Read Honest & Challenged News - Expose Government Corruption & Verify Who Honest!

Now you can challenge fake news & verify who is honest. Our truthful news platform not only exposes government corruption but also ensures to make you acquainted only with honest news. Here you can also read authentic news and articles on science and technology based on genuine sources instead of fake ones. There might be many news sources who just gather information from unverified sources and present you with inaccurate reports. However, we take special care of each and everything, because for us, readers are very important. From collecting information to its verification, we take every step very carefully. Our news platform is dependable & we won’t let you down in any way whatsoever.

Claims of Danger : NOT Enforcing Strict Liability On Corporations Always Reduces Society's Wealth

Why NOT Enforcing Strict Liability On Corporations, Politicians and Ourselves Always Reduces Time Alive & Total of Profitable Exchanges!

by Dan Alter n1cl-1

Preface

After a question posed by Ronald Coase in "The Problem of Social Cost" Journal of Law & Economics, October 1960, it became politically acceptable to relax Strict Liability for corporations, and by extension anyone else who could bribe politicians to relax Liability for them. It was a "theoretical" question, "Could society relax Strict Liability for the damage you do others, i.e. No Liability, and not reduce the Quantity of Goods & Services Exchanged(Q G&S XCed)?

Surprisingly, using the standard measure economists use to total the Q 0f G&S XCed, Coase found no difference as long as you made someone pay for the damage. i.e. The person damaged paid the damager not to hurt them again = the legal definition of extortion = crime does not have a cost to society. It was a controversial result.

This result was loved by corporations and politicians, they could change the rules any which way they wanted to. I read Coase's Theorem in December 1975. It took me eight years to prove how he had committed a fundamental analytical error. He had unconsciously used the Fallacy of Non Attribution = Instead of using a real good in his model as his measure, he assigned an imaginary money price to the goods exchanged in his examples.

Walras Law which economists use to total the Quantity of Goods & Services Exchanged demands one of the real goods in the chain of exchange be used as your money for totaling quantity.

What Coase had actually enabled me to prove was that No Liability always reduces the Q 0f G&S XCed, the Quantity of Time Alive. Coase received the 1991 Nobel in economics for Coases's Theorem.



Coase's basic analytical error is obvious once pointed out. It is called the fallacy of Non-Attribution. He did not use one of the goods in his chain of exchange described in his theoretical model as his basis of comparison = his money. In order to tie economic analysis to objective(we can all verify it with our senses)reality, economists use Walras Law, it is the fundamental mathematical theory used by economists to sum up the Quantity of Goods & Services Exchanged(Q 0f G&S XCed). It explicitly requires that a real good in the chain of exchanges being described, be used as a common denominator measure = numeraire = money. All real scientists require that our measures be objective for all of our predictions, not imaginary. Coase assigned imaginary money prices to the cattle and wheat used in his example.

---

Posted by dan1 Wednesday, June 29, 2005 (15:00:00)

Read More... (11.11 KiB) | 4 comments |    | Claims of Danger | Score: 4.57

Einstein's Missed Implication: His TEST Shows Relativity's Reference Frame To Us

2-10-17 This article explains the background leading to my conclusions which is necessary but long, so here is the summary version. Once you read this short version of his TEST, what follows will be much clearer.

Train car with two lights, one at each end with a detecting screen in the exact middle goes down the track past an observer on the embankment. When the detecting screen is exactly opposite the observer the two lights flash simultaneously.

1. Since speed of c is independent of speed of emitting object, the light flashes from each end of moving car arrive at observer simultaneously;

2. but at the 'detecting screen' the light from rear of car takes a little longer to hit rear side of the screen as the car has moved a bit in the time c takes to reach the screen;

3. conversely, the light flash from front of car arrives sooner at front of the detecting screen as the car has moved a bit towards the front flash in the time c takes to arrive at the screen;

4. ergo, the time difference between the arrival times of the simultaneous flashes on the front and back of the screen can be used to deduce how fast the car is moving down the track with respect to c, the speed of light.

Notice, this is completely independent of the observer on the bank.
Ergo, a self-contained measuring device can be constructed for
an object like a satellite or spaceship or whatever that measures its speed as a percentage of c and its vector in real time

---

12-16-12 I added "To Us" to the title to reinforce that it is from where we sit that we create a picture of how the universe works. A scientific theory begins and ends with its creators = Us. I have not done any other changes below except for minor editing. There are philosophical and epistemological implications that are better served with a separate article.

11-3-09 It is from Einstein's second postulate that relativity is derived; i.e. it is well confirmed by observation that 'c', the speed of light, is a constant with respect to all observers. Ergo, this 'constant' gives a base reference frame to measure our location and speed with respect to anywhere else in our universe. All we need to know is how to measure our speed with respect to 'c'.

At the bottom of this article I show why Einstein's conclusion from his lovely thought TEST was mistaken and that this implies how we can measure our local speed with respect to 'c' the speed of light.

Posted by admin Monday, November 20, 2006 (07:52:28)

Read More... (28.13 KiB) | comments? |    | Score: 4.68

07-27-11 last add: Equation log: derive base equation describing moebius strip

Some self-imposed rules: This is ad hoc, by the seat of my pants. Date at front of Title is date of last change made. 1. I will add a dated entry, leave it here on top, edit it for awhile, and then put an ending date on it. After that, any changes will be dated except for spelling or punctuation errors. 01-07-2007

These entries outline the path to describing a Moebius mathematically. Once the surface area eq was found, the next relationship is determining the width between the two sides of a M surface as some ratio involving distance between sides and circumference using h-bar.

Posted by dan1 Tuesday, November 22, 2005 (03:44:52)

Read More... (64.00 KiB) | comments? |    | Score: 4.5