Patty Crane: Books explores possibility that thousands worldwide could be distant family members

20世紀の哲学は「哲学の墓場」である——新たな原理の構想に向けて

『欲望論』の著者、竹田青嗣氏に聞く② 

そういうわけで、現代哲学は論理相対主義、思想的相対主義、批判的相対主義というように総じて相対主義に行き着いてしまい、人間にとって最も重要であるはずの、価値や倫理の普遍的な根拠を立てることができなくなってしまったのです。

このところ売り出し中のカンタン・メイヤスーなどがポストモダン思想を批判するのもこのためです。現代では哲学が死に瀕しているのです。

20世紀の哲学は、哲学の墓場です。

いま、哲学を学ぼうとする学生は、すでに存在しているどこかの哲学スクールに入ってその「話法」を習い、その｢ルール｣の中で他人があまりやっていない領域を見つければ学者としてやっていける。

ところがそのスクールの「話法」自体を考え直すような論文を書いたらもう終わり。

ほんとうは哲学は、より根本的、より普遍的な洞察の方法を見出していく言語ゲームのはずなのに、現実はさかしまになっている。

でも私は、哲学に強く引かれる若者は、いま言ったような哲学の本質への直観をやっぱりもっているはずだから、必ず哲学の方法の立て直しが起こるはずだと思っているんですね。

だから、私がその言い出し役を引き受けたいと思ったのです。

いま哲学が必要な理由

――相対主義の弊害と言えば、究極には力の強い者が勝つというニヒリズムに行き着くより他はない、ということもあるのではないかと思います。

「あとがき」で、今のままの状況が進めば、人間の社会はそうならざるを得なくなると強く警告されています。その危機感も執筆の大きな動機だったように思います。

近代哲学は、社会の構造の問題を解くために決定的な仕事をしました。近代以前には、そもそも個々人の自由が原理的に確保されているような社会はなかった。例外なく絶対専制支配の社会でした。

近代になって、ヨーロッパに近代哲学が現われて、万人に「自由」を確保する社会はいかにして可能かを、はじめて原理として提示することができた。

このことは、近代社会が資本主義という経済システムゆえにさまざまな矛盾を生み出していることとは、また別の問題です。

マルクス主義も、そのあとのポストモダン思想も、近代社会の大きな矛盾に目を奪われて、近代哲学が提示した社会原理の持つ、この決定的な重要性を忘れている。

問題を整理すればこうなります。

マルクス主義は、自由経済と資本主義が諸悪の根元だと考え、私的所有と自由競争を禁止しさえすれば、よい社会になると考えた。

しかしそれは大きな勘違いで、経済的な「平等」を力づくで実現させようとすると、逆にむしろ強大な権力システムが必要となり、その結果として、必然的に自由が抑圧されてしまう。

この事態を目撃したポストモダン思想は、反権力という対抗思想を作りあげた。しかし、近代社会における万人の自由が、じつは人民の権力によって維持されていることを、彼らはまったく見なかった。

統治する権力がなければ、むしろ先ほども言ったように万人の万人に対する闘争にならざるを得ず、その結果として、必ず力による自由の抑圧に帰結する。このことに現代思想は無知でした。

どのような「よい」統治権力を作り出すべきかが問題なのに、権力自体が｢悪｣だから、それを廃棄してしまえば問題は解決するというロマンチックな夢想に落ち込んでしまった。

ポストモダン思想は、相対主義の立場を取れば、権力だって相対化できると考えた。そしてそこから、どんな権力や制度も絶対的な根拠はもっていないという驚くべき論法が蔓延した。

でも哲学的にはまったく逆です。

相対主義の論理の核は、善悪、正しさも相対的なものにすぎず、その根拠などはどこにもない、という点にあります。しかしそうなれば、その究極の帰結は、善悪や正義･不正義を決めるのは、さっきも言ったように「力」の強いものだということにならざるを得ない。

社会思想の分野でも、相対主義の蔓延は、問題解決の放棄にしかならないんです。

ここ十数年の間に、現代資本主義は新しい局面に入りました。少なくとも先進国では人々に自由がゆきわたり、生活上の豊かさも味わえるようになりました。しかしその一方では、マネーゲームによる独占的支配が世界的な規模で進行している。

マルクス主義のあとに社会批判を担ったポストモダン思想が完全に的を外した批判にかまけているうちに、資本主義の構造がどんどん悪くなってしまったのです。

この観点からすれば、ポストモダン思想の原理よりも近代哲学の原理の方が優れていることは明白です。

モダンを超えると称したポストモダンなるものは、まったくの虚像にすぎなかった。だからこそ、社会構造に関する新しい原理が構想されないといけない。

これも、いま哲学が必要とされている理由です。

 

ゼロ除算の発見は日本です：

∞？？？    

∞は定まった数ではない・

人工知能はゼロ除算ができるでしょうか：

 

とても興味深く読みました：2014年2月2日　4周年を超えました：

ゼロ除算の発見と重要性を指摘した：日本、再生核研究所

 

 

ゼロ除算関係論文・本

2017年11月15日(水)
テーマ：

The null set is conceptually similar to the role of the number “zero” as it is used in quantum field theory. In quantum field theory, one can take the empty set, the vacuum, and generate all possible physical configurations of the Universe being modelled by acting on it with creation operators, and one can similarly change from one thing to another by applying mixtures of creation and anihillation operators to suitably filled or empty states. The anihillation operator applied to the vacuum, however, yields zero.

Zero in this case is the null set – it stands, quite literally, for no physical state in the Universe. The important point is that it is not possible to act on zero with a creation operator to create something; creation operators only act on the vacuum which is empty but not zero. Physicists are consequently fairly comfortable with the existence of operations that result in “nothing” and don’t even require that those operations be contradictions, only operationally non-invertible.

It is also far from unknown in mathematics. When considering the set of all real numbers as quantities and the operations of ordinary arithmetic, the “empty set” is algebraically the number zero (absence of any quantity, po
sitive or negative). However, when one performs a division operation algebraically, one has to be careful to exclude division by zero from the set of permitted operations! The result of division by zero isn’t zero, it is “not a number” or “undefined” and is not in the Universe of real numbers.

Just as one can easily “prove” that 1 = 2 if one does algebra on this set of numbers as if one can divide by zero legitimately3.34, so in logic one gets into trouble if one assumes that the set of all things that are in no set including the empty set is a set within the algebra, if one tries to form the set of all sets that do not include themselves, if one asserts a Universal Set of Men exists containing a set of men wherein a male barber shaves all men that do not shave themselves3.35.

It is not – it is the null set, not the empty set, as there can be no male barbers in a non-empty set of men (containing at least one barber) that shave all men in that set that do not shave themselves at a deeper level than a mere empty list. It is not an empty set that could be filled by some algebraic operation performed on Real Male Barbers Presumed to Need Shaving in trial Universes of Unshaven Males as you can very easily see by considering any particular barber, perhaps one named “Socrates”, in any particular Universe of Men to see if any of the sets of that Universe fit this predicate criterion with Socrates as the barber. Take the empty set (no men at all). Well then there are no barbers, including Socrates, so this cannot be the set we are trying to specify as it clearly must contain at least one barber and we’ve agreed to call its relevant barber Socrates. (and if it contains more than one, the rest of them are out of work at the moment).

Suppose a trial set contains Socrates alone. In the classical rendition we ask, does he shave himself? If we answer “no”, then he is a member of this class of men who do not shave themselves and therefore must shave himself. Oops. Well, fine, he must shave himself. However, if he does shave himself, according to the rules he can only shave men who don’t shave themselves and so he doesn’t shave himself. Oops again. Paradox. When we try to apply the rule to a potential Socrates to generate the set, we get into trouble, as we cannot decide whether or not Socrates should shave himself.

