>>17870332
Where is A AND NOT A in the numeric systems people use? Publish a paper and prove math wrong. There's no such thing as a valueless value, you can have a value that is equal to zero though. It would literally not be defined if we exclude zero, that's how many numeric systems in the past worked. A lack of X is not X so that's just a straw man. How do you know that's exactly how it works? Did you try it on a piece of nothingness since you think it's a thing? You didn't add any number to 1. Who said there are two baskets? Why not 3? What step is being taken backwards in the case of apples in a basket? Who the fuck implied any directionality? Square root of 1 is just 1, there's nothing confusing about it. Stop changing the subject. It's literally undefined for real numbers I specifically mentioned them but in any case you are proven wrong by the fact that numeral systems can work without zero