Apr 2, 2010
The catalyst...winner or loser
Substances come together. They act, they react, they fight, they attack...an action takes place, a result comes out...some are winners, some are losers but there is someone else who is called as a catalyst...neither a an active participant nor a part of the result....it thinks to himself " Will I never have any destination? Aloof from the surroundings, only an onlooker. Yes it is said I help to accelerate the speed of the happenings which are anyways going to happen without my existance! After the action I am back where I was. I don't see myself moving ahead, moving to the next step of life; but wherever I go I see life around me accelerated because of me! Oh creator what kinda strange player you have made me in this fabulous game of life; packed with ambition to move ahead, with the lust to be a winner but destined to perform the best when I am not participating. How ...how am I going to win this battle within and outside!"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It depends on the incidence or the reaction.
ReplyDeleteIn cases where absence of catalyst does not have significant effect on reaction, the catalyst is a loser. Just because his presence/absence is more or less the same. It becomes a negligible mass.
In cases where absence of catalyst affects the reaction significantly or prevents the occurrence of reaction, catalyst comes across as winner. Because his presence/absence causes a huge difference.
A catalyst is a 'catalyst' due to its inherent nature. it just acts as promoter or catalytic poison at times, thats it. Situation decides winner and/or loser.