I am Martin Gibson, dba UniServEnt, a logical and technically minded individual with an interest in raising and investing in human capital, especially the non-market type which represents 70 to 75% of the total value. All capital is human. The portion I am talking about does not show up with the other 30 to 25% on the national and global balance sheets until one or more of us comes up with an idea or initiative that adds market value to that individual or group effort, and non-market value to all of us if the idea or initiative works out. If the idea or initiative fails in its objective, private MV may suffer, but the public NMV is still generally raised with the wisdom gained by that failure—provided the public and private parties recognize, understand, and do not keep repeating that mistake—and ideally find the expertise to apply the failed technology in a new direction.
Though a few appear to be born with it, expertise comes to most of us over time in learning the skills to deal with life’s experience. Those skills may be individual and/or social, physical and/or mental, organizational and/or solitary, intellectual and/or intuitive, creative and/or routine, but expertise in all areas of life is rarely—perhaps never—found in one individual or group. That is apparently why there is more than one of us; it takes a community to develop the skills that each and every individual needs to successfully live in the world.
Everyone is an expert in being themself. The vast majority of us is an expert in operating a smartphone, if only to turn it on and interact with friends; perhaps a plurality, in mastering a range of productive social and business apps; a significant minority, in understanding how to create and program an app; a very small number, in designing and manufacturing a smartphone; and a seminal, very few, with the innovative and entrepreneurial vision of a Steve Jobs to conceive of and, with an understanding of ready market acceptance, bring to fruition the device in the first place. Without an individualized mix of these levels of expertise, none of this would have happened on the scale that now exists.
No one is an expert in everything, and while there are individuals for whom some skills appear to come easily, many experts would take issue with the notion of such perceived ease based on their years of practice behind the scenes prior to any public recognition. The 10,000 hour timeline from novice to expert of Malcolm Gladwell’s Outliers: The Story of Success, no doubt has some validity. I remain a novice in most things, but I have spent the proverbial 10,000 hours pursuing a few of these, though the skill levels achieved remain to be seen.
As indicated on this website at UniServEnt.org, I have grouped these pursuits into three topics of inquiry motivated by a goal of understanding the Essential Principles of Life, the Appearance of Physical Phenomena, and the Quality of Political Economy, all of which represents an investment in my personal non-market valued human capital, and one pursuit of general work experience under Change as Risk and Opportunity, which is part of my market valued human capital, only some of which has been properly compensated over the years.
If you are reading or listening to this, it may well be due to the efforts of a good friend and college roommate, Xxxxxx Xxxx. He has counseled me with the wisdom of sticking to topic 2 below in any website presentation of the subject material, and he may well be right. For me, however, the following concepts are inextricably linked, and while I may need to separate them at some point in the interests of clarity based on the nature of any viewership response going forward, it is my present opinion that the relationship of these links bears not only preserving, but emphasizing, for reasons I will detail after the statements.
- Pursuing an understanding of the Essential Principles of Life started at or even before birth, and except for minor lapses continues to this day, always with an attempt to elevate logic and reason over visceral reaction in confronting life’s problem and to apply intuitive understanding and wisdom over satisfying pique in formulating a response. This pursuit has given me the philosophical perspective of what some call a neutral monism, which means there is essentially only One Thing that motivates everything we experience, and that Thing is Life Itself as the Conscious Power to focus on the variety and range of events within the world we inhabit, looking to avoid the risks while searching to find the opportunities. Such monism does not distinguish between a scientific and a religious perspective, and it certainly does not require a catechism of any type to navigate that world, provided such monism is essentially moral. That morality is motivated by an attitude of harmlessness toward all forms of life, detachment from identification or alignment either with or against any specific form of perceived superiority, and a conscious exercise of power and control over one’s own harmful impulses and attachment to subjects or objects of desire. We might call this the power of the soul, regardless of one’s beliefs concerning the persistence of that soul with physical death; the point of the soul is less metaphysical than moral, to operate with equanimity, without undue concerns for one’s individual physical position or existence, yet without any illusory need for self-abnegation.
- Pursuing an understanding of the Appearance of Physical Phenomena started not long after the attempt to understand that I, my family, and other people were alive, by asking, in addition to the essential ‘who’ is alive, the additional questions of ‘what, where, when, why, and how’. I have always been curious, so these questions always came easily, while answers where generally never satisfying unless I could ‘visualize’ them in some manner. A desire for physical understanding in a scientific cosmology based on this natural questioning was curtailed for a time in early college by answers involving quantum ambiguity unrelatable to answers about gravity, all with the implication of irresolvability. I segued to the study of economics and philosophy as a result and didn’t approach the deeper questions of physical cosmology again until my late forties, after spending three decades in cosmology of the metaphysical sort. For the technically minded, the studies begun at that time evolved through a classical complex wave mechanical approach to eventually model the quantization of fundamental particles as an emergent, discrete rotating torsional wave phenomena of an inertial spacetime gauged with a cuboctahedral lattice potential, driven by the Hubble expansion. A paper is linked here as A Condensed Matter Model of Fundamental Particle Genesis as a Function of an Accelerating Cosmic Spacetime Expansion. This model has been instrumental to me in recognizing the technological, economic, and ecological potential of low energy nuclear reaction or cold fusion from the electrolysis of a deuterated palladium lattice and is shown for that reason in the video, Low Energy Nuclear Reaction, a Geometric Theoretical Model . Without this model, it is doubtful if the technical features of this video would have occurred to me.
