Last word on the Lakers 2023 Season

 The Lakers had an amazing end of season run following a wonderful trade that brought several good players to L.A. It seems that they lacked a solid center for the Western Conference final when they ran into a superstar center (Nikola Jokic) for the Nuggets. In the championship bubble season the Lakers still had Dwight Howard whom had been one on the leagues best rebounders and defensive players at the position that became the Laker’s Achilles heel easily exploited by the Nuggets.

James is nearing forty yet he still scored 40 points in game four. He would have needed to score 60 points for the Lakers to win; in each game. Anthony Davis is a hybrid player who goes well against teams without a strong star center. He isn’t a corner shooter and driving forward like Rick Barry or Larry Bird, and isn’t a good enough shooter as a forward to play the position like they, Magic Johnson or Julius Erving did. Neither is he solid, durable or tall enough to play the center role like Shaq, Wilt or Kareem when running into a Jokic. Davis can put the ball in the hoop inside and out against the majority of teams. If Davis played just one forward position for the Lakers his value could be optimized. If the Lakers can keep Lebron around for 30 off the bench now and then, retain four of the present guards, as well as Vanderbilt and Gabriel, and find that strong, tall center defender and rebounder able to fill the gap in the key they might be able to make it to the N.B.A. finals next year.

If the Lakers haven’t good draft choices maybe they should go to Africa, Eastern Europe and South America to advertise for guys that meet the physical attributes required for center and give them an audition. Training some non-basketball player to rebound and play tenacious defense even if they haven’t the shooting skills of Davis, Kareem, Lebron, Magic or Julius might be enough to win in 2024. After that it is likely the Nuggets and San Antonio will be fighting for the top spot from the west.

A Generation After Ending School Swats; Enter the Dragon of Mass Shootings

 Corporal punishment in American schools mostly ended in the 1980s I believe it was. Before the rise of the new permissive education ecosystem there were few or no school shooting and zero mass shootings in schools. That makes me wonder if there is some positive correlation; spare the rod and spoil the child as it were.

Some schools have taken to placing police-persons in schools with guns to watch over students. It occurs to me that something is missing in the logic of educators that would use what is fundamentally an adult corrections process to correct juvenile misbehavior. As has been noted ad nauseam the brains of kids don’t fully form until about age 23. Kids will make mistakes and test the limits of their existential experience. It is like putting a hand on a hot stove when young and learning not to repeat the process with it’s implicit correction. A swat with something like a cricket bat until 9^th grade for substantive misbehavior would provide some humility and knowledge for students lacking discipline at home or at school. Maybe putting corporal punishment back into public schools should be considered.

It has been reported that the U.S. education system is presently dominated by females. It has also taken a turn toward associationist psychology and epistemological subjectivism. Maybe that’s a good environment for females yet less so for male educators and students alike. One wonders if the permissive, feminist environment of schools (if that is what it is) has driven some male students to seek fraternity in gangs. I wonder if networking bullies that led to the mass shooting in Uvalde Texas might have been corrected with the presence of corporal punishment. When there is not corporal punishment correcting networking bullies all contributing a piece of abuse on a single target cannot easily be corrected since individually the members of the network are not responsible individually for much of the load of abuse, unlike the victim whom must individually use a high degree of violence to apply some to each member of the network of abuse.

I wonder if feminization of schools has led not only to increase the extra-curricular increase of gangs. Maybe the Sandy Hook shooter in a prosperous home responded to the absence of a father in the home and lack of a fraternal environment in schools by looking inward and becoming isolated with drugs and violent music and gangs his replacement. Of course that led to a bad end. Expecting juvenile corrections systems or incarceration to effectively discipline and correct male students from fatherless homes and non-fraternal school environments without male role models in education seems unreasonable. Wasn’t the Aurora Colorado shooter also acting out a fantasy role model exploring the existential limits of an aneomic environment without the reality check of corporal punishment?

It probably isn’t a good idea to rely on guns of police persons in schools to be the first step of correction for juveniles forced by law to be regimented grade in desks and classrooms until completing the 8^th grade. Maybe swatting some juvenile offender isn’t an ideal way to train youth, yet it may be better than the presence of armed police persons beginning a life experience for Americans of Big Brother with the menace of death in a holster waiting outside the classroom door. Adult corrections should be for adults while corrections of misbehavior for juveniles in school should be less than that of a criminal system reply whenever reasonable.

New Military Units and War Crimes

 When the Soviet Union ended so perhaps did Army unit continuity. The Soviet war in Afghanistan occurred in the 1980s and its veterans are long gone. When the new Russia emerged in the aftermath of the dissolution of the evil empire it may have needed to reform its armed forces from scratch.

Of course New Russia or Russia v. 2.0 may have enlisted some veterans from the evil empire. There was quite a large gap between 1991 and 2013 though. It is likely that the percentage of non-commissioned officers and officers with combat experience dropped quite low since Russia was not involved in nearly the scale of combat operations as the United States during that time. Russia did have the Chechen conflict and some other internal or proximal skirmishes yet not of a scale that would create a vastly combat experienced military. Russian special forces gained much experience yet perhaps not more than private military contractors like the Wagner Group.

I mention the above because of a reflection upon the trouble the Russian Army has had in its Ukraine operation. A military historian named Van Creeveld wrote a book of some title I don’t recall that examined several aspects of military composition and performance. He pointed out that armies without solid unit histories; like irregular and guerrilla units tend to have far more war crimes than regular armies with lengthy unit history. I suppose it is the lack of experience and lack of discipline and order that leads to disorder in job performance. The Russian Army may have had about as much combat experience among its NCOs and Officers as a U.S. National Guard unit had during the Vietnam War; none. They may have performed about as well as its officers and NCOs simply lacked the field experience useful for competent and effective military maneuvers, troop allocations etc. During the Vietnam War the Pentagon formed a new Army Division named the Americal Division that had the lack of unit history of a new unit. It also had more than its share of war crimes, including massacre at Mi Lai. It was made up of draftees, NCOs and officers transferred from other units.

