Archive for December 2015

Another History of Islam and the Crusades

December 24, 2015

This is from Stefan Molyneux, something of an outlier in social hierarchies.

Why I don’t listen to social academics and authorities

December 18, 2015

This was my reply to a general internet comment about a person that preferred to believe in academics over random internet commenters like me, because academics had put the work into studying their field and subject.

Con artists have also put half of their life into being professional or studying the bag of tricks, but that doesn’t necessarily mean trust is automatically conferred due to their expertise in comprehending the system.

I prefer to trust in my own judgement over those of sub average or average social authorities. But that’s a question of hierarchy and cultural shock. Some are brought up to defer judgment to a technocrat elite or nebulous authority of elites, although their proof of eliteness is often untested and due to even greater levels of authority, not proof in and of itself.

In the same fashion that the collective defers ultimate authority and obedience to the “System” and individuals resist outsourcing authority/responsibility to unseen bureaucrats in the “System” or strangers, there are cultures which have preferences on a scale, but they are not purely in one camp or another.

On the note of collectivsm -> slavery, that revolves around the issue of which type of slavery. As I term it, there’s Slavery 1.0, Slavery 2.0, and Slavery 3.0.

A system where the uneducated and those who were economically subsistent and reliant on the powerful, such as women or Irish workers, foreigners that don’t speak your language, or lower class servants in the ancient Roman empire, would allow for Slavery 1.0, as the lower class can move to a higher class merely by having education (Roman and Greek slaves could buy their own freedom due to money from their education) or from having resources. They are still subordinate to the ruling doctrine, such as the Helots under the Spartans, or squires under Knights, or serfs under kings and royalty. Yet the unlanded commoner may become a knight, a lesser noble, due to deeds or special favor.

A caste system that does not allow genetic cross transfer or social mobility, such as the Hindu’s caste system with the Untouchables, Islam’s 750+ AD slave trade in Africa and the ME, or 1830’s American Democrat slave plantations, would qualify under Slavery 2.0

A space faring civilization which uses a meritocratic or not system in which a significant percentage of their resource production is manned by slaves, would be between a 2 and a 3. The slaves now comprise a significant portion of the population and is critical for the proper functioning of it. They are so essential, that it would be hard to equate them to the uneducated and disarmed slaves of the American Democrat plantations of 1830. Like the slave soldiers of the Ottomans, once they begin acquiring a critical cog in the system and also power, they may be called slaves later on, but actually treating them as inferior to everyone else, becomes less feasible.

On another note, the United State’s current mainstream culture can be summed up with these precepts.

1. Obey All Authority over you, no matter the orders given.
2. The selfish outliers will be punished.

The tradition and culture may have been focused on the individual, but it has now become the sub culture, not the mainstream. In this fashion, sub cultures can take over the mainstream and reverse the demographics, much like a game of Go. As for a society of individuals not allowing slavery, that of course depends on their definition of an individual. To the Democrat plantation land owners, an individual or a human was only classified as a male white land owner. Women, foreigners, and blacks were genetically considered different and/or inferior. The blacks were born and bred to work the fields so that the white aristocrats would have leisure and time for philosophy and art, the epitome of civilization. That was their justification under their society, why they fought for it. Well, technically the land owners didn’t fight, they were exempt from military service in the US Civil War 1.

What determines the system of slavery and whether it is used or not, is the hierarchy of the social status quo. If the hierarchy is any kind of top down system, there will always be an under class, an inferior spot at the bottom of the totem pole. Some hierarchies try to make this less intolerant by having their servants commanding those lesser than the servants, so that most people can have a superior and an inferior. Like feudalism, that can become stable over time: if the bottom class isn’t a caste system but can actually move up, so they can acquire subordinates of their own. If, however, a society rejects the top down hierarchy system, and adopts a bottom up hierarchy like the Grey economy of the internet, or the non aggression principle of liberty or something other equivalent, post scarcity Banksian derived/based culture, then there is no need for a superior or inferior in a class or hierarchy system.

Average common humans will still prefer to be in a hierarchy, much as pack animals will fight until an alpha, beta, and every other rank below it are established so that everyone understands the order. But voluntary equality or superiority or inferiority between individuals isn’t really an issue equivalent to a System enforcing that hierarchy.

Mathematics and Physics problems

December 11, 2015

http://www.nature.com/news/paradox-at-the-heart-of-mathematics-makes-physics-problem-unanswerable-1.18983

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle

Going back to the article, they seem to be talking about a certain kind of problem which reminds me of that Principle. Not revoking Heisenberg’s principle itself, but applying known unknowns to problems that divide between theoretical equations and actual experiments.

The reason why certain issues in physics have yet to be solved, is because the model is incomplete. And has been incomplete since forever, from the human pov. That doesn’t require the use of a broken mathematical equation. It just requires a different way of looking at the model of physics.

