \times_X \mathcal U \to \mathcal U.$$

A hypercovering K∗ of X is a certain simplicial object in C, i.e., a collection of objects Kn together with boundary and degeneracy maps. Applying a sheaf $$\mathcal{F}$$ to K∗ yields a simplicial abelian group $\mathcal{F}(K_\ast)$ whose n-th cohomology group is denoted $H^n(\mathcal F (K_\ast))$. (This group is the same as $$\check H^n(\mathcal U, \mathcal F)$$ in case K∗ equals $$N_X \mathcal U $$.) Then, it can be shown that there is a canonical isomorphism

 * $$H^n (X, \mathcal F) \cong \varinjlim_{K_*} H^n(\mathcal F(K_*)),$$

where the colimit now runs over all hypercoverings.

Examples
The most basic example of Čech cohomology is given by the case where the presheaf $$\mathcal{F}$$ is a constant sheaf, e.g. $$\mathcal{F}=\mathbb{R}$$. In such cases, each $$q$$-cochain $$f$$ is simply a function which maps every $$q$$-simplex to $$\mathbb{R}$$. For example, we calculate the first Čech cohomology with values in $$\mathbb{R}$$ of the unit circle $$X=S^1$$. Dividing $$X$$ into three arcs and choosing sufficiently small open neighborhoods, we obtain an open cover $$\mathcal{U}=\{U_0,U_1,U_2\}$$ where $$U_i \cap U_j \ne \phi$$ but $$U_0 \cap U_1 \cap U_2 = \phi$$.

Given any 1-cocycle $$f$$, $$\delta f$$ is a 2-cochain which takes inputs of the form $$(U_i,U_i,U_i),(U_i,U_i,U_j),(U_j,U_i,U_i),(U_i,U_j,U_i)$$ where $$i \ne j$$ (since $$U_0 \cap U_1 \cap U_2 = \phi$$ and hence $$(U_i,U_j,U_k)$$ is not a 2-simplex for any permutation $$\{i,j,k\}=\{1,2,3\}$$). The first three inputs give $$f(U_i,U_i)=0$$; the fourth gives

 * $$\delta f(U_i,U_j,U_i)=f(U_j,U_i)-f(U_i,U_i)+f(U_i,U_j)=0 \implies f(U_j,U_i)=-f(U_i,U_j).$$

Such a function is fully determined by the values of $$f(U_0,U_1),f(U_0,U_2),f(U_1,U_2)$$. Thus,

 * $$Z^1(\mathcal{U},\mathbb{R})=\{f \in C^1(\mathcal{U},\mathbb{R}) : f(U_i,U_i)=0, f(U_j,U_i)=-f(U_i,U_j)\} \cong \mathbb{R}^3.$$

On the other hand, given any 1-coboundary $$f = \delta g$$, we have

 * $$\begin{cases}

f(U_i,U_i)=g(U_i)-g(U_i)=0 & (i=0,1,2); \\ f(U_i,U_j)=g(U_j)-g(U_i)=-f(U_j,U_i) & (i \ne j) \end{cases}$$

However, upon closer inspection we see that $$f(U_0,U_1)+f(U_1,U_2)=f(U_0,U_2)$$ and hence each 1-coboundary $$f$$ is uniquely determined by $$f(U_0,U_1)$$ and $$f(U_1,U_2)$$. This gives the set of 1-coboundaries:

 * $$\begin{align}

B^1(\mathcal{U},\mathbb{R})=\{f \in C^1(\mathcal{U},\mathbb{R}) : \ & f(U_i,U_i)=0, f(U_j,U_i)=-f(U_i,U_j), \\ &f(U_0,U_2)=f(U_0,U_1)+f(U_1,U_2)\} \cong \mathbb{R}^2. \end{align}$$

Therefore, $$\check{H}^1(\mathcal{U},\mathbb{R})=Z^1(\mathcal{U},\mathbb{R})/B^1(\mathcal{U},\mathbb{R}) \cong \mathbb{R}$$. Since $$\mathcal{U}$$ is a good cover of $$X$$, we have $$\check{H}^1(X,\mathbb{R}) \cong \mathbb{R}$$ by Leray's theorem.

