Creating the, Theory from the small number eutro, has been and remains ... beautiful ...
It's like discovering and bringing to light, the arcana ... so far ... hidden ...

There are no comparisons with the, Set theory, Given the settings T.n.p.
initials ... In fact, the T.n.p. gives us the results directly, which I can express and
confirm with all the units starting from the cm, called 1c- from the dm, called 1i-
and from the metro Renamed: 10i ..: 100c ..: 1000• .. ex:

==> 1 *10 = 10m^2 = = = 1000i^2
0.1 * 1*10 = 1000kg = 1000dm^3. ===> 0.1=1dm=1i.

==>10i *100i = 1000i^2 = = 10m^2 ===> 10/1i=100i.
1i * 10i *100i = 1000i^3 = 1000'000g.

==> 100c * 1000c = 100'000c^2 = 10m^2 => 10/1c=1000c.
10c *100c *1000c = 1000'000c^3 = 1000kg.

I thank my ex. Prof. Who never explained to me what he wanted
say 0.1 *1 *10 = 1..What kind of 1 .. Would I know only now, from T.n.p.- :)))
Actually, even the current Profs prefer to say 1...of the m^2 and of the^3-
With the aggravating circumstance of saying 0.1..and that's it..of 0.1m^3 = 100.kg. True Geni?

Greetings from Socratis 0.2 * 2 * 2 = = 800i^3 = 0.8m^3
===================> 2i *20i *20i = 800i^3 ==> 2/0.1=20i.
Blessed are those who will study the T.n.p. Because they will know the truth--
And .. the Truth Will Make Them: Free, Wise and Seeker.

I thank my ex. Prof. Who never explained to me what they wanted
say with: 0.1 *1 *10 = 1..What kind of ..Would I know only now, from T.n.p.
Actually, even the current Profs prefer to say 1 ... of 1m^2 and of 1m^3-
With the aggravating circumstance of saying 0.1..and that's it .. of 0.1m^3 =100.kg. True Scientists?

Blessed are those who will use the T.n.p. Because they will know the truth--
And .. the Truth Will Make Them: Free, Wise and Researchers, with the desire for Goats
Above all because the T.d.i .. is able to calculate the volumes and volumes that ..
the world .. Can't Find, since nobody teaches them- :))

Greetings from Socratis 0.2 * 2 * 5 =2000i^3 =2m^3 ==>5/0.1=50i.
=================> 2i *20i *50i = 2000i^3 = 2m^3 ==> 2/0.1 = 20i.
If you don't think with the 1i..10i..you won't understand how it works.

If..2.5m = 25i..you should have 5i *25i =125i^2 which corresponds to 1.25m^2 ...

But if you let This Concept Live, you would have solved the Volumes too ...
In fact : 5i * 25i = 125i^2 .. corresponds to 1i * 5i * 25i = 125i^3 = 125kg.

..///////////////////.////////////////////.///////////////////.///////////////////.///////////////////..|
|__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__|...|
|__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__|...|
|__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__|...|
|__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__|...|
|__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__|./

Volume is defined on 3 axes, which should not interfere with each other ...
should be worth.125.Litri.kg..in any .. True and Practical Mathematics.
Ours should certainly be reformed..to be accessible to
All within the 3rd grade .. Regardless of the prestidigitating Scientists ..

Socratis : 5i *10i *20i = 1000i^3...6i *12i *24i = 1728i^3 = 1.728m^3

Self. 5i *25i = 125i^2 .. which corresponds to 1.25m^2
1i *5i *25i = 125i^3 ... which corresponds to 0.125m^3
But, always 125i^3 is ... just know that 1m^3 = 1000i^3
In fact 2i *5i *1= 0.1m^3=100i^3 Alias ​​2i*5i*10i=100i^3.

Starting with 1i, I have squares and volumes that go hand in hand ..
Also because we have .. 1i^2 = 100c^2 and 1i^3 = 1000c^3 = 1liter.1kg-
Amazing is--. that 1dm^2 is the basis of 1dm^3 and then you would know Everything ..
from zero to infinity: 1 •^3 = 1mg ... 1c^3 = 1g ... 1i^3 = 1000g ... 1^3 = 1000kg.
In fact to; 5i * 25i = 125i^3..corresponds to ..1i * 5i * 25i =125i^3 = 125-Liters.kg.

..///////////////////.////////////////////.///////////////////.///////////////////.///////////////////..|
|__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__|...|
|__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__|...|
|__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__|...|
|__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__|...|
|__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__|./

This parallelepiped is certainly worth 1i * 5i * 25i = 125i^3 = 125kg. but,

I could graph: 1i * 5i * 20i = 100i^3 which corresponds to 0.1m^3 = 100kg.
The volumes are defined on 3 axes, therefore, they cannot interfere with each other ...
but unfortunately this is what the stupid thinks who say 10c *10c = 0.01 and not

they know what ..poor things, I tell you 10c*10c=100c^2=0.01m^2..that, you ..
you know .. since you say 1i * 1i * 100 = 1m. e Not.... 1m^3.... So start from
dm = 10c. the rest comes spontaneously by itself, just consider 1m = 10dm.