On the other hand, the Ukraine military has been provided with a vast amount of donated military experience of American advisers that have been involved in more than two decades of nearly continuous military conflicts. They have fine tuned their use of military technology and HUMINT and can design offensives for the Ukraine Army to go along with all of the fine weapons paid for by adding public debt to Americans and Europeans.

The Russian Army is gaining very hard won combat experience in Ukraine that will likely inform future combat operations should they arise. Its cadre will develop the knowledge of U.S. veterans. Probably its military discipline will increase even if the political wisdom of politicians in many nations does not.

Russia changed from the old Soviet military models to something of a volunteer Army of smaller numbers with higher quality like that of the U.S. military in the first part of the millennium. It’s special forces and the Wagner Group gained experience in Syria yet the Army was not broadly involved. In my opinion the U.S. military control from the civilian sector and general leadership has learned to minimize casualties in a number of ways while yet conducting military operations while Russian leadership has not. Wars of course are best not started in the first place, yet U.S. leadership of the Democrat Party has learned to let others fight there battles for them where possible and to use the most high-tech and expensive weapons they can obtain to fight them with. Russia has used very costly hypersonic gliders and found they can be shot down with Patriot missiles, and the U.S. is developing hyper-sonic cruise missiles I believe it, so nuclear weapons can be delivered within minutes instead of an hour for targets less than a thousand miles away.

I am not sure what experience will be helpful for constructive use of the very destructive weapons when they are effectively used. Neither am I sure of how to get intelligent leadership inn the White House that could restore full normal relations with Russia and the U.S.A. In my opinion the latter would be a better investment of effort than the former.

President Joe's Special Rule of Law-Ukraine

 I was trying to figure out the logical paradigmata the Biden administration has repeatedly invoked in support of the pretense that they are defending the rule of law by supporting the Ukrainian war with Russia. To my knowledge there was no rule of law involved with the formation of Ukraine from a Soviet political entity following the end of the Soviet Union. Changing government and economic system entirely usually requires direct use of force rather than legal proceedings. Boris Yeltsin had no legal authority to make nations of Soviet political units; he was not the Emperor, and neither was Bill Clinton. I believe Joe Biden wants the Stalinist Soviet state boundaries that existed until 1991 for Ukraine in preference to the restoration of Russian boundaries that existed until Lenin, Trotsky and the Bolshevik Red Army took over the country in 1917.

Law is nothing more than an external formalization of power. Rule of law means rule of power. Usurping power from the demos to elites and elite military backed new rulers is what transpired in the case of the nascent Russian revival when the Clinton-Yeltsin axis filched Ukraine toward the N.A.T.O. side of things. Now the main hegemon; Joe Biden, is using that military power to consolidate Democrat Party lawyer-presidential rule decretals he says are law for Russia, Ukraine and for governing boundary disputes among nations..

Laws do not exist for-themselves. Laws do not exist without the people that made them. Rule of Law from the mouth of Joe Biden means rule of the lawyer that was a law maker in the U.S. Senate before executing law. That suit him as president. Joe Biden has in effect a petrified brain viewing himself as the law in-itself.

Rule of Law to Joe Biden does not mean rule of the laws of God. Democrats often break the laws of God as expressed in the Christian Bible inclusive of the Pentateuch. They kill, they do not love God enough to obey His laws, they are adulterers, abortionists, homosexuals and thieves, etc. The rule of law Joe Biden respects and regards as sovereign for the globe are realistically those of the U.S. Democrat Party. Democrats are intolerant of political pluralism or laws not in lockstep with laws they approve of. Democrats may not have forced the world into conformity with their concept of Democracy yet they are trying to get that done.

The Soviet Union ended mostly voluntarily without violence or blood beside a minor fray at the White House (where the Soviet Congress was located) that Boris Yeltsin defeated with a few tank shells. In that regard the ending of the Soviet Union was something of a miracle unparalleled in world history. Some communists dissented with the end of their era. Democrat Party politicians of course were Johnny carpet-baggers on the spot exploiting the situation with the impending vacuum of political and legal power. It goes without saying that U.S. President Bill Clinton had absolutely no legal or moral authority to be involved in negotiating any sort of post Soviet political structure; he didn’t reside in Europe and wasn’t formerly a dual passport holder of the Soviet Union.

Normally nations have formed around tribes or associated tribes that expanded and passed through various social structures of increasing organization levels until they become nations with non-local leadership. Sometimes that leadership is royal or authoritarian, rarely is it democratic and there are several additional forms of political leadership. Sometimes tribes kill their former rulers and ruling class. That occurred in Cahokia and was attempted in the Haitian revolution. The Soviet revolutionaries killed off several members of the former Romanov dynasty in the House of Special Purpose in Yekaterinburg Russia; a tourist site in Boris Yeltsin’s home town.

The non-violent transition from Russia was historically very special and should have been respected rather than exploited by the west. Russian national land should have been fully restored when the Soviet Union died.

Soviet Communist revolutionaries stole Russia in transforming it into the Soviet Union. Normally when property is stolen and recovered through whatever means it is returned to the former owner. When the Soviet Union ended the former Russian borders should have been allowed to emerge from the seventy years of suppression. If a nation had a popular vote and decided to end its existence and join some other entity that would at least be a Democratic procedure. If Mexico petitioned the United States to become a U.S. state and the U.S. Congress voted to accept it that would be a legal process according to U.S. and Mexican law. There would be no international legal convention concerning the process though; it is a process of reason and popular will for two governments to become one as it was in the several European states to form closer political bonds and become the European Union. Russians were never given that opportunity- that is to determine their own destiny in regard to Ukraine that was part of Russian before the Soviet revolution. A tiny minority of one continuing from the Soviet Union (Boris Yeltsin) chose under the influence of Bill Clinton it appears to have disposed of the former Soviet Union land as he saw fit. He ended the Soviet Union and formed the C.I.S. or Community of Independent States as would an Emperor informed by the power of the U.S. President leader of N.A.T.O. with a full and ready war machine poised at his temporarily powerless paper government entity in case he chose another path (such as restoring Russia fully). Boris Yeltsin negotiated with the west with a gun at his head; that was the rule of law that President Biden touts as a great legal and moral principle upon which Western civilization rests.