Note that there is no problem at all in the existential set theory being proposed. In that set theory either Socrates must shave himself as All Men Must Be Shaven and he’s the only man around. Or perhaps he has a beard, and all men do not in fact need shaving. Either way the set with just Socrates does not contain a barber that shaves all men because Socrates either shaves himself or he doesn’t, so we shrug and continue searching for a set that satisfies our description pulled from an actual Universe of males including barbers. We immediately discover that adding more men doesn’t matter. As long as those men, barbers or not, either shave themselves or Socrates shaves them they are consistent with our set description (although in many possible sets we find that hey, other barbers exist and shave other men who do not shave themselves), but in no case can Socrates (as our proposed single barber that shaves all men that do not shave themselves) be such a barber because he either shaves himself (violating the rule) or he doesn’t (violating the rule). Instead of concluding that there is a paradox, we observe that the criterion simply doesn’t describe any subset of any possible Universal Set of Men with no barbers, including the empty set with no men at all, or any subset that contains at least Socrates for any possible permutation of shaving patterns including ones that leave at least some men unshaven altogether.

 

 I understand your note as if you are saying the limit is infinity but nothing is equal to infinity, but you concluded corretly infinity is undefined. Your example of getting the denominator smaller and smalser the result of the division is a very large number that approches infinity. This is the intuitive mathematical argument that plunged philosophy into mathematics. at that level abstraction mathematics, as well as phyisics become the realm of philosophi. The notion of infinity is more a philosopy question than it is mathamatical. The reason we cannot devide by zero is simply axiomatic as Plato pointed out. The underlying reason for the axiom is because sero is nothing and deviding something by nothing is undefined. That axiom agrees with the notion of limit infinity, i.e. undefined. There are more phiplosphy books and thoughts about infinity in philosophy books than than there are discussions on infinity in math books.

 

 

ゼロ除算の歴史：ゼロ除算はゼロで割ることを考えるであるが、アリストテレス以来問題とされ、ゼロの記録がインドで初めて６２８年になされているが、既にそのとき、正解1/0が期待されていたと言う。しかし、理論づけられず、その後１３００年を超えて、不可能である、あるいは無限、無限大、無限遠点とされてきたものである。

An Early Reference to Division by Zero C. B. Boyer

 

OUR HUMANITY AND DIVISION BY ZERO

Lea esta bitácora en español
There is a mathematical concept that says that division by zero has no meaning, or is an undefined expression, because it is impossible to have a real number that could be multiplied by zero in order to obtain another number different from zero.
While this mathematical concept has been held as true for centuries, when it comes to the human level the present situation in global societies has, for a very long time, been contradicting it. It is true that we don’t all live in a mathematical world or with mathematical concepts in our heads all the time. However, we cannot deny that societies around the globe are trying to disprove this simple mathematical concept: that division by zero is an impossible equation to solve.
Yes! We are all being divided by zero tolerance, zero acceptance, zero love, zero compassion, zero willingness to learn more about the other and to find intelligent and fulfilling ways to adapt to new ideas, concepts, ways of doing things, people and cultures. We are allowing these ‘zero denominators’ to run our equations, our lives, our souls.
Each and every single day we get more divided and distanced from other people who are different from us. We let misinformation and biased concepts divide us, and we buy into these aberrant concepts in such a way, that we get swept into this division by zero without checking our consciences first.
I believe, however, that if we change the zeros in any of the “divisions by zero” that are running our lives, we will actually be able to solve the non-mathematical concept of this equation: the human concept.
>I believe deep down that we all have a heart, a conscience, a brain to think with, and, above all, an immense desire to learn and evolve. And thanks to all these positive things that we do have within, I also believe that we can use them to learn how to solve our “division by zero” mathematical impossibility at the human level. I am convinced that the key is open communication and an open heart. Nothing more, nothing less.
Are we scared of, or do we feel baffled by the way another person from another culture or country looks in comparison to us? Are we bothered by how people from other cultures dress, eat, talk, walk, worship, think, etc.? Is this fear or bafflement so big that we much rather reject people and all the richness they bring within?
How about if instead of rejecting or retreating from that person—division of our humanity by zero tolerance or zero acceptance—we decided to give them and us a chance?
How about changing that zero tolerance into zero intolerance? Why not dare ask questions about the other person’s culture and way of life? Let us have the courage to let our guard down for a moment and o
pen up enough for this person to ask us questions about our culture and way of life. How about if we learned to accept that while a person from another culture is living and breathing in our own culture, it is totally impossible for him/her to completely abandon his/her cultural values in order to become what we want her to become?
Let’s be totally honest with ourselves at least: Would any of us really renounce who we are and where we come from just to become what somebody else asks us to become?
If we are not willing to lose our identity, why should we ask somebody else to lose theirs?
I believe with all my heart that if we practiced positive feelings—zero intolerance, zero non-acceptance, zero indifference, zero cruelty—every day, the premise that states that division by zero is impossible would continue being true, not only in mathematics, but also at the human level. We would not be divided anymore; we would simply be building a better world for all of us.
Hoping to have touched your soul in a meaningful way,
Adriana Adarve, Asheville, NC
…/our-humanity-and-division…/

 

5000年？？？？？

2017年09月01日(金)NEW ! 
テーマ：数学
Former algebraic approach was formally perfect, but it merely postulated existence of sets and morphisms [18] without showing methods to construct them. The primary concern of modern algebras is not how an operation can be performed, but whether it maps into or onto and the like abstract issues [19–23]. As important as this may be for proofs, the nature does not really care about all that. The PM’s concerns were not constructive, even though theoretically significant. We need thus an approach that is more relevant to operations performed in nature, which never complained about morphisms or the allegedly impossible division by zero, as far as I can tell. Abstract sets and morphisms should be de-emphasized as hardly operational. My decision to come up with a definite way to implement the feared division by zero was not really arbitrary, however. It has removed a hidden paradox from number theory and an obvious absurd from algebraic group theory. It was necessary step for full deployment of constructive, synthetic mathematics (SM) [2,3]. Problems hidden in PM implicitly affect all who use mathematics, even though we may not always be aware of their adverse impact on our thinking. Just take a look at the paradox that emerges from the usual prescription for multiplication of zeros that remained uncontested for some 5000 years 0
0 ¼ 0 ) 0
1=1 ¼ 0 ) 0
1 ¼ 0
1) 1ð? ¼ ?Þ1 ð0aÞ This ‘‘fact’’ was covered up by the infamous prohibition on division by zero [2]. How ingenious. If one is prohibited from dividing by zero one could not obtain this paradox. Yet the prohibition did not really make anything right. It silenced objections to irresponsible reasonings and prevented corrections to the PM’s flamboyant axiomatizations. The prohibition on treating infinity as invertible counterpart to zero did not do any good either. We use infinity in calculus for symbolic calculations of limits [24], for zero is the infinity’s twin [25], and also in projective geometry as well as in geometric mapping of complex numbers. Therein a sphere is cast onto the plane that is tangent to it and its free (opposite) pole in a point at infinity [26–28]. Yet infinity as an inverse to the natural zero removes the whole absurd (0a), for we obtain [2] 0 ¼ 1=1 ) 0
0 ¼ 1=12 > 0 0 ð0bÞ Stereographic projection of complex numbers tacitly contradicted the PM’s prescribed way to multiply zeros, yet it was never openly challenged. The old formula for multiplication of zeros (0a) is valid only as a practical approximation, but it is group-theoretically inadmissible in no-nonsense reasonings. The tiny distinction in formula (0b) makes profound theoretical difference for geometries and consequently also for physical applications. T

とても興味深く読みました：

 

 

10,000 Year Clock
by Renny Pritikin
Conversation with Paolo Salvagione, lead engineer on the 10,000-year clock project, via e-mail in February 2010.

