Prosperity Gospel

 

Money (That’s What I Want)

Money don't get everything, it's true
What it don't get, I can't use
Now give me money, (That's what I want)
That's what I want

Is the love of money good for you?

“My kingdom is not of this world”. John 18:36

“It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven.”  Matthew 19:24

So how can these words be reconciled with the Prosperity Gospel, which is the fast-growing theologically conservative movement frequently associated with evangelicalism and charismatic Christianity. It emphasizes believers' abilities to become rich in this world through devotion and positive confession.  Does Jesus wish to punish those believers in the Prosperity Gospel, by making them rich in this world, or did those believers have a “Come to Satan” moment?

Continuing Resolutions

 

I Think It’s Gonna Rain Today

Lonely, lonely
Tin can at my feet
Think I'll kick it down the street
That's the way to treat a friend
Bright before me the signs implore me
To help the needy and show them the way
Human kindness is overflowing
And I think it's going to rain today

Continuing Resolutions are Congress’s way of kicking the can down the street.

MAGA Mike Johnson’s innovation in Continuing Resolutions is a laddered approach, which was making two Continuing Resolutions, which each fund approximately half of the Government and expire respectively on January 19, 2024 and February 2, 2024.  Uh, as Steve Colbert observed in his Late Night monologue, isn’t this merely dividing the can in half and kicking both halves down the street.

The old joke goes

“A man had offended the king and was sentenced to death. He fell to his knees before the king and implored, "Oh your majesty! Spare me but for one year, and I will teach your horse to talk!" The king was amazed and granted his wish.

The man's close friend and brother upbraided him, saying, "Why did you make such an absurd promise?"

The man shrugged and replied, "In a year, the king may die. In a year, I may die. In a year, the horse may talk!"

I've got some facts for MAGA Mike.  This horse is NEVER going to talk. Tomorrow may be another day and you might not want to think of unpleasant facts until tomorrow, but “Frankly, Scarlett, I don’t give a damn.”  Kicking the can down the street only moves the can, it does not make the can go away.  Running out the clock, hoping that you or the king may die, is the coward's way.  Deal with the can.  THAT is the way to treat a friend.

Children

 

Fortunate Son

Some folks are born silver spoon in hand
Lord, don't they help themselves, Lord?
But when the taxman come to the door
Lord, the house lookin' like a rummage sale, yeah

It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no millionaire's son, no, no
It ain't me, it ain't me
I ain't no fortunate one, no

 I am my father’s son, but I am NOT my father.

The Hunter Biden controversy, Biden impeachment, and the Trump New York civil fraud trial are examples of competing world views.  Are children and their property, the property of their parents? OR are parents wards/stewards of their children, and their property, until they become adults? If you believe that children are NOT property, then whatever Hunter Biden may, or may not, have done as an adult has no relevance to President Biden.  If you believe that children are property, then their net worth is your net worth, and one of the admissions that Ivanaka Trump made at the Trump civil fraud trial is that former President Trump guaranteed loans with the net worth of property that was his children’s.

So these issues expose competing world views.  Are children property of their parents?  Or are children merely wards of their parents until they attain adulthood?  The Jewish faith has an answer to this in the Bar/Bat Mitzvah ceremony where the child proclaims, “Today I am a Man ( gender neutral)”.  The Roman Catholic and many Christian faiths have an analogue in the Confirmation ceremony.  You can NOT be a Man ( even if you "smoke the same cigarettes as me. I can’t get no satisfaction”)  if you are the property of another, including your parent’s.

Growth Rates

 

What Kind of Fool Am I

What kind of fool I am
What kind of mind is this
An empty shell
A lonely cell in which
An empty heart must dwell

What kind of growth is this?

It is common to express growth in terms of a Compound Annual Growth Rate, CAGR.  Savings accounts, loans, mortgages, inflation, and the Gross Domestic Product of the economy are often expressed this way.  This implicitly assumes that growth is geometric and follows the formula: 

Future= Base *(100%+CAGR)^(periods, years, between future and base).

This is considered a marked improvement over assuming a simple growth rate:

Future=base * (Period, years, between future and base)*(100% + simple growth rate).

