And let us make absolutely clear to note that we are not avoiding math and numbers because we do not understand them quite the opposite we see clearly now the limits and because math is a subset of information we need something to describe we need something outside that system to describe it I.e godels incompleteness theorem math alone will be incomplete to describe a super set of information. And in addition to sequence some idea of more or less seems relevant here because that directionality does seem universal we have different expectations if the answer is more or greater than if it is less or fewer again with the limit being that zero itself only comes into play some of the time I’m not going to say it doesn’t cuz clearly if I have zero deer and you have one deer zero zero is relevant there it’s not it is no but in a different way that I don’t know that I fully grasp myself to be honest. Perhaps the properties of informational attributes IE dimensions can focus on this idea of saying this as a kind of comparison but then to what we should be able to describe information more than just relatively we should be able to say something about an individual particle regardless of its others except that’s probably not how it works we would have a singularity if we if we did have a singularity there’s nothing to compare it to so maybe that’s a key insight here Twain may have said comparison to the death of Joy but it may also be what drives the universe we cannot have information with an n of one, which is perhaps a key fob big bang that we’re assuming that everything started from one thing, which also suggest that idea of singularity may be erroneous. And that may be where the sequence that we call time comes in because we don’t have to compare something to its neighbor I can compare myself to previous versions of myself right that’s an important one. So by assuming the Big Bang started from nothing then we have nothing to compare it to and so maybe this is actually a fundamental mystery of our universe maybe the Big Bang is correct that it simply did not exist and so falls outside of our current paradigms and have we just have to acknowledge that and move on but something about that seems illogical especially considering that it’s hung up on this idea of physical supremacy and only existing in a physical universe. A baby does not exist before it’s first sell is created but that’s a definitional issue it existed through its parents and their sperm and egg, it came from something greater than itself. indeed perhaps illustrating the fallacy of reductivist all or nothing thinking happens all the time systems are created in their entirety from different systems although that system itself did not exist. The system of the system that created the system very much exist so that cyclicality should be acknowledged here and very much speaks to a kind of eternity so it’s amazing that the Indians ever came up with zero in the first place perhaps the illustrate something much more profound than just nothing. everything can be useful in some way just depends on whether we The observers know how to take advantage of that and extract as much information as possible even considering physical reality and physical things they also impose a cost I have to lug s*** around if I have more stuff