The cause of the phenomenon under discussion is identified by Prof. Mattias Desmet, a clinical psychologist, in the book that is entitled "The Psychology of Totalitarianism. The cause is for a "mass formation" of people to form, each person of which mistakes a "complex" physical system for a "non-complex" physical system. Among the perpetrators of this mistake are professors of mathematical statistics who falsely believe that the best explainers of the outcomes of the events of the past is the best predictor of the outcomes of the future. This belief leads these professors to teach this false belief to their students., some of whom become professors who make the same fallacious argument to their students with the result that this phenomenon continues ad infinitem. Among the consequences from this mistake is for mistaken Principles of Reasoning to be widely adopted by institutions that make the same mistake. Among the institutions that have adopted these mistaken principles of reasoning are Harvard University and the Biden Administration
Amen Terry! It is the intergenerational transmission of zealotry and cliches, rather than of principles of reasoning to avoid logical fallacies, skeptical and respectful dialogue, and free inquiry.
The Principles of Reasoning are the solution to Problem of Induction. The problem is of how, in a logically perfmissible way to select the set of inferences about the conditional outcomes of the events of the future for a physical system that will be made by a model of a physical system from a larger set of possibilities. Circa 1975, the problem was solved by the late Ronald Arlie Christensen, then a PhD candidate in the theoretical physics program of the University of California, Berkeley. The solution was for the induced generalization aka "model" to express all of the available information but no more. The prinicples of reasoning that were produced by this solution was to minimize the entropy of the model's conditional inference to the conditionall outcomes of the events of the future for the physical system being modelled and maximized the intropy of each inference to the numerical value that was assigned by the model to the probability of the outcome of each conditional outcome of an event of the future. In short, the Principles of Reasoning are "entropy minimax." Circa 1980, published the seven volume Entropy Minimax Source Book documenting the argument made by entropy minimax in great detail. Entropy minimax reduces to Aristotle's three Laws of Thought in the limit that the various entropies reduce to nil..
The physical system being modelled through the use of entropy minimax is a "complex" physical system. In his book, Desmet reports the finding that a "mass formation" arises amongst people who mistake a complex physical system for a non-complex system. This mistake is commonly made amongst people who include professors of mathematical statistics. Thus by wising up these people we can hope to halt the drift toward totalitarian rule over ourselves and corruption of our universities. I am in the process of creating a substack that will assist in the accomplishment of this objective. I hope to be the beneficiary of your help in this endeavor
I have launched tthe above referenced substack under the title of "Building A Model OF A Physical System Without Making Any Mistakes,." I make this substack available to po·ten·tial readers of it free of charge.
Thiis to introduce you ro Orlie Lingren,, a psychologist and close associate of Ronald Christensen. Christensen solved the Principles of Reasoning and in doing so revealed the Principles of Reasoning for the inductive branch of logic. For conformity to its motto, Harvard must conform to these principles. Orlie's email address is lindgrenorlie@gmail.com.
Typo Alert: I meant to type: "Christensen solved The Problem of Induction and in to so revealed the Principles of Reasoning of the inductive branch of Logic.
The Article in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy contains an Article on The Problem of Induction that is based upon the assumption that this problem is unsolved though it was solved half a century ago by the late theoretical physicist Ronald Christensen by enunciation of the principle that the induced generalization (model) represents all of the available information about the conditional outcomes of the events of the future for the physical system being modeled. but no more. This principle is productive of the Principles of Reasoning that Christensen calls "Entropy Minimax." These Principles reduce to Aristotle's three Laws of Thought in the limit as the missing information in the inferences made by the model for a deductive conclusion to be reached by them in regard to the conditional outcomes of the events of the future reduces to nil.
Approximately one year ago, I emailed the author of this article to advise her of the error in her article. She did not respond, however, to the issue I had raised but rather responded by blocking me from further communication with her. Thereafter, I contacted the editors of the Stanford Encyclopedia Of Philosophy to advise them of this error. They responded by launching an investigation into tmy complaint. but soon they became unresponsive to messages from me,, leaving the error in their encyclopedia's article on The Problem of Induction. intact. What could be the reason for their refusal and that of the author of this author of this article to comminate with me?
