Comparison of hospitalizations and deaths from COVID-19 2021 versus 2020 in Italy: surprises and implications

Data from the Istituto Superiore di Sanità (ISS) emphasized by the media indicate that COVID-19 vaccination reduces related infections, hospitalizations and deaths. However, a comparison showed significantly more hospitalizations and intensive care unit accesses in the corresponding months and days in 2021 versus 2020 and no significant differences in deaths. The combination of non-alternative hypotheses may help explain the discrepancy between the results in the entire population and the vaccination’s success claimed by the ISS in reducing infections, serious cases and deaths: a bias: counting as unvaccinated also "those vaccinated with 1 dose in the two weeks following the inoculation", and as incompletely vaccinated also "those vaccinated with 2 doses within two weeks of the 2nd inoculation".a systematic error: counting as unvaccinated also "vaccinated with 1 dose in the two weeks following the inoculation", and as incompletely vaccinated also "vaccinated with 2 doses within two weeks of the 2nd inoculation". Many reports show an increase in COVID-19 cases in these time-windows, and related data should be separated levels of protective effectiveness in vaccinated people, often considered stable, actually show signs of progressive reduction over time, which could contribute to reducing the overall population resultunvaccinated people show more severe disease than in 2020, supporting also in humans the theory of imperfect vaccines, which offer less resistance to the entry of germs than the resistance later encountered inside the human body. This favors the selection of more resistant and virulent mutants, that can be spread by vaccinated people. This damages first the unvaccinated people, but ultimately the whole community. An open scientific debate is needed to discuss these hypotheses, following the available evidence (as well as to discuss the inconsistent theory of unvaccinated young people as reservoirs of viruses/mutants), to assess the long-term and community impact of different vaccination strategies.

Is Classical Electrodynamics an Inconsistent Theory?

Classical Electrodynamics is a classical theory treating Systems comprising an electromagnetic field and electrically charged matter. In a recent book Mathias Frisch argues that this theory is inconsistent within its intended domain of application and that a number of interesting methodological morals follow from this conclusion (2005,33-5; all citations of Frisch refer to this work).

TWO INTERPRETATIONS OF FEINBERG'S THEORY OF RIGHTS

Christopher Wellman argues that Joel Feinberg fails to grasp the distinction between will theories and interest theories. According to Wellman, this failure leads Feinberg to defend a will theory in “The Nature and Value of Rights” and an interest theory in “The Rights of Animals and Unborn Generations” and therefore to hold an inconsistent theory of rights. Wellman's interpretation of Feinberg is plausible. I will argue that there is another plausible interpretation and that the texts do not allow us to determine which of the two plausible interpretations is correct. I will also argue that this alternative interpretation allows Feinberg to avoid Wellman's charge of inconsistency but has problems of its own. Along the way, I will make some points about how to defend a theory of rights and about the strengths and weaknesses of the will and interest theories of rights. (Wellman holds that choice theories are a subset of will theories. I have argued elsewhere that it is better to see will theories as a subset of choice theories. However, how one cuts up the field is irrelevant to the issue at hand. For the sake of argument, I will assume that Wellman's topology is correct.)

Rigid body collisions with friction

An energetically consistent theory is presented for dynamics of partly elastic collisions between somewhat rough rigid bodies with friction that opposes slip. This theory is based on separately accounting for frictional and non-frictional sources of dissipation. Alternative theories derived from Newton’s impact law or Poisson’s impact hypothesis are shown to be valid only for central (collinear) or non-frictional collisions; generally the latter theories yield erroneous energy dissipation if small initial slip stops during collision between eccentric bodies. Collision processes are complex when small slip is stopped by friction; then either the direction of slip reverses or contact points roll without slip. An inconsistent theory based on Newton’s impact law can yield erroneous energy increases when slip stops during collision; the consistent theory always dissipates energy. The impact law that specifies a simple proportionality between normal components of contact velocity for incidence and rebound is not applicable in any range of incident velocities with small slip if the collision is non-collinear with friction. In Percussion the force or Impetus whereby one body is moved may cause another body against which it strikes to be put in motion, and withal lose some of its strength or swiftness. (J. Wallis, 1668)

Inconsistent nonstandard arithmetic

This paper continues the investigation of inconsistent arithmetical structures. In §2 the basic notion of a model with identity is defined, and results needed from elsewhere are cited. In §3 several nonisomorphic inconsistent models with identity which extend the (=, <) theory of the usual classical denumerable nonstandard model of arithmetic are exhibited. In §4 inconsistent nonstandard models of the classical theory of finite rings and fields modulo m, i.e. Zm, are briefly considered. In §5 two models modulo an infinite nonstandard number are considered. In the first, it is shown how to model inconsistently the arithmetic of the rationals with all names included, a strengthening of earlier results. In the second, all inconsistency is confined to the nonstandard integers, and the effects on Fermat's Last Theorem are considered. It is concluded that the prospects for a good inconsistent theory of fields may be limited.

La filosofía de la lógica de N.C.A. da Costa

The failure of several attempts to achieve a paradox-free set theory led in time to the insight that contradiction in mathematics, far from being impossible, was at the root of every theory. But this insight could not, by itself, change the paradigm which required that every acceptable mathematical theory be consistent. It was necessary to create a logic which would allow the development of an inconsistent theory, and Newton C.A. da Costa took the first decisive step in that direction with his inconsistent set theory, in which he achieved, so to speak, a consistent inconsistency. The present paper exposes and discusses some of the main issues to be found in Da Costa’s recent Essay on the Foundations of Logic, and shows how the author, trapped between an historicist, conviction which his own development has grafted on him, and a strong need to reach an absolute foundation for reason, tries to achieve a compromise which is nevertheless favorable to historicism.