The Emperor With No Clothes Part 2: Personal Interests Vs. National Interests

 As we continue the story of the emperor with no clothes, we stop off the train and gather around the notion of private interest vs. national interests.  It has long been speculated that the president puts his own interests before that of the country.  Before we dive into that matter, I first want to highlight that in 2016 I saw the voting of Trump as a breath of fresh air, a new perspective in the incumbency that is the federal government in Washington D.C.  The cycles of fraud and abuse of power run rampant in Washington D.C. and we have nothing as individuals in society to show for it except for exuberant debt and rising costs of material goods.  Whether those rising costs are the due diligence of D.C. or lack there of, we have grown tired of promises for change and accountability with no extra money in our pockets and no signs of progress outside of corporate autocracy.  Putting America first seemed like a great plan, a fresh perspective that put American interests above no one else, but what we got was a man who puts his own vindictive, self-interest above national interests as a whole.  

Although America is inevitably a free society, freedom of choice, freedom of travel, freedom to do as we so please, what Trump has created in 9 months in office is a negative connotation against the leftist narrative.  As much as I am against woke media and the over exaggeration of topics, both sides are guilty of such rhetoric.  After analyzing SEC documents into Trump’s Media and Technology company, I noticed something interesting about the wording behind Truth Social.  It was created in 2022 to compete with the likes of other social media conglomerates like Facebook, Twitter, Google, and Amazon.  Nonetheless, it reports that free speech is tantamount to maintaining American values in the FIrst Amendment.  Trump even won a lawsuit against Youtube in the amount of 24 million dollars due to censorship on the platform.  Regardless of this fact, I am concerned that he has done a juxtaposition in regards to such an expression he portrays in his company's SEC business overview.  Out of self-interest, he has attacked media companies for bad media publicity, hoping to control the narrative against himself.  In my lifetime, although short, I have yet to see a president attack the media such that Trump has.  To attack the press and in doing so aim to control free speech, he has opened Pandora’s box in terms of Presidential power.  Does the President have the right to subdue free speech for his own personal gain?

Another key interest in examining the President, I find it troubling to conclude that he is the only president in modern times not to elect to open a Blind trust, instead opened a revocable trust.  Before we dive into the concepts of self-interest which this article pertains to, we must first understand the difference between the two.  In a blind trust, a political official no longer maintains control of their financial vested interests, but gives that control up to a person or entity that he has no relation to personally or familially.  Instead of opening a blind trust like his predecessors, President Trump has opened a revocable trust, which in essence, still gives him complete control of assets and company handlings .  He has every legal right to change, add, or remove assets, or dissolve the trust at any time.  When analyzing this more closely, a revocable trust gives the President legal control of his business, further leading to potential conflict of interest.  Although his son(s) control the company now,  it seems as though Trump still holds the reins.  

So what has been going on with the Trump Organization and its subsidiaries?  In the very recent past, we have seen major deals with countries in the middle east.  For example, in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Dubai, TMTG has entered agreements and contractual obligations to build and open real estate properties.  Although controlled by his son Eric, TMTG is set to expand overseas interests in the Trump name, further extending personal ties with overseas governments, businesses, and contractors.  Since Trump has executed a revocable trust, it appears that he still holds a vested interest in the projects and stands to profit personally from the deals now and into the future further enriching himself and his family while in public office. The question is, should Trump halt his company while in office, or should he be able to further his business ventures while in the White House. 

 According to federal law 18 USC 208, it is a crime for a federal-executive branch officer or employee to “personally and substantially participate,” in a particular government matter in which they, their spouse, minor child, general partner, or an organization they're connected to has a financial interest.  In recent times, we have seen the President provide AI computer chips to the Qatar government shortly after they invested 2 billion dollars into Trump’s crypto-currency venture.  Although some will say that the two are unconnected, it seems as though personal interest is at play.  An interesting and very important fact is at play here as we revert back to federal law.  Federal law 18 USC 208, as it is written, does not pertain to the President of the United States and his Vice President.  As a result, the business and government decisions of the President are not held criminally under federal law.   The broad powers of the President and his decisions could essentially touch the nation’s economy and indirectly affect their personal finances.  Nonetheless, the president knows this, and in my opinion, is abusing such power to line his pockets, now, and in the future for himself and his family.  

Whether it be the gift of a 400 million dollar airplane for 1.2 trillion in spending in the middle east, billions in funding of Trump’s crypto company for AI chips, or keeping a revocable trust that is misaligned from the status quo of modern presidents, it clearly shows the President inadvertently puts his own self-interest before that of the country.  While he praises the deals with foreign governments in the name of American jobs and economic investment into the country, there are not six degrees of separation between the Trump Organization and the inner workings of the White House. While we sit back and fight over immigration reform, Trump takes favor for favor with foreign and domestic entities.  Although it is hard to remove human emotion from the equation of our existence whether it be laymen or president, it appears that Trump values personal loyalty and favor over everything else.  As we end this story I leave you with rhetorical questions to be pondered: What are our national interests, should reform be made with regards to current federal law when it comes to personal, financial interests of the president, and finally, should we let it go as business as usual?

What came first: Thought or Motion?

