Mysteries of the ancient history of the land of the rising sun. Allocative Efficiency Evidence
Proof. (12). If for everyone there is
Then we define a bijection as.
(2) (3). If the morphism is natural in A and B, then the following diagrams are commutative:
Diagram 8
Research of parallel computing systems.
Let us take Similarly, considering
(3) (1). For given s and e it is easy to prove that s: is a universal arrow.
![](https://i1.wp.com/studbooks.net/imag_/43/230552/image028.png)
Proposition 2: Let be a functor having a left adjoint. Then for every small category and functor: there is an isomorphism
![](https://i0.wp.com/studbooks.net/imag_/43/230552/image029.png)
Proof. We will use the fact that if there are pairs of conjugate functors
![](https://i2.wp.com/studbooks.net/imag_/43/230552/image030.png)
These are conjugate compositions. Note that the left conjugate of the functor is unique up to isomorphism. Consider the commutative diagram:
![](https://i1.wp.com/studbooks.net/imag_/43/230552/image031.png)
Diagram 9
Where. By virtue of the universality property of the functor, k is conjugate on the left. By the definition of a limit, there is an isomorphism. Therefore, it is conjugate to the left to. Thus,
Composition of conjugate functors
The product of two successive conjugations is a conjugation in the following sense:
Theorem 1: Let two conjugations be given:
Then the products of functors determine the conjugation:
Proof. In relation to hom-sets, these two conjugations determine the following isomorphism, natural in
It means that the product of functors is conjugate on the left with. Let us put and apply these two isomorphisms to the unit arrow 1: . Then the unit of the product of conjugates is equal to, as stated.
Double reasoning shows that the co-unit is equal. One can directly verify that the latter formulas define natural transformations that satisfy the triangular identities.
Using such multiplication, it is possible to form a category, the objects of which are all (small) categories X, A, D,..., and the arrows are conjugations with the introduced multiplication; the unit arrow for each category A is the identical conjugation
This category also has an additive structure. Each hom-set can be considered as a category - namely, as a category of conjugates between X and A. Its objects are the indicated conjugates, and its arrows are conjugate pairs with vertical multiplication.
Let two conjugate pairs be given
![](https://i2.wp.com/studbooks.net/imag_/43/230552/image038.png)
Then the (horizontal) products of natural transformations determine the conjugate pair of natural transformations that correspond to the products of conjugates.
The proof can be expressed by a hom-set diagram
![](https://i1.wp.com/studbooks.net/imag_/43/230552/image039.jpg)
The horizontal multiplication operation is actually a bifunctor
This means that Adj is a two-dimensional category.
Caen expansion
Let be a functor between small categories, and be an arbitrary category. Consider a functor acting on objects as, on morphisms - The left conjugate to is called the left Cahn extension and is denoted. The right conjugate of k is called the right Cahn extension.
If we take into account the fact that schizoids, as a rule, are hardly suggestible and even moreover, stubborn and negative, then we can easily answer the sacramental question of why among outstanding scientists, especially in the field of exact sciences, there are so many people with a clear predominance of schizoradicals . The work of outstanding scientists - thoughtful metaphysicians, taxonomists, brilliant revolutionaries in science, overturning mossy paradigms - almost certainly bears the stamp of some noble madness. Here you can remember famous saying Niels Bohr regarding the hypothesis presented to the court of the respected synclite, that this theory, of course, is crazy, but the whole question is whether it is crazy enough to be true.
An ordinary person, moderately socialized and critical, is inclined to doubt the reliability of the results he has obtained, especially if they fundamentally diverge from generally accepted ideas. There is too much environmental pressure, and the opinions of colleagues are especially important. A schizoid is not touched by such trifles. Being a man of “crooked logic”, as well as due to complete indifference to the opinions of others (he always knows how to do it) and thanks to his unique ability for unexpected comparisons of incomparable things, he easily goes for broke, transforming (sometimes beyond recognition) with fearless courage ) the face of the discipline in which he works. Needless to say, schizoid character traits alone are not enough for such a feat. But if original talent and high professionalism are added to reinforced concrete confidence in one’s own rightness, then the resulting explosive mixture works wonders, creating genuine revolutionaries in any field of knowledge.
Is the notorious crooked logic always so bad? A certain percentage of eccentrics are simply necessary. And thank God that there are people in the world who chronically do not know how to think stereotypically, because without this essential vitamin(we are not even talking about fundamental science) it is impossible to imagine, for example, any serious poetic originality. By the way, people with the so-called defect of logical sense are also good because they can freely dump any nonsense that has not had time to be molded into something digestible. They (and only they) will understand and appreciate you, because in general they perfectly understand everything that is unclear.
