Clif High - Speed of Thought or Teaching a Legislator to think!

Feb. 20, 2023 - Clif High

27:54

Speed of Thought or Teaching a Legislator to think!

How to do energy calculus (no math). In depth analysis of the LI & energy situation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgOEGKDVvsg https://purebulk.com/products/clif-highs-pure-sleep https://clifhigh.substack.com/p/cancer https://knowledgeofhealth.com/what-if-cancer-was-already-cured/ https://clifhigh.substack.com/https://clifhigh.substack.com/p/cancer

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello humans.
	Hello humans.
	Don't be shocked.
	Hang on.
	Go.
	Transition.
	Whoa.
	State of the art.
	Okay.
	This is a tough one.
	We're going to talk about the speed of thought, but in a kind of an oblique way.
	The idea here is that we want to show people how to do effective thinking.
	All right, so we want to show these legislators, legislator guys, who have their, you know, their doctors, lawyers, accountants, you know, all different kinds of people, end up becoming politicians.
	And I'm talking about local legislators, right?
	Fuck the national guys.
	But I'm talking about your local, your homies in your state.
	We want to teach them how to think about things in this highly complex world in which we all find ourselves.
	And so we want to help make our legislators smart, okay?
	Now, smart is applying, the definition for smart is applying all of your intelligence to your own situation, right?
	So we all know those intelligent people that are so dumb they can't get out of their own way, right?
	In fact, it's cliché in the movie industry and stuff.
	Anyway, so there's sort of an art to this kind of thinking, to applying your intelligence to your own situation and becoming smart.
	Now, legislators have a different task, okay?
	They have to apply intelligence and smartness, and they have to extend that outside themselves to the whole of the social order to benefit everyone.
	That's the nominal thinking on why we elect these fuckers.
	All right?
	And in so doing, everybody should benefit.
	They have to make judgments weighing options and knowing, knowing, going in, knowing going in, that some people will be disadvantaged no matter what they decide, okay?
	Because by deciding to do this, you're disadvantaging these other people in this way because of what they want.
	Now, that is an emotional reconciliation issue that we're not going to deal with here, okay?
	So what I'm going to talk about today is energy calculus, okay?
	But don't be afraid, okay?
	So you can tell the legislators, you can go watch this video, don't be afraid, there's no math involved, okay?
	It's all words, and we only have to count.
	We only have to count stuff up, that's all.
	So there's no math involved in this, but it truly is a calculus.
	All right, so we're going to do energy calculus in order to make a good decision.
	And we're going to preface that good decision by saying it's going to be a smart decision by taking all of our intelligence and applying it to ourselves in relation to that decision.
	And so you can have people that have average intelligence, but are way really, really, really smart, okay?
	Because they apply all of their intelligence to their own situation.
	And these people might be your regular Joe who's a millionaire, right?
	Because he applies all of his intelligence to his own situation and makes a smart decision in that regard.
	He doesn't just do shit.
	So, okay, so what I'm going to show you is based on Synergetics by Buckminster Fuller.
	Okay.
	This is my copy of it.
	This is my working copy of it.
	Okay.
	This is the copy I keep around for my general kind of reading and reference.
	And Buckminster Fuller lived in the 20s.
	Go look him up.
	Really a genius.
	Invented lots of shit.
	So genius is being really intelligent and applying it all to your own situation.
	And so he invented lots of shit.
	He discovered the secret of universe is to go on out and help people and universe will reward you.
	And he did that and it rewarded him.
	Okay.
	So he came up with all kinds of cool stuff, geodesics.
	He didn't invent it.
	He perfected it.
	But nonetheless, one of the things he was brilliant at was this energy calculus.
	Now, we're also going to look at Biosphere by Vladimir Bernadsky.
	This is a guy.
	This is my working copy on this.
	It doesn't have a cover on it because I've got three of these.
	This one's mostly beat to hell.
	But the other one I've only got two of.
	So if I get a good book, I always go buy another copy because I know I'm going to trash it in the process of using it as a reference, right?
	And so what we're going to talk about, this energy calculus, comes from these two brilliant fellows back in the 1920s.
	And they each contributed to this art of thinking.
	All right.
	So we're going to analyze things relative to the idea of is it worth it.
	So the whole of energy calculus comes down to solving and answering that question.
	Is this goal worth doing?
	Okay.
	And so you find this kind of thinking in all different kinds of strategies, business strategies, medical strategies, war strategies, all different kinds of things, political strategies.
	You're presented with an idea.
	Is it worth doing XYZ, right?
	And so you have to understand what your goal is.
	So you can't, so you have to think deeply about your goal before you decide to do an energy calculation on this and is it worth it kind of thing.
