The Lenstra–Lenstra–Lovász (LLL) lattice basis reduction algorithm is a polynomial-time method for transforming an arbitrary basis of a full-rank lattice in Euclidean space into a reduced basis featuring short, nearly orthogonal vectors.[1] Developed by Arjen Lenstra, Hendrik Lenstra, and László Lovász, it was introduced in 1982 as part of a broader framework for solving hard problems in the geometry of numbers, including integer relation detection and polynomial factoring over the rationals.[1] The algorithm iteratively applies size and orthogonality reduction steps guided by Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization, ensuring the output basis satisfies the LLL reduction conditions—namely, that consecutive basis vectors are not too long relative to their projections and remain sufficiently independent—while running in time polynomial in the lattice dimension and bit length of the input.[2] Although it yields only an exponential approximation factor (roughly $2^{n/2} for dimension n) to the NP-hard shortest vector problem, rather than an exact solution, this efficiency has made LLL a foundational tool in algorithmic number theory and lattice-based cryptography.[2]Key applications include breaking early knapsack cryptosystems by exposing hidden short vectors in associated lattices, enabling attacks on subset-sum instances underlying such schemes.[3] It also underpins integer programming solvers by reducing high-dimensional problems to tractable cases and supports cryptanalytic techniques against systems like NTRU through partial key recovery via short vector approximation.[3] Despite subsequent improvements like BKZ offering better approximations at higher computational cost, LLL remains the standard for initial basis preprocessing due to its speed and reliability across diverse fields, from error-correcting codes to simultaneous Diophantine approximation.[4]
Computing and mathematics
Low-level programming language
A low-level programming language provides minimal abstraction from a computer's instruction set architecture, enabling direct manipulation of hardware resources such as registers, memory addresses, and processor instructions.[5] These languages contrast with high-level languages by requiring programmers to manage low-level details like memory allocation and instruction sequencing explicitly, resulting in code that closely mirrors the binary machine instructions executed by the CPU.[6]The primary types of low-level languages are machine code and assembly language. Machine code consists of binary instructions (sequences of 0s and 1s) that the processor interprets and executes directly, without any translation step; for instance, on an x86 architecture, a simple addition might be represented as 00000001 00000010 in binary form.[7]Assembly language, a symbolic representation of machine code, uses mnemonics (e.g., "ADD" for addition) and labels for operands, making it slightly more readable for humans while still being architecture-specific; it must be translated into machine code via an assembler program before execution.[6] This one-to-one correspondence between assembly instructions and machine operations ensures high efficiency but demands knowledge of the target hardware's specifics, such as endianness and register conventions.[7]Characteristics of low-level languages include platform dependence, as code written for one processor family (e.g., ARM versus x86) is generally incompatible with others without significant rewriting.[5] They offer fine-grained control over system resources, leading to optimized performance in applications like operating system kernels, device drivers, and embedded systems, where predictability and minimal overhead are critical; for example, assembly code can execute in fewer clock cycles than equivalent high-level constructs due to the absence of runtime interpretation or compilation overhead.[6] However, this control comes at the cost of error-prone development, as programmers must handle issues like buffer overflows and pointer arithmetic manually, without built-in safety features.[5]Historically, machine code emerged with the first electronic computers in the mid-1940s, such as the ENIAC (completed in 1945), where operators wired panels or entered binary via switches to program computations.[8]Assembly language was invented in 1947 by Kathleen Booth for the ARC (Automatic Relay Computer) at Birkbeck, University of London, introducing mnemonics to simplify coding over pure binary entry.[9] By 1949, assemblers were in use for machines like the EDSAC, marking a shift toward mnemonic-based programming that improved productivity without sacrificing direct hardware access.[10] Despite the rise of high-level languages in the 1950s (e.g., FORTRAN in 1957), low-level languages remain essential for performance-critical software, with modern variants like x86-64 assembly supporting billions of instructions per core in contemporary CPUs.[11]
