The etymology of concept is from conceive. It is to put an idea into a mind. Sentient species might create similar ideas without the idea existing someplace other than as an idea. Math is an idea
The Lakers need better, more reliable 3 point shooting yet that’s just an idea. Others may have that idea too without it existing someplace independently as in Plato’s realm of forms.
Should one start a science fiction story with a battle? I read an action novel that started with a brilliant, intensely detailed battle. The hostage rescue team was blindsided in an alley with a hidden .50 caliber machine gun placed by a criminal seeking revenge it turned out, dropping clues for the FBI to recover leading them to the kill zone. The slaughter was described minutely with the agents crawling in hot gravel looking for non-existent cover.
The trouble with that kind of beginning is that the rest of the book couldn’t reach the intensity of the start. The remainder of the story was afterwords.
Detective stories often start with a crime followed with a story to identify the perp. Where to place the crucible in science fiction I would guess depends on the preferred structure of the plot.
Building non rectilinear structures escalates the cost orders of magnitude. Until recently the math would have been a lot more difficult. Curves are hard for carpenters to calculate. Square footage of various comic sections, how and where to cut, and what to cut with for variegated surface, calculations for interior insulation that’s a reciprocal of diurnal solar exposure, etc are tougher. Building artificial mountain ranges for people to inhabit with habitat for wildlife outside might be easier.
For individuals building complex curvy structures might be more the kind of thing rich people could do. Gunnite spray concrete of course allows complex home structures to go up readily for specialized contractors. Incidentally people with bad knees don’t like stairs.
The N.A.T.O. treaty the US is signed into should not obligate the. U.S.A. to join into wars and military conflicts started by N.A.T.O. members like England and France that purportedly plan to send troops to Ukraine to kill Russians and possibly pre-emptive strikes inside Russia itself. If Russia counter-attacks France and Britain the US could choose to remain neutral.
N.A.T.O. cannot be used to let runt members start conflicts knowing the U.S.A. need intervene on their behalf. Consider the stupidity of the treat in an example
Turkey attacks Israel in support of HAMAS. Israel counter strikes Turkey. Turkey demands N.A.T.O. including the U.S.A. attack Israel.
Russia has a right to defend itself against attack. N.A.T.O. is a defensive agreement, not one of partnership to aggression. If England and France choose to more directly involved themselves in the Ukraine war that’s all on them as independent nations.
Pragmatism is selecting something that works and/or is necessary. People can make bad choices though.
Some don’t know what pragmatism is. An example- Act and rule based utilitarianism may be a good theory yet in practice it has a lot of difficulties. The greatest good for the greatest number might require force to implement.
Pragmatism might triage social problems and fix as many as possible with available resources. An ideal approach might ban fossil fuel engines tomorrow, a pragmatic approach might stress support for EVs to eliminate exhaust gases because politically.one would encounter too much protest to eliminating fossil fuel.
It is a complete fiction that pragmatism disregards reality or truth. Lol. The Ukraine conflict may cause a nuclear war. Britain, France and Joe Biden would spend years and trillions of dollars to fund the war and rebuild. Escalating to nuclear war isn’t pragmatic.
A pragmatist would stop the war, share Ukraine with Russia and let the planet get back to working together and move towards environmental economics and justice for all.
The most famous example of pragmatism to solve a problem was that of Alexander the great cutting through the Gordian knot with a sword.
Wittgenstein's Blue and Brown books presented a simple anthropology of language development. It was a somewhat more pragmatic approach than Heidegger's investigation of language and concept meanings with depth in etymology. His thought about language was a part of the development of linguistic or analytic philosophy yet very early. Realism and nominalism questions about words were better understood toward the later half of the 20th century Applying logic to language and meaning as elements of epistemology developed later with people like Cohen, Strawson, Quine and Kripke.
A thought about wars of the distant future... Weapons like scalpels will be applied to scale of conflict. To destroy a planet or galaxy different tools would be used than to excise opposition forces amid some friendly forces. If people remain stupid enough to have wars they will probably annihilate themselves anyway.
Apparently scientists already bred an ape with a human and aborted the foetus, otherwise there would have been a better alternative to Joe Biden. Seriously though, 16 million years ago a major eruption occurred- with vast left-wing lava extrusion (The Columbia River Basalt Province) from the Yellowstone hotspot and before that the Deccan Traps extrusion 66 million y.b.p. Humans have been around from about 100,000-200,000 years ago and no they wouldn't naturally evolve to a super-being in just 100,000 more years. Many people including James Lovelock and the late Jacques Cousteau have said that humanity will probably destroy the livability of the Earth within 200 years. It does seem likely.
https://www.usgs.gov/volcanoes/yellowstone/science/summary-yellowstone-eruption-history
Unicorns in the Old Testament. Apparently Re'em was a unicorn as well as the rhino mentioned earlier ( "the scientific name for the Indian Rhino is 'Rhinoceros Unicornis") It had to do with horns. Stipes was the upright stick Jesus was crucified on and the unicorn was a symbol of Christ. I will quote a relevant piece on unicorns from a google search... "The Hebrew word re'em is mentioned nine times in the Bible and is often translated as "unicorn" in English translations. However, some modern translations use the term "wild ox" (aurochs) to describe the re'em, which is the correct meaning". I tend toward being a KJV only reader myself so far as Bibles go, because I like the language, although the Good News version is sometimes interesting too.
Because there is no foreseeable technology to travel faster than light between star systems it is worth considering the fastest way to power space modules to a substantial portion of the speed of light. Scientists have pointed out that using enough energy to power a spacecraft if the fuel was aboard the vessel would be too massive, the criterion moves to establishing a stream of energy outside the craft it’s ‘engine’ can draw upon to approach equalization of its speed to that of the laser beam, reaching perhaps 3/4s of the speed of light.