We may also compute the coherent sheaf cohomology of $$\Omega^1$$ on the projective line $$\mathbb{P}^1_\mathbb{C}$$ using the Čech complex. Using the cover

 * $$\mathcal{U} = \{ U_1 = \text{Spec}(\Complex[y]), U_2 = \text{Spec}(\Complex[y^{-1}]) \}$$

we have the following modules from the cotangent sheaf

 * $$\begin{align}

&\Omega^1(U_1) = \Complex[y]dy \\ &\Omega^1(U_2) = \Complex \left [y^{-1} \right ]dy^{-1} \end{align}$$

If we take the conventions that $$dy^{-1} = -(1/y^2)dy$$ then we get the Čech complex

 * $$0 \to \Complex[y]dy \oplus \Complex \left [y^{-1} \right ]dy^{-1} \xrightarrow{d^0} \Complex \left [y,y^{-1} \right ]dy \to 0$$

Since $$d^0$$ is injective and the only element not in the image of $$d^0$$ is $$y^{-1}dy$$ we get that

 * $$\begin{align}

&H^1(\mathbb{P}_{\Complex}^1,\Omega^1) \cong \Complex \\ &H^k(\mathbb{P}_{\Complex}^1,\Omega^1) \cong 0 \text{ for } k \neq 1 \end{align}$$

title: Čech cohomology


text:
Talk:Demigod

"Greeks had no such category, however, which consequently introduces unnecessary confusion."
This perfectly sensible sentence, which makes a necessary point here, correcting past confusion in this article (see Article history), was deleted by User:Alterego, who has not made any previous contributions to this article, with the pert Edit Summary: "remove unnecessary sentence". I restored it of course and received the following little note: "Please read the official Wikipedia policy regarding article ownership." I merely lay this all out publicly, for I see no reason to be bullied in private. There will be nothing further from me on this subject. --Wetman 6 July 2005 05:16 (UTC)

 * "since We already provide a link to the greek concept, this sentence is redundant. additionally, it is distinctly POV" (Edit summary of User:Alterego, reverting again) (The reader may judge whether this assertion reflects a neutral—or even an informed— point-of-view.)

Demigod of mythological context.
Demigod--half man, half god... 50% god and 50% man.

The Greeks have their Heroes and Titans, born of heaven and earth. The Hebrews have their Nephilim, born of women and the sons of god.

The distinguishing aspect of these demigods is their enormous strength and stature, and influence on ancient civilization--due to their supernatural birth. --71.215.154.31 23:30, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Titans were gods I'm afaid. ;-) An older generation of gods than the Olympians (Zeus & co.).

 * The attitude to divinities also effects the way demigods (if we can call the nephilim that...demiangels would be more like it) are viewed in Greek and Hebrew culture: for the Hebrews there was only one god, so the offspring of angels and humans were blasphemous and viewed as evil (though superhuman). The Greeks had no such compunctions about deities and interbreeding however, so demigods are viewed as heroes, and often play the role of culture heroes (heroic figures who establish traditions, found cities, invent culturally-signifcant things, etc) that mortal Hebrew patriarchs do. 86.174.121.238 (talk) 18:01, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The definition of demigod is "a being with partial or lesser divine status, such as a minor deity, the offspring of a god and a mortal, or a mortal raised to divine rank"
 * There are comma/ors in that definition and Jesus is the offspring of a god and a mortal. 2001:48F8:4078:1A1:B9DC:3023:DC37:3A95 (talk) 18:22, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

A text about alittle more about a "demigod".
Well,a demigod is a half Person and half god. You see there are many gods, but somepeople focus on only say about 7/8. But its a big difference bacause uaslly a demigod is called a half-blood. ok so a demigod can speak ancient greek or greek or they learn by tring to look on wepons they get then slowy they amerge to the language —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.209.242.103 (talk) 03:42, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

 * Nooo...in mythology demigods are born like normal humans and learn Greek/Roman/etc culture just like everyone else does. They aren't born as fully-formed adults, only gods can be created like that. 86.174.121.238 (talk) 17:56, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Demi-gods of India
Can anyone recast the following, apparently well-intentioned insertion with some source, and a little context? (Wetman (talk) 00:40, 9 May 2008 (UTC))
 * "Often people with an enlightened soul are given a demi-god like stature and they witnessed by say members of the family or some friends."