What you do not know is that, of true 1 there is only the mm, the rest are at least ..
tens: 1c = 10mm..1dm = 100mm = 10c ... 1m = 1000mm = 100c = 10dm = 10i ..
so, who orders you to name it 1..and also Neutral? With so many difficulties ..

what do you fill your Brain as a Good Scientist to say 1dm *1m =1dm ?
|__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| what it says : 1i*10i=10i^2..this tells you-:))

../////////////////// ////////////////////| ==> says : 1i ** 1i * 10i == = 10i^3 = 10kg-
|__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__|/ => says : 10c*10c*100c=10000c^3= 10kg-
========At least be aware that : =====1i^3=c10^3 =1kg. e 10i^3=10kg-

Don't worry about judging me, I am happy to Explain the Truth to you.
I'm sorry you don't want to understand : 0.1*0.1*1=0.01m^3 =10i^3-:))

Socratis : 4i *8i *16i =512i^3...4 *8 *16 = 512'000i^3 = 512m^3-

Don't you know that, of true 1 there is only the mm, the rest are at least .... dozens:
1c = 10mm ... 1dm = 100mm = 10c ... 1m = 1000mm = 100c = 10dm = 10i..for
which ; who orders you to name it 1..and also Neutral? With so many difficulties ..

Try to use the m, in the form suitable for small units.
n.c *100c =100.nc^2.. n.i *10i =10.ni^2. You will avoid taking Blinds
how to have, the factor 1..and conclude 1..0.1 ... 0.01 .... etc ... Type:

0.1 *0.1 *1 = 0.01m^3 = 10kg. Which is valid in dm:
1i * 1i * 10i == 10i^3 ==== 10kg .... which is in cm:
10c*10c*100c=10'000c^3 =10kg. What is worth what you are wrong-

Get it out of your head .. It is not possible that 1m * 0.1m, is 0.1m.
Not even if you want to delude yourself that 1m..is Neutral..always m, it remains
|__|__|__|__|__| |__|__|__|__|__| => 1i * 10i = 10i^2 = 0.1m^2 .... that tells you.
It also tells you that; 1 *0.5 = 50i^2..Alias ​​0.5m^2..Print it and remember it.

Don't bother judging me, I'm happy to Explain the Logic.
rather think..to Find them from You, those Truths that Trample - :))

Socratis : 4^3 +7^3 = 11 *(7*4 +9) = 11 *37 = 407m^3

On Wednesday, February 23, 2022 at 9:10:34 AM UTC-5, Socratis T.n.p. wrote:
> Creating the, Theory from the small number eutro, has been and remains .... beautiful ...
> It's like discovering and bringing to light, the arcana ... so far ... hidden ...
>
> There are no comparisons with the, Set theory, Given the settings T.n.p.
> initials ... In fact, the T.n.p. gives us the results directly, which I can express and
> confirm with all the units starting from the cm, called 1c- from the dm, called 1i-
> and from the metro Renamed: 10i ..: 100c ..: 1000• .. ex:
>
> ==> 1 *10 = 10m^2 = = = 1000i^2
> 0.1 * 1*10 = 1000kg = 1000dm^3. ===> 0.1=1dm=1i.
>
> ==>10i *100i = 1000i^2 = = 10m^2 ===> 10/1i=100i.
> 1i * 10i *100i = 1000i^3 = 1000'000g.
>
> ==> 100c * 1000c = 100'000c^2 = 10m^2 => 10/1c=1000c.
> 10c *100c *1000c = 1000'000c^3 = 1000kg.
>
> I thank my ex. Prof. Who never explained to me what he wanted
> say 0.1 *1 *10 = 1..What kind of 1 .. Would I know only now, from T.n.p..- :)))
> Actually, even the current Profs prefer to say 1...of the m^2 and of the^3-
> With the aggravating circumstance of saying 0.1..and that's it..of 0.1m^3 = 100.kg. True Geni?
>
> Greetings from Socratis 0.2 * 2 * 2 = = 800i^3 = 0.8m^3
> ===================> 2i *20i *20i = 800i^3 ==> 2/0.1=20i.
> Blessed are those who will study the T.n.p. Because they will know the truth--
> And .. the Truth Will Make Them: Free, Wise and Seeker.

