|
In 1905 a total unknown named Albert Einstein released his first publication, detailing his "special theory of relativity". This stunning theory took the science community by storm, and not only revolutionized the field of physics, but was found to have startling applications in other disciplines, from mathematics to geometry. However, I am here to tell you, friends, that one earth-shattering ramification of relativity has been missed. That's right...even the most brilliant scientists of our age have missed one vital application of relativity that needs to be made. Actually, to be perfectly honest, this breakthrough has already been made. However, in much the same way that Leibnitz was really the original inventor of calculus but history gives most of the credit to Newton since he was the one to first publish and explain his invention, I intend to vault into the public eye and display my own intellectual giftedness by proclaiming and explaining a revolutionary new science that is already being used. In fact, there are many who use this science EVERY DAY, completely unaware of just how revolutionary they are.
First, a little background information. One groundbreaking aspect of relativity is the implications it has on geometry. Before Einstein, the basics of geometry had not changed for thousands of years. Euclidian geometry is what this old-time geometry is called, and the best example of Euclidian geometry is the statement "the shortest distance between two points is a straight line". Astonishingly, Einstein proposed that the shortest distance between two points is NOT ALWAYS a straight line. Euclidian geometry was found to be in error, because it does not take into account the curvature of space. Simply put, the universe has more than 3 dimensions. You can approximate the universe in terms of 3 dimensions, but sooner or later, in several very specific cases, your predictions will turn out to be very wrong. Light always travels the shortest possible distance, and therefore a straight line? except when light is passing a very dense object, in which case, the light bends? and ends up traveling what LOOKS like a further distance, when you look at it 3 dimensions. In actuality, the curved line actually was a SHORTER distance than the straight line. To simplify further, if you took our everyday 3-dimensional world and simplified it to 2 dimensions, many things would still make sense. If you throw a ball up, it will eventually come down, even if you ignore the side-to-side movement. However, you would occasionally run up against
events that seem to make no sense at all. If you try to represent a
3-D scene of action on a flat piece of paper, you can see how some
confusion would result. Two objects might be heading straight towards each other for an inevitable collision, but then somehow the two don't hit but move past. This obviously occurred because your 2-D representation doesn't take into account the 3rd dimension ? one of the objects curved into the 3rd dimension.
SO, HOW DOES THIS APPLY TO POLITICS? I was beginning to think you'd never ask. Here is the answer: logic. In other words, the one field that relativity has not yet been applied is logic, and logic's time has come. To explain: for years, confused conservatives have merely been applying one dimension to logic. Something is either logical or not logical. An action is either ethical or not ethical, good or bad. However, I think we all know that this approach has the potential for error. Of course we all remember Clinton, right? He was proven to have lied under oath? and so we all said he was obviously guilty of perjury, which is defined as lying under oath. But lo and behold? liberals began to say that he was not guilty of perjury, even though he did lie under oath. How does this make sense? Easy...logic has more than one dimension. There is the "ethics" dimension of course, but I propose that there is a new dimension, that many people have utilized, but few recognize as a truly new entity. I call this new dimension the
"liberal dimension" Whenever a liberal makes a staggering leap of logic, it makes no sense to ordinary conservatives, but that is simply because you are viewing their thoughts on a 1-dimensional grid. A liberal may appear to be heading towards a decision? but when they get there, they continue on without ever hitting it. How did that happen? Easy ? they curved into the "liberal dimension". It makes perfect sense. The reason liberal logic is so confusing to conservatives is that we are looking at it all wrong. For example, a liberal could explain to you how there are a lot of poor people, how the economy is bad, how there aren't enough jobs, and how inflation is rampant. The conclusion a conservative would normally make? Lower taxes. The conclusion a liberal makes? RAISE TAXES! How did they arrive at this? Easy...they curved into the "liberal dimension", traveled over top
"lower taxes", and landed on the other side, on "raise taxes" Of course, you may be wondering how we can tell when we are involved in a so-called "special case". After all, Euclidian geometry applies in most cases; only occasionally will it go wrong. Well, here's the answer. You see, Euclidian geometry most often fails in the presence of a very dense mass. Huge suns, black holes, and other very dense celestial objects cause most of the errors to predictions based on Euclidian geometry. The application to logic is obvious. The "liberal dimension" is only a factor when in the presence of an extremely dense person. This, of course, explains everything. Now we all know why the 2000 election didn't seem to make sense. That's rightbecause of the presence of Al Gore.
|