By the way, it would be very interesting to trace the relationship between the radicals “schizo” and “cyclo” in art. Kretschmer, for example, believed that full-blooded realistic prose is the absolute domain of cyclothymics (Balzac, Zola, Rabelais), and moral preaching is the lot of schizothymics par excellence (Schiller, Rousseau). Here you need to be doubly careful, because such subtle matters, unstable and ambiguous, leave the widest scope for all sorts of subjective interpretations. But something nevertheless dawns on us: sophisticated aesthetes, concerned mainly with the formal side of the matter and stylistic delights (suffice it to name Ciurlionis or Dali), still gravitate primarily towards the schizothymic pole.
What has been said, of course, does not mean that one can equate giftedness with one or another type of character. Actually, we have already talked about this. Characteristic features can, at best, accelerate (or, conversely, slow down) the development of an individual’s creative potential. Kretschmer also noted that psychopathy is not an entrance ticket to the Olympus of sciences and arts, that there are highly intelligent and weak-minded psychopaths, as well as highly intelligent and poorly gifted ones ordinary people. Let us illustrate this simple maxim with two examples.
The first case was described by the Czech psychiatrist Stuhlik. For several years he observed a talented mathematician who fell ill with schizophrenia. According to the patient, many years ago, when he was a very young man, on the outskirts of the village where he then lived, an aircraft of an unknown type crashed. The entire crew died, and only one girl survived, who later became the patient’s wife. From her he learned that it was spaceship, who arrived from the planet Astron. Since then, the patient’s life has radically changed. He began compiling dictionaries and grammars of the main languages common on the mythical planet. He drow geographic Maps, prepared lengthy reports and thick reference books concerning the population of a distant planet, its economic and political life. It got to the point that the patient even compiled a train schedule at one of the largest railway stations in Astron. The most fully developed language was Iskhi (invented, of course, by the patient himself). The grammar of this language turned out to be so detailed and suitable for practical use, and the vocabulary was so extensive that the patient spoke the Iskhi language without difficulty and even wrote several stories and novels in it. Other languages were under development. Professional linguists invited as experts rated the work done by the patient very highly. They unanimously declared that such work testifies not only to the author’s extraordinary talent, but also to his brilliant professional training in the field of applied and theoretical linguistics. Stukhlik ended his extract from the medical history as follows: “The patient declares that he will create as many languages as he wants...”
Now case number two, which the author of these lines witnessed in student years. At that time, there was an elderly schizophrenic in the Perm regional psychiatric hospital (he was from a village and had a four-year education, and at the beginning of the conversation he introduced himself as a specialist in oil and bread). According to his original concept, the blood of people and animals, accumulated in subsoil voids, after a series of complex metamorphoses turns into oil. In some clever way, in the spirit of the “crooked logic” of a schizophrenic (it’s hard to remember the details now), all this parsley was linked to the grain harvest.
Summary: despite the disparate level in terms of general education and professional training, the heroes of these two stories are almost like twin brothers. In both cases, we see generic features of the schizophrenic way of thinking: the formation of an overvalued idea, the paradoxical “topsy-turvy” logic, the attraction to abstract schemes to the detriment of details, uncriticality and negativism.
But what about the fact that virtue has a sharp nose and humor has a thick nose? (Remember the playful Kretschmer passage with which we began the previous chapter?) In other words, what about a sense of humor, which, without a doubt, is one of the most important personality characteristics? It would seem that the cheerful cycloid should give a hundred points ahead to the schizothymic cracker in this matter. On the one hand, deadly serious people, the so-called agelasts (as, by the way, hypochondriacs, which often coincide), gravitate predominantly towards the schizothymic pole. But upon a closer look at the problem, such a convenient and logical scheme immediately crumbles into dust. Of course, if we're talking about about juicy, full-blooded, earthly humor, about the triumph of the material and corporeal (let us at least remember Francois Rabelais!), then this is the ancestral domain of cyclothymic. But we find the subtlest irony, paradoxical wit, poisonous satire, and destructive causticism in abundance in classical schizoids. You don’t have to look far for examples - here are Gogol, Swift, and Bernard Shaw. What can you do, to each his own...
But epithymicists seem to have the least amount of humor, although here too I would not rush to conclusions. (One may recall Napoleon Bonaparte, who once told the tragic actor Talma, from whom he took lessons in his youth: “I am, of course, the most tragic person of our time.”)
Kretschmer's dichotomy at one time produced the effect of a bomb exploding and was instantly picked up by numerous followers. Works poured in as if from a cornucopia. Outstanding Russian psychiatrist Pyotr Borisovich Gannushkin(1875-1933) found Kretschmer's approach fruitful and significantly expanded his typology. In addition, Kretschmer's classification of characters intersected at a number of points with Gannushkin's teaching on borderline psychiatry, which he was intensively developing at that time. Epileptoids, psychasthenics, a group of hysterical characters, and several other types were additionally described.