	But let's step through it real quick.
	The idea is this: that referencing your own situation or all of humanity, there is this stuff called sums, all right, the sum total.
	And so we have a sum total energy expenditure.
	That's our EE, okay?
	So to get to, and that's our double arrow, to get to our goal.
	Now, something you need to know about calculus.
	All right, so we're going to do a calculus.
	Calculus is basically grammar.
	All right, you know, you don't say ain't in polite company, that sort of thing.
	Grammar at a slightly different level.
	It's grammar about math and thinking.
	All right, so what we're going to be concerned about here is the analysis of basically things that are that are going to lead us in one direction, and then we're going to look and see if we have equivalency.
	Is this worth that?
	And you can weight these things on your gut.
	You can say, because you know, I mean, you're old enough to have grasped the idea.
	You know, ice cream cone or a full-on three-course meal, right?
	So now that's going to be influenced by how you feel and your hunger and so on.
	All right.
	So you would recognize that going on in.
	A smart person would say, and apply their intelligence and say, well, geez, I'm being given a choice of a free ice cream cone now or a three-course meal.
	And hmm, these bastards that are controlling me and setting up this environment, I don't know what they've got planned for me.
	So I'm going to eat that three-course meal because maybe I've got to go three days without any food, right?
	And that ice cream cone isn't going to do it.
	So that's the kind of thinking that you would put into this.
	You would have this equivalency kind of analysis as you go along.
	But you can weight it on your gut if you just sort of think about what's coming ahead and how we proceed with this.
	It's not that difficult an analysis to do, but you just have to be consistent and continually involved in the process.
	So we're going to, one way to look at it, and one really good way that I saw for the analysis was where these people, I think it was these military guys.
	I'd have to really think about where I'd come across this.
	But they said, take the goal and then imagine yourselves as invading space aliens that came down here and had to achieve that goal.
	Because you would have to come down and you'd have this zero-sum starting state.
	That's the whole idea.
	You've got to start with nothing.
	And so we're going to get to the goal.
	Say that our goal was an electric vehicle.
	And further, let's just say that our goal was an electric vehicle powered by a high-tech battery.
	And just to make it a little bit specific and interesting and easy to do, this is the easy part, right?
	We don't have to have committees and thrash out hundreds of different options and all this kind of stuff.
	We'll just go right to the cut right to the chase.
	And let's say that we're going to make lithium plus other rare earths batteries.
	And these are going to power our electric vehicles.
	Never mind that electric vehicles are no good for humans because you're sitting with your NADs on a giant electrical field that's going to fry your DNA and change the gametes and that kind of thing, right?
	And shorten your lifespan.
	Never mind about all of that.
	The space aliens that come on down here have a goal of having electric vehicles.
	They like electric vehicles.
	They got three sets of NADs, so it's like, okay, for them, it's all right.
	But for us, it's not.
	Anyway, though, but the goal is to create electric vehicles powered by batteries that are primarily run on lithium.
	So you can do an energy analysis, and you can say, if our goal was to do this, like the mother wefers, the World Economic Forum, if our goal was to get lithium-powered cars everywhere and eliminate all diesel and other uses, what's going on in there?
	What's involved with this, right?
	Is that possible?
	Is it worth it to do that?
	And usually in doing the is it worth it part, you come across stuff that says it may be worth it, but we can't because of X, Y, or Z. And that's what we're going to analyze right here.
	And it's real easy to do.
	So in my state, the governor is this guy by the name of Inslee, and he's got a wild hair up his butt and says to go to the Agenda 2030, and he's saying, no non-electric vehicle, no diesel, no gas vehicle can be registered for a license in this state past 2030.
	It's like, well, okay, guy, then I'm going to be driving illegal, and you're going to see, you're going to be in court a lot trying to fight me challenging all the fucking tickets and stuff.
	But here's the deal.
	We could say population of Washington state times that population is the number of electric vehicles we need.
	And so we need that many batteries, right?
	At the moment, we don't care how big the population is.
	Bats.
	All right, so now, is this feasible?
	Okay, so here's what you would do.
	You would say each battery is going to take X amount.
	Let's not use that.
	It's like a time symbol.
	Each battery is going to take B amount of lithium.
	So that's one battery.
	Those are our little battery posts.
	Okay, so it's one battery.
	Our one bat is going to require, and so this is where we get this will require symbol, which is this double arrow thing, will require a certain amount, an unknown number.
	So we'll just say number unknown of trucks to mine it for mining.
	So to do a true energy calculus and decide if you're going to get into a situation where it is worth it to do it, where it's feasible, where it's technical, and so on, all you have to care about are these branch chain symbols, okay?
	So in Vernadsky's book, he talks about state changes.