Coherent light- laser light travels at light speed. A very large laser beamed aimed at a target star light Proxima Centauri- 4.6 light years away, would need to be very strong and powered by the sun or a fusion reactor in space near the edge of the solar system. There would need to be a way to tap into the laser beam and convert the photons into electrons and possible an electro magnetic field some configuration that would move the ship forward. Perhaps an on board energy converter could tap into the beam periodically to continue to advance its rate of acceleration closer to the speed of light of the laser beam. The technology would in effect let a spacecraft catch a ride on the laser beam’s energy.
When the first star connection was established, star a to b, then a connection could be made from star b to c. after delivering components to build more laser star links to star b for making a connection to star c. The travel time using the fastest present space engine tech is 88,000 years to Proxima Centauri where with a laser beam to provide power for energy to let a reciprocal electrons power tie-into to the beam travel at light speed the time would be reduced to about eight years.
In order for a stable platform from which to send a laser light star link it might be necessary to locate some Lagrange Point equivalents for the solar system rather than the Earth. On the other hand it could be useful to construct a network of solar system encompassing laser beam platforms on the out edge of the solar system forming a rough sphere around it- balanced for gravitational elements of course, and from those platform each sending a laser beam to some point in space where the beams are gathered with mirrors and combined into a solitary powerful beam initially aimed at Proxima Centauri for a decade when a ship is using the tech for travel.
Some future generation may discover the way to innovate the first few laser star links, if the present war-mongering one being led into nuclear war chicken with Russia doesn’t incinerate future generations by actualizing M.A.D. policy.
It might be feasible to map gravitational currents/fields of this galaxy and use them to sail between select areas by letting the gravitational pull draw a spaceship forward toward the speed of light. Obviously micro-gravity sailing technologies might improve when the causality of gravity is better understood. Still, I like the possibility and recognize that boosting start up acceleration might be desirable with a different technology.
I was considering what the world would have been like if I knew the future a half century ago. That is, if I knew then what I know now. Since I like to consider and write about contemporary history, wouldn’t the future have never become what it was if I wrote about events consistently with accuracy before they occurred?
In my opinion the greatest change would have been that of the Reagan administration. If I had written before the 1980 election that the conservative Republican President would change the political landscape so much in international relations and with the Soviet Union as to bring about the end of the Cold War then that circumstance might not have occurred. Imagine instead if the end of the Cold war in December 1988 when the Soviet began drawing down the Red Army from East Germany were replaced by a Clinton-Biden-Obomb-em-Harris, Yellin, Stoltenberg axis of mooning administrations elevating the world to the brink of nuclear war as at the present time in history.
Presidents intelligent enough to find ways to peace when the outlook is for the dark and stormy clouds of nuclear winter are rare. Snoopy writing from his dog house writer’s loft given a knowledge of the pinball courses of political relations with future knowledge; knowing the whipsaws of changes in presidential administrations and approaches to achieving a stable and peaceful world order where ecological progress and full, meaningful life opportunities for all within a freedom of spirit social paradigm, would be a paradox. Political analysis are limited in validity to a context of limited omniscience or rather, no omniscience at all in regard to the temporal exstasis in which space-time flows. There is no Snoopy sniffing the future of world destiny that will bark at the approach of evil and wag for the good. Presidents instead need use rational prioritization of political concerns to actualize good developments instead of actualizing existential desires emanated from their own desires. Social reality isn’t an existential extension of personal egoism as it may seem for Democrat Party leaders, it is an interactive, heterodox fact where sharing of Ukraine is all that is required to restore historical balance for the time being.
When I learned that the Biden-Starmer-Harris crew were considering giving permission to Ukraine to attack Russia with N.A.T.O. long range missiles Friday the 13th (does that increase the gravity or the irony) that was the first time in my life that I had considered the prospect that nuclear war could follow Saturday. The Harris-Biden-Starmer team is playing nuclear chicken with Russia; a game at a higher level with potential for liberal deaths for all.
Following several years of top hand on the baseball bat mode of escalation with Russia in the use of conventional weapons to turn the tide of war there way, the Harris-Biden-Starmer entity failed to recognize the different context having nearly reached the W.M.D. level. It is a glass ceiling completely opaque to the Starmer-Harris-Biden entity. They should not aspire to reach that top floor.
I could think about the second weekend of NFL football games and the lesser, peripheral concern of potential global thermonuclear war brought to the U.S.A. and the rest of the world thanks to the historically illiteracy of the Harris-Biden-Starmer entity as a multi-tasking venture. When the first N.B.A. game is played in late October concerns about nuclear war will be muted with remote control. For most Americans it is more convenient to focus on important issues such as football, and not on unrewarding ones like terrorists with nuclear, biological or chemical weapons.
The Ukraine-the borderlands, have been a target of western conquest for centuries. Poland, France and Germany among others have invaded Russia to seize land. The gamble that Russia won’t use nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction to defend its historical region of existence when pummeled by a vast array of western military power is a bad one. It is a paradox that mothers against drunk driving would probably advocate Harris for President if they did such endorsements yet would not have a concern about candidate Harris’ full-bodied support of war with Russia over Ukraine. The Democrat feminine vote evidently does not regard nuclear war as anything more than externality or a bluff, yet it isn’t.
If N.A.T.O. begins attacking deep within Russia with Ukrainian cut outs the premise is that Russia cannot retaliate on the west because all of the N.A.T.O. nations would attack en mass because of treaty obligations. There are numerous cut outs available for Russia to use to attack London, Paris, Amsterdam and Los Angeles with nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. ISIS, Hezbollah, Taliban and other Muslim groups in contact with Russia’s Iranian allies come to mind; they might be too happy to supply clandestine infiltrators to deliver a gallon of novachuck nerve agent, a suitcase nuke in a homeless guy’s backpack or a designer virus. Plausible deniability would cover each as the nuclear weapons could have been stolen during the era following the end of the Soviet Union when they were left unsecured across former Soviet territories.
