This blog post will go down in my blog history as one of an anomaly, a blogging style that is so dissimilar to the posts I have below. In this blog post you'll see an uncommon side of me -not the one that jumps around, make merry and allegedly seem immature but instead the more academical, rationalistic and analytical side of me.
Make yourself feel snugged and prepare an open mind for this is a long post in which I'll be pretty much philosophical.
Starting off,
These few days have been a great blessing because I have so many new found relevations in my ways of thought and theories that every day's a day of excitement. Just minutes ago I got to learn part of game theory from Seng Quan (a more affectionate term for Seng En Quan, but mistake not, I'm still straight!) known as Burning The Bridge.
In the bus rides home you'll often see me stare blankly into space. Do not be mistaken; I'm not day dreaming. I'm asking myself questions. Albert Einstein, as a child, questioned about everything and it is this inquisitive nature of his that his mind grew exponentially with the theory of physics and other scientific disciplines which then gave rise to a new found theories and formulas.
I asked myself, for I so love coffee and detest the harmful effects of smoking, this question:
Can coffee be smoked?
And it is this question that gave rise to an excited thought about a new industry of coffee cigarettes, the economical advantages and the great wealth to come. However it is in my process of getting to answer this question that my new business idea got shot down.
Coffee grounds it seemed, when smoked, did not give a high unlike tobacco and that it has actually an aweful taste. Don't worry, I have not joined the Black Lungs club, all I did was to research on the net. Hail the power of google and forums!
Perhaps it seems, that this idea is not viable, complemented by the fact that Singapore law bans the production of cigarettes (But thinking of it, is this a good that will produce negative externalities? Arguable.).
Yet my mind is determined not to let loose this concept and hence comes another question:
How do I make it such that smoking coffee is pleasurable, harmless and viable?
Now that's another question that will set me thinking and drives me into more research. Who knows? You might one day in the future come across kopi cigarettes sold in Starbucks.
I have another business idea, but this one I'll keep mum about it to protect this idea from being predated by other entrepreneurs out there HEHE. However if you're interested in the idea of coffee cigarettes let me know.
Do you know? Technology has allowed coffee to be generated into energy fuel.
Business is, fundamentally the idea of supplying people with a product or service. It's like a barter, where you exchange your outputs for other desired objects, except with a common commodity in between to facilitate this barter. Money.
So it seemed, that they did not explicitly put it in our faces this concept when we studied economics. Instead they shove into our face the problem of scarcity and the derived theory of opportunity costs and the other economic theories.
Scarcity? Now comes a paradoxical concept though: Imagine this, we use Earth's scarce resources to develop technologies that efficiently uses Earth's resources. In doing so we make resources less scarce because we use less of them due to efficiency.
Then I thought about it, hmm:
Let's say Earth started off with a supply of X.
There's 2 people living on earth, Adam and Eve. Each person is entitled X/2 of Earth's resources.
The theory of scarcity states that people have unlimited wants but imagine you own everything on Earth: Adam kills Eve and end up having X all to himself.
He has the whole entire Earth to himself, could he possibly want X+1? X+2? X+3? Does he want the whole universe? Why would it be beneficial for him if he even obtains X+1, assuming it's possible? Why are wants unlimited? Is there a possibility that wants would have a certain limit?
Let now the number of people living on earth be N.
Could scarcity be a point where N increases to such a point whereby X/N does not meet one person's wants?
Now ponder about the point where X/N becomes such that humans no longer can fit their want for food: Food become so scarce that there is global famine, everyone becomes hungry.
Picture a scene to illustrate this point: The world, booming with people has all its resources reduced to water held in hands and a small little bit of bread as food, everyone is naked and standing on an Earth barren, no single trees in sight,no buildings, no animals, no sea, just land; humans, land, each one with a little food and water.
At this point could it be that people start to cannibalise to fulfil their want for food? Now if this happened shouldn't people be part of Earth's supply too?
Earth Supply = X+N?
Let's imagine everyone starts killing everyone with bare hands (lol sorry I know this analogy is pretty brutal and animalistic) and eating their victims. Let's assume one half of the people kill the other half.
Number of people now: N/2
Earth Supply = X + N/2?
What then happens after they deficate out these digested people? Are shit part of the supply too? Now let's assuming for every cell eaten a cell of shit comes out (for sake of simplicity)
Earth Supply = X + N?
Number of people now: N/2?
And I come to a dilemma.
Yet, this dilemma came about because I assumed people to be additional Earth supply, a theory that couldn't be true because we cannot create matter; it can only change form.
What is inputed becomes what is outputed.
I have so many things to discuss about like whether there is another dimension being that can create matter in our world and ALOT ALOT of other stuff (like my personal taboos, communism, inequality bla bla) but I guess this is long enough so....
On to learn about viral warts (not because its part of the syllabus)
PS: I shall ask Seng Quan whether he can lend me his Game Theory notes so I could further my study in it. Gonna use it in my stock picking decision.
PSS: Ok elaborate another point la hor bear with me; if you could analyse the future movements of the demand of one's company stocks (essentially the market's psychology) with 100% accuracy all the stocks that you trade MUST profit (overlooking the minor issue of stock broker commissions). But if everyone can do that there will be no profiters, because one can only profit at the expense of others. (I wanted to discuss this thought but.. nah)
Mind Boggled,
Leon Oh
No comments:
Post a Comment