Sunday, January 08, 2012
Dear Sweden
Dear Sweden (or at least the people of), we need your help. You know why. The internet is at stake.
Signed,
You Pal,
An American (Not to be confused with the gov't.)
Signed,
You Pal,
An American (Not to be confused with the gov't.)
Labels: concerned, help, message, random post
Friday, September 02, 2011
Battle Angel Alita commercial?
I suspect James Cameron has almost got that movie finished (see title), and that's what the new Droid commercial promos are about. I guess they have Angelina Jolie playing Alita? At least that's what it looks like.
Monday, August 08, 2011
One of the failures of economists
I'm sure everybody knows what happens when you clear cut a forest and fail to replant right? It doesn't take much more than a decade or so to see that the results are obvious.
From observation, it seems that economists have had a major failing since somewhere in the 1980's. This is the failure to connect the labor pool to the consumer pool. This is because they are one and the same. What has happened is that everybody has been so focused on cutting labor, they have a complete failure to realize that they are also cutting away at the very consumers that would buy their products. In other words, they're breaking one of the links in the cycle of capital flow. Thus without healthy flow of capital, the economy itself flounders.
You want the economy to do well as well as the businesses within it, right? Well, in order for things to not stagnate and get sick - you've got to spread the wealth around. With a focus on stockholders and a very narrow definition of profit, that's not going to happen. If you would treat the employees you get from the labor pool as an investment instead of as a disposable resource, you'd come to the realization that by considering their income as part of the profit definition that your business and your impact on the economy at large would be much better off.
But what the hell do I know about economics, this is just my observation. But if you happen to read this and agree, feel free to pass it along to an MBAs that may be out there.
From observation, it seems that economists have had a major failing since somewhere in the 1980's. This is the failure to connect the labor pool to the consumer pool. This is because they are one and the same. What has happened is that everybody has been so focused on cutting labor, they have a complete failure to realize that they are also cutting away at the very consumers that would buy their products. In other words, they're breaking one of the links in the cycle of capital flow. Thus without healthy flow of capital, the economy itself flounders.
You want the economy to do well as well as the businesses within it, right? Well, in order for things to not stagnate and get sick - you've got to spread the wealth around. With a focus on stockholders and a very narrow definition of profit, that's not going to happen. If you would treat the employees you get from the labor pool as an investment instead of as a disposable resource, you'd come to the realization that by considering their income as part of the profit definition that your business and your impact on the economy at large would be much better off.
But what the hell do I know about economics, this is just my observation. But if you happen to read this and agree, feel free to pass it along to an MBAs that may be out there.
Labels: business, economy, new model, profit
Friday, July 29, 2011
Weird waking dream...
I woke up this morning after a weird dream, which was sort of funny.
Basically I was in some college style mathematics class, and judging on the surroundings it was a 10AM class.
What it appeared to be was a calculus class (I should know, I did get to that level in high school) but given the topic of the light discussion - I have reason to suspect it was a calculus class for physics majors. This is because instead of treating the variables just as some purely mathematical constructs, there was some air of understanding the deeper implications of what they represented. (Even high school calculus classes have equations for linear attenuation and things of that nature in their books, but there is no talk at all of what those variables represent. It's pretty funny actually.)
The funny thing that made it memorable was that none other than Ben Stein was teaching it. (Bueller? Bueller?) Yeah, that guy. But he actually wasn't boring in this case. In real life he's also an economics major, so it's not at all like he wouldn't be qualified to teach this subject. Math is math in that regard.