The Lenstra–Lenstra–Lovász (LLL) lattice basis reduction algorithm computes an approximately reduced basis for a full-rank lattice in \mathbb{R}^n, transforming an arbitrary generating basis into one with short, nearly orthogonal vectors. Developed by Arjen K. Lenstra, Hendrik W. Lenstra Jr., and László Lovász, the algorithm was introduced in their 1982 paper on factoring polynomials over the rationals, where it enabled polynomial-time solutions to previously intractable lattice problems.[12] The method relies on a parameter \delta \in (1/4, 1), conventionally set to $3/4, which trades off between basis quality and computational efficiency; higher \delta yields better approximations but may increase runtime.[13]A basis \mathbf{b}_1, \dots, \mathbf{b}_n is LLL-reduced if it satisfies two conditions: size reduction, where the Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization coefficients satisfy |\mu_{i,j}| \leq 1/2 for all $1 \leq j < i \leq n; and the Lovász condition, ensuring \|\mathbf{b}_i^*\|^2 \geq (\delta - \mu_{i,i-1}^2) \|\mathbf{b}_{i-1}^*\|^2 for i = 2, \dots, n, with \mathbf{b}_i^* denoting the i-th Gram-Schmidt vector.[14] These properties guarantee that the shortest basis vector \mathbf{b}_1 approximates the lattice's shortest nonzero vector length \lambda_1 within a factor of $2^{(n-1)/2}, i.e., \|\mathbf{b}_1\| \leq 2^{(n-1)/2} \lambda_1, and successive minima are similarly bounded.[13] The algorithm achieves this through an iterative loop: starting from k=1, it size-reduces \mathbf{b}_k against prior vectors by subtracting integer multiples to minimize coefficients, then checks the Lovász condition; if violated, it swaps \mathbf{b}_k with \mathbf{b}_{k+1} and restarts from the swapped position, incrementing k otherwise until k > n.[15]The original LLL runs in polynomial time, with complexity O(n^6 (\log B)^4) in the worst case for dimension n and input bit length B, though practical variants and analyses often show sub-exponential behavior in low dimensions or average cases.[16] Subsequent improvements, such as quasi-linear time algorithms in the bit size for fixed dimensions, have reduced this for specialized settings without altering the core framework.[17]Key applications include polynomial factorization over \mathbb{Q}, where LLL reduces associated lattices to identify irreducible factors efficiently.[12] In integer programming, it solves problems with a fixed number of variables in polynomial time by embedding them into lattices and reducing to find near-optimal solutions.[13] Cryptographic uses encompass attacking subset-sum (knapsack) cryptosystems by revealing short vectors in density-based lattices, as well as applications in lattice-based cryptography for key recovery or parameter estimation in schemes like NTRU.[18] In number theory, LLL aids solving Diophantine approximations, quadratic forms, and simultaneous Pell equations by producing short lattice vectors corresponding to good approximations.[19]
L3Harris Technologies, Inc. is an American multinational aerospace and defense technology contractor that designs, integrates, and sustains mission-critical systems for government, defense, and commercial customers. The company specializes in areas such as secure communications, electronic warfare, avionics, surveillance sensors, and space systems, with a focus on integrated solutions for air, land, sea, space, and cyber domains.[20][21]The firm traces its origins to L-3 Communications, founded on April 30, 1997, by Frank C. Lanza and Robert V. LaPenta in partnership with Lehman Brothers, which acquired 11 operating divisions previously owned by Loral Corporation and held by Lockheed Martin following Loral's divestitures. These units specialized in electronic systems, telemetry, and communications technologies originally developed for military and space applications. The name "L-3" derives from the initials of Lanza and LaPenta, with the "3" signifying the involvement of the Lehman Brothers-led investment group. L-3 Communications expanded rapidly through over 50 acquisitions in its first decade, focusing on secure data links, night vision equipment, and aircraft modernization services for the U.S. Department of Defense and allies. In 2016, it rebranded as L3 Technologies to emphasize its evolution beyond communications into broader technology integration.