The compound rate is also called a geometric growth rate.  It assumes a constant, but non-negative, growth rate (first derivative).  A problem with continuous growth is that it can surpass an absolute amount in the future.  An equally valid growth rate is exponential growth.  It is more commonly encountered as radioactive decay with a half life. For growth, the mirror of decay, the rate is often expressed as a doubling period.  Exponential growth will approach an absolute but will never exceed it.  It thus has a variable, not a constant, growth rate (first derivative).  This is consistent with a constant rate within an exponential function.

Future=base*(100% +exp(rate* period, years, between base and future))

where exp() is the exponential function.

Over the short term, less than 20% of the periods to the absolute, there is virtually no difference between exponential and compound growth.  Exponential growth is higher than compound growth, but less than 5% higher, over the medium term, 20% to 83% of the periods to the absolute.  It is only in the periods near the absolute ( 83% to 100% of the periods to the absolute), that the exponential growth becomes significantly larger.  However unlike compound growth, its future value will never exceed the absolute amount.

It's Relative III

 Dead Man's Curve

(Dead Man's Curve) is no place to play

(Dead Man's Curve) you'd best keep away

(Dead Man's Curve) I can hear 'em say

Won't come back from Dead Man's Curve

If the universe is curved, what does that do to randoneess and choices?

Variance is the dispersion of the data, X,  in a statistical distribution. Mathematically its formula is

Var(X)=∑ (p_i*(x_i-µ))² for i =1 to n variables

The variance is traditionally defined as the square of a parameter of a random distribution,  σ², where σ is also known as the standard deviation, SD.  The other parameter of a random distribution, µ, the mean, which is equal to the median of a normal distribution, is

µ=∑ p_i(x_i-µ)*x_i for i=1 to n variables.

However it is not correct to say that the variance, which is the square of the standard deviation, SD, can be solved by Pythagoras’ formula. This is only true on a flat surface.  In fact on a flat surface, rather than a summation, this should be expressed as a product as

SD(X)=cos^-1(∏ cos(p_i(x_i-µ))) for i=1 to n variables.

On a flat surface, this is identical to  

SD(X)=√( (p_i(x_i-µ))² for i =1 to n variables or √( (x_i-µ))²/n).

That Bessel’s correction, n/(n-1), is necessary for the SD is an indication that the surface is not flat.

On a spherical surface, the formula should be

SD(X)=R*cos^-1(∏ cos(p_i(x_i-µ)/R)) for i=1 to n variables.

Here R is the radius of the spherical surface.  As R approaches infinity, e.g. the sphere become very large compared to any p_i(x_i-µ), this becomes identical to the formula for a flat surface.

On a hyperbolic surface, the formula should be

SD(X)=cosh^-1(∏ cosh(p_i(x_i-µ))) for i=1 to n

The variance, σ², of a random logistics distribution, where the parameters are µ and s, is s²*π²/3.  Because this is the summation of a square, it is correct to say that σ²=s²*π²/3, but it is NOT correct to say that because of this s=σ√3/π.  This is only true for a flat surface.

If the surface is hyperbolic, then the correct formula is

s=cosh^-1(cosh(σ√3/π))

Because cosh^-1(x)=ln(x±√(x²-1)), cosh²(x)-sinh²(x)=1, cosh(x)=½*(e^x+e^-x), and sinh(x)= ½*(e^x-e^-x), this can be expressed as

s=ln(cosh(σ√3/π) ±√( cosh²(σ√3/π)-1))

s=ln(cosh(σ√3/π) ± sinh(σ√3/π))

s=ln(½*(e^σ√3/π +e^-σ√3/π) ± ½*(e^σ√3/π -e^-σ√3/π))

s= σ√3/π ± σ√3/π= 2* σ√3/π or 0

This is because the variance, the square of the standard deviation, is a summation, NOT a single variable.

Only if the surface is flat is it true that s=σ√3/π.

This means that the random normal logistics distribution, the hyperbolic secant distribution,  

PDF = (1/(4s))*sech²((x-µ)/2s); CDF = ½*tanh((x-µ)/2s)+ ½

can be expressed in terms of the parameters µ and σ as

PDF = (π /(8* σ√3))*sech²(π *(x-µ)/(2* σ√3)); CDF = ½*tanh( π *(x-µ)/(2* σ√3))+ ½.

