Focus

 

Hit the Road Jack

Hit the road Jack and don't you come back
No more, no more, no more, no more
Hit the road Jack and don't you come back no more
What you say?
Hit the road Jack and don't you come back
No more, no more, no more, no more
Hit the road Jack and don't you come back no more

Should Travis Kelce hit the road just like Jack?

Popular wisdom is that all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.  NFL players should NOT be dull.  That means that if their work is football, they better have other interests for play.  Rodney Harrison opinioned that Kelce Travis was not 100% focused on football. https://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/for-petes-sake/article292897164.html.

Travis, like Jack, should NOT be 100% focused on football.  If he is not performing as hoped, that should be attributed only to football and NOT to how focused he is on football.  It is expected, and hoped, that he, like Jack, has interests other than work, football. LOL! I wonder what childless cat lady  interest Rodney is afraid is distracting him?  Swifties unite!

Perception

 

If They Could See Her Through My Eyes

Yet when we're walking together
They sneer if I'm holding her hand
But if they could see her through my eyes
Maybe they'd all understand

Let’s not forget that there is a difference between your and my eyes.

Perception, what you see through your eyes, is important.

If you think that you are the only thing that matters, the surface of the Earth may appear flat. You would be wrong, the earth is a sphere, NOT flat, and you can circumnavigate that sphere, globe.

If you think that you are the center of the universe, then the sun may appear to  revolve around you. You be wrong, the Earth revolves around the sun, and this has been known since Copernicus. 

If you may think that everyone sees the same stars as you, you would be wrong. Many of the stars visible in Perth, Australia are different from those visible in New York City.

Thus it is not surprising that our human perception of the absolute may NOT be the absolute’s perception of itself.  Einstein showed that perspective matters when viewing an absolute.  That is the basis of his Theory of Relativity which deals which different frames of reference by observers of the absolute speed of light.

However Einstein solved his equations assuming that space was Euclidean, flat.  If space is instead hyperbolic, that also makes a difference. What may be assumed to have imaginary solutions, for faster than light speeds, might instead only be a difference in perception. Instead, two solutions with NO imaginary solutions, may only be different solutions on sheets of the same surface. (A hyperbolic surface has two sheets, with opposite signs).

On a flat space, transformation of a complex number from polar coordinates, r*e^ix, to complex coordinates is r*cos(x) + r*sin(x)*i, where r is r=cos^-1(cos(cos²(x) * cos(sin²(x))) which because of the circular identity cos²+sin²=1 is identical to r=√(r²*(cos²(x)+sin²(x))) or r=r.  But this does not consider that r² can be either (r)² or (-r)². By contrast on a hyperbolic surface, the solution  is always                     r=cosh^-1(cosh(r*cos(x))*cosh(r*sin(x))). Because of:

1) the hyperbolic identity, cosh²-sinh²=1, 

2) the inverse of the function cosh, cosh^‑1(u),  which has two solutions, ln(u±√(u²-1)), and

 3) the sin(0) is equal to 0, 

if the coefficient of the imaginary axis is 0,  then the solution is

r=ln(cosh(√(a²+b²)) ± sinh(√(a²+b²))), where √(a²+b²) is the real coefficient, r.

If the absolute is an infinite number of triangular waves, just one of its waves might be perceived by an observer on a hyperbolic surface as a normal logistics distribution with s=.5 and μ=π/2 and there would be no solution on the other hyperbolic sheet which is only the negative (e.g. π to 2π ) portion of that wave which can not be perceived. This means that Pythagoras’ Theorem, which is also the CDF of a triangular wave from 0 to π, is only a matter of perception, as are hypotenuse of any triangle. Thus a logistic distribution, and all sum of squares, may only be the perception of a single wave of the absolute as a logistics distribution from an observer on one sheet of a surface with two hyperbolic sheets.

PDF of Triangular wave versus Logistics Distribution on hyperbolic surface.

