(no subject)

Gordon. Trivers , thought that you and I might engage, beginning with my thoughts on your generation theory paper. As you might already know, I am well versed in mathematics and Money. Distinguished from economics. I fear your simplified formulas in large part, ignore the past 50 years. since Duchamp and Poincare, though earlier, (the three body problem). finance, capital theory, Fisher Samuelson, Petty, did not have to contend with the world of currencies, central banks. taxation policy, on a global basis. Marx did not foresee computers being an equivalent to a worker. or workers. Darwinian fitness landscapes. Must be defined by their environmental boundaries. - not so fast. most of your calculations are intra country, and in the majority of your well intentioned examples are merely denominated in dollars. Throw a third body in the mix. and unpredictability becomes provable. (Poincare). I loved your schooling variable. but I would suggest more Physics metaphors than math. one must take into account initial conditions. boundary conditions (environment). resource limitation and its rate of change. Humans as you write fill new niches, it appears that way to humans. niche filling is the basic premise. and its interaction with an ever changing environment. I believe that most of the equations you choose to use are merely algebraic. They are misleading. We live in a world of partial differential equations. some that are not solvable in real time. man plus women equal child. I would argue, does not do the whole story justice. anytime you want to just chat feel free to set up a time.