In the last post we discussed how although certain mathematical operations can be performed, it does not mean that they are actually representative of reality, i.e., that they’re “ontological”. If you perform a mathematical operation which has no actual physical meaning, and then extrapolate from that position, then you’ve created a false underlying ontology which means that everything which is implied or which comes out of that calculation, is false. Such is the case with the climate alarm radiative greenhouse effect.
– Mathematical Freedom –
Mathematics frees us from conscious subjectivity and arbitrariness, from our emotions, experiences, senses, desires, will and mystical intuitions. These have no bearing on objective mathematics. Only mathematics is rigorous, systematic and analytic. Everything else is belief, delusion, opinion, conjecture and interpretation.
Mathematics is the ultimate egalitarian, equal opportunities, meritocratic subject. It doesn’t care about how much money you had when you were growing up, who your parents were, where you lived, what your social status was, how popular and fashionable you were. All that matters is how good you are at it, how talented, how meritorious. Mathematics is the supreme hammer that smashes to smithereens all bullshit and charlatanry. You can bullshit a bullshitter. You can’t bullshit a mathematician. No blowhard can succeed in mathematics. You have to put up or shut up. You have to walk the walk, and not … like so many … just talk the talk.
It has been said that the reason the world doesn’t hear much about Gödel’s Incompleteness theorems is that they concern Truth, and who cares about THAT? That’s exactly right. Humanity is an inherently mendacious species. It has no regard for Truth. Human consciousness is dishonest, self-serving, egotistic and delusional. To get to the Truth, we have to overcome ourselves, our own conscious self-deceit. That’s why the Truth is the hardest thing of all.
People say that the world doesn’t make sense, but of course it does … exactly because it’s a mathematical world, hence has an analytic answer. The world that doesn’t make sense is the emotional, irrational, sensory, wilful, mystical interpretive world of consciousness. It’s consciousness that hides the Truth from us. Consciousness has its own priority – success in life: power, attractiveness, popularity, wealth, glory, the sexiest partners, the best jobs and careers, the best homes, best possessions, fastest cars, biggest yachts, most money, most luxurious lifestyle, highest status, most adulation, and so on. Absolutely none of that has any connection with Truth, yet it’s what drives each and every one of us on a daily basis.
Our vanity is far more important to us than philosophy and mathematics. We prioritised worldly success and power over unworldly Truth. That’s the history of the human race in nutshell. We have a Will to Power, not a Will to Truth. Power and Truth align only at the Omega Point.
What could be more problematic for the human race? – the gate to the Truth, to knowledge of ultimate reality, opens to you only if you overcome your own consciousness, your own vanity, selfishness and egotism. You have to abandon your Ego Trip if you want to enjoy the trip to gnosis, enlightenment, the Truth … to divinity.
The Gods aren’t the most arrogant of beings. They’re the opposite … the most humble. They’re humble in the company of knowledge and Truth, and that’s what allows them to learn and grow. Narcissists learn only what’s useful to them. If mathematical Truth delivers no advantage to a narcissistic psychopath, he will have zero interest in it. That’s true for the whole of humanity. The only human beings who like mathematics are those who are socially empowered by it (by getting high-paying tech jobs thanks to it), or those who love the Truth, and know that there’s no Truth other than mathematical Truth.
“The truth will set you free” = “Math will set you free”.
The Truth is Logos. It’s all about reason and intellect. Humanity’s tragedy is that it has always considered the Truth to be Mythos, i.e. concerned with “holy” books, religious revelations, prophets, popes, priests, gurus, messiahs, faith, the senses, the emotions, mystical intuitions, personal epiphanies and subjective experiences. Absolutely none of that will you help you, and you’re living in a fantasy world if you think it will. Sadly, humans are the experts in believing their own propaganda, and subscribing to their own fantasies.
A problem arises when we try to do physics and we have to determine, say, the boundary conditions required for solving the Fourier Transform relevant to some heat flow problem. You can have insulated boundary conditions, constant-value boundary conditions, boundary conditions as a function of time, or boundary conditions set at a slope…which could also be a function of time.
