That's surprizing, your Post 155 reads like a will to power type thing. No offense intended, I actually like Nietzsche even though I disagree w/ him 100%.
I did enjoy your comments on "real" numbers. I've always been fascinated by i, not simply because the number makes no sense and yet is indispensible, but also because of it's mirrored relationship to "I". Could it be JUST an English thing?
When Moses asked the burning bush "Who are you" and the bush says "I am" it seems to me that God said all we need to know about Him and at the same time provided to us the ultimate goal; that is to move towards "I" such as He is and not merely the impossible, imaginary i that we all unfortunately happen to be (even those who will it otherwise).
I've always been fascinated by i, not simply because the number makes no sense ...
Oh, but it does make sense. I know "i" stands for imagninary (although in electronics they use "j" for the same concept), but it is not imaginary, it is just a way of getting around a limitation of mathematics. A lot of mathematics is like that. That is really what the whole of the Calculus is about, though most mathematicians would be scandalized by that suggestion. At least this is true for derivatives, I havn't thought enough about integrals to be sure, but suspect its true because differentiation is just anti-integration.
I do not understand your I/i illusion to the burning bush. Human beings are not imaginary, but God might be.
Hank