When the standard deviation, σ, is π/(4√3) then this simplifies to

PDF = ½*sech²(x-µ); CDF = ½*tanh(x-µ)+ ½ which is identical to saying that  s=½.

In this case, when x=µ, then the PDF is 50% and the CDF is also 50%. If π is the absolute, and negative numbers are not allowed, then, according to Pearson’s Second Coefficient of Skewness, µ=π/2.  If s=½, then σ²=(½)²π²/3=0.822467.

If the universe is hyperbolic, as proposed by Mabkhout (Mabkhout, 2012), the absolute is defined as π, x is an absolute measurement which means that 0 is an absolute zero, numbers x<0 are not defined, AND the universe is random, then if the universe is normal, it has both a mean and a variance which can be expressed in terms of its absolute. That universe also allows choice, s=½, where there is one choice: the absolute or absolute zero.

If the universe is hyperbolic and random, then random events do not repeat except on an imaginary plane. Random events may appear to repeat, be cyclical, but it is not in the real surface where the coefficient of the imaginary axis is 0.  I.e., Mark Twain was correct.  History does NOT repeat, but it sure does rhyme.

Mabkhout, S. (2012). The infinite distance horizon and the hyperbolic inflation in the hyperbolic universe. Phys. Essays, 25(1), p.112.

Choices

 

I’m Putting All My Eggs in One Basket

I'm putting all my eggs in one basket
I'm betting everything I've got on you
And, I'm giving all my love to one baby
Lord help me if my baby don't come through

This might be a good strategy in love, but it is NOT a good betting strategy.

We are warned not to put all of our eggs in one basket.  The reason being that if anything happens to that basket, then we will have no eggs.  IOW, Henry Ford’s famous choice for the color of a Model T in the 1920s, “Any color, as long as it is black”, is not a choice at all.  It might have been good for Ford’s assembly process since black paint dried faster, but it was not necessarily good for his customers. The company store in the song Sixteen Tons is also not a choice since you either bought at the company store or did without. In both cases having only one choice is putting all your eggs in one basket.

Having a choice between two things is also not a choice.  Game Theory proves that having at least three choices is necessary, https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2021/05/tough-but-fair-beats-always-being-nasty.html assuming that the parties/players offering those choices are not colluding.  The song should be “I’m Putting All My Eggs in THREE Baskets”

Baseball

 

Take Me Out To The Ball Game

Katie Casey was baseball mad,
Had the fever and had it bad.
Just to root for the home town crew,
Ev’ry sou Katie blew.
On a Saturday her young beau
Called to see if she’d like to go
To see a show, but Miss Kate said “No,
I’ll tell you what you can do

 

Take me out to the ball game,

Take me out with the crowd;

Just buy me some peanuts and Cracker Jack,

I don’t care if I never get back.

Let me root, root, root for the home team,

If they don’t win, it’s a shame.

For it’s one, two, three strikes, you’re out,

At the old ball game. 

Next time you sing the chorus, remember the verse!

The American League regular baseball season is 162 games, at least since 1961.  That is what the asterix after Roger Maris’ regular season home run record was all about. The National League increased its season to 162 games in 1962.

An average season since the mid-1960s is  81 wins and 81 losses, a .500 record.  For the standings to be normally distributed, no team can win more than 162 games or lose more than 162 games.  Thus the record has to be such that 81 minus standard deviation/3 ≥0.  That means that the standard deviation of a 162-game season is 81 divided by 3 ≤ 0 or less than 27 games.  The variance is the square of the standard deviation or less than 729.  The team with the best regular season record, before the bias of the playoffs, was 100% the DOMINATE team, but each game was randomly decided, no fixes, so that the CERTAINTY of its being best team is: 68% with a record of 108 and 54; 95% with a record of 135 and 27; and over 99% with a record of 162 and 0.

