Theory of Everything - Why Do Intellectuals Oppose Capitalism?
"Let me state it simply. The mind, the more educated, develops the habit of natural equilibriating logic. This logic is against capitalism because it is not equilibriated, it is a dis-equilibriating class system, even though I support it more than the other wrecks. What may be required is a mixed equilibriated economic system of truly balanced supply and demand, then maybe the intellectuals could support it. But don't tell the intellectuals, they fear what they don't think of!"
Just a hint,
Lloyd"
Thursday, January 26, 2006
Tuesday, January 24, 2006
Beyond Keynes to Inflation
Richard Benson
Without constant monetary stimulus, the credit-based U.S. economy would die. Our current economic model is similar to the one used by banana republic countries that are running hyperinflation* and end up in hock to the IMF:
"Hyperinflations are caused by extremely rapid growth in the supply of “paper” money. They occur when the monetary and fiscal authorities of a nation regularly issue large quantities of money to pay for a large stream of government expenditures. In effect, inflation is a form of taxation where the government gains at the expense of those who hold money whose value is declining. Hyperinflations are, therefore, very large taxation schemes."
America is now extraordinarily vulnerable to the whims of foreign governments. What if our creditors demanded a higher rate of interest? Perhaps they already have, and the Federal Reserve will have to raise interest rates higher than the capital markets currently expect.
What about the housing bubble? Mr. Bernanke may be left with only one course of action: Given housing price inflation of 50 to 100 percent in some areas over the past few years, the Fed’s goal for the next several years will be how to get inflation up without crushing housing prices because of rising interest rates. A housing price crash could severely affect the financial markets in our country and take the economic system down with it. Mr. Bernanke has spent his entire adult life studying to prevent this from happening and I suspect he will do everything in his power to keep inflation going. When everything else is inflated, housing prices (at their current levels) won’t appear to be so over-valued. Getting money into the hands of consumers who can’t tap their savings (because most Americans don’t have any), or use their credit cards (because they’re over-extended - welcome to the new bankruptcy law), or draw cash from the home equity loan ATM installed on the side of their house (housing prices are stagnant or falling), will be a real challenge. To get money into the consumer’s hands, the Fed will have to print more money and encourage the creation of more debt. Mr. Bernanke’s illusion about dropping “money from helicopters” may actually come to pass as a direct way to distribute money to the consumer to service old debts and keep spending alive. The new economic model should be “inflate, or face deflationary collapse”.
Without constant monetary stimulus, the credit-based U.S. economy would die. Our current economic model is similar to the one used by banana republic countries that are running hyperinflation* and end up in hock to the IMF:
"Hyperinflations are caused by extremely rapid growth in the supply of “paper” money. They occur when the monetary and fiscal authorities of a nation regularly issue large quantities of money to pay for a large stream of government expenditures. In effect, inflation is a form of taxation where the government gains at the expense of those who hold money whose value is declining. Hyperinflations are, therefore, very large taxation schemes."
America is now extraordinarily vulnerable to the whims of foreign governments. What if our creditors demanded a higher rate of interest? Perhaps they already have, and the Federal Reserve will have to raise interest rates higher than the capital markets currently expect.
What about the housing bubble? Mr. Bernanke may be left with only one course of action: Given housing price inflation of 50 to 100 percent in some areas over the past few years, the Fed’s goal for the next several years will be how to get inflation up without crushing housing prices because of rising interest rates. A housing price crash could severely affect the financial markets in our country and take the economic system down with it. Mr. Bernanke has spent his entire adult life studying to prevent this from happening and I suspect he will do everything in his power to keep inflation going. When everything else is inflated, housing prices (at their current levels) won’t appear to be so over-valued. Getting money into the hands of consumers who can’t tap their savings (because most Americans don’t have any), or use their credit cards (because they’re over-extended - welcome to the new bankruptcy law), or draw cash from the home equity loan ATM installed on the side of their house (housing prices are stagnant or falling), will be a real challenge. To get money into the consumer’s hands, the Fed will have to print more money and encourage the creation of more debt. Mr. Bernanke’s illusion about dropping “money from helicopters” may actually come to pass as a direct way to distribute money to the consumer to service old debts and keep spending alive. The new economic model should be “inflate, or face deflationary collapse”.
Tuesday, January 17, 2006
The Dynamic Unity of Reality
On Truth and Reality: Philosophy Physics Metaphysics - Wave Structure of Matter: Famous Physics Philosophy Quotes
This site deserves to be read by all. Just finished it myself. After, I checked the web for all official physicists connected, and or related to Geoff's ideas, I found them in agreement, and his ideas flawless. Anyone wanting to thoroughly understand the world of physics and philosophy, and one's own self, need go no further. I think this should become the highest rated site on the web, as it has the real potential to greatly advance all scientific, and `social' redemptive truth.
There doesn't seem to be anyone around, so I'll take a stab at answering your querry. In my logical way of achieving certainty of quantum mechanics, and wsm over cosmological space-time special relativity, I compared the absolute mathematical certainty of greatest magnitude infinity itself, to spact-time relativity's lack of mathematical infinity at all, in the large. Of course infinity, in the small, exists in all systems, but a greatest magnitude infinity only exists in non-space time absolute infinite space, i.e., the new quantum mechanics of wolff, mead, hawkings, lafreniere, haselhurst, myself and others, plus the wsm. It only takes doing the spact-time math of either 15 or 30 billion years of light speed travel to realize einstein's figures fall far short of greatest magnitude infinity. So if we eliminate the possibility of einstein having any cosmological space-time validity, we have more certainty, to start with - no cosmological space-time special relativity confusion. This in no way eliminates lorentz's quantum relativity - the only true relativity to begin with.
