Dimensions in Science Fiction and Nature

 Do you think it's wrong to use the word 'dimension' as in 'a different dimension' as if that were a different place?

The Universe we live in has three spatial dimensions and one of time. If one were to add another dimension or two this would be a more complex universe and humans could see just three of them perhaps.

All of the dimensions would exist in the same universe as the present. Some physicists working with string theory speculate there may be more dimensions that are too small to see- hidden from view like provable items or progress the last twenty years in string theory (joking).

Einstein's friend Paul Erhenfrest wrote that life could not exist in a universe with more than three spatial dimensions because (presumably) particles could not exist as they do making up matter in a three dimension universe (with another dimension of time). Actually the time dimension could just be another spatial dimension or even just three membrane dimensions in motion intersecting each other with time being the present junction of the three intersecting.

Keep in mind that particles are normally two-dimensional and massless. They seem to slow down entangled in the Higgs field and pick up the third dimension. Doesn't that seem to indicate that two or one dimensions are more common even than three, much less four or more spatial dimensions?

Vinyl Siding vs Repaints in S.E. Alaska Rainforest

The cost of maintaining an older home in the S.E. Alaska rain forest can be high. It is worse though to let water get to the wood. Plywood in a few years of water contact, unless it’s marine grade, can turn into something like soggy cardboard. Replacing rafters and studs costs even more. Let’s consider the options of using vinyl siding (or the costlier yet better choice of aluminum siding) against the cheaper painting. In either case the labor costs plus the recently inflated price of building materials make the selection meaningful and worth considering.

An average 4000 square foot exterior would require, nominally, about 10 gallons of self-priming, lifetime acrylic paint for coverage. With paint going for about $60 per gallon that would amount to $600. Vinyl siding to cover 4000 sq feet would run anywhere from $10,000 to $30,000 or more.

Labor cost is the great unknown cost for repaints. Work installing vinyl siding before the recent inflation era ran about $4.00 per square foot. So about $16,000 for the nominal 4000 sq foot home. Painters per job have a vast range of prices and skill levels. Labor for a 4000 sq foot home could run from $3,000 to $15,000. The condition of the home is a factor in estimates. Painting has far more more subjective aspects than installing siding. For siding installation techniques are standard; not so for repainting buildings where contractor work experience and quality matter.

Installing vinyl siding produces a reliable product. True it can be difficult to repair broke siding down the road such as cable installers may precipitate. Some siding becomes discontinued and it won’t be possible to match the product installed on the home in the future.

Solar siding already exists so home owners with a sunny location would probably be better off paying a little more to produce electricity for their home. Considering the life of siding products those that produce free home power for two or three decades vs vinyl siding that is worthless for producing power is an easy choice.  https://shop.mitrex.com/collections/solar-siding/products/solar-siding-350w-black-wood-tile-landscape-1

 Painters on the other hand can produce great, high quality work or complete painting flops...one need look at the contractor’s prior work and references to have a clue what one would be buying. painting a home is far less expensive that installing vinyl or aluminum siding. It is also possible to cover portions of a home with solar power collecting siding as one elects. Tesla solar roofing should cover an entire roof while solar siding could be installed just on a sunny wall.

https://www.tesla.com/solarroof

The main problem with painting in the rain forest is the rain. One should think of it as if one were repainting a wood boat with all of the seams sealed with 20+ year caulking. If the building has water in the wood and one paints over that future bubbles and blisters in the paint will occur. Getting the building to be completely dry-especially after pressure washing, requires days in some case. Getting several days of good weather much less two weeks can be challenging. Paint contractors aren’t being paid for waiting for ideal weather so they can go out of business with not enough work done in the very short painting season in spring and summer.

If the homeowner does it themselves and accomplishes neat, tight lines the result may be satisfactory. Union labor produces acceptable quality although some of the prep work may be skimpy and the longevity of the job may be less with minor blistering that is an eyesore. Neither will unions necessarily use paint additives like EB (Emulsa Bind) that provides cohesion to chalky surfaces such as arise with undercoats of old paint exposed by pressure washing. Still they are the best best.

Contemporary acrylic paint is commonly of lifetime duration. There is a lot of resin in the paint. That means the paint if properly applied will last 15 or 20 years. Painting is a far better value for the homeowner if the work is well done. One cannot stress enough to know the contractor and not accept a pressure wash, some scraping, masking windows and quick spray job measuring the amount of paint applied in millimeters. That sort of work is common for new construction yet for repainting older exteriors great care is required.