India and China’s leaders met recently with President Putin perhaps to discuss what response should be taken to a war upgraded to an existential threat on Russia’s existence by the Biden-Harris-Starmer entity. Tactical nuclear weapons- perhaps neutron bombs with the beryllium sheathing absent, might be employed to counter Ukrainian advances into Russia along with or without full-bodied N.A.T.O. invasions of Russia after the initial round of weapons fo mass destruction are deployed. Russia hasn’t proven ability to defeat conventional western attack on Russia. Candidate Harris called Candidate Trump ‘weak’ at the debate and said that Putin would ‘eat his lunch’. Ms. Harris is a completely enthusiastic votary of Democrat Kool-Aid narratives on Russian-Ukraine-Clinton history. She is determined that conventional war to recover all of Ukraine for western power need proceed. Plainly Candidate Harris is incompetent with global economics, history and military affairs and acts with a cognitive deficit in failing to perceive the likelihood of nuclear war with her partisan, one-sided war policy. The war is harmful to U.S. economic interests and is an existential and possibly Eleatic ,Empirical, Metaphysical and even pluralist threat as well. No matter how hard Ms. Harris acts to spend hundreds of billions more on that war it will fail militarily syncopation even though she may intend to litigate nuclear war and win.
I should point out the the late Harvard historian Henry Kissinger was against the war, and other professors of Russian history realized that Russia would not accept the loss of all of Ukraine and the Crimea without a fight. The political insanity of the Democrat party is barely making a ripple on their political pond of thought. Drunk with power Democrats believe they cannot lose and need not share Ukraine with its historical Russian owner, and in that regard they are probably wrong. It is bad risk to gamble on world civilization not ending with nuclear brinkswomanship continuing year to year.
Before closing this post I will try presenting the conflict from a Russian point of view so far as I understand it. Russia regards the Ukraine as part of Russia stolen by the west repeatedly and lately at the end of the Cold War. Because President Clinton stole Ukraine once more by levering the last Soviet President Boris Yeltsin into giving it up to an independent status instead of insisting that Russia keep it, Democrat Presidents ever since have reinforced the theft and developed a belligerent attitude toward Russia by building up N.A.T.O. membership after the end of the Cold War when peace and economic development should have made that unnecessary. For Russia the west plainly was intending something that wasn’t good, and preparing for a war that it probably realized would need to occur eventually when Russia recovered from the break up of the Soviet Union and was militarily stronger.
Western leadership has historically made war on Russia to take as much of the country as it could, usually without success, Hitler and Napoleon among others. They are pretending with false consciousness that Ukraine is historically an independent nation like that of Germany, England and Poland etc and that Russia is simply waging a war of aggression. That is a dissimulation of historical truth, yet a dissimulation they would assert so far as to bring the world to the brink of nuclear conflict over Ukraine. Sharing Ukraine perhaps with a border along the Dnepr would be a practical political adjustment yet is one that so far the west has eschewed in preference to war.
The United States has sent hundreds of billions of dollars of weapons to Ukraine and that was partially matched by N.A.T.O. members. The unelected President of Western Ukraine wants to use U.S. and N.A.T.O weapons to attack old Russia as well as recovered Russian Ukraine targets like the Donbas and Crimea. Russian leadership apparently will stipulate and tolerate
to a certain extent N.A.T.O. weapons being used in Ukraine, because Russia too can use third party supplied weapons in Ukraine. Yet N.A.T.O. weapons used to attack outside Ukraine; to attack old Russia would be different. For Russia to be equal it would need to attack N.A.T.O. members in retaliation. Ukraine is the bone of contention and N.A.T.O. members and old Russia should be left out of targeting with missiles for parity. Evidently the British P.M. and other leaders want to argue against parity and equanimity and claim that Ukraine is already an independent nation that Russia is attacking and therefore N.A.T.O. weapons can be used to attack Russia. That is itself is a new doctrine with the premise that any nation regarded by N.A.T.O. as having invaded another can be targeted with N.A.T.O. missiles. The nuclear war at the end of the road is not a civil argument over property among lawyers.
Cause for World War III simplified
Was village life the compassionate conservative Utopia it is sometimes held by liberals to be? Villages did have muddy streets with Neo-feral pigs running amok about them eating whatever they could find. Outhouse were often within walking distance unlike modern urban areas where one need walk a mile to find a Starbucks with toilets that can be utilized for the purchase of a seven-dollar mochafrappe.
Village life in European locales allowed accountant free peasant living since the local Nobel owned the land and crops produced by countless hours of toil and sweat. Women’s rights to labor in the home annually during their reproductive years followed the ecstatic pleasure of the Nobel taking first use of a newly wed wife on the wedding night followed by a few decades of servicing the oaf.
Peasants received free military service opportunities with rival Nobels often being at war. Nobel lands were bucolic settings for the original cores of Hatfields and McCoys. Student loans were forgiven a priori for peasants because they received no education besides practical free on the job training in careers servitude swine herding, haying, mucking stables and such for the Nobel. Peasants in Utopian primitive communism shared equally in starvation during lean times when the Nobel’s wars cost the peasant’s winter food supplies in taxes to finance. The Lord Jesus was nearly stoned and thrown from a cliff in his own home village. Swift prosecution of non-conformist ideas with death by villagers saved the public the exorbitant costs of appellate judicial review.
Occasionally bouts of bubonic plague were liberally compensated with no-cost burials for villagers. Foreign imports weren’t much of a problem in not much existing with copious tariffs on goods costing fewer than 800 quid snipping that sort of direct trade off by the balls. Nobels knew the wisdom of stopping villagers from engaging in direct trade with foreign producers that cut out the Nobel middlemen that owned big table retailers.
Conclusion; Village life was somewhat Utopian although it was mostly village idiots that believed it smoking dope for aesthetic relativism.
Democrats are the party of accusations, lies and deceits. After they started the civil war to keep their tradition of slavery alive and lost they were kept out of the Presidential office until F.D.R.- a northerner, took office to usher in the Second World War. Sure Hitler was to blame, yet F.D.R. did lead the U.S.A. into a war that some genius might have found a way to honorably avoid through some clever theoretical politics.