[20][22][23]L3Harris was formed on June 29, 2019, via an all-stock merger of L3 Technologies and Harris Corporation, valued at approximately $35 billion, combining L3's expertise in tactical communications and sensors with Harris's strengths in multiband radios, microwave systems, and public safety networks. Headquartered in Melbourne, Florida, the merged entity initially generated over $18 billion in annual revenue and employed about 48,000 people across more than 100 countries. By fiscal year 2024, L3Harris reported trailing twelve-month revenue of $21.37 billion, with segments including Integrated Mission Systems (encompassing avionics and electronic warfare), Space and Airborne Systems (focusing on electro-optical sensors and missile defense), and Communications Systems (providing tactical radios and broadband solutions). The company targets $23 billion in revenue by 2026, driven by demand for hypersonic defense, unmanned systems, and resilient satellite communications.[23][24][25]L3Harris maintains long-term contracts with the U.S. military, including sustainment of C-12 aircraft fleets and development of next-generation jamming pods, while also supplying commercial aviation products like weather radar systems. Its growth has been supported by strategic divestitures, such as the 2020 sale of the commercial aviation business to focus on high-margin defense priorities, and ongoing R&D investments exceeding $1 billion annually in areas like AI-enabled targeting and quantum-resistant encryption.[20][26]
Health and non-profits
La Leche League International
La Leche League International (LLLI) is a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting and supporting breastfeeding through peer-to-peer assistance. Founded in 1956 in Franklin Park, Illinois, by seven mothers including Mary Ann Kerwin, Mary White, and others who faced challenges in breastfeeding amid a cultural preference for formula feeding, LLLI's initial meeting occurred on October 17, 1956, at White's home to share experiences and information.[27] The organization's name derives from "Nuestra Señora de la Leche y el Buen Parto" (Our Lady of Milk and Happy Delivery), a Spanishshrine depicting the Virgin Mary nursing the infantJesus, symbolizing maternal nurturing.[28]LLLI's core mission is to assist mothers globally in breastfeeding via mother-to-mother support, encouragement, education, and information, while fostering greater societal understanding of lactation as a natural process.[29] It operates through a network of volunteer leaders trained in breastfeeding techniques, who facilitate in-person and online meetings, provide telephone consultations, and offer resources in multiple languages across more than 80 countries.[28] Key publications include The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding, first released in 1963 and revised periodically, which emphasizes practical guidance on positioning, milk supply, and weaning based on anecdotal and observational insights from members.[28] The organization has hosted international conferences since 1964, contributing to advocacy for workplace accommodations and hospital policies favoring breastfeeding initiation.[30]LLLI's efforts coincided with rising breastfeeding initiation rates in Western countries; for instance, U.S. rates climbed from under 25% in the early 1970s to approximately 80% by the 2010s, though attribution to LLLI alone is indirect and shares influence with public health campaigns and WHO guidelines.[31] It maintains fiscal year annual reports detailing global outreach, such as digital expansions during the COVID-19 pandemic, but does not publicly disclose precise membership figures, estimating support for thousands of families annually through group interactions and online platforms.[32] Critics, including some medical professionals, have argued that LLLI's advocacy for extended and exclusive breastfeeding can discourage formula supplementation in medically necessary cases, potentially conflicting with individualized pediatric advice, though LLLI maintains its resources defer to healthcare providers.[33]In recent years, LLLI faced internal and external controversy over inclusivity policies updated around 2020 to encompass "parent-to-parent" support and terminology like "chestfeeding" for transgender and non-binary individuals who lactate or induce lactation.[34] This shift prompted resignations among leaders and members who contended it obscured the biological specificity of mother-infant breastfeeding dynamics and prioritized ideological inclusivity over practical focus on femalephysiology and newborn needs.[35] By 2025, dissenting groups formed alternatives emphasizing women-only spaces, with reports of declining donations to LLLI amid accusations of diluting its foundational mission.[36] LLLI defended the changes as broadening access without altering core breastfeeding promotion, though source critiques highlight tensions between empirical lactation science—rooted in femalemammary gland function—and expansive identity-based framing.[37]
Low-level laser therapy
