Nothing but bloody chaos

It's wonderful for the USA and the world that the US has an Afro-American president, but on the other hand it will take at least two generations to undo the damage which is done these days by the new President (bailout, and so on), and which goes far beyond unprecedented for the US stealing, corruption, and mindless waste, which we are encountering right now. The still much worse thing than the economic damage is the creation of a new, huge bureaucracy. Now additional millions of people will be interested in a repulsive, bureaucratic, political system. Those who will oppose it will be labeled by all kind of demeaning descriptions like "not serious", "unrealistic", "trouble maker", etc. etc. and worse. They will be labeled so by bureaucracy and by still many more millions of people impressed by the authority and power--that's a degenerated way in which the survival instinct can work. People go with the might. They use their brain just to justify their atavistic reflex views. And they already smirk at those who would like to preserve human dignity and personal independence.

It's grayish. Will it rain soon? In an hour or so I will walk about two miles, and I would prefer not to get wet.

Recently I play chess on Internet again, on Polish server "Kurnik". I got to the yellow ranking for a short while. First I got exactly 1500, then I won one game more and climbed to 1510, then I won another game, and climbed to... I don't know, than I lost 4 games in a row, in two sittings before I won one game. Oops, I still played more. Anyway, I am now only a miserable (:-) 1459. I won 44, drew 3, and lost 28 games. This positive proportion means only that my opponents had on average lower rating than me. The correlation between the won/lost ratio and ranking is weak. I'd rather have a negative won-lost score but play stronger opposition. Ironically, I had a clean score against my three top opponents, and even now I have a very positive score against my five top rated opponents:

opp r | won-drew-lost
 1720 | 1 0 0
 1699 | 1 0 0
 1668 | 2 3 0
 1651 | 1 0 0
 1615 | 2 1 0

Against the next one I played three blitz games. The first two were 5m, and I had no chance. In the third one, played at the 7m control, I had a good game but I was not good enough to carry it to success. I wish, we played more 7m games but it was already nice for a strong player to play me 3 games. Thus the next two entries, sorted by the rating of my opponents, look like this:

1612 | 0 0 3
1600 | 1 0 1

Next, my score is mixed until the tail of the list, occupied by weak players. Against the last 19 players I won 20 games, drew 2, and lost 5. I have a minimal, negative score against just two of them, 0-0-1.

I should stop lurking on poetic Internet places. On the Polish ones I even post occasionally. That's not a good way to get away, but, say, do I want to all the way to the end.

Knol trivia. I'll restrict my table tnow to 3+ votes (the ones rated only once or twice make a better impression :-).

      knol title     | rat | #vt | views | description
==================================================================
Mathematics -- index | 5 | 6 | 608 | my mthKnolsIndex
M sp univ for 2pt sp | 4 | 5 | 143 | metric spaces
Euclid-Heron             | 4 | 4 | 87 | triangle area, geom
Math -- two def-s        | 4 | 3 | 106 | mth, general
Top sp & cnt maps      | 4 | 3 | 66 | set topology, intro
Top.--the int. oper. | 5 | 3 | 43 | set topology

Ooooph, that's all. Time to go (and get soaked in the rain--I hope not).

my knol stats and trivia update

By now too many of my knols were rated to waste time on a complete table of all rated knols. Most of them were rated only once though. Perhaps I'll waste time :-) on a table of those which were rated at least twice. Surprisingly, most of the scores are 5.0 (the top), With mostly one vote per knol it is a very fragile and not too meaningful statistics. They rarely are. I was pleased that some my non-mathematical knols got a positive response, even if minimal. It's a bit ironic that my most rated knols are mostly the ones which are not meritorious but logistic. My most popular and most rated knol is the index of my mathematical knols. It was rated 5 times (top rating each time, I think--Google irritates me by not providing the score explicitly and perfectly; instead, I see five gold stars; they look like solid gold, but are they?). I need to run now, more later (perhaps).

