Truth IV

 

Make Believe.

Others find peace of mind in pretending,
Couldn't you,
Couldn't I?
Couldn't we?
Make believe our lips are blending
In a phantom kiss - or two - or three.
Might as well make believe I love you,
For to tell the truth, I do...

I don’t want Make Believe. I want the Truth.

A random distribution, function, has two parameters: the location, µ, and the range, σ. If that random function was considered to be a wave, then the location could be considered to be the phase, and the range is a function of the amplitude. If the Truth is absolute, the sum of all random functions, then each of those waves has a phase and an amplitude, except that the phase of a single wave may inter with the phase, cancel out, another wave. Thus to an observer that is not the absolute it might appear that the absolute has no phase. But the Truth still has a phase and an amplitude, even if that non-absolute observer can only percieve one parameter.

Thus saying that something is True, has an amplitude, or is False, has no amplitude, is misleading. Truth has both an amplitude, which  is a function of σ, AND a phase, which is a function of µ.

If you have played Clue, Mastermind, Wordle,  or many other games, you might be familiar with the concept of a Truth Table. Saying that a Truth Table has only one dimension is misleading. Something that has a phase, but no amplitude might still be the truth if you can use: fact checking, regulation, etc., to establish what the amplitude should be. Something that has an amplitude, but no phase specified, might also be the truth if you can use: voting rights, suffrage, unionization, or etc., to establish and increase the size of the sample. Thus an incomplete Truth, by having no amplitude or no phase, might still be found to be True, if you can establish the missing parameter.

To use Clue as an example, you might know Colonel Mustard is the killer, but you might still need to establish the weapon that he used, assuming that the dimension of the room is not needed. In Wordle, knowing that you have the number of letters correct AND the the positions of those letters correct is what defines a winning word. Then you know will know the Truth, the Whole Truth and Nothing but the Truth, while knowing only one dimension, when there are two, might only be Make Believe.

Zero

 

Zorro

Out of the night, when the full moon is bright,
Comes a horseman known as Zorro
This bold renegade
Carves a 'Z' with his blade,
A 'Z' that stands for "Zorro"

What about a 'Z' that stand for “Zero”

Is zero

1) a mid-point between two absolutes, -∞ and ∞;

2) a coordinate transformation, a relative, positional notation, or

3) the absence of an absolute.

If there are negative numbers, then zero can be the mid-point between two absolutes. If there is only one absolute, then there is an absolute zero (which is an absence of that absolute), and negative numbers are not allowed. Relative, positional, zeros exist when there is an absolute zero  (as in Temperature measured in degrees Kelvin) and the zero is merely a coordinate transformation to a different scale (e. g. 273.15˚ Kelvin is 0˚ Celsius). Zero degrees Celsius is merely a convenient reference point, i.e., the freezing point of water. -40˚ Celsius does not mean that there is NEGATIVE temperature, just that with respect to the temperature in Celsius at which water freezes, the temperature is 40 degrees below that temperature.

Thus there are really only two kinds of zero:

·        mid-point zero, Case (1)  and

·        absolute zero, Case (3).

If negative numbers are allowed, then the zero is a mid-point and there are two absolutes. If there is only one absolute, then there are no negative numbers. Case (2), a postitional zero, is thus merely a subset of Case (3), where negative numbers exist with respect to a reference point, but there is no -∞.

Vectors have both an amplitude, radius, and an angle. The radius expressed as a scalar can NEVER be negative. If you turn a vector by 180˚,  then you still have a radius of 1, not a radius of -1.

Are there mathematical functions which also do not allow negative numbers? Absolutely. An exponential distribution has a Probability Density Function, PDF, of λe^-λx and a Cumulative Distribution Function, CDF, of 1- e^-λx, both with x≥0. Logarithms are undefined for x<0.

Let x be the position in space. The dimension perpendicular to the x-axis might be the value of the PDF and CDF, but for convenience let’s refer to this axis as time. While the PDF and the CDF of an exponential distribution will not ordinarily be zero, in converting to Minkowski space, the time axis is with respect to a fixed point, i.e. now; negative numbers are defined as the past; and positive numbers are defined as the future. For example, a time of 2024 CE only means that -2024 is 2024 years before the Common Era, or 2024 BCE. Alternatively that measurement can begin at the Big Bang. Negative numbers could then be the time before the Big Bang, and positive numbers could be the time since the Big Bang. Reality is the set of choices that have been made. Thus negative numbers could be the set of choices before that reality and positive numbers could be the set of choices that will be made after that reality.

Thus there are three dimensions in Minkowski space:

·        space, which does NOT allow negative numbers;

·        time, which allows negative numbers; and

·        unreality, imaginary/imagination, which allows negative numbers. 