 What came first, the chicken or the egg?  Age old philosophical questions have puzzled the inquisitive minds of many no matter how silly they may seem.  I remember back to an experience I had at my friend Mohammed’s house back in 2017.  I was standing in his kitchen, drinking a beer as I began a conversation with his friend’s husband.  The conversation began superficially, but soon the conversation began to take a philosophical turn.  Mohammed told me my new acquaintance was a member of MENSA, a society of highly intelligent individuals with high IQ’s.  And so began the conversation about what came first: thought or motion.  

We both raised the philosophical question, does something have to think in order to move?  It’s an interesting question to say the least.  From a religious sense, it is said in the Abrahamic religions that God thought, therefore created everything,  essentially willing everything into existence.  Again in Hinduism, existence is said to be pure consciousness, that thought shapes the world around us. In the past I had another acquaintance say he thinks the universe had to begin with a thought in order to come into existence.  In a sense, our thoughts shape reality, governing what we think, how we feel,what we say, and what we see, but what position do they play in the realm of thought vs. motion?  After thinking about that for a while, I decided to do some research to discover how modern science thinks about the issue.  

In voluntary motions, like drinking a glass of water or changing the channel on the television, we inherently believe that we think first, then act or move second.  This concept was studied by a man by the name of Benjamin Libet.  In his experiments with test subjects, he set up a clock with a fast moving dot.  The task was to press a button or flex their wrist when they felt the urge to do so.  Immediately after moving, they reported the dot’s position at the moment they first became aware of the wish or intention to move.  Attached to their scalp during the process was an EEG that recorded the brain’s electrical activity in the motor cortex.  In his findings, he discovered that there was a slow build up of electrical activity in the motor regions of the brain starting 550 milliseconds before the movement.  Participants reported that they felt the urge to move at about 200ms before the movement.  These findings show that the brain’s motor preparation started before the person became consciously aware of the decision to move.  These findings prove that the brain begins to fire unconsciously, and consciousness seems to come after the fact.  These findings can be seen as flawed, the patients can’t possibly know exactly when they are aware that they felt the urge to move?  Later experiments using fMRI and machine learning classifiers detected patterns of neural activity seconds before people say they made the conscious decision.  

Modern science says the brain fires, then processes information before we as humans become consciously aware of the decisions or actions we make.  As we explore this matter even further and branch outside the realm of human existence, we still see motion taking precedence over thought.  Early single celled organisms could move towards light and nutrients well before anything like thought existed.  In the cosmos, the universe was in motion well before living systems, once again proving that motion came first.  So why do people say that thought, self-awareness, and consciousness supersedes everything.

This leads me back to the conversation I had with an acquaintance that night in 2017.  He argued that motion comes before thought as well.  He said that elementary particles must be in motion before information processing, or thought could be made.  From a quantum level perspective, particles interact with one another through fields in vector directions by way of motion, thus further driving home the point: motion came before thought.

The Human Brain and Consciousness

 I think therefore, I am, says the famous philosopher Rene Descartes.  The very notion that we exist simply because we can doubt our own existence.  In doing so, we express thoughts therefore are conscious of our own thoughts because we can think about them logically.  This leads one into the realm of consciousness, and the very nature of human existence.  We derive our consciousness as self-aware beings as being able to respond mentally and physically to our surroundings with the first influencing the latter, but how does this happen? How does information inside our brains correlate with the material world and allow us to respond to it by means of conscious thought? Does the brain work like a computer or does the biology of neurochemistry and physics affect how our mind works and how consciousness is attained?  We shall see.

Although science has a few distinct theories on how the brain creates thought, we shall first examine how neurons work to send signals to one another.  Neurons share information using electrical signals by changes in voltage across membranes as a function of time.  Over time, chemicals of varying positive(Sodium, Potassium, and Calcium) and negative(Chloride)  charges move in and out of the neuron across the synapse via channel gates and work downhill across neural networks of dendrites to send information based on the input stimuli.  The chemical signal is turned into electric signals and vice versa, allowing neurotransmitters to be released across synapses.  But how does the neuron know when to fire? 

The average voltage of a neuron cell at rest is approximately - 65-70mV(millivolts). Dendrites receive signals from other neurons via neurotransmitters which bind to receptors on the dendrite which produces a chemical signal.  As the binding takes place, it opens ion channels that allow charged ions to flow in and out of the cell of the neuron which converts the chemical signal into that of an electrical signal.   If there is net influx of positive charges in the neuron it is known as an excitatory post-synaptic potential which leads to depolarization.  In contrast, if the cell has a net flux of negatively charged ions, it's known as an inhibitory post-synaptic potential.   Because the neuron is connected to countless other dendrites this can shift the polarity of the neuron towards depolarization as more and more positively charged ions enter the cell.  If the voltage in the neuron reaches -55mv, it triggers voltage gates of Sodium channels to open, which then triggers more channels to open at the Axon Hillock, causing a chain reaction in the axon itself.  This chain reaction is the action potential, or when the neuron fires.  When this happens the cell becomes positively charged, reaching up to 40mv.  At this point the Sodium ion voltage gate becomes inactivated, and they no longer flow into the cell.  After the Sodium ion voltage gate channels become inactivated, Potassium voltage gates channels open up, causing positive charge to leave the cell which causes the cell membrane to repolarize.  During this repolarization phase, a Sodium/Potassium pump begins functioning.  This pump moves three Sodium ions out of the cell and two Potassium ions into the cell.  This is known as the absolute refractory period and keeps the action potential, or firing of the neuron from happening too close together and keeps the flow of electric charge in one direction.   The combination of the voltage gate channels of Potassium leaving the cell and the actions of the Sodium/Potassium pump leads to a period of over correction.  This causes the cell to lose charge known as the relative refractory period when the overall charge of the cell is less relative to the initial resting cell membrane.  When the Potassium ion voltage gated channels close, the neuron goes back to resting membrane potential again. 