In computing the numerical solution for the Fourier Transform which describes heat flow, you might have a solution that looks like this:
or, like this:
depending on if you need to use determined boundary conditions or slope boundary conditions, etc.
What the heck is the relevance of these mathematical considerations? The relevance is that the solutions using different boundary conditions lead to different results and different behaviors of the solution, and these can be politicized, can be emotional, can depend on ideology, can be personal, can be sophized about, can get you money, can compromise your career, and can still suffer from the problem of possibly being founded on a false ontology.
Recall this diagram of the climate alarmist radiative greenhouse effect:
The climate alarmist says that the boundary conditions for the heat flow at each layer are such that the energy from each layer adds heat to each layer adjacent to it, irrespective of consideration for the direction of heat flow. They want this boundary condition because it serves their political agenda of their wish to restrict energy, food, and basic resources to poor people and poor countries. These environmentalist climate alarmists pretend that environmentalism is a “social justice issue”, but then they turn around and say that, ‘for the good of the environment’, resources must be taken away and kept away from poor people and poor countries:
- “To feed a starving child is to exacerbate the world population problem.” – Lamont Cole, environmentalist and author
- “We can’t let other countries have the same number of cars, the amount of industrialization, we have in the US. We have to stop these Third World countries right where they are.” Michael Oppenheimer, ‘Environmental Defense Fund’
- “Global Sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control.” Professor Maurice King
- “Complex technology of any sort is an assault on human dignity. It would be little short of disastrous for us to discover a source of clean, cheap, abundant energy…” Amory Lovins, ‘Rocky Mountain Institute’
- “The prospect of cheap fusion energy is the worst thing that could happen to the planet.” Jeremy Rifkin, ‘Greenhouse Crisis Foundation’
- “The big threat to the planet is people: there are too many, doing too well economically…” Sir James Lovelock, BBC Interview
- “Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs.” John Davis, editor of ‘Earth First! Journal’
So much for environmentalism being about socialism, social justice, and distribution of wealth to the poor and needy! These people are outright psychopaths and mass murderers! They are sick, Satanic, demented, damaged people. They actually need our help…our help to become human again. They’re like Anakin Skywalkers who’ve gone too far out of touch with their humanity, reality, and with their soul. We should really pity these poor people, and find a way to help them out of their disgusting, revolting position they’ve happened to find themselves in. The poor things!
These people are certainly sick enough to try to reinterpret mathematics and Fourier Transform solution boundary conditions in the way that their disgusting political ideology requires.
And let this be the last time anyone think that environmentalism is about “social justice”!
Actually, before I move on, just take a look at this idiot’s quote from above:
“The prospect of cheap fusion energy is the worst thing that could happen to the planet.” – Jeremy Rifkin, ‘Greenhouse Crisis Foundation’.
He’s from the “Greenhouse Crisis Foundation”? WTF!? The “greenhouse crisis” is supposed to be due to use of hydrocarbon fuel emitting carbon dioxide. The development of fusion energy would be the solution to that crisis!! So what does this duplicitous position actually indicate? It indicates that he’s actually a completely bloodthirsty psychopath who wishes for poor people to die and for poor countries to not develop, and that man should stop his evolution and development of mind altogether. Given the name of his organization, obviously he’s already all for preventing poor people and poor countries from having access to cheap hydrocarbon fuels, but then he goes further than that and says that humanity as a whole shouldn’t have access to cheap clean fusion energy either which would allow us to go beyond hydrocarbon fuels!
STOP thinking that environmentalism is about social justice and socialism and distribution of wealth! This is the most moronic, cognitively dissonant, inverted thought one can have today. Environmentalism is pure unadulterated nihilism, denial of the existence of mind and of man’s purpose and meaning. It is, as has been demonstrated by these fellows’ own words, psychopathic and regressive. Their words should sound blood-curdling to any rational non-psychopathic non-nihilistic person. If they don’t, you are one of the ones that needs help. Please, go see an Ontological Mathematician and figure out how to be a better human being, before you hurt and murder any more people.