CDF of Triangular wave versus Logistics Distribution on a hyperbolic surface.

The absolute may feature straight lines and sharp corners, discontinuities, but from the perspective of an observer on a hyperbolic surface, these might look like curved lines and smooth corners.  Know your place.

Republicans VIII

 

The Party’s Over

The party's over
It's time to call it a day
They've burst your pretty balloon
And taken the moon away
It's time to wind up the masquerade
Just make your mind up the piper must be paid.

Is the Republican Party over?

A Venn Diagram is the perfect way to illustrate the Goldilocks principle, “Just Right”, when there are three outcomes from two diametrically opposed positions. The maximum condition is when the two positions intersect, overlap, and this creates three outcomes from the total of all conditions.  The first position that does not overlap is 1/3 of the total. The area of the overlap, intersection of the first and second positions is 1/3 of the total. The area of the second position that does not overlap is 1/3 of the total. The total is thus always 1/3+1/3+1/3. The intersecting position might go by the name of Reagan Democrats or Rockefeller Republicans, etc. It is in this bi-partisan area that politics is most effective.

If one side becomes obsessed with ideological purity and refuses membership to those who would work with the other party, the total will not change. In fact the excluded members may join with the other party. In this case the first position has 1/3 of the total. The second position has 2/3 of the total; the 1/3 that did not intersect with the other position PLUS the 1/3 that did previously intersect. Excluding members because they were primaried out; were “RINOs”; spoke ill of other Republicans, etc. ........ or other tests to ensure ideological purity becomes a self defeating effort.

Why has this become a problem for the  Republican Party? It goes back to its very beginnings. No individual party member can be expected to have exactly the same position on every issue. If party membership is defined by only one issue, then there is the probability that membership would be offered to those with no other commonalities among its members. In the 1850s, the issue was the expansion of slavery into federal territories. The no-tax Whigs and the no-immigrant Know Nothings who may have had nothing in common with others who held anti-slavery positions were welcomed into the Republican Party. When slavery was abolished then the ideological position of the Party could become no-tax or no-immigrant, and those who were anti-slavery but low-tax or pro-immigrant may be excluded from the party which they founded. It has taken almost two lifetimes, but the exclusion appears to have been accomplished. A party that excludes Richard Cheney, Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger and Mitt Romney and vilifies John McCain may be "ideological pure", but it is guaranteeing its own defeat.

Lawrence O’Donnell remarked that today’s Republican Party has become a cult of personality. He observed that the policies espoused by the current Republican nominee for President whether it is by JD Vance, Ron Desantis, or even Donald Trump, Jr. are widely deplored, and yet those same policies espoused by Donald Trump, Sr. are admired by many of those same people.  He concluded that it is the personality, not the policies, that are being endorsed. And since personalities have a limited lifespan, one has to ask when Donald Trump, Sr. is no more, is the Republican Party over?

Absolute

 

All in One

One love (hear my plea)
One heart
Let's join together and I'll feel alright
Let's join together (thanks and Praise to the Lord)
And I'll feel alright (and I will feel alright)

Is there also only One Absolute?

If there is an absolute and its absence, for example absolute zero, then the question becomes how many absolutes are there?

While it is true that life=ln(0 ± (sinh(x)+cosh(x))), if an absolute can be approached but not obtained, then the behavior approaching that absolute is said to be exponential. Since both sinh and cosh can be stated as exponentials, the two solutions are x and ‑x. https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2024/09/sides.html

