From: hardman@throb.mcws.fidonet.org (Bill Hardman)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: PV equation
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 01:32:15 PST
Reply-To: hardman@throb.mcws.fidonet.org (Bill Hardman)
Distribution: world
Organization: Bark At The Moon Productions

gisle@ifi.uio.no (Gisle Hannemyr) writes:

> 
> [[ The story so far: ph36@unixg.ubc.ca (Richard Nistuk) has come across
>    a really weird equatuion in "Dianetics", and want somebody to explain
>    it to him.  The equation is:
> 
>                    PV=I*D^x
> 
>    and we later learn that:
>       PV = potential value of an individual or group
>       I  = intelligence (presumably IQ)
>       D  = the "Dynamic".  This is a number between 1 and 4
>            indicating where the individual are within 4 "dynamics".
>       x  = the magnitude on which the person is surviving on the
>            dynamic, it is a number between 1 and 10
> 
>    Mr. Nistuk's basic question is "How do you apply the equation?",
>    to which Mr. Hardman gives the snappy answer "Insert the known
>    factors and use standard algebra".  This doesn't seem to satisfy
>    Mr. Niestuk, who keeps bringing up a strange thing called "units".
>    Now -- let's return to the discussion...]]
> 
> Bill:
> >>> Re-read the chapter.  It's self-explanitory.
> Richard:
> >> No its not.  Nowhere in part 1 of "Dianetics" is there a
> >> discussion of the units.  If anybody knows, please tell me!
> Bill:
> > How many dynamics were discussed in the first chapter?
> > How does society measure intellegence?
> > To keep it simple for you, try using units of 1 to 10 [[for x?]].
> Bill:
> > The unit [[of the Dynamic]] is between 1 and 4.
> 
> Eh, Bill, I think you've missed something really basic somewhere
> along the line.  The word "unit", you see, is short for "unit
> of measurement", and is usually expressed in terms such as 
> "seconds","kilos" "meters", "volts" or whatever.  Numbers that
> doesn't have units, such as "1", "4" and "10" is referred to as
> "unitless".
> 
> Units play a fairly significant part in standard algebra, where the
> SI (Systeme International d'Unites) devised to keep the units used
> in equations consistent.
> 
> For example, the equation for speed is
> 
>                      s = At
>     where
>            meaning            unit
>        ---------------------------------------
>        s = speed              1 meter/second
>        A = accelaration       1 meter * second^-2
>        t = time               1 second
> 
>      now if we want to compute the speed of an object beeing
>      accelarated by earth's gravity (9.8 ms^-2) in vacuum
>      in 10 seconds we get:
> 
>      s = 9.8 ms^-2 * 10 s = 98 ms^-1 = 98 meter/second
> 
> Please note that the algebra not only involved the quantities,
> but also the units, and that the unit of the answer became
> meter/second (meters per. second), which is a unit of measurement
> for speed.

Please note that you assigned the unit.  You assigned meters, and
seconds as the unit measures.  If you would have observed that in
the beginning, you wouldn't need long winded explanations of the
obvious.  You could also substitute like units of measure and the
equation would still work, wouldn't it?

> For those of you out there who did not sleep through your basic
> education, sorry about this long-winded explanation of some very basic
> principles.
> 
> Richard Nistuk's great joke, which Bill Hardman so far has failed to
> get, it that the LRH equation appears to be constructed without the
> slightest understanding of the basic rules of algebra.  You can of
> course fiddle the quantities any way you like (by picking a convenient
> range for "x" or whatever), but real algebra requires the units to
> compute to equality as well, and as the formula is given, it just
> doesn't compute.
> 
> I'll conclude with Mr. Nistuk's absolute prizeless attempt to compute
> the equation.  For those out there who study Scientologist culture,
> note that Mr. Hardman's only response is a feeble attempt at a
> personal attack and the standard cop-out at the end.
> 
> 
> Richard:
> >> I want to find my PV.  O.K. since money is so important to the CoS
> >> (see my next post!) PV must be in units of the American dollar.  Now
> >> my potential income next term from my student loan is about
> >> $2500.00 (US) and from my part time job is about $700.00 US.  So
> >> my PV must be  $3200.00.
> Bill:
> > I can see that you will never make it in the private sector.  It is
> > obvious that you were asleep during your high school education.
> Richard:
> >> Now lets see if the equation gets the same value.
> >>
> >> I is my intelligence,  Hmmm, this must refer to I.Q. score!
> >> My I.Q. is about average, I suppose, so I=125 I.Q. points.
> >>
> >> D is my dynamic.  This refers to where I am within the four
> >> dynamics(TM), I guess.  Well I, as an individual, would like to
> >> see mankind survive, and sure, I'd even like to see all the little
> >> symbiotes survive.  So... I guess in my case D=4, no units are ever
> >> mentioned, so it must be unitless.
> >> x, according to Bill, is magnitude on which the person is
> >> surviving on the dynamic.  Oh!  'x' must be unitless, since
> >> it is a power and not multiplied by any constant.  Hey!
> >> It must be a probability(quite a leap I realise, but I'm grasping
> >> here)!  Well I'm alive, so the magnitude of the probability
> >> that I'm surviving is 1... x=1
> >> ok here we go:
> >>
> >>      PV = I*D^x
> >>         = (125 I.Q. points)*(4)^1
> >>      PV = (500 I.Q. points)
> >>
> >> I estimated my PV to be $3200.00  the "equation" was WAY off.  The
> >> units were even wrong ([$]!=I.Q. points)
> >>
> >>      It seems like this theory needs a lot of work!!!
> Bill:
> > Not as much as you do.
> Richard:
> >> O.K. help me out here, Bill, explain the words!!!
> Bill:
> > It's not worth my time.
> 
> 
> I final question:
> 
> Bill, why it is worth your time entering all these discussions, only
> to bail out every time you meet some real opposition?  You seem to
> have a more imaginative range of excuses (the "out-gradient" was the
> best so far) than the cheese salesman in the Monty Phyton "Cheese
> Shop" skit!


Gisle,

        When did I use the term out-gradient?

        As usual, your observations are flawed.  I have never
"bailed out" of any discussion.  I have not seen any "real"
opposition in this newsgroup.

        I am current in all of the threads that I am involved with.
Your assertion is a bald lie.

        To excuse you lack of education in the location of a mis-
understood word, you have to have the person having the comprehension
trouble in front of you.  It doesn't work over the net.  If he wants
the service for free, find someone local, that is trained and certified
to do it.  If his plea is valid, and he does want to discover the mis-
understood words, he could e-mail me his phone number, and I would
schedule him for an appointment.  Of course, to make it worth my
time, I would have to charge a standard industry rate, as I am a
certified social worker with a degree.

        I have noticed in your posts that you have a poor control
over your psychotic delusions in a discussion, and have a compulsive
habit of attempting to belittle the opposing viewpoint.  When did
you first feel that you had to exert this force over an imagined
enemy?  Your particular neurosis has always facinated me, and for
you, I will handle your case over the net.  I will not use
Scientology, but routine psychological evaluations and practices.
The first hour is on me.

Bill Hardman


------------------------------- :) -----------------------------------
   hardman = hardman@throb.uucp [modem (818) 352-6297]
                (Bark At The Moon Productions)
                        *A Secret Cult*
If you don't have anything nice to say....Say something Rude!!!!