It all started when Andrew got the ball rolling last night and afterwards I couldn't get it off my mind. I spent most of this morning fantasizing about calling up my Intellectual Property attorney and telling him that I want to get a business process patent for "Math." Not old arithmetic, mind you, but New Math.
First thing my IP lawyer will ask if we created "Math" less then a year ago because you have to file within a year. Absolutely, yes. It's fresh. It's shiny as a polished multiplication table. As far as you're concerned anyway.
Then the lawyer will ask if every time we've used our "Math" we've noted that it is our proprietary methodology. Oh certainly. Math.™ ©2008. For sure, every time any kind of numeral sniffs around any other numeral for any purpose whatsoever.
Ok, the lawyer will say, can you describe the functionality that your Math offers. Snort. Of course. Anyone can see it's so obviously revolutionary.
Then I will patiently explain that the next-generation Math we employ is relatively incomprehensible to Old Math practitioners. For example, in our style Math, six to the sixth power could be anything between 36 and several hundred, depending on how many people are involved in figuring out the answer and whether it is before or after 10am.
In New Math, the answer to any problem, from your basic addition/subtraction to trigonometric function action, can be determined vis-a-vis lengthy heated conversations and people crawling around on the conference room table. Snacking can speed progress. Everybody needs a pencil sharpened just perfectly and a lot of time and energy is exerted in this area.
At the end of the maximum length of time that think-tank participants can possibly take it, someone decides what the answer is. Or what the answers are. In New Math™ sometimes there is more than one answer. I mean, one answer is good and all, but more is better. If you have more than one answer, then you can give a rotating answer every time you get asked the question. Based on the reaction you get, you can adjust your response the next time. Or maybe decide to use particular answers with certain demographics or in certain situations, as deemed appropriate.
I'm thinking we charge a modest licensing fee if anybody wants to deploy our methodology. It'll be closed-source because we're money grubbers. And also because the complete lack of repeatable process makes any sort of interfacing mostly unattainable. We will offer Certifications in Math.™ Could be the math of choice for investment bankers and sub-prime lender types, I'm thinking.
Dig it, Digit?