{Corrupt Practices (1)}[11th September 1990]

[Redbook7:280][19900911:1135]{Corrupt Practices (1)}[11th September 1990]

.1135

‘The strict letter of the law must be bent a little for everyone’s sake. Morality and legality must be strained a little bit for business.’

– Kenneth Grob,* disgraced** former Lloyd’s insurance broker, quoted in The Independent Business on Sunday, 19900913:12, ‘Confessions of the Grobfather’, by Tom Bower.

Anyone who has been in business even in a small way knows the opportunities and in some areas the actual conventions, ***and necessities***, of legally corrupt practices: at least as bad in capitalism as in communism, and almost certainly as bad in local government as in business (I have no knowledge of central government**** on this score: what I write now# is based on my own experience and that of my friends).

*[15/09/1921-28/12/1991]

**(but acquitted)

***[Words between *** & *** inserted]

****{But see [[Redbook7:292][1990090914:1619]{Corrupt Practices (2)}[14th September 1990],] 292}

#[ie here, in this journal entry]

[PostedBlogger11for12012022] 

{Economic Cycles}[11th September 1990]

[Redbook7:279][19900911:1036b]{Economic Cycles}[11th September 1990]

(Tue[sday]) 19900911.1036

[continued]

[An article on p21 of The Independent for 10^th September 1990 (Business and City section) headed ‘Policing the Gulf: how we will pay’ ‘Economic Commentary by Bill Robinson’ includes the following: The fact is that the world economy is at an interesting juncture. (“World” is a conveniently brief label for the developed nations whose economic welfare is crucial to our own) The world can be divided into three zones (sometimes called the triad): the US, Japan and Europe. The long economic recovery of the 1980s was led by the US, followed by Japan, with Europe some way behind. (The UK, in this analysis as in so much else, was not fully integrated with Europe – our recovery started even ahead of the US.) This cyclical pattern has proved extraordinarily durable. Some eight years later it is becoming clear that the triad will pass the finishing line of this particular upswing in the same order that they left the starting blocks. The US is now clearly into the downswing, Japan is on the turn, while Europe is just reaching the peak. (The UK is still in the lead, being two years into its downswing.)’]

This is interesting, even if only as an isolated instance: an apparent doubling of the 8-year J[uglar]-cycle* to a potential 16-year cycle ** (or at least an 8 year upswing). Presumably the C year is c1980-1982ff,*** the A~ year c1988-1990-1991ff (I think the economists[’] idea of a crisis may be different from mine:**** however, this does depend upon whether the economic cycles mesh with the overall historical pattern, or imitate them on their own terms – if there is a difference).

The 8-year J[uglar]-cycle was reckoned to have faded away when government began to plan for it. Will we get larger and larger cycles?

*ref VI, [[Redbook6:329-332][19891025:0931b]{Economic Cycles}[25th October 1989]ff,] 329,

[[Redbook6:333][19891026:1125d]{Schumpeter K [, Kondratieff, & Juglar] Cycles}[26th October 1989]&f?,] 333

**See [[Redbook7:320][1990090923:1945]{Economic Cycles (3)}[23rd September 1990],] 320{,

[[Redbook7:291][1990090914:0940b]{Economic Cycles (2)}[14th September 1990],] 291}

***But according to [The] Ind[ependent] Business on Sunday 19900923:11, there were recessions in Britain in 1973-4 and 1979-81 (illustrating in practice the resonance of C and A~?). <900923>

****[See eg [Redbook6:329][19891025:0931c]{Economic Cycles [continued]}[25th October 1989]]

[PostedBlogger11012022]

{Fusion Child*}[11th September 1990]

[Redbook7:278][19900911:1036]{Fusion Child*}[11th September 1990]

