FRACTAL ECONOMICS

  The Crux of the Climate Debate: Distinguishing Between Thermoelectric and Raman Detected Greenhouse Gases Settling The Climate Woo With Quantum-BasedRaman Spectroscop y Published on April 2, 2019 Written by Blair Macdonald Premise, premise, conclusion: this is the foundation of deductive reasoning and that of the scientific method. If one of your premises collapses, so too should your theory – and with it sometimes your paradigm. With greenhouse theory, it seems to me we focus on and argue over its conclusions and its effects, and not enough or at all on its premises. By ‘we’ I mean all of science, both sides of the great debate. The proponents of greenhouse theory strongly claim that at its foundations, the science is settled and need not, based on principles of fundamental physics,  be questioned. Greenhouse theory, at its foundations, is premised on a special group of trace gases, of which carbon dioxide (CO2) is only 0.042%, that are the only gases to absorb an...

By Fractals, There is No Climate and No Macro Economy I haven't written in some time, and to be honest, I haven't been thinking about fractals for some time. I often wonder if I've lost my superpowers, my creative thought. I can worry about this; there was a time I would fill my ideas book up in quick time, whereas now I only go to it every now and then. A fractal view of it would say that maybe I have completed a set of knowledge; that I have completed a shape. Maybe. Last night I was thinking about laws and what a law is, and it quickly came to me that a law is a fractal attractor. It is a shape. I don't know if anyone has put it that way before. When I search what a law is, and I'm doing so to check that my reasoning is on track, I found that my intuition holds. A law is the what; a theory is the why. Anyway, I was thinking of gaseous CO2 coming out of liquid solution, water, and its relationship to heat, and I thought that it works for a fizzy drink and for a s...