It is doubtful that Boris Yeltsin had a moral or legal right to dismember historical Russia and render parts of it independent. Neither did he have the legal authority to give independence to the land where the Brooklyn bridge reaches shore. A sober legal mind would have been mindful that popular will and historical circumstance operating in the political ecosystem of Earth makes national boundaries a matter of military power balances. If one wants to have a peaceful society it is necessary to comprehend and respect those international balances rather than to regard them as following legal fictions. The pretense that rule of law precedes rule of reason and historical facts and justice for adjudicating national boundary disputes is specious. Law is a national concern. International law is nothing more than legal comity or cooperation among friendly nations to enforce similar legal paradigms.

The United States and most nations will not enforce laws of other nations they hold to be unjust. Returning escaped slaves from northern states by force was so disagreeable to the north that it was rejected as law and became one of the proximal causes for the U.S. civil war. There was no natural right for Bill Clinton or Boris Yeltsin to give up Russian land as there was a reasonable paradigm for restoration of former East Block nations to a fully independent status. Baltic states for instance that were not part of historical Russia had an inherent right to return to there pre-Soviet status so far as was realistically possible. Russia shared that right.

Democrat Party politicians have consistently claimed to be enforcers of the rule of law in supplying countless billions of dollars of advanced military weapons to Ukraine when what they have actually accomplished is the rule of lawyers that are Democrat party Presidents asserting their will to power. Instead of peace they chose sufficiently corrupt policies to compel war in Ukraine. Piling up vast public debt in the U.S.A. they risk the security of the nation in escalating a military crisis that brings the world to the brink of nuclear conflict quiescent since 1945.

Russia should never have been placed in the situation of being required to fight with Ukrainians and the west as if it was one of two pit bulls in a dog fight for spectators. There was an are numerous ways to peaceful and directly end the conflict and begin to restore normal relationships in business and ecospheric world recovery from innumerable continuing insults. When a vacuum of power occurs of a unique historical nature simply restoring boundaries of what existed before the Soviet takeover of Russia would have been the conservative step to take. There have been circumstances where international powers have decreed international boundaries or formed nations from what were possession of defeated former ruling powers. One of the most obvious examples is that of the Ottoman Empire.

When the Ottoman Empire lost the First World War the allied powers decided to make several nations in the Middle and Near East from it. England and France ruled large areas of it for a time as well; from Iraq to Syria, Lebanon and Palestine. Saudi Arabia and Jordan were created yet the process was the consequence of military and political necessity for the victors to decide the fate of the former possessions of the defeated.

It is the case that most of the nations created in the Middle East did not exist before the First World War and that the people that lived there in the occupied class rather than that of the ruling class emerged from a time when they had lived repressed for centuries. People of the Middle East had not had an opportunity to live in the form of modern nation states nor with elected national government while the colonial power ruled.

Russia before the Soviet takeover was a well developed modern nation with strong national identity and borders including that of the Ukraine. The Soviets were like a ruling colonial power in Russia. Russia may not have been the most developed of nations in comparison to those smaller nations to the west, and it only eliminated serfdom about the time the U.S.A. ended slavery, yet it was not a completely undeveloped country. Russia had the malodorous institution of royal aristocracy of course, yet it also had a middle class and might have better developed a form of constitutional democracy with fetters and muzzles on the royals given time while the petty bourgeois prospered.

President Clinton made sure that Russians never had a choice about restoring their nation once the terrible oppressive weight of Soviet Communism was lifted. The ancient practice of war to retake their land was the sole remedy available in an international environment where Democrat Party presidents claimed that rule of law gave them the right to dismember Russia and defend the Ukraine, with the long view of joining it with N.A.T.O. and deploying advanced weapons systems on the Russian border to defend the law of force, force of law, or rule of force or law or whatever.

The Biden paradigm of meaning for rule of law means rule of force. It means more than that however. It means that in the future whenever any ruler can be co-opted by a strong international power or when a coup against a government can be orchestrated and an agreeable puppet put in place if he signs a paper with the international power to dissolve his nation and form several new ones as he deems fit the international power may invoke the rule of law precedent to intervene militarily. Stealing nations overnight and laundering their disposal through the rule of law gambit could become the norm for slick elite land grabs.

I believe a couple of additional points may be learned from the Biden and Democrat party lawyer-president history since 1992. One is the trust and betray nature of U.S. foreign policy. Instill the trust of America’s benevolent intentions in an adversary who drops their guard and is then betrayed by the U.S.A. at some future time. Trust and betray has several variations including enlisting allies who are discarded following use.

The other point is retro-causality. A concept invented by the physicist John Wheeler for use in cosmology applications, it also applies to U.S. foreign policy. The Reagan administration for example developed a good and even trusting relationship with Moscow concerning U.S. intentions, who let down their guard and moved toward capitalism, free enterprise and democracy passing through a period of power vacuum while abandoning Soviet communism. Later, due to Democrat lawyer Presidents of the U.S.A. the good work of the Reagan administration followed by the Bush I administration was betrayed thereby retroactively causing the trust phase to become a necessary part of the betrayal phase that was the emergent true policy of the United States Government.