As we move this story forward, axons connect neurons and act as wires that send electrical signals from one neuron to the next at their synapses.  Myelian Sheath acts as a protective layer around the axons much like insulation in a conductive wire.  Between the myelian are what is referred to as Nodes of Ranier.  These nodes contain very high densities of voltage gated sodium and potassium unlike the myelinated segments which don’t allow the ions to pass through.  Since the action potential can’t be regenerated in the myelin, the action potential or firing takes place from node to node known as saltatory conduction.  As depolarization takes place( positive charges move from outside to inside the axon), it opens the gates to the next local voltage gated channel further moving the electrical signal along.  This leads to further action potentials taking place until the signal reaches the synapse and the original process takes place all over again.  In the end, it's a continuous loop of chemical→electrical→chemical→electrical signals that guide information transfer from one neuron to another. 

Now that we understand the transmission of chemical and electrical signals in the neuron of the brain, we can discuss thought.  Thought doesn’t arrive from simply one neuron, but a collection of billions of cells across trillions of synapses.  As the neurons interact with sensory input(external stimuli or the environment), they combine past experiences(memory), emotions, and attention to form thought.  These factors integrate with brain circuits of the cortex, thalamus, and hippocampus to form thought.  Thought doesn’t just come from chemicals or the voltage differences within the neuron cell and its axons and dendrites, but the brain’s information processing.  

Populations of neurons form patterns of activity that represent sensory features, memories, or abstract concepts.  Due to the plasticity of the brain, these patterns change over time as the brain: compares incoming stimuli with stored memories(hippocampus, cortex), weighs options(prefrontal cortex, basal ganglia), and evaluates importance via emotion/reward circuits(amygdala/ dopamine system).   

Communication between areas of the brain often involves rhythmic oscillations(brain waves) that help coordinate timing.  When thousands or millions of neurons fire in a coordinated rhythm, their tiny electrical currents add up to produce oscillations or waves in the brain’s overall electric field.  Based on these waves, it dictates the state of being of the person from deep sleep to being at attention. 

Now let's compare a computer to that of the human brain and its neural networks.  Information flows through both the brain and a computer, but through different mediums.  For the brain, information flows through neurons and neural networks while information in a computer flows through transistors.  Although similar, information flows much faster in a computer than that of the human brain.  In addition, you can compare the logic gates of computer to that of channel gates of a neuron.  Neurons can have action potentials or no action potentials just as logic gates are either 0 or 1.  Both take the sum of inputs, and if the action exceeds a threshold, fires an output spike.  Nonetheless, the brain and the computer are inherently different.  The brain is able to change, grow, and adapt over time while a computer is set based on instructions given to it. To change the computer, you must change the code, while the human brain rewires itself as we learn more external information. In the end, the brain is an information processor, but not a computer.

And so remains the burning questions. Is consciousness derived from neurochemistry and physics, or is there a kind of dualism that separates the mind and conscious thought from the inner workings of the brain and its neural function?  Some say consciousness pervades all matter throughout the cosmos, and its thought that brought everything into existence.  Are neuro-networks entangled allowing quantum processes to take place inside the brain, or is there too much decoherence or background noise that breaks down entanglement?  These are the burning questions that lead me to sit and ponder the nature of consciousness, the human brain, and the universe. 

The Path of Self-Motivation

 Motivation, the very force that drives us to do what we do.  Without it, life becomes difficult, almost impossible.  Motivation brings meaning to life, accelerating tasks and bringing to fruition goals one sets out to achieve.  Motivation is what gets us out of bed in the morning, and what keeps the energizer within us waning into the night.  The reward centers in the brain become activated and drive us forward, eager to want more.   There are two types of motivation: internal and external motivation.  Both exist as a means to an end, but one reigns supreme, internal motivation.  

Life is full of challenges, bringing about resistance to the natural flow and order to life.  As life is thrown out of balance, we dig deep, grabbing life by the britches and slowly climbing back to the top of the reins and grabbing ahold of life, your life.  Sometimes life can be hard, I have fallen flat on my face many times because of my own self-destructive behavior, but one thing that I use to pull myself up is motivation, internal, self-motivation.  The inner voice calls out, beckons me to stand up on my own two feet and try again.  My purpose lures me to act and so I am today writing to you.  My purpose is to prop up those who see life worth living, to live vigorously in achieving their goals.  I was a teacher for ten years, and whether my students saw it at first, over time they realized I was there not just to teach facts and concepts, but to build them up to be self-confident young adults.  

Internal, or intrinsic motivation comes from action from within.  One acts because the task at hand is meaningful and aligns with your personal goals.  When something resonates with your values and curiosity, you keep going, not stopping even if no one is watching.  I remember back to high school baseball, Coach Ryder would tell us time and time again, it's all about what you do when no one is watching.  Personal drive moves you forward, accelerating you energetically towards your goals.  It’s like the electrical force, a spark, that pushes you forward. Pursuing goals that reflect who you are builds autonomy, and a sense of purpose, key factors of happiness and psychological health.  Without such means, you act merely for rewards like money, praise, and good grades.  Simply relying on external motivation can create stress, anxiety, and feeling of being controlled.  

