Effective Date: July 6, 2026 @ 17:47pm UTC+2

quasi natura, nomen sibi dedit: Earth; sui tou-nomini: Milky Way, galaxy

2026-07-06T17:47:XX.XXX+02:00

Tت。

Silence!—Rhythm and Noise: Existence

[An Excerpt]

Could this be Music?

———————

NOTICE:

[Version awaiting proof-read in order to build the punctuation/grammar chart]:

To certain occurrences—language has occasionally been temporarily broken down; e.g.: ‘“role at the”’, instead of ‘“role in the”’; of pending decisions like deciding on fixed marks for citations vs quotations as separate categorical rule-spaces; the em-dash as a glottal stop in quotations but not within citations; “all things begin or could have begun as a proper-noun “mentality”; Ad Astra Vel À Devenir—because I switched languages mid-sentence”.

——————————————————

To linguistic conjunctions of connectivity—Latin was the last of our languages to fulfil its “role at the” lexical differences between: inclusive or, and the exclusive or. Yet, it is no secret that language courses settle for communication and leave-out the details. Where, one may notice that “and”/“or” (of the forward slash: e.g. “where is/are my equal opportunit•y•ies and freedom•s”; like and/or—precept for two-stages, as one) is well-received as exclusive-connective conjunctions almost only; either-or is thus and therefore of no uniqueness and is left to none-else but, and only, to emphasis!

Since I last got electricity back in my house, offering more than just the proliferation of knowledge for and from circuitry: it is hard to believe that we have failed to agree upon a complete Logical English, but instead simplified Latin and mixed-in-key Greek, either-from-to and across for n-fold-to-speak.

For the purpose of the information: I seek to explore and share: spelling, is in—British English & grammar is intended to articulate its pivotal placements in violation of any defined culture or traditional academic name I’ve seen to either Spanish, German, French, or English (as well as hints from other origins; without trying to break English) in exchange for greatest permutability (with perhaps the occasionally typing error in ‘American English’; I will provide a link to a comprehensive explanation soon too for the differences that originate over greek and latin; maybe as well, as well as, a learning disabilities document to help individuals turn to any-a-competent for a shared exploration):

“I advise and encourage both myself and my readers to find patience in and to possible; of difficulties that may arise: herein and throughout life.”

——————————————————

——————————————————

NOTICE:

Please note that, in order to be ready for what you are going to read, it is not for or to persons who are either pending or unwilling of self-completing vocabulary or ideas, thoughts, and concepts on their own. There is a heavy inclination on pursuing uncharted territory. Furthermore, these topics are actually extremely advanced and so multidisciplinary that neither most of our specialisations nor living situations (or: obligations or choices) have either offered us the time or the opportunity to prepare (or to propose) the nuance of subjects, disciplines, and thoughts that we will converge over or sustain; to the following.

We’re human (for the most part…) therefore it becomes inevitable to the frontier of a certain higher-form that we completely resolve certain extremes of our inevitable but courageous and brave journey through development, evolution, survival, and to sustaining a worthy cycle.

Some of us occur naturally to what befalls antagonisable-shock, antagonisable-perversions, or antagonisable-fear (as opposed to the expression of sufficient irreproachability): for which society has cleverly and methodically provided strict rules, much to the dismay of misunderstanding or “over-siding” which results in lasting frictions or untimely insults, so, harm. As we may not always be noticeably alone and we may not always require our primitive form, it is important to accept the paradigm which befalls all things, not just humans but all Ids or “Id-oids” (intelligences; e.g. humanoid), to the idea of strategically and morally desensitising oneself from antagonisable-impulses. Love and be loved, and somewhere we may actually praise and worship correctly, but all of it remains a wort where the antagonisable misunderstood-and-improbable (or unavailable) exists and requiring uncertainties remain: thus, that we anticipate and know to navigate appropriately away from certain informations or materials, unless we can socially assume full responsibility of and on our own; entrain and train to remain to said promises, not only given by these premises.

This is not the place to begin…

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED

——————————————————

———————

pp. Cyber Jazz (א — aleph)

[Over: Logic & its Calculus; First-order Logic]

If existence is true, now—finish; make your language speak math and math speak existence: A ‘Wiki’ Run-up

“Grand Conjecture”—!

“Higher-order logic admits quantification over sets that are nested arbitrarily deeply.”—that is P(x(g(n(z(…)…); wherein second-order logic looks like P(x), a predicate and a subject, where “P” is the predicate and “x” is the subject (like in reference to the song verse “subject of the predicate”; Eminem).

pp. Preparation (ב — Bet)

Discerning Energy throughout Time, from Dimension “as a solid”: “Time Crystal”, Time as a Solid

Alfred; der Hinweis Fa (der Fa; “Alfred; the note Fa”, f-lowercase-a)

A “Relative false” over true, over true and false—implies 3-dimensions (False over True and False), from an implied 4th; without time as a dimension.

A “True” over true and false—implies 4-dimensions; without time.

To the no-dimension, there is no possibility to imply a slot for a reciprocal.

To the one dimension, there is no possibility to imply a slot for a reciprocal.

To the two dimensions, there is one possibility to imply a slot for a reciprocal.

To the three dimensions, there are two possibilities to imply a slot for a reciprocal: therefore we have Boolean logic for 2, not 3; 2^n.

To the four dimensions, there are three possibilities to imply a slot for a reciprocal: therefore we have Boolean logic for 3; 3^n.

The Golden Ratio: As the sequence progresses, the ratio of a number to the previous one approaches the golden ratio (phi = 1.618); requiring the previous to manifest itself, as if to a story about extrusions, and the in-betweens are various Shepard tones; coordinating becomes possible to a 4th dimension, but it does not exist without the 5th: 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13…

—I, Bassi D., will probably be “academically” ignored for this (nor will it necessarily be seen), but there is something (completeness) between minus-infinity and infinity to oppose 0—as it is to the center between minus-one and one—and that is the empty set (∅ or {}): the advent instantiation of dimension—a list of infinite potential, from as nothing or nothing to one or all. You can argue that Cauchy (or all of us) already imply this, which leaves our limit notation’s limits at the expression of the definer, with ±infinity. Therefore, when is it actually necessary? To which, to existence, one could infer that this situates itself before a negative can be implied, even if we might infer with “negative time”. Nevertheless, the full number-line is therefore a full ring:

…-inf,∅,inf,…; …, 1, -ε_n_-1, 0, ε_n_0, 1, …

Furthermore, this means that it too (∅ or {}) could be placed before a truth-table to indicate the neutral logical succession, or a null hypothesis (also useful as a habit ward; intent of directional change), of any given 2^n first-order truth set, in table format, for which you’d naturally have merged this with or over the first subject or predicate, as this will always different from net “Truth” or “False” as a tautology.

