Mimesis and Violence

Hubbard Hechsher
June 16, 2007, 11:15 pm
Filed under: Humor, Judaism, Mathematics, Rants, Religion, Scientology

It recently came to my attention that Scientologists don’t believe in calculus. Something having to do with Xenu and Thetans and integrating over extended perfect fields taking over our immortal souls and preventing us from reaching enlightenment or somesuch. By recently I mean that I found out about 10 months ago, though I only recently found proof.

Rate of change is this mathematics known as Calculus. Calculus, it’s a very interesting thing, is divided into two classes — there’s Differential Calculus and Integral Calculus. The Differential Calculus is in the first part of the textbook on Calculus, and Integral Calculus is in the second part of the textbook on Calculus. As you look through the book, you’ll find in the early part of the book on Calculus, “dx” over “dy”, a little “dx”, and a little “dy” — and one’s above the other on a line — predominates in the front part of the book, but as you get to the end of the book you find these “dx” and “dy”s preceded by a summation sign, or are equating to a summation sign, and the presence of this shows that we are in the field of Integral Calculus.

Now I hope you understand this, because I’ve never been able to make head nor tail of it. It must be some sort of a Black Magic operation, started out by the Luce cult — some immoral people who are operating up in New York City, Rockefeller Plaza — been thoroughly condemned by the whole society. Anyway, their rate-of-change theory — I’ve never seen any use for that mathematics, by the way — I love that mathematics, because it — I asked an engineer, one time, who was in his 6th year of engineering, if he’d ever used Calculus, and he told me yeah, once, once I did, he said. When did you use it? And he said I used it once. Let me see, what did you use it on? Oh yeah. Something on the rate-of-change of steam particles in boilers. And then we went out and tested it and found the answer was wrong.

Calculus — if you want to know — there is room there for a mathematics which is a good mathematics. And it would be the rate of co-change, or the rate of change when something else was changing, so that you could establish existing rates of change in relationship to each other, and for lack of that mathematics, nobody has been able to understand present time — you just can’t sum it up easily — or let us say, for lack of an understanding of what present time was, nobody could formulate that mathematics. So, actually there’s a big hole there that could be filled — a thing called calculus is trying to fill that hole, right now, and it can’t.

L. Ron Hubbard (founder of Scientology and science fiction author)

Incidentally there are serious mathematicians who have taken issue with the founding principles of calculus. Philosopher George (Bishop) Berkeley (for whom Berkeley, California, the University of California at Berkeley, and the Berkeley residential college at Yale are named) criticized Newton’s and Leibniz’s calculus on the grounds that the notion of infinitesimals – infinitely small chunks of space that nonetheless sum up to chunks of measurable area – was so poorly defined as to completely lack rigor. Like any fine 18th century philosopher Berkeley launched his critique in religious terms, naming his work “The Analyst,” with the subtitle of “A DISCOURSE Addressed to an Infidel Mathematician.” Indeed, the field of nonstandard analysis attempts to develop all the analytical machinery of calculus using a rigorous definition of infinitesimals.

Hubbard never got that far, though. He just didn’t like these “rates of change,” these tools of a “Luce cult” of evil New Yorkers. And why should he? What did New York ever do to deserve L. Ron’s respect?! Fuck ’em all, those infidel New Yorkers!

In that spirit (and in the spirit of my own misanthropic religious background) I’ve come up with the Hubbard Hechsher, a sign for all the faithful that a consumer product is strictly calculess – the Scientologist’s halal or kosher. Just in time, too – Travolta could use some dietary restrictions.

I give to you the official Scientological calculess symbol:

Hubbard Hechsher

Like kosherness, calculessness certification is awarded by a central authority – the Tom Cruise Center for Kids Whos Likes to Jumps on Couches. Here are some fine products made without any calculus at all.

Calculess Plane

We built this calculess airplane on trial and error, and it flies even higher than noted Scientologist Giovanni Ribisi‘s post Boiler Room career. Keep in mind that, like Ribisi’s career, we’re still in the error phase.

