Summary—The Nobel Prize essay discusses my theory of one, my Bernoulli model and my method of argument—and asks that I be nominated for the Nobel Prize.
The following is a list of my twenty-five favorite movies—Thirteen Days, Matrix, American Beauty, Eyes Wide Shut, Get Shorty, The Thirteenth Floor, Apollo 13, Go, Almost Famous, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Basic Instinct, The Thomas Crown Affair, The Hunt for Red October, LA Confidential, Something Wild, Contact, Blade Runner, Three Kings, Good Will Hunting, Wonder Boys, Groundhog Day, Dave, Erin Brockovich, True Romance and The Getaway.
Relativity Theory and Quantum Theory. The macrocosmos of relativity theory (1905) is the universal law of spacetime and reveals that spacetime dilates as a function of velocity relative to lightspeed in accordance with the Pythagorean Form—ie. h^2 + (v/c)^2 = 1^2, h = height, v = velocity, c = lightspeed. According to relativity theory—if v = c then h = 0. On the other hand, according to Newtonian physics (ie. a cornerstone of Western civilization)—if v = c then h = 1. In other words, h is unaffected by v. Relativity theory says that a body traveling at lightspeed exists at the boundary of spacetime—beyond which lies an unimaginable abyss of nothingness. The microcosmos of quantum theory (1925) is the universal law of matter and is based on Planck’s constant and Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. The uncertainty principle states that causality breaks down at the spacetime boundary of Planck’s constant. Causality is simply an ordering of spacetime. An absence of causality means an absence of spacetime. Quantum theory says that an absence of spacetime indicates a boundary between spacetime and nothingness.
The Theory of One. My theory of one (2001) unites relativity theory and quantum theory by arguing that lightspeed and Planck’s constant are the same boundary of the spacetime continuum. Note that the terms our universe and the spacetime continuum are used interchangeably. Consider a tabletop representing the universe of all universes. It is true that our universe occupies no more than a point in the universe of all universes. As such, every point in our universe is both at the centre and the boundary of our universe. We could then say that the big bang (ie. the creation of our universe) is occurring at every moment going back to its origin sixteen billion years ago when a photon (ie. a particle of light) splits into another photon, which then splits into an electron and a positron (ie. matter and antimatter). By definition, photons travel at light-speed and thus exist at the boundary of our universe. From within our universe, light appears as both waves and particles. Interestingly, matter also appears as both waves and particles (ie. Schrödinger’s wave equation and electrons). From outside our universe, a single photon appears as a spherical film encapsulating our universe. One might argue that God and Light are the same thing. As such, it then follows that our universe exists inside of Her womb (ie. God’s womb). In essence, God and the universe therein contained can be effectively seen as a single particle (ie. the God particle). I have thusly defined God.
The Bernoulli Model. The essence of portfolio theory is forecasting, integrating and optimization. In 1670 both Newton and Leibniz formulated versions of calculus—ie. the mathematics of motion. John and James Bernoulli picked up on calculus, spread it through much of Europe, and set the roadmap for efficiency analysis by finding the curve for which a bead could slide down in the shortest time. No less than eight Bernoulli’s made significant contributions to mathematics. In 1952 a twenty-five year-old University of Chicago graduate student named Harry Markowitz stood on the shoulders of giants in producing a fourteen-page paper entitled Portfolio Selection. His approach combines regression analysis (ie. forecasting) with matrix algebra (ie. integrating) and linear programming (ie. optimization) in the engineering of portfolio theory. The Markowitz model uses exposure and historical data and inputs in producing an optimally efficient set of decisions as outputs. My Bernoulli model builds on the Markowitz model by adding components like the Delphi and expert opinion programs along with utility theory and event risk modeling using decision trees—and by fortifying existing components with advanced regression models and metaheuristic algorithms such as Monte Carlo simulation, neural networks, genetic and hill-climbing algorithms, and the state-of-the-art four-moment Camus distribution that I developed with the vast unrealized potential of simulation-based optimization. The Bernoulli model is a stylish Excel-based, RoboHelp-complemented, totally-expandable, enterprise-wide, actuarial-valuation, decision-making system designed for use at the executive level.