Not without criticism, of course, in which there was a lot of both fair and unfair. Most of all, Kretschmer was reproached for moving in the direction from pathology to normality. What, now almost everyone should be considered a potential schizophrenic or epileptic? Why is psychopathological material so abundantly used to describe the character of a healthy person? On the other hand, the classical four-member classification of temperaments, dating back to Hippocrates and Galen, and numerous typifications of characters according to other criteria (and the Pavlovian scheme, which we wrote about above, among others) are far from perfect. Well, who managed to fully explain a person with all his giblets?
The overly zealous critics who attack Kretschmer and his followers for allegedly overdoing it in terms of psychopathology have a lot to say. In fact: when they talk about a “normal personality” or “normal character,” they involuntarily fall into some contradiction, since the word “personality” itself emphasizes the individual, the special, the opposite of the norm or the average. The same applies to character. When they talk about someone having this or that character, they inevitably point to a certain one-sidedness of his mental organization and make it clear that there is some disharmony in his psyche. Translated from Greek, the word “character” means “trait, feature.” Character is precisely what distinguishes one person from another, therefore the presence of some predominant character traits in itself indicates a lack of balance in the relationship between individual aspects of mental activity. After all, if we had under observation a person with an ideally normal psyche (which, of course, is an absolute utopia), then it would hardly be possible to talk about the presence of this or that character, because in his mental organization there is not a single line that distinguishes him from the general series. Here is how Gannushkin writes about this: “It is clear that the study of character can be fruitful only if it leaves the narrow framework of normal psychology and is guided, in addition, by data from pathopsychology. All this is already completely clear a priori, but the same thing becomes completely definite and unshakable from the data of experience. If we take any description of characters or temperaments, at least the one made by the famous Kant (meaning “Anthropology” by Immanuel Kant. - L. Sh.), if you think about it and read this description carefully, if you compare it with our clinical experience, then you will need to come to a very definite conclusion that the description of the so-called normal temperaments coincides to the smallest detail with the description of psychopathic personalities taken from clinical psychiatry; one can say even more that a correct understanding of these types, these temperaments has become possible only since the psychiatric point of view was taken as the basis for this understanding.”
We do not intend here to analyze in detail Kretschmer’s expanded typology, so in conclusion we will briefly dwell on only one group - epileptoids. Already from the term itself it is clear that an epileptoid is in the same relationship to epilepsy as a schizoid is to schizophrenia. Simply put, epileptoid – means like an epileptic. “With a cross around his neck, with the Gospel in his hand and a stone in his bosom” - this is how the classic of German psychiatry Emil Kraepelin described this type. This statement is often remembered when describing the epithymic character - a combination of brutality, obsequiousness, pedantry and viscosity.
The descriptions of old psychiatrists exhaustively present the disgusting appearance of the epithymic: extremely cruel, deceitful, hot-tempered, flattering, overwhelmed by passions and adamant in achieving his goal, a voluptuous prude and jealous, but at the same time a pedant, pathologically detailed, clingy and viscous. A very unpleasant and difficult person. Dostoevsky painted a whole gallery of such types - just compare Stavrogin, Smerdyakov and Fyodor Karamazov. Dostoevsky was not only a brilliant psychopathologist, but, as you know, he himself suffered from epilepsy, which is why everything turned out so convincingly for him. Vladimir Levi is absolutely right: “Of course, one cannot understand Dostoevsky through epilepsy alone, but the frantic breath of the “sacred disease” can be heard in every line of his...”
The classic portrait of an epileptoid is the image of Porfiry Vladimirovich Golovlev (nicknamed Judas) by Saltykov-Shchedrin. They say that the great Russian satirist wrote from life, having in mind his own brother, a severe epileptic. It turned out ideal type, even now in a textbook: the viscosity, and the thoroughness, and the sweetness, and jokes, and endless litotes - everything is right there. Let us allow ourselves a small quote:
“The blizzard, apparently, has really started,” notes Arina Petrovna (mother of Judushka Golovlev. L. Sh.), - squeals and squeals!
- Well, let him squeal. She squeals, and we are here drinking tea - that’s it, my friend Mama! - Porfiry Vladimirych responds.
- Oh, it’s not good to be in the field now, if this kind of mercy of God finds anyone!
- Some people don’t feel well, but grief isn’t enough for us. For some it is dark and cold, but for us it is both light and warm. We sit and drink some tea. And with sugar, and with cream, and with lemon. If we want it with rum, we’ll drink it with rum.
- Yes, if now...
- Excuse me, mummy. I say: it’s very bad in the field now. No roads, no paths - everything was covered in snow. Wolves again. But here it’s bright and cozy, and we’re not afraid of anything. We sit here and sit in peace and quiet. I wanted to play cards - let's play cards; I wanted to drink some tea - let's drink some tea. We won’t drink more than we need, and we’ll drink as much as we need. Why is this so? Because, dear friend Mama, God’s mercy does not leave us. If it weren’t for him, the king of heaven, maybe we would now be lost in the field, and it would be dark and cold for us... In some zipunishka, an inferior sash, little bast shoes...”
