>>13936815i believe the arguments which the "negative numbers" people produce, to then believe there are infinite amount of negative numbers (a negative number being less than "1" and "0" being what nobody knows what the fuck is currently), over what you just siad
>basically i think negatives are the lowest number to infinity but "0" is lower than 1 still - from what you saidfurthermore - but this might be schizo for /sci/ and this is to no effect anyways... - i think computers should have "less than 0" as a number in an array. to then start there (1 less than 0) to count upwards starting at 0
>>13936793i like how the body is laid out, from fingers, to half-finers, to hand, to atm, to body and from width of hand-to-hand, and this distance the body overall. but thats geometry
i know you are just shitposting but it is interesting, to wonder why we have only 5 fingers
maybe it is "random" or an "accident" for us t have 5 fingers (and toes) from monkeys?
i wont discuss this further (but ill listen to what you reply with, many times as you want) but many another anon will
who knows? could help bump the thread lol! i wont complain
