Jan 5, 2020, 1:53 PM We can quantify all sorts of metrics of human behavior, but you’re confusing mathematics with physics, the same way most people confuse averages with instances or distributions. In other words, mathematics describes averages of points in time, it doesn’t not describe operations.Mathematics consist of operations that describe states and changes in states and averages. But not the underlying operations. Physics studies both the quantitative and the operational. Mathematics just the quantitative (positional). So while mathematics describes ‘sums’ operations describe changes in state. Here: At every “level’ of reality we discover an underlying limited number of operations (Grammar) producing some set of symmetries (outcomes, equilibria), and above that a new limited number of operations (Grammar, outcomes, equilibria)) that produce another set of symmetries, and above that and so on. So, we don’t yet know what causes the quantum level We have a fairly good idea what causes the subatomic level. we have a very good idea what causes the atomic level. We have such a good understanding of chemistry that it’s boring. We are getting a fair understanding of biochemistry (and that it’s mechanical). We are getting a beginning understanding of proteins (and that it’s mechanical(operational) ) We are getting a beginning understanding of genetic reproduction (and that it’s mechanical- operational) . We are getting a fairly good understanding of cells. We have a more than fairly good understanding of multi-cellular (complex) organisms. I’ll stop there since I think you can see the pattern of some set of physically possible operations producing a finite set of physically possible states, followed by another set of physically possible operations producing a finite set of physically possible states, and that this process continues indefinitely, all the way to what we call consciousness. Now life buys us conservation of energy (defeat of entropy), but it’s still bound by the laws of physics (the underlying grammars). Memory buys us prediction. And prediction provides our ability to perform operations (actions) that improve our defeat of entropy. Increase in neural( brain) volume provides Competition between predictions, which provides us choices of options for defeating entropy. Increase in Brain volume provides iterations on predictions for increasing choices of defeating entropy the sequence of actions (or inactions for that matter). Increase in brain volume provides prediction of others predictions and predicting opportunities for cooperation that further improve our ability to capture and use energy by defeating entropy. Human ability to capture energy is limited by the grammar of human action (possible actions and sequences of actions and parallel combinations of other’s actions). So the grammar of human action consists in the physical, emotional-intuitionistic, and cognitive operations. Those operations are bounded by physical limitations of the grammars upon which they are constructed. Both Physics and Economics are bound by the same underlying grammars (laws) but because humans have memories, prediction, sentience, and consciousness, reason, calculation, symbolism, and computation, we can use debts and credits with each other to temporarily seize and advantage and then later return to equilibrium by repayment of the cooperation. We don’t violate that physical law. Because humans observe reciprocity (equilibrium) just as the physical world obeys equilibrium (entropy). And some people specialize in capitalization (productivity) and some people specialize in consumption, and others in parasitism or predation. But in the end, over time, we are limited by the physical laws of the universe. We can create productivity (as does life), or we an parasite upon other lives (as do bacteria and viruses). We cannot run the clock on parasitism (Socialism or gypsies) or conquest (islamism) forever because we will run out of hosts to prey upon. So economics is just physics with debits and credits (ability t steal, to borrow, to exchange,to produce, or to save) made possible by consciousness, by test of reciprocity (account balances), within the limit of proportionality (exit). TRIANGLE: What limits to human operations? ………………What Limits?………………. ………………………|………………………… …………….Human Actions…………….. ……………..Consciousness……………. …………………Sentience……………….. …………………….Life……………………… …………………./…………………………… ……….subatomic..macro-atomic….. ………………./…………………………….. ……….?Limits………….Limits?………… Human limits are reciprocity (positive) with the limits of proportionality (negaitve). The subatomic level appears to run out of energy by maximum dissipation. The macro atomic level appears to run out of ability to compress energy. Sorry but it’s just Physics with the ability to use each other for debt and credit that we call ‘cooperation”.
