Man, I wish I had a “dream job” of working for a highly-profitable company so I can have a fat bank account–and the reason why is so that when the day comes for me to retire I’ll be able to use the money I have in that fat bank account to fund my own research in quanta (CMA) and consequential system neutralization.
That’s the reason for the existence of Hexagon Lavish®. For now, it’s a website in which I utilize to show [and prove] to the world my capabilities in #unorthodox research. I’m not even certain in regards to the evolution of Hexagon Lavish®. What the world will look like in 2018, I have no idea. I subscribe to the “pinball model” of history and finance. If I wanted to know what the world will look like tomorrow then it’s going to look like it does today. Try modeling the motion of the pinball. You can use the same principle until it hits a bumper at which point it’s going to fly off in some random direction. As time passes the odds of something happening that causes the straight-line approximation to fail increases until it hits one. Folks will be able to deal with this sort of system using Lypanov exponents and time-scales. So, the time-scale for ‘history hitting a bumper’ is roughly two-to-three years.
Also, it matters when you hit the bumper as well. For example, as of right now, there really isn’t all that much of a point in talking about financial regulation because all of the big decisions have already been made over two years ago and no one wants to revisit them and try to undo the deals that were being made then.
Let’s get economical, shall we?
I mean, how exactly would you model the financial situation properly?
I’ll hurl multiple-scale analysis into the picture.
What happens with complex dynamical systems is that you often have things happening at vastly different time-scales, so what you do is calculate a local equilibrium at one time-scale and then using that as your order zero scenario to do perturbation analysis at a different scale.
In regards to stars, you have things happening on hydrodynamic scales (i.e., seconds) and nuclear time-scales [millions of years] and then you’ll separate those two problems. Bear in mind, that this can happen a lot in finance. The time-scale for stock price equilibrium is seconds. The time-scale for macroeconomic impact is months. The time-scale for institutional change can be years or sometimes decades. You can assume local equilibrium at one level and utilize that as a base case for another level.
I spend a good bit of time everyday focusing on “hard math”; it keeps the brain going. If I were working on something that wasn’t math-intensive there would be nothing to keep my skills from rotting. So even at the level of storing “brain power”, my #unorthodox approach to research provides me with a service more useful than therapy.
arheliean.com 