The evidence points to the conclusion that these individuals believe what they were taught by their proffessors of mathematical statistics, for "entropy minimax" is a generalization of mathematical statistics rather than being mathematical statistics itself. When I asked a professor on the scientific faculty of Stanford University of why I I had received no response to my offer to help the scientific faculty of Stanford come up to speed on entropy minimax, he responded that his colleagues were "set in their ways."
The pursuit of truth is hampered when a student or faculty member believes a falsehood to be a truth., as is case when this individual believes a data set has a probability density function under the condition that the axiom of probability theory called "unit measure" is falsified by the argument made by a model of a physical system but believed to be satisfied by this argument. In the course of my career I have found this belief to be quite common, possibly because few pe read the peer-rbecause few researchers read the peer-reviewed article entitled "Unit Measure Violations In Patterrn Recognition.{ was indoctrinated in this false belief as an undergraduate. I have found this false belief to be common amongst the employees of regulatory agencies where it leads them to believe they can regulate a physical system that cannot be regulated.
Harvard can Wake Up and Stand Up by abandoning its practice of treating a "complex" physical system as if it were a "non-con-complex" physical system in the construction of a model of this system, where a "complex" physical system exhibits one or more "emergent properties, each of wiich is a property of the whole system and not of the separate parts of this sustem and r"eplacing this practice by conformity to the entropy minimax principle as described by the late theoretical physicist Ronald Arlie Christensen in his seven volume treatise on this topic entitled the Entropy Minimax Sourcebook.
The Entropy Minimax Principle solves the ancient, previously unsolved Problem of Induction, where the problem is of how, in a logically permissible way, to select the set of inferences that will be made by a model of a "complex" physical system from a larger set of possibilities. This principle solves the ancient, previously unsolved Problem of Induction.
The entropy minimax principle as described by th late thorretical physicist Ronald Christensen in his seven volume "Entropy Minimax CSourcebook. In doing so, Harvard would conform to the Principles of Reasoning that Christensen calls the "Entropy Minimax" in the title of his seven volume treatise on this topic titled th "Entropyy Minimax Sourcebook" (C(irca 1985). Through his application of this principle, Christensen solves the ancient, previously unsolved Problem of Induction, where the problem is of how, in a logically permisssible way to select the set of inferences that will be made modell from a larger set of possibilities.
Re: The United States (or Harvard University) is an example of a complex physical system
A "complex" physical system differs from a "non-complex" physical system in exhibiting one or more "emergent properties," each of which is a property of the whole system and not of the separate prarts of this system.
A bicycle plus its rider is an example of such a system. When it is underway, a bicycle and its rider exhibits the property of "stability." Take away this property and a bicycle crashes.
By analogy, the United States and Harvard University once had the property of stability but collectivists have taken this property away. Thus, the United States and Harvard University are both in the process of crashing. To prevent this crash we must restore the stability that these institutions once had. This can be accomplished by replacing collectivism by free market capitalism.
Thank you all for sharing/tweeting etc. !
-Omar
The cause of the phenomenon under discussion is identified by Prof. Mattias Desmet, a clinical psychologist, in the book that is entitled "The Psychology of Totalitarianism. The cause is for a "mass formation" of people to form, each person of which mistakes a "complex" physical system for a "non-complex" physical system. Among the perpetrators of this mistake are professors of mathematical statistics who falsely believe that the best explainers of the outcomes of the events of the past is the best predictor of the outcomes of the future. This belief leads these professors to teach this false belief to their students., some of whom become professors who make the same fallacious argument to their students with the result that this phenomenon continues ad infinitem. Among the consequences from this mistake is for mistaken Principles of Reasoning to be widely adopted by institutions that make the same mistake. Among the institutions that have adopted these mistaken principles of reasoning are Harvard University and the Biden Administration
Terry Oldberg
Engineer/Scienitist/Public Policy Researcher
Los Altos Hills, CA
1-650-518-6636
terry_oldberg@yahoo.com
Amen Terry! It is the intergenerational transmission of zealotry and cliches, rather than of principles of reasoning to avoid logical fallacies, skeptical and respectful dialogue, and free inquiry.