Theme: Measurement
-
Economics Is Just an Extension of Physics
Jan 5, 2020, 1:53 PM We can quantify all sorts of metrics of human behavior, but you’re confusing mathematics with physics, the same way most people confuse averages with instances or distributions. In other words, mathematics describes averages of points in time, it doesn’t not describe operations.Mathematics consist of operations that describe states and changes in states and averages. But not the underlying operations. Physics studies both the quantitative and the operational. Mathematics just the quantitative (positional). So while mathematics describes ‘sums’ operations describe changes in state. Here: At every “level’ of reality we discover an underlying limited number of operations (Grammar) producing some set of symmetries (outcomes, equilibria), and above that a new limited number of operations (Grammar, outcomes, equilibria)) that produce another set of symmetries, and above that and so on. So, we don’t yet know what causes the quantum level We have a fairly good idea what causes the subatomic level. we have a very good idea what causes the atomic level. We have such a good understanding of chemistry that it’s boring. We are getting a fair understanding of biochemistry (and that it’s mechanical). We are getting a beginning understanding of proteins (and that it’s mechanical(operational) ) We are getting a beginning understanding of genetic reproduction (and that it’s mechanical- operational) . We are getting a fairly good understanding of cells. We have a more than fairly good understanding of multi-cellular (complex) organisms. I’ll stop there since I think you can see the pattern of some set of physically possible operations producing a finite set of physically possible states, followed by another set of physically possible operations producing a finite set of physically possible states, and that this process continues indefinitely, all the way to what we call consciousness. Now life buys us conservation of energy (defeat of entropy), but it’s still bound by the laws of physics (the underlying grammars). Memory buys us prediction. And prediction provides our ability to perform operations (actions) that improve our defeat of entropy. Increase in neural( brain) volume provides Competition between predictions, which provides us choices of options for defeating entropy. Increase in Brain volume provides iterations on predictions for increasing choices of defeating entropy the sequence of actions (or inactions for that matter). Increase in brain volume provides prediction of others predictions and predicting opportunities for cooperation that further improve our ability to capture and use energy by defeating entropy. Human ability to capture energy is limited by the grammar of human action (possible actions and sequences of actions and parallel combinations of other’s actions). So the grammar of human action consists in the physical, emotional-intuitionistic, and cognitive operations. Those operations are bounded by physical limitations of the grammars upon which they are constructed. Both Physics and Economics are bound by the same underlying grammars (laws) but because humans have memories, prediction, sentience, and consciousness, reason, calculation, symbolism, and computation, we can use debts and credits with each other to temporarily seize and advantage and then later return to equilibrium by repayment of the cooperation. We don’t violate that physical law. Because humans observe reciprocity (equilibrium) just as the physical world obeys equilibrium (entropy). And some people specialize in capitalization (productivity) and some people specialize in consumption, and others in parasitism or predation. But in the end, over time, we are limited by the physical laws of the universe. We can create productivity (as does life), or we an parasite upon other lives (as do bacteria and viruses). We cannot run the clock on parasitism (Socialism or gypsies) or conquest (islamism) forever because we will run out of hosts to prey upon. So economics is just physics with debits and credits (ability t steal, to borrow, to exchange,to produce, or to save) made possible by consciousness, by test of reciprocity (account balances), within the limit of proportionality (exit). TRIANGLE: What limits to human operations? ………………What Limits?………………. ………………………|………………………… …………….Human Actions…………….. ……………..Consciousness……………. …………………Sentience……………….. …………………….Life……………………… …………………./…………………………… ……….subatomic..macro-atomic….. ………………./…………………………….. ……….?Limits………….Limits?………… Human limits are reciprocity (positive) with the limits of proportionality (negaitve). The subatomic level appears to run out of energy by maximum dissipation. The macro atomic level appears to run out of ability to compress energy. Sorry but it’s just Physics with the ability to use each other for debt and credit that we call ‘cooperation”.
-
The Answer: “The only difference in qualia being marginal indifferences”
Mar 4, 2020, 2:59 PM (core) UPDATED
—“The Qualia of Geometry Is Uniform. Or, to paraphrase: The cartesian properties of a cube are perceived uniformly.”—Andrew M Gilmour
Or differently: all humans perceive space, consisting of place, location, objects, paths, and boundaries, uniformly, with the only difference in qualia being marginal indifferences. Or differently: all brains we know of evolved from the necessity of coordinating action within space and time, using the same method: construction of triangles, hexagrams, and rough approximations of volumes (spherese) from them, with the only difference being scale proportionate to bodily movement. Just want to thank you again for that bit of elegance.
-
The Answer: “The only difference in qualia being marginal indifferences”
Mar 4, 2020, 2:59 PM (core) UPDATED
—“The Qualia of Geometry Is Uniform. Or, to paraphrase: The cartesian properties of a cube are perceived uniformly.”—Andrew M Gilmour
Or differently: all humans perceive space, consisting of place, location, objects, paths, and boundaries, uniformly, with the only difference in qualia being marginal indifferences. Or differently: all brains we know of evolved from the necessity of coordinating action within space and time, using the same method: construction of triangles, hexagrams, and rough approximations of volumes (spherese) from them, with the only difference being scale proportionate to bodily movement. Just want to thank you again for that bit of elegance.
-
All Epistemic Processes Are the Same
Mar 6, 2020, 6:28 PM This might be hard. Yes, all epistemic processes are the same:
sense-perception > auto-association > hypothesis(intuition) > theory(reason) > survival in market(demonstration) -> repeat.
So it’s rather obvious that information move from sense perception(observation), to intuition(prediction), to reason (permutation), to action (demonstration), to observation in a continuous cognitive loop (continuous recursive). DECEIT 1. Emotional Influence (intuition, empathy): Bias, Wishful-Thinking, Loading-Framing,
- Cognitive Influence (Rational, sympathy): Suggestion, Obscuring, Overloading, Inflation, Conflation.
