Image not available

596x720

MV5BMTk3NTY4NzgyO....jpg

๐Ÿงต Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16166864

1 x 1 = 2

Anonymous No. 16166924

>>16166864
What if he's right tho

Image not available

250x236

sweatin.jpg

Anonymous No. 16166925

>>16166924

Image not available

1x1

1689306556659072.pdf

Anonymous No. 16166933

Cult of Passion No. 16166942

>>16166925
Thats how and why people like me or Norman Wildberger would spend "doctorate" time doing "Arith-Metic" research.

Im looking for a ruleset that aligns best with Physics, not Accounting.

Cult of Passion No. 16166943

>>16166933
>Physics, not Accounting
Theory, not Applied, Maths.

Exactly what Norman, myself and this paper and stating.

Image not available

400x311

1706042156148600.jpg

Anonymous No. 16166963

>>16166933
>1 = a
>1 = b
>1 = c

Image not available

558x550

images (10) (11).jpg

Cult of Passion No. 16167006

>>16166942
>Physics, not Accounting
One linearly scales, the other fractals.

Know the fractalling point, and the base system the first emerges from it, one can better understand the moment of Creation itself.

Counting grains of sand at the beginning of time.