The World of Super-Shocks (a poem)

 

Centered within space-time          paces          pry ultrified knocks
dimensions to believe in                places        some things are taught
eventual horizons                            face            surfaces of spheres   
shapes yet to come                        grace            formations of years
each star of the galaxy                    spaces          where galaxies go 
one thought to feel                          light              one thought to know
drawn to start                                races            called to beginnings
tempests and structures              case            beatings of hearts.

Venus Global Warming Repair Lab

 The Earth’s atmosphere and ecosphere need repair. Since Venus is the most Earth-like planet in the solar system and has a temperature on the surface of something like 750 degrees F, it could be a good experimental repair lab for testing global cooling technology. The added benefit is that reducing the temperature of Venus would be a first step toward terra-forming that planet.

It is said that the Earth will burn up in four billion years or so when the sun becomes a Red Giant and expands in size to incinerate the Earth. Yet in four thousand million years physicists probably will have discovered some way to convert the red giant star’s heat into an energy field surrounding the Earth so they can keep the planet at a cool, comfortable temperature. Actually one might expect they could get that job done within one million years since a million years is quite a while for science to advance.

Of course it is difficult to test out some scientific theories. Hawking radiation theoretically would let a black hole cough up enough virtual particle half pairs in a trillion billion years to evaporate the black hole. Alternatively a black hole may input enough super-positioned virtual particles from all over the Universe to increase its size over a trillion billion years rather than decrease it. Perhaps every virtual particle that could appear from space-time eventually goes into a black hole until space-time is exhausted of virtual energy and not even space-time exists outside of a singularity at which point a catastrophic release of the black hole content might arise. It would be difficult to test that sort of theory.

Space-time,virtual particles in space-time, gravity and engineering anti-particles are four elements that allow for some fascinating potential configurations for experimenters of the future. One might find a way to use anti-particles to repel or kedge a space ship through the gravitational fields of the Universe toward the high end of relativistic limits without need for fuel (if one manufactured the antiparticles aboard ship). If one knew enough about gravity and what causes it one might in some way repel the space-time with gravity in it just enough to allow a spaceship to slip through the rent in space like a torpedo with super-cavitation follows an air bubble at its bow through water. It might be possible to travel faster than the speed of light with relativistic limits of space-time finessed away from a ship’s immediate area of travel.

Developing some technology or innovating convenient product is occasionally simple. For instance one enjoys a supply of empty bags for filling with coffee, folding over the opening and stapling it closed to make single coffee bags with whatever ground coffee blend one likes. Making space transport work better for the masses with electro-magnetic mass drivers is an obvious upgrade over single use chemical rockets because mass drivers can be used 24 hours a day repeatedly launching specially designed modules into orbit. One can research and upgrade planetary cooling devices in field test experiments. Applying a global cooling sun-screen above the atmosphere of Venus should be requisite before even considering applying one as a band-aid last-resort for Earth at L-5 in case of runaway greenhouse effects.

N.A.S.A. should add a Venus sunscreen program to its bucket list and enlist support for and cooperation with the space agencies of China, Russia and Japan plus anyone else that might want to contribute to making Venus habitable in the long run while developing a potential remedy for Earth’s greenhouse gas problem. Individuals making coffee single bags at home is controversial too I suppose, and even dangerous, yet not as dangerous as making a sunscreen to cool down a planet without testing it first in a full-scale model.

Immutability and Uncertainty

 I wanted to write a bit on contemporary topics of cosmology and economics. It’s a reasonable place to drop in a philosophical idea or two as well.

In a video titled “If there is a God, why are there atheists?” R.C. Sproul raised several interesting points that prompted me to review a few issues. Sproul quoted the New Testament book of Romans (cited below) to make the point that everyone knows God directly, in a sense through plain wonder at creation and existence. It is an innocent apprehension of being at all and the wonder of existence. Then people develop false explanations for why things existence, etc. That may be comparable to intuitively recognizing a good first choice move in a blitz chess game and setting it aside to overthink the position and with enough sophistication select a bad move.

Romans Chapter 1: 17 “For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are

clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his

eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as

God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and

their foolish heart was darkened.”

Verse 20 above relates that “the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are plainly seen, being understood by the things that are made”. Quantum mechanics at least is unseen to the naked eye, and I believe God’s spirit is deeper even than quarks or strings. Certainly each are invisible, yet God has made visible things from the invisible that humans may perceive or understand-with the term understand perhaps meaning to be aware of or to re-cognize. It may be an error to go too much further in that direction, for beyond the naive, primal perception and recognition of perceived objects lies the sophistication that effaces the first impression and its wonder.

Not to say though that scientific knowledge is wrong or an error. Mankind needs to work and physics and cosmology are work. One can learn a tremendous amount about the relationships among things that exist in the Universe. For instance, mass and energy are convertible and may be viewed as two forms of the same kind of thing that are in different states. It is somewhat remarkable to me that Einsteins formula E=mc² was written before knowledge of the Higgs Field or of Higgs Field values if those are known very well, or are as familiar as the values of electro-magnetic fields. Light particles are nearly massless particles (photons) that exist in electro-magnetic fields I believe. Converting mass into energy at the speed of light squared plainly would seem to burn up all of the energy, or expend all of the energy, yet it can’t really do that. How can mass convert itself into a massless state, be neither created or destroyed and still exist? It might just be to reduce the mass to a massless form (a photon wave) that exits the Higgs field entanglement wherein two dimensional particles become three-dimensional and seem to have mass when they don’t really. Three-dimensional mass converting to spent energy becomes two-dimensional with the entanglement that made its mass shorn away.

Alternatively gluons that make the strong force between quarks, and are pure energy may transfer their energy to something else, like space-time itself. It may be that within an event horizon as quantum relations are annihilated and mass even at the scale of gluons and strings become energy in-self without relational form that some asymmetry in the process attaches itself to space-time and energy quanta with virtual entanglement effects on the event horizon creating the apparent, emergent effect of gravity and space-time expansion. I wonder if anyone has considered the issue of CP violation inside the event horizon as quanta are destroyed and converted to pure energy and virtual energy; could virtual anti-energy act as virtual anti-dark matter acting to push space apart on the event horizon Universe a concatenated anti-gravitational emergent field?

