In light of the events of January 6-8, 2021, and the banning of Donald Trump from Twitter, I have written an update to this post and included the contents of this post in the subsequent post. I encourage anyone who has come across this post to visit the new post and see the update.
Today’s topic concerns exponential decay curves. This is what happens when “something” declines over time. A classic exponential decay curve is shown here:
Exponential decay curves are often found in nature. The classic one that is taught in classrooms concerns radioactive decay. For a given radioactive isotope of an element, the half-life of the isotope determines the shape of its decay curve. A half-life is defined as the amount of time for 1/2 of the radioactive decay for an isotope to have occurred. This can vary among isotopes from fractions of a second, up to 4 billion years in the case of Uranium 238. Half-lives are very important when calculating the potential radiation exposure to a radioactive isotope. Isotopes like Cobalt 60 are powerful radiation sources that are used industrially to examine welds and metals for defects. They provide plentiful gamma rays since the half life of this isotope is only 5.3 years. That is why there is concern about the use of this isotope in a dirty bomb, since the radiation from an explosive dispersal of Cobalt 60 would cause significant exposure to high powered gamma radiation.
Exponential decay curves may be found in other natural and also artificial systems. A new example of an artificial system that appears to be following an exponential decay curve is the Presidential tweet. The response to a Presidential tweet appears to be following a typical decay curve function. It is too early to get an accurate measurement of the half-life of tweet effectiveness, but a preliminary estimate is that the half-life of the response to a Presidential tweet is about two months.
Since this system of Presidential tweets is an artificial system (one not normally found in nature), it is uncertain as to what the response of the originator of the Presidential tweets will be to an ongoing decrease in tweet effectiveness. Most observers believe that the originator will greatly increase both the frequency and objects of tweets so as to continue to receive a total response to the tweets that approximates the effect of the first tweets.
However, it is nearly certain that since the effectiveness of any individual tweet will continue to decline, eventually the response to all Presidential tweeting may approach zero. There is a school of thought though, that maintains the belief that we may begin to see an inverse function develop for the tweet response. That is, instead of receiving a positive response to tweets, each subsequent tweet may result in a negative response. It is possible that the magnitude of the negative response may increase with additional tweets, so that Newton’s third law may be given a test in the political arena. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Observers of politics will be watching this process with rapt attention.
8 thoughts on “Exponential Decay Curve in Politics”
You really expect that Donald Trump will follow scientific knowledge?
What’s the half life of that strange orange glow that seem to exude from his skin and hair?
I know there is a direct correlation from his tweets to how much hair people are pulling out of there own heads….
[…] Exponential Decay Curve in Politics […]
It’s an remarkable piece of writing in support of all the online viewers;
they will take benefit from it I am sure.
Cafe thanks. Please take a look at the follow-up post that shows the actual decay rate over the past 2 years
I see you don’t monetize evenabrokenclock.blog,
don’t waste your traffic, you can earn extra cash every month with new
monetization method. This is the best adsense alternative
for any type of website (they approve all sites), for more details simply search
in gooogle: murgrabia’s tools
Can I simply just say what a relief to discover a person that actually understands what they are talking about on the net.
You definitely know how to bring an issue to light and make it important.
A lot more people ought to look at this and understand this side of your story.
I was surprised you aren’t more popular given that you definitely have the gift.
Thanks for your kind comment. Take a look at the more recent post whe9the last two years of data showed that tweet effectiveness is decaying as expected. Just a slower decay rate than I expected.