|
The Kassien Theorem The detection and application of infinite variables of (X) found within the error margin. The error in a standard economic model can be eliminated by adding infinite variables of (X). The process of adding infinite variables is forever building. Computed decisions cannot be accurately and ethically made for all using one linear equation, but one always adding variables can. The error margin doesn’t show what we should accept, as it’s used today, but instead it is an indicator for where there are stray variables of (X) not yet defined. It’s where the automation to search for continually variables of (X) is. The error margin also holds a new (Y) (when considering Y=X…). The Y is in flux only when the variable (or variables) of (X) are scouted by examining the cause, lead or production of the error margin. It is producing a (Y) that has not yet been fathomed by the original equation either by lead (having the second equation line equal a Y already determinable) or by producing a new Y (having the second equation equal a Y that was not previously determined before the error margin was scouted for the stray variable). When a new variable of (X) is added, a new constraint needs to be added and is derived from the reasoning of why the stray variable of (X) was in the error margin to begin with. This is an equation that is run twice before equaling. The equation must essentially be done twice to be done. The equal sign needed for this modeled equation does not yet exist. Its creation is necessary to understand and solve the equation. All equal signs account for all numbers being defined stationary (3 will always be 3) until infinity. In social sciences the equal sign is usually defined as equalled sometimes, but not always. This equal sign is not substantial or fitting for this modeled equation because in this model and other models built with this theorem as a base. This is because in this equation the equal is true as long as it’s only the defined variables being utilized. Numbers as variables can produce yes no or maybe. Current social science models can produce maybe yes or maybe no, due to the error margin. Inclusion of the error margin in the equation begins the process of adding additional variables of (X) not yet defined (not real or unreal, not yet defined). When a variable produces an error margin, that is one line of the equation. The next line of the equation is adding those variables of (X) with their new variables constraints by determining how they lead to the error margin being the second line. The one that is now able to be solved equal in the moment. True in the moment. Until an error margin is again produced by a variable of (X). Thus starting the process again. A forever fluxing equation that is true, but in flux. Until the equation is ran for the variable of (X) producing the (Y) that consists of an error margin, that variable of (X) is to be logically considered as non-existent. In the second line of the theorem, the original equation is altered (with constraints and impact (addition vs multiplication) to include the reality of the new variable of (X) that was discovered. It’s an equation that is forever in flux. True at all times until it isn’t, but it will correct itself with the human intervention in the addition and full integration of new variables of (X) and the alteration of the overall results of (Y) possible if necessary. Then, once fully solved. The equation is true again. The human handling the model will have to monitor and account for all data available and that means data that comes after the fact. The error margin is an indicator for data that is now coming after the fact. Why there is two lines of the equation with the first equation line being altered and then solved. New Equal Sign New variables exist in the constraint. The variables in the constraint are constant, but its effects or lack of (multiplication vs addition) is dependent on the variable). A constraint with the same variables can equal a different level of output in the solved Y depending on this factor. The equation itself is the mathematical representation of the human thought process. Can be used to final tune AI. AI computing decisions are only made possible with the human application of additional variables of (X) that produce (or lead) to the error margin. This is where human judicial systems and AI systems meet. Each human is a variable of (X). No (X) can be grouped logically, because every human is different. (X) can only be grouped for non animated variables of (X), that are independent from human interference. No grouping if it is considered to be ethical in dealing with societal impacts models or judicial decisions made by the modeled equation. This is on the non negotiable basis that each man is different. No two men are the same, not ever. Similar at times, but not the same. For judicial AI practices this is a new version of an “appeal”. This is necessary for using machine derived decisions ethically. Every appeal will be the person's specific variable of (X) that has been found in examining the error margin in the first line. This will produce a new (Y) result or form a new (Y) result all together. Both the variable of (X) identification and the search for a possibility of a new (Y) (what is done in the second line, where solving for a true equal is now ready to begin) has to be done by man because only man can understand other man. After incarceration or disciplinary action, a new variable of (X) should be introduced. This is to account for the change the human underwent thus changing themselves as a variable of (X) thus producing a new variable of (X) that when applied to the model will result in an error margin first line and repeat of the process of the theorem for it to be equal and true again. The previous variable of (X) should still be included even if it’s determined the human of that variable of (X) has changed and became a new variable of (X). Variables of (X) and their corresponding restraints can only be added, never deleted. Once a variable of (X) is added, it should remain, however, in judicial decisions, the effect of the new variable of (X) should be the only one calculated for. For judicial AI implications this means a need for expanded mental health services, expanded personality screenings, expanded record keep and as many specific metric scenarios as possibly accounted for. In conclusion each man is a variable of (X) in social sciences. It is possible to compute, but it requires an environment where there are infinite variables of (X). An infinite amount of data and constant rewriting of more variables of (X) and their interactions in the model/equation. 