---

I'm back. I have three knols rated 1 (the lowest score), each time by one reader. One knol is about patents. Why would anyone react so strongly to such an innocent topic. Is this person somehow in the patenting business? Perhaps a patent office employee? Who knows. My another bottom rated knol is about the separation of the marriage notion and law+government. I advocate for years that it is not any business of the governmental and law agencies. A total blindness of law and government w.r. to the notion of marriage would empty many unnecessary problems and complications. And recently I "published" a list WhoWheWha (in progress) of people who had significant contributions to the human life quality. I wrote in a huge font that this knol is IN PROGRESS, that I have covered more or less only a few initial letters, for mathematicians only, plus a few musicians, plus two pure philosophers. Very soon I got rating 1. Most likely because I value philosophers and philosophy very little. I don't know. This is just a table with names, birth and death dates, and speciality--like mathematics, physics, music, biology... I want to add writers, movie directors, painters... Even politicians, including the pathological ones. This table takes awfully lot of time and effort though. At this moment it features 154 entries, 11 of them musical, 2 in philosophy, some in physics, astronomy. Only one in biology, Darwin, but I want to add Mendel.

---

Someone's knol gets in one week more pageviews than all 60++ of my knols over months.

Recently my knols are sprinkled with mostly single ratings, mostly the top one. One knol got rating while it has still only 3 pageviews. Another within hours since being "published"--Total logarithmic series, it has so far zero recorded pageviews, hey!

---

OK, time for the trivia table:

=============================================================
abbr. title - - - - - - |views#|rating|r-#|domain
========================|======|======|===|==================
Mth. -- index - - - - - | -608 |- 5 - | 5 |mth, general
Topology--sh-sh intro - | - 75 |- 4 - | 5 |mth topology
Met sp univ for 2-pt sp | -143 |- 4 - | 4 |mth metric sp
Euclid-Heron tr area - -| - 87 |- 4 - | 4 |mth geometry
Topological spaces ... -| - 66 |- 4 - | 3 |mth topology
The interior operation -| - 43 |- 5 - | 3 |mth topology
knolog - - - - - - - - -| -383 |- 5 - | 2 |general
Mathematical notation - | -263 |- 4.5 | 2 |mth, general
Right triangles - - - - | -160 |- 2.5 | 2 |mth geometry
ideals in Z, and gcd - -| -159 |- 2.5 | 2 |mth num th
Money--economy (part 1) | -147 |- 5 - | 2 |Art of Agr economy
Connected spaces - - - -| -122 |- 5 - | 2 |mth topologia
Mathematics -- two def -| -106 |- 5 - | 2 |mth, general
Top. subbases and bases | - 84 |- 5 - | 2 |mth topology
Kuratowski pairs & real.| - 76 |- 5 - | 2 |mth set theory
Met univ of (R^n d_m)--1| - 64 |- 5 - | 2 |mth Met sp

Factor. in semigroups - | - 56 |- 5 - | 2 |mth algebra
Birkhoff lattice of top | - 54 |- 5 - | 2 |mth topology

Infinitude of primes - 2| - 37 |- 5 - | 2 |mth num th
x^2 = -1 mod p(Euler)+W | - 34 |- 5 - | 2 |mth num th
Aleksandrov 2-pt sp - - | - 29 |- 5 - | 2 |mth topology
Cuts and miscuts - - - -| - 24 |- 5 - | 2 |mth topology
∞-Metrics - - - - - - - | - 22 |- 5 - | 2 |mth Met sp
Topological weight - - -| - 20 |- 5 - | 2 |mth topology
Fermat sequence base b -| - 13 |- 5 - | 2 |mth num th

I'm tired, it's well after midnight, I need to stop this now.

flu

" Will I or will I not get flu?" was not a question--I already had a flu, and the actual question is "how long?" will it keep me in its paws.

Google reformated knol environment, perhaps for the better. But it lost views! Now some of my knols have fewer views listed by google than I have recorded in the table. I wonder if they also lost some of the ratings? Perhaps not, because ratings are not anonymous to Google but attached to the readers. My quibbling is about trivia but I like trivia to be sharp, clean.

emails and mathematical topics

Will I or will I not get flu?

Suddenly I got emails about mathematical topics from two of my friends. I have induced AP to program baroque numbers, which he was doing on and off, now on again. He uses the so-called genetic approach which is like simulated annealing + one additional kind of moves, where from two vertices one gets a new one (it simulates sexual reproduction). He has a better software, better computer, everything better than me but the results. Somehow it's not easy to communicate on long distance, in an irregular way, and it's hard for me to pass to him my experience. Actually, I am rusty these days myself, and will have to start almost from scratch (almost) if at all.

As the luck has it, around the same time I get an email from JBrz, who is excited about abc again. He and JBro have published a nice paper anbout abc years ago, about the integer and polynomial versions. So, they are serious, while I had only an amatourish interest in the topic, and only in the classical, integer version. But JBrz is all about the polynomial version these days. I am a social being, so I will try to join him.

