Number partitions, prime numbers, and Godel Incompleteness approach to partition theorem

Numbers as a formal system: axioms

This is an attempt to prove that there can never be an exact formula for the say nth prime or for that matter the no. of partitions for number n. 

  • 0 and 1 exists
  •  addition is a way of adding 1 to an existing number
  • 0 is the identity element for repeated addtion operation
  • Primes is special type of number, which has exactly one partition where all the constituent numbers are equal(in this case 1).

I might be missing something, but i think next step would be to prove that having an “exact closed form formula” for prime would be the equivalent of proving one of the axioms.

Then from Godel’s incompleteness theorem we have proved our premise.

Advertisements

The Injectable Estradiol and Progesterone Shortages of 2018

MTF Trans Hormonal Therapy

Rev. 6, by Beverly Cosgrove, 9-6-2018

UPDATE 9-9-2018: Perrigo states that there is a limited supply of the 40mg/ml generic available. Perrigo also forecasts that the 20mg/ml generic will become available this month, in September.

UPDATE 6-26: (1) Perrigo has declared, finally, an official shortage, but confirmed that they intend to CONTINUE production of EV in 20mg/ml and 40mg/ml strengths. Their announcement says “Perrigo has estradiol valerate 20 mg and 40 mg vials on back order and the company estimates a release date of August 2018.” (2) A new shortage of Estradiol Cypionate injection in the Los Angeles area has been reported by patients. (3) One patient in Sweden has reported a shortage of Polyestradiol Phosphate (Estradurin).


Once again, shortages of injectable estradiol have appeared.

AMAB trans women who are entirely dependent on injected estradiol are finding that their usual prescription is entirely unavailable. And a sense of panic is…

View original post 1,473 more words

Democracy (& Governance) implemented by the Blockchain– what if??

Political system(Proof of Representation –DLT based tech for voting on policies):

* — Inspired by thoughts/comment on a tweet. ([original commenti](https://twitter.com/softwarmechanic/status/939001090044919810))

*– Verbatim: rmehta: Democracies hacked by lying, autocracies by murder, Any option?       softwaremechanic: We might have to come up with something like Proof of       Representation on top of the Distributed ledger tech(aka crypto currency). Be       assured, there’ll be new hacking methods invented after though.

How to Read:

* — This is partly sci-fi and partly realistic (Only in the very, very long-term).

* — Techies do read the Techie Section at the end.

### Core proposal:

* — A DLT/Crypto coin based policy making system

* — Create a few category of policies

* — A set of proof validation techniques.(For ex: crowd sourced face recognition for   identity).

* — Create a set of proof of xxx implementation for voting in policies

* — Map policy categories to proof validation techniques.
### Some examples:

* — Policies need to be categorized based on their (primary aka first-order) impact .For ex:(geographical for land impacts on say agriculture, natural resources etc. , economical for impacts on economy   like interest rates, inflation rates, real-estate prices, etc.. policies might be SEZs,   tax-policies etc.. )
* — For Geographical policies, proof of representation should depend on land ownership   proofs, and proof of living for the policy’s governing area
* — For economic policies, proof of status of living in that area should be used.
* — For social policies(law and order), it’ll be interesting, proof of living should be   used, but how to figure out proof of living in the community is a tricky question.
### Some cons:

* — Intersection of impacts is common for policies and people will constantly and   consistently try to mis-categorize policies for the sake of   influencing/dominating/take-over attack the voting on the blockchain.

* — For Geographical policies, can be dominated by biggest land owners and so will get some   dominance by them. Will raise echoes of say the Zamindar system.
* — Will probably[^1] take more time for decision-making than representative democracy.
* — Will probably be harder to convince people to adopt it as it’ll be called   discrimination.
### Some pros:

* — Less centralized than the current [representative democracy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_democracy) (ELI5: Some chosen(generally by voting) people represent a bigger group of people and vote for them in bigger policies)
* — Less decentralized than the complete [participatory democracy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participatory_democracy)(ELI5: Everybody votes for every policy)
* — More participation and interestingly, can be more participation at a segregated level.
* — Can help or work better in the globalized economy, by preventing mistakes done by a   central authority to prop-up their currency.

