### n-Vector cross product of goodness

I got my hands on an interlibrary loan of Strang's "Introduction to Linear Algebra" Fourth Edition and decided to do a speed run through the course as entertainment. I also wanted to do the comparable process at Khan Academy simultaneously as well as document it with equations and graphs in my Zim wiki and do some Python and SciPy scripts in the mix.

What I realized is that there is something missing. It has been said that there is something magical about geniuses like Euler, Bernoulli, Gauss and others. I have heard that about my actions as well. I suppose what is being said is that they don't understand how you can do that as they cannot nor will they ever be able to. There were comments on slashdot that some people are genetically predisposed to certain abilities and I would accept that with the caveat that the combination of predisposition and environment cross product is necessary to have anything come of it. On top of that it isn't just one thing, so it is like capabilities in n DIFFERENT dimensions that cannot be correlated to a scalar.

I was looking into cross products and it is defined in 3 dimensions and is a somewhat convoluted method. The difference is that I have been down this road and lost in the desert outside of the vector cross product many times. Something in the cross product creates a logical cross product of interest to me and so this is even more complex than the original and I would not attempt to teach this as I have gone down that thorny path before and what you have to do is give somebody all the pieces they need to construct an n-dimensional tesseract

{4,3,3}
{4,3}x{}
{4}x{4}
{4}x{}x{}
{}x{}x{}x{}
and then magic happens. That happens as an instruction ONLY on certain biological CISC processor systems. It is much like CISC vs RISC, with the architectural problem that the CISC is implemented in such a way that it cannot be simulated as a series of RISC instructions in a reasonable time frame that matches the decay time of temporary memory. In other words it can't be taught. Methods can be taught, but that ability to create the original form is only possible with a given set of hardware, data and coincidence. Inspiration is hardly magic and, in fact, it is likely that I will devise a hardware that is that system, eventually.

There are weaknesses inherent in that system as there are in any set. Some idiot savants are completely incapable of comprehending social motive, and I assume it has to do with assuming the structure of the people to be modeled as being similar. This is problematic in SO many ways that I can't enumerate. It is possible though somewhat cumbersome and a little disturbing to do. If you do not study psychology and stick to engineering, it is unlikely that you will develop the tools to deal with that difference.

So, what I understand is that the science and math as represented is perhaps only the shadow of what Gilbert Strang understands, delivered in such a way that it can be applied. And that is just the shadow of what is beyond. It takes one to know one and that is all I am saying. It sounds like self adoration or hero worship, but I can assure you, there is no self esteem, worship, or even any delusion that what serves as the vehicle is remotely kin to a true singularity in perpetuity.
This time I know what I am looking for and I know the shape of the rock I want out in the intellectual desert, so hopefully I will find it this time and be able to incorporate it as a CISC MIMD internally as well as in some external hardware.
So I do understand that the vector cross product of genius and sociopath is not a Normal, in fact it is abnormal psychology and always ends poorly and that is basically why giving doomsday bombs to anybody who would actually  see a use for them is contraindicated.
It turns out poorly for those involved as well as everyone and every thing else.
It is one thing when it happens in the course of events, but quite another when done purposefully or as a principle or simply for failure of the key agent to recognize the consequent.
I could probably cite a vast number of analogous vectors to describe the plane of dissonance, but even if I did , few would recognize it, and ,those who would, can already get there on their own.
If you fabricate a scale where A is better and B is worse then you might assign "goodness" to specific organisms, but I find this has no root foundation and is certainly circular reasoning.  I don't find it any more reasonable than creating a graph and using gnuplot

set xr[-pi/2:pi/2];set zeroaxis;
set xlabel "Good";set ylabel "Evil";
set label 3 "Good=Evil" at 0,0 point pointtype 4;
set label 2 " 1.2" at 1,0.84 point pointtype 4;
plot sin(x),x
I am not sure how I would characterize negative good.

Another stupid thought, on some Markov chains or digraphs, it is possible to say that you can't get there from "here", being a certain end node with only efferent or afferent process, depending on ones perspective.

there
here
there->here
}