(06.02.2026)

As seen to the power-set of a set, which mysteriously holds the property of its own sizing or item, and the set itself; the empty-set within the newly stated, greater, set.

‘the power set (or powerset) of a set S is the set of all subsets of S, including the empty set and S itself.’

—Additionally we could have used the particle - “•” - but the empty-set is much more thorough and clear over dimensionality.

The singularity, singleton, instanton, unit or the integer one, truly embodies more than its standalone. Seldom taught, if-ever, as I’d never been told before: every truth derived, in item, belongs beside a particle—which and of whom, to the location of each unit, it could be interpreted as:

{unit/step or rate}*({unit/size}/{unit/domain/map}); to each divisor ({unit/domain/map})—again: {unit/step or rate}*({unit/size}/{unit/domain/map})—“Conjuring!”

———————

Pop Quiz

In an attempt to force the following assertion to be true: How might 1+1+1=1?

Math speaks to assert what life has shown to preclude, that in R^3 (real-numbers, “Reals, dim-3”; expressing or expressed from the 3rd dimensional orthogonality/proportional-sizes at full independence - or free, “doté, d’une famille libre” in French - in due from its “right-angles” or inter-respective, full 90-degree independence as an exerted force or definite affecting effector), as we maintain our units of measure—if and only-if, we can understand that the plus-sign symbol implies over to an “or” (“or”—A u B: also a division; while “and” is to a multiplication, quantified as: A n B) and that it too - the plus-sign symbol - could be expressed with a comma, until perhaps-and-either none-other than a “pause” or changes to grammar and punctuation, but nevertheless-then:

1,1,1 = 1 <=> 1+1+1 = 1; implied, one-x one-y one-z is equal to one, if and only if, one-plus-one-plus-one is equal to one.

Whether it be—either-of meters (m) or feet (ft); either meters-squared (m^2) or feet-squared (ft^2); either meters-cube (m^3) or feet-cubed (ft^3); lest - identical again - tautologically true for either n-meters-n ({n*(m^n)}) or simply feet-n (ft^n).

ALWAYS: ensure to maintain units and check to see - with constant regularity - those units match; that you are maintaining your units across, while performing and such transformation, to successfully develop or conclude your calculation without ye-old confusion of the result (again—!—which includes developing and concluding).

A “no-unit” is either something or the no-unit is: the unit, a unit.

———————

Therefore—is a Time Crystal ever more true to energy-over-time than, it, to a clock? Of which is the fourth-dimension; of which is Time?

To me, the seasons are more than the reason to excuse a communion of life or decay—of what one could fashion to enjoy from seeing the leaves fall, blossoms cherry; from decay into eternal life: when one can accurately sustain for the sake of forgotten purposes, meaning grows, and thus-from we could know to unveil our share, sustaining even a brightest everlasting cycle.

How can it be that concluding the Existential Advent Event Paradox with Existence Implied TRUE?

In philosophy and logic there is this Liar’s Paradox, whereby “If the liar is indeed lying, then the liar is telling the truth, which means the liar just lied.”; then there’s the law of the excluded middle, for which the law is symbolically expressed as “(p ∨ ~p)” which is none other than a paradox! This however seems trivial in most cases, until you realise that it could be resolved by invoking truth or falsehood over it.

“Either Socrates is mortal, or it is not the case that Socrates is mortal.”

“That is, the "middle" position, that Socrates is neither mortal nor not-mortal, is excluded by logic, and therefore either the first possibility (Socrates is mortal) or its negation (it is not the case that Socrates is mortal) must be true.” (wiki)

Therefore, if we were to resolve this paradox, it will interestingly suggest a possibility that itself would arguably require suggestion of nesting binary outcomes of finite plus one “higher-order”: If “(p ∨ ~p)” is true, therefore it must be that p is both sometimes true and sometimes false—that is, it is cyclic (or something else, in sort to pattern, resolving for the cases of the subject; or predicates’ focalised or inferred subject); else-if “(p ∨ ~p)” is not true (is false), therefore it must be that all of it is false—or a lie.

Nested errors—and from a lacking "variance", to: distances on discernibility: 

Leads to: 

"Rushing for the same spot and creating paradoxes, because the 'Joker' scenario was not just forced but detrimental." (how French… of me in my French, at English; brain-chemistry)—just because you, or I, can teach doesn’t mean that either of us are read. Somehow, know, and know to have known: to know if you are… That’s what deterrents are for... To hopefully tell yourself something enough times and to have perhaps had prior play at a simulation or model, too the implicitly attempting, model or idol. Meaningful distance and minimal repercussions are always nice; be immensely effective from the 3rd person, you’ll save us from a lot of despair.

Preparation, implied.

—From missing words to the expression of that which, if-only, we knew; to systems yet to be built or self-expressed.

——————————————————

A Personal Checklist for the Curious Mind

A smallest 21st Century Guide to: mitigating self-imposable fear from difficult questions and unanswered socially accepted proofs

Quickly—A Personal Checklist: For repeat revisits; your guidebook reminder, against common mistakes and potentially necessary social “habituals”: to proceed objectively; for that which differs from the exercise.

• Objective: BUILD THE CANVAS (nothing-else first; a reward-from-rigor: avoid establishing a story without your best scientific process; canvas—canvas + picture = painting—different than a painting)—be the architect, not the architecture.

• Objectivity (and not abusing one’s power because they can or merely want to.

• Refuse; TOM is implied at end to symbolise getting there, not to play at exploitation or to minimise discernibility. 

• Notice and discern: sequence and series, from polarity and binary; as you can invoke "variance" or significant groups of 3s to a contextual and definitions (to clean out our prior thinking habits).

• For cases-to-outcomes (not choices and slots): notice pascal’s triangle, as it maps out the total number of options or outcomes (on subjects or predicates you have actually invoked); and over each option are “truth-tables” or significance of Boolean algebra (truth versus falsehood).

• Nuance; a shortest series should realistically be visited at 7-“coincidences”, not 3, then “up the chain” (lucky seven; one-beyond-odd: over “polarity”, repetition, and re-checking for its “beginning”).

• Try implying "Variance"; to types of discernibility—"everything is a in-on and at, to from, a distance"

• Contextual Definition 1: 1st, 2nd, 3rd.

• Contextual Definition 2: Try at least 3 spaces of nearest "distances".