There are fewer good home exterior repainters willing to take pride in producing a long-lasting paint job than there are vinyl siding installers willing to put on monkey proof product. If a painter uses EB in primer and in the body color as well as lots of mildew killer and takes great care in prep and finish work the paint job is a far better value than siding. The prosperous homeowner with deep pockets may opt for the siding however as it is less of a gamble. Fifty thousand plus or five thousand dollars; that is the question.

https://www.walmart.com/ip/Polaris-Board-and-Batten-Vertical-Vinyl-Siding-1-Square/1502663923?wmlspartner=wlpa&selectedSellerId=17585&adid=222222222271502663923_17585_148761268552_18466345604&wl0=&wl1=g&wl2=c&wl3=655683448929&wl4=pla-2008520474321&wl5=9034074&wl6=&wl7=&wl8=&wl9=pla&wl10=125536665&wl11=online&wl12=1502663923_17585&veh=sem&gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIhbjZxfvdhgMVIWlHAR0cAwHVEAQYByABEgJK6_D_BwE

Saudi Disdains Renewal of Petro-Dollar Privilege for the U.S.A.

 Perhaps heralding the beginning of the end of a stable U.S. dollar, Saudi Arabia cancelled a 50 year old agreement to sell oil just with U.S. dollars. people talked about that for a long time as an indicator of instability of the global value of the dollar. People could have more trust in Chinese currency or bitcoin.

I am not sure how dumping the dollar as the global de facto currency works. People want to sell their dollars I suppose and that deflates their value. In turn inflation would rise domestically. If people feel the dollar isn’t the best denomination to park their investment in and select others that may bring substantial changes.

The Biden administration’s war on Russia is the proximal cause for the lack of trust in the U.S. currency. Those on a fixed income won’t appreciate the lunacy of war and the cascade of planetary economic challenges flowing downhill .

Peace with Russia with a fair settlement of the Cold War land distribution fiasco was called for, rather than the path of ignorance. Ukrainian leader Zelinsky went to Saudi to ask for cash and weapons apparently and Saudi responded by eschewing the exclusivity of the U.S. dollar. The BRIC nations are rising and the old west (primarily the U.S.A. because Europe is neighbors with Russia and eventually will resume lose relations even if illicitly) is led by Joe Biden with the tunnel vision of war sometime in the 1980s.

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/us-saudi-petrodollar-pact-ends-after-50-years#:~:text=The%20petrodollar%20agreement%2C%20formalized%20after,and%20protection%20to%20the%20kingdom

How to React if the Political Economy Develops Worst Case Ecosphere

 Considering poor political management of the United States and the world concerning environmental conservation and synergistics it is reasonable to begin considering post-environmental apocalypse structures enabling the human race to survive to a certain degree. Perhaps I will add some structure from time to time; a note on anything new or novel for surviving during the transition to an ecospherically dead world and while keeping a human continuum. The capacity to have a spiritual life and faith in Jesus Christ will require liberty from tyranny of various possible kinds obviously.

One might of course create hollow mountains for humans to live inside that are sealed from the outside. One might regard the Earth as more like Mars with little or no remaining atmosphere unable to support human life.

Samples could be made of all life and permanently mapped genetically with the genomes stored on-line and in secure data vaults. Actual biological samples could be kept too. When humanity does get off world to populate habitats it creates on whatever scale, or terraform worlds, it may value maps of life quite highly.

Some years ago after visiting Phoenix I thought of buildings that were pyramids coated with solar panels with escalators powered by the sun outside. I wrote about that many years ago. It was then a thought to grow plants on the outside of buildings that were structured with less than vertical 90 degree walls in order to have zero net loss of biota where humans construct things. Simple structures like that could be made air-tight. As good as that concept is, it may be time to go past the paradigm of a survivable ecosphere and planet and to imagine the world in the condition of being as dead as every other planet in the solar system and foresee how humanity might still live on a dead world.

U.S. Not Politically Adjusting to the Future These Days

 The United States has always been surrounded by international influences seeking to reduce it to servitude, prey, tool-hood or simply erase it. During the revolutionary era Spain, France, Portugal and England vied for power in the Americas. France in its war with England found common cause with American patriots (the revolutionaries) and were instrumental in overcoming British military power. Not even the addition of German mercenaries or coinciding native warriors attacking the Carolinas was sufficient to defeat revolutionary military forces.

In the late 18^th century aristocrats were the essential belligerents driving conflict forward against their own kind, with all seeking to suppress revolutionaries and native resistance to colonization. American patriots had to war against the loyalists to royalty. Some of those loyalists, such as New York Governor Henry Clinton, were military geniuses with common sense allocation of military resources. Clinton won the battle for the southern colonies and General Cornwallis bypassing Clinton lost them. England had numerous tools useful for undermining the integrity and war-fighting powers of the revolutionaries. That circumstantial power continued to exist into the modern era though subtle perfidy may be better suited now.