These people are stubborn, quick-tempered, and intolerant of the opinions of others. Their affective attitude almost always has a somewhat unpleasant tint, tinged with poorly concealed malice, against the background of which from time to time, for insignificant reasons, violent outbursts of uncontrollable anger develop, often leading to dangerous violent actions. IN family life These are obnoxious tyrants who create scandals over trifles and constantly make all sorts of comments to their family. The extraordinary punctuality of the epithymician stems from his categorical conviction that everything should be done exactly this way and not otherwise. These people are extremely active, super sociable, going headlong towards their goals, interfering in everything and looking everywhere for specific culprits. They are prone to forming extremely valuable ideas, are unusually consistent, and never doubt that they are right. Such a person can only be stopped by a shot from a gun. In terms of somatic constitution, a significant part of epileptoids are distinguished by a peculiar athletic-dysplastic physique. If there is intellectual giftedness, the epithymic person is able to reach very great heights. Indomitable, overflowing energy, combined with incredible persistence in achieving their goal, allows such people to literally move mountains.
Among the outstanding historical figures there are many people of this type - Alexander the Great, Caesar, Mohammed, Peter the Great, Napoleon.
At this point we leave Kretschmer alone and move on to other typologies, the authors of which sought (when constructing their own schemes) to get rid of the oppressive connection with the clinic as much as possible.
3. HE DOESN'T LIKE YOU SO MUCH IF HE WON'T ACCEPT THE FACT THAT YOU'RE DATING
Spending time together does not mean dating
Oh yes, dates can be very different, especially in the early stages of a relationship, when everything is covered in a foggy veil of mystery and no one asks unnecessary questions. Men really enjoy this period because it's when they can pretend they're not dating you. And they also show with their entire appearance that they are not responsible for your feelings. When you ask someone out on a real date, it's more or less formal: "I'd like to meet you alone to see if we can be romantically involved (and I'll at least pretend to listen to the woman attentively, although I'll only be thinking about whether she’s wearing a thong today).” Just in case you still have doubts: on a real date, people usually visit some interesting places, go to a restaurant and hold hands.
The "He just went through a painful breakup" excuse
Dear Greg!
I am very, very deeply in love with someone. This is exactly what I wanted to say first of all. We have a close relationship, he is a very, very good friend of mine. His unhappy marriage recently came to an end. He is painfully going through a breakup with his wife, so he made it clear to me that now he is simply not able to take on any obligations. In short, he likes to come and go as he pleases. We've been seeing each other and sleeping together for six months now. It really hurts me that I don't know when I'll see him next. And it’s also very painful to realize that in fact I’m not his woman. I don't like being in such a helpless position, but I think that if I find the strength to wait, then in the end he will be mine. But now it’s very difficult for me. What to do?
Lisa
From Greg's archives:
Dear Lady Very, very!
Let's talk about yours good friend Johnny and about your strong friendship with Johnny. This arrangement is only to his advantage. Since you were his girlfriend during his divorce, he can always use the “we’re just friends” trump card. He is quite happy with the role of a friend and the opportunity to avoid the responsibility that, as a rule, an official boyfriend has to take on. Plus, since you're his "girlfriend," you probably won't want to put him through any more emotional stress after the "hurtful breakup" he went through. He’s just perfectly settled: he has a wonderful girlfriend who has all the advantages of a mistress, and at the same time, he sees her only when he wants to. He may be one of your closest friends, but as a man he's not that into you.
Beware of the word "friend." It is often used by men or women who are in love with these men to justify the most swinish behavior. When choosing friends, I prefer people who don't upset me.
The "But we're really dating" excuse
Dear Greg!
I've been dating one guy for three months now. We sleep together four or five times a week. We attend different events together. He always calls me if he promises and never tries to deceive me. We're having a great time. He recently said that he does not want to call himself the boyfriend of any girl, since he is not yet ready for a serious relationship. But I know for sure that he is not dating anyone else. I think he just doesn't like the term "someone's boyfriend." Greg, everyone says that a woman should judge a man not by his words, but by his actions. Does this mean I should ignore his words and be happy that he wants to be with me? Because despite what he says, the truth is that he really likes me?
Keisha
From Greg's archives:
Dear Lady Shut Up Your Ears!
I looked up the expression “I don’t want to be your boyfriend” in the human relations dictionary to make sure I was correct. I was right. It still means "I don't want to be your boyfriend." Class. And this is coming from a guy who spends four or even five nights a week with you. It must have hurt to hear him say that. It’s very nice to realize that “not your boyfriend” exists in your life without imposing any obligations on yourself. It’s just not entirely clear what you get from such a relationship. If you want to devote all your time to a man who emphasizes that he is not your boyfriend, then continue in the same spirit. But I hope that you will still meet a guy who will not tell you, looking into your eyes: “I don’t like you that much.”
