Negative Numbers and Other Frauds

by
Steffan Stanford
Did you ever have uneasiness with mathematics? Did the process ever make you fe
el a bit queasy in the stomach? I certainly had those experiences as I advanced
down the road of the maths. While I could readily do all the work that was ass
igned in arithmetic, algebra and geometry and I could also get the acceptable an
swers easily enough, there were just some applications that made me feel quite u
ncomfortable.
As I began learning arithmetic, things were fine. The function of addition was
quite easy to conceive: If you have 3 apples in a bowl and you add 3 apples to t
he bowl, there are 6 apples. I could even count things like this out on my fing
ers whenever I needed reassurance of the accuracy of my solutions to the equatio
ns. And, I easily whizzed through subtraction by simply reversing the process o
f addition. So far, my stomach was in good shape.
It was then that multiplication was introduced to me, which tables I readily mem
orized and applied, again getting the acceptable answers while pleasing my teach
ers. And, thereafter, division was shown me, which was just the reversal of mul
tiplication, so I simply learned how to operate the multiplication tables in rev
erse and I was able to perform the function of division in an acceptable manner,
except, the instructors forced a "rule" down my throat that I dutifully memoriz
ed and remembered, but it never set too well in my stomach.
The rule I was troubled by is that: it is impossible to divide by zero. As I w
orked through this rule, my stomach became queasier and queasier. The basis for
the rule, I was told by all who I asked, is that zero represents nothing, and i
f you divide nothing into something, the solution to the equation would be infin
ity because it would take an infinite number of nothings to amount to something.
Does this sound a bit tautological to you? It did to me.
As I pondered how many nothings it would take to amount to something, my mind be
gan delving into metaphysical concepts. I eventually concluded that nothing cou
ld be infinite in this world or the physical universe otherwise it would be poss
ible to divide by zero. After scratching my head several times on many occasion
s, I finally just applied the rule and overrode my intuition that made my stomac
h turn somersaults.
My adventures into the maths then continued, and when I had nearly forgotten how
uncomfortable I was at trying to solve the riddle of infinity and division by z
ero, my instructors began throwing out more servings of rubbish in the form of "
rules" and other concepts. The most annoying of these supposed concepts was neg
ative numbers, after which, came rule upon rule of unmitigated rubbish to substa
ntiate the bizarre concept.
Many scientists and academics refer to mathematics as a "pure" science. For the
m, negative numbers are pure. "Pure" in this sense does begin to approach Purit
y from a Pure dimension. Pure in this sense is merely a term for the discipline
of mathematics to indicate that it is supposedly based upon "truth". In this p
hysical realm, there is no Purity, nor are mathematics pure.
Many years after I had "learned" many of the absurd rules about negative numbers
, I was doing some research on mathematical formulae when Amitakh mentioned to m
e that mathematics in this realm are quite flawed and very different from the ma
thematics of purer dimensions. This was the insight that I needed to help me be
rid of the queasiness in my stomach that so many mathematical operations have c
aused me to feel. As I delved deeper into her wise advice, I came away quite as
sured that mathematics in this dimension is seriously flawed, and in some areas,
altogether fraudulent.
Geometry was relatively accurate and somewhat honest. However, much of the hone
sty in geometry was forced upon the mathematicians. It only occurred because ge
ometry involved measuring and defining tangible solid shapes. This has a tenden
cy to discourage mathematicians from fudging matters since there are readily ava
ilable methods of testing various theorems by physically measuring the shape in
question. But even the forced "honesty" of Euclidean geometry has some serious
problems because one of its foundational concepts is the premise that parallel l
ines are lines that will go on forever and never meet. This would perhaps be tr
ue in an infinite universe, but, in a finite one, all lines will be forced to cu
rve at some time, hence lines cannot go on forever. This fact has forced a lot
of fudging in geometry.
Pythagoras was an early mathematician who developed several useful formulae that
are still applied today. However, he was much more than a mathematician, he wa
s the Divine Amoeba incarnated. Pythagoras was interested in the metaphysical c
haracteristics of numbers, and realized that various numbers have differing prop
erties. His studies regarding the properties of numbers have been a great benef
it to modern numerologists. In the late nineteenth century, it was becoming pub
lic knowledge that the properties of numbers in this physical realm were based o
n nine different vibrations, hence ordered from one to nine. Prior to that time
, it was only in secretive, esoteric circles that such things were discussed.
Pythagoras did a great deal of work with geometry, and it is the Pythagorean the
orem that allows accurate measurements of triangles. While working on shapes, h
e discerned that the few symmetrical solids in the physical world had some very
interesting properties. He observed that most of the angles created in symmetri
cal shapes, the cube being excepted, were easy or soft angles. He determined th
at tetrahedrons and spheres were very effective at protecting people who wished
to meditate and free themselves temporarily from the "roar" of the physical worl
d and enter into a world of "silence".
Subsequently, Plato concluded that the sphere was the most perfect of shapes in
this realm. One of the reasons was that it offered the most protection to those
who surrounded themselves with a sphere.
Astrologers have long known about many of the properties and effects resulting f
rom angles and aspects caused by relative locations of various celestial bodies.
They are quite capable of making predictions based upon aspects, knowing full
well that when planets are at 30, 60 or 120 degree aspects, that easier times ar
e ahead, and when they are at 45, 90 or 180 degree aspects, that difficulties ca
n transpire.