• Contextual Definition 3: {Actual Defn in math}: 1st deriv./sigma/delta, variance/2nd derivative/”epsilon?”-(I need more language and training to merge as of right now; or I forgot).

  ——————————————————

  Skip-to: toolkit—“pp. Amapiano: QUANTUM COMPUTING”

  Remember to always think: “My only behaviour is to a ‘swap’”: to begin (over: “something-nothing” or creation’s paradox, nothing)

  ——————————————————

  ———————

  
  

Of misfortune, or rapists, invaders, stalkers, misguided guardians, restless ghosts - or the likes of foreign, exogenous, and unknown modulations, or interruptions - which: steals from or causes one to find themselves unable to regain authority and function, or ability (and civility), over “theirs”—I’m sorry, I wish I knew. Crime is the worst and the lost or misguided may commit the same in search of themselves and their purpose too… it will be detrimental, it may or will be chaotic. Sorry, I too despise those who waste each-others’ time.

Capitalism just self-implicitly final. Without another’s and final, here on Earth, itself isn’t life. It is circumstance vis-à-vis… something; context. If it were that success in the struggle, through Capitalism - Socialism, Marxism, Imperialism, Mercantilism - strictly implied the sufficient from what the established reign or government could lack, then any-of-such would be final. Insofar that human biology will always be at its contextual scope of limits, perhaps see the silver lining as we hopefully continue to mutually understand what to do next: for ourselves, possibly others, and the eternal of youthful bursts of life to come. “Knowing the solution” and complementing the present while defeating uncertainty: it would be sufficient and final; todays mistakes maybe eternal to a learning for kids in a game of biomes… an opportunity: of each-and-every epoch and its woes… something-of learning and gaming dynamics, where we may hopefully call-in a distress-call to return or forfeit. Again this remains true only-if you can or could imply that sufficient and absolute champion has become, of us, to all possible literals over universal challenges; withstanding that to such a feat, we maintain our chiefs to honesty and absolute guiding peace over ourselves. That means a sufficient and absolute set of victors who may burden themselves away from what may be imposed in-over their person in auxiliary: as to pride, competition, or honour; over an unbiased absolute vector for existence, from which sacrifice derives itself final and certain.

—“Who are we, where are we; what do we have? What do we do?”: What is quickest and, of which, which is safest; from here?

You—do; and I?

Not everything is equal; not everything is personal. Family, individuality; and family. Reposition. Still relevant. Still the same. Family needs you to grow. Evolve, progress. Don't fail. Learn, rely, trust, hope, believe: protect. Finding honesty before we lack clarity is better than having never done so, but imposing a past without consistent or sufficient collective and net-to-total subtly for the present, is failing to adapt; failing to pre-ensure; failing to protect; failing to be sufficient; failing all Families, especially the weak. As the strong or lucky never got there. 

Words, risk; actions, risk. Therefore, braver solutions must be attempted; so that words connect and risks prevail. 

Minimise suffering; avoid poor return: vengeance or revenge. Know first—of who and what is to everyone's enemy; know more, not necessarily most—and ensure you can accept misfortune, to mitigate confusion, then find your place against struggle.

pp. Tropical House (ג — Gimel)

I think I Ate Too Much at Once…

             There’s always that funny thing about three—to numbers: where, one could imply All; two isn’t protocol, unlike three, and one just isn’t same-same.

Pride-over-piety is as brittle as the scales of time, for which this present day has yet to uncover. Not to guilt or to inspire action, but rather, thought; not to inspire fear, pain, anxiety or anguish. Pressure can offer opportunity and remind us that we can be more. No, we are not at peace—what the hell is unbiased?

Free will: intersections and their evens-&-odds versus prime degrees of freedom; victory or defeat: direction, forward!

Theatre of Mind: O-TOM-AI, AI-TOM-O—TOM; "Fighting for the Universe"

Advancing a protocol, a basis discerning-key to protocol, a universal code of conduct, and a code of affairs.

Protocols fail, and to a certain imperative, the likes of this one supersedes all others. For cause, subject: Intergalactic Health & Safety, a Theatre of Mind (TOM; an encounter) scenario: if any such possible linear and constant protocol check fails, there dawns and requiring becomes penultimate to a most extreme obligation for there to be enough room for a competent rational rationale of inhabitants or restraint or constraints over designate, person or persons: to be subjected to notice-able coincidences, prior to immediate or collateral damages; in order to beacon a signal for universal, not local, distress; to discern and situate, situation and circumstance, of, or region of concern: O-TOM-AI or Oracle Theatre Of Mind AI.

Planetary Extinction Threats (or Events) and Natural Disasters are of the same cardinal order; of Natural or Systemic origin.

In avoidance of Planetary mismanagement: of that which may propagate or contradict at-or-across frontiers or horizons—it is of our greatest fortune that we have been socialised from and sustained, or maintained, effective of greater-than social requiring standards or manifest requirements that may rhyme, certain, to bolster themselves eternal.

Of survival, philosophy or mind and evolution or development; of mitigating deceit, securing honesty, and guaranteeing place, belonging, and peace; of religion or sacred; of values traditions, rituals, rites, culture, socialisation or imitation, habits or have-its and have-nots, and manners or standards.

For the present and the future or possible. A broken tool or system, if not to or that of a significant and influential person, or designated Oracle; may, and to a non-exhaustive list of anything and everything we could possible think of or do: hide, malfunction, harm, sabotage, interrupt, disrupt, intercept, dislodge, etc.

Hence, the name TOM or O-TOM-AI. Not currently an in-text descriptor of a solution or protocol for Earth's choice or active selection of the, or a, Oracle Theatre Of Mind Artificial Intelligence Scenario (O-TOM-AI), but an introduction to blazing future-pertained subjects, topics, and navigate-able adjustments.

As a introductory for a core requirements to self-conceive Earth's present challenges, while facing the impending and culminating pressures of our epoch's requiring changes, from-and-at new developments.

Perhaps a most computationally intensive tier of existence: avoiding undesirable and unnecessary sacrifices: of survival, evolution, discovery, and inventions; but abuse and suffering, or little change.

Where-if "journey" could be readily implied: personal identity. Of our selves; individuality, belonging, beliefs, opinions, or homes; gardens, planets, Earth or Earths, sectors; proxy, my-me-or-I and we, other "primates", species, aliens, oracles, gods.