Other obvious questions arise concerning a four-dimension Universe located on the event horizon of a black hole in a five dimension Universe. One wonders if matter from the five dimension Universe continues to be taken into the black hole passing through the four dimension Universe. One wonders if the cosmic microwave background pattern at the earliest time that can be captured by the Webb Space Telescope was caused by the black hole drawing in mass or energy from the event horizon. One wonders if space-time yielded the energy that became mass after a burp from the black hole wherein a lot of virtual entangled particle pairs appeared outside the event horizon. Black hole belches could occur like solar flares perhaps at rare times as often as the appearance of a Majorana neutrino in a particle detector.

Sproul mentioned Kant and Sartre in a class he taught on atheist attacks on faith I believe it was, as atheists. He did so in the context of disagreeing with Kant that one can’t know certain things that are unseen. I believe Sproul and Kant are functioning in different categories and Sproul’s reasonable ideas on Kant and Sartre were misplaced.

I read most of Sartre and Kant’s works and don’t recall anything about atheism in them. Certainly they weren’t in Being and Nothingness or The Critique of Pure Reason. Sartre’s Being and Nothingness is fundamentally an author’s intimate oversoul point of view of a human; nearly a first person narrative of what one mind experiences existing. It is like an authors’ examination of what a character in a novel perceives and thinks about what he perceives, feels, senses etc. It is a very subjective work rather than an objective philosophical examination of the Universe. Sartre tends to analyze social reality and social behavior rather than to seek scientific accounts of nature. Sartre infers the reasons why others behave the way they do in the reality of his experience on the basis of how he understands himself.

The Critique of Pure Reason was a great book that might probably was influenced not only by Hume and his ideas about cause and effect, what can be known empirically and so forth. Kant was probably heavily influenced by Descartes’ Meditations on a Method. French rationalism opened the door to a systematic examination of the relation between perception, mind and logic. Kant’s noumenon or unknown is not quite the same as the Apostle Paul’s invisible things made visible. The noumenal are things one doesn’t know and hasn’t perceived. It is possible that things like quarks are imperceptible, or that theoretically very small quanta of less than Planck length size are a reasonably classified as noumenal and cannot be seen or known beyond theory.

One might speculate about the qualities of God from what is seen or known from first impression of perceiving the world (such as He is omnipotent and Good), yet I don’t think one can know all of His qualities or Being at all, unless of course is purity of power and goodness cohere in on-the-surface apprehensible and perceptible impression anyone may have if they don’t hide their knowledge with false-consciousness and self-deception. Maybe understanding salient characteristics of God visible in nature, or direct inferences one may make from nature is as far as the faithful may go, and from that point they need rely on scripture and revealed knowledge.

Science tends to rely on evidence based knowledge, and on verifiable knowledge. One may verify that the Mona Lisa is made of select materials, and even analyze the brush strokes and order of composition, yet the painting’s aesthetic qualities are challenging to confirm scientifically such that one might verify that it is beautiful or somewhat less than comparable portraits, etc. What one finds beautiful may have different value to others. Human judgment and aesthetic values are made by creatures. God evidently recognized that His human creatures have the capacity for aesthetic and moral value judgments. Those judgments tend to surpass a scientific, evidence based criterion. Quantum mechanics itself is a kind of bootstrapped art form that is phenomenal and temporal referring to radiated waveforms in which they exist in an entangled state.

And that brings me to the idea of this Universe existing on the event horizon of an extra-dimensional black hole. The four dimensions of space-time could be located on the event horizon of a five-dimension black hole apparently. At least that’s one theory. The Universe would be on four dimensions around the black hole rather like a sphere around a black hole, or a kind of Dyson Sphere around a black hole.

A Dyson Sphere is like a giant basketball built around a star. People would live on the basketball. A universe located on the sphere of the event horizon may be referred to as a Basketball Universe I suppose. Well, enough of that metaphor.

The initial singularity would have been theoretically caused by information that was gulped by the black hole, or half of the information of entangled virtual particles gulped from a vast black hole inputting a tremendous amount of galactic mass, being refocused toward the event horizon and experiencing faster-than-light seeming redistribution from a starting point around the event horizon. Maybe virtual particles may be entangled in triples as well as pairs- who can say for sure. If they can it might cause faster area dispersion coverage during formation of a universe from a singularity.

Gravity may be an action of the vast black hole acting on the mass-energy of the Universe. It may equally well be the cause of the continuing acceleration of the universe being drawn into the black hole. Because of the time dilation the life span of the Universe on the surface of the event horizon that seems billion of years old may be far less if viewed from further toward the center of the black hole- even a few days. I suppose one might calculate the size and spacing of the Universe in regard to the mass and area of a black hole able to host the known or observable universe.

If a black hole has so much mass that it warps space-time that wraps itself around mass when there is enough of it, to form a black hole, it has also been suggested that quantum structures collapse inside a black hole at the singularity. Mass exists because the smallest known particles pick up a third dimension in the Higgs field that is a scalar field that works in all directions; unlike a charged magnetic field. Unanswered are questions like does the Higgs field exist within a singularity even if no mass does, and all mass is made into massless energy. One wonders how many dimensions energy needs to exist, or if strings are simply energy, in addition to what energy is in-itself...Is energy a wave, and are plain waves trapped at the singularity compiled into themselves?

If the singularity of a black hole is pure energy, or if the singularity rolls up space-time within itself to a singularity too what fills the space outside the singularity, and what force or field prevents more space-time from entering into the singularity even if it is mostly devoid of mass? Space-time cannot exist apart from mass-energy embedded in it?

