Mirrors

 

The Man in the Mirror.

I'm starting with the man in the mirror
I'm asking him to change his ways
And no message could have been any clearer
If you want to make the world a better place
Take a look at yourself and then make a change

What if we live in the mirror!

In a prior blog post, I despaired that teenage Trekkie me would be very disappointed because I proposed that rather than moving to hyperspace when we exceeded Warp Factor 1, we were already in hyperspace. I would like to now propose that we are also living in a mirror in which case the teenage Trekkie me would be very happy that we are living in the episode Mirror, Mirror of Star Trek TOS (the one where Mr. Spock has a goatee), in the universe of the Imperial Star Ship, ISS, Enterprise. This is hardly a new concept. Lewis Carrol explored it in his novel where Alice went Through the Looking Glass and proposed that the behavior outside of what can immediately be seen in the mirror would be very different than what we ordinarily experience. Again this is hardly a new concept since the ancient Greek philosopher Plato proposed that what we can perceive is only the shadow of reality on the wall of our cave. In other words our universe is an  example of the Analogy of the Cave in his work the Republic.

If we live in hyperspace, within one sheet of a two-sheeted hyperboloid, then what we can perceive will not be what happens in the other sheet. While the other sheet has to be the opposite sign of the one from which we are observing, the question is whether that sheet is normally positive or negative. The conventional wisdom has been that the sheet we are perceiving is positive, which makes the other sheet negative. If instead it is negative and what we perceive is in hyperbolic space, then a normal distribution can explain almost all of the infinite domain but finite range of the  absolute. However if what is perceived is positive, then the absolute has to be ABnormal and can NOT be a wave, filling all of the unobservable but known range. The  problem is that a wave function has to be definable and cyclic, repeating, in every quadrant. An absolutely false distribution can not be a wave, normal, because the second derivative of a wave function, has to be the same as the integral of that wave function. If it is positive then that its second derivative, the fourth quadrant of a wave's cycle, has to be undefinable, the negative of a logarithm.

While a winning, true and NORMAL distribution can satisfy the wave function, a winning, true and ABNORMAL distribution can NOT. Thus the behavior of a group of individuals emulating the entire range of the absolute must be winning, true and NORMAL. That also means that at most the individuals acting as a group can achieve 96% of an absolute and still be normal, which is where false losses are equal to false wins. But not all normal distributions are true. Individuals in a group emulating an absolute must follow a distribution that is winning, normal and TRUE.

{.96, .02, 0, .02} is the maximum right-handed skew of the normal distribution,
{2/3, 1/6,  0, 1/6}.  But  {.97, .01, 0, .01} is ABNORMAL. Solutions that are greater than
{.50, .25, 0, .25} will  winning, normal and TRUE but the maximum, left-handed skew,
{2/(4.52), 1/(4.52), 0, 1/(4.52)} is winning, normal and FALSE, In order for it to be winning, normal and TRUE, it first has to be the negative portion of the full cycle of the absolute in hyperspace. If we insist on perceiving this as the positive portion of a wave of the absolute, then the wave that is inferred is only one line of the observable, not the entire range of the absolute. The man in the mirror is not only in hyperspace, but he is also the negative of the absolute.