Exestential Hyperbolics

My apologies for not making this essay “simple”.  Evidently I’m not as smart as Einstein to break it down for a two year old.  On last night’s Zodiac killer episode they said all you need as an IQ of 126 to land any job you want and after that it’s just gravy.  I’ll believe it when I see it.  Of course the thought crossed my mind last night that maybe the person I think of as Mal Evans is really the spirit of a now dead Zodiac killer what with all those word games and puzzles.  But there is a difference because none of our clues are as cryptic as a Batman episode as these clues were.  We were going to do some Beatles stuff at the end of this essay but I suspect that we won’t have time.  We already served up Beatle material as a side dish on our last posting so I guess we’ll just hold off on serving up any main courses for now.

We’re doing the hyperbolic thing one more time till all you readers get good and sick of it.  This paragraph covers “Geometric Background” and you might want to skip to the next paragraph is you know this stuff here.  First of all we have to learn to “think in reverse”.  That’s hard because our visual cortexes have been wired since we were two to reason along certain lines.  You know it has something to do with the words concave and convex.  We normally relate to convex space.  Convex lenses are the more common type on optics both because they deal with far sightedness, the more common visual ailment, and also because they are the kind of lenses used in cameras.  Some may say “It’s just a question of which way the arc bends.  Like they used to say about desegregation in the south.  “Nobody is against bussing - - it’s just a question of which way the busses run”.  We’re going to be running the busses the other way.  For instance many in the construction business may know the coordenates of a particular roof line on a home is a prospective buyer asks, but may now know the number of degrees in the slope.  If he had arc functions on his calculator he could look it up.  We talked about light “bending away” from matter in hyperbolic or concave space.  But Alice in Wonderland might come along and say “Well, maybe it isn’t that.  Maybe the light is just attracted to the NON space!”  We are going to have to think in such strange terms.  First of all you have to know that concave space can be defined as “That which has a lower refraction index than ether”, which of course has none.  So it’s a case of “less than zero” some may say.  Perhaps.  Any light source will bend out rather than in if it enters ANY substance with a LOWER refraction index than that which it was traveling in already.  So that number clearly need not be zero.  Some may wonder if we are talking about “mirror space”.  Let me put it this way.  We know in “natural trig” that sign and cosine coordenates make up a circle, where in hyperbolic trig these are defined by a ninety degree hyperbola.  Keep that number ninety in mind later.   Some may argue that it is “Not backwards but sideways and reversed”.  I’ll illustrate.  In circular trig the tangents form kind of a vertical “S” where the points of the S run up and down.  Actually if you analyze it it’s in reality a reverse “S”.  Look at one.  It’s the spikes on a heart beat scope.  Now we have the hyperbolic tangent.  This indeed is a real horizontal “S” with the points going flat to the side left and side right.  So- - to convert from one to the other you either in Paint lingo rotate it 90 degrees to the left and use the horizontal flip, or else- - you can do the vertical flip FIRST and then rotate it ninety degrees.  Either one will get you the same thing.  One tangent goes to infinity with limited lateral ability- and then starts over at negative infinity for a new cycle.  The other one has unlimited “latitude” but will never exceed the bounds of one and negative one.  The hyperbolic world values never exceed a one.  This could be a key clue.  I would as a side note warn you readers not to over extrapolate on your own.  If we don’t give the example, you better not do it yourself.