Low-level laser therapy (LLLT), also termed photobiomodulation or cold laser therapy, involves the application of low-power lasers or light-emitting diodes emitting red or near-infrared light (typically 600–1000 nm wavelengths at power densities of 1–100 mW/cm²) to tissues, aiming to stimulate cellular repair, reduce inflammation, and alleviate pain without thermal effects.[38][39] The therapy operates on the principle of non-thermal photon absorption by endogenous chromophores, such as cytochrome c oxidase in mitochondria, which initiates photochemical cascades.[40]Developed in the 1960s following the 1960 invention of the ruby laser, LLLT's biostimulatory potential was first observed in 1967 by Hungarian researcher Endre Mester, who noted accelerated hair growth and wound healing in laser-irradiated mice during experiments intended to test carcinogenic effects.[41][42] Initial clinical applications emerged in the 1970s for wound healing and pain management, with broader adoption in the 1980s–1990s as helium-neon and diode lasers became available; by 2002, certain devices received U.S. FDA clearance for specific indications like pain relief and inflammation reduction.[43]The proposed mechanism centers on light-induced modulation of cellular metabolism: photons absorbed by cytochrome c oxidase enhance electron transport chain efficiency, boosting adenosine triphosphate (ATP) production, reducing reactive oxygen species, and promoting nitric oxide release, which collectively support anti-inflammatory cytokine shifts (e.g., increased IL-10, decreased TNF-α) and tissue regeneration.[44][40] These effects are dose-dependent, following an Arndt-Schulz biphasic response where low doses stimulate and high doses inhibit biological activity; optimal dosing varies by condition, typically involving 1–10 J/cm² per session.[38]Applications span musculoskeletal disorders, dermatological conditions, and oral health issues. In orthopedics, LLLT targets tendinopathies (e.g., Achilles, plantar fasciitis), osteoarthritis, and nonspecific chronic low back pain, with sessions of 5–20 minutes applied 2–3 times weekly.[45][46] Dermatologically, it aids wound healing, acne, and skin rejuvenation by enhancing collagen synthesis and fibroblast proliferation.[47] In oncology support, it mitigates oral mucositis from chemotherapy, reducing severity by up to 40% in randomized trials.[48] Other uses include neuropathic orofacial pain and post-surgical recovery, though evidence quality varies due to heterogeneous protocols.[49]Efficacy data from systematic reviews indicate short- to medium-term pain reduction: a 2019 meta-analysis of neck pain trials (n=16 RCTs) reported significant Visual Analog Scale improvements (mean difference 14.23 mm) immediately post-treatment and up to 22 weeks, outperforming placebo.[50][51] For lower extremity tendinopathies and fasciitis, 2022 reviews confirmed reduced pain and disability at 1–3 months (standardized mean difference -0.89 for pain).[45][52] In fibromyalgia, a 2021 review of 7 RCTs found LLLT superior to placebo for pain and sleep quality, though functional gains were inconsistent.[53] However, evidence for long-term benefits or functional outcomes (e.g., range of motion) remains limited, with some reviews noting high risk of bias in trials and no superiority over active comparators like exercise in chronic low back pain.[46][54] Proponents attribute variability to suboptimal dosing, while skeptics highlight placebo effects and publication bias in smaller studies.Safety profile is favorable, with no serious adverse events in most trials; the non-thermal nature minimizes tissue damage.[55] Mild, transient side effects occur in <5% of cases, including localized erythema, pruritus, or tenderness, resolving within hours.[56] Contraindications include direct ocular exposure (requiring protective eyewear), treatment over known malignancies due to potential angiogenesis stimulation, and photosensitive epilepsies; caution is advised in pregnancy over the abdomen.[39] Long-term data are sparse, but cumulative exposure appears well-tolerated in chronic use protocols.[57] Regulatory bodies like the FDA classify approved LLLT devices as Class II, affirming low risk when used per guidelines.[58]
Religious organizations
Lutheran Laymen's League
The Lutheran Laymen's League (LLL), officially known as the International Lutheran Laymen's League, was founded in 1917 by twelve lay members of the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod (LCMS) who organized a fundraising campaign to retire a $100,000 debt owed by the synod following financial strains from World War I and internal organizational costs.[59][60] This effort succeeded, marking the league's initial focus on supporting synodical missions and lay involvement in church stewardship. Over time, the LLL expanded its scope to include evangelism and media outreach, notably sponsoring the launch of The Lutheran Hour radio broadcast on October 2, 1930, which remains the world's oldest continuously airing Christ-centered program.[61]The organization operates as Lutheran Hour Ministries (LHM), an independent auxiliary of the LCMS and Lutheran Church–Canada, with a mission to "Bring Christ to the Nations—and the Nations to the Church" through Gospel proclamation in relevant cultural contexts.