0 Comments
Theres a single guiding thread in history of all that is progress. One who embraces human thought is on course not to be a non-historical person, and the progress of human thought in all its true components works in direct correlation with one being historic, in a spectrum manner.
One could derive that its correlation is more exponential than linear. It could be described in a graph form of the historic person’s persona on the y axis and the human thought on the x. Where Y is dependent on X. The law of progress is exhibited in all historic peoples. One is only old when all of life’s faucets have been experienced and its thoughts regarding have been throughly deduced to nothing by the man experiencing it. This is never achieved as life is infinitely expanding, for even space itself is expanding according to modern science. Therefore, all things known is virtually impossible, as is old age. All man is young by logic.
It is only natural for one to reject fully or accept whole-heartedly--- to indulge oneself in both is to ensure dissonance within oneself and to cause dissonance with one's connection to the "other" (other being mankind/nature).
There's exists a type of drive within man, one that may display itself as competitiveness, however, the competitiveness exists in its purest form. The resulting interaction orchestrated between man and mankind creates an environment infinite for the expansions of thoughts, wills and emotions. Arguably, a true academic environment.
The satisfaction, when one's physical effort is displayed and perceived (for example, art and literature) is received internally, percentage wise, depending on the said, "effort's" overall, moral based impact on all of man, in good standing.
Education did not originate as an invention of man, rather, it was discovered as a pre-existing force--- a force acting in itself and/ or harmoniously within nature (or all things) and the sub-mind of man. This sub-mind alone acts in in harmony with the found force in all things where instruction is granted by the thing to the sub-mind (real things) and with the sub-minds of other man. This latter form physically showcases as the influence of others upon each other. A second action form of the sub-mind is connection between the sub-mind of other man between man followed by a disregard to all things, in sense of its found force--- note this action is not preferred.
A striving exists within the sub-mind of man in direct correlation with this described force. The striving an individual feels towards the physical acts of both teaching and learning, the natural physical apparition of the force of knowledge. This striving serves as the sole measure of said persons current and potential capabilities concerning all things regarding the force of knowledge. Democratic states such as the United States where there exists a dependency upon bureaucratic delegation in both directions, distribution of power begins in the home where the parents are delegated the responsibility of raising compatible citizens for society (a domestic monarch of sorts). The utilization of this, by measurement of emphasis, varies upon region.
The United States formed its great idiosyncratic political climate through a de-emphasizing process, received by Americans, beginning at a young age. It was believed that the public schools harbored the titles and duties of a general public good--- thus making it apparent that the aim of its structure be based upon allegiance to the whole (The United States) instilling support of America's societal systems. Consequently, political matters such as current events, campaigns and public hearings are ignored. A consequence that further results in a set state of political withdrawal in the American people. In 1848, a confident time stamp dating the beginnings of the great de-emphasizing effect, it should be noted that boyhood in the 19th century expanded into the college years.
Fear of partisan separation, believed to be the reasoning for the de-emphasizing of politics, compiled to a generally accepted environment by schoolhouses, and their members, where ignorance is accepted over individuality. Slavery to the slave, will always be slavery--- regardless, of the terms listed.
When the land or material is given to the owners and their slaves freed, oppression will have no choice but to let up the land and/or materials that they cannot manage on their own. Their excess. |
AuthorCarpe Noctem Chief Director, Esosa Osaro Enagbare Archives
November 2025
Categories |
RSS Feed