For an introduction to what we’re talking about here’s a short excerpt from a piece by Michael Chabon, published in 2006 in Details: ….Have you heard of this thing? It is going to be a kind of gigantic mechanical computer, slow, simple and ingenious, marking the hour, the day, the year, the century, the millennium, and the precession of the equinoxes, with a huge orrery to keep track of the immense ticking of the six naked-eye planets on their great orbital mainspring. The Clock of the Long Now will stand sixty feet tall, cost tens of millions of dollars, and when completed its designers and supporters plan to hide it in a cave in the Great Basin National Park in Nevada, a day’s hard walking from anywhere. Oh, and it’s going to run for ten thousand years. But even if the Clock of the Long Now fails to last ten thousand years, even if it breaks down after half or a quarter or a tenth that span, this mad contraption will already have long since fulfilled its purpose. Indeed the Clock may have accomplished its greatest task before it is ever finished, perhaps without ever being built at all. The point of the Clock of the Long Now is not to measure out the passage, into their unknown future, of the race of creatures that built it. The point of the Clock is to revive and restore the whole idea of the Future, to get us thinking about the Future again, to the degree if not in quite the way same way that we used to do, and to reintroduce the notion that we don’t just bequeath the future—though we do, whether we think about it or not. We also, in the very broadest sense of the first person plural pronoun, inherit it.

Renny Pritikin: When we were talking the other day I said that this sounds like a cross between Borges and the vast underground special effects from Forbidden Planet. I imagine you hear lots of comparisons like that…

Paolo Salvagione: (laughs) I can’t say I’ve heard that comparison. A childhood friend once referred to the project as a cross between Tinguely and Fabergé. When talking about the clock, with people, there’s that divide-by-zero moment (in the early days of computers to divide by zero was a sure way to crash the computer) and I can understand why. Where does one place, in one’s memory, such a thing, such a concept? After the pause, one could liken it to a reboot, the questions just start streaming out.

RP: OK so I think the word for that is nonplussed. Which the thesaurus matches with flummoxed, bewildered, at a loss. So the question is why even (I assume) fairly sophisticated people like your friends react like that. Is it the physical scale of the plan, or the notion of thinking 10,000 years into the future—more than the length of human history?

PS: I’d say it’s all three and more. I continue to be amazed by the specificity of the questions asked. Anthropologists ask a completely different set of questions than say, a mechanical engineer or a hedge fund manager. Our disciplines tie us to our perspectives. More than once, a seemingly innocent question has made an impact on the design of the clock. It’s not that we didn’t know the answer, sometimes we did, it’s that we hadn’t thought about it from the perspective of the person asking the question. Back to your question. I think when sophisticated people, like you, thread this concept through their own personal narrative it tickles them. Keeping in mind some people hate to be tickled.

RP: Can you give an example of a question that redirected the plan? That’s really so interesting, that all you brainiacs slaving away on this project and some amateur blithely pinpoints a problem or inconsistency or insight that spins it off in a different direction. It’s like the butterfly effect.

PS: Recently a climatologist pointed out that our equation of time cam, (photo by Rolfe Horn) (a cam is a type of gear: link) a device that tracks the d
ifference between solar noon and mundane noon as well as the precession of the equinoxes, did not account for the redistribution of water away from the earth’s poles. The equation-of-time cam is arguably one of the most aesthetically pleasing parts of the clock. It also happens to be one that is fairly easy to explain. It visually demonstrates two extremes. If you slice it, like a loaf of bread, into 10,000 slices each slice would represent a year. The outside edge of the slice, let’s call it the crust, represents any point in that year, 365 points, 365 days. You could, given the right amount of magnification, divide it into hours, minutes, even seconds. Stepping back and looking at the unsliced cam the bottom is the year 2000 and the top is the year 12000. The twist that you see is the precession of the equinoxes. Now here’s the fun part, there’s a slight taper to the twist, that’s the slowing of the earth on its axis. As the ice at the poles melts we have a redistribution of water, we’re all becoming part of the “slow earth” movement.

RP: Are you familiar with Charles Ray’s early work in which you saw a plate on a table, or an object on the wall, and they looked stable, but were actually spinning incredibly slowly, or incredibly fast, and you couldn’t tell in either case? Or, more to the point, Tim Hawkinson’s early works in which he had rows of clockwork gears that turned very very fast, and then down the line, slower and slower, until at the end it approached the slowness that you’re dealing with?

PS: The spinning pieces by Ray touches on something we’re trying to avoid. We want you to know just how fast or just how slow the various parts are moving. The beauty of the Ray piece is that you can’t tell, fast, slow, stationary, they all look the same. I’m not familiar with the Hawkinson clockwork piece. I’ve see the clock pieces where he hides the mechanism and uses unlikely objects as the hands, such as the brass clasp on the back of a manila envelope or the tab of a coke can.

RP: Spin Sink (1 Rev./100 Years) (1995), in contrast, is a 24-foot-long row of interlocking gears, the smallest of which is driven by a whirring toy motor that in turn drives each consecutively larger and more slowly turning gear up to the largest of all, which rotates approximately once every one hundred years.

PS: I don’t know how I missed it, it’s gorgeous. Linking the speed that we can barely see with one that we rarely have the patience to wait for.

RP: : So you say you’ve opted for the clock’s time scale to be transparent. How will the clock communicate how fast it’s going?

PS: By placing the clock in a mountain we have a reference to long time. The stratigraphy provides us with the slowest metric. The clock is a middle point between millennia and seconds. Looking back 10,000 years we find the beginnings of civilization. Looking at an earthenware vessel from that era we imagine its use, the contents, the craftsman. The images painted or inscribed on the outside provide some insight into the lives and the languages of the distant past. Often these interpretations are flawed, biased or over-reaching. What I’m most enchanted by is that we continue to construct possible pasts around these objects, that our curiosity is overwhelming. We line up to see the treasures of Tut, or the remains of frozen ancestors. With the clock we are asking you to create possible futures, long futures, and with them the narratives that made them happen.

 

ダ・ヴィンチの名言 格言｜無こそ最も素晴らしい存在

 

ゼロ除算の発見はどうでしょうか： 
Black holes are where God divided by zero： 

再生核研究所声明371（2017.6.27）ゼロ除算の講演―　国際会議　 
 

1/0=0、0/0=0、z/0=0 
 
1/0=0、0/0=0、z/0=0 
 
1/0=0、0/0=0、z/0=0 
 

ソクラテス・プラトン・アリストテレス　その他 
 

ドキュメンタリー 2017: 神の数式 第２回 宇宙はなぜ生まれたのか 
 
〔NHKスペシャル〕神の数式 完全版 第3回 宇宙はなぜ始まったのか 
&t=3318s 
〔NHKスペシャル〕神の数式 完全版 第1回 この世は何からできているのか 
 
NHKスペシャル 神の数式 完全版 第4回 異次元宇宙は存在するか 
 

再生核研究所声明 411(2018.02.02): 　ゼロ除算発見4周年を迎えて 
 

再生核研究所声明 416(2018.2.20): 　ゼロ除算をやってどういう意味が有りますか。何か意味が有りますか。何になるのですか　－　回答 
再生核研究所声明 417(2018.2.23): 　ゼロ除算って何ですか　－　中学生、高校生向き　回答 
再生核研究所声明 418(2018.2.24): 　割り算とは何ですか？　ゼロ除算って何ですか　－　小学生、中学生向き　回答 
再生核研究所声明 420(2018.3.2): ゼロ除算は正しいですか，合っていますか、信用できますか　－　回答 
再生核研究所声明 427(2018.5.8): 神の数式、神の意志　そしてゼロ除算

2018.3.18．午前中　最後の講演：　日本数学会　東大駒場、函数方程式論分科会　講演書画カメラ用　原稿 
The Japanese Mathematical Society, Annual Meeting at the University of Tokyo. 2018.3.18. 
 より

 

*057 Pinelas,S./Caraballo,T./Kloeden,P./Graef,J.(eds.): Differential and Difference Equations with Applications: ICDDEA, Amadora, 2017. (Springer Proceedings in Mathematics and Statistics, Vol. 230) May 2018 587 pp. 

 

再生核研究所声明 424(2018.3.29): 　レオナルド・ダ・ヴィンチとゼロ除算

 

 

Title page of Leonhard Euler, Vollständige Anleitung zur Algebra, Vol. 1 (edition of 1771, first published in 1770), and p. 34 from Article 83, where Euler explains why a number divided by zero gives infinity.