(Tue[sday]) 19900911.1036

[A press-cutting from The Independent for 900904:3 inserted here in the ms, headed ‘Fusion scientist tells of huge research costs', by Tom Wilkie, Science Editor, includes the following passages: ‘The European Community will have to spend more than £30bn over the next 50 years on nuclear fusion research before the technology will first produce electricity commercially, a conference in London was told yesterday.... Charles Maisonnier, who heads the fusion research programme at the European Commission, said that the first commercial electricity-producing fusion reactor would not begin operating until 2040 at the earliest.... Construction would not start on a demonstration power-producing reactor until about 2020, he said.’]**

I include this because of the symbolism of fusion being perhaps achieved at around 2048ce, the 2048 year (and possibly 4096 year) C degree, whose principle, of course, is Attraction, and whose quality is Unity.

*{(ref I.[[Redbook1:265A,297A-I;2:1A-1G][19730501:0000][The Wind, the Edge of the Sea, and Fusion Child][To 1st May 1973]] end, & II. [(repeated, ms only)] beginning}

**(The notion of fusion providing cheap, safe power for all has been around for as long as I can remember.)

[The timescale suggested in the article seems at present remarkably accurate, with private companies now beginning to put serious private capital into the development and production of commercial fusion reactors using various methods of containment, and mostly, it would seem, looking at commercial electricity production around 2040. <20211128>]

[PostedBlogger10012022]

{Can I believe my eyes?}[6th September 1990]

[Redbook7:277][19900906:2000]{Can I believe my eyes?}[6th September 1990]

(Thur[sday]) 19900906.2000

‘Dumas’ memoirs of Nerval offer a similar mine of misinformation: in his version, Nerval’s lunacy comes out as an acute case of lovesickness, brought on by the death of Jenny Colon – a complete fabrication, seeing as the actress died more than a year after his initial hospitalisation.’** (sic)

‘Seeing’ what??? – T[imes] L[iterary] S[upplement]??

*{ref [[Redbook7:235][19900825:0048]{Gerard de Nerval}[25th August 1990],] 235}

**( – T[imes] L[iterary] S[upplement] 19900817-23:870 ‘Journeying through the labyrinth’, by [...], Professor of French and Comparative Literature at [...][a U.S.] University)

[PostedBlogger08for09012022]

{Testing Times}[5th September 1990]

[Redbook7:277][19900905:2312c]{Testing Times}[5th September 1990]

.2312

[continued]

What are the remaining stages?*

(1)		Hypothesis – introduction by:	(a) anecdotal evidence
			(b) intuition re structure
(2)		Decide which parts can and which cannot be verified scientifically, eg by prediction and testing of predictions using statistical methods:
	(a)	Metaphysical – cannot be tested, only judged (broadly, the further hemisphere)**
	(b)	Actual – can be tested (the nearer hemisphere)**
(3)		Devise tests of selected significant parts of C[ircles] A[nalysis] and S[ynthesis], eg predicting statistical results and future historical events***
(4)		Perform tests, wait for results
(5)		Assess results, draw conclusion(s).

*[Repeated from end of last previous entry]

**[]

***{See [[Redbook7:289][19900913:2209]{Testing: Identification of Significant Event-Clusters}[13th September 1990],] 289 for one convenient method}

****I’m not sure how the attempt to fit non-C[ircles] A[nalysis] and S[ynthesis] patterns, as an invalidity test, fits in here <900914>

[PostedBlogger08012022]

{Circles of Migration [continued]}[5th September 1990]

[Redbook7:276-277][19900905:2312b]{Circles of Migration [continued]}[5th September 1990]

.2312

[continued]

Whether these ambiguities* are sufficient to render C[ircles] A[nalysis] and S[ynthesis] useless, is a matter for argument.