Men, like women, strive to gain a sense of security and safety when they see a relationship becoming serious. One common way to achieve this is to claim your loved one. Oddly enough, men themselves say: “I’m your boyfriend,” or “I’d like to be your boyfriend,” or “If you ever leave that guy you’re not actually dating, then I’d like to be yours.” boyfriend." A man who is truly passionate about you will want you to be his. What's wrong with that, my hot ladies?
The "It's better than nothing" excuse
Dear Greg!
I've been dating this guy for months now. We see each other about once every two weeks, we have a great time, have sex. This is all very nice. I thought: let everything go as it goes, and perhaps we will meet more often. But everything remains the same. I really like him, so I think it's better than nothing. I know he is very busy man and probably just can’t meet with me more often. And in general I should be flattered that he devotes as much time to me as he can, and he probably likes me very much. I was wrong?
Lydia
From Greg's archives:
Dear Lady Better-than-nothing.
Is your goal better than nothing? Is it true? I hoped you would at least strive for something that is much better than nothing. Or maybe even to something. Are you going crazy? Why should you be flattered that he gives you the pitiful crumbs of his time? The fact that he is busy adds to his dignity. "Busy" does not mean "the best." According to my data, a guy who can quietly exist for two weeks without seeing you is simply not very interested in you.
Oh, how easily you forget what I taught you! Let me remind you: you want a man who wants you, calls you regularly and makes you feel like the sexiest and most desirable woman in the world. He longs to see you more and more often, because each time his feeling grows stronger, growing from sympathy to true love. I already know. A relationship in which you meet a man once every two weeks or once a month without feeling any love or sympathy from him can last a day, or a week, or a month. But can they last a lifetime?
The “But he’s often out of town” excuse
Dear Greg!
I've been dating a guy for about four months. He often leaves on business, so we don’t see each other regularly. Sometimes we start spending more time together, and as soon as I gain the maturity to talk about how our relationship will develop further, he needs to leave town again. It seems to me that it is stupid to start such a conversation right before his departure. And when he returns, it’s stupid to ask him about it after we haven’t seen each other for a while. It's hard for me to bring up this topic because I love being with him and I don't want the "relationship" conversation to ruin what exists between us.
Marissa
From Greg's archives:
Dear Time Traveler!
I’ll tell you a little secret of men who often travel: they always look forward to leaving. They enjoy participating in course point bonus programs. THEY like the fact that they can sneak away. A moving target is the hardest thing to hit, but you can travel and at the same time maintain a relationship with your loved one, or you can travel and demonstrate with all your appearance that you are not bound by any relationship. What type your chosen one is is determined simply: if a guy tirelessly insists that breaking up with you is worse than torture for him, then this is option number one. And if, while away, he is not at all worried about the fact that you might meet someone else, then most likely you boarded a plane with the airline “He’s not into you.” Fasten seat belts.
You have every right to know what's going on between you and your partner and where your relationship is heading. And the more confident you become that you have earned this right (and a great many other similar privileges), the easier it will be for you to ask him “important questions.” And at the same time, you will no longer worry or feel awkward. I guarantee you this.
IT IS SO SIMPLE
From this moment on, right now, when you read a book, make a solemn vow to yourself: in your new novels there will be no mystery, no ambiguity, no uncertainty and no understatement. And, if at all possible, try to get to know the person well before getting into bed with them.
THIS IS WHY IT'S HARD
I hate talking about my feelings. I hate talking about “relationships.” I know, I - woman. And women are supposed to be emotional. But I'm not like that. I don't like all this at all. And most of all, I don’t like asking a guy questions about whether our relationship has a future and what feelings he has for me. Oh! Everything should happen naturally, and easily, and naturally.
So, I guess, if I have to think and plan and puzzle over all sorts of ways to figure out what position I'm really in, then most likely my situation is not the best. Oh shit!
But wait... Starting a new novel terrifies me. We have all lived long enough in the world and experienced a breakup, or at least seen it happen to others. We know that if a relationship had a beginning, then there was always (and if we are still dating someone, there will be) an end. And parting only brings pain.
And of course, people, including women, resort to all sorts of tricks, tricks and distractions, just to not notice that a new romance is beginning in their lives. And this feature of human nature seems very useful and reasonable. So what if at the very beginning there is some uncertainty in the relationship for some time? Who dreams of playing the role of a crazy girl who knows what's going on in a guy's soul when they first met? Oh no, you usually want to be the cool girl - the girl who knows how to act on dates without seeming too pushy. This is exactly the kind of girl I wanted to be. And she always was.
The whole problem is that the calm girl also suffers when she is hurt. She also reacts to how she is treated. She also hopes that he will call. She is also worried about when she will see him again and whether he is happy with her. It just infuriates me.