 

私は数学を信じない。　アルバート・アインシュタイン / I don’t believe in mathematics. Albert Einstein→ゼロ除算ができなかったからではないでしょうか。

1423793753.460.341866474681。

 

Einstein’s Only Mistake: Division by Zero

 

 

ゼロ除算は定義が問題です：

 

再生核研究所声明　１４８（2014.2.12）　100/0=0,  0/0=0　－　割り算の考えを自然に拡張すると　―　神の意志 

 

再生核研究所声明１７１（2014.7.30）掛け算の意味と割り算の意味　―　ゼロ除算100/0=0は自明である？

 

 

Title page of Leonhard Euler, Vollständige Anleitung zur Algebra, Vol. 1 (edition of 1771, first published in 1770), and p. 34 from Article 83, where Euler explains why a number divided by zero gives infinity.

 

私は数学を信じない。　アルバート・アインシュタイン / I don’t believe in mathematics. Albert Einstein→ゼロ除算ができなかったからではないでしょうか。1423793753.460.341866474681。

 

Einstein’s Only Mistake: Division by Zero

 

#divide by zero

TOP DEFINITION

 &nbsp
;

A super-smart math teacher that teaches at HTHS and can divide by zero.

Hey look, that genius’s IQ is over 9000!

    

by  October 21, 2009

 

 

 

 

民主党からの大統領候補指名の候補者アンドリュー・ヤン氏、

テクノロジーがこれから先、何億もの仕事を消していくだろうと警告する。

大量失業にもかかわらず、一般的な繁栄を実現させる事が可能な

公共政策が必要となるのです。

画像　：　ヤン氏　2020から

 

 

 

 

パラダイムシフトとは・・・

　　　　　　　　その時代や分野において当然のことと考えられていた認識や思想、

　　　　　　　　社会全体の価値観などが革命的にもしくは劇的に変化することをいう。

 

 

 

 

 

　            　　　　　　　　　　　　  　＿☗＿　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　

　　　　　　　　　 　　　　　　　　　  ℵℵ   

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　   ~　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　☟

　　　　　　　　★:*:。★:*:。★:*:。★:*:。★:*:。★:*:。★:*:。★

 

 

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　TED

 

　　　　　　　　　　　Fixing the Flow of Human Capital:

　　　　　　　　　　　 Andrew Yang at TEDxGeorgetown

　　　　　　　　　　　人間資本の流れの修正：アンドリュー・ヤン氏

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　TRD　ジョージェットタウン

　　　　　　　

 

 

　　　　　　　　★:*:。★:*:。★:*:。★:*:。★:*:。★:*:。★:*:。★

 

　

２０２０年　米国大統領選挙にアンドリュー・ヤン氏は毎月$ 1000〈約１０万円）の

ベーシックインカムを公約に掲げて出馬しますっ！

贅沢をしない人はそのお金でNGO&NPOなど奉仕活動に自分の人生を使う人々も増える。

「人間に投資する」という意味の「人間ファースト」です。

米国の政治が変われば・・・日本の政治にも新しいそよ風が必ず運ばれますっ！

若者の未来や地球人全体の未来に希望の光がかならずともされる！　応援しよう～～！

 

　彩冷える　

 

 

 

 

 

Jul 13, 2018 / Andrew Yang

 

Humanity is more important than money — it’s time for capitalism to get an upgrade

人間性はお金よりも重要　－　資本主義がアップグレードする時きたり！

 

 

What capitalism prioritizes, the world does more of. So how can we change capitalism so that it focuses on what humans really want and need? Entrepreneur Andrew Yang has a surprising proposal.

何が世界でより多く行われる資本主義の優先順位なのか。

人は何が本当にしたくて手に入れたいのかに焦点をあてるのに、

どうやって、資本主義を変更すればいいのか。

起業家アンドリュー・ヤン氏は驚くべき提案を持っているのです。

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

　稲葉剛氏　

　立教大学大学院21世紀社会デザイン研究科特任准教授　

 

 

 

 

 

 

Most of us do some or many of these things — and usually, we don’t do them for money. What these activities add up to is what we might call a normal life, a well-rounded life of care and character, rich with community and creativity and balance. When you do these things, you don’t think of yourself as participating in capitalism.

 

＜私たちのほとんどが行う事・・・これらのいくつかの物事の多く。＞

 

お金のためにする事ではない。

これらの活動に何を追加するのかは、

普通の生活とは何なのかかもしれない。

人格と精神のケアのバランスのとれた生活、

地域社会と創造性とバランスのある豊かさ、

これらを行う時には、資本主義に参加しているのであり

自分の事を考えているのではない。

 

 

　　　毎週火曜よる9時のドラマ「健康で文化的な最低限の生活」（フジテレビ系）

　大西連氏　

　認定NPO法人自立生活サポートセンター・もやい理事長

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But the fact is, capitalism moves and energizes the modern world. And what capitalism values, our world does more of; what it doesn’t, we do less of. Many of us feel like the activities of a normal life are becoming harder and harder to accomplish. So the question becomes: In a system where capitalism is a prime determinant of value, how can we preserve what we truly value as humans, what matters to us beyond money?

 

＜しかし、実際には資本主義の動きで現代社会につながっている。＞

 

資本主義の価値とは何か、我々の世界はもっと何をするだろうか、

何を削減していくのか。

多くの人々が普通の生活をするのも難しくなってきていると感じていて、

成し遂げるのも困難です。だから問題なんです：

システムの中で資本主義は主要な価値決定、

人間としての本当の価値は何なのかをどう保護するのか、

お金を超えて何が我々にとって重要なのか？

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

莫大な軍事費を被災地や社会福祉へ・・・祈り。

　2018_anti_isdef　

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I’m someone who was educated to thrive and dominate in our capitalist system. And my deep conviction now is: it has to change. I’m an Ivy League graduate who followed the 59 percent of my peers into one of the four jobs we all take — lawyer, business consultant, finance, technology — in one of the four US cities we all move to, and in the process abandoning our hometowns and the dreams that first inspired our academic success. I watched the country’s best-educated young people fall into jobs that were designed to harvest and concentrate wealth, working insane hours to pay off insane loans. And my hometown friends who didn’t end up on the Ivy League track are facing a bleaker future, as automation destroys more and more jobs in towns across America, disrupting com
munities and families. No matter where we stand on the socioeconomic ladder, the future of the “normal life” doesn’t look good.

 

＜私は我々の資本主義体制の中で支配され繁栄するために教育を受けた誰かなんです。＞

 

私の今の深い信念は：　　変えなければいけない！

私は５９％の同僚が弁護士、ビジネスコンサルタント、金融、

テクノロジー関係、これらの４つの仕事に就職する

アイビーリーグの卒業生です。

 

Ivy League（アイビーリーグ）とは・・・米国北東部にある名門 8 私立大学の総称。

 

4つの米国の都市の一つで、私たちのすべてが移動して、

私たちが故郷と夢を放棄する過程で、

初めに私たちの学問的成功に影響を与えました。

お金に執着した農業経営、

非常識なローンを完済する非常識な時間といった

仕事に陥る国で最高の教育を受けて若い人々を見てきました。

アイビーリーグに乗れなかった私の故郷の友人は暗黒の未来に直面しています。

AIはもっともっとこの先、仕事を奪い全米の町で、

地域社会や家族を崩壊させるだろう。

たとえ我々が社会経済のはしごの上に立たされていようが、

未来の「普通の生活」は良いようには見えません。

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

未来の「普通の生活」は良いようには見えません。米国から・・・パラダイムシフトをｗｗ！

ちなみに、ウルフアリスは英国のバンドですっ。

　Wolf Alice　

NPO　bond Project　

SCANDAL　

 

 

 

 

 

 

　＜フォロアーの多い芸能人やユーチューバーやバンドマンやブロガーの方々・・・

　　　　　　　　　BI制度（ベーシックインカム）など国民の未来の不安を取り除く

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　何らかの政治政策の重要性を拡散よろしくお願いしますっ。＞

 