Dear Omar:
Thank you for taking the time to respond!
The Principles of Reasoning are the solution to Problem of Induction. The problem is of how, in a logically perfmissible way to select the set of inferences about the conditional outcomes of the events of the future for a physical system that will be made by a model of a physical system from a larger set of possibilities. Circa 1975, the problem was solved by the late Ronald Arlie Christensen, then a PhD candidate in the theoretical physics program of the University of California, Berkeley. The solution was for the induced generalization aka "model" to express all of the available information but no more. The prinicples of reasoning that were produced by this solution was to minimize the entropy of the model's conditional inference to the conditionall outcomes of the events of the future for the physical system being modelled and maximized the intropy of each inference to the numerical value that was assigned by the model to the probability of the outcome of each conditional outcome of an event of the future. In short, the Principles of Reasoning are "entropy minimax." Circa 1980, published the seven volume Entropy Minimax Source Book documenting the argument made by entropy minimax in great detail. Entropy minimax reduces to Aristotle's three Laws of Thought in the limit that the various entropies reduce to nil..
The physical system being modelled through the use of entropy minimax is a "complex" physical system. In his book, Desmet reports the finding that a "mass formation" arises amongst people who mistake a complex physical system for a non-complex system. This mistake is commonly made amongst people who include professors of mathematical statistics. Thus by wising up these people we can hope to halt the drift toward totalitarian rule over ourselves and corruption of our universities. I am in the process of creating a substack that will assist in the accomplishment of this objective. I hope to be the beneficiary of your help in this endeavor
Cordially,
Terry Oldberg
Engineer/Scientist/Public Policy Researcher
Los Altos Hills, CA
1-650-518-6636 (Mobile)
terry_oldberg@yahoo.com.com
fascinating and thank you for elaborating, I look forward to reading more! Thanks again
Dear Omar
FYI:
I have launched tthe above referenced substack under the title of "Building A Model OF A Physical System Without Making Any Mistakes,." I make this substack available to po·ten·tial readers of it free of charge.
Cordially,
Terry Oldberg
Engineer/Scientist/Public Policy Researcher
Los Altos Hills, California
thanks, Terry, much appreciated
Dear Omar
Thiis to introduce you ro Orlie Lingren,, a psychologist and close associate of Ronald Christensen. Christensen solved the Principles of Reasoning and in doing so revealed the Principles of Reasoning for the inductive branch of logic. For conformity to its motto, Harvard must conform to these principles. Orlie's email address is lindgrenorlie@gmail.com.
Cordially,
Terry Oldberg
cc::Orlie Lindgren
Dear Omar:
Typo alert: Lingren's first name is spelled "Orlie" NOT "Orlie.."
Also, Orlie's phone number is 916-604-4266 (sacramento, CA). I am sure that he would like to hear from your.
Dear Omar:
Typo alert to my previous sent typo alert:
Lindgren's first name is speelled "Orley" NOT "Orlie" Also, his phone number is 916-804-4266.
Typo Alert: I meant to type: "Christensen solved The Problem of Induction and in to so revealed the Principles of Reasoning of the inductive branch of Logic.
The Article in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy contains an Article on The Problem of Induction that is based upon the assumption that this problem is unsolved though it was solved half a century ago by the late theoretical physicist Ronald Christensen by enunciation of the principle that the induced generalization (model) represents all of the available information about the conditional outcomes of the events of the future for the physical system being modeled. but no more. This principle is productive of the Principles of Reasoning that Christensen calls "Entropy Minimax." These Principles reduce to Aristotle's three Laws of Thought in the limit as the missing information in the inferences made by the model for a deductive conclusion to be reached by them in regard to the conditional outcomes of the events of the future reduces to nil.