Endless noting down of C[ircles] A[nalysis] and S[ynthesis]-type connections from the actual world, eg in press cuttings, begins to seem rather futile after a while: after all, this is only the hypothesis-introduction stage (like my booklet).** What are the remaining stages?***

*[See last previous entry]

**[See []; eventually took the form of a website]

***[See next entry]

[PostedBlogger03for07012022]

{Circles of Migration}[5th September 1990]

[Redbook7:276-277][19900905:2312]{Circles of Migration}[5th September 1990]

.2312

One example of the ambiguities inherent in the C[ircles] A[nalysis] and S[ynthesis] system relates to colonial expansion or migrations of peoples. This seems* most usually to occur around M~ or around G~ – diametrically opposite degrees. It no doubt occurs at the other degrees too: J~-G~-R~, S~-M~-U~; after all, the O[uter] C[ircle] is an outward, as well as outer, circle.

One might expect an M~-centred expansion to have more of the character of a willed invasion, but a G~-centred expansion to be more in response to events.

It would also seem likely that the later an expansion occurred, the less long it would last – given the characteristics of the O[uter] C[ircle].

*(unstatistically speaking)

[continued]

[PostedBlogger03for06012022]

{[The […] Railway] Line}[5th September 1990]

[Redbook7:276][19900905:1000]{[The […] Railway] Line}[5th September 1990]

19900905.1000

A rather confused dream about visiting (with [W] and the children) the [...] Railway at Llan[...] station – much more complicated than usual, with a works train which ran off the track and on again to get round an obstruction – and meeting an organiser of the [...] [Railway] Line Travellers’ Association, and various other confusing events, such as keeping one of the children from running away – is only worth mentioning because when [W] brought in the [local newspaper] this morning, there was my article* on the [same] […] Railway, taking up most of the Section Two front page,** and with a marker on the main front page. This is the first piece I have ever had published (for payment, I hope!)*** in a genuinely public periodical, ie for general circulation.

*(a W[riting] S[chool] exercise)

**{The [newspaper] is not a tabloid! – but they took a few photos.}

***{Yes – £30, the mean sods!}

[PostedBlogger03for05012022]

{Circles and Ellipses [continued (4)]}[4th September 1990]

[Redbook7:275][19900904:1815]{Circles and Ellipses [continued (4)]}[4th September 1990]

19900904.1815

… but all this* business of the Outer Ellipse is just one way of looking at it!

For instance, what we may have at C is not so much a single point as an inward-turning tendency towards C (i[nner[ c[ircle]), at least on the o[uter] c[ircle]: this can turn the individual right round, of course, onto the i[nner] c[ircle], but more often he sends himself out again past M~, moving outwards. At A~ (diametric resonance from C) there is a returning tendency of a related kind.

(In relation to a circle, of course, a moving point may be turning inwards** (ie round a point rather than in a straight line) and yet still be turning outwards (ie the radius of its arc is wider than the radius of the circle from the same centre point).)***

*[See last three previous entries, [Redbook7:273-275][19900902:2325b]{Circles and Ellipses}[2nd September 1990]ff]

**[sic]

***[The final 5 words should probably be omitted, as ‘same’ appears misleading – it cannot be the same centre point as the arc, so presumably refers to the circle – & if ‘same’ is omitted than the other 4 words are unnecessary]

[PostedBlogger03for04012022]

{Circles and Ellipses [continued (3)]}[2nd September 1990]

[Redbook7:275][19900902:2325c]{Circles and Ellipses [continued (3)]}[2nd September 1990]

19900902.2325

[continued]

As – in the C[ircles] A[nalysis] and S[ynthesis] case – the critical factor is originally the separation of A_n along the vertical axis, I suspect that this by some pre-determined ratio or similar factor(s) govern(s) the shape* in all cases; but this is only a guess. For example, if the minimum radius from O is that of the circle, this limits the shape of the ellipse. And how far towards a~ can the horizontal axis G~_nM~_n lie? Certainly not beyond it; and I presume not beyond the horizontal line j~u~, although this is also a guess (why stop there?): after all, the vertical line COa~A~_n might be capable of infinite extension away from O through a~....