　　　　　　　AI時代の到来に向けて仕事はどんどんなくなります。

　　　　　　　BI制度や何らかの政治政策が不可欠であることを

　　　　　　　多くの人々に伝えてくらさい。

　　　　　　　政治からその取り組みやそれらの政治家を支持する事の重要性。

　　　　　　　日本でも国民が選挙でBI制度やそれらの政策を政治に取り込んでくれる

　　　　　　　政治家に投票していく事れす。

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

　　　　戦争を静かに終わらせていき・・・AI時代の到来に向けてBI制度のような政治政策で

　　　　「　貧困撲滅＆格差改善！　」　

　　　　　地球人の未来を希望へ　地上の環境を楽園に戻せますよう・・・祈り。

　　レッドベルベット　　

　　　DATS　

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

＜ベーシックインカムと生活保護どう違うのですか？＞

 

生活保護は「自分はダメ人間」とか「負け組」とか日本の場合、

社会からの見えないレッテルで自信すらそぎ取られるイメージがあります。

 

BI制度は方向性が全く違います。

BI制度は無条件。

そのお金をもとにして何か企業を起こしたり、

生活保護では仕事をすれば犯罪です、でも

BI制度ならパートタイムの仕事を探したりもできる。

贅沢をしない人は自分の人生の時間をNGO＆NPOなどの

奉仕活動に使うなど未来の展望は明るくなります。

 

　　　　　　　　　　「人間に国が投資する。」という事なんです。

 

「資本主義」に食いつぶされてしまうのではなくて・・・

「人間性を豊かにしていく社会をつくるために人間にお金を投資する」

 

　　　　　　　　

　　　　　　　　　　　人間資本主義なんです。

 

 

 

　　　　　　　　　

 

 

 

　　　「　　米国では・・・BI制度を選挙公約に掲げて出馬する

　　　　　　２０２０年米国大統領選挙へ出馬する候補者がいます。」

 

 

　            　　　　　　　　　　　　  　＿☗＿　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　

　　　　　　　　　 　　　　　　　　　  ℵℵ   

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　   ~　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　☟

　　　　　　　　★:*:。★:*:。★:*:。★:*:。★:*:。★:*:。★:*:。★

 

 

 

　　　　　　　　　２０２０年米国　民主党からの大統領候補指名の

　　　　　　　　　　　　　候補者アンドリュー・ヤン氏

 

　　　　　　　　　Andrew Yang for President | Humanity First

　　　　　　　

 

 

　　　　　　　　★:*:。★:*:。★:*:。★:*:。★:*:。★:*:。★:*:。★

 

 

　　　　　

　　　　　　　　　　　リンゴ音楽祭　

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What is happening in Fukushima?
By Satoshi Takamatsu
March 17, 2011
In Japanese:

Due to the subject matter, this entry may seem a bit more formal than usual. It is quite a long
entry, but if you have time, please read it. It may help shed some light on what is happening in Fukushima.

The Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant was hit by an earthquake of a magnitude that far
surpassed any expectations. The intensity of the earthquake and tsunami (tidal wave) that
followed was a hundred times greater than what Japan had been preparing and bracing for,
so it is not surprising that the nuclear power plant in Fukushima also suffered damage. (A 0.2
difference in magnitude produces 2 times the energy).

Despite being struck by a natural disaster of such magnitude, the reactors that were in
operation automatically shut down when the earthquake struck. The situation will not
become catastrophic as long as the temperatures of the reactors can be maintained
low. Having said that, I completely understand why some people are expressing
concerns. Through conversations or emails exchanged with friends, I have discovered that
many people are scared and worried. Some people are over-reacting, it seems, to the nuclear
issue; they are barricading themselves indoors. I felt that the best way I could help people
under the current situation was to accurately and in simple layman’s terms explain what is
happening in Fukushima, so that is why I am writing this entry.

I studied radiation in college and conducted experiments at the Tokai Village Nuclear Plant
in Ibaragi prefecture. Before I began my experiments I studied radiation at length and also
acquired the Radiation Protection Supervisor certification. So I have some knowledge about
radiation. What I am about to write is my personal opinion, which I have carefully formed
based on the analysis of experts around the world. I am writing this with the hope that it will
help clarify what is going on amidst a confusing mass of information.

Those of you who may be more directly impacted by issues in Fukushima may find this entry
offensive as I will be focusing on the situation in Tokyo and reiterating, “Tokyo is safe.” I do
sincerely apologize in advance for any offense this entry may cause you. Please note that I am
writing this for my friends and family living in Tokyo. I felt that this would be the best way for
me to help people who are close to me, living in Tokyo, and to give them some peace of mind,
so please bear with me.

I have tried to summarize the information I have collected over the last three days as

accurately and as straightforward as I could (as of the night of March 17th). Although I had

initially written this summary for my friends and family, I have decided to post it on my blog.

I am neither a journalist nor an expert, so please do not expect my synopsis to be perfect.

Sorting through the superabundance of information may help you “understand” what you may

have thought was “confusing” before; that was true for myself. I believe often we are “afraid”

of the “unknown.” I hope that my entry will help you understand what is going on and

alleviate fears.

I will be introducing information I thought was essential, that would help give us reassurance.

1. It is impossible to get accurate real-time updates about “what is happening” and “what
measures are being implemented” at the Fukushima nuclear plant from the government.

The government does not want to provide real-time information for a number of reasons. And
there are also things even the “government doesn’t know in real-time.”

This is true even with a “good government” or an “ideal government.” (Although there
may be a difference in the way they communicate or in the capabilities of the nation) what
governments are first and foremost concerned with is the safety of their people and about
the preservation of the nations’ economic capacity (with the desire to minimize primary and
secondary damages). Faced with a crisis of such unparalleled scale, governments neither
can take responsibility nor evade taking responsibility for what has happened. Governments
(in most cases) only have one thing on their minds – to do the best they possibly can for the
people.

Some have criticized Tokyo Electric Power Company Inc. (TEPCO) saying that it has only
provided vague answers to date, but this can’t be helped either. There are frequent explosions
at the nuclear plant, and even if the workers are wearing hazmat suits, they are only able
to work up to 15 or 30 minutes a day near the facility before they reach the daily limit of
radiation exposure. It is difficult enough just to “go look” at what is happening to the reactors.
What is more, many of the radiation measuring instruments are broken. So it is very difficult
for TEPCO to acquire a great deal of accurate information. Of course since the people working
on site are professionals, they are able to make an “intelligent guess” of what may happen.
But “estimations” and “possible scenarios” would only cause confusion among the public.

Without a doubt, as a private enterprise, TEPCO wants to minimize the damages. And it is
also indisputable that as a public utility company, it would like to contain and limit radioactive
contamination as much as possible. Moreover, they have had no training or experience
speaking to the public about such a matter of great importance. And as they are trying
to stick to the facts and refrain from making speculations as much as they possibly can,
this makes their press conferences seem rather awkward. And if an extremely important
announcement needs to be made, the “government” would want to be the one to make such
an announcement. TEPCO and other institutions are employing their best efforts and acting
as professionally as they can. I believe that for the moment, we should stop being suspicious
of “what TEPCO is doing right now.” The fact that they tried to use the same facility for over
40 years or other policy errors are another matter. What I am talking about are the measures
they are implementing to handle the current issue. Japan’s Self Defense Force, the police, and
the fire department are also working as hard as they can to help.

I have also heard some people say, “Can the government be trusted? Can we really leave it up
to our head of state?” But one cannot interject one’s opinion in announcements regarding an
issue of such gravity and scale as radiation. So, there is no room for the head of state to reflect
his personal opinion in the measures being taken. When sophisticated technical problems

are putting people’s lives at risk, it is the experts in the field that decide what the appropriate
measures are.
When Apollo 13 was facing a crisis, was the U.S. president able to do anything? He could not.
It was NASA’s intelligence and the astronauts that tackled the issue. The experts at the nuclear
plant, the police, the Self Defense Force, and the firefighters are, as sleep deprived as they
are, working around the clock trying to think of and implement the best possible solution.
With all eyes on Japan, the Japanese government cannot cover up what is going on like the
Russian government did in Chernobyl. Therefore, we have no reason to be “suspicious of our
government.”