Perennial American interests such as border security, equal protection of the law for all citizens, free enterprise, national independence and a vibrant healthy ecosphere are undermined by foreign and domestic forces with no concern for any of the above. The United States is regarded as a kind of golden goose to have for dinner or at least to extract value from. Plainly negating the political power of ordinary citizens is vital to those seeking to concentrate wealth and power in foreign and elite domestic hands.

What is of interest is the number of means of control of mass political opinion that exist and those that are continuing to develop. Wealth is concentrating in the U.S.A. which is now made the U.S.A. a peer of Mexico in that regard. The media is largely owned by the rich and a sycophant of interests of the rich economically. Corporatocracy forces allegiance on its minions.

So the nation elected Bill Clinton in 1992 to replace the former C.I.A. Director and Phi Beta Kappa in economics George W. Bush. Clinton was a British groomed Oxford Rhodes Scholar lawyer and southern governor. As President he was loquacious and over-confident. With unknown advice he wrested the Ukraine from Russia during the break-up of the Soviet Union. He should have instead insisted that Russia keep Crimea and Eastern Ukraine, for war would inevitably follow when Russia grew strong enough to attempt recovery of its lost land.

When the European Community evolved into the E.U. and N.A.T.O. began expanding its membership allow the Soviet Union no longer existed to present a threat, Russia became concerned in time with the growing threat of the west. Select European elites probably wanted all of Eastern Europe to become part of the European Union. With an American ally and suggestible presidents unable to think independently for themselves or for the benefit of Americans Europe was bold in militarizing Ukraine and increasing E.U. size while reducing military budgets letting the United States foot the bill for defense.

Globalization through telecommunications upgrades and the internet allowed a brief period of actual free expression for the masses. Then the rich began buying up internet control and corporations began filtering out and censoring free speech. Media were largely sycophants of the control by the rich, and had the reliable premise that anyone in opposition to concentrating wealth was necessarily communist. The ghost of the Soviet Union and specter of latent Chinese Communism seeking to devour was the basic argument in support of control of the world by wealthy elites.

Artificial had not yet been invented or applied broadly as at present. A.I. can filter and censor the entire Internet, and A.I services for editing may be exclusively structured to censor or refuse to process material with use of political incorrect terms. ChatGPT will not process writing with politically incorrect terminology. Because the little work available for free at Open permits just politically correct speech, and since there is a 24 dollar a month charge for unlimited use of its writing capacity, the poor of the world will have quite reduced opportunities to express political dissent in the brave new world of A.I. Yet like buried search engine listings new age censorship will be subtle and indirect with plausible deniability rather than blatant, and glaring methods of the past.

Those willing to submit to the criteria of Artificial Intelligence programmers able to afford the monthly fee for unlimited use will be able to generate unlimited quantities of politically inoffensive verbiage to post on the Internet. A.I. can simply out-write humans, and marginalize the value of liberal arts and humanities education so far as writing goes. There may be an era of A.I. spam ahead with hundreds of millions of users posting A.I. products on social media as if it were their own. Initially the material will be advantaged left because fewer conservatives have been programmers creating A.I. Therefore conservative A.I. products will be slower to appear at the few conservative social media sites that exist such as Truth Social. Conservative leaning A.I. will also have implicit bias against free speech and select political philosophical approaches because original thought isn’t mass produced. Yet they will at least have a different banned language list than A.. programmed from the left and hegemonist corporatococrats.

Billions of poor people on Earth including the U.S.A. won’t be able to afford Starlink or pay ChatGPT and its writing A.I. triumvirate for unlimited access to put out inhumanly written screeds with their name on it as author. They will fall farther behind the rich and their minions. There will be no advances in political philosophy or opinions concerning the dangers concentrated wealth and power present to democracy and the benefits of egalitarianism in economics such that democracy can thrive rather than choices from the de facto one-party state. The nearly illiterate human with A.I. skills able to give verbal prompts to A.I. can produce material quantities of the same ideas at grade levels suitable for any reader from elementary to college graduate. Capital increase faster than wages. Apple Corp and queer leadership can buy up A.I. and set its lexical values. Perhaps Mt. Suribachi will be proscribed as hate speech; who can say?

One wonders about the impact of A.I. writing on European politics. In the U.S.A. the Democrat party support war in Ukraine to consolidate N.A.T.O. post-Soviet expansion. Will the rise of the right in Europe bring more support for war on Russia or less? Maybe the left and right will be unified on war with Russia with the main difference being that the right oppose mass illegal migration to Europe. Alternatively the right may be opposed to war in preference for peace and good Russian relations, content to leave war to national socialist party’s of Europe such as preceded the Second World War.

