Sunday, November 29, 2009
MagneGas(r) uses Agoracom.com for publicizing its news and I have been obliged to detail the reasons on this site as someone (Pr Fred Mandell) distorted the reality. As he was not concerned, I suppose that Dr Santilli asked him to do so. Why he did not acted by himself? I ignore, but it shows how much I misplaced my confidence for so many years.
To be comprehensive I should start over here by the last of mine chapters so anyone can read following a natural development.
Is per naivete that science defines its goal.
It is a science because it allies open curiosity to knowledge.
Ptolomy, as any primitive human being, saw our planet being the very center of the Universe while, the latter, was turning around the Earth: he was anthro-pocentric. However, despite his mathematician skills, his Universe was illegible.
Such a complexity was the main incentive to Copernicus to try shaping the Universe on, what appeared then to be, the reversed way: the Sun being the center of our Universe.
So doing, Copernicus was applying a relation from effect to cause. Copernicus world is the consequence of the complexity of Ptolomy’s world. As Copernicus was a Church convict we can notice that, often, politicians want to interfere into science.
These relationships are the core of the general dynamics as a science who observes the in-between relationships of a set, whichever are its components: physical, chemical, biological, vegetable, animal, human beings, etc.
The problem is that when observing, analyzing, reporting on a component out of his environment we distort it as we severe the feedback in between the components themselves but, on top of it, we instate at the least some of our own subjectivity. This is why, a reliable observer defines, in advance, not exclusively his position towards the object but, as well, his ability to accept – or refuse – such a reality in accordance with his acquired knowledge and beliefs.
These are the basis of his ability to transfer any report for our understanding: he has to be able to explain us his own modeling.
As science advance went and still goes on, it has been and it is still possible to isolate an increasing number of components from their sets. However this isolation remains detrimental to their “in set” relationships and, therefore, we observe, anyhow, an already “twisted” component due to the lack of action and feedback. The inner links are being destroyed up to the point, economically speaking, that the lack of “communication” creates a technology decreasing yield. Per example, as softwares request an increasing speed and memory quality, the investment value decreases faster than economical expectations.
Due to the confusion existing nowadays, cybernetics meaning mostly an exact science, I will here use the word “dynamics” which as well, in our case, wants and implies restoring the links between the human and social set’s components: a disassembled watch will provide wheels, springs, handles, etc. but one gets a watch only and exclusively if each component is carefully assembled in accordance to some defined order and connections.
Applied to most human made projects, dynamics seems an obvious science but when one considers human disciplines, mainly law and economy, this becomes really tricky as the observer is simultaneously inside and outside his own system: while trying to get an overview, the observer still depends on the system itself. This is becoming so complex that even philosophers get confused. Jean Giono stated once: “As a dictator I would jail each teenager. It would help them to become aware of themselves”. (Translated by the author)
So doing, Giono, as “The Dictator”, would disappear on the short to medium run... and with him each one of our institutions as there is always action and feedback.
Feedback can be expected or not, can initiate other unexpected “feedbacks” creating a whole new dynamics made of several feedbacks which cannot be completely isolated even if the observer seems not to be concerned. To this point we may refer to politicians and their “permanent campaign” in order to enjoy a public support: showing the set while hiding or editing some of its components, most of the time will be far more acceptable than a crude, straight reality.
There is hope or fear invested into the future while past is practically always embellished being tough times “buried” in our deep memories. The consequence of it is that we are always afraid of what’s new, unknown, with obviously unknown links and their unexpected feedback towards ourselves.
Such a fear is due to the “complexification” of the system itself as we, human beings, are simultaneously object and subject of our own History.
The Human society remains a complex system made of individuals who act and react towards themselves. Per example unhappiness is contagious. Such a fact, usually so obvious, remains very complex when several systems keep interfering towards each other in such a way that it could either enlarge the feedbacks, either restrain them or even hide them.
True is that, as Milton Friedman and Ana Schwartz have demonstrated, there are very few chances for Authorities decisions to match with the environment due to a lack of simultaneity. This is why Murray Rothbard, in 1972, when writing about the Great Depression of 1929 that, alike in 1837, 1873 and 1892, the ‘accidents” this was not due to a laissez-faire of the Authorities but, to the contrary, the consequence of irresponsible behavior of them for promoting economic and financial actions with very specific targets.
What to say about the present (2008) deep crisis? Its source is the sub-prime bubble. This was apparently made to help the less wealthy people having access to property, while responding to an economic need for creating support to the general economy.
The deficit bubble went in less than 8 years from 94 to 1,752 billion!
True is that the economic analysis provided by the Authorities – whichever the country is – remains to say the least “adjusted and edited”. But if explanation is not an excuse for misbehavior, the decisions related to the analysis, are twisted because there is no direct and sole consequence from cause to effect.
The actual crisis is for the lawmakers something like Copernicus applying Ptolomy’s system!
Consequence of the cybernetics, the dynamics wants to create a model which is somehow spherical, with cones figuring time fourth dimension, while the other three are:
· The object itself we intend to study which still is to be defined
· The way we, as observer, define our own ability to report
· The existing links between the object and its appearance to the observer.
To render the dynamics as easy to get as possible, I will introduce Minkovsky’s graphs.