We can trust our government. Having said that, there are many areas where they can improve
– “are they communicating well?”; “have they been able to provide accurate directions
quickly?”; “is the government implementing preemptive measures in preparation for the
worst?” These are questions we are all asking ourselves. Although the experts are developing
strategies to handle the technological issues, there may come a time, in the near future, where
the government will have to make a difficult political decision. I hope that when that time
comes, the
government will make the right “decision” and exhibit strong leadership. If we
begin criticizing the government, there will be no end, and I am sure you have all become tired
of reading such articles. Here, I would like to refrain from critiquing the government; rather I
would like to focus on shedding light on the current situation.

2. I believe that the government is refraining from sharing information about “what is
happening now” and “what measures are being implemented” for the following reasons
(although they have begun to give details recently):

A. The media may over publicize or provide erroneous information without sufficient literacy
about nuclear power generation or radiation (for example, “what does it really mean when a
nuclear reactor melts down?” and if “a meltdown does occur,” “within what walls,” “within
what container” does it occur?” “Can the radiation be contained in the container?”
Making comments such as “meltdown has begun” or a “meltdown is inevitable” without
understanding these issues in depth will only cause unnecessary confusion.

B. In addition to the mass media, social networks such as twitter, which was a well functioning
lifeline immediately after the earthquake, may suddenly transform into a device used to
widely disperse the general public’s mistaken notions. In the mid term, the information
available will converge on a large social network to become the “truth” or “recognized fact.”
But in the meantime, although people’s “anxieties” may be “incorrect,” they can spread
instantaneously and be perceived as being “factual” until people realize that such information
is actually a misconception.

C.
There is a possibility that people will begin to panic in response to the media coverage.

D. As a result, people may begin to hoard goods, thereby create a shortage in supply of
essential commodities.

E. Unnecessary evacuation will wreak havoc to the transportation system such as trains.

F. Collective fear and stress, especially during blackouts, may lead to localized riots resulting in
criminal activities such as looting and rape.

G. When economic and manufacturing activities significantly decrease due to perceived fears
about the current situation, this will have an astronomic effect on the economy in the short
term.

From the broader perspective, the above should be avoided. In the mid term, although the
freedom of the press should be respected, unless the media can take responsibility for the
possible confusion and chaos its coverage on the nuclear plant may cause, providing more
information than “what has been released by the government” “about what is happening
now” based on “speculations” is not necessarily the right thing to do.

If information about “what is happening now” and “what measures are being taken” is
released in real-time, there will be a lot of commotion, a lot of “criticism” and “suggestions.”
“Inject sea water!” “Secure electrical power!” “Use helicopters pour water on the reactors!”
– The government and TEPCO have taken all of this into account and are implementing the
best measures possible. But on site, even a delay of a single second in decision making may
result in a catastrophe. There is no time to be listening to “criticism” and “suggestions” or
for “rebuttals.”
The only thing that can be done is to implement the plan experts believe is the right one, the
best one, step by step. Each phase and method should be formulated based on a manual
comprised over an extended period of time and decided flexibly by taking various conditions
on site into consideration.

For the above reasons It is impossible for the government to accurately know “what is
happening now” and “what measures are being implemented” in real-time. There may be
things happening that the “government doesn’t even know about.” But even if we “knew what
was happening, there is nothing we can do.”

3. The government may “intentionally delay” providing information to the public.
But I am sure we can be safe in believing that they would not “fabricate” information or “play
down” the situation. This is because the truth cannot be withheld from the public in the long
term. (As long as you have a device) anyone can measure the level of radiation. And there
are too many people involved, which makes it impossible to hide what is going on with the
reactors.

4. Therefore, at the moment there is no need to escape from Tokyo (at least in Tokyo or
anywhere west of Tokyo), refrain from going outdoors, or to panic because you think “the
government can’t be trusted” (albeit it is understandable to feel that way about the current
administration).

5. On the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale, the incident at Fukushima
nuclear plant has been rated level 5. The incident at Three Mile Island, US, which was also
a level 5, required pregnant women and children living within 16km of the nuclear plant to
evacuate after the accident, but (so far) the evacuation zone has not been enlarged. So the
20km radius at Fukushima seems like it is a more than sufficient margin.

In response to the incident at Fukushima, the US government advised its citizens within an
80km radius to evacuate, but this is not because the “US government knows something we

don’t.” The “US government doesn’t know any more than the Japanese government,” so
that may be one of the reasons why it has set a wider, more cautious buffer zone. And if you
think about it, it is quite normal for foreigners to evacuate faster, when “faced with a crisis in
a foreign country.” It is very difficult for people who do not speak the local language to go to
hospitals to get care or to go to evacuation centers.

When there is a coup d’etat or natural disasters overseas, Japan is the first country to evacuate
its citizens. If a natural disaster of a similar scale occurred in another country, the Japanese
government wouldn’t stop at an 80km radius evacuation zone; it would advise its citizens to
refrain from traveling overseas, and also brings its citizens home. So there is no need to be
frightened by the US government’s 80km evacuation zone.

6. The intensity of radiation is inversely proportional to the square of the distance from the
point source. This means the following. The evacuation zone is set at 20km. If you are in a
location that is double the distance of 40km from the source, the radiation level would be 1/
4 what it is at the source; at 80km, 4 times the distance, the level would be 1/16; at 160km,
8 times the distance, the level would be 1/64, and at 320km, 16 times the distance, the level
would be 1/256. Tokyo is about 300km away from the source.

Even if the radiation levels within the 20km evacuation zone gets as high as 200 times the level

considered harmful to human health, (by the time the radiation reaches Tokyo, the level will

be 1/256 of the level at the source, that is 0.7 times the level considered harmful to human

health. I will talk about radiation in more detail later), people in Tokyo have no reason to

worry about adverse effects to their health.

7. What is most important and what is also misunderstood, it seems, by many people
about “what actually happened” at Fukushima is this: immediately after the earthquake, the
reactors successfully, automatically shut down, and the “nuclear fission chain reaction of
uranium” had ceased. This is a very important fact. Without a doubt, the “nuclear reactors
have shut down.” If they had not, in about 45 hours the reactors would have started to melt
down, and we would not have been able to stop the process.

In other words, if a “meltdown” had actually occurred immediately after the earthquake,
by Sunday the situation would have become a catastrophe of cosmic scale. But this has not
happened, so the “reactors have indeed stopped.” This fact is scie
ntifically indisputable.
People seem to be mistaken that “uranium is on fire” or “nuclear fuel is continuing to melt
and spewing radiation.” But this is not at all the case. We should first understand that
the “nuclear reaction of uranium” has already stopped.

The fact that there was a hydrogen explosion that took down the exterior building (just in case
you may be wondering, a hydrogen explosion has nothing to do with hydrogen-bombs), is also
not a very serious problem. (The explosion was within expectations and) the external building
does not serve any purpose when it comes to preventing radiation. There “actual walls” – all 3
layers – of the containment vessel remain in tact.

8. So, “what is happening,” and “what are they doing?”

Although the “nuclear fission chain reaction of uranium has stopped,” in other words,
the “nuclear reactors have shut down,” what people on the ground are doing now is “cooling
the residual heat with water.” The No.4 reactor was not in operation when the earthquake
struck, but spent fuel rods were being cooled in a pool of water. This is because fuel rods
continue to give off heat even after “nuclear fission chain reaction of uranium stops.” The
heat given off by the spent fuel rods gradually dissipates, and in due course they will be safely
transported and processed.

This may be a little confusing, but when the nuclear reactors are in operation (while uranium
undergoes nuclear fission), there ar e”byproducts” such as radioactive caesium and iodine.
They have much less “power” and shorter “half-lives” than uranium. These “byproducts” emit
heat even after the nuclear reactors shut down. (Compared to the nuclear fission reaction of
uranium, the amount of heat byproducts give off may be far smaller, but) the “byproducts”
naturally decay over time (decay refers to the process through which these radioactive
isotopes become no longer radioactive). And the heat these “byproducts” emit rapidly
decreases over time.

What is needed is a good way to keep cooling the fuel rods, and as time passes, less water will
be needed each day to cool the fuel rods.

If the heat can be managed and cooled with water, the nuclear reactors will not melt down.

According to the most recent information, there may be a possibility that a part of the reactor

has begun to melt down. But even if the reactor partially melts down, if the fuel rods can be

cooled before the 3 layers of the containment vessel are destroyed, the damages will not be

extensive.

The last defense line, the third wall of the containment vessel “has been designed from the
start to stop a meltdown should it occur,” to contain the melted fuel to ensure that it does not
come in contact with the outside world. As of today, there is no news that the third wall has
been penetrated.

9. Having said that, to cool “residual heat,” you need “water” and a “pump,” as well
as “electricity” to power the pump.

Ordinarily, “pure water” (such as distilled water without any impurities) is used, otherwise the
reactors might end up rusting or there may be a build up of grime. After the earthquake struck
(more precisely after the tsunami) TEPCO could not secure enough “pure water” and lost the
ability to generate “electricity.”

Due to the lack of “pure water,” “sea water” has been injected into the reactors. This means
that the reactors will no longer be viable, but the government and TEPCO decided to throw the
idea of getting the reactions back in operation out the window, and injected “seawater.” But
this also means that there is an infinite supply of water.

The problem is securing electricity. Immediately after the earthquake hit and the reactors

shut down, emergency diesel generators supplied electricity for a while. So a possible power
failure was foreseen and there was a contingency plan. However, the diesel generators were
damaged in the tsunami, so they can no longer generate power. Then, backup batteries were
used to supply power for around 8 hours. These are batteries, so once they run out, there is
nothing to be done.

What will be done today and tomorrow will be to secure electricity somehow to operate the

pumps, and to continue to cool the reactors. Or they may douse the reactors with water from

helicopters or use water trucks to hose them down. In any case, it will require quite a lot of

manpower. On March 16th, they had to stop dousing the reactors from helicopters because

the radiation levels were too high, but they were successful on the 17th. And from the 17th

they will also supply water from water trucks.

We can’t take our eyes off reactors No.1 through No.6, but there is no immediate threat (as of
March 17th).

Reactor No.1 is being cooled smoothly. I don’t know “how it is progressing” or “exactly what
they are using to supply water.” But the important thing is that the temperatures are coming
down.

Reactor No.3 requires additional measures. They will begin extensive hosing operations on the
18th, but it is not in a critical condition.

The building containing reactor No.2 is still in tact, but there is potential damage to the
suppression chamber, so measures need to be implemented. Because it still has a roof,
reactor No.2 is the most difficult to cool from the outside, but if the electricity can be
resupplied, they will try to get the pumps up and running.

Reactor No.4 was not in operation when the earthquake hit, but there were spent fuel rods

cooling in the pool, which ended up causing a fire. As I explained before, that was a result of

the “heat emitted by byproducts” even after shut down. As long as water can be supplied,

reactor No.4 is safer than reactors No.1, No.2, and No.3, but because the “building hasn’t

exploded and remains in tact,” it is harder to supply water to it. They plan to supply water

through “one of the large holes” the fire made.

Reactors No.5 and No.6 are fine for the moment, but that does not rule out the possibility of

something happening to them.

In any case, what is important is getting electricity back and water trucks.

With respect to electricity, General Electric, the manufacturer of the No.1 and No.2 reactors,

have announced that it will deliver 10 gas turbine generators. However, hopefully TEPCO will

be able to successfully supply power to the Fukushima nuclear power plant from the Tohoku

Electric Power Company’s power lines before these generators arrive and start working. There

are high expectations that significant progress will be made by the 19th. (If these efforts

are successful, the situation will dramatically improve; that is, if the pump isn’t broken.)

Moreover, special water trucks are on the way from the US base, Yokota, and those of Japan’s

Self Defense Forces are also going to be put into operation.

Due to the maximum dose of exposure and the amount of water that can be transported

each time, this cannot go on for a very long time, nevertheless, the efforts up to date seem

to be working. If we can get the power supplied from Tohoku Electric and if the pump and

emergency cooling system kick in, we will be able to constantly cool the fuel rods.

If we can prevent the meltdown of the nuclear core through all these efforts, there will be no

major catastrophe. And what is another important point is that even if the cooling efforts are

insufficient and the “nuclear core melts down,” as long as the radioactive materials “remain

within the third layer of the containment vessel” there will be no major catastrophe. I will

touch upon this again below.

10. The radiation being detected at the moment – what is the nature of it and what effect will

it have on Tokyo?

So, why are radioactive isotopes being released into the air and how serio
us (or not serious) is

it?

As I have explained a few times already, currently, the nuclear reactors are shut down. So the

uranium is not undergoing nuclear fission. However, byproducts are emitting heat. Because

water is being used to cool it, the water vapor causes the pressure within the containment

vessel to rise. If this pressure is not relieved, the containment vessel (and not the building) will

explode. This must be avoided at all costs. That is why pressure is being released. (Imagine

a pressure cooker. When the pressure builds up to a certain level, the valve pops up and

relieves pressure.)

Most of the radioactive materials that are being released into the air with the vapor are
substances known as rare gases, such as xenon-137 (this may not sound familiar, but it is not
dangerous). Xenon-137’s ability to emit radiation “halves in a few minutes” so as long as you
are far away, “this radioactive substance is not dangerous.” Even if the substance is carried in
the wind, it won’t reach Tokyo in a few minutes.

The half-life of iodine-131, which is most likely the radioactive material being detected by

people who have been exposed and evacuated, is said to be 8 days. So even if you came in
contact with it, in 8 days time (this is if you don’t wash it off) its effect would be halved. But in
reality, there aren’t that many people who don’t wash their hands or take a shower for over a
week, so the substance would be washed off before the 8-day period. Let’s take a close look
at 2 of the worst cases of “exposure” to radiation reported in Fukushima so far.

At the moment, the worst case of exposure to radiation reported (levels taken from shoes

of an evacuee in Futaba) recorded an absorbed dose of 0.53mGy/h (I have decided to skip

over the complicated equations and just give you the end result) (source: National Institute of

Radiological Sciences). Your skin starts to become affected from 2-3Gy. So 0.53Gy/h is not a

problem at all. And even if it stays in contact with your skin for 8 days, the total effect would

only amount to 0.1Gy (0.52Gy/h x 24 hours x 8 days x 1/1000 = 0.102).

On March 12th, the highest radiation levels of 1015 mSv (micro sievert) were detected. This
means that even if you stood there in a daze for about an hour, the amount of radiation
you would be exposed to would be approximately 1 mSv. Those of us who live in Japan are
exposed to 2.4 mSv of radiation in any given year. If you live in high altitudes, you would be
exposed to 10 mSv. Each time you get an x-ray mass examination, you are exposed to 4 mSv.
Pilots and cabin attendants are also exposed to 2-3 mSv annually. So we are “exposed to
radiation” every day. You can see how “there is no reason to be overly scared” since even the
highest case reported at the gates of the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant is 1 mSv .

In addition, the strengths of radioactive materials are, as I mentioned before, inversely

proportional to the square of the distance from the source. And the half-lives of many of the

radioactive isotopes range from a few minutes to around 8 days.

There are some are people in Tokyo who are afraid when they hear reports about how the

radiation levels in the neighboring prefecture, Chiba, spiked (momentarily) to “twice normal

levels.” Even if the levels were 5 times the usual, we would only be exposed to the same level

of radiation as people living in high altitudes, and these people live up there year round. So it

is completely safe even if we are exposed to a higher level of radiation for a few hours or few

days. If you are worried about this, you wouldn’t be able to get any x-rays or CT scans.

In comparison to getting a CT scan or getting on a plane to go to New York, for example, the

increase in the radiation levels in Tokyo is miniscule.

There is no need to be “scared of radiation” in Tokyo. You don’t have to stay indoors, wear

a mask when you do go outdoors, keep the windows closed, or refrain from using the air

conditioning (except to save energy).