* — Can be extended to include compensation for the Govt. employees and subsidies. =

* — Has potential to reduce bribery, as there’ll be no way to not leave a trail

* — If implemented on a protocol, that implements an identity centric implementation as   opposed to anonymity focus, can be used as a public record without needing [RTIs](http://rti.gov.in/) and such.
### Techie Section: #### Bitcoin-specific:

* — A crypto currency is defined as a string of digital signatures.

* — Distributed Ledgers are basically a big long immutable hash map of strings that appends   a new string every transaction.

* — Verification is by majority consensus.

More generic:

* — A crypto currency is defined as a string of digital signatures.

* — Anyone can add a new string provided they satisfy some xxx condition and consensus.

* — The xxx condition is called proof in case of [bitcoin](https://fermatslibrary.com/s/bitcoin)   it is a complex computation that by design takes a long time, and (by putting   a cap of total mineable coins) is mostly costlier than the electricity it takes.

* — In the case of [Ethereum](https://ethereum.org) it is called proof of stake(or will be).

* — There are non-mineable coins too, which are implemented by a different type of   contract.

* — The contract(of proof of xxx) and the number of coins are defined during the [Initial Coin Offering(ICO)](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/initial-coin-offering-ico.asp) in a whitepaper.

* — One hackable issue is few people gaining majority of the coins and is called majority   attack

* — By definition during the initial problem few people have the majority and can screw   over the rest of the community.

* — Crowd sources trust issues.

Scifi-section:

* — The context was inspired by only DLT based currencies for everything including budget   allotment.

* — It will work well in a futuristic world of energy utopia.(there might be a way around,   but they’re all hard to bootstrap).

* — Can be built on top of [Ethereum](https://ethereum.org/).

Disclaimer, References & Footnotes:

* — Some parts/ideas were inspired by the blog [The Blockchain Man](https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2017/10/10/the-blockchain-man/)

* — Particularly light on the implementation details of the protocol, because it’s not   clear what’s best at the moment
* — Author is NOT a political  scientist. Primarily a technologist, with some orthogonal   degrees and self-learnt knowledge in a few other fields.
* — For the techies who know about the DLT area, you’d notice, some of the PO(X) terms can be   replaced by Proof of Stake, and it is correct. The only reason, the author uses a   different term is the Stakes are complicated and need to be categorized/grouped as such by policy.
[^1] — Probably, because technology, can speed up, if we have enough energy, which we may not.

Block Chain (or crypto currency) based government

## Political system(Proof of Representation –DLT based tech for voting on policies):
* — Inspired by thoughts/comment on a tweet.
([original commenti](https://twitter.com/softwarmechanic/status/939001090044919810))
*– Verbatim: rmehta: Democracies hacked by lying, autocracies by murder, Any option?
softwaremechanic: We might have to come up with something like Proof of
Representation on top of the Distributed ledger tech(aka crypto currency). Be
assured, there’ll be new hacking methods invented after though.
### How to Read:
* — This is partly sci-fi and partly realistic (Only in the very, very long-term, energy utopia(or atleast cheap energy)).
* — Techies do read the Techie Section at the end.

### Core proposal:
* — A DLT/Crypto coin based policy making system
* — Create a few category of policies
* — A set of proof validation techniques.(For ex: crowd sourced face recognition for
identity).
* — Create a set of proof of xxx implementation for voting in policies
* — Map policy categories to proof validation techniques.

### Some examples:
* — Policies need to be categorized based on their (primary aka first-order) impact .For ex:(geographical for land impacts on say agriculture, natural resources etc. , economical for impacts on economy
like interest rates, inflation rates, real-estate prices, etc.. policies might be SEZs,
tax-policies etc.. )

* — For Geographical policies, proof of representation should depend on land ownership
proofs, and proof of living for the policy’s governing area

* — For economic policies, proof of status of living in that area should be used.

* — For social policies(law and order), it’ll be interesting, proof of living should be
used, but how to figure out proof of living in the community is a tricky question.

### Some cons:
* — Intersection of impacts is common for policies and people will constantly and
consistently try to mis-categorize policies for the sake of
influencing/dominating/take-over attack the voting on the blockchain.
* — For Geographical policies, can be dominated by biggest land owners and so will get some
dominance by them. Will raise echoes of say the Zamindar system.

