Date

Hello xxxx,
How are you? Hope you are making up in the cheese state.

Well xxxx, can you believe I wrote what I consider an excellent letter but my buggy Ubuntu froze. Well, I will deal with those computer issues later.

But in the meanwhile let me try to better my previous letter that began with how I became interested in the 1916 Campaign in Mexico through reading a passage in my Russian phrasebook ("He was involved in the 1916 campaign in Mexico"). From here I naturally discovered the tales of the elusive Pancho Villa, his ally Zapata, and the teachings which inspired Zapata. Namely the readings of Kropotkin. Further reading about Kropotkin revealed that his major influence were the French Encyclopedists.

I may have told you that I was studying The Encyclopedia by Diderot and D'Alembert; something I considered to be obscure, so it struck me to discover that the term French Encyclopedists was fairly common. From what I discovered, unlike the Federalists or any other literary/philosophical collective - true collective, in the sense that writers work to produce one work, "French Encyclopedists", was more popular than their namesake, The Encyclopedia.

This may be because The Encyclopedia is in French and is too voluminous to be translated in English - not entirely true, the University of Chicago has an ongoing project to translate it. Suppose only certain portions were to be translated, then they would reach a very limited market considering that the entries are relatively (regionally, i.e. industrialized countries) "out-of-date" - well, the specific technologies do not exist per se but the concepts are the same - therefore it would have to be translated and printed in paperback, which would carry to much overhead costs and not appeal to people who would be interested in Voltaire, Jean Jacques Rousseau, D' Alembert, etc., respectively.

I have been working on papers I consider to be more relevant to present times. Much of the inspiration is of course coming from a portion of what I consider the most comprehensive look into the working of society, The Encyclopedia. Not to write off the Encyclopedia, because I used the word "relatively" to imply that much of the resources present in many third world countries are comparable to industrialised countries right before the industrial revolution; when the Encyclopedia was written. However many countries continue to develop in the style of Western Europe, the USA, and other industrialized regions. Taking into consideration the inherent lack of physical labor, i.e. employment, needed to develop in this manner, the development of the USA is appropriate for our type of economy in which most people do not rely on physical labour to generate personal income but rather work in the service, financial, engineering, and management industries. Today this is called appropriate technology, although the entire field has been iffy in terms of implementation.

This is one of the things I have been trying to address. My approach has actually been linguistic. It works off the assumption that there are a limited number of concepts and in science and technology they repeat themselves. If you identify those concepts then you can relate them linguistically, hence much if not all of the sciences will share the same concepts in the sense that once you learn one science almost no new fundamental concepts will have to be taught.

This is more serious than it appears. And I have to answer the question, "Why hasn't anyone discovered this already?" Consider Biology and hemodynamics. The relationship for blood pressure, resistance (constriction of blood vessels), and blood flow is exactly the same as voltage, resistance, and current. But the relationship isn't readily established because "voltage", named in honor of Alexander Volta, is semantically empty - a situation that happens when people disregard linguistics and use words to pay homage, name concepts based upon what they resemble physically, or simply lack the knowledge of morphology. All previous cases disregard the fact a word is designed to describe the concept in a manner that will best help one understand it's importance and role in the usage.

Take the word "antenna", which was named for an antenna; something that sticks out like a bee's antenna. This was done because when antennas first arose all antennas resembled like bee antennas. But the error comes in naming after resemblance instead of function, so now-a-days we have dish antennas, which is a totally contradictory and hence meaningless. An antenna is actually an electromagnetic radiator. As a sidenote, today, antennas that actually look like antennas are called whip antennas.

Previous to the 1920's "voltage" was know as "electromagnetic force." Current is the flow of electrons, thus in Biology you have blood pressure, resistance, and blood flow while electricity has electromagnetic force, resistance, and electron flow. These are the same relationships (D'arcy's Law in biology and Kirchhoff Law in electrical engineering) and can be related through the mathematical concept of duality. Much in the same way The laws of Electric and Magnetic fields are related through duality.

In order to make this technique universal, one needs a standardized method of the described concept. I have already established this. Secondly, one needs to have the concept accepted. People naturally reject change therefore, I can't advocate changing anything. Instead I am working on a project to introduce my concept in the form of a new descriptor; a two or three word description. For those who would say a third concept description to accompany the word and definition makes no sense. I would say "Don't we have titles, abstracts, and the body of paper for research papers? and if we had titles for research papers that were no longer descriptive of their respective papers and abstracts had been eliminated, wouldn't there be a need to at least reintroduced abstracts?"

This has great implications and has largely eluded the linguistics establishment. It has been worsened since - according to Wikipedia - Bell Laboratories invented the modern acronym concept and with modern technology the practice of using acronyms has become standard practice in increasingly more fields of study. "SONAR" was apparently the devil that started it all, but I would question Wikipedia on this, until I find out when the term "RADAR" was coined.

What I have done is not entirely original, I believe the Frankfurt School may have touched on this concept in theory, namely Theodor Adorno in his JARGON OF AUTHENTICITY. But I highly doubt he has an answer to his concern. In fact, I will go out today and try to find the book.

In the field of design, my new concept is justified since it strikes balance between different fields of knowledge and through common practices. We will see, I am also working on that Public Works manual for you. I will test out my concept making you my first subject to see whether what I state has any validity. Because, of course, if the guy(me) who apparently knows the most about the concept can not correctly apply it for efficacy then why would anyone else want to use it? Once everything is validated I even have a Plan A to get it funded.

So far I have electricity planned out, I have worked a bit on freight and shipping of goods. I might just leave it at that for a draft version and touch on biology (trees) and civil engineering, mechanics, cars, and buildings later on. I want to also do a manual for modern industry. But I will save my ideas for now.

Say hello to xxxx.