SO WE KNOW THAT THERE CAN BE COUNTS THAT
ARE GREATER THAN OTHER COUNTS. MY FAVORITE
EXAMPLE IS WHERE A PLANE OF POINTS HAS
MORE POINTS THAN A LINE. NOW OF COURSE OUR
PARADIGM DOES NOT ACCEPT SUCH A POSITIVE
ESCALATION. IF EVERY DIMENSION INCREASES
IN POINTS? WHY WOULD THE NUMBER OF
DIMENSIONS ITSELF NOT BE UNCOUNTABLE. AND
IF THAT WERE TRUE HOW COULD S FINITE
QUALITY OF DIMENSIONING HAVE RELEVANCE
FOUNDATIONALLY?? CONTINUING... COUNTS OR
FULNESS BEING GREATER THAN OTHER COUNTS OR
FULNESSES SHOULD RAMIFY, ALL THINGS BEING
EQUAL, SOME EMPTINESS BEING MORE EMPTY
THAN ANOTHER'S EMPTINESSES! TAKING THE
SENSE OF UN-FINITENESS SERIOUSLY FROM
ABOVE THE BEGINNING OF EMPTINESS IS
ABSOLUTE OVER EMPTINESS. . THE NOTION OF
TWO ITEMS BEING ABSTRACTLY ABSENT FOR
EXAMPLE IS PERHAPS AN IMPEDIMENT TO TOE
THINKING. MOST ABSTRACTLY THE ONLY
AXIOMATIC EMPTINESS OR NOTHING OR ZERO IN
MATHEMATICS IS ALL OF MATHS ITSELF. . SO
PROCEEDING DOWN DOWN DOWN FROM THERE
PROVIDES THIS ▣0=0-0▣. WERE EVERY
ALGEBRAIC FUNCTION -UTTERLY DISMISSING THE
PREMISE OF THE RIEMANN PARADOX- TO BE
THEN SOME THIS ▣ 0+F(X)=0-0+G(Y)▣ THEN
SOLVING FOR THE ZERO-LIKE TERM WOULD BE A
META-CONSTANT THAT COULD BE THOUGHT
OF AS 'NOT-MATH'. LET'S TRY TO HEAR. WHAT IS NOT-MATH
AS A CONSTANT. CAN IT BE USEFUL. METAPHORICALLY
ALL COMPUTER PROGRAMS OUGHT TO BE SUSCEPTIBLE
TO CRITICAL ERRORS. IF NOTHING ELSE MERELY
LEAVING UNATTENDED WILL RESULT IN AN ERROR
OVER TIME FOR SOME INEVITABLE CAUSE. MORE SYNTHESIZING TO
BE SHELVED NOT DELVED; ONE MATHEMATICIAN JOKES: HOW DO WE DISCERN THE
DEFINITIONAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN ZERO AND MINUS
ZERO. THE OTHER REPLIES: MINUS ZERO TELLS US ZERO
SHOULD NOT EXIST, EXCEPT THAT IS A PARADOX. THE FIRST:
AH SO THESE MUST BE REVERSED FOR ZERO TO EXIST
AT ALL. SECOND: EXCEPT AN ENDLESS STRING OF ONES IS
THAT REVERSAL. FIRST: SO THAT MUST BE ELIMINATED!!!
SECOND: TO DO MATH IS TO NEGATE MEANINGLESSNESS; NOW MATHS IS BY DEFINITION UN-TEMPORAL;
HOWEVER HAVING A CRITICAL FAILURE BE THE
BASIS FOR A TOE AND THAT FAILURE IN TURN
BE QUANTIFIED AS A CONSTANTS SEEMS LIKE A
GOOD START. SO THEN WE ANALOGIZE BETWEEN A
N ETERNAL TEMPORAL FAILURE IN A COMPUTING
MACHINE AND A INFINITE SPATIAL FAILURE IN
A MATH PARADIGM. THAT IS THERE IS NO WAY
TO REPRESENT INFINITE EMPTINESS AS BY OUR
INITIAL AXIOM. HOWEVER WE CAN REPRESENT
ITS OPPOSITE WHICH IS AN ABSOLUTE FULNESS
THAT IS JUST AS MUCH IN ERROR
CONCEPTUALLY SPEAKING. ABSOLUTE FULNESS,
AS IT WERE, WOULD BE A ENDLESS STRING OF
ONES. WE DO NOT NEED TO DEBATE IF THIS IS
IN TWO OR AN INFINITE QUANTITY OF
DIMENSIONS BECAUSE OUR GOAL IS TO ABROGAT
E THAT CONCERN. WE ARE CUTTING THE HEAD OF
THE SNAKE OFF FROM THE GET GO. IF OUR
STRING WERE DIAGONALIZED IT WOULD BE
UNCOUNTABLE IN ITS SUBSEQUENCES. YET THERE
IS NO REASON TO TO PRESUME A ONE
DIMENSIONAL ENDLESS STRING OF ONE'S WOULD
ALSO NOT HAVE THIS PROPERTY. WHAT ABOUT A
TWO DIMENSIONAL DIAGONALIZING OF A MINUS
ONE'S STRING. THIS WOULD IMPLY MINUS ZERO
AND IF WE TAKE THAT AS THE STAND IN FOR
THE POSITIVE ENDLESS ONE'S STRING? THEN
ALL IS WELL. MINUS ZERO IS ALREADY
USELESSLY UNNECESSARILLY LISTABLE. SO WHY
NOT INSTANTIATE IT DEFINITIONAL WITH BEAST. THE THE THE THE THAT'S ALL FOLKS,
EVERYONE KNOWS I'M BORED S-LESS
Caption this Meme