* — Will probably[^1] take more time for decision-making than representative democracy.

* — Will probably be harder to convince people to adopt it as it’ll be called
discrimination.

### Some pros:
* — Less centralized than the current [representative democracy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_democracy) (ELI5: Some chosen(generally by voting) people represent a bigger group of people and vote for them in bigger policies)

* — Less decentralized than the complete [participatory democracy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participatory_democracy)(ELI5: Everybody votes for every policy)

* — More participation and interestingly, can be more participation at a segregated level.

* — Can help or work better in the globalized economy, by preventing mistakes done by a
central authority to prop-up their currency.
* — Can be extended to include compensation for the Govt. employees and subsidies.
* — Has potential to reduce bribery, as there’ll be no way to not leave a trail
* — If implemented on a protocol, that implements an identity centric implementation as
opposed to anonymity focus, can be used as a public record without needing [RTIs](http://rti.gov.in/) and such.

### Techie Section:
#### Bitcoin-specific:
* — A crypto currency is defined as a string of digital signatures.
* — Distributed Ledgers are basically a big long immutable hash map of strings that appends
a new string every transaction.
* — Verification is by majority consensus.

#### More generic:
* — A crypto currency is defined as a string of digital signatures.
* — Anyone can add a new string provided they satisfy some xxx condition and consensus.
* — The xxx condition is called proof in case of [bitcoin](https://fermatslibrary.com/s/bitcoin)
it is a complex computation that by design takes a long time, and (by putting
a cap of total mineable coins) is mostly costlier than the electricity it takes.
* — In the case of [Ethereum](https://ethereum.org) it is called proof of stake(or will be).
* — There are non-mineable coins too, which are implemented by a different type of
contract.
* — The contract(of proof of xxx) and the number of coins are defined during the [Initial Coin Offering(ICO)](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/initial-coin-offering-ico.asp) in a whitepaper.
* — One hackable issue is few people gaining majority of the coins and is called majority
attack
* — By definition during the initial problem few people have the majority and can screw
over the rest of the community.
* — Crowd sources trust issues.

### Scifi-section:

* — The context was inspired by only DLT based currencies for everything including budget
allotment.
* — It will work well in a futuristic world of energy utopia.(there might be a way around,
but they’re all hard to bootstrap).
* — Can be built on top of [Ethereum](https://ethereum.org/).

### Disclaimer, References & Footnotes:
* — Some parts/ideas were inspired by the blog [The Blockchain Man](https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2017/10/10/the-blockchain-man/)
* — Particularly light on the implementation details of the protocol, because it’s not
clear what’s best at the moment

* — Author is NOT a political scientist. Primarily a technologist, with some orthogonal
degrees and self-learnt knowledge in a few other fields.

* — For the techies who know about the DLT area, you’d notice, some of the PO(X) terms can be
replaced by Proof of Stake, and it is correct. The only reason, the author uses a
different term is the Stakes are complicated and need to be categorized/grouped as such by policy.

[^1] — Probably, because technology, can speed up, if we have enough energy, which we may not.

Fungible Code monkey.

Something i wrote a loong looong time ago, inpsired by this scene

I’m not a fungible code monkey
I’m in another category
What you have with you
Is not some script kiddie
Nothing here is faked
I’ve done a mighty time with code,
A few things have been added
And one or two subtractions

I’m not a fungible code monkey
I won’t let you forget it

When you say “Just get it done”
You stab me all the way through
My tender,bleeding hacker heart

And if you happen to be ex-programmer
You could show a little heart and understanding
Instead of ordering and whining and pointing Judas fingers
Like a bunch of cowards in a battlefield
And if you think I’m such a freak
There’s no need to cut me down
And put me in my place
You just may want to look at yourself , oh so smug

I’m not a fungible code monkey
I don’t write foot-long scripts
Don’t pound a server keyboard
I don’t want your five cents
Before this song is over

‘Cause I’m not a fungible code monkey
So please don’t be so rude
I’ll break your fucking mind, sir
And then I’ll python while
I mend my hacker heart
Can’t you just “Lisp”
And “haskell” and “node” and “llvm”
To my tender, hacker heart