Self driven motivation builds resilience and persistence.  When something is important to someone, it allows the individual to move mountains to complete the task at hand. Even during some times of pitfalls and setbacks, intrinsic motivation is there to build the self back up.  It allows you to finish what you started, to be independent in a world where others seek the immediate praise or guidance of others.  The inner reason keeps us going at all costs no matter how bad we want to give up.

When times get tough, we should strive to look inward, to know ourselves and know we are capable of completing any task or goal we wish to pursue.  Success is not attained through seeking others' approval, but when we look at ourselves in the mirror and say, "You can do it.”   While external motivation fades over time, internal, self motivation may fluctuate, but it stays true in the heart and mind of an achiever.  Find purpose, work hard, and don’t stop until you achieve what it is you set out to do.  Small achievements through self-motivating work, soon culminate in large scale progress in the long haul.  In the end, let the heart guide the mind and body towards the spirit of achievement for when something is achieved, it feels as though it was worth the fight all along.

Private Ownership of Stock By Public Figures

 Material wealth, the one thing most of us strive for.  The accumulation of capital according to some is the epitome of existence in this capitalistic society we live in.  I would be lying to you if I said that money wasn’t a motivating factor in why I do the things I do.  The money I made off of COVID made me wish I injected more money into the market when I did.  The rise and fall of stocks are hard to predict by the laymen, but when you get it right,it leads to large gains at the expense of only time.  So what happens when public figures are allowed to trade stocks?  Some may find it morally apprehensible, while others study their moves, replicate, and repeat, hoping to beat the system.  Here is my story of Private Ownership of Stock By Public Figures.

As of right now, there are no laws preventing publicly elected figures from owning stock.  Whether the concept is justifiable, we must understand the concept of private ownership.  Private ownership in capitalism is the idea that land, machine, and capital can be owned by private individuals, including public figures.  Our Constitution allows anyone, including publicly elected officials, to own private ownership which includes stocks.  The problem is that Congress rights its own rules, its own ethics, and such rules are very broad and undeveloped. 

So one may ask, what has Congress done, what legislation has been passed in terms of stock options being purchased by publicly elected officials.  In 2012, Congress passed the Stock Act of 2012.(Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act)  This piece of Congressional legislation requires members of Congress, their spouses, and their children to publicly disclose most stock trades worth more than $1,000 within 45 days.  Although this provides citizens with transparency with knowledge of what our elected officials are doing, it doesn’t provide enough detail of why they made the trade(s) they did.  Law makers legally cannot make trades on material, non-public information gained through their duties in Committees, but the penalties are few and far between.  Federal law( 18 S.C. 208), prohibits members of Congress from acting on matters in which they have a direct financial interest, but definitions of such laws are very vague, and so it leaves much to be said about the concept of financial self-interest and federal law.  

So why is it a problem for publicly elected officials to hold stock in publicly traded companies?  First and foremost, members of the government hold first hand knowledge of government appropriations(spending), regulations, hearings, or federal contracts that can affect stock prices.  As a result, they can act on such knowledge for their own private gain.  Knowledge of such trades within 45 days is simply not enough for the American people when private knowledge is made for personal gain.  Disclosure rules don’t prevent timely or strategic trades that might appear self-serving.  Enforcement of the Stock Act of 2012 has been dismal at best, only met with small fines for late disclosures.     

If a corporation or private citizen makes trades based on private information that said individual or corporate entity would be subjected to punishment or indictment by the SEC or the FBI.  Allowing publicly elected officials to hold stock is a crime to humanity, to the people in which they represent.  Publicly elected officials have a fiduciary and civic duty to the people they represent.  When there are blurred lines in this relationship, corruption occurs and self-interest reigns supreme.  Unfortunately,  such measures to eliminate publicly elected officials from holding stock are by way of Constitutional Amendment.  There is very little motivation by the powers that be to eliminate their ability to accumulate material wealth while in public office.  I leave you with this to say, should an individual who has prior knowledge be able to privately gain from it, should we allow our nation’s elected officials to continue to gain from their public office?

The Evolution of Term Limits in America

 One of the most controversial topics in American politics in recent years is that of Congressional term limits.  In the 20th and 21st Centuries, we’ve seen career politicians hold office for decades.  As I think about this topic, I contemplate whether this concept is valuable or destructive to American freedom and democracy.  Who gains from such incumbency, are there benefits, are there drawbacks from allowing elected officials to hold office for the greater part of their adult life? While analyzing such a topic, I began researching the evolution of term limits in America.  Here is my story:

In early 19th Century society, politics was seen as a civic duty rather than a profession.  The Founding Fathers imagined a citizen-legistator model to the political arena of the early United States of America.  These citizen-legislators would be made up of farmers, lawyers, and merchants alike who would serve briefly then return home.  Many early members of the American Congress served just one or two terms before heading home.  Travel was difficult, pay was low, and there weren’t permanent political parties.  