President Truman faced the same challenge as F.D.R. in having a war thrust upon him in Korea and failing to find a way to develop a theoretical political way of settling the dispute without armed conflict. He did however fire General MacArthur who wanted to end the communist regime in China then. The present Chinese government in a way may be regarded as the legacy of the Democrat Party’s Harry Truman, who also dropped the first two atomic bombs ever used in war.
The Democrat Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson each got the Vietnam war started and burning strongly for more than a decade without being able to find a way to avoid or conclude it. Kennedy and Johnson also failed to do anything more than exacerbate the Cold War with the Soviet Union. The Cuban Missile Crisis and Bay of Pigs were notable incidents, Francis Gary Power’s U-2 flight was shot down in Soviet air space. No reduction of nuclear arms build up occurred during Kennedy and Johnson administrations-quite the opposite in fact developed.
President Nixon- a Republican elected in 1968 after Democrat youth rioting outside the Chicago Democrat National convention could not prevent the party from running the Minnesotan Hubert Humphrey from taking the party nomination to lose in November, ended the Vietnam War with a gradual draw down and sent the late Henry Kissinger to Beijing (or Peking as it was known too) to begin diplomacy to develop normal diplomatic relations and economic ties. That process continued after Nixon was forced from office for the Watergate burglar, Nixon said that he thought the country was undergoing civil war.
President Reagan- a Republican, ended the Cold War working with Soviet President Gorbachev. He hoped to end the threat of nuclear weapons and to develop a united, peaceful Europe and world economic environment.
President Clinton- a Democrat, was convicted of perjury lying to congress. He took the Ukraine- the borderlands, away from Russia where it belonged, from the totally weak final Soviet President Boris Yeltsin in the transition to a post Soviet new world order. Of all the nations that ad there full independence restored by the Soviet troop withdrawal starting at the end of the Reagan administration, Russia was the only nation that lost land rather than recovering it, like Germany had for instance. The theft of Ukraine from re-emerging Russia set the stage for the present Ukraine-Russia war.
Democrats under the Obama and Biden administrations built up N.A.T.O. eastward in former Warsaw Pact nations presenting an existential threat to Russia. They supplied vast weapons inventories to Ukraine even before the Crimean reconquista by the armed forces of Russia. Following the reconquista a vast range of sanctions, dire threats and imprecations were placed on Russia and Russians-including seizures of the assets of Russian millionaires and billionaires, some of whom had economically benefited the Clinton Foundation. The countdown to conflict in Ukraine steadily built until climax after the election of President Biden.
Democrats elected just lawyers for President after Harry Truman’s one term administration. They returned to the successful F.D.R. model of lawyers who felt law and government structures were entirely malleable tools for Democrat Party power, in effect made to support Democrat party goals. The modern civil rights movements came to be understood as the anti-strait white male civil rights movement. Special interests rights were custom legislated. Antipathetic language became proscribed as ‘hate speech’. The concept of law as impartial justice that should prevail in democracy was lost.
In democracy the purpose of the law isn’t to implement an abstract concept of justice or retribution. Its essential reason for being to to let individuals live securely and pursue their self-interest. In an authoritarian government alternatively the purpose of law is to reinforce the power and will of the ruling class. Though the democrats have not gone full-hog authoritarian or royal, that is the direction they are headed. Sometimes the particular genius of a ruling class needed to take power is to have the support of the masses in so doing. Plebeians supported Julius Caesar. His son Octavian known as Augustus was more the most powerful Senator rather than emperor yet still required support of the commons.
After Charles Darwin’s publication his evolution theory and the rise of pragmatism and investigations into truth theory gradually people lost faith in not only the belief in God and the veracity of the Bible, because of its different creation narrative fro that of Darwin’s Origin of the Species, fascism developed in Europe and a concept that truth was entirely subjective arose. The Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics brought even the nature of reality to be questioned. Secularists might well believe nothing is real and that subjective epistemology and subjective perception actual determined what the content of the objective world is that was subjectively perceived. That idea was itself incomplete, and reality was not solipsistically homodox (is that a word?), it was instead heterodox though far more complex than was or could be definitively understood, even by philosophers and cosmologists.
Even so the popular notion that truth was self-defined and proprietary made lying more acceptable. Democrats gradually learned to apply the premise of ‘kill them all and let God sort them out later with truth replacement theory. With truth replacement theory it is better to accuse first, best and far more often than to be a passive defender with lame opposition denials to accusations. Political pejorative use-truths (ref Sartre) were justifiable and common. The big lie; the colonialist’s false interpretation of events, became normal for the Democrat Party and intensified following Al Gore’s loss to George W. Bush in the 2000 Presidential election where after the party went full lunatic use-truth civil war with Republicans, though that was suspended for a time after the Sept 11, 2001 terror attacks.
Democrats use-truths brought them to full accusatory mode on President Trump’s first term of office when they brought with all of their power the accusation of Russian collusion with Donald Trump to become elected. It was a ludicrous and false charge continued for years, followed by an impeachment and every possible charge they could send his way. Democrat Party lawyers continued their prosecutorial mode even running a former prosecuting attorney for President vs Donald Trump seeking re-election. For Democrats prosecuting Russia in with all conventional weapons in order to win the court battle for truth (the Democrat Party has an historically false narrative of Russia’s relation to Ukraine) will continue until nuclear war is achieved and victory is theirs. With the existential criteria of subjective definition of truth the Democrat Party isn’t able to quit its prosecution of war for there is no other means (what is peace and sharing?).