Posibility of mixing seed
the seed of the two fathers is mixed in her womb (not a modern biological possibility, but one that was firmly established in Antiquity).

I am not a biologist but is it not theoretically possible that child have 2 fathers? I.e. dizigotic chimera? Uzytkownik (talk) 23:48, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Jesus
Wouldn't Jesus be a demigod as well? With God being his father, and Mary, a human, his mother? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.163.79.83 (talk) 03:20, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Yes. But I think you are going to have a hard time getting any mention of Jesus on this page past the Christian Wikipedians.--Editor2020 (talk) 00:46, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Jesus should be mentioned but requires a special note since while being "half-god" is also in a way, a third of a god but then also being God at the same time... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.254.79.182 (talk) 11:00, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

 * The traditional interpretation of Jesus is closer to the Hindu idea of an avatar than the Greek idea of a demi-god, in that he is generally considered as God incarnated in human form rather than a human-god hybrid. Of course, there were early sects (later deamed heretical) that different interpretation of Jesus, some of which a demi-god interpretation could have worked. --50.149.180.189 (talk) 16:51, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * God / Father is Spirit so his "seed" is intangible.
 * Mary was human so her seed was tangible.
 * Why can't Jesus / Rabbi Yeshua be a "demi - God" 2001:5B0:2B0E:2388:C1A8:242F:4C6:DAF8 (talk) 06:48, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

POSSIBILITY OF MIXING SEED It is possible and has happened in a modern case involving a prostitute. There are times where two sperm will enter and egg and simply not create faternal twins rather create only one. Dont have time to explain it but if you look it up online you will definatly find it. (google it) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.3.193 (talk) 06:04, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

"Jesus is not a good example of a demigod, and that's not simply a subjective religious opinion of Christians. Jesus simply does not fit the definition of a demigod, according to this page's own criterion: that of being half god, and half human. According to every major Christian demonimation, Jesus is fully god AND fully human."

Then perhaps the page definition needs addressing? Demigod was never so precisely defined and Dionysus whilst having both human and divine parents was fully divine, unlike for instance Hercules who had to earn his divinity. Most mainline Christians would agree that Jesus has fully divine and human natures, excepting the non-chalcedonian (monophysite)Oriental Orthodox confessions. The monophysite Jesus, being fully divine and not human by his nature, may escape the accusation of being a demigod as he is more of a theophany or full incarnation of God. The Gnostic Jesus of the Valentinus is absolutely divine, passing through Mary as water through a pipe and therefore not a demigod. Also the Jesus of the Monarchians for similar reasons.

Jesus is not a good example of a demigod, and that's not simply a subjective religious opinion of Christians. Jesus simply does not fit the definition of a demigod, according to this page's own criterion: that of being half god, and half human. According to every major Christian demonimation, Jesus is fully god AND fully human.

This is explicitly stated in very broadly accepted Christian creeds such as the Nicene Creed and the Athanasian Creed. (For example, the latter creed states that "Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and man, God of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and man of substance of his mother...Perfect God and perfect man...Who, although He is God and man, yet He is not two, but one Christ.") The other figures listed on this page, such as Heracles, are listed because they were believed by the Greeks to be half god and half man. By the same standard, you must only list Jesus if he is believed by his followers to be half god and half man. And, demonstrably, he is not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alg0207 (talk • contribs) 05:38, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Jesus is a perfect example of a demigod and the very idea was of course lifted from Greek tradition. It is hardly relevant that the Christians who wrote the Nicene Creed (a document drafted three centuries too late to be anything but legalistic conjecture) or any other tract appear to disagree with Christ as demigod because of a point of semantics. The basic facts are: Jesus was born of a woman who was impregnated by a god. Christians will argue until the next religion comes along about whether he was, a god, a man, or both. The objective fact is that was a demigod. The Christian thought police don't want to recognize this fact because it reveals that the Christian story is strongly influenced by the myths of the middle east and Greece.

