Economics classes are given the "Robinson Crusoe on his island" scenario to explain economics.
Let us look at a "Robinson Crusoe" scenario with say a four person economy on an isolated island.
Quote: "The first thing that is clear is that supply and demand are not measurable. "
Example: the supply of firewood by the person designated to gather firewood is measureable.
If the island is small, the total supply of wood may be obviously measureable too.
The demand is also measureable: how much wood the group need per day is an amount that can be measured.
The other 3 islanders may be expected by the wood-gatherer to pay for their share of wood with other goods or services that they provide.
If supply suddenly increases (a storm blows a vast amount of driftwood ashore, say); then the 'price' of wood may drop to zero.
If a fire burns up most of the trees on the island; the price of wood may increase as the wood-gatherer may have to spend more time gathering wood. So wood becomes more valuable and scarce.
There is no unknown data here?
The mathematical aspect that is present here is; assuming all other things being stable; that over-supply or under-supply will move the price. And over-demand or under-demand will move the price.
Well you may claim that future variations in supply or demand are unknown; but that whatever those future patterns are: the price will adjust to compensate.
That way "price" becomes a complementary variable that is tied to another variable (e.g. supply or demand).
This "tie" means the definition of "price" contains the definition of "supply"; and the definition of "supply" contains the definition of "price". So you have Chris Langan's mutual containment.
But "price" is expressed in terms of other values (as reduces to bartering); so these other categories meet 'price' too, in mutual definition.
The category "3 coconuts" may meet "price" at a different point as the category "12 pieces of firewood" does.
Maybe "1 coconut" corresponds with "6 pieces of firewood".
So you can have all kinds of categories (quantities unspecified, 'unknown') that intersect at various points of mutual price-definition (so are thus "known" in terms of each other) at these points.
Scientists researching is like looking to find where categories overlap. Does "Jupiter" overlap with "has a ring around it". A
spaceprobe showed these categories do intersect.
However, if the laws of physics are found in the patterns of "collisions" or "overlap" between intersecting categories (that are themselves defined by other intersecting categories); that is curious.
Sure, if you know about supply and demand; you might predict the effect on price when temperature rises re: power demand.
What you are doing is intersecting categories.
You take category "price" and map it onto category "demand for cooling power". You make a graph. You take category "temperature of weather" and map this against category "demand for cooling power". Then you partially differentiate to get the equation (as a solution to Dr. Dick's fundamental partial differential equation); to get the equation for category "price" against category "temperature of weather".
The fundamental pattern here involves: compare two patterns; compare this comparison with a 4th pattern. From these 4 can be derived 4-D space-time, it seems.
The fundamental equation will involve of course 4 constraints. These can be expressed technically as 4 different perspectives on the other categories-sums that make up those 4.
Perhaps a sum of delta functions on sets of intersecting (mutually overlapping) data categories (partially unknown data) will be able to map the area of definition or overlap required for any new relation (rule) that involves these categories intersecting with other such data categories (partially unknown data).
Einstein's ideas lead to new technology. His breakthroughs came from "thinking deeply and philosophically". The history of science shows a great deal has been achieved by such thinking.
From a book about Schrodinger I learned:
The Nobel Prize is decided by members of the Swedish Academy and previous winners, I think.
It must be awarded to outstanding advances in knowledge and/or invention. People can be nominated many times over years before they win.
Schrodinger had been nominated 25 times over the years before he was awarded his. There had been delays/ debate over recognising purely theoretical work. Look at the actual reason Einstein was given his prize. Probably for photo-electric effect, not relativity.
Are you, Aurino; Dr. Richard Stafford phD? I'm still inclined to think you are not. Sorry if the question irritates.