- Pursuing an understanding of the Quality of Political Economy through the wise use of technology has long been an interest, which over the past 15 years has included an analysis of the structural changes of the past 50 years in the sector accounts of the US Fed and World Bank data, in particular in to how laisse faire policy has effected the overall distribution of capital and consumption spending. With this came recognition of the significance of the golden ratio, f, as an optimization factor in the valuation of the ratio of these expenditures, and of late, the operation of weighted ergodicity in a comparison of 1989 to 2019 US Fed domestic household stocks and flows. Along with the hope for an implementation of LENR, these critiques suggest the need and eventual realization of an electronic fiat currency based on the thinking of UBI and MMT and conceivably a public block chain, with further study for an implementation of the optimization factor as a policy guideline for the benefit of private and public policy initiatives.
- Pursuing an understanding of Change as Risk & Opportunity has come naturally, once again from early on, within an environment of existential work and essential play in making life choices and as indicative of the individual and collective need for developing the skills for optimizing such choices. This has led me through a variety of experience driven by a desire for both private and public initiative. Over the years I have been involved in, 1) the residential and commercial, engineering and architectural, design, development, real estate, and construction business, 2) creative writing of prose, lyrics and music, of database software and application, and of technical analysis, 3) and for the last 30 years, independent claims adjustment and consultant review in the catastrophe insurance business in the eastern United States. The episodic nature of this latter career has given much time for the inquiries indicated by the first three of these topics.
As stated at the top of this list, an in-depth understanding of any of these topics relies at least in some small part on a studied knowledge of the other three. Essential Principles, whether in the form of a scientific, philosophical, and/or religious set of axiomatic laws, necessarily concerns itself with a source of supreme power, physical or spiritual, either one of which must be a moral power if it is to be logically consistent. For much of the current modeling of the scientific world, that source is the singular point event from which all space, time, and the events within it continue to emerge, an event that we call the Big Bang. That singular source of potential is essential to everything we participate in and thereby to human consciousness, so it is self-contradictory to talk about the nature of physical phenomena without acknowledging that the essential principles that have resulted in the reality of the observed cosmos are also responsible for the reality of we humans that do the observing. It is correct to call such essential principles the Truth. If those principles involve the participation of principals, then it is correct to expect those principals to be moral, to observe the truth in their dealings with one another.
Big Bang cosmology is essentially a deistic concept, pushing any notion of intelligence or intentionality into the background and so out of the discussion until the epiphenomenal introduction of human consciousness gives that consciousness the power to inquire into and deign to understand the nature of that very cosmos that created its existence. While there is nothing logically or morally wrong with this as a scientific approach, it tends to ignore any evidence—including logic—that such deigning with its expression of intelligence and intentionality has been baked into the cake from the beginning. Yet sentience has been present from the level of cell and virus development onward, cellular and viral development that requires a condensed matter environment warmed or cooled to a habitable range by either planetary core or solar surface heat, and that requires such solar and planetary origins from either gravitational aggregation once a big bang nucleosynthesis has condensed to gas or the operation of a yet unrecognized pre-gravitational, galactic inertial source, perhaps dark matter. The modeling of this website acknowledges a potential for the latter. It also acknowledges the fact that all scientific investigation is essentially a search for intelligent and intentional order amidst the apparent chaos of nature, guided in part if not in whole according to the intelligence and intention and/or chaos encountered in the mind of the relevant investigator.
I would imagine that not too many people consider these facts and the deductive implications, given a preoccupation with the current crises of traditional faith and scientific understanding brought on by perceived existential planetary threats, due at least in part to the successes of global technological development. Looking instead to the solace of the future, many opt for a simple creation myth measured in millennia, passively waiting for divine intervention to rectify the condition, while others led by the views of the scientific establishment opt for a map of ill-defined scale and legend to find their way out of a maze replete with ad hoc and contradictory elements and worm hole dead ends in search of a unified understanding, that if properly addressed with unifying principles would solve the problem. Meanwhile, in the realm of political economy, those coveting the public purse live in the present, content to watch and stir up the axiomatic conflict of science versus religion for political and personal gain … when in fact the conflict of axioms is made up.
The effect of the current ad hoc modeling of science is more than simply cultural. It has hampered the development of real and significant technological innovation in the production of safe, inexpensive, and sustainable energy for over 30 years, while we have watched the environment degrade. If the essential principles of logical, moral consistency were to be applied to the study of physical phenomena, the problems of political economy could be solved through an enlightened, ethical distribution of private and public risk & opportunity, all without the need for redistribution of anyone else’s private property, real or financial. Hence the need for addressing the four topics of the website as indicated in this discussion.
The particle-as-wave model of the work presented on this site allows, among other things, a theoretical understanding of LENR and offers a path to innovative development of the technology. It also runs the likelihood of being incredibly disruptive of the economic and social status quo. This leaves those of us with some self-directed understanding of technological change and its social ramifications as well as some level of expertise in the assumption and management of risk and opportunity in the interplay of the private and public sectors, the responsibility of trying to cajole others on the cusp of a similar understanding out of the torpor brought on by COVID and private retirement and into a necessary public discussion of the nature of the social dislocations and benefits this technology is likely to bring—for the benefit of our grandchildren and everyone else that cares about the spiritual and physical health of humanity and the only planet that, for now at least and for the foreseeable future, is likely to be our home.