> I remember your numbers from some time ago when I was doing H-numbers.
> They attracted some attention, specially after Cliff Pickover mentioned
> it in his Reality Carnival blog. But it eventuated to nothing, apart
> from entertaining people and also leading me to Mirror Set. The number
> axioms that bind natural, integer, real and complex numbers are very
> powerful. They form the basis of mathematics and science. When new
> numbers are theorised, they have to be checked against this powerful
> background. Not an easy task. There is not enough formal analysis in
> your work that relates your work to the axioms. Mathematical logic is
> absolutely essential if you want to get anywhere in fundamental
> research. My H-numbers suffered due to the same reasons. I find that,
> you gotta compare your work to many sciences. If they are good, they
> should stand the test.
>
> Now wiser, I switched to natural numbers. I think they are at the base
> of everything. Specially the {0,1,infinity} triplet. I intend to extent
> my Mirror Set to integer, real and complex numbers in due course. At
> the moment I am slumbering around multi-factorials (E.Barnes type). I
> think nature first makes 1, then using it as a mediator, it makes 0 and
> infinity as boundary. 0 is important, but infinity is equally
> important, since they form an inseperable duality. Mathematics is the
> most difficult topic of all. It needs formalism as much as intuition...
> and a lot of work patience.
>
> Timothy Golden BandTechnology.com wrote:
>

>> I've looked at your ATON a bit.
>> I do have some mathematics that supports a zero-dimensional entity
>> which is awfully like nothing but it is not yet accepted.
>> How does ATON relate to continuum?
>> The polysign construction takes magnitude as fundamental and marries it
>> with the natural number as another fundamental:
>> http://BandTechnology.com/PolySigned
>> I do not adhere to the usual construction of the reals any more.
>> It strikes me as artificial and if it were reality then the continuum
>> would be composed from the natural numbers, but this is hardly where
>> physics has taken us.

>>>From these basics the 'real' number has been taken as fundamental

>> rather than magnitude. This may be a mistake which sources much
>> confusion allowing modern physics' partial insanity.

>

>> When composing a basis something must be granted. If we do not grant
>> enough then the consequences of the basis will diminish. This then
>> requires more construction on top to get more consequences. If such a
>> structure can be collapsed to a basis that grants slightly more and
>> gains features consistent with reality without any superstructure then
>> I think that the expanded basis deserves some attention, especially
>> when the old basis never even got the consequences of reality.

>

>> So you can see how I am curious about ATON's ability to derive a
>> continuum model. Would you take the route of the reals? The context of
>> continuous juxtaposed with discrete is present here.

>

>> -Tim

>

>> Akira Bergman wrote:

>>> Yes it is a bit niched but changing fast also. I opened a blog on
>>> nothingness theory not long ago when there were only few places. Now
>>> there are many. It is moving in both directions I think. From niche to
>>> mainstream and vice/versa. Blogs have penetrated the newspapers for
>>> example. A very positive development. I love the new video bases like
>>> YouTube. Infinite potential.

>

>>> I don't really go out of my way to "spread the word". The word is
>>> there, accessible to anyone anytime. Sometimes I get a bit impatient
>>> and move around to see what can be read and said in various places. I
>>> think quality is more important than quantity. In a place like the
>>> Internet, quality would eventually shine through, hopefully fast
>>> enough. Not that I am stuck on that too much either. As long as I enjoy
>>> my day and feel positive about it, that is what counts for me,
>>> regardless of how small it is. In line with my nothingness theory in a
>>> way. If that is not good enough for the reality, too bad. If it doesn't
>>> deserve saving, it should suffer and learn. Humans for example deserve
>>> a lot of spanking at the moment.

>

>>> Timothy Golden BandTechnology.com wrote:

>

>>>> The internet community is highly niched isn't it? I wonder what sort of
>>>> consequence that will have. Have the organic bits speciated? I like all
>>>> of what you have said in your post. We're preaching to the choir.
>>>> Perhaps we should be lurking in groups conflicting with these views in
>>>> order to exercise them. I tend to stay within physics, math, and
>>>> philosophy, only occasionally catching a thread cross-posted to
>>>> politics.

>

>>>> -Tim