Because the mainstream broadcast media and much of the main Internet social media corporations fill their ranks with Democrat Party affirmative action legacy employees that media entirely supports the Democrat Party narrative use-truths. Because Democrat Presidents founded so many wars and military conflicts (even President Obomba fomented several Middle East and North African conflicts and helped build up the anti-Russia approach for European and N.A.T.O. politics militarily) and are totally invested in war with Russia over Ukraine (possibly just in Ukraine) there is no main stream broadcast media opposition to the war as there was in Vietnam. American youthful voters and Democrat Party members are somewhat paralyzed into inaction in opposition to the party narrative and what is likely to develop into a nuclear war. The passivity of the left acquiescing to war-mongering leadership is a amazing yet edifying spectacle to experience. Maybe an explanation is the Democrat support for legal and copious dope to pacify the public.
Science fiction writers like to fold space for faster than light space travel. Maybe Frank Herbert in Dune was the first to use the concept. It is attractive, clever and improbable. I shall explain why and suggest a different approach for science fiction stories.
The four dimensions of the Universe happened someplace without any dimensions- and the four dimensions coincided with expansion,. So what do you think about that? Parmenides and Heraclitus considered the spatial volume. If the number of dimensions was variable at the start then it must have had zero to start with.
Space doesn’t exist. What does exist is a unified field that unfolded in four dimensions from a compact singular condition. Space in the universe is a thin part of the energy and other forms of stuff that the Universe is made of. One can shape electric fields and gravity seems to be everywhere yet space of the Universe is also a part of the field. True nothingness is not the same as space. True nothingness that existed before the Universe and in which the Universe and its four dimensions exist probably has zero dimensions.
If the Universe might have had more or less than four dimensions (if it were designed for example) it probably would need to have appeared in a tabula rasa environment with zero dimensions. The Universe field differentiated with four basic forces today (plus unknown forces such as dark energy and dark matter perhaps) is grounded in zero dimensions. Instead of folding space or in other words folding fields with all of the problems that would follow reshaping portions of the Universe and all of the fields within portions of it, science fiction writers could simply have faster than light four dimension travelers in some way slip through to the zero-dimension/four dimension point of contact where distance does not exist; yet simultaneously does.
That paradox could be why select quantum particle and waves can convey information faster than light to entangle distant particles. At some level below the Planck length, the four dimension entangled state of mass and energy may contact the zero-dimension paradox and exchange information faster than light because there is no distance from A to B in zero dimensions. The interface of four dimensions with zero dimensions would be a quantum shortcut where everything in four dimensions has no distance apart. Exploiting the interface area would be challenging of course. To remain a four dimensional entity stepping somewhat beyond to the zero dimension ‘point’ where distance and other forces do not exist (such as gravity) might be comparable to exploiting the surface of a microscopic black hole that exists without gravity yet warps space (this is only a metaphor because space doesn’t exist- it is just field phenomena that are reshaped to a warp paradigm by gravity) so one could abridge distances down to near zero for the purpose of expediting travel time. Traveling around the Earth is faster near the poles. Consider zero dimension travel to be like the north pole (or south) that continues curvature to infinity and allows access to all locations of four dimensional spacetime without distance because of the topology.
Before the singularity existed in space-time there were no dimensions. For some reason the Universe expanded with four dimensions arising, although string theory posits smaller 'hidden' dimensions. There may be no necessity that a Universe must have four dimensions instead of ten. Some cosmologists speculate that the universe may exist on the surface or event horizon of a hyper-dimensional black hole in a Universe that actually has five or more dimensions. In order for the original empty space or void that pre-existed the Universe to allow a Universe to arise with x dimensions it need have no dimensions to start with, and the appearance of dimensions in the space-time expansion of a singularity is phenomenal. Though the Universe arises, it does so in the area or volume that has no dimensions. No dimension void is the host for all possible dimensions that might appear. If all of the dimensions that exist re-existed the Universe then they would have filled the true void unto infinity and would not allow more or less dimensions to exist. I suppose that is the basic presupposition of some who regard the singularity as expanding within a four dimensional void thereby sinking string theory.https://youtu.be/Ua4Lu0Vo42g
Laura said; “Yes, I want confirmation. That extrusion of new space is at the edge of the Ludwig Von Trump galaxy forty million light years from the end of the Sagittarius arm of the Milky Way. Alert the crew of the finding and take us to Ludwig Von Trump and a habitable cluster of stars with planets on our way toward, yet not beyond, the galactic habitation zone.”
Laura considered what she knew about the Ludwig Von Trump galaxy. It was named for the inventor Ludwig Von Trump of the original Earth-Mars Plutonic solar system. Trump invented a way of streamlining and accelerating patents applications with the vetting and granting of patents with a broad tree diagram of free induction slots to place a patent idea in-the-market and let it flow through the system toward potential emergence as the one, true idea returning standardized royalties to inventors from producers.
Human societies, Trump believed, needed to encourage and support intellectual inventions from everyone rather than to repress them. Often the rich could afford to restrict or co-opt ideas of poor inventors trickling up creativity with massive hydraulic pumps. Von Trump’s humble, liberating thought stimulated a cascade of new ideas bringing swiftly to market a wealth of inventions that became salient components in the drive to comprehend the cosmological mechanics of Meta-universal configurations.
Laura Thought regarded Von Trump’s ideas concerning liberation of the marketplace of ideas inadequate to inform the human race about the inability of capitalism to apply good human-sense management in democracy to promote ecospheric conservation and natural resource sustainability under classical human economic assault. For Laura, primitive, predatory, unreflective capitalism was comparable to ravenous insects landing on the leaves of tasty plants and mafia taking over police unions eliminating society of dissidents to mafia control of government with unions.
She knew that capitalism was the fundamental premise of evolution with species, and even mass under the power of gravity seeking to build up as much capital for itself as possible. It is the gravity that builds up planets and galaxies, the power that builds molecules and draws forests competitively upward. Yet reason must prevail as well as pluralism Laura thought, lest capitalism produce nothing more than black holes.