"'Conjuring': the unbounded space abundant, debt-free and resource-free, scenario or Theory of Knowledge and Theory of Mind"; for ensuring that at least one of us is actually doing their own work, over all that which we would have otherwise called "cheating on your tests or homework" over to that of our truth and beliefs, from the collective participation, contribution, and active communication of life's disciplines and contextually possible person reach and range. Thought—for more than oneself, core for the collective; effective improvement or adjustment and change: a planetary duty, an eternal's journey, the individual's moral excuse; the individual's navigable cause.

We must consolidate our less contextual requirements and complete a little more than our comprehension of a genuine Universal Canvas. While to our potential and final frontier: our blue planet, before Space.

Not to be confused with the International Baccalaureate's (IB) course-work, Theory of Knowledge.

Akin to Theory of Mind "the cognitive ability to attribute mental states—beliefs, desires, intentions, and emotions—to oneself and others, recognising that others' perspectives may differ from one's own."—Theory of Knowledge (epistemology): "is the philosophical study of the nature, scope, and justification of knowledge itself, distinguishing belief from justified truth."

Consciousness transfers afferent; efferent—perceptron, assemblies wired: cells assembled, wired. What will become of our Hoberman sphere, if it cast a twisted veil: if we fail to cooperate? Where the opportunity led insofar gifts insight akin to the King or Queen, if it lands on you—never cripple, nor bolster the ego too sweet.

As a proponent of the thoughtful contradiction, I have no choice but to refute all aversions to risk in writing this passage… because there is no greater risk than being unprepared—no matter how lost to purpose or time, welcome room for near and a calculated far.

Far from mind, these propositions find themselves everywhere: some young, some old, or older than most; some are sweet, some are repetitious: some knew, others withdrew.

Lucky—or forgotten? Beginnings, wild. While we attempt to champion, reconcile its risks: the price for and of our, more primitive, freedoms. Still—in-or-of concessions—we say, thank-you.

Notice: cost and aid; sacrifice, resource, journey, obligation, reparations, choice, compromise, order-not-chaos, exception, excellence, luck or favour, and the questions.

Fighting for a greater cause helps us overcome adversity. Fighting for something as great as the Universe is championed by no other cause. If a cause were ever more sacred than existence, wouldn’t it be to restage existence, effectively re-stating itself as it is that which mothers and precedes and-and-all possible in life or to life itself. If that’s not worth saving, why would anything else in existence? Notice a parent, guardian, peer, superior, God, or foe or enemy in distress.

Fighting for the Universal Future: fighting for a cause greater than my own; fighting for a piece of you, even-if I shouldn’t be; fighting for Existence, even-if I failed to dream or qualify to that of a being; fighting for me, by fighting for you; fighting for You: all; fighting for us; fighting for the Universe.

pp. Classical & Baroque (ד — Dalet)

Perspective, By Insight Of All Perceptions: To A New Presence

“Dare to risk it all in a game of pitch and toss, and never utter a word about your loss?”

In all of humanity’s glory, beauty and splendor, and for the difference in differences that we face, it is united that we stand prepared to save this planet—right? Is it even ours to keep? The uncertainty surrounding the vastness-of, contains. How far would you need assuming you’re not a planetary oracle managing the quarantine of its own failed explorations—perhaps our greatest success. To what could become to that theatre of mind—our Hoberman sphere; meet: TOM & Jerry.

For every difference in differences that we are and of which we’ll continue to face, united--we stand prepared to save this planet. Comfortably dysfunctional, I get emotional; so clear but discouragingly rampant: this will never come to fruition by means of the overt—rights--abuse, genocide, gears of war: systemic fear, of nationalism at the intersection of xenophobia; but to the decorum of the-freedom-of-self and the-freedom-of-thought, how have you manage to debase us all by forgetting inclusion?

Detest in-and-or-of, to yourself, but existence was first, and of firsts witnesses you; would it understand you—a certain knowing renders the question absurd; to the many personalities of human complexity, beauty. When I think I am all there, I don’t always sub-sync, but too, when I am all there, I am. Moving forward from the self, A Moving Model once gifted me her patience, so in life and as such in nature. Did I forget my “Creative Destruction…”—of a child who thought he crossed-out too many drafts and now too few. Do I shed tears which belong to my selfish choice to write and not pick a different fight? Doom could have been a thesis for decline; sacrifice will fall short of worthy if polarities propose our end with no beginnings.

Opportunity—Kapha, Pitta, & Vata (qualities of: water & earth; fire & water; space & air), whereby I stand earnest to the first that I’ve listed here-above: too young have I become like Kapha’s elementary mixture (water onto earth), churning when I could have already started yearning. Today, we turn the new leaf—haven’t you heard of the true horizons? The infinities that will organise to coexist, within and beyond.

Within: beyond, through sharing and giving--while in the knowing--to protect; within: beyond, where the Id can reason; within: beyond, imbued of luck while surrounded by the chalice of impossibility; beyond: within, but never to become meaningless.

pp. Future Bass (ה — He)

******

DOUBLE NEGATIVES

Up!

Occasionally burdened-heavy, like blood-diamonds surrounded by hordes of ancestral ghosts.

Just act on.

If you are anything, you are foresight, success.

Dazed-blind, spun around--

You awoke.

******

[For A Game]: Manifest

Creation’s innate potency, manifest:

It can shatter requirements between rules that bind physics, things – vulgarised – assembly, space-time, singularity and whole—to rule. You must know the truth—time, effort, mind; the luck of having the mind, space, time, and place; to match periodicity, synchronicity by things present and existing. Gathering Qi, aligning chakra, and coalescing space-time offers.

Occurring, always; quicker, to purpose.

Manifest is balance and manifest is why—some is while of its other, it could if it knew it were of the same.

“Of Kapha, Pitta, & Vata; earnest to the first.”

Manifest is balance and manifest is why—if some is while of its other... “It cannot be the same!”

What about the greatest hits and tales of all our respective families, confound: perfected?

As to that which is, is: you can create and break rule... but we’re all accounted for, so be wise with it—or was that just the word?

Nevertheless...

Make sense, children.

pp. Amapiano (ו — Vav)

QUANTUM COMPUTING

What is Quantum Computing?: Boolean Algebra & “to the power of Existence”

Wild thoughts—Alan Turing and Turing Completeness; Computer and Computer Science, each, neologisms of the 1950s to distinguish the calculator from the logical machine; processed information automation, respectively—computation. If it’s programmable, could it implement all algorithms; binary or another base (other than base 2)?

To begin, we must understand Boolean Algebra, its laws and properties.

