Post by Eugene 2.0 on May 4, 2023 14:50:43 GMT
Let's imagine a plainest process that is a single step action that can be described as this:
if there was A, then B came (i)
This can be interpreted as
One resulted in two (ii)
Because A has changed into B (where A≠B). The last one seems to be the same or similar to
if there was n, then n+1 came (iii)
If we put (ii) into (i), we'll have:
if there was one, then two came (iv)
The meaning of (iii) and (iv) are common, except for n there is one, and n+1 is two. Which is correct.
So, it's not impossible that the natural number sequence is an example of the simplest change that may be taken as some kind of a foundation or a type for other changes.
if there was A, then B came (i)
This can be interpreted as
One resulted in two (ii)
Because A has changed into B (where A≠B). The last one seems to be the same or similar to
if there was n, then n+1 came (iii)
If we put (ii) into (i), we'll have:
if there was one, then two came (iv)
The meaning of (iii) and (iv) are common, except for n there is one, and n+1 is two. Which is correct.
So, it's not impossible that the natural number sequence is an example of the simplest change that may be taken as some kind of a foundation or a type for other changes.