However, since the introduction of the championship, division, and wildcard playoff series, the league regular season champions might be sitting their best players once the team has clinched a spot in the playoffs, and is no longer trying to win every game at the end of the season. Thus, the playoffs can determine the most DOMINATE team in those playoffs, but the CERTAINTY that this is also the best team can no longer be established.  The regular season is only a means to determine the seeding for the playoffs.

Each playoff series can determine a dominate team for that series, but can not also determine that the DOMINATE team in each series is the BEST team.  In a 3-game series, a team that wins 2 games is dominate but it could have been expected to have a 3-0 or a 2-1 record if all three games had been played.  But the CERTAINTY of the dominate team being the best team is only 34% (it is 88% for a 3-0 record but that is only 12% of the possible outcomes!)   In a 5-game series, a team that wins 3 games can be expected to have a 5-0, 4-1, or 3-2 record.  The winning team has a certainty of being the best team of 38%.   In a seven-game series, a team that wins 4 games can be expected to have a 7-0, 6-1, 5-2, or a 4-3 record.  This is a certainty of 40%.  However, the winner of the wild card or division round was not necessary the higher seed, so if the lower seed wins its certainty should be reduced by being in the previous round. 

The playoffs determine the most DOMINATE team in each series with an odd number of games, but they do not determine the best team with CERTAINTY.  It is the record of the losing team that does that. If the series is stopped after a majority of the wins have been achieved  (e.g. four games in a seven-game series), there is no way to determine what the record would have been in the games which were not played.

That is why the playoffs might be more exciting, but they are not, can not, be certain. If we wanted to be certain, we would have to play ALL of the games. In other words, Play Ball!

Free Speech on Social Media

 

This Land Is Your Land

There was a big, high wall there that tried to stop me
A sign was painted said "Private Property"
But on the backside, it didn't say nothing
This land was made for you and me

This Land was made not for you and me as individuals, but for us as a group.

Woody Guthrie wrote the song This Land Is Your Land in response to the philosophy in Irving Berlin’s God Bless America.  In it, he stated his philosophy that there was no such thing as Private Property in the seldom sung fourth stanza.  The problem is that not only is there public property, Our Land, but there is also private property. And public property might also have no trespassing signs.

The fact that you are a member of a group does NOT give you the right to use the property of the group.  And the fact that you are not an owner of private property, means that the owner of that property, not you, can control that property. 

The problem on the Far Right is that those who are controlled from Public Property, think that because they are a member of the public, they have control on that public propety.  E.g. the issue of private grazing on public land.  The problem on the Far Left is that those who are forbidden from private property, insist that there is no Private Property.  E.g. the issue of occupying private spaces.  Both are wrong.

The public can control access to public property, whether it is forbidding grazing on certain public land, or licensing the public airwaves.  Private owners can control who speaks, carries guns, assembles, etc on their property.  Those spaces are private spaces over which the public has no control.  The fact that you were invited into a private space did not change it into a public space.

Thus while you have a right of free speech in public places, X (formerly known as Twitter), Facebook, Instagram, etc. are NOT public spaces.  An individual’s public rights have no standing in these private spaces.  Every thing that is not your private property is not public property.  It can be private property owned by another.  And the fact that you are a member of a group does not mean that the group’s property has become your private property.  

And yes, Donald Trump, us, a group, is U.S.  IOW, United we stand, divided we fall! So stop trying to divide us.

Acceptance

 

Smile 

Smile though your heart is aching
Smile even though it's breaking
When there are clouds in the sky, you'll get by
If you smile through your fear and sorrow
Smile and maybe tomorrow
You'll see the sun come shining through for you 

In other words, say the Serenity Prayer!

The Vinegar Tasters is a traditional subject in Chinese religious painting. The painting depicts the three founders of China's major religious and philosophical traditions: K'ung Fu Tzu, who has been latinized as Confucius; Buddha; and Lao Tzu, the founder of Taoism.  

K'ung Fu Tzu has a an expression of resolve, because the vinegar is sour and needs to be dominated, by the following of strict rules. 

The Buddha has a sad expression because vinegar is sour like life, but like life it must be endured. 

Lao Tzu has a smile because he has accepted that vinegar should taste sour like vinegar. 

Smile!

New and Improved!