[62] Key activities encompass international mission support, Bible distribution, and digital evangelism, reaching an estimated 195 million people weekly across radio, internet, and print media in more than 60 countries.[63] LHM facilitates over 450,000 faith-sharing engagements annually, including ambassador programs, listening clubs, and congregational resources, while maintaining approximately 300 staff in over 35 global locations.[62]Membership consists of nearly 100,000 individuals organized into hundreds of local chapters, which now include both men and women, emphasizing volunteer-led initiatives for Christian witness and service within LCMS congregations.[64] The LLL's structure supports district and zonal groups for fellowship, leadership training, and project funding, aligning with confessional Lutheran principles of Scripture's inerrancy and sola scriptura without direct operational oversight from the LCMS.[62]
Political and historical activism
Lithuanian Liberty League
The Lithuanian Liberty League (LLL; Lithuanian: Lietuvos laisvės lyga) was an underground dissident organization in the Lithuanian Soviet Socialist Republic, founded on June 14, 1978, by Antanas Terleckas and an initiative group in Vilnius to pursue the restoration of Lithuania's pre-war independence through nonviolent means.[65][66] Terleckas, a former political prisoner born in 1928 who died in 2023, served as its primary leader, drawing on his experience in earlier resistance efforts against Soviet occupation.[65][67]The LLL's founding declaration emphasized non-partisan, democratic principles, lacking a rigid hierarchy; it defined the National Council as its highest authority and stipulated that any Lithuanian resident actively supporting its aims—chiefly the "restoration of an independent Lithuania"—could consider themselves a member, while calling for a foreign council among émigrés to advance the cause abroad.[66] Core tasks included fostering religious, national, and political consciousness domestically and elevating Lithuania's freedom issue in international arenas, with early focus on publicizing the secret protocols of the 1939 Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact that enabled Soviet annexation.[66][67]Activities centered on producing and distributing anti-Soviet samizdat publications, organizing clandestine protests, and launching petition campaigns; for instance, the group collected nearly 1.5 million signatures demanding Soviet troop withdrawal and coordinated boycotts of military conscription in collaboration with youth groups like Young Lithuania.[68] Key public actions included a June 14, 1988, rally in Vilnius Cathedral Square displaying the banned national flag and an August 23, 1987, demonstration near Adam Mickiewicz's monument marking the pact's anniversary, which drew international dissident support including from Andrei Sakharov.[67][68] A September 28, 1988, gathering in Cathedral Square faced violent suppression by authorities.[68]Soviet authorities responded with arrests and trials, including Terleckas's repeated imprisonments for "anti-Soviet agitation," yet the LLL's persistence amid perestroika helped catalyze broader movements like Sąjūdis, contributing to heightened awareness of the occupation's illegality and Lithuania's March 11, 1990, independence declaration.[67][68] Legalized in 1988, it operated as a radical pro-independence political entity into the post-Soviet era, formally ceasing activities around 2003 after influencing early democratic transitions.[68] Terleckas received Lithuania's Freedom Prize in 2012 for his role.[69]
Military history
Loyal Lusitanian Legion
The Loyal Lusitanian Legion (LLL) was a light infantry formation of the British Army, primarily composed of Portuguese émigrés exiled in England following the French invasion of Portugal in 1807, raised to combat Napoleonic forces during the Peninsular War.[70] Organized in July 1808 in Plymouth under the initiative of Portuguese colonels José Maria de Moura and Carlos Frederico Lecor, with British governmental support from Lord Castlereagh, the legion was placed under the command of Brigadier-General Sir Robert Wilson, a British officer experienced in irregular warfare.[70][71] It embodied Portugal's loyalist resistance, incorporating volunteers alongside limited British, German, Swiss, and even French deserter officers, and was equipped and trained in British light infantry tactics for skirmishing and guerrilla operations.[70]Structurally, the legion initially comprised two battalions of light infantry (each with eight companies of approximately 97 men), an artillery company of 86 men equipped with four light guns and two howitzers, and theoretical cavalry elements of three to four squadrons, yielding a total strength of about 2,000 to 2,600 men by late 1808.