It is obvious to see that architects and planners of this physical world have te
nded to use the difficult aspects in designing buildings, towns and roads. Most
houses are comprised of a multitude of 90 degree angles, which in turn attract
the more difficult energies. Were the standard building design a hexagon, thing
s would be much easier for everyone in this world.
What has developed from Pythagoras's groundbreaking study into the properties of
numbers is the discipline known today as numerology. The basic premise of nume
rology is that numbers have individual vibrations and characteristics and that t
here are only 9 different numbers. That is, all numbers can be reduced to a sin
gle-digit number. There are a few exceptions, such as 11 and 22 that are often
not reduced to a single digit, but for the most part, numerologists reduce all n
umbers to single digits of one to nine.
In Euclidean geometry and numerology, the lowest number is zero, which is not re
ally a number, but actually a representation of a non-number or a nothing. Noth
ing was the smallest thing that was considered, but all that was to change as fr
aud became the order of the day and the "rule" of mathematics.
From geometry evolved the "science" of algebra, which is a part of mathematics t
hat employs letters as substitutes for numbers in an effort to solve unknown por
tions of equations. When mathematicians began switching letters for numbers, th
ey had a free licence to contrive and invent at will. Nobody cared whether the
concepts used were absurd or fraudulent, so long as the mathematicians could get
acceptable and answers with precision.
With this new-found freedom the big lies such as the theory of parallel lines in
Euclidean geometry became much, much larger in algebra and other forms of mathe
matics. Mathematicians even dared to label one of these fraudulent concepts as
"imaginary numbers", which should have put everyone on notice of something being
skewed to the side of fraudulence. And, of course, there were negative numbers
too.
You might wonder what purpose negative numbers serve. You might even wonder wha
t they are. All our lives we have been indoctrinated to the belief that negativ
e numbers exist and have been trained with various formulae to make them work in
this world this indoctrination came from our teachers at school. We have been
shown the location of negative numbers on continuum lines, have been shown how t
o count backwards and forwards with them, how to multiply and divide with them,
how to plug them into equations &c. But, are they real or are they an illusion?
We have been given absurd rules to apply to this weird concept, such as: a negat
ive number multiplied by a negative number equals a positive number. How can it
be that a negative number, which by the definition mathematicians have given us
, is less than zero, when multiplied by another number that is less than zero, b
ecome a positive number? It has to be pure, unadulterated nonsense.
As stated earlier, 3 + 3 = 6. Counting it out on your fingers can prove the acc
uracy of the equation. We can see apples and oranges in clusters of 3 or 6. It
is reasonably easy to visualize the concept of addition of positive numbers. B
ut, despite what all our algebra teachers have instructed about negative numbers
, when we try to add 3 apples to a pile consisting of a (-3) apples, things do n
ot work out so simply. I get a queasy feeling in my stomach every time I try to
work with negative numbers. It makes me quite uneasy to think that my bowl con
taining 3 apples will be swept off into a vortex and lost forever if I were to a
dd them to a pile containing a minus 3 apples, yet the pile of 3 apples would re
main intact if I were to place them into an empty container.
The mystery of where the 3 apples would travel absolutely baffles me. And, yet,
it would be a rare mathematician who would concede that negative numbers are an
illusion. The mathematicians don't care if the rules and concepts they employ
are idiotic as long as they can arrive at precise answers time after time. In o
ther words, they know full well that negative numbers are fraudulent, but, since
they are useful tools, they are happy to continue with the illusion.
To my way of thinking, the smallest number of anything would have to be zero. W
hen there are no apples on the plate, it is empty. It would take a strange meta
physical phenomenon indeed to allow me to place 3 apples on the plate and watch
them vanish. Since when did the sceptical people of science allow such portals
that consume apples to be considered "normal" behaviour? This is not to say tha
t such portals cannot exist, but it is to say that such portals could not be cal
led upon to operate in a totally predictable manner each and every time someone
placed a hyphen before a number converting it from a positive number, or somethi
ng, into a negative number, or a weird thing that is less than nothing.
We have heard all our lives that minus times a minus equals a plus. Alice would
remark, "Curiouser and curiouser." But, we have been told the lie so many time
s, that we accept it blindly as true.
Even spreadsheets are designed to perpetuate the lie. Try any of these calculat
ions in Excel or Lotus and you will discover that either the programmers are ign
orant or are intentionally perpetuating the lie.
The note of "A" vibrates at 440 Hz. Following the theory of negative numbers, i
f you were to play an A and a negative A (-440 Hz) simultaneously, they should c
ancel one another and you would hear nothing. You might think this is true if y
ou have been thoroughly indoctrinated with the rules about negative numbers. Ho
wever, the two will not cancel each other because there is no way of reproducing
a negative Hz.
Negative numbers are an illusion, but they allow scientists to happily "solve" p
roblems. Negative numbers were invented by a Hindu mathematician whose ruler wa
nted to go to war and the coffers were empty. In order to fund a war with no mo
ney, the mathematician invented deficit spending and negative numbers. From tha
t immoral beginning, the fraud of negative numbers has been perpetuated.
Would anyone like a dustpan to collect these negative numbers and dispose of the
m properly? Worry not; it is being done at this time as the entire physical rea
lm is crumbling under Our Divine Mother's Plan, and as the putrid realm crumbles
, its impure and filthy mathematics will be swept into a proper receptacle along
with it.