nightmath worry the ' as in 0' -> 1 so that ' implies scratching the surface and giving it a name, might one say that 1 _always_ implies 2 for example, that nothing _always_ implies one? that the surface sways, roils, produces through its very (non)- existence: existence, "there is" or in other words, never mind the zeros. lower down the operations things if i remember tend to level out, repeat an uncomfortable bedrock of notices as if there were legalese involved. perhaps such basic operations are all there is and everything from particles to universes proceed accordingly from the non-existence absent ontology of mathematics. http://www.alansondheim.org/daymath.jpg http://www.alansondheim.org/plusone.jpg http://www.alansondheim.org/nightmath.jpg _' but what has to be, doesn't what is, has no necessity, what isn't is, has potential. what has potential, hasn't occurrence. what has to be, hasn't. what we read is what we write, nature neither writes nor reads. nor is it blind nor blind sentience. or what might be a blind sentence. sentience is consciousness surely. laminar mind wraps around laminar mind. it is witness. i must acknowledge that. what is witness is witness'. what is neither this nor that is productive. neti neti, tine v tine, is productive. it doesn't have to be, it is. _' _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