Directed capitalism like directed evolution requires intelligent design of structures to arise and exist in space-time. Capitalism and the invisible hand of Adam Smith weren’t repositories of human wisdom or political responsibility such as might exist across more enlightened societies with their own market wisdom limited in scope and utility. Human societies far too commonly replied on Adam Smith’s capitalist paradigm to replace environmental responsibility with the belief that the invisible hand of capitalism would provide the best of all possible worlds so long with royal supervision.
In actual fact capitalism is an expression of human values concerning supply and demand, lacking in-itself environmental wisdom or cognizance as one should expect politicians to have. Capitalism is a natural and consistent urge to swell in scale and power amplified with technology that will destroy the natural order unless it is carefully directed with intelligent human design. it cannot be more than a reflection of natural forms. President Franklin D. Roosevelt showed wisdom in political leadership is required to moderate irrational capitalist exuberance that puts on environmental blinders in an insatiable smirch for proplits.
Ensuing human abandonment of environmental and political reason brought humanity to environmental self-destruction with no environmental captain running the ship. The environmental crash of the first global civilization of Earth left survivors on Mars and Pluto; mostly rich elites and their breeding servants. While Chin Chi Wang led the Martian survivors through a protracted period of civil war toward unification, the second great Earth planetary civilization arose from the ash heap of history like a spring seedling in a scorched Earth forest. A greater trans-planetary system civilization grew with a library of intellectual capital to build upon, sending explorers and settlers beyond local Universes to the Metaverse.
The Shibboleth’s A.I. programmed a special relativity coordinate tensor to the Von Trump galaxy star system Drizzle and planet Drizzle Three. The ship’s pilot engaged the Higgs field decoupler and three-dimensional data transfer to send the S.V. Shibboleth faster-than-light across two dimensions as data into the Troposphere of Drizzle Three.
Arresting and correcting global warming is a huge, challenging task possible too great for a nation of suers rather than doers to get done. Democrat party politicians can’t just sneak a lawyer’s Rube Goldberg environmental bill under wraps through Congress with a one-party majority vote and actually get the job done even if they are elected and spend half a billion dollars on day care as a partial remedy. The challenge is quite large and is likely to need vast changes in the economy and human tool kit. That will require a publicly reviewed and engineered approach; one that the Democrat Party could sign on to and support before their next presidential primary season.
In 2020 one of the Democrat candidates in the primaries advocated building aa great sun screen at L-5, while another had some kind of complex, unknown plan that journalists who reviewed it said would cost more than 50 trillion dollars. Approaches to solving the global atmospheric heating crisis require input from a host of disciplines including physics, biological, sociological, economic etc. There will be consequences for the world to any approach taken. Such a once-in-a-lifetime political action needs peer reviewed vetting of the highest order. Reducing the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth could have vast unintended consequences that need be considered.
During the Eisenhower administration the nation could still get large physical infrastructure projects accomplished. In recent decades the nation has failed at such large projects with vast cost overruns and even cancellations mid-way. Bureaucracies and legal challenges have rendered the feral government unable to accomplish projects like the Interstate Highway System, the T.V.A., the Grand Coulee Dam , the Apollo Missions that had great scale and investment and complexity. There was even a plan to extend the Inside Passage from Alaska to Portland Oregon with a canal from Olympia Washington. That would have made western Washington State an island and provided a two-state solution with Washington’s blue voters on the Western Island and the Red voters on the mainland decades ahead of time. Not all projects turned out to be environmentally, and there is a lesson in that for any potential environmental bill to knock out global warming. It is not certain that any large, costly (if necessary) global warming reduction project would amount to anything more than a costly swamp for partisan spending.
Private enterprise has added some technology to capture and sequester CO2, solar voltaic panels have become more affordable and will reduce acceleration of warming gasses from the sunny parts of the world that might otherwise be emitted from electrification powered by fossil fuels. It is plain that government should provide leadership for example, in developing road surface material that reflects rather than absorbs sunshine to warm the atmosphere during the day and after dark. Asphalt manufacturers aren’t likely to invest in research to develop new materials; that is a task that government could accelerate by offering a 100 million dollar prize for a practical, pragmatic way to convert asphalt to have a high albedo character or to convert photons into electrons traveling in circuits. A remedy to asphalt caused heating would cool cities and eliminate developing nations paving millions more miles with asphalt.
If one wants to build a salt-water canal across the southern border to let sunlight evaporate fresh water that would be condensed and collected with sloped polycarbonate roofs to collection canals in order to fill the Salt Lake with fresh water the job would be nearly impossible to get done today. If one actually wanted to build a tin foil hat sunscreen at L-5 to keep out intelligent ideas from reaching the Democrat party, after the research was done to determine the affect on the world; its oceans, plankton etc and to determine if it would cause a new ice age very quickly it would be reasonable to use the thing for multi-tasking. That is, the sunscreen could be used as a dish to receive programming from distant alien civilizations in other galaxies far far away, or to collect sunlight and focus it to a collector node t heat a trapped gas to power a laser to particle beam that would in turn be the power line for space-transport modules racing at very high speed throughout the solar system (i.e. 2 months travel time Earth to Pluto at ¾ the speed of light).
Affecting global warming’s arrest and correction may be the largest challenge western civilization, or rather world civilization faces (along with mass species extinction and natural resource depletion. Arnold Toynbee said that a civilization does experience challenges that it overcomes or that alternatively end it. Recognizing and addressing empirical challenges successfully is a skill that political leadership should not fail to keep in its skill set. The Democrat party has failed to order its political agenda in such a way that a transparent and publicly reviewed plan to end the global warming and mass extinction challenges along with a political economy that works to support the plan exists.
Mutually assured destruction was the basic deterrent for the use of nuclear weapons during the Cold War 1.0 Nuclear brinkmanship occurred several times over the years including one when the Soviet Missile Defense System had a bug with a false reading that said the U.S. had launched on them. Premier Andropov had 3 minutes to decide to retaliate with a full package of nukes on the U.S.A. and decided that it might be a false reading- and so he did not launch. President Biden and Vice President Harris have tilled the soil thoroughly in preparation for a global thermonuclear war.