Hey, this wasn’t easy for me either to figure out but I told you people I’d try and do it.  But we have to get just a little more “extential” than I planned.  You can rightly deduce one thing.  Hyperbolic matter would have to exist in the form of a gas - - not a liquid or solid.  I was musing on this knowing that under Romulan cloaking - - a person would have to exist as a gas and relate to gasses.  These couldn’t disappear altogether because you wouldn’t be able to breathe in the oxygen and you’d suffocate.  How many of you thought of that?  We know from chemistry that “gasses expand to fill the volume of the container they are in” and they have a whole set of physical laws that apply exclusively to gasses.  So if something is in hyperspace- - it in a sense FILLS UP the whole universe at once.  This may be a bit metaphorical but we’ll come back to it.  Now though I’d like you to picture an hour glass.  (more elaboration in paragraph four) We know that tangents at 45 degrees are a one.  Here’s another rabbit side trail - - - it’s wrong to extrapolate the whole “range of tangents” thing to specific readings.  They go to infinity in circular and to just a ONE in hyperbolic.  We also know that hyperbolic is “center focused” whereas with circular no part of the circle is less important than any other part.  This whole circle thing is but an optical illusion to begin with - - and we discussed this aspect before mocking God for “running out of time to create more things in the universe”.  But the whole “circle” thing works.  Actually we live in what you would call an “outside – in” universe.  But hyperbolic space is an “inside – out” universe.  I’ll explain.  We see every object as if on the outside looking IN at it.  We don’t view life from the Object’s point of view but our own.  Capish?  I’m going to hit this next topic right now.  In photography we have objective or real images and also apparent images- - that we see.  It can be argued that distance numbers between lens and object can never fall below an index “modification” of ONE meaning no modification.  I guess that would be zero refraction-  if the lens were flush with the object.  But the other way from one we can go to Infinity- - and indeed beyond infinity to upside down and shrinking.  Don’t over-extrapelate that.  But look at Infinity there.  In any object focused in a real image by a convex lens- - - each spot or detail in the projected picture image- - if it were replaced by an eyeball viewing OUTWARD - - that eye would see just one color.  It would only see Itself, in other words.  In this strange Ayan Ran paradox - - - to be completely centered on Self and to see Self as filling the whole Universe and being a center of it- - is to be “properly focused”.  Our souls may be the Image- - -  but the actual Object the image represents would be “Creation in the Mind of God”.  And our SOUL - - - IS that object image and if our Mind (the lens) is functioning properly WE, our souls- - will “be on focus”.  Do you catch that.  So really when any camera lens is focused at a value of infinity it is it’s own stated F stop value- - so can be said to have a factor of one.  Of course as the object comes closer- - the Focal length interval will necessarily go up.

I’m aware of how much space we used.  One more point.  Harken back to that whole “sideways” thing again.  Now picture an hour glass as we said before.  The sane mounds up at an angle of 45 degrees.  The tangents would be one but this is basically to conform to the original hyperbolic equation and your average hyperbolic chart which deals in ninety degrees.  If you split 90 degrees vertically in two is breaks down to 45 degrees, of course.  Remember that in a hyperbolic chart- - the “space” is what is under the line.  So it can be argued that perhaps 76% of the area on a tight angle chart may be shaded in, but not all of it.  76%, which is a key figure for you math people.  This represents the number ONE.  You are a ONE - - and arguably are only entitled to 76% of your hopes and dreams being met alone.  Or Jefferson or great people are responsible for 76% of the ideas in the Declaration of Independence, and not all of it.  No matter how many people you can have you can never exceed 100% happiness.  If you think of life as holding up a football plackard card to spell out a message from the bleechers in football games- - you show the “presentation” side of the care Outward and what’s on the CARD is not meant for you to see.  Just as YOU present your own COLOR outwards of the focused light that hits You so you shine in your own Color while filling up the whole universe in your “gassious state”.  Capish?  

NOW get ready for our final point.  I keep getting away from that hour glass.  Pretend that sand is like some substance you can carve through like a Milky Way or something.  If you slice vertically you get a hyperbola.  If you slice horizontally you get a circle.  If you are a bit oblique but mostly horizontal you get an elipse- - of what you get when you approach the speed of light.  If you are off axis vertically- - - your own hyperbola will be under 270 degrees.  That’s right.  You are not the SAND - - YOU are the Space.  It’s like Bart telling Lisa “Well, YOU are the Cow Dung”.  You have to think of Being the thing you think you are not.  And you know again that even in the optical example - - you exist not in the “enclosed area” of the 90 degree hyperbola but in the other 270 degrees.  In hyperbolic trig the 76% represents the ONE.  You can of your own power only ever hope t achieve 76% happiness.  I doubt most people can even achieve THAT much without help.  You’ve heard it said “There are old pilots and bold pilots but there no OLD and BOLD pilots.  If the horizontal represents the OLD and the vertical represents the BOLD this is some kind of analogy for you, if not the best.  One can also see oneself as “The more off center you are the more rounded your hyperbola is”.  So that you are cheating life a little.  Maybe this represents the immature like with kids getting “more than their fair share” having rounded off hyperbolas that become more sharply curved (and dangerous?) later on.  But as more sand falls into the hour glass the “less off center” you will appear to be- - just by virtue of getting older and not even particularly by making any effort at it.  OK we are done.