The sad part of the dream is that I felt like the slowest person in a class full of nerds. (And that's defining nerds in a good way.) So I came to class the least prepared. All I had was a piece of paper and one pencil. But nobody cared. Apparently because it was the first day and everybody else was too polite to say anything. (Either that or that I was there for some reason.) The bad thing was is that in the dream I was dead-tired. Ben Stein was talking about some project by a classmate at Harvard (did he go there?) and if anybody knew what it was about. Surprisingly the other students were pretty blank on this, and I was the one that knew what it was about. It had to do with Bussard-Heim fusion of methane molecules, in other words there was some process that fused the hydrogen in methane without too much worry about the carbon atoms. And then we started with some long equation about "Shumann Resonance" or something like that. It started out with R (but written in a particular way) equals E equals... (yes, the same E of E=mc^2) then a long equation involving square roots and such. And that's where I started falling asleep. And I was sort of pissed at myself for doing so in the dream. I was trying hard as hell to write that down. But I was the kind of tired where everything goes blurry. So I tilted back to keep from laying my head on the desk. But then started leaning way back and passed out.
And that's when I woke up.
Why the hell did I dream about that? It's just the weirdest stupidest thing, and in being awake it doesn't make that much sense. And I'm going to have look up the subject of discussion to see if it resembles what was being written on the chalkboard.
Basically I was in some college style mathematics class, and judging on the surroundings it was a 10AM class.
What it appeared to be was a calculus class (I should know, I did get to that level in high school) but given the topic of the light discussion - I have reason to suspect it was a calculus class for physics majors. This is because instead of treating the variables just as some purely mathematical constructs, there was some air of understanding the deeper implications of what they represented. (Even high school calculus classes have equations for linear attenuation and things of that nature in their books, but there is no talk at all of what those variables represent. It's pretty funny actually.)
The funny thing that made it memorable was that none other than Ben Stein was teaching it. (Bueller? Bueller?) Yeah, that guy. But he actually wasn't boring in this case. In real life he's also an economics major, so it's not at all like he wouldn't be qualified to teach this subject. Math is math in that regard.
The sad part of the dream is that I felt like the slowest person in a class full of nerds. (And that's defining nerds in a good way.) So I came to class the least prepared. All I had was a piece of paper and one pencil. But nobody cared. Apparently because it was the first day and everybody else was too polite to say anything. (Either that or that I was there for some reason.) The bad thing was is that in the dream I was dead-tired. Ben Stein was talking about some project by a classmate at Harvard (did he go there?) and if anybody knew what it was about. Surprisingly the other students were pretty blank on this, and I was the one that knew what it was about. It had to do with Bussard-Heim fusion of methane molecules, in other words there was some process that fused the hydrogen in methane without too much worry about the carbon atoms. And then we started with some long equation about "Shumann Resonance" or something like that. It started out with R (but written in a particular way) equals E equals... (yes, the same E of E=mc^2) then a long equation involving square roots and such. And that's where I started falling asleep. And I was sort of pissed at myself for doing so in the dream. I was trying hard as hell to write that down. But I was the kind of tired where everything goes blurry. So I tilted back to keep from laying my head on the desk. But then started leaning way back and passed out.
And that's when I woke up.
Why the hell did I dream about that? It's just the weirdest stupidest thing, and in being awake it doesn't make that much sense. And I'm going to have look up the subject of discussion to see if it resembles what was being written on the chalkboard.
Labels: calculus, class, dream, math, physics, weird
Monday, June 27, 2011
Weirdo dream during a nap
Somehow I dreamt that I was making a ramp overpass out of dirt and rocks so that I could ride my bike up to some overpass. And as I finished the ramp, my bike was missing.
And then it was getting late, but I managed to get some help in searching for my bike from people in charge of something going on at a nearby property. Yet nobody had any luck, and then I got stuck under some cyclone fence.
And that's when I woke up.
An unresolved dream that didn't make much sense. And in a way I almost wanted to go back to sleep so I could get my bike. Which is funny, since I know where my bike is when I'm awake. Just another oddity I suppose.
And then it was getting late, but I managed to get some help in searching for my bike from people in charge of something going on at a nearby property. Yet nobody had any luck, and then I got stuck under some cyclone fence.
And that's when I woke up.
An unresolved dream that didn't make much sense. And in a way I almost wanted to go back to sleep so I could get my bike. Which is funny, since I know where my bike is when I'm awake. Just another oddity I suppose.