The Method of Argument. Like Newtonian physics, the method of authority is a cornerstone of Western civilization. Essentially it means that authority gets the last word and that government agents (eg. educators and doctors) are not responsible for answering to arguments. Consider that Descartes (1596-1650) formulated his famous Cartesian model for constructing arguments which is—Order thoughts from simple to complex—Only accept clear and distinct ideas as true—Divide arguments into as many parts as necessary—Check thoroughly for oversights—And rehearse, examine and test arguments over and over until they can be grasped with a single act of intuition or faith. Initially, one faithfully or intuitively senses truth, which is followed up by constructing rational arguments and then intuitively capturing completed arguments. In other words, faith leads us to reason and then reason leads us back to faith. And we must remember what Socrates (469-399 BC) said—Follow the argument wherever it leads. Sir James Jeans (1877-1946) said that God is a mathematician. Mathematics and actuarial science are disciplines involved in the constructing of arguments. I have solved all the world’s problems by introducing my method of argument. My theory of one (2001) proves that the government does not answer to arguments. I am proposing that we use Philosophymagazine-style essays (ie. sixteen hundred words) in the making of arguments. I am asking that government agents write essays that either challenge or accept my arguments and models.
My Story. In 1987 I moved to Toronto after graduating from the University of Calgary with a degree in applied mathematics—and found myself working for The Wyatt Company as an actuarial analyst. In 1989 I moved back to Calgary with The Wyatt Company. In December 1990 I was back in Calgary during which I was doing a six-month stint in the San Francisco office of The Wyatt Company. I then bought a house in Crescent Heights located north of downtown Calgary. In 1993 I qualified as an associate actuary. Actuaries use math to solve business problems. In 1995 I left The Wyatt Company and began consulting to TransCanada Pipelines and PetroCanada in developing Monte Carlo simulation models. In 1998 I began consulting with the CFO and treasurer of Canadian Pacific Limited. I also produced the first five essays regarding my theory of one and my Philosophymagazine.com website on 1 January 2001. I have published thirty-two essays to date. In 2001 Canadian Pacific Limited broke up into its five subsidiaries and was the beginning of my fall from grace. I lost my house in August 2003 and spent a year and a half in the hospital. Since then I have spent my time updating my Philosophymagazine.com website and writing essays and letters. The following is a list of arguments that I have also developed—determinism versus freewill, behaviorism versus existentialism and animal versus man.
The Nobel Prize. It is now ten years since I developed the theory of one (2001). Relativity theory (1905) only took four years before it was recognized by the scientific community. Quantum theory (1925) was recognized almost immediately by the scientific community. All that I am asking for is my fifteen minutes of fame. I am also arguing that we must amend the Canadian constitution to include topics from this essay. Since 2001, I have sent out over a dozen letters and material pertaining to the theory of one, the Bernoulli model and the method of argument to dozens of politicians, professors, doctors and executives across North America. I think that I deserve to be nominated for the Nobel Prize in that I have made three compelling arguments and models. What is the point of making an argument if no one answers it? I suggest that you write a brief letter arguing for my nomination of the Nobel Prize—and include a copy of this essay.
Conclusion. It is well established that the greatest scientific problem of all time is how to marry relativity theory (based on lightspeed) with quantum theory (based on Planck’s constant). I have solved the problem of how to unite relativity theory and quantum theory with my theory of one by recognizing that lightspeed and Planck’s constant are the same boundary of our universe. I further argue that even if my theory of one is wrong, it is still effectively right because it sets forth the pathway to truth—which is the question of how to unite relativity theory with quantum theory. The Bernoulli model combines forecasting, integrating and optimization algorithms in the optimal formulation of portfolio theory. The method of argument argues that we must base our society on arguments rather than authorities. I am asking you to nominate me for the Nobel Prize. Please contact me for a cup of coffee if you like.