Discover the world's scientific knowledge
With 135+ million publication pages, 20+ million researchers and 1+ million questions, this is where everyone can access science
You can use AND, OR, NOT, "" and () to specify your search.
This question is related to a preceding question about procurement.
In commercial property management, if the properly manager is paid a percentage for managing commercial rental properties, properly manager benefits if the contract amount is higher, because a larger contract results in a higher percentage-based fee. What contractual incentives can be included in the property management contract to induce the property manager to strike the best contractual price? If the contract dispenses with a percentage-based contract administration fee, using a flat fee for example, different risks arise. The property manager might not investigate best prices or supervise the contract as required. In other words, the property manager can increase its profits by reducing its time investment instead of increasing its revenues. Does game theory have any suggestions?
These questions seem to fall into a more general category of using game theory to influence fiduciaries to honor their fiduciary obligations.
I am a PhD student in program evaluation. My dissertation topic is about demand for evaluation as a service. I am trying to build the demand function for evaluation and analyze the factors that influence that demand. I am facing challenges trying to find the right measure that represent the variables of the demand function (quantity demanded and price) in the evaluation market. I need help and guidance from an economist with knowledge of economic theory who works in evaluation and understand the dynamics of evaluation contracts.
If you believe you are the right person considering your background and expertise also eager to provide some guidance and have the time, I would be so very grateful if you can contact me on my email address:
The crucial problem of Einstein’s theory of relativity is that the relative spacetime (length contraction and time dilation) is not true.
If the relative spacetime was true, in any sense, Einstein’s theory of relativity should be a very great theory. But, in fact, relative spacetime only is a faked story.
The crucial experiment is that, in the high energy accelerator, the speed of particles is the highest close to the speed of light and the condition is the most stable, precession and repeatable. But, no length contraction and time dilation was observed in it. Then, why the relative space and time was observed in other objects? It is certain, these observations are false. For example, it is not true that the life of the highspeed mesons is longer than that of the stationary ones. First, there are not the so-called stationary particles. Second, the mesons decay with N(t)=N0e-ikt. The life of some mesons is longer than others. Third, crucially, the mean life of the so-called stationary mesons was not considered. The mean life is determined with N0. If the number N0 of the so-called stationary mesons are larger than that of the highspeed ones, the mean life of the so-called stationary mesons may be longer than that of the highspeed ones.
As the relative spacetime only is a faked story, the hypotheses and “theories” based on it also are only faked stories. Unfortunately, in the past 110 years, many theories and experiments were based on it. A lot of faked stories were produced. More unfortunately, these faked stories are regarded as great theories and the experiments are very dominated.
So, if we hope to understand modern physics and Einstein with his theory of relativity, we have to first know whether or not the relative spacetime is true.
And, may I advise the friends who try to advance the theory of relativity or to develop new theory from it. As the space and time are not relative, these tries are unfruitful.
At Planck scale, the physical gluon acquires third degree of freedom in the form of scaler potential when the unphysical ghost particle effect disappears at Gribov horizon. Now, relativity demands Lorentz Fitzgerald contraction of Planck scale at light speed of gluon. But that would mean sudden demise of quantum theory. In order to unite relativity with quantum theory, the physical gluon speed instead reduces to zero in any inertial frame and accordingly exhibits mass gap property. For more details, please refer to my preprint http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.25092.65926
I am looking for statistics related to forward contracts results e.g.: the tipical compliance percentages per product has been experienced in the practice when forward contracts are involved, or the bad debts percentage were not ever collected.
This is to determine a risk measure and what could be the real ROI for an investor.
I am testing moderation effect of partner's opportunistic behavior on formal contract and relational factors, trust and distrust. When I run the tests through Process macro results are different with non normal data and with normal data. With non-normal data results are as per the theory. However, when I normalize the data ( Templeton, G.F. 2011. "A Two-Step Approach for Transforming Continuous Variables to Normal: Implications and Recommendations for IS Research," Communications of the AIS, Vol. 28, Article 4. ) then OB fails to moderate either of them.
What should I do?
If possible, give an example of a continuous function defined on a convex subset of a Banach space $X$ satisfies Kannan contraction but does not satisfy Banach contraction.
How can a clock inside a spherical shell "know" that it should tick slowly? Unlike Newton's action-at-a-distance theory of gravity (though even Newton himself had reservations about this), Einstein's General Relativity is a FIELD theory. Yet there is NO gravitational FIELD inside the shell. Furthermore, let the shell radially contract (expand). The gravitational POTENTIAL inside the shell then becomes more (less) strongly negative, so the clock must then tick more (less) slowly. Yet there still is NO gravitational FIELD inside the shell. By Birkhoff's theorem, even while the shell radially contracts or expands (not merely before and after the radial contraction or expansion) there is NO gravitational FIELD inside the shell. So with NO gravitational FIELD to interact with, how does a clock inside the shell "know" that it must tick slowly, even though the gravitational POTENTIAL inside the shell is negative? How does it "know" that the gravitational POTENTIAL has become more (less) strongly negative after a radial contraction (expansion) of the shell, and hence that it must then tick more (less) slowly?
Swammerdam (17th century) stimulated a muscle in a fluid-filled jar with a small-bore tube attached, measuring a slight decrease in volume, disproving the "balloonist" theory of muscle contraction. This finding is well-replicated in frog sartorius, but there is a recent claim (Clark & Demer 2016) that human eye muscles are different in that they increase as much as 18% in total volume when they contract to rotate the eye. I don't believe it!
Can anyone point me to contraction-volume measurements in vertebrate muscles, or any muscles that might be more like human EOMs, or to an expert who might know about this stuff?
According to special theory of relativity, when an object is moving towards an observer with speed near to the speed of light, it gets contracted. what happens if the object is moving away? will it still appear contracted to the observer? any kind of help is appreciated.