206.125.70.58 (talk) 02:56, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Demigods are generally considered to be mythical, Jesus is generally considered to be historical. Paul August ☎ 01:15, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Not quite. Nearly all Biblical scholars generally consider that Jesus, the demigod turned of god Roman myth (just like Hercules), is based on an ordinary historical man.Kcornwall (talk) 02:58, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

The historicity of Jesus is debatable. However, the Jesus god-claim is definitely mythical. Jesus is a demi-god. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.89.148.177 (talk) 01:04, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Jesus is arguably a demi-god. In fact, the Christian church argued about that until writing the oft-quoted creeds mentioned above. However, the conclusion of "fully god, fully human" was not merely semantics. That distinction makes a very real and highly important difference in the Christian faith. As such, it is universally acknowledged among all branches of Christian faith and those who disagree (but might still claim the title Christian) must perforce qualify that they differ from normal Christianity in this regard. Since the preservation of the Jesus story has been historically carried out by Christian church, it is reasonable and academically sound to accept the Christian definition. (e.g. One could argue that a particular teaching of any religion was nonsensical but it still remains the teaching of that religion.) In other words, Jesus should not be listed as a demi-god even though he may seem to fit that description. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.236.183.144 (talk) 19:32, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

If Thor and Hercules had known you guys were going to have this argument, they would have said that they were both god and man, too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.27.27.100 (talk) 21:19, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I call for adding a Jesus section. To me all of the arguments here in favor are reasonable. All of the arguments against are couched in esoteric apologetics (a.k.a. obfuscation). Here's my take on it.

Jesus was a demigod for these reasons. Latter-day revisionism notwithstanding, he was fashioned directly after other demigods of the time, sharing many of the same attributes and stories (i.e. Zarathustra, Hercules, Horus, Attis, Glycol - these most of these guys are also missing, BTW).

Definition: "Demigod - 1) a person in mythology 2) who has some of the powers of a god, 3) who is  part god and part human."

1) Jesus is a person in Christian mythology (despite possibly being based on an historical person). His feats and tales are collected in various writings in the New Testaments and other apocryphal texts.

2) He is described as having limited powers while incarnate (i.e., requiring air, food, water, sleep; organs could be pierced and bleed; cells died and were replaced as he grew.) Like Hercules, not a god until he ascended.

3) According to the plain Christian narrative (not how it is parsed out in theology), he was part god and part human. Reproduction at the time was conceived as the father contributing the genetic material (the form) and the mother the raw material. So just like Hercules, Jesus required a womb to grow in and be born from (and even in the modern cellular view, obviously sperm and egg were necessary to form a zygote for the rest of Jesus' body parts to develop from).Kcornwall (talk) 01:04, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

JESUS IS NOT A DEMIGOD, A DEMI GOD, OR A DEMI-GOD It amazes me how there are some among you so willing to claim that Jesus is not only a demigod but a demigod that is also a myth while at the same time unwilling to consider or even accept what the Church has taught about Jesus because it does not fit your world view and is therefore, unacceptable. 173.86.11.220 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:17, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Demigod vs. Demi-god
What is the proper way to write demigod? Is it demigod or demi-god? Are the two interchangeable? Shouldn't the article be consistent with what they call it? Prplfz9 (talk) 05:39, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Moved comment on article page just below header to discussion page
The definition given above would make Theseus a demi-god, demonstrating that the category, which applies in some sense to Heracles alone, is not a functioning category in ancient Greek religion.

Literary/Fictional Reference
I removed the line: "Also, in the Percy Jackson and the Olympians series, Percy and his friends are mostly demigods, or half bloods." It was at the least out place and uncited, and at the most completely irrelevant. Maybe if someone wants to create a section of artistic depictions of these demigods, it could be included there... Alex8541 (talk) 18:04, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Should the Olympian Series be mentioned at all? It seems almost every wikipedia page on Greek Mythology mentions that series, and almost exclusively which makes it seem more like advertising than trivia. Theyre mentioned in hundreds of currently popular fiction, from Xena to the X-men and yet only Percy Jackson is mentioned and mentioned everywhere. 219.88.182.68 (talk) 08:50, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Ansel
Who the hell is Ansel? I've been searching all over the place online for him and I can't figure out who this is meant to be in reference to.