A complex number in three polar dimensions can be expressed as re^iθ .  Transfomed to cylindrical coordinates where the cylindrical volume is formed by rotating the real surface (r, space-time) about the imaginary, i, axis, this is r*cos(θ)+r*sin(θ)*i. Thus Euler’s Formula, e^ix=cos(x)+sin(x)*i, is the special case where r =1 and is on the real surface which is rotated about the imaginary axis. If that surface is flat, Euclidean, then x=θ and r=√((r*cos(x))²+(r*sin(x))²). Since cos²+sin²=1, this becomes r=r. If the surface that is being rotated is spherical, then then as the radius of the spherical surface,  R, approaches infinity, its  limit is also r=√((r*cos(x))²+(r*sin(x))^2. But if the surface being rotated is hyperbolic, then it is     

  r=ln(cosh(r*cos(x))*cosh(r*sin(x))±√((cosh(r*cos(x))*cosh(r*sin(x)))²-1)).

The origin (0,0,0) has two solutions for the coefficient of the imaginary axis. Sin(0) and sin(π) are both 0. But cos(0)=1, while cos(π)=-1. And cosh(0)=1. This mean that a rotation of a hyperbolic surface that passes through the imaginary plane at the origin also has two solutions

r=ln(cosh(r*cos(0))*cosh(r*sin(0)) ± √((cosh(r*cos(0))*cosh(r*sin(0)))²-1)) 

and

r=ln(cosh(r*cos(π))*cosh(r*sin(π)) ± √((cosh(r*cos(π))*cosh(r*sin(π)))²-1)).

Using the hyperbolic identity that cosh²-sinh²=1, and thus sinh=√(cosh²-1), and the values for 0 and π , these can be simplified to r=ln(cosh(r) ± sinh(r)) and r=ln(cosh(-r) ± sinh(-r)). Because cosh is an odd function, that is cosh(x)=cosh(-x), these both can be expressed as r=ln(0 ± 2*cosh(r)). In Minkowski space it is conventional to describe a light cone and an inverted light cone whose peaks intersect at the origin. But this assumes that the surfaces being rotated are flat, Euclidean. If the surface being rotated is hyperbolic, then the light cones become two sheets of a hyperboloid where the two sheets intersect at the origin. There is one solution in each sheet of the two sheeted hyperboloid. The radius appears negative in one sheet and positive in the other sheet, and there is a rotation of π when passing through the origin between those two sheets. But from  the perspective of each sheet, its radius is positive, and radius of the other sheet is negative, and its rotation of the imaginary axis is 0 and the rotation of the imaginary axis in the other sheet is sheet is π  from its imaginary axis. Thus while there is one solution in each sheet, it may be percieved differently, relatively, in each sheet.

This is all because zero as the coefficient of the imaginary axis is a positional, not an absolute zero. This zero does not signify nothing and can thus can be ignored.  It signifies a relative postion that can NOT be ignored.

Zero Sum

 

                                                                   Don’t Fence Me In

I want to ride to the ridge where the west commences
And gaze at the moon till I lose my senses
And I can't look at hovels and I can't stand fences
Don't fence me in

Overpopulation is growth with fixed fences.

A Zero-Sum game might explain the existing problems in the US House of Representatives. The number of representatives was fixed at 435 after the issues of apportionment following the 1910 census. In “1929 the Permanent Apportionment Act became law. It permanently set the maximum number of representatives at 435. In addition, the law determined a procedure for automatically reapportioning House seats after each census.”     
https://www.visitthecapitol.gov/sites/default/files/documents/resources-and-activities/CVC_HS_ActivitySheets_CongApportionment.pdf

The problem is that growth inevitably would occur and has in fact occurred. By setting a cap on the number of seats, it became a Zero-Sum game, i. e. the fences were fixed.

This is no different than overpopulation, which is when growth occurs in a Zero-Sum game. There will be winners and losers. And ultimately you reach a point where the behavior starts looking like that described by Calhoun. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_sink

The Wyoming rule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyoming_Rule adds congressional districts in accordance with growth and the Constitutional requirements BUT has no cap. It would require that the current House consist of 574 members instead of 435 members. There would be virtually no losers after each census, there would be mostly only be winners in accordance with growth. It is also observed that the current problem with the Electoral College is because of the cap on 435 members in the House. Fixing this issue may be a way to address those problems WITHOUT abolishing the Electoral College. Congress created this problem.  Congress should correct this problem.