 

This Old House

Ain't got time to fix the shingles
Ain't got time to fix the floor
Ain't got time to oil the hinges
Nor to mend no window panes
Ain't gonna need this house no longer
I’m gettin' ready to meet the saints

But if it ain’t broke, DON’T fix it!

A basic rule in engineering is “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.  Doctors follow the same instructions in the Hippocratic Oath but it sounds better there,  “First, do no harm”.  Unfortunately beginning with Thomas Watson, Jr., IBM and all tech companies, have been violating these rules.

Tech companies have constantly “improved” their offerings with frequent updates.  While this was supposedly to benefit the users of these programs, all too often it is at the expense of dropping features that were previously included, or putting features that peviously existed behind a pay wall or other “protections”. Also there is always a user cost to these improvements.  There is a learning curve to unlearn the old ways, and learn the new way, of doing things.  The more you know, then the more you have to unlearn, so the cost is borne particularly by long-time users.

Does anyone remember the “New” Coke marketing fiasco of the 1990s.  Coca-Cola corporate honchos though it would be a good ideas to introduce a “New” formula for their soft drink.  There was nothing wrong with the Old Formula.  They just wanted to improve it.  Their customers revolted and forced the reintroduction of Classic Coke and eventually New Coke disappeared.  

I could do without the new upgrades that are made by tech companies where they are forcing their users to accept that it wasn’t broke, but they fixed it anyway.  Thanks for nothing tech companies.  I guess the tech companies had the time because they aren’t “gettin’ ready to meet the saints.”

Christian Nationalists?

 

Onward Christian Soldiers

Onward, Christian soldiers!
Marching as to war,
With the cross of Jesus
Going on before.

“Christian” soldiers is about as accurate as the “Freedom” Caucus! 

In George Orwell’s novel 1984, there is a warning about the lies that those in charge can use to try to deceive us, such as “War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.”  The “Freedom” Caucus is more about slavery than freedom, and “Christian” Nationalists are about themselves, not Christ.

Would Christ say that he came to ensure that the laws of the Old Testament were enacted as the law of the Land? I believe that he said that “unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven”.  What is important is righteousness, NOT the law. 

If the Christian nationalists say the Rapture is imminent, then how can that be squared with Christ's own words “no one knows the day or hour when these things will happen, not even the angels in heaven or the Son himself"?

If we are supposed to turn immigrants away from our border, then isn't that in conflict with the Parable that Christ told of the Good Samaritan?

If we are supposed to eliminate the national debt, bury our wealth,  then how can that be squared with Christ's Parable of the Talents?

Christ would have told the Handmaid’s Tale as a warning, not as a blueprint.

It sounds to me like “Christian” Nationalists are not very Christian, but that sounds so much better than "Satanic" Nationalists.  Not as true, but we are living in the world of "alternative" facts, aren't we.

Flat?

Bare Footin’

Hey little gal with the red dress on
I bet you can barefoot all night long
Take off your shoes and throw them away
Come back and get them another day
We're barefootin', we're barefootin'
We're barefootin', we're barefootin'

 What about Flat- footin’?

To an individual human on the earth, the surface looks flat.  However, this is only because the distances that the individual enounters are probably much smaller than the radius of the Earth.  To an ant on the surface of a beach ball, its surface may also appear flat. But just like the beach ball, the surface of the Earth is actually spherical.  If it WERE flat, then a stick perpendicular to the ground at the equator would cast no shadow at noon, and that same stick at a higher latitude, say London, should also cast no shadow. ( The shadow in London would be shortest at noon, but there would still be a shadow.)  If the Earth were flat, then the highest points (e.g. the mast) of a ship on the horizon would NOT ALWAYS be visible before the rest of the ship.  These, and other apparent paradoxes, can be explained if the Earth is round but can not be explained if the Earth is flat.  Thus the perceptions of an individual are NOT the truth.

It is assumed that space is flat. This, however, is also just an assumption. If the surface of space is hyperbolic, curved, then any conflict betwwen the age and distance of the universe, the Planck Length, the rotation of galaxies, the inflation of the early universe, etc. may all be explainable.  But that requires giving up the perception that the space is flat.  Space may be bare, but that does not mean that it is flat.

