All Americans past present and future are guilty of the most heinous war crimes ever in the history of people. They should all be hanged for their crimes. All 300 million of them.

Okay... JD lords his math skills over everyone, Lord Karth is a servant, Heru-ur is fed up with the math jibberish (me too) and I still have no clue what PieceofCake is talking about.

Good morning, ladies and germs.

My bike I'm working on (427 c.i. over hydraulic) @ sig.

Daily Howler has a post about Rachael Maddow's programming choices, explaining what has been disappointing about her program. She is all over the 'who gives a flyin' damn' John Ensign sex scandal which, of course, means that she is wasting air time that could be spent on exposing the real world scandal of the cost of health care. That "debate" is going on right now while the money just keeps on flowing into corporate hands. The literal life and the economic life of the middle and lower income earners of our nation is draining out as she speaks.

http://www.dailyhowler.com/

So you don't understand the distinction between plane geometry and hyperbolic geometry, spherical geometry, geometry on manifolds? I wasn't bringing up mathematics to show off, I was trying to elucidate my understanding of a situation. I was already taking flak all around just for parenthetically defining the term 'generic'. I didn't choose to give a treatise on non-Euclidean geometry, but now that you brought it up, why don't you deliver everybody a good sermon on how it all fits together. I'm sure a person who can't understand what a theorem is will have no difficulty understanding surgery on manifolds.

You can cite your degree, you can cite your wealth. You believe chaos theory is only relevant to the weather, indicating that you've never really done much with it, and are hardly someone to sermonize on whether it is relevant to anything else. Your understanding of physics has also suddenly appeared, it's also quite wanting. A degree and some patents, which you obviously believe you hold over any of the accomplishments of others here, and that entitles you to lecture on someone else's subject matter of which you know next to nothing, and declare it irrelevant. I believe you've confused being successful in business with knowing something.

But here's a clue. Why don't you drift over to FireDogLake, go through their archives, and look at the discussion of Mandlebrot and multifractals and why it should be used to do Monte Carlo simulations for calculating economic risk. Then maybe look up the Rössler attractor and read about SA signaling in the human heart. And then look up the blue sky catastrophe and its application to biology. And....

The point of citing complex systems was to talk about how I view the growing complexity of social and international interactions, and why it's inevitable and will grow more complicated as the population increases. Why studies or solutions that make use of ceteri paribus or nineteenth century experimental models don't accurately portray what is going on. And why having a very uncomplicated "big picture" into which real life gets forced by making a few "approximations" doesn't really work much anymore. Complex systems is very relevant in describing why that might be. Just because you made a lot of money on patents without it doesn't make it irrelevant. Someone who thinks so is a businessman, not a mathematician.

"Just because you made a lot of money on patents without it doesn't make it irrelevant. Someone who thinks so is a businessman, not a mathematician."-- ondelette

Indeed. And you'd think with all that money, a spelling coach would be in the budget. Or maybe JD just likes to misspell words to look more "common man" :) JD is to math what "the Fool" is to logic (a lot of hummingbird, very little alligator).

More crap.

Tell you what perfesssorrr, have any of your own simulations given you a sure fire system for playing the market? No? Why is that? I have known chartists, and others that though "artificial intelligence" and computers were going to make them rich. Give me a call when someone can predict market movements with equations.

By the way, if you want predictions then learn Austrian Economics. However, that will only tell you what will happen in the long run, they do not try to predict tops or bottoms. (*)

-----
(*) If someone does not have a good s&m joke for that sentence, UT has dried up!

you never mind all that shit:

Saturday, July 11, 2009 05:36 PM

"LondonLad ran me all over tarnation trying to get me to name names at government agencies.."

Either substantiate that statement or take it back and don't take all day to do it neither.

Perhaps.

But lets be sure we know the score on what happened. PDA used the Pythagorean theorem from middle school math to make fun of people. He, in effect, claimed it was always true that A squared plus b squared equals c squared and only fools would claim otherwise.

Well, my math courses in college and grad school claimed that it was not always true. It is true in Euclidean geometry given a right triangle, but that is not the only geometry there is. I even took a course finite geometry, in which there is not an infinite number of points on a "line". I loved that course.

As with many things, geometry begins with the axioms you set up. PDA forgot that, not JD. In fact, JD sounds just like the applied math guys I knew and had fun arguing with. (I loved the theoretical side)

Next someone will be telling me that Boolean algebra can be used to contact the dead or something.

Could we just drop it all folks --- this is just as bad as a 9-11 dust-up.

I don't follow the math shit too deeply. But I know JD is sound. He knows the limits of it and isn't daft enough to apply it to Afghanistan. He is also sound on the physics on YKW, whereas the poster that wrote this isn't:

A theorem is something that's been proven true. Which means it was always true, but we now know it was always true, because we've discovered the proof

Brilliant, Lewis Carroll couldn't have put it better.