By my mind's logic, absolute greatest magnitude infinity makes far more sense than einstein's restricted cosmological curved space-time special relativity balloon, of false lesser than infinity mathematics. If we are going to accept logic as mathematical certainty, greatest magnitude infinity must be accepted as a corresponding mathematical certainty, only possible in wsm's new quantum infinite space reality. You can't have conflict in mathematics and achieve any certainty at all in formal logical systems. Most all formal higher order logic and mathematics systems either agree or correspond, not contradict. Einstein's cosmological space-time special relativity mathematics contradicts the highest order formal logic of greatest magnitude mathematics. Thus, einstein is wrong and wsm is right, as the only other serious mathematical reality left - a new logic of mathematical certainty - least and greatest magnitudes of infinity.
As to the laws of nature, physics and sciences, they really don't control anything, anyway. They are the evolving of space motion onward. They exist as descriptors of wave actions of motions. Even if I were to grant the validity of einstein's cosmological space-time special relativity, none of the natural laws would change at any velocity approaching the speed of light, even if such a foolish idea as speeding the earth were done, due to conspansion, all measuring tools, parallel lines, maths, etc., on and on would all shrink with inperceptable change to any theoretical observer. The reality of the observer, even in the shrinking rod scenario or clock scenario, is absolutely impossible due to conspansion - the fact that no observer at the cosmological level, under einstein quantifactions, can ever tell if that type of universe is going forward or back, or stable, shrinking, or expanding, or matter shrinking, nor can an observer ever exist at that level, even theoretically, without always viewing the same unchanging frame of reference. Not to be offensive, but quite a foolish false reality, if you ask me. So I suggest we accept the only sensible possible reality - wsm and true infinite and absolute space.
We have only one real choice, the false mathematics of special relativity einstein or the true greatest magnitude mathematics of infinity.
by L.A.Gillespie
This site deserves to be read by all. Just finished it myself. After, I checked the web for all official physicists connected, and or related to Geoff's ideas, I found them in agreement, and his ideas flawless. Anyone wanting to thoroughly understand the world of physics and philosophy, and one's own self, need go no further. I think this should become the highest rated site on the web, as it has the real potential to greatly advance all scientific, and `social' redemptive truth.
There doesn't seem to be anyone around, so I'll take a stab at answering your querry. In my logical way of achieving certainty of quantum mechanics, and wsm over cosmological space-time special relativity, I compared the absolute mathematical certainty of greatest magnitude infinity itself, to spact-time relativity's lack of mathematical infinity at all, in the large. Of course infinity, in the small, exists in all systems, but a greatest magnitude infinity only exists in non-space time absolute infinite space, i.e., the new quantum mechanics of wolff, mead, hawkings, lafreniere, haselhurst, myself and others, plus the wsm. It only takes doing the spact-time math of either 15 or 30 billion years of light speed travel to realize einstein's figures fall far short of greatest magnitude infinity. So if we eliminate the possibility of einstein having any cosmological space-time validity, we have more certainty, to start with - no cosmological space-time special relativity confusion. This in no way eliminates lorentz's quantum relativity - the only true relativity to begin with.
By my mind's logic, absolute greatest magnitude infinity makes far more sense than einstein's restricted cosmological curved space-time special relativity balloon, of false lesser than infinity mathematics. If we are going to accept logic as mathematical certainty, greatest magnitude infinity must be accepted as a corresponding mathematical certainty, only possible in wsm's new quantum infinite space reality. You can't have conflict in mathematics and achieve any certainty at all in formal logical systems. Most all formal higher order logic and mathematics systems either agree or correspond, not contradict. Einstein's cosmological space-time special relativity mathematics contradicts the highest order formal logic of greatest magnitude mathematics. Thus, einstein is wrong and wsm is right, as the only other serious mathematical reality left - a new logic of mathematical certainty - least and greatest magnitudes of infinity.
As to the laws of nature, physics and sciences, they really don't control anything, anyway. They are the evolving of space motion onward. They exist as descriptors of wave actions of motions. Even if I were to grant the validity of einstein's cosmological space-time special relativity, none of the natural laws would change at any velocity approaching the speed of light, even if such a foolish idea as speeding the earth were done, due to conspansion, all measuring tools, parallel lines, maths, etc., on and on would all shrink with inperceptable change to any theoretical observer. The reality of the observer, even in the shrinking rod scenario or clock scenario, is absolutely impossible due to conspansion - the fact that no observer at the cosmological level, under einstein quantifactions, can ever tell if that type of universe is going forward or back, or stable, shrinking, or expanding, or matter shrinking, nor can an observer ever exist at that level, even theoretically, without always viewing the same unchanging frame of reference. Not to be offensive, but quite a foolish false reality, if you ask me. So I suggest we accept the only sensible possible reality - wsm and true infinite and absolute space.
We have only one real choice, the false mathematics of special relativity einstein or the true greatest magnitude mathematics of infinity.
by L.A.Gillespie
Sunday, January 15, 2006
Matter Is Made of Waves
Matter is made of waves
I was so impressed with this site I just had to post it. Maybe a little common sense about physics can help us more clearly understand economics. The same solipsistic academic entanglement embroils economics as is clearly made evident in LaFreniere's site. We must start to see through economics pseudo-equilibrium math problems, then maybe we can start to truly solve a few of the real world's problems.
I was so impressed with this site I just had to post it. Maybe a little common sense about physics can help us more clearly understand economics. The same solipsistic academic entanglement embroils economics as is clearly made evident in LaFreniere's site. We must start to see through economics pseudo-equilibrium math problems, then maybe we can start to truly solve a few of the real world's problems.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)