The Zero Delusion v0.99x
Zero signifies absence or an amount of no dimension and allegedly exemplifies one of humanity's most splendid insights. Nonetheless, it is a questionable number. Why did algebra embrace zero and dismiss infinity despite representing symmetric and complementary concepts? Why is zero exceptional in arithmetic? Is zero a "real" point? Has it a geometrical meaning? Is zero naturalistic? Is it universal? Digit 0 is unnecessary in positional notation (e.g., bijective numeration). The uniform distribution is unreachable, transmitting nill bits of information is impossible, and communication is never error-free. Zero is elusive in thermodynamics, quantum field theory, and cosmology. A minimal fundamental extent is plausible but hard to accept because of our acquaintance with zero. Mathematical zeroes are semantically void (e.g., empty set, empty sum, zero vector, zero function, unknot). Because "division by zero" and "identically zero" are uncomputable, we advocate for the nonzero algebraic numbers to build new physics that reflects nature's countable character. In a linear scale, we must handle zero as the smallest possible nonzero rational or the limit of an asymptotically vanishing sequence of rationals. Instead, zero is a logarithmic scale's pointer to a being's property via log(1)). The exponential function, which decodes the encoded data back to the linear scale, is crucial to understanding the Lie algebra-group correspondence, the Laplace transform, linear fractional transformations, and the notion of conformality. Ultimately, we define a "coding space" as a doubly conformal transformation realm of zero-fleeing hyperbolic geometry that keeps the structural and scaling relationships of the world.
Zero signifies absence or an amount of no dimension and allegedly exemplifies one of humanity's most splendid insights. Nonetheless, it is a questionable number. Why did algebra embrace zero and dismiss infinity despite representing symmetric and complementary concepts? Why is zero exceptional in arithmetic? Is zero a "real" point? Has it a geometrical meaning? Is zero naturalistic? Is it universal? Digit 0 is unnecessary in positional notation (e.g., bijective numeration). The uniform distribution is unreachable, transmitting nill bits of information is impossible, and communication is never error-free. Zero is elusive in thermodynamics, quantum field theory, and cosmology. A minimal fundamental extent is plausible but hard to accept because of our acquaintance with zero. Mathematical zeroes are semantically void (e.g., empty set, empty sum, zero vector, zero function, unknot). Because "division by zero" and "identically zero" are uncomputable, we advocate for the nonzero algebraic numbers to build new physics that reflects nature's countable character. In a linear scale, we must handle zero as the smallest possible nonzero rational or the limit of an asymptotically vanishing sequence of rationals. Instead, zero is a logarithmic scale's pointer to a being's property via log(1)). The exponential function, which decodes the encoded data back to the linear scale, is crucial to understanding the Lie algebra-group correspondence, the Laplace transform, linear fractional transformations, and the notion of conformality. Ultimately, we define a "coding space" as a doubly conformal transformation realm of zero-fleeing hyperbolic geometry that keeps the structural and scaling relationships of the world.
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
or quadratic on real-algebraic coefficients and solvable in terms of the exponential
function, taking the (real-algebraic) natural logarithm gives rise to inverse
hyperbolic functions, such as arccos, arcsin, and arctan, where the prefix "ar-"
means "area". Because the "internal" world encodes external data logarithmically,
it is a "hyperbolic space", regardless of whether we model the world as
a Möbius, Laguerre, or Minkowski plane. Nevertheless, these planes determine
the conic invariant under LFT and somewhat the contour of the "coding space"
where hyperbolic geometry applies; given two interior points and a conic, the
"shortest" path connecting them must orthogonally intersect the boundary of
the coding space. These paths are the geodesic lines that tie the inner coding
space with the outer world.
The need for an efficient numeral system justifies using the logarithmic scale,
as described in subsection 3.2. The logarithm shrinks angles and distances to
convert (flat) Euclidean into hyperbolic spaces. For example, the analog of E 2 is
the hyperbolic plane, H 2 , a surface of constant negative curvature. Logarithm and
conformality form a strong bond because of the hyperbolic geometry’s absolute
relation between distance and angle (see Figure 2.5 in [18]). Informally, this
interdependence means that two hyperbolic lines can achieve true parallelism
only at tiny distances; as they move away, one line sees the other rotate until
they become perpendicular at infinity. Natural parallelism and conformality are
nonzero and finite; conformal mapping generally preserves angles only locally
and loses consistency at large distances. Bearing in mind this fact is critical
in physics problems where keeping the structural or causal links between the
elements of a system or organization as much as possible is required.
We seek a doubly conformal coding space, first, supported by and immersed
in spaces whose isometries derive from conformal transformations, and second,
equipped with a metric of inverse hyperbolic functions to sum distances linearly.
For instance, the unit disk of the Minkowski plane preserves the angles between
intersecting hyperbolas, but absolute and relative (cross-ratio) distances are Euclidean
lengths. The Beltrami-Klein (Klein disk) model [182] handles distances
logarithmically but preserves no conic and so distorts angles. These disk models
are not doubly conformal. Additionally, we require a coding space to be a
subspace of the universe; otherwise, we would not have "space" to decode the
information. For instance, the hyperbola-based Gans model [54] is doubly conformal,
but we cannot consider it a coding space because it maps H 2 onto the
entire E 2 .
However, the Poincaré disk (Chapter IV, The Non-Euclidean World in [139])
is a doubly conformal model of hyperbolic geometry that projects the whole
H 2 in the unit disk. Circle-preserving Möbius transformations create the isometries
of the universe, Ǎ. The logarithmic measure of separation between points
is invariant under the subset of Möbius maps acting transitively on the unit
disk, which becomes a coding space. Assuming that the disk center is at the
origin of the plane, points z 2 and z 3 within the disk connected by the arc of a
geodesic circle perpendicularly intersecting the disk’s boundary at z 1 and z 4 are
at hyperbolic distance [186]