Markets and Relevance

A good, i.e. relevance, made of synergies of irrelevance, when inspected in detail will convey irrelevant values. A good made of relevant values can only convey relevant values.

Markets

What you are looking for is in the neighborhood.
Relevance constituents.

Ashrams

Irrelevance constituents.
Outposts where congregate those who couldn't find what they were looking for in the neighborhood.

Writing a book it can be assumed one has traveled outside the neighborhood.

A book cannot be written with only relevance. Colloquial speech is a neighborhood device. Relevance always decays into colloquial speech because demand for it is everywhere greater than supply. It never collects into a book.

Technology's ultimate reference is historical where neighborhoods were transcended.

Corporations are built by systematization of travel out of the neighborhood, and preservation of relevance despite it.

Irrelevance is the logical result of growth block, throughout evolution. It is not a corporate venture, since those assume speech.

Commentary on an argument can be either relevant and valuable, the usual case, or irrelevant and valuable, which can become relevant in the same manner a product of synergies can do this.

Infinite irrelevant value--the appearance of scarcity

The transition from an undenomenated commodity to a denomenated commodity, for both relevant values, such as gold, and irrelevant values, such as altruism, requires the discovery of unsuppliable demand, that is, scarcity, which, because it has a value of infinity, and this can be shown to imply that finite quantities also exist, enables the formation of markets.

Thus, for irrelevant values, someone manages to establish himself as a provider of such a demanded irrelvant commodity, demanded because he has been careful to keep his sums of this value separated into bins characterized by consistency, and thus they do not add, but do multiply, and in multiplication the square root of minus one value in the enumeration multiplies with itself, the irrelevance disappears and a negative value appears, but doing this with another pair of irrelevant values, giving another negative relevant value, and multiplying these, gives a positive relevant value where before this there were four irrelevant values, that this demanded irrelevant commodity is part of a vein of infinite value, because it is absolutely scarce.

An irrelevant commodity that does not fail to supply all demand, but that does supply all demand, is not a scarce commodity. Thus, a poor prophet who cannot find anyone who understands the whole impact of his philosophy will be forced to produce superlative irrelevant behavior at every turn, because that's what he has made of himself and he has no other way to interact. If he is especially diplomatic as well as irrelevant, he can accumulate a following of persons willing to buy his irrelevant books or donate all their wealth in order to live with him. Neither of these is a scarce commodity, implying infinite value. But they are irrelevant.

What differentiates infinite from undenomenated irrelevant value is rigor. I believe I have stated the outlines of a description of this exact rigor above. The product which I have assembled from four irrelevant values is the art in the sidebar, English Transformation Art, which has sold here one piece to date. No altruism or other irrelevant value is necessary to appreciate its value. It is accessible in strictly commercial terms. Yet its constituents are completely irrelevant values. These I will not divulge as they constitute a trade secret. I suppose speculation could determine some of it, but purchase is so much easier. It is now a business, and it will take normal business practices to build. My discussion of irrelevance goes to global understanding. It would be better not to have to do it, but in today's world of open sources, one has to do some of it just to be part of the action.

a blog reference to relevance, irrelevance, and Jesus

I found a blog with a post about relevance, irrelevance, and Jesus. it is here. It's a pretty traditional discussion, with some cross castigation. I can't say as I find it personally useful, but I thought I would give any readers a chance to look at it.

rich man/camel quote by Jesus

The quote by Jesus is "It is harder for a rich man to get into the kingdom of heaven than for a camel to get through the eye of a needle."

A man who is extremely rich has dealt with a world of relevant values, weeding out all the irrelevant ones rather than creating an adaptation for keeping irrelevance straight and keeping track of its synergies that result in multiplication of irrelevant values, leading to appearance of negative relevant values, so that further multiplication allows these negative values to become positive values--a negative times a negative yields a positive. The rich man never learns how to do this and consequently is totally lacking in spiritual values. This of course is the textbook case and rarely does it fit reality. Irrelevance is hard to weed out, even though it is harder to reconcile it, and usually everybody gets a little taste of the irrelevance of doing good.

on God/Caesar quote from Jesus

The quote from Jesus is "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. Render unto God what is God's." I read this to be a straight application of the orthogonal relationship between relevant and irrelvant values. Caesar's values, the relevant ones, do not affect the ledger for God's values, the irrelevant ones, since they lie along a different coordinate axis. You can have responsibilities in each tender. Discharging one does not reduce the debt in the other. Of course this is not the whole story. It deals with the purely additive properties of relevant, or real, and irrelevant, or imaginary, values, not the multiplicative ones that produce a negative when two irrelevant, or imaginary, values are multiplied.

irrelevance and the square root of minus one

It seems to be little appreciated that much of what goes on in the lives of "spiritual people", from the common church goer to Jesus himself, is much more rational, even calculative, than is given credit for. I was musing over this and happened to reflect on the possibility that the term for the square root of minus one, imaginary, is not as linguistically appropriate as the term "irrelevant". In the complex number plane, where real and imaginary values are graphed orthogonally, an imaginary value is quite plainly irrelevant to values on the real axis--it does not add in and can be componentally disassociated from the real values. Imaginary is not a measurable concept. Irrelevant is.

What if all the considerations present in a life viewed as irrelevant were actually just as calculative as the considerations present in a life viewed as relevant. When would we notice the effects of multiplication of two values that are irrelevant to get a product that is negative and relevant? There never having been a ledger sheet for irrelevance, all the calculations involving irrelevance are out of control except for the traditional lessons of spirituality, a largely trial and error process. it is easy to see how negatives to relevance, as well as negatives to irrelevance, could develop quite naturally. Jesus, and all prophets, have a hell of a time with the establishment. They're always considered negative by a great number of people. I am not saying this is incorrect. It is correct, but I am proposing that it's more understandable than has been thought.

It may very well be that we are missing a lot of economically important information in the economy by not incorporating irrelevance on ledgers and in our money system.

The creation of a profit from manufacture of a product occurs because the total spent on materials and processes is exceeded by the saleable value of the manufactured good. This is called a synergy. The sum is greater than the parts. But what I take it is happening is that addition of the inputs is not where the synergy comes from. It comes from their multiplication.

So anytime a product is profitable we can pretty much expect that there is a multiplication of relevant values involved in its manufacture, somewhere on a ledger. But if just one irrelevant value gets mixed in with all the relevant values in the multiplication, the net result becomes irrelevant. And if two irrelevant values get involved, the net result is negative. For this reason companies watch very carefully to weed out irrelevance from the workplace. But if irrelevance were monetized, it could be ledgered and the size of the economy would be doubled, on first principles. There would no longer be any fear of irrelevance because it would be steered by accounting into net positive relevant values.

Somewhat murky, I'm afraid, but perhaps you get the picture.