It wasn’t until the 1820s and 1830s the political arena began to evolve under Jacksonian democracy.  The establishment of the Democratic Party and the Whigs changed American politics forever.  As voter turnout grew exponentially due to the restrictions of land ownership being a factor in voter rights being lifted, by 1840 turnout was over 80%.  As a result of increased turnout, it brought about party machines and competitive elections.  Party organizations needed experienced leaders to keep power, so staying in office became a much more common practice.  The Democratic Party pioneered campaign rallies, slogans, party newspapers, and conventions to mobilize ordinary voters. By the late 1800’s, long congressional tenures were commonplace.  

  By the early 1900’s, legislators saw a boost in pay, pension plans, and committee seniority, and so public service became a full-time job.  Following WWII, America saw a rise in mass media, fundraising systems, and after the 1970s party primaries began, which favored incumbency, making long careers common.   

After analyzing how history culminated in the evolution of long term, career politicians, we sit at a crossroads in American History.  Do we sit back and allow the status quo to continue with business as usual, or do we strive for change in the American political arena.  Who benefits from the status quo?  First and foremost, the politicians themselves.  The longer someone stays in power, the more corrupt they become.  Corporations have something to gain in incumbency.  The more money they pour into a continuous campaign of a Congressional and/or Committee leader, the more favor that party member shows in return.  If someone could only hold two terms, money couldn’t corrupt politics and members of Congress compared to its juxtaposition.  On the other hand, Congressional members are democratically elected officials.  In the democratic process, citizens have the power of the vote to decide who they wish to hold public office, but who is to say primaries and party funding don’t hold the incumbent in favor over new “talent.”  In the end, it is for you to decide the fate of party politics and term limits in America. 

Pros and Cons of a One World Currency

 As we begin this blog, I revert my thoughts back to a time and a place.  The time is midnight in the summer of 2014 and the place is my bedroom in Vineland, NJ.  As I sat in my bed, I was conversing with one of my old friends, Ricky.  Ricky was a philosophy and foreign policy major in university.  During this evening’s conversation, we were discussing foreign policy and money.  Before we discussed foreign policy, we began a dialogue about the foundations of aid to those on welfare and disability.  He believed that the church and other non-profit institutes should provide financial and medical aid to those individuals on welfare and disability.  I happened to disagree, I told him it was the government’s job to provide for the welfare and common good of the people in which they represented.  My oldest sister was on disability with serious medical conditions so the topic was near and dear to my heart.  Although we simply disagreed with one another’s views, we both understood and valued the viewpoint of each other.  As the conversation progressed, we began discussing foreign monetary policy.  We both agreed the world was in need of a unified global currency.  The concept of a global currency would solve so many problems, but we both agreed it would take decades before this dream could come to reality.  Here is my story of the pro’s and con’s to a One World Currency.  

Although a single unified global currency is far from being implemented into global economic and political policies, it is something that we should strive for in the coming century if not decades.  We begin this dialogue by discussing the potential pros of such a scenario.  First and foremost, it would eliminate the need to exchange currencies or worry about fluctuating exchange rates.  Secondly, international businesses could save billions of dollars in transactional costs and hedging against currency volatility.  Current global FX, or foreign exchange, markets handle seven trillion dollars daily, even a small cut in these costs by means of a global currency, could cut costs by the billions  In addition, a unified global currency that is well managed might reduce currency crisis caused by sudden devaluations or speculative attacks on one specific currency like we see today.  In the long term, it could promote long-term investment flows as investment would be done with the same currency globally.  In terms of transparency and fairness, countries couldn’t manipulate exchange rates to gain trade advantages.  Furthermore, price comparisons worldwide would be straightforward, fostering more competition between local and global markets eliminating the need for tariffs to bring back jobs and manufacturing to the local country or region.  Global competition would lead to lower prices for consumers in theory.  In the end, it would lead to a more synchronized global economy and marketplace.

Just as a unified global currency has its advantages, there are many pitfalls to such a concept.  First and foremost, especially in America, this would come at a loss to national sovereignty and monetary policy.  Central Banks like the Federal Reserve system in America use their own currency to respond to local conditions like raising or lowering interest rates to meet the current economic climate or printing money during economic crises.  A global currency would strip a nation’s ability to respond to economic crises during recessions or economic shocks.  In addition, due to the imbalances in global economies, many countries are at different stages of economic and industrial development.  As a result, the need for different monetary policies becomes apparent.  Subsequently, a unified global currency might benefit richer countries more often than not.  The next set of challenges comes down to trust and governance.  Who would control the global central bank?  How could smaller or less wealthy countries be represented fairly leading to disputes and political tension amongst the nations of the world. Governments would still have their own budgets and debt levels, so without control of monetary policy, debt crises could spiral

In the end, a unified global currency is many moons away from actualization.  What is needed for such an idea to come to fruition is more synchronization amongst nations of the world, political stability, fiscal discipline, and global cooperation.  Because of such factors, I am skeptical if such means are attainable.  Due to global instability, a global unified currency lay on the back-burner for now, but I believe as the world comes to an equilibrium industrially and economically, a centralized global currency would benefit all.

Levels of Meditation

 Mind over matter, the famous and useful axiom that many of our parents teach us as children to overcome some physical or psychological obstacles.  I remember living through Northeast winters, freezing from the cold, dreary winters of New Jersey.  Mom used to say, “mind over matter,”as I braved through bitter, cold days.  “Picture yourself in a warm place,” she said, and the cold wouldn’t be so bad.  At the time, It never worked, I could never get my mind to a point where it helped me overcome my physical and psychological existence, but it paved the way for deeper thinking as an adult.  The mind is a powerful thing, it shapes our existence as conscious observers and thinkers.  Today, the early morning of September 26, 2025, I wish to talk about this concept of mind over matter through the means of meditation.  Deep and powerful, meditation is a guiding practice that helps me relax my physical body and mental state through practices of controlling one’s thoughts, breathing, and heart rate.  Here is my story: Levels of Meditation.