Filibuster

 

Mrs. Robinson 

Sitting on a sofa on a Sunday afternoon
Going to the candidates' debate
Laugh about it, shout about it
When you've got to choose
Every way you look at this you lose 

A debate isn’t always losing 

The Senate filibuster has a noble purpose. It is to extend debate and allow minority positions to be articulated. However under the current rules, the filibuster has been used to prevent action, not to extend debate. I would propose that a motion to end debate is always in order. Unless a motion is then made for a SECRET vote to extend debate, the subject advances to the floor (e.g. extending debate becomes an opt out, not an opt in.)  If called for, a SECRET vote of a quorum of Senators, not a public vote along party lines would be taken. And given that there are only two parties in accordance with Duverger's Law, unless one party has a filibuster proof majority, a party vote can block an action if its votes is public and votes against the party are punished.  (In less technological times it was done with white and black balls in a jar, hence the phrase “blackballed”, so I think a modern accommodation could be made). 60 SECRET votes to extend debate (I might personally choose 68, the mean of 100 senators plus one Standard Deviation, but that is  merely the statistician in me showing) does not mean that there would be 60 votes in favor of the act, but the intent of the filibuster is to preserve debate, NOT to block the passage of acts.

Term Limits

 

I’m A Man

You think that I'm not human
And my heart is made of stone
But I never had no problems
Cause my body's pretty strong
I'm a man, yes, I am, and I can't help but love you so

When did you become a man?

Children and others may be considered to be wards of the state. They are counted in census and in apportioning representatives, but at some point, they may no longer be wards of the state. Thus a representative for them while them are a ward, e.g., a regent, should have a term that expires when they typically become of age. In the Jewish faith between the ages of 12 or 13,  you have a Bar (or Bat) Mitzvah and declare that “Today I am a (wo)man.” Restaurants and others have a children’s menu /price until typically the age of 12. The driving age is 16.The voting age is 18. The draft age is 18. The drinking age for alcohol is 21. The age of consent varies by state but is typically 16 to 18 years. So clearly there is some leeway on how long the term should be, but there seems to agreement that a regency is less than a lifetime and somewhere between 12 and 21 years.

Then why are some officers of the United States considered to be lifetime appointments. Every officer of the United States is merely a representative of the people, the sovereign f the United States. If elected legislative officers are for a definite term, and most executive officers serve at the pleasure of the elected term limited executive, then should not judicial and other officers also be for a defined term, not a lifetime appointment. To avoid political controversies in the nomination and approval process, that term should be long, for example 16 years, but it should NOT be for life. A lifetime appointment makes it possible for  the officer to be confused that they are more than just a representative. The group that is being represented might be immortal, or at least have a lifespan greater than any representative, but that officer is not immortal, or at least might have a life span less than the group. There is no reason that an officer should not be nominated for an additional term, barring constitutional issues, and service in one office should not prohibit anyone from serving in other offices, but every office ( legtisative, eceuruve AND judicial should be for a definite term because if you represent a man, that man is NOT immortal.)

Regulations

 

This is Me

When the sharpest words wanna cut me down
I'm gonna send a flood, gonna drown them out
I am brave, I am bruised
I am who I'm meant to be, this is me

Why did I do what I did?

I got into my field because I wanted to serve a group by explaining why large groups of individuals make the decisions they do.  See the first few episodes of Foundation on Apple TV+.  I wanted to be Hari Sheldon.  I learned at college that transportation played this game.

I also learned that it is never a binary choice.  It is a choice among at least three things.  Thus not unregulated capitalism versus only regulated communism, but give the group the choice of regulated capitalism. 

There are things that should be functions of the group, e.g. health care, prisons, education. etc., that should never be delegated to subgroups (e.g. corporations) without regulation.  Similarly there are things that are functions of subgroups, (e.g. individuals, clubs) such as free speech, free press, freedom of religion, freedom to asemble, voting rights, etc. that should never be delegated to the group without regulation. Delegating without regulating is stupid.  You should NEVER be offended because you are being regulated.  You are being regulated NOT because the group doesn't trust you.  You are being regulated because the group doesn't trust the other guy.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkcdU4gxU38

 

Names

 

The Name Game

Shirley!
Shirley, Shirley Bo-beer-ley
Bo-an-an fanna Fo-fer-ley
Fee-fi-mo.-Mer-ley
Shirley!

“What's in a name?That which we call a rose by any other name would smell just as sweet.”…..Or
“Her name was Magil, She called herself Lil, But everyone knew her as Nancy.”

If you look at my user profile, you will see my name is Daniel Beagan. My late father was also Daniel which meant that when I was very young, I was called “Little” Dan while my father was “Big” Dan. This lasted until I was a teenager, and it became obvious that I was going to be taller than my father. At that time while I was living at home, I was called Danny, a diminutive of Daniel, and my father was called Dan. It was not until I left home that I also became Dan. Beagan means “little” in Gaelic. That means when I was very young my name could be translated as Little Dan Little.

Daniel in Hebrew means God’s (-iel) Judge(Dan). Which means that my name translated is Little God’s Judge Little. Grammatically, it could be questioned as to whether the first Little modifies God while the second Little is a modifier of Judge. In order not to not be blasphemous. I prefer to think that little modifies judge in each instance. Which means that my name could be translated as God’s Little Judge. You hear that, Harlan Crow. Where is my bribe? Tens and twenties please!