It is also true that while sinh(x) and cosh(x) are repeating functions,  they repeat only in imaginary planes every 2πi. These are also wave functions with positive and negative parts. They are positive during odd repeats of n*πi and are negative during the next following even repeat of n*πi. Since it has already been said that the coefficient of the imaginary axis must confined to 0 in order to be real, this coefficient must be a relative zero not an absolute zero. Therefore x must practically be between 0 and π to be meaningful. Thus while it is true that one solution is x and one solution is -x, both solutions must have a coefficient of zero for the imaginary part in order to be real. That means that rather than a parabolic solution where the solution CAN be imaginary, this is more probably moving from one sheet of a two sheeted hyperboloid to the other sheet. The solution of x, and -x, therefore must also be between 0 and π. In that case, if the universe is one sheet of a two sheeted hyperboloid, then for  Pythagoras' Theorem to be true, then  π must be the size of the universe. If c, a, and b are much less than the size of the universe then they are also much less than π. Then Pythagoras’ Theorem is c=√(a²+b²) is because the universe is locally flat while universally hyperbolic.

If the three dimensions of that hyperboloid are space, time and imagination, and imagination is confined to be zero in order to be real, this can also be stated that  negative coefficients of i are worse than real,  and positive coefficients of i are better than real. Time also can be defined as the past is negative, and the future is positive, if the present reality is 0. This means that both time and i, imagination, must also be infinite. This means that only space can be constrained to zero and real values and thus be absolute. If there is an absolute, for example absolute zero temperature, then the question becomes how many absolutes are there? Temperature is directly proportional to velocity, and velocity is merely the derivative of space with respect to time. This means that temperature and space are effectively the same thing. This suggests that if there is an absolute zero of temperature, this means that space has the same absolute zero. If the dimensions of time and i must NOT be absolute,  and the dimension of space has to be an absolute, then there is no such thing as negative space. What is from our flat perspective perceived as negative space is merely one sheet of a two sheeted hyperboloid and thus there is only one absolute, just as there is only one volume. The three dimensions of this volume are space, time, and imagination, and only space is absolute. Again, temperature is merely the derivative of space with respect to time. Absolute zero temperature means space is absolute. If neither time not i, imagination, can be absolute, then there is only one remaining dimension that can be absolute.

Beliefs

 

I Believe

I believe for every drop of rain that falls
A flower grows
I believe that somewhere in the darkest night
A candle glows
I believe for everyone who goes astray, someone will come
To show the way
I believe, I believe

What do you believe?

Must  followers of Science, Technology, Engineering and Math, STEM, disciplines be atheists? When I was first working, a co-worker said that someday since I was an engineer, I would stop believing in God and become an atheist.  Now almost 45 years later, it still has not happened.  I have instead realized that the position that was being put forward is merely one of nomenclature. Scientists believe in an absolute and the absence of an absolute.  For example they believe in a temperature of absolute zero. Theists believe in God and the absence of God.  Exchange absolute for God, and they are both saying the same thing. Technologists believe in an absolute, even though technologists have never obtained either an absolute or an absolute zero. Theists believe in God, even though theists have not seen God or the absence of God.

Instead what scientists and other technologists believe is that through research and study they can discover  how the absolute/God works, NOT that there is no absolute/God. If there are rules, those rules are the mind of God. The problem is the belief that understanding how rules works means that if you follow those same rules that YOU are then God. It does not mean that studying the rules, or personally testing those rules, means you don’t believe in the rules.  In the New Testament of the Christian Bible, when the Apostle Thomas doubts that the others have seen the Risen Christ he is not saying that there is no Risen Christ, only that he personally needs the proof that there is a Risen Christ. He won’t accept the word of others that there is a Risen Christ. Christ himself does NOT chastise Thomas for this doubt.  Christ instead appears before Thomas, and asks Thomas to inspect his wounds.  But Thomas did not say that by inspecting those wounds he had become the Risen Christ, only that he believed in the Risen Christ.

If the rules are those of the absolute/God, knowing those rules means that you believe in the rules, not that you ARE the rules.

Ceilings II

 

O Death

Well I am death, none can excel
I'll open the door to heaven or hell
Whoa, death someone would pray
Could you wait to call me another day

If life is a building, then birth is the floor and death is the ceiling.