As we begin this story, my mental vision rewinds time, re-emerging to my 21 year old self.  I am accompanied by my life-long and best friend, Jared.  I don’t remember how the conversation came to be or where we were, but I remember the dialogue.  Our conversation diverged on the topic of meditation.  One of our acquaintances, Bryan, began to meditate, and in one instance, saw his body from the ceiling.  At first, I was dumbfounded by such an idea, casting doubt on such a concept.  How can one have an out of body experience?  After doing research on it today, AI and science say it’s all in your head, that it truly doesn’t exist, but nonetheless the 21 year old version of myself was skeptical, but I kept an open mind and set out to replicate such a task.  I went home that night and began to meditate in my bedroom.  The lights dimmed, my mind turned off, my chakras aligned, I began to meditate in my bed.  Hours passed with no such results.  I almost gave up before all at once, my body began to melt away and all at once, I saw myself.  I was looking down at my body from the ceiling.  The year was 2011.

As we continue this story, the lamp light flickers  in my room.  I am laying in my bed again, the year is 2014.  I remember looking out the window, it was a dark, summer night.  I lay alone in my room and decided to meditate.  I lay flat on my back, eyes closed and crossed across my mental vision, arms crossed at  my groin, legs crossed, ready to slowly delete thoughts from my conscious being.  Next, I began to control my breathing, slowing my respiration and heart beat, and soon I reached even keel.  Soon after, I began to feel my body vibrate.  Science says this is caused by discharges from the autonomic nervous system as it re-balances.  Nonetheless, pictures and images began to propagate in and out of my mental vision.  The most interesting part of my meditation is the perception of time.  What felt like five minutes was actually twenty to thirty minutes in real time.  As I opened my eyes, I felt sheer and utter bliss, like I just got the best sleep of my life.  

Fast forward two years and many experiences later, I felt as if I mastered the art and science of deep state meditation.  The year is 2016 and once again I'm laying in my bed on a summer’s night.  Following the steps laid out in the previous paragraph, I positioned myself preparing for another experience, but this time was different.  No sooner that I close my eyes and align my energy centers, or chakras, does the meditative experience begin.  As my body vibrates, my mind shoots across space.  As I travel in my mind, space is created out of nothing, like pieces of a puzzle, space attaches to itself and replicates from itself as I travel forward.  The feeling of acceleration was exhilarating, as if I was traveling on a beam of light across the cosmos.  Soon enough, I came to a stop.  I look down from my mental vision, and see the Earth below.  I let out a deep breath and the Earth came to life from darkness, a deep blue and green planet.  In the dream-like state, I lowered myself down to the surface and found myself in a forest, standing before me was a man and a woman.  Soon after, I opened my eyes and came back to reality wondering what just took place.  What felt so real in my mind was simply a story created by my imagination in a dream-like, but conscious state of being.  

Meditation has a deep history in eastern culture.  During the Vedic Period from 1500 BCE to 500 BCE, hymns of the Vedas mention contemplative practices for stilling the mind and communing with cosmic order.  In later Indian history, the Upanishads described meditation as a means of realizing the self as one with ultimate reality.  In Buddhism, Siddhartha Gautama, or the Buddha, taught meditation for insight and concentration to end suffering.  In Jainism, meditation was emphasized for inward stillness and austerity for non-violence and liberation.  In China, Daoism, Zen Buddhism, and Confucianism also practiced and were highly influenced by meditation.  In Daoism of the 4th century BCE onward, they practiced breath-focused and inner meditations aiming at cultivating vitality, or being strong and active, for energy.  In Zen Buddhism, meditation was used for direct realization of the mind's nature.  Although meditation in Confucianism was less mystical, it encouraged stillness and introspection as moral cultivation.     

Over the course of my life, I have taken to meditation.  From age sixteen  into my thirties, I lay in my bed at night, eyes closed and thoughts cleared, meditating.  Without the shadow of a doubt, I feel as though there are levels to meditation: 

1. Clear and quiet mind, stillness

2. Physical Reactions

3. Mental and physical reactions

Each level of meditation must be mastered before moving on.  Sometimes I wonder how common meditation is in today’s society and whether others share similar experiences.  Please feel free to share your experiences with me.

Light, The Holographic Universe, and Quantum Entanglement

     As I sit here to write, ideas pop in and out of my conscious thought.  As I sit here and contemplate, the light bulb goes off in my mind, projecting mental images in my head.  The nature of reality is quite trivial, there are so many avenues and rabbit holes to travel down one soon gets lost in ideas and explanations for why things exist the way they do.  The philosopher sits in deep thought and asks himself, how did we get here, how did everything come into existence?  Please bring light to my troubled thoughts he says to himself!  No sooner does he have an epiphany, an aha moment in time and so begins the story of light, quantum entanglement, and 3d objects.