Maybe I'm the only one who has these problems because my priorities have changed as I've gotten older. But now I don't want to "sort of date" anyone. I don't want to "sort of spend time together" with anyone. I don't want to waste my energy suppressing my feelings and appearing indifferent. I want to demonstrate my interest. I want to sleep with a man who - I know for sure - will come again, because he has already proven to me: he is reliable and honest - and is really passionate about me. Of course, at first you need to exercise some caution in expressing feelings. This caution is not necessary to man felt more comfortable. It is needed only for you, because you should always remember: you are a fragile and precious creature who must carefully and selectively approach the choice of who to give your love to. This is exactly what I do now. And things are not going badly at all.
THIS IS HOW EVERYTHING SHOULD BE
Greg:
My friend Mike liked my friend Laura. One day after a rehearsal, he asked her out on a date; they are now married. My friend Russell met a girl named Aimee, they dated and then got married. My friend Jeff met a girl who lived out of town. He visited her the following weekend and began visiting regularly until he moved in with her. It's really that simple. It's almost always that simple.
GREG, I DID IT!
Corinna, 35 years old
I had been dating a young man for a couple of months when it dawned on me that he was not very interested in me. Previously, I would never have given up just like that, I would have come up with a bunch of excuses for him and would have had an educational conversation with him. But this time I decided to do a little experiment. I assumed that he didn't like me that much and stopped calling him. As I suspected, he never called me! I can’t believe how much time I saved by realizing that our relationship is all about me, and I also want more!
IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE GREG
One hundred percent of men surveyed said that fear of a serious relationship has never stopped them from starting a new romance. One young man even remarked: “The fear of a serious relationship is one of the myths big city" And another guy said, "That's what we tell girls we don't really like."
WHAT YOU SHOULD LEARN FROM THIS CHAPTER
Men talk about their feelings, even if you refuse to listen or don't believe their confessions. “I’m not ready for a serious relationship” means “I’m not ready for a serious relationship with you” or “I’m not sure that you are the woman I need.” (I am sorry.)
“Better than nothing” should not suit you
If you don't understand what's going on in your relationship, then there's nothing wrong with slowing down and asking him a few questions.
Smells of uncertainty? Don't expect anything good.
There is one guy in the world who will want to tell everyone that he is your boyfriend. Stop fooling around and go find him.
Our super cool and really useful workbook
It is not difficult for us to give advice. To be honest, it's even fun. It also allowed us to learn something new about ourselves. At least this definitely applies to Liz. Why don't you try too? It's funny to think you know more than other people!
Dear Pretty Woman who bought this book (that's you)!
I've been dating a guy for several months now. And during all this time we did not have a single real date. He always makes an appointment either at a bar or at a friend's house. He doesn't seem to want to be alone with me except when we're having sex. I like sleeping with him. Can't we keep doing this until he gets to know me better and realizes that he's really into me?
ANSWER:
If you answered correctly (this implies that you advised this nice lady to get rid of the alcohol-infused Casanova and go in search of a man who would at least dare to invite her to a pizzeria), then you can be sure that your brain has learned to solve such problems. This information is lodged in your head and will probably remain there forever. It is much easier to see how things really are when you look from the outside. And now that you know how to act in such situations, you can use your newly acquired wisdom to your advantage.
From the book This Weaker Sex author Fat NatalyaWhat to do if the fact of treason is established? You feel an overwhelming emotional shock. He experiences a state of depression and emptiness. Feelings - a palette: oppression and anxiety, pain from betrayal, uncertainty and fear. You thought that if this happened, you would leave immediately, but
author Berendt GregAre you still dating the same guy? Hey, I know the guy you're dating. Yes, that's true. This is the same guy who is terribly tired from work and is under terrible stress because of his current project. He recently went through a breakup
From the book He Just Doesn't Like You: The Whole Truth About Men author Berendt Greg1. HE DOESN'T LIKE YOU THAT MUCH SINCE HE WON'T ASK YOU OUT ON A DATE Because if he likes you, trust me, he will definitely make an appointment with you. Many women said, “Greg, men rule the world.” Wow! It sounds like we're pretty determined people.
From the book He Just Doesn't Like You: The Whole Truth About Men author Berendt Greg2. HE DOESN'T LIKE YOU SO MUCH IF HE DON'T CALL YOU Men know how to use the phone. Of course, they claim that they are very busy. They had such a crazy day at work that they didn’t have a single free minute when they could pick up the phone and
From the book He Just Doesn't Like You: The Whole Truth About Men author Berendt Greg4. HE DOESN'T LIKE YOU SO MUCH IF HE DOESN'T WANT TO HAVE SEX WITH YOU If a man likes a woman, he always wants to touch her Dear ladies, you have already met and will meet a great many men while you are still young and attractive. I really
From the book He Just Doesn't Like You: The Whole Truth About Men author Berendt Greg5. HE DOESN'T LIKE YOU SO MUCH IF HE'S SLEEPING WITH ANOTHER WOMAN There is no truly convincing excuse for cheating If a man is cheating on you, leave him immediately! Joke. Of course, everything is not that simple. I admit, this is generally very difficult
From the book He Just Doesn't Like You: The Whole Truth About Men author Berendt Greg6. HE DOESN'T LIKE YOU SO MUCH IF HE ONLY WANTS TO SEE YOU WHEN HE'S DRUNK If he likes you, he'll want to see you when his brain isn't clouded by alcohol fumes. It's actually fun to drink and date. by someone. Well, who doesn't like to miss out?