	And so this is what we can think of.
	Every time you get to a change of state, you're getting in branching off into a whole new chain of energy analysis to provide the supporting equipment for that state of change that you want to engineer into your material.
	So your material starts off in dirt, right?
	And so you've got to dig that out.
	So you need trucks, you need excavators, you need diesel to run it.
	That gives you another chain where you need drilling for diesel.
	You need well heads, all of that.
	You need refinery, refining.
	So that refinery would be another one of these, right?
	Another one of these shift in the state because you're changing the oil that you're going to ultimately use as diesel from crude to the refined state that goes into the trucks.
	So each and every one of these adds up.
	And all you have to do is to set a threshold and say that each and every one of these batteries will provide us over its entire lifespan, this one battery will give us the equivalent of, I think they're claiming 800 barrels of oil.
	Okay.
	So they're saying that over its lifetime that this battery would complete, no, it was, yeah, it was 800 barrels of oil.
	It would replace 800 barrels of oil.
	Well, you know, so that means it has a very finite lifespan.
	So we have to note that in our energy calculations.
	That's our lifespan.
	But nonetheless, we just go on and we say, okay, if that's true, then each and every battery would have to, if it's going to replace 800 barrels of oil, that in a total examination of this, right, a sum total energy calculus examination, how many barrels of oil does it take to produce the battery?
	So if it took eight barrels of oil to produce the battery, you'd say, fuck damn, look, you know, we're getting a 10 times return.
	But in reality, what are we getting?
	So if we actually examine all of these chains that develop, and so this is just one state of change.
	And so we go from dirt to separation of the dirt to separate the lithium out.
	Then the lithium has to be dissolved.
	It has to be, that's another state change from the separated lithium to a dissolved lithium for purification.
	And so each and every one of these creates major state changes you've got to analyze in your energy calculation as to whether it will ever, ever, ever pay back.
	Now, just eliminating the manufacturing of the trucks, eliminating all of the manufacturing for all of the sub chains.
	So throwing away 90% of our energy calculus, we still discover that just in the mining, each battery of lithium is going to require about, so these are minuses, about 100 barrels of oil, okay, to transport.
	So also, right, every single one of the state changes, by the way, usually involves a transport chain.
	Transport chains are analyzed on their own because they're so energy intensive.
	So you would, in this case, you would usually, to do a total energy analysis, you would have to analyze that transport chain.
	And you would have to say that, you know, what is it energy to take to make the trucks, et cetera, et cetera.
	In our advanced state of our society now, most of the energy calculus that is done eliminates all of these past one or two drops.
	These are called drops.
	All right.
	So one of the drops in production chains.
	Past one or two of these drops, they don't analyze because nothing would in essence be cost-effective if you did that.
	But here's the thing.
	We're going to need the transport trucks to move landscaping rock as well as mining.
	Okay, they're different scales and all of that.
	Nonetheless, we're going to have to have the same facilities to make trucks regardless of any individual goal on this.
	So it is legitimate to say, just set a cutoff and say we're not going to look beyond two drops down from our primary goal, which is the battery made of lithium.
	But even so, we find out just in the mining, you use one-eighth of all of the possibility here.
	Also, by the way, this is bogus.
	So this here, 100% bogus because even Tesla says you can't charge it more than 95%.
	The reason you can't do that is because of wear and tear on the battery and you shorten the battery life significantly if you take it all the way up and then down, all the way up and down, all the way up and down.
	It just destroys the battery very, very rapidly.
	It'll cut the lifespan down to nothing, which is something else you have to put in here for dividing all of this.
	But we won't get into that.
	Anyway, so you have the separation, you have the lithium being dissolved, you have it purified, and then there's vast quantities of other side chains that go into the production of the materials for the battery housing,
	as well as all of the copper needed for the car.
	Okay, so I'm just going to stop right there, all right?
	Because usually in these energy analyses, especially for social things, like for society-wide, right?
	So for my individual needs here, I have done an analysis on a particular use of my truck, and I went down 10 levels here.
	I went down 10 levels for my primary goal.
	and said, okay, I've got, you know, yeah, there's a lot of side chains, but the result will be worth it here because within that 10 levels, I will achieve the goal.
	Now, here's the thing.
	We're at a point here where it's, if we look at all of the side chains here and their energy use, we get down to the point where we're taking out 780 barrels as an estimated average to produce the batteries.
	So you're only going to get, and it only holds one barrel's worth of energy at a time, okay?
	So it's not like it's a great storehouse or anything.
	And then you have all of the other costs of this.
	You can't dispose of the batteries.
	They erupt into a fire and you can't put them out.
	You have to build a giant infrastructure that uses even more copper just to effectively charge them.