I do wish that I could appreciate your work. I suspect my own is nearby in its tremolo effects on reality. Yet is pairing pairing when an n-ary principle is at work?
In effect to substantiate that to have three is to have two and one as well and that to have four is to have three, two, and one and while the sum may be greater the whole of each part is content to the greater sibling. Should such a conception of number take a non-ordinal status? After all, there these lessers are filed away whereas where I am thinking they are elements of a herd. Thus as a herd of four goes this is sensible, no? We would not ordinarily grant a herd of one maybe, but here that would be as fundamental as two, and the pairing is not operant.
4 3 2 1
3 2 1
2 1
1 These are graphically more akin to naming in the definitional sense. Then should it be that the string
43210321021010
is a cryptome? I guess the recent post about that binary complement string appendage has my thinking off kilter. The zeros here are as much a matter of formatting as they are of meaning or quantity. Should this be as the zero is? Is it exceptional? Here the mathematician and the engineer could get feisty with each other, and yet for the engineer some other breakpoint exists around five oddly enough, which then gets us back into the pairing paradigm... That the ultimate is to take the radix of the system as the next whole tone is perfectly sensible. Well then, when a digit dances it dances and all is well. To hell with engineering stabilizers. Zero as exceptional saves the day, the month, and the year.

Could you remind me what tnp stands for? I've got a new one that is going around the threads now: tsms. I do not believe that you are a full blooded tsm.

Don etsk me, and look the other way, - Tim

On Friday, February 25, 2022 at 3:58:21 PM UTC-5, Timothy Golden wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 23, 2022 at 9:10:34 AM UTC-5, Socratis T.n.p. wrote:
> > Creating the, Theory from the small number eutro, has been and remains .... beautiful ...
> > It's like discovering and bringing to light, the arcana ... so far ... hidden ...
> >
> > There are no comparisons with the, Set theory, Given the settings T.n.p..
> > initials ... In fact, the T.n.p. gives us the results directly, which I can express and
> > confirm with all the units starting from the cm, called 1c- from the dm, called 1i-
> > and from the metro Renamed: 10i ..: 100c ..: 1000• .. ex:
> >
> > ==> 1 *10 = 10m^2 = = = 1000i^2
> > 0.1 * 1*10 = 1000kg = 1000dm^3. ===> 0.1=1dm=1i.
> >
> > ==>10i *100i = 1000i^2 = = 10m^2 ===> 10/1i=100i.
> > 1i * 10i *100i = 1000i^3 = 1000'000g.
> >
> > ==> 100c * 1000c = 100'000c^2 = 10m^2 => 10/1c=1000c.
> > 10c *100c *1000c = 1000'000c^3 = 1000kg.
> >
> > I thank my ex. Prof. Who never explained to me what he wanted
> > say 0.1 *1 *10 = 1..What kind of 1 .. Would I know only now, from T.n..p.- :)))
> > Actually, even the current Profs prefer to say 1...of the m^2 and of the^3-
> > With the aggravating circumstance of saying 0.1..and that's it..of 0.1m^3 = 100.kg. True Geni?
> >
> > Greetings from Socratis 0.2 * 2 * 2 = = 800i^3 = 0.8m^3
> > ===================> 2i *20i *20i = 800i^3 ==> 2/0.1=20i.
> > Blessed are those who will study the T.n.p. Because they will know the truth--
> > And .. the Truth Will Make Them: Free, Wise and Seeker.
> I do wish that I could appreciate your work. I suspect my own is nearby in its tremolo effects on reality. Yet is pairing pairing when an n-ary principle is at work?
> In effect to substantiate that to have three is to have two and one as well and that to have four is to have three, two, and one and while the sum may be greater the whole of each part is content to the greater sibling. Should such a conception of number take a non-ordinal status? After all, there these lessers are filed away whereas where I am thinking they are elements of a herd. Thus as a herd of four goes this is sensible, no? We would not ordinarily grant a herd of one maybe, but here that would be as fundamental as two, and the pairing is not operant.
> 4 3 2 1
> 3 2 1
> 2 1
> 1
> These are graphically more akin to naming in the definitional sense. Then should it be that the string
> 43210321021010
> is a cryptome? I guess the recent post about that binary complement string appendage has my thinking off kilter. The zeros here are as much a matter of formatting as they are of meaning or quantity. Should this be as the zero is? Is it exceptional? Here the mathematician and the engineer could get feisty with each other, and yet for the engineer some other breakpoint exists around five oddly enough, which then gets us back into the pairing paradigm... That the ultimate is to take the radix of the system as the next whole tone is perfectly sensible. Well then, when a digit dances it dances and all is well. To hell with engineering stabilizers. Zero as exceptional saves the day, the month, and the year.
>
> Could you remind me what tnp stands for? I've got a new one that is going around the threads now: tsms. I do not believe that you are a full blooded tsm.
>
> Don etsk me, and look the other way, - Tim

Polysign offers the idea that we can tell two from four for instance:

4 4 4 4 4 4 4
2 4 2 4 2 4 2 4 2 4
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
3 2 1 4 3 2 1 4 3 2 1 4

OK, so one and three have some issues, but two and four seem fairly distinct.
Are such numbers as these the ones I seek?
There are more dances and these are merely the numbers stepping on their own feet.
When they step on others feet though pretty much the same thing arises... especially and obviously for one and three. Oh dear: the pairing again. It's time somebody got to paring the pairing. It's one and two back in three; its one and four up in five; and then there's six... you don't even want to think about six yetsky. Don etsk me, and look the other way, - Tim