[70][71]Battalion commands included Lieutenant-Colonel William Mayne for the 1st Battalion and figures such as Frederick Baron de Eben for the 2nd, emphasizing mobility and rapid maneuvers suited to Portugal's terrain.[71] The unit's effectiveness stemmed from its hybrid composition and focus on disruption, though logistical challenges in recruitment and desertion occasionally reduced operational numbers.[70]Deployed to Portugal in early 1809, the legion engaged in independent guerrilla actions against French supply lines before integrating into Anglo-Portuguese forces under Arthur Wellesley (later Duke of Wellington).[70] Key engagements included the defense of the Alcantara bridge on 14 May 1809, where it repelled French advances under General Lapisse; the Battle of Talavera on 27-28 July 1809, contributing to Allied holding actions; the Battle of Bussaco on 27 September 1810, skirmishing on the flanks; and defensive operations along the Lines of Torres Vedras during the 1810-1811 winter.[70][71] In 1811, it fought at Fuentes d'Onoro on 3-5 May, harassing French cavalry, and suffered heavy casualties at Albuera on 16 May, where its light troops endured intense combat despite being outnumbered.[70]By April 1811, amid broader Portuguese army reforms under British oversight, the legion was disbanded by royal decree on 20 April to reorganize its personnel into the 7th, 8th, and 9th Battalions of Caçadores, elite light infantry units of the regular Portuguese forces, reflecting the shift toward a unified national army capable of sustained conventional warfare.[70][71] This integration preserved the legion's expertise in light tactics, enhancing Portugal's contributions to the Peninsular campaign until French withdrawal in 1814.[70]
Anatomy and medicine
Left lower lobe of the lung
The left lower lobe (LLL) constitutes the inferior portion of the left lung, which is smaller and more concave than the right lung due to the cardiac notch accommodating the heart. It is demarcated superiorly by the left oblique fissure, extending from the mediastinal surface near the T4 vertebra to the posterior costophrenic angle. The LLL accounts for roughly 45-50% of the left lung's volume and is enveloped by visceral pleura, facilitating smooth expansion during respiration.[72][73]Structurally, the LLL is divided into four bronchopulmonary segments, each with independent segmental bronchi, arteries, and veins, allowing for targeted surgical resection in pathologies: the superior segment (LB6), anteromedial basal segment (LB7/8, combining anterior and medial basal due to the heart's position displacing a distinct medial segment), lateral basal segment (LB9), and posterior basal segment (LB10). These segments receive air via the left lower lobar bronchus, a branch of the left main bronchus arising approximately 5 cm from the carina. The superior segment bronchus typically originates posteriorly within the lobe, while basal segments share a common trunk before branching.[72][74][73]The LLL's blood supply mirrors the lung's dual circulation: deoxygenated blood arrives via segmental branches of the left pulmonary artery for gas exchange in alveoli, while oxygenated bronchial arteries—primarily from the descending thoracic aorta (intercostal and esophageal branches)—nourish the bronchi, pleura, and connective tissue, with venous drainage partly into pulmonary veins and partly into azygos/hemiazygos systems. Lymphatics drain to hilar and mediastinal nodes, following bronchial and pulmonary vessel paths. Innervation derives from the pulmonary autonomic plexus, with parasympathetic fibers from the vagus nerve (promoting glandular secretion and bronchoconstriction) and sympathetic fibers from upper thoracic ganglia (causing bronchodilation and vasoconstriction).[73][75][76]Functionally, the LLL contributes to ventilation and perfusion, with its basal segments positioned for efficient gravity-dependent perfusion in upright posture, aiding oxygenation of approximately 20-25% of total cardiac output passing through the left lung. Alveolar units within segments enable diffusion across a surface area exceeding 50 m² per lung, with type I pneumocytes for gas exchange and type II for surfactant production to reduce surface tension.[73][75]Clinically, the LLL's dependent position predisposes it to atelectasis, aspiration pneumonia, and pleural effusions, with consolidation often visible on imaging as opacification in posterior basal segments. It is a common site for bronchogenic carcinoma originating in segmental bronchi, and lobectomy via thoracotomy or video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery preserves function if segments are spared. Congenital anomalies like sequestration or hypoplasia may affect the LLL, while radiation or chemotherapy targets segmental vasculature in malignancies.[72][74][73]