Since the recent Ukrainian invasion of Russia in the Kursk region with a new front possible toward Belgorod, the arrival of F-16s in Romania- a N.A.T.O. country to attack Russian target in Ukraine and inexorable scalar increase of war the prospects for nuclear war have been enhanced. If Russia were to lose ground and territory because of N.A.T.O. participation it is likely that the Kremlin would decided to use tactical nuclear weapons to offset the disadvantaged position. What would follow from that?
Because Russia probably would prefer to attack Europe and not the United States because that would upgrade to M.A.D. policy directly with a full scale nuclear exchange, it is likely that N.A.T.O. member countries would experience atomic attack. Would that mean that a Harris administration would need to decide to retaliate and upgrade to M.A.D. implementation directly?
N.A.T.O. doctrine is for an attack on one member being an attack on all. Would a treaty obligation with N.A.T.O. obligate a President Harris to in effect destroy all human life on Earth? Alternatively could she step away from the N.A.T.O. paradigm and not retaliate upon Russia after Stockholm, Bonn, London, Madrid and Budapest were incinerated?
The Democrat Party is a wise-guy one-party system of conflict and war to force the world to acquiesce unto their social agenda for complete social structure makeover. The threat of nuclear war was an inevitable consequence of their confrontational and belligerent political way of being.
U.S. and Mexican politicians will fail to reduce global warming. Some like kamala Harris are afraid to suggest anything that wouldn’t gain more votes for election. Donald Trump is of a genre of business people focused on the throughput velocity of money. For those global warming concerns are an economic externality. Trump however is for world peace and prosperity while democrats prefer war in Europe and irrationally, peace in the Gaza to allow Hamas time to rebuild its military capacity.
N.A.T.O. is largely a democratic organ of the European Union with the U.S. being the blaster. Like a criminal gang members cannot demure from the wolf pack attack on Russian Ukrainian land. The European Union wants a to-state solution for implacable unilateral enemies (Hamas is the party dedicated to Israel’s destruction while Israel acknowledges the Palestinian’s right to exist in the Middle East) and categorically reject a two state solution for Ukraine. Candidate trump at least understands that the Democrat party gang insanity will likely lead to atomic war; bad for business. War though is an easy thing to sign aboard for gang members and anyone that wants out may be erased (for N.A.T.O. the equivalent would be leaving them exposed to possible attack with the same kind of perverse reasoning as affected the Union war vs the Confederates at Chickamauga when a Colonel with a peeve against a fellow officer failed to convey a message that would have moved troops and closed the gap that let Confederate forces surge through to rout Union forces.
The Democrat party should be plain and simple first in acting to reduce global warming. That is incompatible with truth and scale for party politicians wishing to hide from taking real action since they might not be elected. One simple plan would have three parts
1) remove millions of miles of asphalt streets that absorb and release solar heat.2) eliminate fossil fuel engines and other egregious sources of carbon monoxide/dioxide to the atmosphere3) ban coal burning power plants
Simple yet effective at great slowly anthropogenic climate change. Each measure would have detailed plans about how to accomplish it without great economic harm to those displaced by the change. Plainly a simple, realistic plan will complete fail to appear on party agenda the next 50 years.
Democrats will have bait and switch atmospheric heating reduction schemes and even some that have a positive effect on reducing greenhouse gases and asses (such as eliminating cattle grazing for the meat market on federal land) and designs for no-net loss of biota housing and zoning instead of providing free cash for the poor and middle class to make huge down payments on new homes that the poor and middle class will default on payments on in a couple of years when they can’t afford monthly home payments. The Harris housing scheme would probably cost 75 billion dollars at a minimum.
The 2007-2008 home mortgage derivatives banking failure and economic crash followed the Clinton administration’s drive to expand housing with loans to people with bad credit and the lower middle class. Bad money follows good; repeating the mistakes of the Clinton may well combine a perfect wave of some sort of unknown financial failure and tax cuts with a cascade of public debt default. Then N.A.T.O. might ask for a half trillion dollars as America’s share to help rebuild western Ukraine if that war is concluded without atomic conflict.
It would be better to provide cash to those that live in poor rural, non-electrified sheds to upgrade their properties with micro-wave, waterless toilets and saturate them with solar panels and free insulation, yet practical economics that reduce global heating is eschewed by the Democrat Party. One could build a dozen decent sheds for each $25,000 given for a down payment on a ‘starter home’. Many people on the planet would be happy with a good ten by twelve foot shed with an electric Incinolet toilet and solar panels to live in (those cost extra) to start and finish with.
Wouldn’t three million new homes demand 50 to 500 gallons of water apiece every day. A bath runs about 30 gallons and flush toilets a couple gallons per flush. Some people use dishwaters and water lawns besides. That new use adds up from 150 million to one and a half billion gallons of water every day. Environmentally speaking that is a disaster. Does the Colorado River have spare billion gallons of water for new western homes?
Won’t every scammer in the nation sign up for the free cash down payment and end up pocketing the cash after selling the place without making a single payment? Wouldn’t the poor without a good job that would qualify for a home loan of even the cheaper ‘starter’ $300,000 (yuppies will expect to move into a mansion after several years of hardship living in starter models) be excluded. Democrats often talk about the middle class (a class in decline) and sweep the poor under the rug. Many of the poor would be happy to just buy a decent length airstream trailer with their $25,000 if they would qualify. The prosperous and welcome often believe the poor are lazy not understanding that life doesn’t go equally easy and breezy as it might have been for them. Head bobbing sycophants sometimes find things go easy economically. Others are just well positioned and experience life without so many challenges; the ‘let them eat cake’ mentality is not uncommon. Will the homeless and unemployed have the free money those with sinecures get?