Approximately one year ago, I emailed the author of this article to advise her of the error in her article. She did not respond, however, to the issue I had raised but rather responded by blocking me from further communication with her. Thereafter, I contacted the editors of the Stanford Encyclopedia Of Philosophy to advise them of this error. They responded by launching an investigation into tmy complaint. but soon they became unresponsive to messages from me,, leaving the error in their encyclopedia's article on The Problem of Induction. intact. What could be the reason for their refusal and that of the author of this author of this article to comminate with me?
The evidence points to the conclusion that these individuals believe what they were taught by their proffessors of mathematical statistics, for "entropy minimax" is a generalization of mathematical statistics rather than being mathematical statistics itself. When I asked a professor on the scientific faculty of Stanford University of why I I had received no response to my offer to help the scientific faculty of Stanford come up to speed on entropy minimax, he responded that his colleagues were "set in their ways."
Terry Oldberg
Engineer/Scientist/Public Policy Researcher
Los Altos Hills, California
650-518-6636 ( mobile )
terry_Oldberg@yahoo.com ( email )
The pursuit of truth is hampered when a student or faculty member believes a falsehood to be a truth., as is case when this individual believes a data set has a probability density function under the condition that the axiom of probability theory called "unit measure" is falsified by the argument made by a model of a physical system but believed to be satisfied by this argument. In the course of my career I have found this belief to be quite common, possibly because few pe read the peer-rbecause few researchers read the peer-reviewed article entitled "Unit Measure Violations In Patterrn Recognition.{ was indoctrinated in this false belief as an undergraduate. I have found this false belief to be common amongst the employees of regulatory agencies where it leads them to believe they can regulate a physical system that cannot be regulated.
Harvard can Wake Up and Stand Up by abandoning its practice of treating a "complex" physical system as if it were a "non-con-complex" physical system in the construction of a model of this system, where a "complex" physical system exhibits one or more "emergent properties, each of wiich is a property of the whole system and not of the separate parts of this sustem and r"eplacing this practice by conformity to the entropy minimax principle as described by the late theoretical physicist Ronald Arlie Christensen in his seven volume treatise on this topic entitled the Entropy Minimax Sourcebook.
The Entropy Minimax Principle solves the ancient, previously unsolved Problem of Induction, where the problem is of how, in a logically permissible way, to select the set of inferences that will be made by a model of a "complex" physical system from a larger set of possibilities. This principle solves the ancient, previously unsolved Problem of Induction.
The entropy minimax principle as described by th late thorretical physicist Ronald Christensen in his seven volume "Entropy Minimax CSourcebook. In doing so, Harvard would conform to the Principles of Reasoning that Christensen calls the "Entropy Minimax" in the title of his seven volume treatise on this topic titled th "Entropyy Minimax Sourcebook" (C(irca 1985). Through his application of this principle, Christensen solves the ancient, previously unsolved Problem of Induction, where the problem is of how, in a logically permisssible way to select the set of inferences that will be made modell from a larger set of possibilities.
Terry Oldberg
Engineer, Scientist, Public Policy Researcher
Early adopter of the Entropy Minimax Principle
Los Altos Hills, California, SA
`1-650-526-6636
Re: The United States (or Harvard University) is an example of a complex physical system
A "complex" physical system differs from a "non-complex" physical system in exhibiting one or more "emergent properties," each of which is a property of the whole system and not of the separate prarts of this system.
A bicycle plus its rider is an example of such a system. When it is underway, a bicycle and its rider exhibits the property of "stability." Take away this property and a bicycle crashes.
By analogy, the United States and Harvard University once had the property of stability but collectivists have taken this property away. Thus, the United States and Harvard University are both in the process of crashing. To prevent this crash we must restore the stability that these institutions once had. This can be accomplished by replacing collectivism by free market capitalism.
Terry Oldberg
Engineer/Scientist/Public Policy Researcher
Los Altos Hills, California, USA
`-650-518-6636
terry_oldberg@yahoo.com