Read an interesting quote about how imaginary numbers began to be "perceived" by human beings... in other words, how imaginary numbers became something a little more than imaginary. "How do we 'create' a number that is the square root of -1? Simple. Just get enough mathematicians together in one room and get them to all agree that from then on, the letter "i" represents the square root of -1. That's all it takes. That's all it took. A convention of mathematicians creates the convention of "i", and "i" is subsequently recognized as being the square root of -1." - LariAnn Garner's book, "Fractalic Awakening: A Seeker's Guide" Too bad mathematical concepts like i can strangle and limit our perception of the world still as we struggle on our mission to demystify reality by making things more complex for ourselves. (by forcing things into a box defined by this arbitrary parameter i used to define a theoretical concept) Way to go divisive interest groups and other additive enterprises! If anyone needs me, I'll be deconstructing "reality"... Either that or I'll envision you tripping out about how the dollar really just ain't shit. It's based on "zero", another of these imaginary numbers. Two is imaginary as well, for that matter... And what is one but the division of all over all? [Ramble ramble ramble... er... gamble]
Not sure if this is what you were getting at, but in my opinion 'math' is really just the structure of reality itself given a name. The downfall is that math is very strict, 1+1 must ALWAYS equal 2. What if 1+1 could equal 3. Or 1+1 could equal infinity. 1 could be infinity. 0 is infinity.
Zero is not truly infinity. It's the one thing that is supposed to not be infinite, and yet by being a concept, it is definable within infinity. Zero's inaccurate, my friend, and thus, so is our lens for viewing OBJECTIVE reality. We were all taught math from a young age so we "naturally" think that way. I'd be more inclined to say it's part of the nurturing process.
Those numbers are symbolic concepts. What you're basically saying is validating my point: yeah, if you insist on something long enough, you'll accept it as true. If we accepted that repetition means infinity, like skeptics of religion argue that scientists accept that repetition means proof, we'd be setting our own subjective (a.k.a. perceptually-imposed) limitations on our understanding of reality. Perhaps we should understand how we perceive first before we argue that our perception is truly accurate and Universal.
After Thought.....I See where Ur Coming From......Like saying the color green is green...but 2 a color blind person green may look like yellow..but is he wrong?.... I think 2 much when high...
Sometimes high thought is simplifying thought... often this is mistaken for (I should say, regarded as) having dumb thoughts. I think it just reminds us of the human connection we have, and yes, you got my gist. Numbers are just as subjective as colors. As some of you may recall from a previous thread, Zylark mentioned tribes in the Amazon region that can't count, literally. They've been taught repeatedly simple counting, but it is impossible for the adults to learn. They think of reality as "one", and not as divided objects. Other tribes don't have the words for "left" and "right", but rather base directional speak on the sun or stars.
And here's a fractal music video: http://video.aol.com/video-detail/mandelbrot-chaos-zoom-fractal-music-lsd/3531608257 It might remind you of acid.
Numbers are not things, words are not thoughts, and my pointing finger is not the moon. Don't mistake it to be.
Numerology should also be noted to the arguement. I think that maths is used to define and quantify space and matter. For the arguement 0 or 1 being infinity, infinity can only exist if we define it by measuiring it. The moment we mark it as 0 or a 1 we are defining a beginning or an end to something that has neither beginning or end.