I did like the 2020 primary idea from a Democrat in the primaries about reducing global heating directly with a large sunscreen at L-5 in space. It would in effect be a vast tin foil hat constructed to keep harmful intelligent ideas from reaching the voters. The consequences to the Earth are of course entirely experimental and theoretical. It’s fun to consider the mass disasters that could result from that. Yet one must first consider some of the great number of variables for how the screen is deployed, designed and applied.
Would the screen be as large as the moon in diameter? Would it be adjustable like Venetian blinds? Would it partly block sunlight or entirely block it a few days a year like an eclipse? Would it reduce light all year or just a few months annually? Would the filter affect the entire planet or just part of the planet? The affects on global weather and ocean temperature and currents might produce drastic whipsaw events and a cascade of change that are irreversible. It is fun to consider the idea though and it would require a lot of government financed investigation and consideration by excellent scientists from a number of discipline for at least a decade before even considering build the thing.
Financing a vast sunscreen at L-5 would be challenging as would construction. Does one hire Boeing to get it done? The N.A.S.A. effort to return astronauts to the moon is going kinda slow. Would the 1000 mile tin foil sombrero get built faster?
This is a theoretical deliberation on a social phenomenon; unnecessary police violence.
In Anchorage last week police entered a home following up on a call and shot to death a 16 year old girl with a knife. Like most other major urban police forces the officers were members of a union. Can the union mentality be a cause for overly lethal police violence? Instead of defunding police could it be that de-unionizing police departments would restore a equality in identity with citizenship and humanity to law enforcement?
Government unions are dangerous. They build a wall between themselves as self identity as ordinary citizens of a democracy. Ordinary policemen and government employees don’t share the same self-identity as being equal independent people. In order for the Bolshevik revolution to happen, soviet or in effect sovereign unions needed to infiltrate the military. When the Kronstadt naval rebellion occurred the cascade of union revolutions followed.
Unions can promote the sort of class consciousness found in gangs. Gangs and wolf packs can defend themselves too aggressively and effectively for their targets to survive close encounters. Wolves respect humans generally for their size and leave them alone. Wolves have a sense of easy association with humans, unlike police members of unions.
Cruising in cars sets them apart from two-leggers on the street easily as may walking heavily loaded with weapons, chemical mace, and clubs. They do not identify with the groups they police. So much as the great union pay and benefits.
Union programming sometimes transcends ordinary citizenship growing intolerant of any kind of threat to job security and risk from ‘scabs’. Hence the inclination to use excessive force to subdue dissent from civilians that appear to be any kind of threat to class security and power. Union broadcasters probably have their six. Government unions displace individual citizens as the primary people for government to serve. Instead the government exists to pay union members better salaries and retirement benefits. Union power has spread over governments like fungus. Reform becomes impossible.
Honest police forces are necessary for the stability of a healthy social environment where individuals and their rights including privacy have the primary and fundamental place in civil society. There can be higher and more power social class such as unions can present. Unions with guns can be hazardous to civil health, law and order.
The most civil violence in American cities beginning with the black lives matter movement occurred in cities with left-leaning politicians. Cities like Portland Oregon and Seattle Washington have experienced leftist, pro-union leadership and protracted periods of near urban anarchy since the Obama administration. Union workers probably don’t regard themselves as leftists, though politicians do.
Violence and police violence have raised calls to defund police from the left. Politicians of the left generally have union support. The entire situation can be self-reinforcing with class conscious union police using violence o leftist protesters to get support fro leftist politicians and media to defund police and redistribute power and prosperity to the leftist constituency.
Part of the problem with a malfunctioning American political economy is the decades of gerrymandering pay out entitlements that have made a Swiss cheese maze of unintended economic structures, advantages and disadvantages instead of plain social equality. To rectify the situation it might be a good idea to create a basic income of $12,000 for all adult U.S. citizens, and $3000 for minors while eliminating all entitlement programs from food stamps, social security, military and government retirement to unemployment, guaranteed student loans and so forth. Every citizen would have a basic income until they reached a threshold of $41,000 in annual income. That would render social entitlements as plain as Roman was Roman law. Collateral benefits would such as a drop in people going to jail costing $50,000 annually because of economic stress related crimes. Younger adults would have more access to capital for entrepreneurial ventures. All adults would be better positioned to endure ecological economic and other tech shocks to the system that are disruptive yet perhaps requisite for civilization to eliminate its economic practices that are destroying the health of the ecosphere and innovate constructive, synergetic ecological economic procedures.
It is of course quite reasonable for workers to use collective bargaining to market their product that is labor with massive organizations in the private sector. Separately negotiating other labor benefits or rights to unions exclusively instead of legislating rights for all workers in the nation together is harmful to the sovereignty of individual citizenship collectively. Government needs to be flexible and adaptable; unionized government interferes with that. If a citizen wants more than the basic income during working years and when old, they should get a job or start a business savings some of their capital perhaps combining that with a few friends’ capital. It is interesting to consider that housing is the primary expense. Transport could be made very cheap with electric go-carts for local lower speed use and freeways converted to automatic electric slots for moving vehicles automatically to selected off ramps with proper spacing and low-risk, zero pollution inter-modal progress. Food will remain costly as it is increasingly internationally supplied and delivered.
My grandfather’s house purchased in 1965 cost $5000. It was a decent place with a very good garden. The average cost of a home today in the U.S.A. is something like $400,000; that exemplifies the failure of capitalism to produce a better cheaper product over time, as is the case with automobile transport. More so than being capitalism’s failure, it may be a failure caused by the unionization of government and the quest for retirement wealth and luxury that is unsustainable as it ossifies and reinforces a limited, finite and exclusive enrollment period to in an ossified political economy. Political and economic ossification are prime causal factors within Arnold Toynbee’s historical cycles of the rise and fall of civilization. Surpassing the cycles requires intelligent leadership commonly lacking from the left’s social studies.
With a basic income of $12,000 an individual could live well enough in the U.S.A. if housing and transportation costs were recovered to a 1960s standard with of course the addition of contemporary electronic devices, solar panel roofing, foam insulation and ground Earth heating-cooling..