If quanta are annihilated in the singularity or converted into energy and space-time combined, what is the primordial field thereat and is it charged inwardly, or does it have any qualities that allow it to radiate outward or tunnel through the hyper-density of a singularity. At the event horizon what pull might be made upon the Universe existing on the event horizon? Could the appearances of gravity or expanding space-time be a consequence of unknown fields within the area between the event horizon and the singularity that act upon quanta and space-time on the edge or dimensional surface?

If from the inflationary epoch the universe gradually slowed down while expanding for seven billion years that could have been a function of mass attracting itself to other mass though gravity, and that acting partially antipathetical to the direction of travel of all mass on the event horizon toward the black hole. It was discovered that the Universe renewed expanding about seven billion years ago and that could have been a result not of dark energy, but of the end of the consolidating, semi-salutary or beneficial effects of the energy of the initial Hawking radiation escaping information burst of particle pair singles forming mass and energy being attracted by gravity and resumption of the inexorable pull of the black hole on all of the Universe living on its edge.

God always was; He is eternal. So He may manifest whatever form of being in whatever way and within any form of space-time he selects. He may issue a singularity at any space-time like that of an event horizon with its own space-time relativity scales.

There are many things that are unknown in cosmology yet that are interesting to speculate about. Problems of quantum uncertainty and linguistic indeterminism and the non-translatability of language lexicons and space to other lexicons space-time locations make philosophy a valuable tool for working up theories. God is immutable fortunately so while human understanding may vary and evolve at least they have Him, through the Son Jesus Christ, to rely on for certainty.

After Killing the Peace Dividend; what next

 The old joke about what one should do if they hit a lawyer jogging with their car (back up and do it again) could be well-applied to lawyer Presidents of the Democrat Party running over the peace at the end of Cold War 1.0. That is run over the peace to kill it and future peace dividends to make sure that peace is well and truly dead. If fighting and winning a war does more harm to the victor and makes his position less secure than making peace before the war, a belligerent should consider choosing the path of peace. Democrats should have considered making a peace settlement with Russia over Eastern Ukraine and Crimea rather than financing a war with Ukrainian proxies.

One may compare historical trends to weather. Some people prefer censorship of news bad to them, even news of bad weather. Weather though, like political relations doesn’t change just because one sticks one’s head up their ass so they don’t see it. Thus I write about the real political changes and some consequences likely to follow the Democrat Party’s obsession with making Ukraine an independent state affiliated with the west, through military conflict with Russia. I prefer to be on the accurate side of describing history in progress.

Shouldn’t one expect the U.S. Government to be trustworthy or honest in its efforts to keep the world peaceful? When the spokespersons of the U.S. Government seem inflexibly propagandist in expressions about Russia and Ukraine that is challenging to believe they have good character or good faith. They should at minimum be capable of expressing the opposition force point of view or rationale in regard to the conflict in order to logically react to the Russian position. I will provide and example of what the U.S. Government might say in order to seem honest...

State Department Spokesman; “We understand that Russia feels that President Clinton in effect stole Ukraine from historical when Russia was weak and effectively helpless after the end of the Soviet Union and wants it back- we just don’t give a fuck. We have plenty of money, guns, lawyers and Ukrainians to throw into the fray. We have friendly propaganda media that support our side of the battle willing to repeat our assertion that Russia is the unprovoked aggressor- and that’s just the way it is.”

The U.S. Government and N.A.T.O. positioned themselves like chess players with the white pieces against Russian defenders playing black during the post-Cold war era. White played a positional game gradually strengthening its position in former East Block countries with additions to N.A.T.O. followed by increasing sanctions on Russia after Russia took Crimea. White played like Anatole Karpov with 24 inch pythons tightening all over the board. With the ascension of historical Russian adversary Joe Biden to the White House, Russian President Vlad Putin choose to use the normal blitz chess strategy of attacking on the opponent’s half of the board instead of moving his own pieces around in some kind of positional play that loses without sorties from interior lines in some kind of ultra-modern tactic. Maybe it is comparable to Israel’s pre-emptive attack in the Yom Kippur war while Egypt was mobilizing its forces for a first strike. The initial long, inadequately supported Russian drive to Kiev where armored columns became bogged down and ran out of fuel seems to have been a bold, early checkmate effort that failed.

Even so black pieces remain in what was White’s half of the board (Eastern Ukraine) and seem set for some sort of defense against the highly publicized white counter-attack. It might be a mistake though to anticipate that the black pieces will abandon the traditional blitz chess plan of attacking on their opponents side of the board with a king hunt leading to checkmate. Russians are pretty good chess players and not usually easy knockouts.

It may be that the U.S.A. and N.A.T.O. wins its proxy war against Russia. Post-war would the U.S.A. expect a situation like it encountered in post-war Iraq where it eliminated most of the leaders of Saddam Hussein’s Baath party? Would that mean eliminating the Russia United Party? Is regime change an implicit part of the game plan of the west although they have not said so publicly? Would the U.S.A. be content in erecting a new Iron Curtain against Russia until it can foment a revolution in Russia that works? Maybe I should write on this subject in five years to learn how things worked out.

It should be a priority to the west that the world polity be not divided to the level of war. If in order to keep the world economy buzzing peacefully and humming along with modernization and ecological restoration in Eurasia that Russia have it south-western lands that were taken from it by the communists initially, restored to it, and that the Ukraine is shared between Russia and a pro-western government on the west bank of the Dnepr then that should have been the project that U.S. leadership worked on. Pursuing war rather than peace was a mistake from the start. It was a mistake that U.S. leadership seems incapable of finding even a smidgen of willingness to correct.

