Fifteenth law of worker entropy
|
Legal quantum indeterminacy
/ˈliːgəl ˈkwɒntəm ɪn dɪˈtɜːmɪnəsi/ (n.)
The JC’s fifteenth law of worker entropy, also known as the theory of legal quantum indeterminacy, states:
“The more precisely the position of a particular negotiation is determined, the less precisely its momentum can be known, and vice versa”.
The theory has a complicated genesis. Most accounts record that it was first proposed by pioneering British financial naturalist J. M. F. Biggs, who invented it on the spot to defend a plainly preposterous assertion he had been backed into making during an otherwise enjoyable closing dinner in Vienna in 1924.
Being somewhat the worse for wear at the time, Biggs — who would later find immortality when he discovered the Biggs Hoson — then forgot about it for twenty years.
Curiously, in that time Biggs appears to have not so much as mentioned this revolutionary theory — which would p[ave the way for the ninth law of worker entropy,[1], and his work took him in a very different direction, employing classical lexo-geometry and none of the trippy relativistic frames of reference implied by LQI.
Biggs claims only to have been reminded of it by Otto Büchstein as the old Austrian playwright lay dying in a Burmese sanitorium in 1943. Biggs, by this stage an Anglican priest, was administering last rights to his old friend, who had been at that closing dinner in 1924, but was now wracked with dengue fever and suffering nightmarish hallucinations.
Other scholars have argued that, in fact, Biggs had not thought of it it at all but, rather, Büchstein had hallucinated it out of whole cloth. As a result of the controversy, despite being coined by the latest in 1943, it was not canoninsed as the fifteenth law of worker entropy until late 2022.
Intranet quantum indeterminacy states that “no intranet contains any information that is both up-to-date and useful. The more useful information is, the more out of date it will be. The more current, the more pointless.”
See also
- ↑ “As the number of people involved in negotiating a contract goes up, its brevity, comprehensibility and utility goes down”.