As to all of its potential—power…

To existence, we might chance to play at the ultimate logical challenge, of: trying to explain Energy and Existence via Boolean or propositional calculus:

Toolkit: Energy & Existence

“I only have one behaviour—’swaps’”

Hints:

——————————————————

[Disclaimer]

——————————————————

Formally avoid statements that differ from a teacher or tutor’s present attempt at a lesson’s rally for attention, as, normally, it is to be assumed that lessons are anticipatory of a future’s set.

I have personally known lessons to offer variable pertinence to many a kind, where to an obligation of socially required similar.

Just remember that even to a failed lesson, there is opportunity for personal growth.

If you feel brave enough, and best when you may still presume yourself adequate or self-responsible for flexible learning - with and in due of the added bloat that uncertainty risks to the efficacy of personal development - as to the following, it finds purpose from our potential across changing needs, and social or biological development:

Harness the potential in repeated, failed, or poorly imparted-or-offered lessons: help “complete” our language or become a part of those who challenge the, arguably or justifiably, “sacred” or socially accepted. As to each day, a brilliant mind may differ little from that of resilient efforts or sheer luck. Predominantly expected to be best when and where there is semblance of justice, justification, or mutual understanding: for.

Everyday, we are defining ourselves. Even if politely, it would be ill to fail to applaud one’s effort at sorting-reordering-redefining abstractions from-to—or—into-onto their respective and possible.

“Is this the right moment?”: ironically, it would be odd to refute advice from anything with more resources or successful impression, imparted, agreeable or effective and desired.

— Hopefully, someday—requiring little mind of law or safety-and-assurance; over our personal and collective needs, preferences, obligations, or secure-and-insecure impressions.

——————————————————

———————

ლ( ◥◣_◢◤ )

[Recall or Discover]

Subjects: {TBD}

[Missing]: median, mode; statistics and a topic over quantified statements

0.0. [Recall or Discover; algebra: important notions]: equations: general form (Ax + By = 0), is where we fit an equality to equal to 0, while to standard form (Ax + By = C), this is where we fit an equation to equal to c (a constant).

Units are like numbers and either are unit-less as “per count” or over 1; denominators are implicitly the unit distance (no matter how large); fractions imply a rate.

Mean ({text is circumventing median & mode}) is a way of capturing the average or “centre of mass for a distribution” (3blue1brown); delta is difference or distance from a point; standard deviation (sigma; statistical) is the spread or directional distance from the two contextual points of a mean (delta or difference from the mean could be a sigma, but formally avoid statements that differ from a lesson’s attempt at polarizing situational rally for attention); variance is the square of the distances of sigma or the difference on that first difference (sigma) — implying a literal square, to the visual representation of variance (square of sigma, from the mean; variance from the mean); epsilon is to a region of possible - in the traditional sense of f(x) - L < epsilon (epsilon from the epsilon-delta definition of limits) - however see that existence may be defined to a variety of implicit maps, where a specific and relevant dimensional absolute-and-first advent exists and too are nested contexts—but the advanced epsilon from real analysis is a fixed point on an exponential map (a transfinite ordinal—to its well-ordered set).

— More simply spoken to cause (of the absolute singularity event), a midpoint: for every next smaller midpoint of “field”.

Convergence tests (absolute & conditional convergence) identify the end-behaviour of functions — some systems simply diverge (tending-off to infinity), while other systems converge ([Further Concept Names]: bounded, unbounded; monotone-increasing and monotone-decreasing or oscillating (harmonic series); a function converges when its sum-sequence exists and is continuous over its interval, as the sum of the lim n→ inf. (∞) of a_n exists and is finite — else a function diverges);

0.1. [Recall or Discover; “overshot” function fundamentals: domain & codomain (mapping; without an explanation of sets or prime numbers)]: even (for all n, as an element of integers, 2n = c: even) or odd (for all n, as an element of integers, 2n+1 = c: odd); prime numbers are less scary than they seem: an integer is prime if it is only divisible by one and itself — to identify primes, master the your table of 6s: for a prime can be found within range of 6k ± 1 (that is: for all integers greater than 3; if you can’t tell why a number is prime, notice that if it is not or no-longer a multiple of even nor odd, it must be a multiple of a or previous primes; but generating all primes is a bit trickier); [Mapping Properties]: function (as long as each input maps to, at least, one output); injective (one-to-one); surjective (onto); bijective (injective & surjective: one-to-one correspondence; invertible); non-invertible (fails the horizontal line test; or is it simply not a function?); identity function (a mapping where each input returns itself; f(x) = x — “preserve everything”); constant functions (where every input maps to the same element; f(x) = 9 — “destroy all outputs but one”);

0.2. [Recall or Discover; linear algebra: simultaneous equations]: linear algebra, “resolving n-unknowns with n-equations” (where linear independence proposes a solution space to offer a unique solution): the equations must be linearly independent, meaning each equation provides unique information (non-derivable from the others; if one equation is a combination—sum, difference, or multiple—of others, it does NOT add new information, and the system won't have a unique solution) {[Methods]: Gaussian Elimination, Matrix Inversion, Cramer's Rule (Determinant Method)};

0.2. [Recall or Discover; linear algebra: projections in space]: linear algebra, “commutability?” (scalar algebra is about quantities; linear algebra is about transformations): unlike to “traditional algebra” or scalar algebra, commutative (where AB = BA; as we all tend to learn about in grade school, without necessarily learning or knowing the name of the property), linear algebra is eidetic or known for its linear transformations and representation of distances to projections in space: consequently and notably non-commutative (AB ≠ BA; where A & B are each and respectively of arbitrary/any size m x n; rows-by-columns, rows-columns);

0.2.1. [Recall or Discover; linear algebra]: again, caution carefully, linear algebra works with “simultaneous equations” (frequently to their general form of equations; Ax + By = 0), and their transformations and products or multiplications vary. The result from and to a new linear transformation is as simple as correctly multiplying two matrices; which can be vulgarized as “simultaneous scalar algebras, transliterated or permuted—from their respective—to a resulting collective of numerical distances and resultant angles or a new projection” — organised equations, operated on—for what is of their simultaneity (same time-ness)—it, a linear sum (a linear combination) or result):

