Proportional response has become a new favorite quip in the lexicon of international citizens. Ok. Let us look at the math. x is proportional to y, if it follows this form:

x = a * y

Where 'a' is a non-zero constant.

The situation we are actually observing now, from our international detractors is what is known as inverse proportionality.

x = a / y

The MSM are openly advocating the belief that if 'y' is terrorism and 'x' is the response to that terrorism, as 'y' gets bigger, 'x' should diminish, since the 'x' breeds more terrorism.

I would agree with the assertion that the international response to terrorism has not been proportional. Inverse proportionality is not a proportional response.

So what can we do to guarantee proportionality?

The minimum possible value of 'a', which affords a future for Israel is

a value equal to one.

x = y

So for every act of terrorism a carefully balanced and measured response is delivered. Of course, this minimum condition, leads to several decades of zero progress. Obviously this is a condition we are familiar with.

What I would like to see is an 'a' value equal to 100.

x = 100 * y

For every act of terrorism 'y' we see a response 100 times more potent. This is a value, designed to achieve victory.

And the beauty of it is, when you look at the math, it is a proportional response.

.

## Wednesday, July 26, 2006

Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

## 14 comments:

But it's a disproportionate proprtion!!!

Thanks for the algebra lesson, Professor Insolublog. Now my head hurts.

Okay, so let me see if I get this straight. For there to be proportionality then the terrorist act, y, would have to be multiplied by some number not equal to zero to achieve the proportional Israeli response, x? Forgive me, I am to Algebra what Helen Keller was to public speaking.

Uh...

Y is sometimes a vowel!!!

Uh, Y is where I eat! Oops that was an "Inapropriate response" HA

I need a cheat sheet to follow this post!!! It's like high school all over again.

AHH, MY ACNE!!!

FIAR – Proportionally speaking, of course.

FM - I think you have it. If we look a mathematical proportionality, pounding the snot out of the terrorists, every time they sneeze, is proportional, as long as it is consistent policy. It becomes disproportionate, when you send mixed messages.

Damian – I don't remember the three stooges treating it like that in the famous alphabet song.

Ssssteve – O... K....

Wyatt – No penalties here, if you go peek over at Hippy-pedia ( I must admit it is a good math resource)

Thisa sort of reminds me of the "violence will solve every problem if taken to the fullest limit" theory of resolving problems. Someone jay walks; you shoot them; they won't jay walk again. What's better is that everyone that whitnessed the event will be terrified of jay walking.

I suppose if jaywalkers were supporting their cause to venture out into traffic, by strapping bombs to children, or throwing non-jaywalkers in front of the cars, I would have to agree.

It's elementary, dear Insolublog!

I knew there was something bugging me about this post!

The constant should have been expressed as 'k', to follow conventional notation.

There, I've said it.

When I was taking semiconductor theory and physics, I became so used to seeing 'k' standing for Boltzmann's constant, I don't use it elsewhere.

So there is a good reason ;)

BTW, the latter 'k' would be wayyyyyy too small for this purpose.

Not only that, us math-idiots wouldn't have gotten it had you used "k". We don't need no semiconwhatsits.

Perhaps a new notation for the constant is in order in this case:

x = (monkey stomp)^2 * y

-- I've been away from here too long. Thanks for teh funny, Insol!

That's ok fm, just hit 'em hard, every time you hit them.

It's nice to hear from you GunnNutt. I still visit your place occasionally; still doing great work, I see.

Post a Comment