Never Trust a Corporation

I would like to start by noting multitudinous objections to assertions made in Larry Mitchell\u27s Corporate Irresponsibility: America\u27s Newest Export. But I waive these points for purposes of this Symposium. I would prefer to take the occasion to celebrate the book. So I will make two points on the subject of corporate social responsibility on which the book and I stand in complete accord

Drama for the Church: the Soul Purpose Plays

Intended as an introductory chapter to a book, this essay outlines the motivation for writing liturgical drama and for creating Soul Purpose. Unfortunately, John Steven Paul (1951-2009), professor of Theatre at Valparaiso University, passed away before he could complete the full manuscript

Melodia : A Comprehensive Course in Sight-Singing (Solfeggio)

Melodia is a 1904 book designed to teach sight-singing. The educational plan is by Samuel W. Cole; the exercises were written and selected by Leo R. Lewis. Melodia is presented here as a complete edition and has also been divided into its four separate books.https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/oer/1000/thumbnail.jp

Book crossing numbers of the complete graph and small local convex crossing numbers

A $k$-page book drawing of a graph $G$ is a drawing of $G$ on $k$ halfplanes with common boundary $l$, a line, where the vertices are on $l$ and the edges cannot cross $l$. The $k$-page book crossing number of the graph $G$, denoted by $\nu_k(G)$, is the minimum number of edge-crossings over all $k$-page book drawings of $G$. Let $G=K_n$ be the complete graph on $n$ vertices. We improve the lower bounds on $\nu_k(K_n)$ for all $k\geq 14$ and determine $\nu_k(K_n)$ whenever $2 < n/k \leq 3$. Our proofs rely on bounding the number of edges in convex graphs with small local crossing numbers. In particular, we determine the maximum number of edges that a convex graph with local crossing number at most $\ell$ can have for $\ell\leq 4$.Comment: Version 2 extends our result on the maximum number of edges on a convex graph with local crossing number at most c for c=4. In This in turn improves most of the bounds in Version

Can Physics ever be Complete if there is no Fundamental Level in Nature?

In their recent book Every Thing Must Go, Ladyman and Ross claim: (i) Physics is analytically complete since it is the only science that cannot be left incomplete. (ii) There might not be an ontologically fundamental level. (iii) We should not admit anything into our ontology unless it has explanatory and predictive utility. In this discussion note I aim to show that the ontological commitment in implies that the completeness of no science can be achieved where no fundamental level exists. Therefore, if claim requires a science to actually be complete in order to be considered as physics,, and if Ladyman and Ross's “tentative metaphysical hypothesis ... that there is no fundamental level” is true,, then there simply is no physics. Ladyman and Ross can, however, avoid this unwanted result if they merely require physics to ever strive for completeness rather than to already be complete