June 1, 2019.
P1
In terms of completeness, a Riemann structure must be completely incomplete to qualify as mathematics, or the formal asymmetry is expressible mathematically. ---The Equations
Q1: In mathematics, stacking is completeness.
Q2: Complete stacking is 2-d.
Q3: We can surmise complete 2-d is 1-d, etc.
Q4: 1-d and 2-d, and completeness suggest fundamentality for mathematics, which is logic.
Q5: 1-d and 2-d we will take to be mathematics or something more fundamental.
Q6: We will say nothing is more fundamental than the 0-d.
Q7: All dimensions will be mathematics or something more fundamental.
Q8: The representation, taken as analogous to representation, is the reality, which is fundamental.
Q9: The representation is mathematical or more fundamental.
Q10: If it is not mathematical or else complete it cannot be fundamentally complete without mathematics.
Q11: What is truly fundamental is fundamentally complete.
Q12: One form of completeness derives from mathematics.
Q13: What is truly complete is a combination of all that is complete.
Q14: Logic, being more fundamental than mathematics is dimensional, which is to say, fundamental, as nothing is more fundamental for dimensions than the 0-d, and mathematics implicates that what is fundamental for mathematics at least includes dimensions, so nothing will be more fundamental for dimensions than something involving mathematics which is fundamental. Therefore logic is fundamental which is to say dimensional.
CONCLUSION: Then we will search for s logic which is undeniable fundamental, which is to say, exponentially efficient like a second version of zero. Finding such a system will serve the purpose of illustrating something fundamental about reality, specifically coherence.
Scientific completeness may be a different, related, although perhaps doomed or take-it-with-salt kind of endeavor. Sometimes lab coats look like poisoned cool-aid.
…