I have a thousand of topics for knols (instead of working on one topic only), and now I have a thousand and two. And so it goes.

Recently I have finished ("published") my first knol about logarithmic and exponential functions, log and exp--a constructive and an axiomatic approaches. It has scored its first six views. The logarithmic knol is partially based on two knols about Integration of monotone functions and The ground level properties of integral.

A table of my rated knols

It looks like two people who know me (? or only one of them knows me?) have sprinkled my mathematical knols with one or two 5s (top score) recently. One of them likes topology. Another number theory. A third one metric spaces? Let me waste some time to make another table:

==========================================================
abbr. title - - - - - - |views#|rating|r-#|domain
========================|======|======|===|===============
∞-Metrics - - - - - - - | - 15 |- 5 - | 1 |mth met sp
Aleksandrov 2-pt space -| - 26 |- 5 - | 1 |mth topology
Birkhoff lattice of t sp| - 49 |- 5 - | 1 |mth topology
Closure operation - - - | - 13 |- 5 - | 1 |mth topology
Congruences - - - - - - | - 14 |- 5 - | 1 |mth num th
Connected spaces - - - -| -108 |- 5 - | 1 |mth topology
Euclid-Heron area of tr.| - 77 |- 3++ | 3 |mth geometry
Factorization in semigps| - 39 |- 5 - | 1 |mth algebra
Fermat sequence base b -| -- 7 |- 5 - | 1 |mth num th
Ideals in Z, & gcd - - -| -124 |- 2.5 | 2 |mth num th
Infnitude of primes - 2 | - 30 |- 5 - | 1 |mth num th
Interior operation - - -| - 39 |- 5 - | 2 |mth topology
Iso-graphs of m m into R| - 27 |- 5 - | 1 |mth met sp
Knolog - - - - - - - - -| -322 |- 5 - | 2 |general
Kolmogorov axiom - - - -| - 37 |- 5 - | 1 |mth topology
Kuratowski pairs & real.| - 60 |- 5 - | 1 |mth set th
Linear orders in top sps| - 72 |- 5 - | 1 |mth topology
Marriage v. law & govern| - 33 |- 1 - | 1 |Art of Agr
Math -- two definitions | - 97 |- 5 - | 1 |mth, general
Mathematical notation - | -239 |- 4.5 | 2 |mth, general
Mathematics -- index - -| -549 |- 5 - | 4 |mth, general
Met sp univ for 2pt sp -| -139 |- 3++ | 3 |mth met sp
Met sp univ for 3 & 4 pt| - 62 |- 5 - | 1 |mth met sp
Met univ of (R^n d_m)-p1| - 49 |- 5 - | 1 |mth met sp
Money--economy (part 1) | -128 |- 5 - | 2 |Art of Agr
Patent Law - - - - - - -| - 26 |- 1 - | 1 |Art of Agr
Piecewise cont functions| - 17 |- 5 - | 1 |mth topology
Prods of bounded primes | - 13 |- 5 - | 1 |mth num th
Seq of coprime integers | - 10 |- 5 - | 1 |mth num th
Topological product of 2| - 20 |- 5 - | 1 |mth topology
Topological subb & bases| - 67 |- 5 - | 1 |mth topology
Topological subspaces - | - 28 |- 5 - | 1 |mth topology
Topological cuts & miscs| - 21 |- 5 - | 1 |mth topology
Topological weight - - -| - 17 |- 5 - | 1 |mth topology
Topology -- sh-sh intro | - 63 |- 4.6 | 3 |mth topology
Top. spaces & cont. maps| - 58 |- 4 - | 3 |mth topology
Triangles - - - - - - - | - 72 |- 5 - | 1 |mth geometry
x^2 = -1 mod p - - - - -| - 25 |- 5 - | 1 |mth num th

Taxes

Can't people understand a simple principle? It's NOT the goal of taxes to reduce the material inequality between people. For this, taxes are a very wrong tool. Taxes are for one and only one reason: to provide government with money, so that it can operate and carry certain projects.

The only institution which means to help poor people should be charity. Government should stay away from charity, it does more wrong than right, but if it has to be involved in helping the poor people then it should have a separate branch, called "Charity", while all other branches would be freed from such a consideration.

Actually, taxes should be lower, virtually non-existent, and charity should be done by people themselves, through a decentralized system.

I've described a way to tax, which would cause society the least harm, in Art of Agreeing, in Painless tax. (I stated this idea publicly a long time ago, and more than once, but never vigorously).