AI

 

They All Laughed

They all laughed at Christopher Columbus
When he said the world was round
They all laughed when Edison recorded sound
They all laughed at Wilbur and his brother
When they said that man could fly
They told Marconi
Wireless was a phony

Is AI a laughing matter?

AI is no different than: a written alphabet, the printing press, a camera, or copy and paste.  Each of these were accompanied by social upheavals, so why should we expect AI to be any different. AI is a tool invented by humans to make it easier to tell, process, and preserve stories.

But as a tool it is perhaps misnamed.  IMHO, it should be Artificial INFERENCE, not Artificial INTELLIGENCE.  It is only making inferences from the data that it processes, and it is only as intelligent as those who wrote the algorithms in the AI to do that processing.

So what is the difference between an inference and intelligence?

Before Copernicus, it was inferred that the Sun and the planets revolved about the Earth.

Before Kepler, it was inferred that the planetary orbits were perfect circles, not imperfect ellipses.

Before Wegner, it was inferred that the continents did not drift and that what we observed were the fixed position of the continents.

Before Darwin, it was inferred that life was created and while evolution can destroy species but it can not change them.

Before Einstein, it was inferred that the speed of light could be exceeded.

In each of these and other instances, INTELLIGENCE only means OBSERVATIONS, as in military intelligence, not that the observations, or the inferences from those observations, were intelligent and correct.

And because AI is an inference from observations, anything that was not observed is NOT part of the AI.  If there is confidential or copyrighted information that is being observed, then those inferences otherwise might be theft/a security breach/copyright infringement.  If that protected information, or any information, is being excluded from an AI, it does not mean that it did not happen, just that it was not observed and considered by that AI.

It is important to remember each of these when using AI so that people will be laughing with you and not at you.

 

Moving Pictures

 

Pictures of Lily

And then one day things weren't so fine
I fell in love with Lily
I asked my dad where Lily I could find
He said, "Don't be silly".
"She's been dead since 1929"
Oh, how I cried that night
If only I'd been born in Lily's time
It would have been alright
There were always pictures of Lily to help me sleep at night
Pictures of Lily to help me feel alright

And even better today we have moving pictures of Lily.

Ginger Rogers passed away in 1995. Lauren Bacall passed away in 2014.   Audrey Hepburn passed away in 1993.  But whenever I want, I can see them dancing in “Swing Time”, whistling in “To Have and Have Not”; or eating “Breakfast at Tifanny’s”.  While I was born in their time, you might not have been. While I am still here, thanks to the movies it will always be their time, so it is always alright. And it is more than just their pictures.  It is their moving pictures.  "Mona Lisa" move over, and "Hurrah for Hollywood".

Math

 

All About The Bass

Because you know I'm all about that bass
'Bout that bass, no treble
I'm all about that bass, 'bout that bass, no treble
I'm all about that bass, 'bout that bass, no treble
I'm all about that bass, 'bout that bass (bass, bass, bass, bass)

Actually it’s all about the MATH!

Most people are familiar with Pythagoras’ Theorem, c=√(a²+b²), where c is the hypotenuse of a triangle with sides a and b.  This is actually only true for a flat, Euclidean, surface.  It is true because of the identity of a circle, cos²+sin²=1. For a triangle on a flat surface, the hypotenuse can also be expressed as

 cos(c)=cos(a)*cos(b).

For a triangle on a spherical surface, the formula for the hypotenuse of a right triangle is based on a similar principle, but it is

cos(c/R)=cos(a/R)*cos(b/R)  or c=R*cos^-1(cos(a/R)*cos(b/R))

where R is the radius of that spherical surface.  As R approaches infinity, it becomes identical to Pythagoras’ Theorem.

For a triangle on a hyperbolic surface, the formula for the hypotenuse is

cosh(c)=cosh(a)*cosh(b) or c=cosh^-1(cosh(a)*cosh(b)).

This is true because of the identity of a hyperbola, cosh²-sinh²=1.

What is true for any surface, regardless of its shape, is only that c²=a²+b². 