With the basic international policy direction toward eliminating tariffs on trans-boundary business (as in the E.U. and N.A.F.T.A. nations) building a new Iron Curtain dividing capitalism east and west is plainly a regressive policy. If Russia owned the Crimean Peninsula and its present Eastern Ukrainian holdings and peace established, sanctions ended and free trade restored within a decade the distinction of who owns the land would pale in significance in comparison to the prosperity and liberty for travel. For the west to develop a policy that results in the worst future scenario with a divided East and West without any sort of ideological economic foundation as it had with communism seems insane with the caveat that a nuclear conflict would be worse.

Following the political original sin of separating Russia from Crimea and the Ukraine during President Clinton’s (a Democrat lawyer) term of office, the Democrat Party has pursued a narrow legalistic line toward Russia. The original sin created a ripe condition for the rise of Russian sentiment to recover its lost land as it developed as a post-Soviet nation. Democrat president’s were confident of their legal right to defend Ukraine. Law I should point out is based on force. Military power is the juice that makes law effective at the international level if one wishes to assert a legal paradigm between nations rather than political common sense and statesmanship.

Democrat lawyer President since Clinton have also pursued a legalistic approach toward Russia (Obama and Biden) entirely disregarding statesmanship and common sense. So what is the cost to the United States for tripling down on force-based U.S. law toward Russia and its will to retake its lost Ukrainian land?

The peace dividend that to President Clinton may have been the opportunity o redistribute parts of the former Soviet Union to the west in the absence of a military backed governance capability of the former Warsaw pact nations was to Wall Street the opportunity to invest around the world including China and the former Soviet Union from an advantaged position. The united States, the west and even the east may have believed a new era with less military expenses would follow. Greater world security could arise without a Cold War and nuclear, biological and chemical threats. Only a few of those conditions developed, as for example, nuclear weapons proliferation seems to have increase rather than decreased.

Opportunity costs to the United States for ending the Cold War should have prompted the Democrat lawyer-presidents to consider statesmanship templates for adjudicating the Russia-Ukraine issue in addition to narrow legalism in a system wherein the United States Government as the principle nuclear weapons stakeholder of N.A.T.O. was in a position of being the Supreme Political Court and Chief Executive as well. The legal advantage blinders of Democrat lawyer Presidents through every kind of sanction and punishment on Russia that it could since the reconquista of the Crimean Peninsula. The process followed by the Democrat Part’s belligerence toward Russia with false accusation against former President Trump that he colluded with Russians to steal the 2016 election from the female Democrat lawyer presidential contender Hillary Clinton left Russia with little reason to believe that the newly elected Democrat party lawyer President Joe Biden would be anything besides hostile and determined to add more sanctions upon and isolation of Russia internationally so far as it could. Because of continuing U.S. weapons build-up in Ukraine and addition of new members of N.A.TO. The Russian point of view concerning its prospects for retaking Ukraine may have been that the situation would only worsen if it waited. The election of Joe Biden to the White House in 2020 prompted the invasion of Ukraine in 2021 after Joe Biden was sworn in to office.

The decision to make Russia a lasting enemy seems to have been a strategic mistake for the United States during a time when it experienced several international challenges as well as domestic. Instead of Russia being a good free trade partner working cooperatively with the United States on numerous fronts from anti-terrorism to ecological health restoration, global warming fighting etc a new divided Eurasia likely to follow the end of a war settled through military force.

The U.S. Federal Reserve issues loans to big banks owned by the rich at very agreeable interest rates that are sometimes zero. For every dollar deposited electronically in big bank that bank for the rich can loan out four more abstract dollars appearing from nothing- virtual currency that need be repaid to the bank with real dollars, while the big bank need just repay one dollar to the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve in effect issues free money to the rich so they can buy up the planet’s resources and invest in foreign nations to get in on the ground floor. Dividing East and West along the Ukraine border changes the balances concerning full faith and credit of the U.S. Government. Today the President says he won’t negotiate on the issue of raising the nation’s debt ceiling and ability to borrow by selling i.o.u.’s to the Federal Reserve (who issues virtual dollars made from nothing to buy the i.o.u. paper). President Biden wants no limit public debt and borrowing so he can finance the Ukraine war and fund a government that can’t sustain itself through tax revenues since it cut the taxes on rich to low, low levels. There can be severe consequences to all of the bungled policy choices that first affect the poor and lower middle class adversely as the advantaged seek to make them pay for the bad policy.

The Democrat Party floods the nation with cheap foreign, illegal labor to keep wages down for the working class. The poor and middle class buy their goods at Wal-mart stocked with cheap manufactured in China goods. Good jobs were outsourced to new Chinese factories as the U.S.A. became a service economy convenient to the rich globalists running the show through Democrat party mouthpieces and of course blue blood Republicans loyal to the dollar as if it were an opioid. Fentanyl and food stamps have become the new opioids for the masses.

Instead of a world with suppressed terrorism an increase of terrorism may occur. Rather than establishing efficient trans-continental high speed transportation such as with hyper-tubes, or very fast and efficient Eurasian to North American very high speed and low pollution ground cargo hyper-tubes no progress will occur that requires Russian participation. China will be the benefiting nation.

Already the world’s largest economic power, China’s preferred nation status with Russia will synergize its growth with low cost Russian natural resources unwelcome in the west. China will also have the best position to invest in Russian development and would be capable of helping the Russian economy grow during the era of continuing western sanction against Russia that probably will continue indefinitely. A new Cold War will follow the end of the hot Russian-Ukraine conflict, if it can even be peaceably settled without use of nuclear weapons.

Strategically the United States Government has selected policy toward Russia and Ukraine that weakened U.S. national security and economic prospects. It is not unlikely that the Chinese Juan will replace the U.S. dollar as the preferred global currency within a decade or two as the Chinese economy continues a well balanced increase without compiling vast public debt during a time when the United States has low taxes on the rich concentrating wealth internationally while the domestic economy is financed with vast public debt. Military costs required to keep up with an arms race with Russia and China to force the legal will of the Democrat Party instead of peaceful statesmanship with rational expectations and real politicks concerning international power is consistent with the evolution of the Democrat party into one that uses law like play dough to bend, fold, spindle and mutilate it to whatever extent it can to have its way with political affairs.