The mass-gap problem relates to the observation that the particles that carry the weak and strong nuclear force have mass. This is also why the weak and strong nuclear forces have limited range, unlike gravity and electromagnetism, and why quarks are only found as part of composite particles such as protons or neutrons, never in isolation. The problem is that there is no rigorous mathematical theory which explains why the force-carriers have mass, when photons, the carriers of the electromagnetic force, are massless.

The fundamental question of “what is mass” has been under research since a long time now. People thought the atom was indivisible once before. Then thought protons, neutrons, and electrons were indivisible, that this was the basic of matter. Then quantum mechanics went further and discovered something else.

The point is, hypervolumes, higher dimensional intrusion in lower dimensions. Experimentally, it is unfeasible, because the human ability to manipulate mass in other dimensions is limited, or rather non existent at the moment. Mathematically, equations can account for higher dimensions or lower ones.

As I may have mentioned before, fluid dynamics, light speed and gravitational lens warping, those things could not be calculated without an actual comprehension or model of the physical phenomenon. Theoretical mathematicians can create equations for them, but until they have a model from which to view the effect, they cannot find the cause or even close to it. Mathematicians need to know the unknown unknowns, the variables, into known unknowns. Thus Newton could use differential equation, calculus, to solve gravitational issues, on a planet. Yet Einstein used the same calculus field to calculate the manipulation of the space time field by masses of gravity. E=mc^2 is merely a rather cut down version of the longer differentiation equation. In a physical world where light traveled at different speeds depending on time, not space, it would be hard to create experiments for it and thus even harder to generate an actual eq with it as a constant. If it isn’t a constant.

The current model of the world under physics is incorrect. Thus until the defects are “corrected” to be more accurate, certain problems cannot be solved. Any more than the invisible energy of the magnetic field could be predicted without a comprehension of the energies at work.

I take a guess at higher dimensions as that which requires a better human comprehension, before mass and quantum particles may be better understood. I also take a preference at the Dirac Sea pov, as well as observational minds collapsing quantum wavefronts into physical phenomenon.

Once a consistent physical model of the universe is set down, it is often “good enough” to last a few generations before it is in need of an overturn or overhaul. That’s because as mad scientists keep pushing the barrier of human knowledge, there begins to be things that the current model can no longer adequately explain or calculate.

This has been true even for electricity and magnetism, let alone fields of physics where the human ability to influence or generate experiments is effectively close to zero.

The best tools humans have for finding weird quantum particles has been the particle accelerators, smashing one particle against the other to figure out if any new ones may be unaccounted for or missed due to the energy traces.

For example, http://home.cern/topics/higgs-boson

Hawking, in public, bet his reputation to Higgs’ face that such a particle did not exist presumably because Hawking’s “Equations” stated that it would not exist.

So much for his God Equations.

If there is a universe inside the Dirac Sea (to account for the infinite/extra energy) or negative dimensions within or below the various quantum particles in the Standard Model, it would become easier to generate models and mathematical equations for various physical particles. At that point, it might become feasible to determine why things have mass or not.

The way the quantum particles pair up and line up, seem very strange. Almost as if they are merely the consequences of some other thing at work. Or perhaps that is merely the normal human pov for something that doesn’t adhere to the classic system. For relatively new models of the atom, such as the electron cloud, neutron and proton in the element tables, it still felt similar to the gravity binding planets and comets. Barely within the same conceptual framework, but still within the paradigm.

Modern quantum physics seems much like a child smashing apart radios and miniature models, to figure out how the internals work. How such things are constructed, is beyond present day comprehension. The theoretical models seem to be holding as accurate, for now.

The problem is the things which currently have no models to describe them. How can people figure out where mass comes from, when they don’t even know about what matter consists of?

For Newton’s equations, they were accurate since space time distortion and warping didn’t exist on planet Earth to such a degree that it required equations designed to account for black holes or light speed limits.

However, when dealing with mass and elementary sub particles, it is all around us and within us. Mathematicians and physicists can no longer have an easy approximation of the prediction. Magnetism and electricity can be turned on and off, in order to experiment with it. To a certain degree, overriding whatever exists in nature.

Yet does humanity have the ability to turn off the existence of particles and their mass, to do enough experiments to equal humanity’s comprehension of electricity and magnetism? Ohms and Maxwell were human individuals who tore through the barriers. Perhaps humanity lacks the individual strangeness and or the technological metallurgy to do the same with mass and gravity. For now at least.

Humanity has often been on the wrong path to no where. It is only individuals that were ever any different. It is the individuals, outliers, which pulled humanity along on the endless path.

Interview post Muv Luv kickstarter with Yoshimune

December 2, 2015

http://www.siliconera.com/2015/10/30/koki-yoshimune-on-making-muv-luv-characters-lovable/

Yoshimune answers directly. Pretty good read for the fans.