The Bill of Rights to the US Constitution concentrates on establishing rights (ceilings and floors) on individuals beyond which the state can not operate. The Constitution itself also set some floors for its officers, but unfortunately did NOT set ceilings. This was done because the life expectancy at the time of writing of the Constitution was such that any ceilings that needed to exist would be beyond the limits that death already imposed. Thus a minimum age for as President as 35 years was written into the constitution, but no maximum age was established. At the time, life expectancy was only 40 years. Admittedly that was skewed by death in childhood but even a 35 year old might on average only be expected to live an additional 30 years in 1796. Thus setting a ceiling of 75 years for taking the oath of the presidency could be considered to be an unnecessary ceiling when death might come earlier.

However life expectancies have changed. It is now conceivable to live to 100 or more years. So if there is a floor, we can no longer count on death imposing a cut-off before a ceiling is needed. By never acknowledging that the People as individuals were giving to die, no ceilings were set. If instead the People collectively are expecting to live forever, then ceilings shouldn’t be ignored.

There should be ceilings on how old its officers could be in order to take their oaths. There should also be term limits on each of those offices, NOT lifetime appointments. Those terms can be long enough that they are generational, not as nominated by the present voters. If the adult voting age is 18 years, then an 18 year term limit is consistent with being a regent for most wards of the state before they achieve full voting status. The nomination of most federal officers is by the President. If a President is limited to two term, then most federal officers should also be limited to two terms, unless otherwise specified. Not acknowledging death, allows death to win.

Branding

 

You Don’t Know Me

You give your hand to me
And then you say hello
And I can hardly speak
My heart is beating so
And anyone can tell
You think you know me well
Well, you don't know me

Maybe to be known, you need better branding!

When I was  a young engineer, I was working on what became known in Boston on I-93, the South East Expressway as the Zipper lane. That was NOT what it was called by us engineers.  We called it the SEXway ( South East eXpressway) Reversible Movable Barrier Separated High Occupancy Vehicle Lane.  Rolls trippingly off the tongue doesn’t it! 😉

The basic concept is that connected, concrete Jersey barriers are stored against the median on both sides of the South East Expressway and moved as needed.  The traffic was highly directional during peak hours, northbound in the morning and southbound in the afternoon.  While the traffic was such that it warranted an additional lane during the peak hour in the peak direction, there was not the right of way to add an additional lane. But there was an extra lane in the reverse direction.  But that traffic was already going at expressway speeds in the opposite, off peak, direction so it could not be safely taken.  A lane could be taken if that lane was separated by a physical barrier, but then that barrier would be needed to be removed, and switched to the opposite side only hours later each day.  If only there was a physical barrier that could be moved twice a day when needed, and thus the concept of movable barriers was developed.  The barriers could be moved to create the lane in the early morning, and stored against the median in the afternoon.  In the afternoon, the process would need to be reversed in the opposite direction.  Once the kinks were worked out, a design was developed, and the barriers were put in place.  Because there was only a single lane, to entice and reward drivers to use this lane, and to prevent it from being overloaded upon opening, entry would be restricted to High Occupancy Vehicles (e.g. carpools and buses).  But there was still that name.

The branding of the lane was taken care of by the newspaper headline writers.  The machine that moved the connected barriers appeared like it was opening a big Zipper, when it was stored it appeared to be closing a Zipper, and the lane that it created allow you to Zip into Boston from the suburbs. Would it have been as successful under the original name?  Maybe.  But the Zipper lane by which it is known is MUCH better branding.  There is an article by Parker Molloy dealing with another example.  What is formally known as  “coherence bias” by journalists might be better branded as “sane-washing”. The intent is cleaning up a speech by journalists which informs only about the policies, but does not convey about the character, of the speaker.  The intent is good and is informative on policy but is depriving any information about character.  Knowing it is “coherence bias” is interesting.  Calling it “sane-washing” is not only better branding, ... it gives the reader the proper information.