RECONCILIATION: Integers. My prior assumptions: Physical integers are false because scaling/zooming in changes amounts. (the “what” changes as the numbers grow depending how you are counting and as each set of objects becomes a container for more objects until you reach a realm of uncountable things). My 2020 reconciliation: Using physical integers for representation is okay *because* each object is comprised of other objects.

RECONCILIATION: Integers.
 
My prior assumptions: Physical integers are useful but false because scaling/zooming in changes amounts. (the “what” changes as the numbers grow depending how you are counting and as each set of objects becomes a container for more objects until you reach a realm of uncountable things).
 
My 2020 reconciliation: Using physical integers for representation is okay *because* each object is comprised of other objects.
 
This means I can REFRAME an integer into a “thing”, which in old Norse/German/English means “assembly”. The integer is representation of a collection of countable-but-too-large-assemblies of other things and can be treated as if it is a ratio of hidden quantities.
 
So I never left my old assumption of deconstruction but I am now willing to fold it back up again into an integer and work with it in this understanding.
\—

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


− three = 6

Leave a Reply