Tom’s Apple

Tom’s calculess apples are guaranteed to make you inscrutable to psychotherapy and impervious to public opinion. A calculess apple a day keeps those damned doctors away and ensures that, though your recent movies are just plain awful, people will still pay nine to eleven dollars to watch you prance around and steal high-end electronics in poorly named trilogies. And we would never ever use any calculus to grow Tom’s apples, not even if it made them taste 10 times better, cost 10 times less, and cure world hunger. Such is our commitment to L. Ron.


One of the great advantages of calculessness over kashrut (kosherdom for you goyim) is that pigs are naturally calculess. No processing, salting, or special killing methods are required: pigs just can’t integrate. In that respect they’re very much like the distinct and insular minorities protected by current US constitutional jurisprudence. Did we mention that calculess pigs are naturally fat free but taste exactly the same as regular fatass pigs? mmmm…guiltless bacon…doubly treif

Calculess Nuke

Finally, we’ve got the clean burning calculess nuclear power plant and companion nuclear submarine. Much less dangerous than their calculating counterparts and much cheaper to maintain too (hint: that’s because they don’t work).

“You don’t get rich writing science fiction. If you want to get rich, you start a religion.”
L. Ron Hubbard


1 Comment so far
Leave a comment

Alright, I did not think anyone was ignorant enough to actually attack Calculus. In an attempt to end ignorance, here is a short break down of 2 dimensional Calculus without going into differential equations (Which is beyond Integral Calculus) from someone who actually understands it, not some fool screaming “Witch!” when someone uses mathematics.

From 8th grade algebra:
Everyone remember slope-intercept form for graphing lines on an X-Y axis? If not, this is it:
y = M*x + b
Where “M” is the slope (rate of change) of the line and “b” is where the line intersects the Y-axis at x=0.

Now, differential Calculus in a nutshell:
Starting with “y = M*x + b” we take the first derivative of “y” with respect to “x”, denoted as such:
(dy/dx)*y = M
(dy/dx)*(M*x + b) = M

As you can see, ALL that this non-magical operation does is find the function’s rate of change, “M”. As the equations get more complex, so does the operation, but the result is always the rate of change of the function.

Now on to integral Calculus:
This is more complex to describe, but is no less non-magical and simple in it’s result.
From Wikipedia:
“The definite integral is defined informally to be the area of the region in the xy-plane bounded by the graph of f(x), the x-axis, and the vertical lines x = a and x = b, such that areas above the axis add to the total, and the area below the x axis subtract from the total.”

Explained more simply:
Let’s take a shape we are all familiar with: A square.
Everyone should know how to find the area of a square, right? It’s just length multiplied by width. So, our square will be on the x-y axis, defined initially as a horizontal straight line: y = 5 In this case, our line has no slope. We want to find the area of the square, so we use integral calculus.

The Integral (from 0 to 5 on the x-axis, since this is a square) of y = 5 is:
y = 5*x2 – 5*x1
where x1 = 0 and x2 = 5

Which would be formally:
[Integral from x1=0 to x2=5] y = 5
and then evaluated,
Y = 5*(5) – 5*(0) = 25
Which is clearly the area of a 5×5 square.

Again, as the equations become more complex, so does the operation. As an engineer myself, I can tell you that I use Calculus EVERY DAY. Furthermore, if one experiments a gas and then one finds that the Calculus equations used to model it’s behavior don’t describe the observed behavior, then one has not modeled the system properly and has left some variables unaccounted for in their equations.

Now, to counter Hubbard’s comment on co-change. That is simply a matter of modelling dependent variables using differential equations, the 3rd tier of Calculus.This is merely an extension of differential and integral calculus followed to their logical conclusion. It is a complex system because our physical universe is extremely complex. Determining the rate of change of something that is is dependent on the rate of change of something else (such as time or temperature) is among the primary uses of Calculus.

This is not some belief system or heretical dogma that is open to debate or subject to interpretation, this is mathematics. Without this system of Calculus, NONE of the luxuries we enjoy today, most notably every electronic device in existence, space travel, GPS, flight navigation, etc. would be possible. As a man of faith myself, this is not a challenge to anyone’s beliefs; this is simply an attempt to dissolve ignorance.

Comment by Feargan

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: