So i was going to leave a comment and throw Steve some support. I really don’t understand the hooplah about lateral inversion. it’s just like stage right and stage left, it’s only relative to where you’re standing. But i guess that is the point of a lecture about what we consider reality. So i went to go read about what Elizabeth posted and your response about top to bottom inversion. I still felt the same, like what’s the big deal? That’s just how reflections work, like steve said – objects on the right are still on the right and same with the left and so on… However, those only apply to situations when the mirror is on a level plane. Elizabth’s students thought to lay the mirror down, what if the mirror was at a 45 degree angle or- what about a funhouse mirror? When it can be on many planes and bend at lots of different angles? is there a certain type of inversion for that? or is that just classified as a combniation of many left-right up-down inversions?

I still feel like Steve, no mystery here. but im willing to admit im probably missing something. Are we just over explaining common sense or is there really a deeper universal meaning to all of this?

If you look at yourself you will see an image of yourself that is facing the opposite direction you are. Your feet will still be creating and image on the bottom of the mirror. Your head will still make an image on the top of the mirror.

The reason for left – right inversion and no top bottom inversion is the same reason you don’t fall upside down every time you turn around. Your feet stay on the ground, but your hands on different sides of your body.