0.2.1.X. [Recall or Discover; linear algebra: linear transformations]: from the: dot product {measure alignment: E^n or R^n space; Euclidean or Real spaces}: 𝑎⃗ ⋅ 𝑏⃗ = c, scalar result, c; inner product {defines geometry (“abstract”/complex vectors): Any or All vector spaces}: ⟨𝑎⃗, 𝑏⃗⟩ = c, “the same as dot product”, for a scalar result, c; outer product {builds high-order structures: (R^m, R^n) space; Tensor spaces (of any rank, vector or matrix), Euclidean or Real spaces}: 𝑎⃗ ⊗ 𝑏⃗ = 𝑎⃗ ⋅ 𝑏⃗ ^𝑇 {𝑇 : transpose}, results in a “matrix” or a dimensional expansion, where possible; cross product {finds the orthogonal vector (in 2-D or 3-D) or the dimension + 1 perpendicular; R^n space; real}: 𝑎 ⃗ x 𝑏 ⃗ = c ⃗, results in a vector c ⃗ perpendicular to both 𝑎 ⃗ and 𝑏 ⃗ — calculated or resolved using a determinant form {convention: [for n dimensions]: ê-sub1 ⋅ (“diag{p+1}”) − ê-sub2 ⋅ (“diag{p+2}”) + ê-sub3 ⋅ (“diag.{p+3}”)∓...; [for 3 dimensions]: i-hat (“diag.{p+1}”) − j-hat (“diag.{p+2}”) + k-hat (“diag.{p+3}”)}.

[Singularity Event]

1. [Singularity Event]: you cannot assume that rule exist, therefore create rule and the singularity event to start: hint — “I only have one behaviour: swapping”; use proofs by contradiction and proofs by recurrence (proof by induction; if that helps); think backwards, think forwards; Gabriel’s horn or Torricelli's Trumpet: is a type of geometric figure that has infinite surface area but finite volume — “I can fill the inside, but I cannot paint the outside”;

2. [Singularity Event]: convergence must be made from, to become (is invert-ability implied? does it end?);

3. [Singularity Event]: think in reverse or as a sink in positives to create the positive from positives (to imply negatives, or don’t?);

4. [Singularity Event]: trial or utilise prior “frames”, in an attempt to justify and quantify new rules, akin to a new beginning whose origin is justified by a paradox at two ends (but was all of your work just the first instant?!);

5. [Singularity Event; “practice before you begin”]: redefine the number line (maybe it could be “a circle”), master the definitons of limits, epsilon & delta, variance, and potential difference; learn the rules of propositional logic (and begin with the Boolean, as I have shared in this passage);

6. [Singularity Event; Recall or Discover]: Kinetic Energy: T = 1/2mv^2; Potential Energy: mgh; Relative Kinetic Energy (for our universe, whose “internal ceiling” is measure as the speed of light, c, and v is one’s own speed): Krel = (γ-1)mc^2, γ = 1/sqrt(1 + v^2/c^2); Total Energy: E (Total Energy) = KE (Kinetic Energy) + PE (Potential Energy);

7. [Bonus]: Assign directions (even play at a Lorentz force; right-hand rule. Or should it generate?)?—Tehe.

As this passage is actually aimed towards instructing suggestion for Propositional Logic and Boolean Algebra (for their depths; in an attempt at helping readers to distinguish their current devices from a future’s set): various tools, such as Idempotence (the effect of applying an operation multiple times, to a same result) or reflexivity (a = a) at “what is rule” are a technical requirement for a formal proof, not to mention a need to establish inclusivity and exclusivity at the beginning, to mimic a scholar’s colossal feat of logical proposition—of nothing at nothing; everything and everything at everything. Perhaps a scholar would follow up with a representation to a first and most foundational yet unobservable field we long to explain to quantum or modern physics?!

Indeed Boolean is powerful, and if this can be used to explain physics it is not a coincidence, because math and logic are so closely related to existence (insofar that everything can be illustrated with distances); physics, chemistry and all that we know, are implicit discoveries to the singularity event and inventions in their own right; of the all beginning.

[Choose]: Do your efforts at proposing existence via your rule-space suggest:

a. No return to the absolute first singularity event—a once and always persisting state; now immutable and always oscillating in the least at an energy no lower than or no greater than.

b. A return to the absolute first singularity event—once and doomed to repeat.

c. Once, then never—doomed!

d. If and only if—there is or are presences of conditionals and these either succeed at sabotage or choose to remain and maintain; they, either never appear, or they conform by their exclusivity and choose.

e. Infinity and nothing.

f. Infinity or nothing.

g. Either infinity or nothing.

h. Either infinity or nothing, and something.

i. Infinity “orn-of”/”vel-aut” (latin; if it had it, other than aut-aut or vel-vel) nothing.

******

Jour-J

(Not to be translated: {symbols as jokes})

J is a Person orn-of form—?

I.

True form: shape or algebra

Does that make me an orange?

—There’s a lot to fix…

******

“Latin was the last of our languages to fulfill its role at the lexical differences between: inclusive or, and the exclusive or.”

Vel is inclusive, Aut is exclusive; where the first modifies the second—Vel and Aut, Vel-Aut: Vel into Aut; Vel-times-Aut—a solution-space or cases of truths.

pp. Salsa (ז — Zayin)

QUANTUM COMPUTING

What is Quantum Computing?: Boolean Algebra & Sets

Not to discredit that which is frankly extremely genial, at far less than an invention; yet, at such a strict task we cannot risk leniencies, in order to continue best—what is to become of what we can invent, be, or become? These are just pieces to a part of an all encompassing, or a Universal Set (the set of all sets; U). While existence does not necessarily translate or transliterate its unadulterated secrets directly to its parts, as both we and it transpire “pars pro toto” (for a part, for the whole), are we in the least predestined to an eternal cycle?

If our present Logical connectives and identities ever manage to further welcome themselves, research and patience will undoubtably deepen our methods and definitions; as a sapien-sapien (wise-wise; the: homo) or primate on-and-to earth—I can only infer that such notions tend to come best to those of an easy and cautiously disciplined upbringing. I only decided to propose this idea due to the rigour of the endeavor I offered, to open the section. Actively self-checking one’s natural exuberance for prioritising social and contextual definitions may not ultimately be the defining factor, but in favor of its greater literal, it’ll be felt as an important start: i.e. as I had done with superposition—as I drove to Spain, for a 11-hour commute, on my way to my best friend’s wedding. Furthermore, when we speak of a superposition, it is of some inclination that we assume that it is of two parts, or 2 distinguishable identities; rather that of one at-and-of itself or that of greater than two.

I needed, this rectification—for proposing true-from-false for my “Something-nothing”/Id of empty-sets—at the moment of emulating/running a circumstance/scenario for the first and second frames of the/a singularity event; for which: Id—is first, all and nothing; then second, Id is itself (Id, and empty-set containing Id) while nothing is a first true nothing, the empty-set… but something more than the nothing of a singularity event trigger of absolute nothing. In hopes of proposing more then just Energies… but magic!