A rationalist driven by a political ideology of nothing other than the drive to understand reality will look at the ontology of the argument for the above diagram, and will come to entirely different boundary conditions required for its solution. They will attempt to determine the math and boundary conditions which are truly ontological, rather than like psychopaths premeditatedly try to determine ones which justify them murdering lots of people.
First, let’s follow the murdering climate alarmist logic of the diagram and generalize it to explore its limits and implications. The reasoning is that if you have a radiatively opaque upper layer above a bottom surface layer where heat is generated, then the upper layer will split the surface radiation by two. Hence, only half of the energy can get out from the bottom layer through the upper layer. This requires the bottom later to double in flux output so that the upper layer then receives a doubled radiation, splits it in two, and thus on the exterior side of the outer layer all the energy is emitted that was supposed to originally be emitted from the bottom layer.
One can generalize this by simply adding more layers. The same mechanics must then be applied to every layer which required the doubling in radiation flux output for each layer below it, and thus the solution for the bottom-layer flux is
Fbottom = 2n*F0.
Thus, if you have 10 layers of glass and the noon-time solar input through the glass is 1000 W/m², the bottom later temperature would be, via the Stefan-Boltzmann Law which converts radiative flux into temperature,
Tn=10 = [210*1000 W/m² / 5.68e-8]1/4 = 2061 K = 1788 C = 3251 F.
Lava, molten rock, has a temperature of only 900 C or 1652 F. Imagine that if all one needed to do to melt rocks was to place it under a few layers of glass!
Now something about this just doesn’t seem right. Call it intuition, experience, general theoretical knowledge of thermodynamics, or whatever. As I asked in the last post, why do we use magnifying glasses and parabolic focusing mirrors to concentrate Sunlight and make it more powerful, rather than simply use much-easier-to-manufacture flat panes of glass?
And the other thing on the theory-side of things is the boundary condition which required each pane of glass to heat up the layers underneath it independent of what the direction of heat flow should be, i.e., only from hot to cold; the climate alarmist boundary condition required that cold sends heat to hot.
What the rationalist will postulate is that the layers of glass actually form insulation, and insulation in the mathematics of Fourier Transform heat flow requires slope-boundary conditions with the derivative set equal to zero. Insulation, in Fourier Transform heat flow mechanics, indicates boundary conditions for each layer such that the spacetime gradient of temperature is equal to zero. Stacked panes of glass are commonly understood to create insulation, not heat amplification!
With these boundary conditions, heat never flows from cold to hot, and simple panes of glass don’t concentrate solar radiation like rounded magnifying glasses or parabolic mirrors – the latter two operate on the same principle, while that principle doesn’t exist for planes. These boundary conditions also don’t allow for a concept of a “radiative greenhouse effect which man is increasing in strength” which the murderous environmentalists require for the basis of their cognitively dissonant “social justice environmentalism” and “climate alarmism” which is actually just a deceitful cover label for their underlying wish to kill people for whatever arbitrary reason they can invent and convince you of.
Always remember: Whenever you are dealing with an environmentalist, keep in mind that you are dealing with a very sick, very damaged person, who has such extreme cognitive dissonance that they believe ‘social justice’, ‘socialism’, and ‘distribution of wealth’ equates to making poor people even poorer, and then killing them. These are people who are spiritually damaged, and you must be very careful around them such as to not be infected by their sophistry and degenerate ways of thinking.
It is not that empiricism is completely unnecessary in Ontological Mathematics, it is just that empiricism should be in the service of Ontological Mathematics. Even still, we are still left with the problem of psychopaths who will do their best to ignore and cover up empirical refutation of the basis of their murderous beliefs.
In any case, real greenhouses demonstrate that their internal temperature does not amplify according to the psychopathic environmentalist method, and Joseph Fourier himself worked with a friend who had a device with multiple layers which also showed that the temperature did not amplify according to that blood-desiring environmentalist method.
Stacked panes of glass form insulation. They are not a heat amplifier. The ontological boundary condition, of insulation, for the heat flow Fourier Transform for those panes results in their temperature only being equal to that of the radiant forcing into to them from the active source – Sunlight from the Sun. This is what real greenhouses demonstrate and it is what Fourier found as well, 200 years ago.
The days of climate alarmist idiocy are numbered.