That is what I attempted to overcome with a double blind "check."
Originally, the experiment was setup to prove the Golden Rule was a rule of economics. (That does not mean it should be excluded from applications in other areas of study.)
Since this is not a linear proof, it may behoove an observer to view it from several angles. A variety of write-ups will be presented to help this process. However, this attempt will go ahead and try to explain the non-linear concept in a linear way.
Q: Is The Golden Rule a valid law of economics?
Several experiments were set-up to study this question (including Y2K, Stock Portfolio, Retooling Of Information Plants, H2O, Energy, and Global Warming.)
[side note: please try to remember, these are all economic studies that examine costs and benefits. All the experiments prove that wrongful spending of money has costs... and, that we the people make that choice. My favorite of the moment is the War On Terror. Though I can not find official figures, it appears as though we are approaching a trillion bucks in unaccounted for money. What do you think the cost to you will be?]
All of the experiments have held up to the economic proof --
All economic forecasts based on the theory have returned positive results. Unfortunately, the positive results proved a direct relationship in "real time" to our negative economic choices.
None the less, I was still looking for an independent (or as independent as possible) verification... validation... check. You know? ...like checking a math problem.
The problem: True or False
The Golden Rule is a law of economics?
A law of economics is The Golden Rule.
That check was unknowingly performed by another player (in response to the letter about Nash.)
In other words, the best responses of all players are in accordance with each other.
To which sidd replied:
heehee reminds me of the law of chemical equilibrium -- Le Chatelier's Principle
or the golden rule....
Back To The Study Widgette.com