Fundamental Universe Solved

Fundamental Universe Solved
Final post, unless someone cares to comment. I won’t hold my breath.
Cantor was wrong. Painfully wrong. Miserably wrong. Woefully misguided.
1 / 0 = ∞
Infinity = Constant of Change
Finite = Absence of Change
Infinity is analog
Finite is binary
The universe is analogous to a simple single pole light switch. It represents the division or physical separation of 1 and 0. It requires motion between those two points to be in either position, which necessarily causes change that results in the perception of time.
On/Off = Analog
1/0 = Analog
Motion = Analog
Time is a derivative motion.
Motion is a derivative of motionless space.
Space must always exist, but motionless space necessarily lies outside the observable universe.
This is falsifiable. Show me somewhere in the universe absent motion, or time, or space. Anywhere.
The universe is most likely a finite series of analog nested waves, laid out like this;
1 > 1… > ∞ > 0… > 0
Infinity cannot be labeled with numeric values because it is not a binary state.
Think about it logically.
When 1 is divided by 0, the result of that answer would wind up being a smooth unbroken result. 1/1 for example, results in definitive singular finite object with a value of 1.
1/0 = Motion
Motion is analog, not discreet. It is a smooth unbroken process.
Motion is time, which is also analog.
Space, motion, and time causes energy, which can be quantified between 1 and 0.
The absence of motion yields a potential to perform work, which we define as potential energy.
1 is potential energy.
0 is the absence of existence, which cannot occur. The laws of physics even tells us that, as energy cannot be created nor destroyed, only transformed.
There is no such thing as an infinite quantity. Infinity cannot be quantified, because it is an analog state. It is physically impossible mathematically. Cantor actually proved it, because he showed none of the cardinalities can be infinite. That resulted in Cantor’s paradox, which isn’t a paradox at all. Set Theory is perfectly valid in the digital realm, but Infinite Set Theory is an ill conceived, fallacious, and erroneous concept. The digital can be used to probe or understand the analog, but neither can physically be the other. They are two fundamentally different concepts. Counting and quantities do not apply to analogs.
We place way too much emphasis on numbers. We forget that numbers are an invention of mankind. It’s a simple redundant logical labeling system designed to quantify objects for resale or commerce. That was the intent of numbering and math. 10 fingers wasn’t enough to carry an inventory or sort cash. We expanded on that simple concept with a universal numbering system, for the sole purpose of fair trade. We developed a teachable numeric an mathematical system so we could assess monetary value to objects in relation to other objects.
Mathematics and numbers were not design for science. They were retrofitted.
We are treating the universe like an accounting problem.
Sorry, there were no replies found.