The Future

 

It’s About Time

It's about time we begin to turn the world around
It's about time we start to make it the dream we've always known
It's about time we start to live the family of man
It's about time, it's about changes and it's about time
It's about peace and it's about plenty and it's about time
It's about you and me together and it's about time.

That time is NOT only the present, it is the present AND the future.

Republicans are supposedly conservatives and Democrats are supposedly liberals.  Conservatives are supposed to seek the lowest total cost associated with an action.  However the lowest total cost at the moment, may not be the lowest total cost over the life of that action. Case in point, a story when I was an appointed government bureaucrat serving in a conservative Republican administration.  The manger, to whom I reported, had been upset by one of the mangers who reported to me.  She thought that the manager, who reported to me, had been insubordinate to her and as punishment wanted him fired.  That manager, who reported to me, had Civil Service status.

I pointed out to my manager that if I fired the manager who reported to me, that manager would revert to his Civil Service status and be transferred to another office in our department.  I also pointed out that his salary as a Civil Service employee was higher than the salary he was receiving as a manager who reported to me. Thus if I fired him, the long term result was that he would receive a pay raise.  Upon reflection my manager thought about this long term impact, reconsidered, and directed me to tell him that as punishment, she was directing that he NOT be fired.  Since I did not agree that the manager who reported to me had been insubordinate to my manager, I was more than happy to follow this direction.  When I explained the conversation to the manger who reported to me, he could not stop laughing. As punishment, he was not to be fired?

There is a reason that the popular sayings are "Look before you leap", "Marry in haste and repent at leisure",  "A stitch in time saves nine", "For want of  a nail..", etc. It might be conservative to seek the action that has the lowest cost.  But it is the TOTAL cost associated with that action, now and in the future, not merely the cost at the present.

Love and War

 

War

It ain't nothing but a heart-breaker
(War) It's got one friend that's The Undertaker
Oh, war, has shattered many a young man's dreams
Made him disabled, bitter and mean
Life is much too short and precious
To spend fighting wars each day
War can't give life
It can only take it away, oh

Is it true that “All’s fair in love and war”?

War seems like a simple matter of two parties: the American Colonists v. the British Empire, the North v. the South, the Allies v. the Axis, etc. But it is not just two parties if there are rules and a party to enforce the rules. A third party has stated the rules, e.g. the Geneva Convention, and a third party also ensures that war crimes have not been committed by either of the two combatants, e.g. the International Criminal Court in the Hague.

The same is true of the opposite of War: “Make Love, not War.”  This saying shows that while War and Love are not the same, they are the same in that they are both contests with three players. Again, one of the players is not often recognized but it is always there …society. If love is “You and Me against the World” then there are admittedly three parties.  If society will either bless or condemn your love, then there is always a third party.

Rather than the popular wisdom, there is no diffence between love, war, and any other contest.  It should be “Even in love and war, you should always play fair.”

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.