*[See last previous entry, 2^nd paragraph, & diagram]

[continued]

[PostedBlogger03012022]

{Circles and Ellipses [continued]}[2nd September 1990]

[Redbook7:274][19900902:2325b]{Circles and Ellipses [continued]}[2nd September 1990]

19900902.2325

[continued]

The common factor is the point O, which is the unmoving focus; and for the circle (I[nner] C[ircle]) the only focus; and the vertical axis through O (C[-]A~). The points G~ and M~ must be equidistant and the line between them must be horizontal. The second focus must be the other side of O from C, which means that A_n is always further from O than C_n. I have an idea that there is in fact only one point C, incorporating all C_n points.

**

The shape of an O[uter] C[ircle] ellipse is determined by the relationship of the horizontal to the vertical axis, ie the ratio of their lengths;* but I have an idea that no ellipse can be smaller than the (inner) circle.

(It does not necessarily follow that speed is governed by the same rules as for planetary orbits, ie [that] the same area of any sector on O is covered in the same time.)

*[Presumably ‘shape’ here is intended to mean something more specific to this (Outer ‘Circle’) use than the whole defining property of any particular ellipse; see next entry]

**(Note Cross of Lorraine representing basic I[nner] C[ircle]/O[uter] C[ircle] pattern (ref THB&THG??)

[continued]

[PostedBlogger02012022]

{Circles and Ellipses}[2nd September 1990]

[Redbook7:273-275][19900902:2325b]{Circles and Ellipses}[2nd September 1990]

19900902.2325

[continued]

[This journal entry was originally intended to continue from the last previous entry, with a multiply-struck-through text starting (in what appears to be the final attempt before deletion): ‘In C.A.S. terms, their state may be defined in terms (I guess) of radial distance from the centre (greater) and (I guess) of degree: the lower the worse; in view of the problem with distance, it might be better to emphasise that CAS relates to curves, not just circles. I think the basic model of inner and outer circles may look something like this:’ (There follows a rough diagram, also multiply-struck-through, which appears similar to the next diagram reproduced in this ts* from p273, but without any letters, arrows or other markings). All this is scored out and replaced by the following marginal note:]

Too tired to make sense here: the basic idea is the I[nner] C[ircle] as circle, the O[uter] C[ircle] as ellipse(s) with centre of circle as one of [the] ellipse’s** foci; but the O[uter] C[ircle] keeps turning out as a wider circle with different centre and same C point on both circumference[s], which is not what I wanted.***

*[See next entry]

**[ms has “ellipses’”, which must be a mistake]

***[(But) see next entry]

[continued]

[PostedBlogger01012022]

{Right and Wrong}[2nd September 1990]

[Redbook7:273][19900902:2325]{Right and Wrong}[2nd September 1990]

19900902.2325

Puzzling over a builder who had been made exceedingly angry by our refusal to pay him for work he had not done – at all, not just done badly – my mind was clarified and ‘cleared’ by the realisation that just as there are cultures or nations, in international affairs, * so in everyday life there are individuals, who simply cannot tell the difference between right and wrong. For these people, ‘right’ is what benefits them and ‘wrong’ is what disadvantages them.

They have no effective conscience.

*Ref VI...? []

[PostedBlogger31122021]

{Revelation and Reason}[1st September 1990]

[Redbook7:271*][19900901:2312]{Revelation and Reason}[1st September 1990]

19900901.2312

It’s worth clarifying something which I hope has been implied: that if ‘Revelation’ follows an O[uter] C[ircle] path (when it presumably originates in a radial resonance to Revolution at G~), it passes through Ordination** to become dogma and part of the assumptions basing rationalisation, on an ultimately disintegrating circuit; whereas if Revelation follows an I[nner] C[ircle] path, it is subjected to rational analysis on an integrating circuit through evolution*** and harmony.****

*This entry should have been between pp 272 & 273

**[at S~]

***[at u~]

****[at s~]

[PostedBlogger30122021]