216.54.22.188 (talk) 23:04, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Jesus
I just removed Jesus from this list but I have now realized this is an old argument. I am actually uneasy about the very existence of this article. To be clear, this isn't really an ancient pagan concept. Greeks and Romans didn't have a god-demigod-human classification. This is an idea that I suspect was popularized by the Percy Jackson books. Applying it haphazardly to figures who have not been described in this way is original research. --Lo2u (T • C) 17:06, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

The lead
I'm a little confused about the reasons for the reversion of my sourced additions. A few points:
 * Replacing three references to reliable, published sources with a single reference to a self-published source doesn't really seem helpful, particularly when the edit summary includes the phrase "Don't change referenced material".
 * Wikipedia may not be a dictionary but unfortunately dictionaries make up the majority of the limited reference material that actually says what a demigod is. They are a source for many Wikipedia articles.
 * As far as I'm aware, the Greeks never called their heroes "demigods". Pointing out that it is a modern term seems accurate and relevant.
 * The definition of demigod is fluid and inconsistent. Except perhaps in the Percy Jackson books, the term has never meant simply, "one parent is a god; one parent is a mortal" and it was difficult to find sources that give this definition, rather than "part mortal". Virtually every source accepted the "minor deity" definition. The current lead is simply wrong, and I don't understand why sources that showed this were removed.
 * The section entitled "Greek" seems to be a very messy synthesis of mediocre amateur scholarship and unsourced speculation. It makes all sorts of claims that I simply don't believe. The same can be said for many of the comments on this talk page. I agree, it is unsatisfactory that the lead as I wrote didn't quite reflect the rest of the article, but the whole thing actually needs a rewrite. --Lo2u (T • C) 08:56, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Prabhupada's use of the word demigod seems to be inconsistent
Although in the paragraph "Hindus" it's stated that Swami Prabhupada used the word demigod for those who are not Krishna (or his emanations), the same author also uses the word god for Surya, which is not Krishna. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.157.184.144 (talk) 22:27, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Constant addition of tags to this article
I am happy to try to help improve the article if there appear to be problems but the following does not seem like the user is really trying to improve the article: --Lo2u (T • C) 12:54, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=next&oldid=705225760 - user added 'multiple issues' tag
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=next&oldid=717446221 - user added 'self-published sources' tag
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=735685935&oldid=734491503 - I took this out on the grounds that there were no self-published sources
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&type=revision&diff=743249019&oldid=741330753 user added multiple 'citation needed' tags; expand with modern examples; ISBN needed
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=745708856&oldid=743249019 - I took one unsourced statement out; another statement in the opening was sourced, just not in that sentence
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=745836118&oldid=745708856 - user added ISBNs for arbitrary editions of ancient texts and replaced line numbers with requests for page numbers; he replaced references to very well-known works from before the 1970s with ones to more obscure print-on-demand books, simply so that ISBNs could be supplied
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=745871089&oldid=745850861 - he was partially reverted to restore line numbers and editions actually consulted
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=745892255&oldid=745871877 restored his edit but in a more helpful way
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=745939912&oldid=745893524 bot removed line numbers
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=745981249&oldid=745939912 entire thing was reverted by another user
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=746116889&oldid=745981249 replaced an accurate reference with an inaccurate one simply because the inaccurate one had an ISBN, and for the same reason restored the ref to the print-on-demand book.
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=746117178&oldid=746116889 added more tags requesting page numbers
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&type=revision&diff=746970453&oldid=746129817 I supplied page numbers and removed those tags; restored the correct references
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=747090787&oldid=746970762 added yet another page needed tag
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=748052907&oldid=747104022 added a tag saying the modern usage section was short of examples
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=756378570&oldid=753350953 I supplied the page number and removed the tag requesting more examples (there is nothing obviously missing)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=756540030&oldid=756378570 tag was immediately put back
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=756542433&oldid=756540086 further requests for a page reference for the OED and alteration of reference to a different Oxford dictionary
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=756714569&oldid=756553241 I removed the request for a modern examples tag, after contacting the user to say he had not said what modern examples were missing and I was not convinced there were any major omissions.
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=759910152&oldid=756714569 I supplied the OED page number and restored the ref to the OED
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=759942033&oldid=759910152 User kept my page number but again changed the reference to refer to a different dictionary with different page numbers so the page number and book didn't match
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=next&oldid=759942033 User added a tag claiming there were too many examples in the 'See also' section. There were 7.
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=next&oldid=760172696 User yet again restored the pointless 'expand' tag.
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=next&oldid=760173318 I removed the expand tag
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=next&oldid=760173972 I reduced the number of see also links and then removed that tag
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=next&oldid=760174445 editor put the links I had removed back and then restored the tag saying the links needed to be reduced
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Demigod&diff=next&oldid=760175636 ...and then reverted his own edit

