Ahmed Mousa

This research implements a recent evolutionary-based algorithm of equilibrium optimizer to resolve the constrained combined economic emission dispatch problem. This problem has two objective functions that represent the minimizing of generation costs and minimizing the emission of environmental pollution caused by generators. The proposed algorithm integrates the dominant criteria for multiobjective functions that allow the decision-maker to detect all the Pareto boundaries of constrained combined economic emission dispatch problem. In order to save the effort for the decision-maker to select the best compromise alternative, a cluster study was carried out to minimize the size of the Pareto boundary to an acceptable size, representing all the characteristics of the main Pareto frontier. On the other hand, in order to deal with the infringement of constraints, a repair algorithm was used to preserve the viability of the particles. The proposed algorithm is applied to solve the standard 30-bus IEEE system with 6 generators to validate its robustness and efficiency to produce a well-distributed Pareto frontier for constrained combined economic emission dispatch problem. Compared with other studies, good results in solving constrained combined economic emission dispatch problem are obtained and a reasonable reduced Pareto set is found.

Where did we come from? Why are we here? Where are we going? How should we live? I am sure that whoever is reading my words now has probably, at least once, asked these existential questions [1]. Among them, which one resonates the most? Probably the first question. You are not the only one since it has occupied minds of mankind since the dawn of history. But, why does it have such significance? Simply because its answer impacts everything else including the other three questions. Our lives would become profoundly different based on our answer. There are only two possible answers, each of which has proponents. Theists give the affirmative answer while atheists give the negative one. This controversy involves both philosophical and scientific arguments. The scope of this paper will revolve more around philosophical argumentation than empirical scientific dialogue, into which it shall not dive deeply. The paper gathers different types of arguments, cosmological, moral, and fine-tuning arguments. This way, it introduces a reader new to the controversy to the types of arguments used, and, to readers familiar with the controversy, it gives insight about each type of argument through criticism. Each argument type has a lot of details. However, I care more about presenting the core of each type. My aim in this paper is equipping the reader with a firm foundation for their future search in pursuit of the truth. The main focus shall be on the existence of a first cause. Nonetheless, there shall be also a brief discussion about its attributes. The paper’s methodology for each type of argument is showing evidence for both theistic and atheistic views. Then a collective critical evaluation of each side’s arguments to show which side argues more soundly.