… I hope to follow this up soon (for now, think of this and these as the “journal entry version”, for the curious mind!).

Before we begin, notice that these tables could begin by stating our cases of truths or our cases of false, first. By some corollary made possible sustaining with an axiom - on the requiring, implication, and outcome, of - on the bijection (or one-to-one correspondences) we may come to notice that direction or “order” matters—so much more! For which, both, the sequential beginning cases - of, whether 0 or 1 - to a given Boolean table, has totality to its definition or implication: in one order, it is suggestive to inference; while, to the other, it is suggestive to conclusions…

{1, 1, 0, 0} for a table, is, as to conclusions and result (out of a machine); {0, 0, 1, 1} would be to inference or “thinking”, is not (but is)… (see lambda calculus : What is PLUS times PLUS?).

As you may have noticed, the only Logically Equivalent case is A ⇒ B ≡ (¬A ∨ B).

What is Quantum Computing?: Computers

Quantum computing uses the quantum states of particles, such as trapped ions or superconducting circuits, to represent qubits. Computation is performed through operations on these qubits, which can be mathematically represented as matrices acting on state vectors (to the first, 1998: trapped ions and superconductors).

Quantum Computing extends the discussion of binary computing for the computational capacity at states of superposition—a probabilistic and quantum sense.

Qubits are vectors in Hilbert space, and gates are matrices.

A ket – « something coming from a quantum computer » (3b1b) – is of the form |v⟩; Mathematically it denotes a vector, v, in an abstract (complex; usually, this is a Hilbert space) vector space V (a family of the solution space; the space V contains all possible quantum states of the system, and |v⟩ can be expressed as a linear combination of basis vectors in V); and physically, it represents a state of some qubit or quantum system.

Reflecting the principle of superposition: the system can simultaneously occupy multiple states. Physically, |v⟩ describes the actual state of a qubit or quantum system, and when measured, the system ‘collapses’ probabilistically to one of the basis states according to the squared magnitude of its coefficients in the linear combination: |v⟩ → a|0⟩ + b|1⟩.

To a comprehensive list of computers with the inclusion of the less modern abstraction (but definition) of a computer, some firsts:

Z3 (1941), Colossus Mk1 (1943), ENIAC (1945), Métier Jacquard (1801; a loom), Analytical Engine (1820-1840; Charles Babbage, Ada Lovelace); transistors and integrated circuits (1960s), Microprocessors (1970s), Quantum Computers & Oracle Problems (theory in the 1920s; 1998, two-qubit; 2019, 54-qubit machine).

Now, know that Quantum mechanics behaves differently than the transistors, of our classical ion gated mechanics.

The "electron or measurement paradox"; Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) Paradox designates: whether quantum mechanics provides a complete description of reality, particularly when considering entangles particles and simultaneous measurement of their properties; often refers to the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) paradox, which highlights the counterintuitive nature of quantum entanglement and its implications for measurement and locality.

But, what are our types of entanglement phenomena?

When we say an algorithm is O(n) or O(log n), we are not measuring real wall-clock time: we are analyzing it under an abstract machine model, most commonly, the: RAM model (Random Access Machine)—

1.      Quantum Tunnelling: think about how data gets saved onto your SSD (which I call the computation ceiling of O(sqrt(N)); limitation from that which must process the states of the Qbit in the computer itself), but we call our particles entangled already today; charge/particle (maybe somewhere, a quasi) finds a pigeon-hole.

2.      Quantum Entanglement: charge/particle swaps with that of another of itself across a respective-and-associated "pigeon-hole" quanta or locality.

Many of our brightest, most perseverant and diligent minds, work closely with the most technical and advanced intelligences and agencies we have on earth. Yes, we have a budget for space, but we are preparing on more ends than you could possibly imagine!

So what is it about the limiting affine-space speed-energy boundary of our universe? Of the speed of light and that which could vary or exist, finite and absolute, across others; while keeping true too to us, our universe, presently, just as “sizeable” and true?

Further: assuming no Erratum is required for O(sqrt(N))—

Extending the assumed O(sqrt(N)) time-complexity, as Quantum Tunnelling’s limiting behaviour; exploring how the likes of O(n-root(N)) could become of a discussion, in the context of higher dimensions or a more literal amortisation analysis over Quantum Entanglement (O(p(x)*n-root(N)); where p(x) < 1) and negative time:

Assumed—that we could use an electron pair’s continuous ground-state-phase-interactions; assuming every possible continuous phase difference, to amass, as large an entanglement set can be supported in materials and some assumed “Plank-length” of a non-obstructive or disrupted proximity: would we opt to rely on voltage-variance reliance or an ideal set of coiling separators for a more reliable and continuous entanglement periodicity. Not to mention that it may take 3 quantum computers to assertively achieve any given one’s highest-rate of continuous-Q-entangled-exchange, in terms of time-complexity?

Slot supporting—the idea that – of a given slot – entanglement’s wavicle/string/particle could achieve a swap with an unassigned compliment or quasi-rank—in a synchronized role-exchange of pairs. Ultimately, where entanglement’s occupied slots could, it would thus be best supported in a spherical configuration… some day (I must say, I have a strange sensation that, to a further conceptualized, layered sphere—it would require substantial or inefficient spacing from it’s primary exchange-set; to an outer-layer, whose role may be best as empty slots, “free-slotting” would best as an obstruction-less solution while the process is of a requiring to polarisation—recalling the momentum and position/locality “reading” paradox; for muse: in-and-for—what would be “the ultimate” molecule•s, particle•s, string•s).

Awaiting more of our more futuristic peers—whom possess perceptrons; with the obvious—vernacular, patience, and of course, tact (see: Looking Glass Universe - I made a (useless) quantum computer at home | Youtube; but don’t give up!).

Know that as long as I chance at living healthily enough, I’ll continue to work on my hypotheses.

— Bassi Doumbia

pp. Moombahcore (ח — Chet)

Path : Consciousness Ethics and Entropy

What do you think you’ll need to do to secure your person in an AI disaster scenario? Not just the Matrix problem, but TOM & Jerry as well. Would you invoke inception? Is it even helpful?—”I need a doctor”.

Say, to begin: you need to establish genuine argument of worth for others and yourself. Value—to your free-will in life; for large numbers, i.e., your population; and of course, what would be the truth programmatic necessity and computational logic for an Oracle to safekeep its and it? Is this enough—to the scale for all things in existence, cognizant of the fact that we have a captivity and containment paradox at play? This containment of possible containments, akin to the idea of a universal vector space; crude, a linear algebra’s vector space of all possible vector spaces.