Entertainment and media
Long, Long, Long (Beatles song)
"Long, Long, Long" is a song written and primarily performed by George Harrison for the Beatles' 1968 double album The Beatles, commonly known as the White Album.[77] It appears as the seventh track on side three of the original LP release, running 3:04 in length.[77] The composition features Harrison on lead vocals and guitar, with Paul McCartney providing backing vocals and Chris Thomas contributing piano.[77]Harrison began writing the song during the Beatles' transcendental meditation retreat in Rishikesh, India, from February to April 1968, marking his return to guitar after focusing on sitar.[78] Initially titled "It's Been a Long Long Long Time," which Harrison deemed too lengthy, the track draws inspiration from a chord progression reminiscent of Loudon Wainwright III's "Sad Girl."[79] The lyrics express themes of spiritual longing and rediscovery, with Harrison later confirming it as his first direct address to God, lamenting years of searching ("So many tears I was searching, so many tears I was wasting") before rejoicing in reunion ("You know it's all right").[78][79] Though the ambiguous wording could suggest a romantic ode, Harrison clarified its divine subject, aligning with his growing interest in Eastern spirituality amid the band's internal tensions.[77]Recording took place at EMI Studios (Abbey Road) in London, with the rhythm track laid down on October 7, 1968, followed by overdubs on October 8 and 9.[77] Harrison handled most instrumentation, including acoustic and electric guitars, organ, and tamboura, while Ringo Starr played drums and McCartney added harmonies.[77] The song's haunting coda features eerie feedback from an unplugged guitar amplifier, spontaneously amplified when Harrison struck a high note, evoking a ghostly wail that blends with rattling effects from a wine bottle on the guitar strings.[78] This experimental close underscores the track's introspective mood, contrasting the White Album's eclectic styles.The song was released on The Beatles on November 22, 1968, in the UK and the following day in the US, as Apple Records PCSO 7127/8 and Capitol SWBO-101.[77] It received limited contemporary attention amid the album's 30 tracks but has since been praised as one of Harrison's finest spiritual compositions, highlighting his maturation as a songwriter during a prolific phase.[78] Retrospective analyses note its subtle beauty and emotional depth, often citing it as an underrated gem that foreshadows Harrison's solo explorations of faith in works like All Things Must Pass.[79]
Phrases and idioms
Live and let live
The phrase "live and let live" expresses a philosophy of tolerance and non-interference, urging individuals to conduct their own affairs freely while permitting others to do the same without judgment or obstruction, assuming no direct harm to third parties. It embodies principles of personal autonomy and reciprocal respect, often invoked to promote peaceful coexistence amid diverse lifestyles or beliefs.The expression derives from the Dutch proverb leven en laten leven, first documented in English in 1622 by Gerard de Malynes in his treatise Lex Mercatoria (also known as The Ancient Law-Merchant), where he translates it as "Leuen ende laeten leuen, to liue and to let others liue."[80] This early commercial context highlighted pragmatic accommodation in trade disputes, reflecting a mercantile ethos of avoiding unnecessary conflict to sustain mutual benefit.[80] By the late 17th century, it appeared in collections of proverbs, such as John Ray's A Collection of English Proverbs (1678), establishing it as a common idiom in English-speaking cultures.[81]In literature, the phrase gained prominence in the 19th century; for instance, Sir Walter Scott used it in The Heart of Midlothian (1818), with a character advising, "we suld live and let live—we hae been young oursells."[82] Its application extended to real-world scenarios during World War I, where opposing trench soldiers on the Western Front informally adopted a "live-and-let-live" system of restrained fire and minimal aggression during static periods, prioritizing survival over orders for constant combat—a pattern analyzed as emergent cooperation amid repeated interactions.[83][84] This tacit truce persisted in quiet sectors despite military directives against it, illustrating the phrase's practical utility in de-escalating hostility.[84]In the 20th century, "live and let live" became a slogan in Alcoholics Anonymous by the late 1930s, encapsulating recovery principles of focusing on self-improvement without policing others' behaviors.[85] The phrase continues to underpin libertarian and pluralistic arguments for limited government intervention in personal matters, though critics argue it falters when individual actions impose externalities, such as in public health or environmental contexts.[86]