Light is a force carrier, it carries throughout the universe both information and energy.  Although it has no energy of its own, it is the fuel that gets things moving so to speak.  As light interacts with quantum(very small) fields, it gets them excited.  These fields propagate into particles and eventually atoms that we come to know and understand.   Just like the light bulb going off in your head leads to ideas and pictures in your mind, light does the same thing with the universe along with the other force carriers.  

The holographic principle states that the universe is made up of a two dimension surface or brane.  When studying black holes, one can deduce that the information of the black hole is inscribed on the area of the black hole horizon, not the volume that is inside of it.  The equation is as follows:

S≤ AK / 4GH/c^3where

S = entropy 

A = area 

K = Boltzman’s Constant

G = Newton’s Gravitational Constant

H = Plank Length

At the smallest level of known existence, the universe acts as a hologram, a set of information that governs the universe.  When studying holograms, one knows that light plays a major factor in how they operate.  As one shines light on a 2d plate of information, out pops a 3D model that is correlated to the 2d set of information. Bringing one back to the concept of the holographic principle, the information of the 3d universe lives on a 2d boundary in a lower dimensional space.  The math is equivalent, the 3-d brane we live in is the same as the 2-d surface it projects from.

The boundary of information describes the geometry of space-time and 3d objects that live in higher dimensions within it.  

Quantum entanglement, the concept that Einstein calls, “spooky action at a distance,” describes how qubits, or bits of information behave.  Scientists used to believe that two qubits had to be 0 or 1,independent of one another,  but in an entangled system, the two or more qubits are inherently linked to one another regardless of how far they are from one another. They can be both 0 and 1 at the same time until they are measured. In an entangled state, qubits are glued or woven together, like a perfect lattice or web.  Entangled qubits propagate from the boundary of 2d spacetime and glue together all that exists within the geometry of 3d space.  If entanglement is lost, so is the 3d space we live in.  It is like a blanket woven together. If you tear a few strands of fabric, the whole blanket is destroyed.

As one can see light, the holographic principle, and quantum entanglement, are all interconnected.  Light, or photons are a carrier of information between the 2d boundary to the bulk, or 3d space.  Light is an example of bulk physics that is “painted” on the boundary of space-time.  The holographic principle is the concept that 3d space is not connected to its volume, but is directly correlated to the 2d boundary of space time.  What is painted on the boundary is a set of information that governs the universe’s geometric shape in 3 dimensions.  Quantum entanglement is the glue that holds the puzzle pieces of 3d space together.  It states that at the most fundamental level, bits of information are woven together, directly connected to one another regardless of the locality of one another.  They interact what seems to be instantaneously with one another, and if entanglement is lost, the 3d universe falls apart with it.

    

At last the philosopher rests, finally satisfied with the answers that he found.  The nature of reality is what he seeks to find.  No sooner does he find answers, that new questions form in his mind, but today is but one day in a lifelong journey toward absolute truth. 

Social Darwinism and its Effect on Modern Society

 Throughout the history of the United States, socioeconomic issues have been debated in many ways by thinkers, politicians, and reformers. While some economic philosophies of past centuries have endured, others have faded into history. During the mid- to late-1800s and even into the early 20th century, Social Darwinism, as promoted by Herbert Spencer and William Graham Sumner, played a key role in shaping society’s economic dynamics. Their central idea was that the “fittest” survive—meaning that the rich and powerful were naturally the most capable—and that government should avoid interference.

    Many critics opposed this view, arguing that unrestricted competition harmed the vulnerable and enabled the upper classes to exploit others. In my personal opinion, society should be based on hard work, determination, perseverance, destiny, and merit—not on inherited privilege. A person should succeed because of effort and character, not merely because they were born into wealth.

    During the 1700s and 1800s, several influential economic philosophers shaped the foundations of social and economic thought in America:

• Robert Owen envisioned a utopian society in which property was collectively owned within cooperative settlements. He believed people were selfish because they lived in a “dog-eat-dog world.” In my view, this ideal would be unworkable today, as people place too much pride in their possessions and the acquisition of capital.

• Adam Smith introduced the laws of supply and demand and emphasized competition as a natural regulator of the economy. As demand for a product rises, so does its price; when demand falls, prices decline. Competition, he argued, improves quality and keeps prices fair. This system still shapes our economy today, though modern consumer behavior is also driven by brand recognition—people often buy what they see advertised, regardless of quality or price.

• David Ricardo proposed the “iron law of wages,” asserting that when labor is plentiful, wages decline, and when labor is scarce, wages increase. This concept remains visible today: jobs requiring advanced degrees, such as law or medicine, often pay more because the labor pool is smaller and training is expensive.

• John Stuart Mill criticized the extremes of laissez-faire economics, warning that unchecked capitalism could harm society. While he supported limited government interference, he believed the state should act to protect public welfare. I agree that some government oversight is necessary to prevent corporate abuse, though in modern times the closeness of government and corporations raises its own concerns.

• Thomas Malthus argued that poverty was inevitable because population growth would outpace food supply. While his theory never fully materialized on a global scale, poverty remains an issue even though modern technology and agricultural innovation have largely prevented famine in developed nations.

    Among Social Darwinists, Herbert Spencer believed that human society mirrored the natural world—those with superior intellect, self-control, and adaptability were the “fittest” and deserved to thrive. He favored a laissez-faire society with minimal government interference, opposing public welfare programs and state-supported education. Industrialists such as Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller embraced Spencer’s philosophy, seeing their wealth as evidence of their fitness.