Jesus
Jesus was divine, and very human. Fits the description, but depends on your interpretation of the word "Demigod". I wouldn't say he was 50/50, half god and half human, I would just say he was 100% both and more. Indeed, if you're looking to put a technical definition from secular religious studies to explain the nature of Christ there is a term that is much more suited to that particular job than demigod. Most secular religious scholars tend define Jesus as an "Avatar" a physical/personal manifestation of God himself, in this case Jesus Christ is an Avatar of Yahweh, not a demigod. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.10.147.119 (talk) 23:49, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

 * I'm sorry I would have to disagree. By definition He, a child born from a human and God mix, (last documented) is a Demigod. Was also the last to harness and use magic of the world and science of life. And the Avatar of Yahweh is un likely, cause at bat Jesus knocks the ball out of the park. Since, Jesus calls God “Father” over 165 times, in the Bible. Please give opinions I enjoy good debate 174.247.237.49 (talk) 14:43, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Demideity/Demi-deity
Can Demideity/Demi-deity be used at least as a redirect?

ArchAngelAvenger (talk) 00:58, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Is this supposed to be considered a Compliment or severe hindrence for Non Believers?
For religious figures, this can be used as a way for someone to get or yield power or to be more full of themselves, or just someone really believing that they are a descended from g*d and have special power or privileges. But what about an ordinary person who for example runs for office? Is this considered blasphemous? What is the first is agnostic or an atheist can he still claim Demigod? The definition provided seems kinda open-ended. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.81.150.168 (talk) 22:17, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

George Washington and Abraham Lincoln are considered Demigods
I added this at the end of the introduction... In US History, George Washington and Abraham Lincoln are considered demigods. 2601:589:4802:AB0:80F4:8C3:9BBD:C5A (talk) 14:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Not by any reasonable source I have seen, and if you want to add it again you will also have to add a reliable source that supports the change. Sjö (talk) 15:09, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Modern use
There is no mention in the section on 'Modern use' of demigod being a translation of deva in Hinduism. There are many volumes of books using this translation in scores of different languages. Is there any reason it shouldn't be included? Namady (talk) 12:30, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Demigod


text:
Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University

Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University (TNDALU) is a public state university established in 1997 at Chennai, India by the Government of Tamil Nadu under The Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University Act, 1996, which also brought all law colleges in Tamil Nadu under the control of the university. It was named after B. R. Ambedkar, an Indian jurist, social reformer and the architect the Constitution of India. The university was inaugurated on 20 September 1997 by K. R. Narayanan, former president of India. The university started a law school on its own campus in 2002 as the School of Excellence in Law, Chennai (SOEL).

Academics
At the undergraduate level, SOEL has a three-year course leading to a Bachelor of Laws (LL.B.), and five-year integrated double-degree courses leading to a combination between a LL.B. and a Bachelor of Arts, Bachelor of Computing, Bachelor of Business Administration, or Bachelor of Computer Application.

The Postgraduate Department provides Master of Laws degrees across nine different branches.