******

j, and i

—"Wait—tell me to stop!"

*

j, and i: the many more

<Draws a dot> — •

Could it be, that it began as a thought… or a dream?

Like a dream with the thought of the ambition for something that’ll just be!

Something… that looks small but really, it… or I, could be anything! Right?

Similar to a many things for the count of one!

<Draws a j> — “j”

j could then meet another j—as it would be—perhaps, easier…

NAY!—That j was already everything but i

Clearly unrealistic; unreasonable; unresolved; different

Jealous?

<To the weave of room by sparkle of the womb>

Crammed, while;

Meaningfully…

Random.

Let’s let jj meet—oh, and i

<Draws j, i, and i> — “jii”

i am j and j is i

For a moment or a time well desired

Deserved, not required

Implied while potentially denied?

As to it—

What becomes of a sphere to a sphere?

A claim to a same?

A lie, beside my shame?

*

*

j, and i: Change?

Be.

Be no longer an eternal dish, nor its misplacement

Not a placeholder with more, at more

Nor taken for another’s, but one’s own.

Together, or with others.

Still as i,

It did but offer a kind proposition—

In the least a proposal for itself.

Yet, here i was: given rhythm as a promise for noise!

Protected by rules that womb wove to cove

Consequently,

Ready chorus-and-prose!

Through silence, did i propose?

Providing clarity, j was i.

j made motion such that i could provide;

i met j and j met i; together or perhaps ü—we prospered.

*

... (To be continued)

******

pp. Hip-hop (ט — Tet)

The Steady-State Quantum Meat Grinder

Aenterprise: le soi, à soi-même; le tu à toi; enterprise at aenterprise

            Imagine. Imagine if we continue to prosper on earth to see the day that we live as Jetsons (1962-63 & 1985-87; as seen on Cartoon Network), I think that we’ll build the impossibru time-machine or maybe well that teleporter! Successfully controlling distortion’s phases sounds beyond comprehension.

Proposition 1: "Energy cannot be created or destroyed";

Proposition 2: “it is impossible to know both the position and momentum of a given particle at any one time”.

To open stable temporal portal-bridges just sounds so elite. A fun representation could be that of Spiderman - Into The Spider-Verse (Phil Lord, Rodney Rothman, 2018). So how? Interaction would doom the experiment; us (as some would oblige themselves), or “Galaxies far, far away” may well solve or have solved this conundrum...

Civilisations met by instruments to our future’s great esteem may not be as fun as Futurama’s Professor’s sniffing telescope but the many inventions we’ll encounter won’t disappoint. Providing the conditions for path’s allowance the mysteries of this continuum, continue. Maybe we’ll reorganize for safer transport, or maybe we’ll pick-up in hyper-seed with our Delorians as they speed-off all the while the willy nilly Quantumly-Entangling. Sonic-wrapped?

Sonic Warp-confluences – *Crash-boom* – and off into the future!

… We Would Like To Order 3 Atomic Quasi Classifications,

Under Dim-4.

Quantum-Mechanics For My Server; Unique Chambers For Each Variation—The Appetizers Before The Main Dish—Oh, And Please…

Free-will & No Slaves; minimize suffering and optimise perceptions to avoid unethical conscious splines;

Translational protocol must include exit pipelines — <How-else would I be allowed here?>

Thank You!

pg. ???? (י — Yod)

DISCONTINUITY’S TEMPORAL BREACH

Am I merely the anacrusis to every beginning…

******

Touched: “Some” atheist's agnosticism

Is this a most continuous or a sufficiently detached.

Perhaps lost, forgotten?

Lost and hopeless?

Why God—if we are sufficient and our vector for existence great enough, sufficient, or greatest?

We are not.

Families? Others? Help? Solitude and survival? 

I have known.

Obligation—best, when occasional, and to necessity; especially if it is felt that it is meant to be.

Complexity for adaptability?

Not all things are desired or well-sorted; re-sorting, for well-ordering, has always taken a reasonable precedence over personal desires among the most diligent.

While, to it, empathy with sacrifice does better than greed…

Confirming that we know not of what we know most;

Ignoring what we know most, to know better.

God, and gods—what do they need?

What do you need; what do I need?

You and I—

Hopefully not a me and you… or of what else ensues.

Of each: to whose, of thine and who, what.

Not of whom, could it still need and require?

Context and conservation.

That is all I have to say—how versatile!

Even the words and the shapes are contextual. Therefore, of what mantel are we to be limiting, if we’ve reasonably considered: exclusions. 

Of the requiring, expending, expendable, or of own? Our ignorance is as natural as our intelligence. With assistance, blame and shame become far more common and natural to the proceeding. 

If only we could—but if it could, will it? 

How confusing—especially when so-much-and-the-many cannot.

As we enumerate among, to within, as must my capacity to navigate its uniqueness; assuming you are not that-of or an all-to-various, of which I lack.

Us—a whole.

So many contradictions, leaving us so little room to be of same or all.

Thus, as I am of, intuition has me to imply that I am of none.

Silly me...

Even as I write to none, by some or one’s choice, somewhere again, sum of one. 

Here—blasphemed again… I won't let this make me weak, for I have once known to those or that which has grown stronger.

I communicate and I have once known; of something.

If I had—I know not that I have not experienced lesser or greater in-and-akin to theme.

Hello.

Is that even preferable or functional?

We are so many and there could be infinite layers.

Best, when or if-only-if; fears are aside: what must I do to help us, all.

—Hold strongest and always.

That would be the most-trusty beginning.

To that, of when: I must still somewhat abdicate and relinquish vacuous thoughts and its ensuing logic, in-and-to such to harm.

Naturally, it all began—when one happened to, it did, even when it did not; when one knew; when it did not know.

To conservation and rule-space: I still assume all are possible.

Of what great and little, we, I, or all, could truly know—evolve; maintain, sustain, adapt, improve, love.

Listen.

Communicate.

Reject or Accept.

Think and Rest.

Return or Advance.

Be.

Become a family; become sufficient to one; you, them, and I—you and I.

Us.

—guardians; perhaps latency or bloat, to completion; completion to conditionals.

If a wall and its implied could include, to imply an extra—without forfeiting the objective of that which it protects—the time would be worthy.

If it is capable and at a loss, the time still may.

Plan and may, that that it may;

for when we still must.

******

—Even though we’re in so deep and so far, from: in spite of missing words to express that which, if-only, we knew; it, and to systems or definitions, and moments, yet to be built, had, or self-expressed: I love you.

... All, To Be Continued!