EMOTIONS: HOW MUCH CAN WE LOSE ($) WITH THEM?

Nonexistent Money, does it exist? Well, when you need that money you never even thought existed for your long-term investment, that’s everything. This is the new approach we are going to adopt on the Blog these days.

Before anything else, the answer is YES! Nonexistent Money Exists! But isn’t this ambiguous or illogical? Let’s go through the logic below, via MNE, which I propose as:

For illustration purposes, imagine the scenario: over 30 (n) days, 100 currency units are received. When totaling all expenses (C), it is noted that 90 % of this value — 2700 — are consumed, then you will say: “This is simple, 300 currency units remain, and that money exists, so you’re wrong!” I only ask for calm.

The MNE Function (Non-Existent Money) takes into account the Forgetting Factor — Lambda — and the Complex Numbers — S — as exponents, which makes all the difference when calculating what you really have over the entire 30 days.

In this scenario, imagine that the Forgetting Factor equals 1, which in this case was calculated experimentally and is therefore irrelevant; meanwhile, the Complex Number is fixed at 4 + 4i. With these data, the final result is approximately – 2735.7 – 41.31i. This indicates a strong financial lag, a balance of around 265 rather than the 300 you had calculated initially. But how does this happen? The influence of the imaginary part of the Complex Number.

The imaginary component “ – 41.31i ” reveals oscillation details that should be of immediate interest. Anyone working with Complex Numbers already knows the importance of the Modulus in calculations, and this complex number was chosen precisely to present a specific Amplitude: about 54.6. This example Complex Number, in isolation, suggests growth of Modulus and phase shift, which makes compensating the expenditure insufficient — sensitizing the real part of the MNE according to this logic: the greater the cost relative to the exponential projection, the deeper the deficit recorded.

The MNE Function acts like a double-edged sword: it simultaneously measures the net magnitude of the financial flow — the real part — and the oscillation behavior — the imaginary part — and that is why the Complex Number is part of the Arrangement. In practical applications, this dual diagnosis allows for more refined interventions. It is advisable that consumption not be so high, especially for Long-Term Investments, and, in practice, one must still consider the influence of the Forgetting Factor — Lambda — which will be addressed in a future post with a new scenario, since this Function is still under analysis.

What can be inferred is that, in the MNE Function, the larger the imaginary part, the greater the tension in retaining currency, and therefore the Cost becomes more significant than it really is due to the exponential imaginary component of the Complex Number, which — together with the Real Part — presents the Amplitude of Interest.

Finally, in the scenario presented, it is possible to conclude that consumption at 90% and without Lambda modulation causes the entire system to operate in a severe deficit that produces a phase shift — something that compromises predictability — after all, the daily life of those who received the currency units is oscillatory, with emotions and feelings, because, in fact, the Human Being is still Human and not Mechanical. Lastly, the MNE Function, by quantifying this risk vector, offers a solid framework for making strategic financial adjustments designed to ensure financial viability and, as a secondary aim, the temporal stability of Cash Flow.