    William Graham Sumner combined the Protestant ethic, classical economics, and Darwinian natural selection. He argued that industrious, temperate, and frugal individuals were the most “fit” for success. He believed that wealth should be preserved within families and viewed millionaires as products of natural selection—society’s chosen few. Sumner opposed most government intervention, fearing it would lead to socialism, and believed social evolution could not be engineered through legislation.

    These ideas faced significant criticism. Richard Ely, in The Past and Present of Political Economy, rejected the notion that economics should serve the wealthy at the expense of laborers. He condemned using laissez-faire to justify inaction while people suffered. In 1885, Ely and colleagues founded the American Economic Association, advocating for government as a force for social progress.

    Simon Patten, another critic, challenged the wage-fund theory and emphasized the need for adapting economic policies to industrial society. Reformers like Henry George argued that competition was necessary but also saw progress hindered by inequality created by civilization itself. Edward Bellamy, in Looking Backward, proposed nationalizing industries to eliminate the brutalities of competition, claiming that the competitive system brought out the worst in all classes.

    A significant reform movement during this period was the Social Gospel, led by clergymen such as Washington Gladden, Lyman Abbott, Walter Rauschenbusch, and others. Observing urban poverty and harsh labor conditions, they sought to bridge the gap between harsh individualism and socialism by advocating for cooperation between employers and workers. They emphasized Christian principles of goodwill, mutual aid, and gradual reform rather than unrestrained competition.

In my view, Spencerian social theory is deeply flawed because human society cannot be governed by the laws of the jungle. Economic systems must balance competition with fairness and protection for all. I support the ideals of the Social Gospel movement, which promoted cooperation in the workplace—an approach that can lead to shared prosperity.

Life, The Creator, and String Theory

As I dive deeper into the study of the universe, reality, and faith, my belief in a Creator grows stronger with every passing day. I often find myself contemplating the harmony of nature while remembering the insights of the great scientific minds of the 20th and 21st centuries—Albert Einstein, Richard Feynman, and my favorite living astrophysicist, Dr. Leonard Susskind. All three have spoken in different ways about the mystery of a Creator and the astonishing fine-tuning of the mathematical fabric of nature.

The more we probe the laws of physics, the more remarkable it seems that the numbers governing the universe are so precisely balanced. If even a few constants were slightly different, the stars might never have formed, chemistry would fail, and life as we know it would not exist. To me, this exquisite tuning suggests the hand of a Designer.

I spend much of my free time thinking about reality and how the Creator shaped it. I’m struck by the idea that He created the universe with conditions that allow intelligent beings like us to evolve—to learn enough to glimpse the workings of nature, perhaps even to “read the mind of God,” as Einstein once said. And yet, the sacred texts remind us that we may never fully comprehend everything. When told that something is unknowable, the human spirit often burns to know it all the more. I feel that drive every day: the more I learn, the more I realize how much I do not know.

General Relativity and the Arc of Life

Einstein’s general relativity, formulated in 1915, describes how gravity arises from the curvature of spacetime caused by energy and mass. On vast cosmic scales the fabric of spacetime is remarkably smooth, though punctuated by dramatic bends near stars, black holes, and galaxies.

Life, I think, is similar. From day to day we experience ups and downs, triumphs and setbacks. But when we look back over decades, our personal timeline often appears smoother than the small ripples we felt in the moment. Like spacetime, life’s large-scale shape emerges from countless local distortions.

Quantum Mechanics and Human Choice

If general relativity reveals the smooth, sweeping arcs of the universe, quantum mechanics describes the jittery dance of particles on the smallest scales. Electrons exist in clouds of probability until measured; they behave like waves that can interfere, amplify, or cancel each other out.

To me, that randomness mirrors the small-scale choices and events of our daily lives. Each decision we make can feel unpredictable, yet patterns emerge as the moments accumulate. Our choices, like quantum waves, sometimes reinforce each other and sometimes cancel out. Over time, those seemingly random steps trace a path that defines who we become.

String Theory and Connection

String theory suggests that the fundamental constituents of matter are not point-like particles but tiny, vibrating one-dimensional strings. Some strings form loops—closed strings—while others have free ends that can attach to higher-dimensional surfaces called branes. The way these strings vibrate determines the properties of the particles they manifest.

I find this picture to be a powerful metaphor for life. Our actions and experiences may seem isolated and random—like individual strings vibrating on their own. But as they interconnect, a larger pattern emerges: the fabric of a life story. When our choices align and resonate with each other, the picture becomes smoother and more harmonious, as if guided by an unseen orchestra.

Faith and the Bigger Picture

I hold to Judeo-Christian ethics and see the Almighty as a guiding presence—offering free will yet illuminating many possible paths before us. To me, this resembles the relationship between quantum unpredictability and the large-scale smoothness of relativity: moment-to-moment freedom within an overarching order.

We may never know who “plucks the strings,” but the harmony that results suggests purpose. Life often begins like an open string—free and unbound—but gradually becomes shaped by our connections, our decisions, and the people we encounter. The challenge is to stay connected, to trust that each moment has its place in the greater design, and to never lose faith in the bigger picture.

Closing Reflection

The more humanity uncovers about the universe, the more we glimpse its elegance. Whether written in the equations of physics or in the wisdom of scripture, I see the same message: life and the cosmos are bound by connection, guided by purpose, and full of wonder