Curt Doolittle

Form: Short Note

  • False theories are different from incomplete theories

    http://phys.org/news/2014-01-einstein-wrong.html#jCpAgreed. False theories are different from incomplete theories.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-16 08:45:00 UTC

  • I thought it would be hard to defeat rothbardian ethics while preserving Hoppe’s

    I thought it would be hard to defeat rothbardian ethics while preserving Hoppe’s insights.

    Not throwing out the baby with the bathwater so to speak.

    But it turned out that hoppe was right as far as private property was concerned.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-13 08:06:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a photo

    Curt Doolittle shared a photo.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-12 11:13:00 UTC

  • PRIESTS AS BEGGARS I’ve run into this particular Orthodox Deacon here in Kiev a

    PRIESTS AS BEGGARS

    I’ve run into this particular Orthodox Deacon here in Kiev a few times. He is very generous with his blessings. In our previous meetings I got the impression that he understood english. But what I discovered is that his english is limited to asking about your family members so that he can give them blessings too.

    After which he asks you to help him. By giving him money.

    (sigh). Another happy place, crushed. 🙁

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-10 14:49:00 UTC

  • MATH: THE LANGLANDS PROGRAM (getting closer) OK. Gotta say. This is a bit on the

    http://publications.ias.edu/rpl/MORE MATH: THE LANGLANDS PROGRAM

    (getting closer)

    OK. Gotta say. This is a bit on the hard side. Most philosophy is nonsense, so it’s a matter of just sifting through it for a few fragments of gold. And I think I get number theory as well or better than anyone else. It LOOKS to me that I understand it correctly, given that Turing was so clear at operationalizing and demystifying math. (and Petzold helped too. And for me at least, not to forget Poincaré and Mandelbrot.) But the number of terms I have to learn here is just overtaxing my short term memory and I’ll probably have to write my own glossary just to make sure that I actually understand it all.

    Anyway, I don’t really have to understand or work on the mathematical problem – and I wouldnt be good at it. (Actually it’s like crack for nerds, and I’m afraid of being addicted to it.) I do have to understand the relevant language well enough that I can address mathematical platonism thoroughly.

    Work, work, work…. lol

    http://publications.ias.edu/rpl/

    Arthur, James (2003), “The principle of functoriality”, American Mathematical Society. Bulletin. New Series 40 (1): 39–53,

    Bernstein, J.; Gelbart, S. (2003), An Introduction to the Langlands Program, Boston: Birkhäuser

    Gelbart, Stephen (1984), “An elementary introduction to the Langlands program”, American Mathematical Society. Bulletin. New Series 10 (2): 177–219,

    Frenkel, Edward (2005). “Lectures on the Langlands Program and Conformal Field Theory”

    Gelfand, I. M. (1963), “Automorphic functions and the theory of representations”, Proc. Internat. Congr. Mathematicians (Stockholm, 1962), Djursholm: Inst. Mittag-Leffler, pp. 74–85

    Harris, Michael; Taylor, Richard (2001), The geometry and cohomology of some simple Shimura varieties, Annals of Mathematics Studies 151, Princeton University Press

    Henniart, Guy (2000), “Une preuve simple des conjectures de Langlands pour GL(n) sur un corps p-adique”, Inventiones Mathematicae 139 (2): 439–455,

    Kutzko, Philip (1980), “The Langlands Conjecture for Gl2 of a Local Field”, Annals of Mathematics 112 (2): 381–412,

    Langlands, Robert (1967), Letter to Prof. Weil

    Langlands, R. P. (1970), “Problems in the theory of automorphic forms”, Lectures in modern analysis and applications, III, Lecture Notes in Math 170, Berlin, New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 18–61

    Laumon, G.; Rapoport, M.; Stuhler, U. (1993), “D-elliptic sheaves and the Langlands correspondence”, Inventiones Mathematicae 113 (2): 217–338,

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-09 04:19:00 UTC

  • I keep trying to find some venue that I can use to work into the Right’s intelle

    I keep trying to find some venue that I can use to work into the Right’s intellectual stream. Unfortunately, it’s not possible. I mean, you know, an argument against something isn’t an argument FOR anything. It’s pretty hard to be against something if you aren’t FOR something ELSE.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-08 13:49:00 UTC

  • Another watershed couple of days. I have my arms around the problem of mathemati

    Another watershed couple of days.

    I have my arms around the problem of mathematical platonism, and therefore all platonism. And I can argue that platonism, like obscurantism, is immoral, at least in public speech. And since I can prove platonism is unnecessary, and a remnant of primitive religion, then one must choose to perpetuate the immoral for convenience.

    But perhaps, more importantly, I can sort of sense, in a tip-of-the-tongue sort of way, the degree to which ‘babylonian magic’ still remains in western thought. A kind of dependence on the dream state that is not present in the germanic mythos, but is pervasive in monotheistic thought.

    What does it mean for our society when we emphasize the real, versus the dream? The acting versus the observing?

    Again, from the naturalist view, we have only so much time to think about what corresponds with reality, OR dream about what does not. Is then, magian thought, simply lost opportunity cost? And is that the entire point of magianism? To deprive people of the opportunity of thinking about alternatives in the real?

    Is the magian the ultimate source of Popper’s ignorance?

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-08 06:54:00 UTC

  • IGNORANCE OF MATHEMATICAL PHILOSOPHY – CONTINUED I’ve been working my way throug

    http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/naturalism-mathematics/LESS IGNORANCE OF MATHEMATICAL PHILOSOPHY – CONTINUED

    I’ve been working my way through this reading list and it turns out that plenty of people have written on the subject, but it’s not clear that they understand the underlying problem of correspondence (even if they use the term ‘external authority’). And the best author in the space is incorrect, and the matter apparently isnt settled.

    So, now it’s off to articulate the solution to this particular problem, even in mathematics. That will sort of anchor the legitimacy of my argument in favor of operational language in all disciplines.

    Sigh.

    Roman is pushing me to publish and not to spend time outside of Politics and Ethics. But my instinct tells me that my argument (calculation) seems to invite the solution to unifying the ‘logics’ and, as I’d hoped, eliminating platonism as well as obscurantism.

    If in fact, the innovations that I’m adding to political ethics are largely in the realm of requiring calculability and operational language, then it would seem to me that I should also ground operational language and calculability.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-08 04:16:00 UTC

  • ITS GENETICS YOU KNOW. I think we are up to something absurd like 20 papers a we

    ITS GENETICS YOU KNOW.

    I think we are up to something absurd like 20 papers a week basically confirming the nature side of the nature nurture debate.

    You can screw up your kids, but you can’t really make them materially better than your genes. So the whole trick is really, not to screw them up. 🙂 Which is pretty good, since evolution wouldn’t have been very good to us if we were dependent on pedagogy.

    JUST LIKE CONSERVATIVES HAVE ALWAYS ARGUED.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-07 14:57:00 UTC

  • RUSSIAN DRIVERS 1) “You can actually see the answer in most videos posted on You

    RUSSIAN DRIVERS

    1) “You can actually see the answer in most videos posted on YouTube. It’s the complete disregard for all traffic rules.”

    2) “Russian cultural bias to ‘go with your gut’ rather than follow the rules.”

    3) “Russian fatalities are not much above the world average.”

    Source date (UTC): 2014-01-05 20:51:00 UTC