Dan · Joined: Jan 01, 1970 Posts: 448 Location: USA

21-04-05,
21-04-08 Changed title to "What LEGAL Scientific Discovery Creates a Real Civilization?"
from "The Fundamental LEGAL Scientific Discovery Is"
21-04-15 changed title to "The Base Scientific Discovery Answers a LEGAL Question

What Laws, How Do We Enforce Them, and Why?

Why is easy: What Rule of Liability Maximizes the Quantity of Goods & Services Exchanged
(Q-G&S-XCed)? That's the food you eat and all the other things you require for a "civilized" existence.

Raising this question, "Which/who do we hold liable?" is a choice between two mutually exclusive, opposite
ways of "LEGALLY Enforcing Who Pays For Causing a Cost To Someone Else:
1. Strict Liability is when you cost someone else you are held responsible; or
2. No Liability is when the person damaged pays you not to hurt them in the future.
e.g. a protection racket.That is the legal definition of extortion, a First Cost.

In the "Problem Of Social Cost" Journal of Law & Economics October 1960, Ronald Coase
asked that question and got no difference in the Q-G&S XCed, a controversial result,

Clearly Coase was wrong, the question was why? Showing why and how makes banning
Extortion not just a legal choice, but a survival necessity for any society based on XCing
G&Ss with others so as to SAVE TIME for each party to the XC.

When Strict Liability does "maximize an XC based societies time saved";
then one can deduce a Grand Unification Theory(GUT) that shows how the
Natural Laws and forces of our universe work using Planck's Constant(h);
because G&Ss involve all possible forms of energy and matter in our universe..

Conducting XCs starts from this base premise:
I am self-aware and see the universe from where I am now.
In or out of body.

Second premise: We are physical spirits who live on after our body dies.

Third premise: When in body, Spirits in their life forms(usually unconsciously) try to
Minimize The Time Each Spends getting whatever they think they need or want.
That does not mean we minimize well, because when you make a "wrong" choice,
you become a dead life form and an out of body spirit.

Fourth premise: You must use a real, physical = objective piece of the universe common
to all the phenomena you are comparing to predict how these phenomena work.

Not using a common measure is called "The Fallacy of Non Attribution,
which is the error Coase made in doing his comparison between Strict and No Liability.
He used imaginary money prices to compare the quantities of the cattle and the wheat.

A scientist must always use a measure common to all the phenomena you are explaining.
In a Theory of Everything's case, Planck's Constant is this common denominator measure.

This is my original paper.
Not Enforcing Strict Liability On Corporations Always Reduces A Societies Wealth