Breaking the Status Quo
On our Msingi Afrika Magazine Facebook page, I shared a post about Terrence Howard and the various conversations he has been having online about some inconsistencies in Math and other world issues. The responses we got from a couple of people were quite revealing about some basic truths.
The post says:
“Ask yourself how until recently, when Terrence Howard (holder of 97 patents) put forth the question, no one has deemed it fit to ask why 1+1 equals 2 but 1×1 equals 1. But do you know that as simple as that question is, the correct answer to 1×1 and the adjustment of world mathematics to fit the correct answer can crash the entire global banking and finance system? Including taxation, salary structures, insurance, everything connected to money, numbers, and everything in between. But this a good example of the power of one and the change that one question can create in a world system that was created and sustained to raise zombies and non-free thinkers.
The same question can be asked; why is One US dollar worth 132 Kenyan Shillings or why should the same One US dollar be worth 1471 Nigerian Naira? Don’t let them give you stupid economics that makes no sense as to why that is, using indices that were created by the very minds that want you in perpetual financial bondage.”
Someone named Joey responded to the post and a long conversation ensued between us. I am not going to edit the words of the post, to retain its originality.
Joey: He’s quoted as saying on JRE that “The entire AR/VR [augmented reality/virtual reality] world was built off of my first patent” yet doesn’t know that in 1968 the first virtual reality system and headset was invented by Ivan Sutherland and his student. Patents does not equal invented. Plus his patent was rejected. His patent was not novel or distinguishable from other established patents so it was ultimately rejected. After rejection he did not follow through on providing the requested information to reverse the rejection. His patent was cited a number of times by inventors and examiners true, but not for the reasons he thinks. Mainly cited to distinguish THEIR patent from his incredibly generic idea with no tangible product or method to execute.
Msingi Afrika Magazine: Accepted or rejected patent makes no difference and that’s not even what this post is about. Should 1+1 equal 2 and 1×1 equal 1? That’s what this post is about. Share your answer.
Joey Cortez: He actually said 1×1 = 2 which is wrong
1×4 = 1+1+1+1 = 4
1×3 = 1+1+1 = 3
1×2 = 1+1 = 2
1×1 = 0+1 = 1
In maths you don’t start at 1 you start at 0.
Msingi Afrika Magazine: How does multiplying 1 by 1 become 0? Where did 1 go?
Joey: Simple. Let me explain with an example: if you have 0 TVs and I give you 1 TV 1 time then you end up with 1 TV thus 1×1 = 1. 1 in this analogy represents the number of TVs I’m giving you. The second 1 is the number “times” I’m giving it to you (which why we say 1 times 1) so you end up with 1 TV. If I give you 1 TV 2 times then you end up with 2 TVs thus 1×2=2.
Msingi Afrika Magazine: Then it should not be called multiplication. Because if am multiplying 1 tv by 2 that should give me 3 tvs. Or else what happened to the first tv out of which I brought out two?
Joey: Ok let me explain 1×2=2 (multiplication) if you start with 0 TVs then I give you 1 TV 2 times then you end up with 2 TVs thus 1×2=2, but what you’re talking about in the above comment is if you start with 1 TV then in that case the equation would be 1×2+1=3
Msingi Afrika Magazine: But there cannot be 0 tv. For anyone to call it tv simply means it exists. if it exists then it cannot be in the state of 0 which is the state of non-existence. If we want to multiply that which exists, we cannot start from 0 which does not exist. But we all know there is no emptiness in space. So to start from zero is to say there is emptiness in space.
Joey: So in my analogy, I stated you started with zero TVs but I had 1 (which is the existed TV) that I then give to you 1 time. No one is born with a TV, so at one point in your life you had 0 but just because you had 0 TVs doesn’t mean the TV didn’t exist. So now you went from having 0 TVs to 1 because I gave you 1 TV 1 time. Thus 1×1=1 no matter how much you spin it the maths still adds up. This is what we learn in the 3rd grade.
Msingi Afrika Magazine: This is the exact point of the post. That we learned it in third grade does not make it correct. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed but it can be added to, multiplied etc. And like you said about the tv being in existence before it was given to me, that proves my point that we cannot start from 0 if 0 is a state of non-existence. And this is not putting a spin on math but stopping the spin so that we can take a look at the foundational principles that make up math when it’s not spinning and confusing.
Joey: True just because we learned it in third grade doesn’t make it true but it doesn’t make it false either when it can be explained which I did in my comments. That being said not everything we learned in third grade is true either but at least multiplication is and besides that the premise of my comments is that a lot of what Terrence Howard’s says has been proven wrong like his statement about AR/VR and 1×1=2 for example amongst other things so I would not take what he says as absolute truth the guy is talking a lot of nonsense. And 0 does apply to many situations like the analogy I gave for example you owned zero TVs when you were born and did not gain 1 until you bought 1 or someone gave you 1. Or everyone before 1900s owned 0 TVs because it wasn’t invented yet. Zero most definitely applies to other situations too. For I stance I have 0 experience living in Africa because I never been there. See how that works?
Msingi Afrika Magazine: I understand your point. But are you saying that the law of math is not universal or absolute? Because if me not having a tv means 0 and you having a tv means 1, that’s not being a universal law that says energy can neither created or destroyed. Which in turn will mean that the result of math is only worthy of the person who knows how to manipulate it for their intended result. This also answers the question of why is 1USD worth 132 Kenyan Shillings not just 1 Kenyan Shillings.
The conversation with Joey is a bit longer than what I have shared but I am sure you got the point of the discussion. But one quick question to pull out of his statement is “When did the masses of the world agree that “1 gold piece equals 132 silver pieces”? No one has ever asked us what we think about the so-called social contract that Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum keeps talking about. Who wrote it and when did we sign it and for what?
Anyway, we also got a few more comments on LinkedIn where the post was shared. Here are a few of them.
Larry: We all played a role in arriving at this challenging situation, so there’s no need to assign blame. If we had focused on locally producing what we need and consuming our own resources, we may not have ended up in this predicament. Consider how few outsiders wear or utilize our traditional clothing and textiles, or partake in our local cuisine, while many of us eagerly embrace their imported foods and products. It’s an interesting dynamic worth reflecting on. Don’t you think so?
Msingi Afrika Magazine: Oh yes we agree that we all have roles to play in the challenging situations that we have found ourselves and I bet you we are doing that daily. But that role is not just about producing what we consume, even though it’s part of it, The question we are seeking answer for is, but by what rule is what i produced given value. Who sets the rule that says my Naira has to be 1400 to a US dollar. How does the US dollar that is not backed up by anything have such power, while the fact remains that most of what the US consume are produced in China or outside of the US. Who wrote the economic law that says my country’s local currency can only take its worth from another country’s currency. And this is not a blame game but simple foundational questions that can make us have conversations.
Larry: You raise profound and thought-provoking questions about the foundational rules governing global economics and currency valuation. A country’s trade balance, manufacturing base, political stability, and commitment to poverty alleviation can significantly impact its currency’s worth, as exemplified by China’s remarkable economic progress over the past two decades.
Someone else called Brian also commented. The conversation with him was even longer and intense that others had to join in but at the end, he was quite furious and then wrote:
Brian: …if you are not a mathemaician then what makes you think discrediting thousands of years of mathematical knowledge is right instead?
Someone named Gaurav also commented:
Gaurav: It is perhaps time to move out of the framework of ‘economics’ that makes us account for life and nature in ‘capital’ and ‘asset’ terms. It is perhaps time to evolve a new framework within which we see the relationship between Nature, work, and our needs. Whether humans can prefer minimalism with the same enthusiasm as they prefer maximalism, is the question before us, is the task at hand. Whether humans can prefer a way of life that nourishes itself the more we nourish nature, is the ask. Can the game not be about who can monopolise the most resources, in return for paying the most taxes, taxes that go to maintain standing armies and war capabilities?
Defence is a wasteful need for every country and province, a need that perpetuates our present economics that is founded on citizen-country-currency framework instead of a better economics founded on human-Earth-Love framework. Can all countries switch to a uniform Earth-Life view of economics, can all countries give up weapons imultaneously, can people of all countries agree that Earth belongs to all life equally, can all countries agree the purpose was to accommodate life and not exclude life?
Msingi Afrika Magazine responded: This is you hitting the nail on the earth. This is the question or conversation that the post was made to generate. Why can’t we just be humans for crying out loud. Why should Congo be under siege for centuries just because some foreign powers want the natural resources that they have. Why can’t Congolese people be allowed to breathe and enjoy their land just like every other nations on the earth have the right to breathe and enjoy their lands. Why are we not looking at the damage consumerism is doing to out young people across the board. These are the questions we are asking. Thanks for your response.
What I think
• Only a few are aware that there is something wrong with the system that runs this world. And the award winners for this ignorance, sadly, are found among the immediate past generation of our parents. I mean those who were schooled by colonialists, some even attaining scholarships to study in the UK and America, and who took over from the colonial workforce when they were leaving the continent. They just cannot see how the very system that trained and made them who they are can have any fault. So, in their eyes, you are just a bunch of ingrates if you speak about the devilish system that is ruling this world. But devilish and evil is the system that runs this world and we have to face that reality if we want to make any meaningful changes.
• Too many people are afraid of upsetting the status quo. Can you blame them? Maybe yes or no but the reality is, when a handshake has gone beyond the elbows, then it is time to stop and think. We have played too much hanky-panky with the status quo that was created and sustained by ungodly hearts and which is draining the life out of humanity. We need to change the narrative, but fear cannot be the tool for such change. Love for a better humanity is.
• Too many people depend on the system and status quo that controls the world, either for money or for power. No system in this world runs by itself. It was created by humans and runs under the guidance of humans. However, who controls the humans that run the system is a question for another day. But the thing is, until we all start to ask questions, we will never be able to see what is really behind why things are the way they are in Africa and the world. It’s an embarrassment to put “Africa is the richest continent in terms of natural resources” in the same sentence as “Africa has some of the poorest nations in the world”. It demonstrates a failure of thinking and wisdom. But we also understand that there are Africans who are building empires from the proceeds of their embrace of the system that fleeces Africa of her resources. So, to say Africa is poor while she is rich in natural resources is just a signal that too many people depend on the system that makes her poor, for personal gains.
• The noise about climate change and sustainable development is just what it is – NOISE. I listened to an interview where Bill Gates admitted so blatantly that he is not a pro-tree-planting person. He and people like him are the ones disbursing billions of dollars globally for the creation of GMOs, and distribution of contraceptives which are causing infertility among women in developing countries. What are their reasons? The world is overpopulated and this so-called overpopulation is causing climate change because of a human strain on nature. So, to mitigate against climate change, according to Gates and his cohorts, it’s ok to kill off some sections of humanity but not so cool to plant trees.
This world has been stretched almost beyond what is reasonable and it’s up to the masses to make the shift and break off the chokehold that the masterminds of the system have put in place. We can begin by stopping the buying of processed food that is weakening the immune systems of our people, stop taking their vaccines, stop being educated by their corrupt curricula that create more workers than thinkers, and stop depending on our government to come fix our immediate community needs. We must raise our children with true knowledge that empowers who they are on the inside, their true identity, and not the falsehood the modern school system is teaching them. The status quo is only what it is because we have allowed it to be so.
What you do next after this is up to you.
What's Your Reaction?
