Applause for well-describing an area all not that easily captured.

There are two things going on at the same time:

* Math is intrinsically linked to but never the actual essence itself; it is an abstraction of reality (and not: abstract objects itself).

* Math contains multiple realities. Some parts of math are like 2D paintings, others like 3D reality. Spatial math is/should be 4D.

A very important aspect of math is its approach to number zero. Without understanding all functions associated with number zero, math can never be understood. Even today there are two mathematical groups (Group Theorists and Set Theorists) that do not think the same of number zero. And yet neither sees all functions associated with zero.

---

The third option is most easily explained when declaring something behind a curtain as male or female, and then realizing that the object behind the curtain is a rock. This should show us that the human mind desires unification, and yet it abhors that number zero that spoils ultimate unification. Unification is like matter in the universe: it does not exist at the largest levels, but frustratingly it exists at all other levels. The human mind is still trying to conquer the material universe as a single entity and will therefore fail to capture it. Diversity is the ground rule; unification is always around but always the second ground rule.

https://medium.com/cantors-paradise/discovering-zero-among-the-prime-numbers-65a47cbf79ec

The third option simply means that the two-way manner of thinking was incorrect in the first place. Einstein and Bohr should have both seen how Gödel beat them to the punch line of what is truly true: incompleteness.

Ancient tribes (and I believe all across the globe) only needed three numbers: 1, 2, and 3. I am mentioning it, so we can recognize that the decimal system as we know it is just one of the mathematical constructs we can play with.

1 was not the same as our 1 for these tribes because in their minds there isn't anything that can be declared with our pure 1. Modern physics acknowledges this: there is no single material unit that can be seen as the 1 of matter. Matter has diverse building blocks. Obviously, the universe cannot be declared as 1 either.

Instead of rejecting some functionalities of zero, mathematicians should reject 1 as real, just a suggestion that I hope gives you pleasure to read, perhaps a laugh, perhaps a view to the truth.

With 2, the tribes recognized the duality in which we exist, and a good word from physics would then be symmetry.

With 3 they did not mean 3, but pointing out a group, or the whole, the plural reality we find ourselves in.

I have never seen anything that is of just three equal parts of any kind. Have you?

I am convinced the tribes understood zero pretty darn well, though they did not need to give it a number.

No truth exists unless its context is declared. No matter exists in the universe that is linked to all matter.

Thank you for your article. Fun.