	And then they need something on the other end to provide the electricity.
	Okay.
	And could be dams, could be nuclear.
	Likely it's going to be a coal plant in most places.
	So now, if I were doing this energy calculus here against my numnuts governor Inslee's projection that we've all got to have electric vehicles by 2030, I will tell him it's not possible.
	And we've just proven by going through all of this here, if we were to actually throw in real numbers like the population of the state, the actual number of batteries we're going to need, the number of trucks and the number of mines, the number of tons of material and so on and so on and so on, we can prove that there is not enough of the lithium and rare earths.
	You'll run out of rare earths before you run out of lithium, right?
	You need the other rare earths in the other part of building this battery.
	And they're much more finite in number.
	But nonetheless, you would run out of lithium as well long before you could get an electric vehicle for just the citizens of Washington state.
	We would need hundreds of more mines.
	We'd need thousands of more people working in the electric vehicle business.
	You'd need thousands of more people putting in massive amounts of electrical lines to do charging.
	We'd have to upgrade our power plants in order to be able to handle the flow of electricity through the mains and through the generation capacity into the delivery system, etc., etc., etc.
	You'd need new power lines everywhere.
	And so you would need, basically, to get an electric vehicle for everybody in Washington state who lives here now, we would need to double our population.
	And I think it was like 17 times our current level of investment in species and dollars into the electric business just here in Washington state to achieve this one goal of getting basically one of these lithium batteries for every human in the state or every collection of humans, two or three depending, children, etc., right?
	But it's just not feasible.
	For every driver in the state, we do not have enough resources and we will not have enough resources by the finite number of years that Inslee has set for his line in the sand kind of thing.
	And so it's doomed to failure.
	And so, hey, Inslee, hey, got a great job there.
	You're doomed to failure.
	There ain't shit you can do about it.
	Nothing can happen.
	And the society will not achieve that goal.
	And it's easy to see this at any point along the process because even if you've never done one of these before, even that process can be estimated and analyzed as Buckminster Fuller did repeatedly in order to get his own inventions.
	He would say, is this invention likely to succeed?
	So he had this brilliant invention, which was a kind of brick that took less energy to make and was non-flammable.
	It was structurally sound and it was designed in such a way that even in the worst earthquake, it would not shake apart or crumble or collapse or any of that.
	Brilliant, brilliant.
	He got patents on it the whole deal.
	And it was worthless.
	He knew it was worthless because he did an energy calculus on it and abandoned it because of the infrastructure that would have had to have been put into place requiring X number just to use this and convert the construction industry over to it, right?
	And he estimated that it would take him two generations to convert just enough people that actually did the masonry work to understand this to get it into the production cycle.
	And reality would probably be closer to three or four generations.
	So it was not worth it putting in the investment in 1920 because it wouldn't have happened and so on and so on.
	And so he was smart.
	He put his own intelligence to his own task and let that project go and just abandon it because it was a good idea at the time.
	It was brilliant.
	He was able to succeed.
	But it did not have an energy calculus that favored it in the future.
	Make sense?
	So you can do this for your own, any decision you have to make.
	You can do an energy calculus.
	You don't have to go down into any kind of detail.
	You needn't have a lot of math, but you should set some kind of a, how many of these side chains do I have to investigate?
	And will I get derailed?
	You know, pardon the use of the term, will I get derailed before I can investigate that number?
	So a lot of people, I know a guy that's intent on learning a particular thing, and he doesn't understand the number of side chains he's going to have to go in order to produce his goal.
	And also, he's not aware of his own nature that he's going to get distracted somewhere in the second or third chain and never make it to the fourth one, which is necessary that he get to in order to achieve his goal.
	So he's sort of doomed to failure on that, right?
	And so this is what we're setting our social order up for, following the mother wefers.
	This is what, you know, they've got their own agenda, their own plan.
	We're at war with them.
	This is the fifth generation unrestricted warfare against the mother wefers in the CCP.
	But all that aside, all that aside, you know, whether Inslee is a mother wefer or not, his idea is a non-starter.
	I mean, you know, he can push it and he'll have shit happen, but it's doomed to failure.
	It's absolutely doomed to failure.
	It's like being out here on the coast and in a howling rainstorm and watching a guy on the beach trying to light wet newspaper and wet logs into a campfire.
	You know, all you can do is let him try until the universe shows him it isn't going to work.
	Anyway, guys, I got into a lot of these little luxury kind of ones because we've got all kinds of stuff happening and we need to go through things and discuss some of the other developments.
	This was just a diversion because I keep running into all these legislator guys here who've never had the benefit of having their minds twisted into thinking about things at an engineering level.
	Most of them anyway.
	So that's it for now.

▲