From the book He Just Doesn't Like You: The Whole Truth About Men author Berendt Greg7. HE DON'T LIKE YOU SO MUCH IF HE DON'T WANT TO MARRY YOU Love cures commitment disorder Just remember this. Each of your former men who told you he doesn't want to get married, or doesn't believe in marriage, or has doubts about
From the book He Just Doesn't Like You: The Whole Truth About Men author Berendt Greg8. HE WILL NOT LIKE YOU SO MUCH IF HE LEAVED YOU “I don’t want to be with you” still means exactly that. We all want to be loved and needed by the person who broke up with us. I can understand that. What could be better than hearing how on the other end of the line
From the book He Just Doesn't Like You: The Whole Truth About Men author Berendt Greg9. HE DOESN'T LIKE YOU SO MUCH IF HE JUST TOOK UP AND DISAPPEARED Sometimes you have to put an end to it yourself. He disappeared. Oops! He just took it and disappeared into thin air. Well, everything is very clear here. He made it clear to you that you were so not his type that he didn't even bother to leave
From the book He Just Doesn't Like You: The Whole Truth About Men author Berendt Greg10. HE DOESN'T LIKE YOU SO MUCH IF HE'S MARRIED (this includes all the other, most incredible reasons why he can't be with you) If you can't love each other freely and openly, then it's not real love There is some contradiction here, but I
From the book He Just Doesn't Like You: The Whole Truth About Men author Berendt Greg11. HE DOESN'T LIKE YOU SO MUCH IF HE BEHAVILS LIKE A SELF-LOVING EGOIST, A BRAUGGER, OR JUST LIKE A BIG ASSHOLE If you really love a person, you will go out of your way to make him happy “He has so much positive qualities. This is the absolute truth.
From the book How to Talk to Your Son. The most difficult questions. The most important answers author Fadeeva Valeria VyacheslavovnaWhat to do if your feet sweat a lot? IT IS IMPORTANT! You must have your own towel, washcloth and other personal hygiene products. Don't use other people's. Otherwise, you can catch unpleasant diseases (for example, chlamydia). First of all, pay attention to what kind of shoes you wear.
From the book Promise Doesn't Mean Marry author Berendt GregYou're all dating... the same guy. I know the guy you're dating! Yes, yes, I know him very well. This is the same guy who is so tired of work, so worried about his project. He just went through a very difficult breakup, and it's for real.
From the book My Child is an Introvert [How to Identify Hidden Talents and Prepare for Life in Society] by Laney Marty From the book Never Mind by Paley ChrisIf someone imitates you, it means they have natural empathy, they really like you, or they've read this book. We all instinctively imitate others - we pick up expressions from friends and copy the poses of our interlocutors - and we do it unintentionally. When I entered
Allocative efficiency - this is the optimal combination of economic resources for the manufacturer, which gives the optimal combination of products for the consumer.
In the example of a farmer, the optimal combination of inputs for wheat production was explored. If we add to this example the fact that the farmer, in accordance with market demand, is simultaneously looking for the best combination of the products he produces (wheat or rye, or a little wheat and a lot of rye, and maybe also oats), then we get an example of an allocative search efficiency. In essence, the farmer will “judge whether the use of a particular resource is excessive, optimal or insufficient at prevailing prices in the market for inputs and final products...”.
The main barriers to achieving maximum allocative efficiency include the monopolization of economic resources (with the result that the owners of these resources do not always use them as efficiently as possible, while there are not enough of them for more rational producers), as well as closedness national economies(resulting in the economy missing out on the opportunity to fully exploit supply and demand in foreign markets).
Due to allocative inefficiency, a situation arises called technical inefficiency (X-inefficiency), when the actual volume of production is below the maximum possible level (i.e. below the production possibilities frontier), and the costs and prices for these products are above the minimum low level. An example would be the construction of housing in Russia, especially in large cities, where, with the support of local authorities, monopolistic firms dominate and do not allow active competition from either domestic or foreign builders. As a result, less housing is being built in the country, and it costs much more than in the last Soviet decade.