Evidentiary Influence (empirical, imitation): Fiction, Fictionalism, Deceit
Denial, and substitution of agreement/disagreement for truth/falsehood.
FICTIONALISMS 3.1 Intuition(emotional-predictive) -> Occult-Supernatural -> vs realism, naturalism 3.2 Reason(rational-theoretical) -> Sophistry-Idealism -> vs Logic, incentives, rational choice 3.3 Action (physical-empirical) -> Magic-Pseudoscience -> vs Operationalism, Empiricism Technically speaking these are all methods of overloading our ability to detect constant and inconstant relations by appeal to emotional, rational, and evidentiary Edit
-
All Epistemic Processes Are the Same
Mar 6, 2020, 6:28 PM This might be hard. Yes, all epistemic processes are the same:
sense-perception > auto-association > hypothesis(intuition) > theory(reason) > survival in market(demonstration) -> repeat.
So it’s rather obvious that information move from sense perception(observation), to intuition(prediction), to reason (permutation), to action (demonstration), to observation in a continuous cognitive loop (continuous recursive). DECEIT 1. Emotional Influence (intuition, empathy): Bias, Wishful-Thinking, Loading-Framing,
- Cognitive Influence (Rational, sympathy): Suggestion, Obscuring, Overloading, Inflation, Conflation.
Evidentiary Influence (empirical, imitation): Fiction, Fictionalism, Deceit
Denial, and substitution of agreement/disagreement for truth/falsehood.
FICTIONALISMS 3.1 Intuition(emotional-predictive) -> Occult-Supernatural -> vs realism, naturalism 3.2 Reason(rational-theoretical) -> Sophistry-Idealism -> vs Logic, incentives, rational choice 3.3 Action (physical-empirical) -> Magic-Pseudoscience -> vs Operationalism, Empiricism Technically speaking these are all methods of overloading our ability to detect constant and inconstant relations by appeal to emotional, rational, and evidentiary Edit
-
Why They Emphasize Intersubjectively Verifiable Property
Why They Emphasize Intersubjectively Verifiable Property https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/why-they-emphasize-intersubjectively-verifiable-property/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 20:03:36 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266097815819882502
-
Why They Emphasize Intersubjectively Verifiable Property
Mar 22, 2020, 1:43 PM I can’t always come into possession (exclusive control) over those things in which I’ve demonstrated an interest (by bearing a cost so that I can demonstrate an interest). Just because I have invested doesn’t mean I can come into possession of what I’ve invested in. Awareness > opportunity > resources > demonstrated Interest > (common share > contractual share > possession in fact) This is why reductio analysis fails. And it’s why the jewish libertarians emphasize reductio analysis to bait you into hazard. And why they emphasize intersubjectively verifiable property (physical) rather than demonstrated interests in property in toto, in order to bait you into hazard.
-
Why They Emphasize Intersubjectively Verifiable Property
Mar 22, 2020, 1:43 PM I can’t always come into possession (exclusive control) over those things in which I’ve demonstrated an interest (by bearing a cost so that I can demonstrate an interest). Just because I have invested doesn’t mean I can come into possession of what I’ve invested in. Awareness > opportunity > resources > demonstrated Interest > (common share > contractual share > possession in fact) This is why reductio analysis fails. And it’s why the jewish libertarians emphasize reductio analysis to bait you into hazard. And why they emphasize intersubjectively verifiable property (physical) rather than demonstrated interests in property in toto, in order to bait you into hazard.
-
No. It’s that Math Is the Reductio Example of Grammar.
Mar 22, 2020, 3:34 PM Math? … It’s not so much math. I don’t really think that way. Instead, I understand the grammars. I understand math is the most simple possible Formal grammar. That programming the next grammar, and that law the next grammar. And so I illustrate concepts with the most simple possible grammar: math. The more I do this the more ‘trivial’ or “simple’ the language of mathematics is, and how mathematical rues (proofs) or deductions are just the simplest possible theory -with the added benefit that since math is scale independent, we don’t have to think about limits.
- Formal Grammar (logics)
- Laws of Nature Grammar (Natural/physical Sciences)
- Natural Laws Grammar (Cognitive, Behavioral, and Social Science)
Identity (category) Sets (multiple categories) Association (pairing off, pebbles etc.) Ordering (positional naming, numbers) Counting(Arithmetic) Balances (Accounting) Ratios (Math) Lines (Geometry) Curves (Calculus (change)) Waves ( Wave Functions (competition) ) Models (Manifolds, topology, geometries, n-dimesional geometries) Simulation (…) All grammars follow this same evolution. All language is open to geometric representation.