Being new is not just having a new façade. There are people who lead their lives based on the axioms passed on to them. Another group might choose to organize their lives in the same way as the layers of soil are stratified, gaining experience by the passage of time. You can think of any other established procedure, but what makes all of these life algorithms alike or even different, is the fact that you need to renew your evanescent thoughts and ideas each day. I’m not talking about a new strategy here, I’m just depicting an idea you can perceive as ‘necessity’: You can’t just regurgitate what you learn or what is taught to you; you need to analyze each day of your life to conclude it before it is lost if in the ocean of time, so that you can come up with a more evolved point of view. Each of us has certainly experienced cases when devoting our time to an idea has altered the way we rule our lives on the basis of a revised plan. It’s an irony how a transitory thought might result in a life change, but that’s exactly the point, if and if only this switch happens in a deep level; when the reason is clarified: It’s ‘thinking’ that propels your life through. You can’t claim your new day is different from the day before unless you accompany the act of analyzing your moments with you. How does your blood coagulate? The reason are platelets. And in my opinion, ‘time’ is much like ‘blood’. You need to supervise it because it is limited and crucial. I believe that time needs coagulation by something. I believe that you have lost your time just like your blood if you fail in controlling it. But the equipment to have your time under control is ‘thinking’. We humans need to intrude upon more solid thoughts as we grow older, because we all know how hard encroaching the rocky mountains of adulthood is like. But the outcome is satisfactory: more intrapersonal strength. That is the reason why I like to remind myself that ‘new, modern, etc.’ isn't really anything unless it carries the characteristic of being revolutionary on the basis of thinking. That is why I think modern art, modern painting, etc. can’t claim to be really modern unless it carries a deep idea with itself, not just a new façade.

The Capital It’s been a week that I've been staying in my dorm, on the easternmost part of Tehran, the capital of Iran. No matter where you come from, you feel like a complete outsider when you put your first step in this enormous city. You can’t bring your everything-is-fine mentality with yourself to this city, because you have to face it as an adversary first. Not only because people are somehow ethnocentric (but of course nice like everywhere else), but also because you can sense that an ecological disaster is taking place right in front of your eyes on its grandest scale. For a city that lacks enough water resources and is ranked among the top 100 most polluted cities in the world, all you see is giant scaffoldings built on the outside of high buildings, on a ground that many seismologists warn that a quake of at least magnitude 7 is inevitable, instigating the catastrophe of the 21st century with at least 1 million fatalities. The Lifestyle in here is neither comfortable nor simple and it’s not that authentic way you would expect from a city with such a history. Tehran, with its connotation of cold winters, Damavand (the highest peak in Iran), unique subway system and fresh water, is now by definition, a city where you have to tolerate every difficulty to get paid for a living. Yes, the denotation of encyclopedias is not similar to what I wrote, but it’s a fact. You just need to ask someone, of course when they are not wolfing down, because otherwise you may find out a primal fact about the people: many of them are not real inhabitants of Tehran, coming here in the hope of a good work. To hit the point, the problem with people migrating to Tehran is the preconception welded into their minds that it’s the city to work and not to live, and it’s true to a certain degree. The overall management of the city seems to be promising, but they've been unable to harness the powers of nature in a satisfactory manner, failing in many of them. To paraphrase what I said, you may have a whale of good time if you just want to stay here for some time, but I, personally, refuse any invitation of staying here for the rest of my life out of hand, because it’s hard to love the negligible peace you may find in Tehran, without renouncing your innermost feelings of amenability and wholeheartedness.

Is it possible to write a sentence like this? I don't know whether it's possible to say such a sentence, especially because of adding 'same' in the middle of the sentence; so can you confirm that any of these sentences is OK (or not)? 1. It is certainly not the same witnessing an event than is a success. 2. It is certainly not the same witnessing an event than a success is.