For the cylindrical coordinates (r, θ, z), of a point (x, y, z) in rectangular coordinates, it is true that x=r*cosθ, y=r*sinθ, z=z, and θ=tan^-1(y/x).  However the solution of r as √(x²+y²) is only true if x and y are on a flat surface. On any surface it is only true that r²=x²+y², and the solution for r depends on the shape of that surface. 

Additionally, hyperbolic trigonometric functions are defined in terms of exponentials such that

cosh(x)=½*(e^x+e^-x)

In this case, if the surface is hyperbolic, then the formula for the hypotenuse of a triangle is

c=cosh^-1(½*(e^a+e^-a)* ½*(e^b+e^-b))

From Euler's formula, e^ix=cos(x)+isin(x), it is also true that eⁱ⁰=-e^iπ.  Thus it is suggested that Pythagoras’ Theorem, taking the imaginary axis into consideration, is better simplified as  

c=ln(-cosh(a²+b²)±sinh(a²+b²))

rather than the conventional

c=√(a²+b²).

However it is also acknowdged that, when a and b are much less than infinity, just as Pythagoras’ Theorem can be used on the surface of the spherical Earth where its radius, R, is much greater than a or b,  Pythagoras’ Theorem is still a reasonable approximation. In fact there is virtualy no diffence between the two until a and b are more than 20% of the absolute/infinity.  The difference between the two does not become appreciable until after a and b are more than 7%[1] of the absolute/infinity.

Euler’s formula, e^ix=cos(x)+isin(x) can also be viewed as the rotation of Minkowski’s spacetime, reality, on an imaginary axis to create cylindrical coordinates. If, in Eulers’ formula, x is taken to be θ, that is  e^iθ=cos(θ)+ sin(θ)*i, this can then be viewed as a complex number in rectangular coordinates, a+b*i, where sin(θ) can be viewed as a rotation of the imaginary axis, i, by θ, and cos(θ) is the real portion of this complex number. However, while sin(x) is cyclical, and sin(0)=sin(π)=0,  the cosine, the real part of the complex number in rectangular coordinates, is out of phase with the sine such that cos(0)=1 but cos(π)=-1.  Thus it is proposed that if a surface passes through an origin of a two-sheeted hyperboloid such that sin(0)=sin(π)=0, that in one sheet of the two sheeted hyperboloid, cos=1, while in the other sheet cos=-1. This implies that if our universe, reality, is on one sheet of a two sheeted hyperboloid, that at its origin it must have undergone a phase change such that a hyperbola in one sheet, our universe, is a reflection of a hyperbola in the other sheet, and that one sheet is also a phase shift of π from the other sheet.

Setting the coefficient of the imaginary axis to 0, does not mean that the axis is eliminated, only that its coefficient is zero.

[1] Actually the mean of a choice of one, squared, multipled by π squared divided by three, is 0.5²π²/3 , which is equal to the variance, or 82.2%.

Speaker of the House

 

Sympathy For The Devil

So if you meet me
Have some courtesy
Have some sympathy, and some taste
Use all your well-learned politnesse
Or I'll lay your soul to waste, mm yeah

Republican “moderates” in the House appear to have had a “Come to Satan” moment.

By picking MAGA Mike Johnson as their Speaker, the moderate Republicans appear to have selected him because he seemed so polite, compared to Jim Jordan.  Uh, the devil is also polite.

The devil is NOT equal to God.  Believing that life is a contest between God and the devil is to believe that the devil is EQUAL to God.  If you have chosen God, then denying anyone else a choice is tantamount to handing that person over to the devil, because you won’t let that person choose God for themself. It does not count that you are afraid they might choose the devil.  Someone can choose God or no-God, but that same person can not choose the devil, unless the devil is equal to God.

No-God is the ABSENCE of God.  This is NOT the devil, although the devil is also absent of God.  Since MAGA Mike wants to eliminate the ability to choose your gender, your partner, your reproductive freedom, your religion, etc. he is apparently against many choices.  It makes no difference if he is polite in doing so, that is the way of the devil. Those moderate Republicans who voted for him have had a "Come to Satan" moment.  They are confusing tolerance with acceptance.  God help us all.