Campus
Chief minister J. Jayalalithaa in February 2016 unveiled a state-of-the-art campus for the TN Dr Ambedkar Law University at Perungudi next to Taramani MRTS station. The new campus has separate blocks for administration and classes, besides a library at a cost of 59.27 crore. The CM opened the facility through video conferencing from her chamber at the Secretariat. The campus also has hostel facilities for girls and a playground with gallery.

title: Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University


text:
User talk:Sridev

Hello. Please write in complete sentences. If you havn't already, check out How to edit a page and the various tips and info linked from Welcome, newcomers. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 15:47, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I was planning on adding more info later. Sridev 15:49, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Welcome !
Nah.. not coincidence. I went to your User Contributions page and went through most of the new articles found there. If new users are having problems with editing we can help them out. But you're doing a good job. Welcome to Wikipedia! Jay 09:20, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Substubs
Substubs are merely a type of stub, they are not a different category. See Find or fix a stub and Substub. Accordingly, there is nothing wrong with having a stub message on a so-called substub. Also, please note that the use of the substub concept is disputed, see Wikipedia talk:Substub. --Michael Snow 20:17, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Spam in Juniper Networks
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Juniper Networks, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Juniper Networks is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Juniper Networks, please affix the template  to the page, and put a note on its talk page. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Juniper Networks itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 19:43, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University
A tag has been placed on Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. trakesht (talk) 11:46, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sridev


text:
Effervescence

Effervescence is the escape of gas from an aqueous solution and the foaming or fizzing that results from that release. The word effervescence is derived from the Latin verb fervere (to boil), preceded by the adverb ex. It has the same linguistic root as the word fermentation.

Effervescence can also be observed when opening a bottle of champagne, beer or carbonated beverages such as some carbonated soft drinks. The visible bubbles are produced by the escape from solution of the dissolved gas (which itself is not visible while dissolved in the liquid).

Chemistry
Although CO2 is most common for beverages, nitrogen gas is sometimes deliberately added to certain beers. The smaller bubble size creates a smoother beer head. Due to the poor solubility of nitrogen in beer, kegs or widgets are used for this.

In the laboratory, a common example of effervescence is seen if hydrochloric acid is added to a block of limestone. If a few pieces of marble or an antacid tablet are put in hydrochloric acid in a test tube fitted with a bung, effervescence of carbon dioxide can be witnessed.

This process is generally represented by the following reaction, where a pressurized dilute solution of carbonic acid in water releases gaseous carbon dioxide at decompression:

In simple terms, it is the result of the chemical reaction occurring in the liquid which produces a gaseous product.

title: Effervescence


text:
ATC code M02

M02AA Anti-inflammatory preparations, non-steroids for topical use

 * M02AA01 Phenylbutazone
 * M02AA02 Mofebutazone
 * M02AA03 Clofezone
 * M02AA04 Oxyphenbutazone
 * M02AA05 Benzydamine
 * M02AA06 Etofenamate
 * M02AA07 Piroxicam
 * M02AA08 Felbinac
 * M02AA09 Bufexamac
 * M02AA10 Ketoprofen
 * M02AA11 Bendazac
 * M02AA12 Naproxen
 * M02AA13 Ibuprofen
 * M02AA14 Fentiazac
 * M02AA15 Diclofenac
 * M02AA16 Feprazone
 * M02AA17 Niflumic acid
 * M02AA18 Meclofenamic acid
 * M02AA19 Flurbiprofen
 * M02AA21 Tolmetin
 * M02AA22 Suxibuzone
 * M02AA23 Indometacin
 * M02AA24 Nifenazone
 * M02AA25 Aceclofenac
 * M02AA26 Nimesulide
 * M02AA27 Dexketoprofen
 * M02AA28 Piketoprofen
 * M02AA29 Esflurbiprofen
 * M02AA31 Loxoprofen
 * QM02AA99 Antiinflammatory preparations, non-steroids for topical use, combinations

M02AB Capsaicin and similar agents

 * M02AB01 Capsaicin
 * M02AB02 Zucapsaicin

M02AC Preparations with salicylic acid derivatives

 * QM02AC99 Preparations with salicylic acid derivatives, combinations

M02AX Other topical products for joint and muscular pain

 * M02AX02 Tolazoline
 * M02AX03 Dimethyl sulfoxide
 * M02AX05 Idrocilamide
 * M02AX06 Tolperisone
 * M02AX10 Various
 * QM02AX53 Dimethyl sulfoxide, combinations

title: ATC code M02