Similarly, even if you get rained on it is completely safe at the moment (but it’s still cold

outside, so it is better if you don’t get wet). Unlike the atomic bomb, there will be no nuclear

fallout. And Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant is fundamentally built different from the

Chernobyl, so even in the worst-case scenario, damages of calamitous scale will not occur.

A nuclear reactor will “never” be a nuclear weapon. Although people seem to believe the

myth that what is happening in Fukushima may end up causing the same scale of damages as

Hiroshima, even if the world turned upside down and sideways, this will not be the case. If a

nuclear reactor could become a nuclear weapon, countries like Iran or North Korea wouldn’t

have to go through all the trouble. These 2 are completely different things.

Moreover, the word “meltdown” is being used quite vaguely, and this is probably contributing

to the fear. This word is not a scientific term. It seems like people use the word with the

following image in their minds: as a result of the “reactor core melting down,” the nuclear

fuel within the containment vessel “melts,” releasing the radioactive materials outside, which

results in extensive radioactive damage. If this is what is referred to as a meltdown, then a

meltdown didn’t occur at the incident at Three Mile Island in the US either even though it was ,

described as being catastrophic. What happened at Three Mile is that the nuclear core began

to melt beyond control, which dissolved through later 1 and 2 of the containment vessel, but

pooled at the bottom of layer 3 and stabilized within the walls of layer 3.

Even in this case, although people living in the 16km radius were evacuated, there was hardly

any impact on the environment, and no one has died from radiation exposure.

The Three Mile incident occurred 12 days after the movie, “China Syndrome” was released.

The movie told a story about a nuclear reactor in the US melting down, nuclear fuel melting

through the containment vessel, the earth, and reaching all the way down to China on the

other side of the planet. Perhaps this movie helped create this fear or overreaction to the

word, “meltdown.”

Even if a meltdown occurs, and even if they could not cool the fuel rods successfully, nuclear
reactors in Japan and the US have been designed in a way to contain the fuel within the third
wall of the containment vessel.

Lastly, let me talk about the “worst-case scenario.” The possibilities of this happening are very
low, but it’s now zero. And as I mentioned in the beginning “not knowing” is “scary.” So let’s
see what would happen in the “worst-case scenario.”

“The worst-case scenario”

If the reactors cannot be sufficiently cooled even with the efforts of Tokyo Electric, the fire

department, Self Defense Forces, the US Army, GE’s generators, and the supply of electricity

from Tohoku Electric, then “meltdown” in one or some of the reactors from No.1 through No.6

will be unpreventable.

If layer 1 and layer 2 of the containment vessel melt, then the nuclear fuel will start to pool at

the bottom of layer 3. With this possible scenario in mind, the third layer of the containment

vessel has been designed to absorb, diffuse, and solidify the substances. Radioactive

substances solidifying at the bottom of layer 3 is what happened at Three Mile. If this

happens, it will require a lot of time and staggering costs to clean up.

But what I would like for you to remember is that even at Three Mile, the radioactive

substances remained within the third layer, and the fuel did not come in contact with the

outside world. As a result, the
damage wasn’t too serious.

What this all means is that even in the “worst-case scenario,” the damage radiation will have

on the surrounding region is slight. And there is no possibility that Tokyo will incur damages.

I would like to end here, but let me talk briefly about the “ultimate worst-case scenario.”

If the melted nuclear fuel does not remain pooled at the bottom of the third layer, in other

words, if the third layer of the containment vessel is breached, the melted fuel and radioactive

substances would be released and the radioactive leakage would be devastating. This is the

ultimate worst-case scenario. This will have a significant effect on the surrounding region. The

extent of the damage will depend on the amount of radioactive materials that leaks. Should

this happen, there will be mid to long-term adverse effect on human health, crops grown in

the area, and the sea.

(For the moment, crops grown in and near Fukushima do not contain enough radiation to

be “harmful to human health.” There is talk about spinach being contaminated, but this is not

harmful to human health either, except if you could consume a truly crazy amount of spinach

in one sitting. The half-life of iodine is said to be 8 days. The half-life of caesium is said to be

30 years but if you take metabolism into consideration, the internal exposure to radiation is

about 200 days. (Even if you ate the detectable amount of spinach after you’ve washed it)

and multiply it by 200 days, and 24 hours the amount of radiation would not be harmful to

human health. Of course the result would be higher than the baseline, so it is probably better

to temporarily stop distributing such produce. However, if the levels fall below the baseline

in the future, there is no reason to worry about eating produce from Fukushima or Ibaragi

prefectures. We need to be careful not to completely devastate the farming and fishing

industries in Fukushima and Ibaragi by believing unfounded rumors in the mid to long term.

Even in the “ultimate worst case scenario,” the radiation (enough to be harmful to human

health) will not reach Tokyo immediately (and if you remember, the intensity of radiation is

inversely proportional to the square of the distance from the point source.)

Of course there is a possibility that the wind and rain may carry radioactive substances. If

that happens, we would hear about it on the news. Governments and media from around

the world all have their eyes on Japan. And now IAEA and the US army are also offering their

cooperation to get the situation in the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant under control. Google

Earth continues to take photographs regularly and is sharing the information. So even if

the “ultimate worst case scenario” does occur, you will have enough time to act.

I say act, but there is no reason to evacuate Tokyo. Just listen to the government and the

media coverage, and avoid walking in the rain or stain indoors if necessary.

Understanding what the “ultimate worst scenario” would be, I am sure you see that it

is “unnecessary to live in fear in Tokyo” under the current situation.

So let’s stop worrying, hoarding, and sending emails that may cultivate fear; let’s spend each

day with a positive attitude. And let’s appreciate the efforts of those who are putting their

lives on the line to cool the reactors in Fukushima, and calmly wait and see how things pan

out.

I truly believe that with Japan’s world-class technology and the efforts of those who are risking

their lives, we will be able to avoid the worst.

Satoshi Takamatsu
March 17th, 2011
23:20

Revised with additional information
March 21st, 2011
18:55
I reorganized the links I would like for you to reference.
I corrected some grammatical errors.
I added comments to clarify certain points and also added a section on farm produce.

メガネキャラはさ　

あ、そう、このブログタイトル『B級メガネ』ってのを見れば分かると思うけど
ボクはメガネキャラなんだ。

パーマとか　おじいさんとかは　あとから付いてきたヤァツなんだ

でさメガネキャラってさ

ずっとメガネをしてないといけないと思うんだ。

プライベートでもどこで誰が見てるか分からないから
メガネをかけてた方がいい

メガネを外すのはさ本当に閉鎖された空間
特定された人間の前だけでしか外さない

そのくらいの徹底っぷりをみせるべきだと思っているんだ。

でもさ　ココ最近もういろんな画像や動画が出回ったりして、
もう　なんかな　って自分でも普通に晒したりもしてるね

昨日もさ　アンコールで頭ふるのに邪魔でライブでさえも外していたね。

しかも今朝もさ　ジュリィーの機材車にメガネ忘れてきて
普通にメガネなしで入りしてたね。

そもそもさ

メガネキャラのメリットってなんだろ？

最初はさ、目元のシワが少しでも隠れるかな？

って始めたノリなんだけど

今　考えると　メガネのフレームの影？せいで返って老けて見えるんだって。

でも　もうメガネキャラでやってる以上　メガネ外せないよね。

もっと自覚してとことんメガネキャラでいなきゃね。

ボクのとりあえずの目標は　less than human のモニターになりたいんだ。
もしくはZoff使いたい放題でも　今なら満足だ。

てかさ、キャラ作るからには　そのカテゴリーで一番になりたいね。

てかさ、あ、あくまでビジュアル界の中で

「メガネキャラ」って誰がいるん？
だれが　ミスターメガネ　なん？

その中でボクって何番目？

笑っちまふよな
5/1渋谷O-WEST単独公演を大成功させたい！ チケットNOW ON SALE!! ■チケットぴあ（Pコード：346-672） ■ローソンチケット （Lコード：74537） ■ライカエジソン東京店 ■ZEAL LINK

ミネムラ