Production efficiency
In economic practice, economic efficiency is most often measured in its narrow meaning, i.e. as production efficiency. It is represented by a number of indicators, including:
- labor productivity (the cost of manufactured products based on the number of employees or hours worked, or the cost of labor costs). Labor productivity in Russia, calculated according to the first option, in the last decade during the boom period grew at an annual rate of 5–7%, including in the manufacturing industry – at 6–9%;
- material and energy intensity (cost or quantity spent natural resources, including those that have undergone primary processing - raw materials, materials and semi-finished products, as well as fuel and energy, in relation to the cost of manufactured products). Thus, in 2010, Russia consumed 1.043 trillion tons of fuel equivalent (1t reference fuel = 7000 kcal), the volume of output amounted to 44.9 trillion rubles, i.e. per issue 1 rub. the product consumed 23 g of fuel;
- capital intensity (the value of physical capital used, more precisely, fixed capital, based on the cost of production) or return on capital (the inverse indicator obtained by dividing the cost of manufactured products by the cost of used physical capital, more precisely, fixed capital). Thus, in 2010 in our country, the cost of fixed capital excluding unfinished construction amounted to 93.2 trillion rubles. and products worth 44.9 trillion rubles were produced. To calculate capital intensity, we divide the first value by the second and get a capital productivity ratio of 1.94, i.e. to produce products worth 1 rub. 2,075 rubles were required. fixed assets. When calculating capital productivity, we swap the numerator and denominator and get a coefficient of 0.48, i.e. for 1 rub. fixed capital produced products worth 48 kopecks. In a more detailed analysis of capital intensity (capital productivity), the incremental capital intensity (capital productivity) indicator is also used, which shows how many rubles of investment are required to increase output by 1 ruble. (by how many kopecks will output increase when investing by 1 ruble).
To determine the efficiency of use of all resources (more precisely, to measure the increase in the efficiency of their use as a contribution to the economic growth of the country), they measure total factor productivity (total factor productivity ). According to estimates, in 1990–2007. it provided 52–54% of the economic growth of developed countries.
Firms use a number of indicators to calculate the efficiency of their activities. In Russian statistics, primarily the following are published: return on assets And profitability of goods and products sold (works, services). The first indicator is calculated as the ratio of the company's profit and the value of its assets. In the pre-crisis years, this figure in Russia was 6–9%, in subsequent years – 5–7%. The second indicator is narrower - it is calculated as the ratio between the cost and the cost of goods and services sold. In the pre-crisis years it was at the level of 10–14%, then about 11%.
All these are cost indicators, i.e. measured in cash. If we measure them only in physical quantities, then these will not be economic indicators, but technological efficiency, which differs from the cost of resources. For example, from 1 cu. m of unprocessed wood in Russia produces 45 g of newsprint, or 58 g of printing paper, or 61 g of writing paper, or 152 g of containerboard. At the same time, according to technological efficiency, it is rational to use only new equipment, and according to economic efficiency You can also use the old one, which, although less productive, does not require purchase costs.
When calculating the efficiency of purchasing and consuming goods, the consumer, as a rule, proceeds from the alternative cost, i.e. from the value of those goods that he has to give up when obtaining the desired good. It is clear that this opportunity cost is different for different consumers, since their preferences (tastes) are not the same. However, for most goods in society there is a generally accepted, established opportunity cost, although this also changes over time.
A chemistry student demonstrated that Heaven and Hell exist.
One University of Washington chemistry student gave such a detailed answer to an exam question that his professor shared it with his colleagues online.
So, the question is: Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)?
Most students used Boyle's law to prove it (a gas cools when it expands and heats up when it contracts). One student, however, wrote the following:
“First, we must know how the mass of Hell changes over time. Thus, we need to know the speed at which souls move into Hell and the speed at which they leave it. I think we can safely assume that once a soul has gone to Hell, it will not get out; thus, souls do not leave Hell. To tell how many souls go to Hell, let's look at the different world religions.
Most of these religions claim that if you are not a member of that particular religion, you will go to Hell. Since there is clearly more than one of these religions, and a person usually does not profess more than one religion, it can be unequivocally stated that all souls go to Hell.
Considering the birth and death rates in the world, one can expect that the number of souls in Hell is growing exponentially. Now we need to look at the rate of change in the volume of Hell, since Boyle's law states that in order for Hell to maintain the same temperature and pressure, the volume of Hell must expand in proportion to the addition of souls. This gives two possibilities:
1. If Hell expands more slowly than the number of arriving souls grows, then the temperature and pressure there will increase until it explodes.
2. If Hell expands at a rate faster than the number of souls in Hell increases, then the temperature and pressure will drop and Hell will freeze.
Where is the truth?
If we accept the postulate Teresa told me in my first year: “Hell would freeze over before I sleep with you,” and take into account the fact that I slept with her last night, then option number two is true, and thus, I'm sure Hell is exothermic and has already frozen over.
The corollary of this theory is that since Hell has frozen over and therefore no more souls can go there, only Heaven remains, which proves the existence of some kind of divine being and explains why Teresa screamed 'Oh my God!' last night."
- Equisetaceae department general characteristics and significance What structure does a horsetail spore have?
- Practical work “Structure of fern and horsetail. Horsetails have
- Who is behind the attacks on Tuleyev?
- Kirill Barabash - Lieutenant Colonel of the Air Force: biography, political views What is the IGPR “call”