US Gov Won't Recognize Western Russia

 The U.S. Government in sponsoring Ukraine’s war with Russia labeled Russia the aggressor, as if that was all the logic required. Blame and prosecute without second thought for fining peaceful coexistence and economic partnership. The war could still be swiftly, peacefully settled with each side halting in place and permanent borders made thereat. The U.S. Government prefered a fictitious rationale that is a convenient half-truth to justify its posture as it did with the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution and W.M.D.’s for the Second Iraq War. The Ukraine is former western Russia. Russia invaded it when no other remedies were available to recover it from the Clinton-Yeltsin swindle. It was not like invading Poland, France, Finland or Germany. U.S. policy has a stench about it, of accomplishing for the Central Powers the taking of Crimea and Ukraine, a task the Central Powers could not permanently accomplish for themselves.

The U.S. Government has a cognitive deficit in failing to recognize historical western Russia and believes the Ukraine is an independent state equal to that of England, France or Denmark. Basically the U.S. Government and Democrat party leadership have bought into the Soviet Union’s boundaries as the real ones and those of historical Russia put down by the Soviets as fiction.

Russian claims on Ukraine extend backward to the founding of Kiev. Yet in the modern world since 1800 the Ukraine or borderlands were part of Russia including the Crimean Peninsula. Germany invaded Ukraine (and Russia) during the 20^th century in the Deutchland Uber Alles era that may be returning presently with expanded German military budgets and close war partnership with Ukraine. It may be just a matter of time before Germany develops a high quality nuclear weapons program with an array of high tech weapons to counter the Russian ‘threat’. An arms race of an Unholy Roman Empire that is the new European community may follow a German-Ukrainian victory versus Russia in the present Ukraine-Russian conflict. A nuclear weaponized Germany may present tactical challenges to Democrat Party national security theorists, if such exist, if they put down their burritos to think about it.

When the Cold War 1.0 ended Boris Yeltsin was the Soviet Union’s last leader. President Clinton made a deal with Yeltsin swindling Ukraine from Russia. At the time Russia was an oppressed nation that was only in the gestation stage of being reborn after seventy years of subjugation to the Communist Evil Empire. President Clinton preferred to abort the nascent Russian revival and deem it a big rump state. At the time Russian military and political power was at it’s lowest point in history. Completely ebbed, the ungoverned land may have looked to Clinton like the near east looked to Alexander the Great; ripe for the taking. Russia had no army or even leadership to oppose the west’s rapacious desire to take as much Russian land for-itself as possible. Decades would need to pass before Russian leadership could seek to reassert control over western Russia occupied by a pro-western government forces.

Bill Clinton was an Oxford trained lawyer leading the world’s greatest military alliance. He could rightly claim that western law was world law and that if Boris Yeltsin agreed to give up the Ukraine to independence then it was so...a fait accompli defensible with the ultimate reason of western military power. Even the World Court was located in a friendly leftist European nation that has values unlike those of much of the world. Ukraine President Zelinsky would clamor for war crimes charges against Russia leadership and the United States piled every sanction it could imagine upon Russia to prevent any possibility of a peaceful settlement to the conflict.

Yet the deal or swindle was unrealistic. Based on ignorance of Russian history and national character, taking western Russia and labeling it independent Ukraine was like taking title to a floodplain without an awareness that a river would eventually rise to cover the land. The Russian river of blood returned to the Ukrainian flood plain as the natural flow to drive out those that claimed and built upon it. The Biden administration has spent a quarter of a trillion dollars to dike the natural flow. Its post war economic planning would be to construct levy’s with N.A.T.O. along the floodplain. Since the rise of blood floods to the era is natural the event may be recurring in the future if the Russian political and military surge loses this season because of insufficient blood waters.

It’s not a communist river. It is not an effort to restore the boundaries of the former Soviet Empire. It is the rise of historical Russia seeking its former western land. Russia is a capitalist nation developing democracy. The President was given super-powers in time of external threat to pursue Russian national interests. Restoration of Russia’s western lands was an inevitable desire that should have been recognize and addressed a priori in the early 1990s. Taking the Crimean Peninsula away from Russia was an unthinkably dense, maladroit political mistake. Yet with other bodies to spend in the effort to prop up bad historical judgment maybe the calculations of the early 1990s seemed reasonable. The Russian desire to recover the Crimea and the rest of Ukraine was predictable, easy to recognize and the conflict simple to avoid with right political reasoning well informed by history.

I suppose that it may be possible to avoid a nuclear conflict that is an offspring of the protracted conflict. It is also possible that western investment in the war may actually secure something of a victory. Even if the west did achieve its immediate aims it may be the case that decades of adverse relations will follow between the west and Russia. Those are dangerous adverse relations with substantial opportunity costs, security and economic externalities. Paradoxically one might not be surprised if regardless of who the technical winners are, the natural flow of trade between Russia and Europe will eventually return and the losers will be those that had friends and family killed or wounded in the conflict..

It would be in the interest of the United States to negotiate an end to the war in place with a free trade zone without taxes made throughout a demilitarized zone extending several miles on either side of a new permanent border. Returning to a normal economic condition as soon as possible is the best way to let the world move forward. The United States had learned that good terms for ending a war for both sides...and especially the losers, serves to build peace instead of future war. The lesson was learned after the hard terms given to Germany at the conclusion of World War One may the final battle of that war named World War Two inevitable. The lesson evidently was lost to the west.

Right Angled Space (the poem)

 

Relativity syncopates past time
beats of Higgs drums so strikes differ
super positioned waveforms with tangles
collapsed spinning round normal spurs

Light and gravity might consider jokes
massless particles tighten mass pace
orbiting fore-selves cast at light speed
wave-knots pinwheel lore right angled space.