The Many Perspectives of Reality
Relativity and the Gravity Model
According to Einstein’s gravity model of the general relativity principle, perspectives are warped when projected from a curved surface. This is probably why at a certain time, the city council of Monza, Italy, barred pet owners from keeping goldfish in curved bowls. As noted by Hawking in his book, The Grand Design, the sponsor of the measure explained it in part by saying that it is cruel to keep a fish in a bowl with curved sides because, gazing out, the fish would have a distorted view of reality. For instance, due to the distortion, a freely moving object would be observed from a frame of reference that is curved, to move along a curved path.
But how do we know we have the true, undistorted picture of reality?
Analogously therefore, following relativity, an event in space can be observed from an infinite number of locations; all of which define a sphere or curved surface, and each of which defines a perspective of the event. However, by the normality principle in games theory, a game of infinite moves may be reduced into a single unit move, which is then iterated until the game ends. The duality series in operations research presents what would be an acceptable outline of the unit perspective that is adopted to define the natural order, N-O. Serially:
- Maxima, S: Impulse, F1
- Minimax, L: Nature, L2
- Maximin, A: Nurture, L1
- Minima, F: Sustenance, F2
Given these four, 4 items, the factor- S would represent the form of the reality; which would be adequately defined by the three, 3 features that include F, L, and A. The factor-F defines the analogue or object of the form, S to identify the corresponding objective equivalent of the phenomenon that is a fact in the relative material world. The factors L and A are inverses that define the contradiction or relativity aperture that effects the reduction from form, S to object, F.
The Principle of Forms
These items are selected intuitively, by the thought process. Thus the factor-L actually defines the position that the person has taken. Then the factor-A would identify a precedent, the first, 1st attempt at defending the position. And then the factors F and S would represent antecedents; both of which combine to let the antecedent build on phenomena that occurred earlier in time, as evidence that the phenomena that follow in the series, will ultimately occur in the future.
But the typical form comprises three, 3 items according to the components of the mind defined above as the will, A the emotion, L and the intellect, F. They represent the work, L that is to be done, the energy, F with which to accomplish the tasks, and the exhaust, A by which to keep track of the progress achieved. Ultimately, for humans, it is the emotion, L that is to be stabilized; via an astute intellect, F which success is evaluated against the attitude of will, A or disposition to phenomena. The appropriate disposition would therefore be evidence that sufficient energy has been expended at work, to reduce the phenomenon into the essential elements; for A = 19(C – 1). Then the work, L component would have been reduced into the nurture, L1 and nature, L2 elements according to the wave principle. And the energy, F component would similarly have been reduced into the impulse, F1 and sustenance, F2 elements. The exhaust, A is reduced into the principle, A1 by which the work is to be accomplished, and the purpose, A2 that is to be achieved. Serially:
.In this case, work1 defines the minimum requirement, for the object to exist; which has to be nurtured, into maturity. Work2 defines the matured optimum nature of the phenomenon, beyond which it would be a waste to attempt any further improvements. Work1 and work2 are funded by energy1 and energy2 respectively. If the principle that underlies the selection of these items has been applied correctly, it would be evident in the level of consistency; to which extent the attainment of the purpose would be expected. It is sufficient that these four, 4 factors are consistent, to establish the factors F and S as analogues that are equivalent; as well as the factors L and A as inverses that define the relativity aperture.
The Law of Reciprocity
This is an application of the law of reciprocity, by which every phenomenon is a form that must have a corresponding objective equivalent that is a fact in the relative material world, to be fulfilled. This law is presented here to derive from relativity and the associated curvature, from which has arisen the intuitive craving of the human person for certainty, which requires a demonstration so convincing as to leave little room for doubt. As noted above, this is achieved in the following two, 2 ways:
- Precedents, and
Precedents look to examples in the real world, to satisfy certainty. This is the actual manifestation of the proposed phenomenon, which already exists. But principles are not limited by precedents. However, they need to be reduced into antecedents, so that they create the impression of reciprocity. While precedents are backward looking, antecedents are forward looking. Antecedents build on phenomena that occurred earlier in time, as evidence that the phenomena that follow in the series, will ultimately occur in the future.
Recall the principle of model-dependent realism in physics, following which a physical theory or world picture is a mere model, generally of a mathematical nature, and a set of rules that connect the elements of the model to observations; providing a framework with which to interpret modern science. This principle is the offshoot of the conclusion that there seems to be no single mathematical model or theory that can describe every aspect of the universe. Instead, there appears to be a network of theories. And with each theory or model, the concepts of reality and of the fundamental constituents of the universe have changed. Forms provide a consistent and objective basis for selecting the network of theories. For instance, the concept of a universe that is self-contained has been adequately described by the following three, 3 principles, in series:
3. Uncertainty Principle
2. Quantum Physics
1. General Relativity
Risk and the Possibility of Aversion
Similarly, from the perspective of investments, risk has been defined simply as the likelihood that an investment’s actual return will differ from, being lower than expectations. The major types of risks have therefore been outlined as follows:
- Country risk
- Currency risk
- Inflation risk
- Liquidity risk
In this case, the business environment that prevails in a country (location?), determines the strength (size?) of its currency; according to the rate (impulse?) of inflation and financial liquidity (sustenance?). Whether risk is defined in terms of investment, or in general terms as the chance of something going wrong or the statistical odds of danger, the bottom line is, the inadequacy of information. The better the information base from which decisions are made therefore, the greater is the chances of success; and the less the chances of something going wrong, or the statistical odds for danger. For that matter, the less the likelihood that an investment’s actual return will differ from, being lower than expectations.
Viewed from this perspective, the law of reciprocity enables the problem of risks to be dealt with, appropriately. It is rooted in the concept of whole spectrum knowledge, which is a series of events that list phenomena, from the beginning to the end. Architecture and engineering have taken advantage of this principle, when they make models of houses and products, respectively. The models enable the end to be seen, from the beginning. Similarly, by the perception model of mind, PMM, a mind that operates optimally would reduce phenomena into the five, 5 essential elements that give it being. These items would cover the whole spectrum of what needs to be known about the phenomenon. To derive the standard procedure series, SPS which comprises six, 6 items, it is sufficient that the purpose item is reduced into its five, 5 essential elements.
The Standard Procedure Series
Given the perception model of mind therefore, the standard procedure series would be the analogue (reciprocal?) of the natural order. Then, reducing a task into the standard procedure would be sufficient evidence for the certainty that the objective will be achieved. The SPS would actually be a conceptual model of the proposed action. In the SPS, a phenomenon is at once, characterized and procedurized. The first, 1st four, 4 items on the series define the SMART objectives that need to be fulfilled, for the project to be accomplished, according to specification. Serially:
This would be merely a re-echo of the management by objectives, MBO principle, in a way that gives it precision, brevity, and solidity. Moreover, the MBO and the N-O would be mere restatements of the law of reciprocity to operationalize it. In this case, the N-O would define the position, and MBO would be the precedent that attempts to defend the associated point of view. The PMM and SPS would be antecedents that establish this precedent. Serially:
In another parlance, the N-O is reduced into the MBO, which work is done with energy that is sourced from PMM and SPS. But the PMM and the SPS would be analogues, so that the N-O and the MBO would be the relativity aperture that makes the reduction from form, PMM to object, SPS. It is this seemingly labyrinthine and complex symbiosis that demands for the consistency in the four, 4 items.