Labels: bike, dream, ramp, weird
Monday, March 21, 2011
Something for Physics to chew on
Fizeau's experiment needs to be re-visited, but not in regard to "Aether" theory. Instead it should be considered with relativistic time. That is, the progression of time itself should be considered as non-uniform throughout space.
Think about it this way... Velocity is distance over time. The speed of light is a velocity. Now if the time part itself is not a constant, what does that say about the speed of light? C'mon, do the math.
As an observer in typical instances, you're not going to see the speed of light change one bit because you're only able to measure the speed of light relative to your own frame of reference. Right now, we don't have the technology to go to other star systems where the gravitational field causes time to progress at a different rate, nor the ability to approach relativistic speeds (in regards to an observer here on earth) where time may condense. Variable time progression can also red and blue shift light in the same way movement itself causes Doppler-shift. Think about how a record sounds when you speed it up or slow it down. You're not moving the sound source in space, but compressing or expanding the frame of time in which the sound has been heard.
Gravitational fields can bend light. Since you're not changing the physical density of empty space around a field emitter (there's nothing to change the density of), the next obvious thing to account for the Fresnel effect is to change the progression of time itself.
Thinking of this, I believe the speed of light is not a constant in this universe, but rather a coefficient. There's a subtle difference (at least for most purposes), but it's big enough to be quite important.
I do believe that the math should work out and may prove a little interesting.
Think about it this way... Velocity is distance over time. The speed of light is a velocity. Now if the time part itself is not a constant, what does that say about the speed of light? C'mon, do the math.
As an observer in typical instances, you're not going to see the speed of light change one bit because you're only able to measure the speed of light relative to your own frame of reference. Right now, we don't have the technology to go to other star systems where the gravitational field causes time to progress at a different rate, nor the ability to approach relativistic speeds (in regards to an observer here on earth) where time may condense. Variable time progression can also red and blue shift light in the same way movement itself causes Doppler-shift. Think about how a record sounds when you speed it up or slow it down. You're not moving the sound source in space, but compressing or expanding the frame of time in which the sound has been heard.
Gravitational fields can bend light. Since you're not changing the physical density of empty space around a field emitter (there's nothing to change the density of), the next obvious thing to account for the Fresnel effect is to change the progression of time itself.
Thinking of this, I believe the speed of light is not a constant in this universe, but rather a coefficient. There's a subtle difference (at least for most purposes), but it's big enough to be quite important.
I do believe that the math should work out and may prove a little interesting.
Labels: physics, space, speed of light, time, timetravel, universe, weird
Monday, October 25, 2010
Vote "Rich Whitey" for Gov? Yep!
I'm usually not one to get too concerned about politics, but here it goes.
I'm voting "Rich Whitey" for governor here in Illinois. Why? Because he's up-front and least likely to lie about who he is.
Actually the real reason is that both Democrats and Republicans have abused the office, and now it's time to try something different. (The Greens don't have that huge a following yet in this country, so if they blow it in office - it might be a while for them.) I'm voting for Rich Whitney because his party seems to be the least corrupted so far.
Now for all those people voting Democrat because it seems more likely to keep the Republicans out (or vice versa), (pardon my language but) I'd like to offer a big hearty FUCK YOU!!! You're the part of the reason why it's stuck in a two party system in the U.S. with the same bullshit going on for years. Grow a pair, and instead of voting only to "block" somebody, vote for what may be a real difference!
I'm voting "Rich Whitey" for governor here in Illinois. Why? Because he's up-front and least likely to lie about who he is.
Actually the real reason is that both Democrats and Republicans have abused the office, and now it's time to try something different. (The Greens don't have that huge a following yet in this country, so if they blow it in office - it might be a while for them.) I'm voting for Rich Whitney because his party seems to be the least corrupted so far.
Now for all those people voting Democrat because it seems more likely to keep the Republicans out (or vice versa), (pardon my language but) I'd like to offer a big hearty FUCK YOU!!! You're the part of the reason why it's stuck in a two party system in the U.S. with the same bullshit going on for years. Grow a pair, and instead of voting only to "block" somebody, vote for what may be a real difference!
Labels: 2010, election, governor, illinois, vote