Bill Clinton helped the quality of U.S. Presidential leadership with importunate personal conduct while in office, burning alive American civilians at Waco, snipe shooting citizens at Ruby Ridge and so forth. Imperial British education may confer a degree of arrogance on a leader. That was good for the International community trying to gain leverage over the United States to make it serve foreign rather than American interests. Foreign entities like the U.N. prefer sympathetic, compliant tools in the White House with a certain disregard for equal protection of laws.

It isn’t known what hidden leverage Ukraine has over President Biden to bring him to render full financial service to the unjust foreign war on Russia. Russia is trying to recover Ukraine when no other way is possible. Biden’s determination to alienate Russia for good, divide the world economically, risk nuclear war through endless escalation and increase European and N.A.T.O. power is not beneficial to Americans. Peace with Russia ceding Eastern Ukraine and Crimea with full restoration of normal economic relations is best for global stability. It is as if intelligent thought of Democrat Presidents has been governed by an alien species in recent years such that Demo-Prezes are incapable of rational thought about the urgency to restore peace and good relations while that is possible. It is as if the Ceth HQ is underground below the U.N. (from the game CRISIS).

The West vs Stalin before W.W.2

 An interesting historical point occurred to me recently. It concerns the practical reasons why Stalin signed off with a treaty with Hitler before the start of the Second World War. Of course the treaty didn’t last very long as Germany invaded Russia in 1941 in Operation Barbarossa costing three quarters of a million Russian soldiers their lives to repel. Americans often use the treaty made by Stalin as an excuse or justification for putting Russia down morally in the modern world.

So I considered the circumstances of the treaty. Some of the west denied diplomatic recognition of the Soviet government of Russia and the United States had even sent 2000 marines to fight in Russia for the White Armies versus the Red Army in the Russian civil war. In short the west was antipathetic to the existence of the Russian government so when Germany offered a treaty Stalin was perhaps quick to take it; it was better to have one neutral party to the west rather than face a unified block of opposition to communism in Russia.

Pragmatism was thus the primary motive of Stalin in seeking to find peace to the west. Joseph Stalin was of course a ruthless dictator; one of the foremost of world history, yet he was also a realist. Maybe the treaty bought him some time before the Nazis would decide to invade. Plainly Stalin had no prospect or possibility of a rapprochement with the west before the Nazi invasion, when thereafter England and the United States sought Stalin as an ally in order to combat the Nazi expansion east and west. So in the final analysis I won’t hold the treaty as a negative point against Russia. Stalin made peace with the only neighbor nation that it could amid a solid neighborhood of haters to the west. Germany had yet to demonstrate the kind of people the Nazis were to the world, and that is a point to remember. Generally Americans blame Stalin for signing off with Hitler before the war as if he knew what the Nazis would be like in the future, and obviously that is absurd.

Should a nation not try to be at peace with its neighbor nations generally? Stalin was wrong with his choice to invade Finland morally speaking, yet that I a different issue and one concerning the problems of communism and dictators rather than Russians as a people. Russians did not elect a communist government to replace the Kerensky government and legislature (the Duma). Instead a revolution by cadres of well organized communists accomplished a takeover and never looked back through most of the 20^th century.

The Perfidy of Elective Wars in the Anthropocene Era

 Escalating war on our W.W.2 ally is terrible- inexcusable really.  Strategically it is completely daft. Russia lost 3/4 million soldiers to stop the Nazi invasion in 1941, and then it needed 2.6 million soldiers to remove the Nazis from Ukraine in 1943.

Ethnic Russians have paid heavily for defending their ancient homeland. Russia's September 1943 900 mile front enabled the American landings a month later in Sicily. About 6 million ethnic Russians perished in the Second World War retaking Ukraine and other areas that were part of Russia before the Soviet takeover. 

Germany had a million casualties on the Eastern front with operation Barbarossa. Russia and friends took away a lot of Nazis that otherwise would have met the U.S.A. at Normandy too. The U.S.A. lost 4,500 soldiers at Normandy on D-Day. Biden trusts Europe more than Russia for all the wrong reasons. Students of Biden's generation just learned western civilization in school- nothing about Russia  really-except cold war stuff. So the early learning was retarded. Joe Biden is the anti-Reagan.

People forget history and lack pragmatism in politics. The Clinton-Yeltsin swindle stealing Ukraine from Russia set the stage for war when Russia became strong enough to fight to get it back. Without a negotiated peace with Russia keeping what is has presently their isn't hope for anything beside escalating risk to the entire human race. The United States should really think about staying out of European lunacy instead of joining it. The U.S.A. should lead towards a free world with stable borders and people moving toward ecological economics.

  Joe Biden simply wants to be re-elected and maybe get a little glory. He is like one of the belligerent Diadochi in the Third Diadochi War that wants a piece of Antigonus's action circa 315-312 B.C  The national scheming is something U.S. rube Presidents are better off staying out of. Euros shouldn't be encouraged in such perfidies in the Anthropocene era.