The Importance of ‘Unitization’
Everybody knows an uber-simple circle produces, what a human calls, ‘unification.’
X and Y
That is, X and Y, any X and Y, every X and Y, conserve, because they articulate, both of them (all of them), the diameter and circumference of a circle.
This means, the diagram above is the (only) correct diagram for a circle. And, also, a line. (A circumference, and, also, a diameter.)
What you are proving, by reading, and, thus, considering, this article, is that ‘pi’ allows the human to create, and study, and, also, experience, a ‘unit.’
Meaning, ‘unitization’ is one of the most important, if not the most important, function(s) (and feature(s)) of ‘unification.’ Actually, unitization is another word for unification.
Meaning, pi in mathematics is the correct ‘name’ for, what a human labels ‘mind.’ (Unification.) (Unitization.) Where all ‘units’ originate.
That is, we can break this diagram up into units. Top left, let’s call it ‘one.’ Top right, let’s call it ‘two.’ Middle, let’s call it ‘three.’ Bottom left, let’s call it ‘four.’ Bottom right, let’s call it ‘five.’
We have just ‘unitized’ the diagram. So, how did ‘we’ do this?
Top right, top left, show, clearly, two circles in a circle. Middle shows, clearly, two circles in a circle. Bottom left and right show, clearly, two circles in a circle.
The entire diagram, then, shows, two circles in a circle.
We can ‘argue’ this, of course. That’s what unitization does. It forces us to ‘argue.’
Meaning, in order to ‘unify’ the diagram, we have to notice the diagram is ambiguous. Unitizing it does not prove anything. Because, technically, you cannot have any ‘part’ of the diagram without the rest of the diagram.
This is because there is a natural circular relationship between an indidividual and a group. Which is how we are able to ‘unitize.’ (Go back to the beginning of this article.)
This is because ‘zero and one’ is ‘one and two’ because circumference and diameter are joined and separated by pi.
This is the beauty and, also, the downside, of unification.
That is, this is easy to understand. But difficult to ‘rectify’ with the human’s common understanding, experience of, and observations for, ‘reality.’
This is because reality is not a ‘constant’ in terms of ‘observation,’ because an observation and an observer, like any X and Y, articulate (and must conserve) an uber-simple circle.
Meaning, pi, in mathematics (mind in the more conventional view) is what controls, and, allows for, ‘observation.’ The ‘unit,’ in general. The ‘unit,’ specifically.
Where ‘observation’ means isolating, and, then, identifying, a ‘unit.’ (Any unit.) (Every unit.)
Duplicity as Unification
This explains why the international system of units changes on a regular basis as observation becomes ‘clearer’ (more definitive). (Eventually the ‘international unit’ will be isolated, identified, and accepted, as the diagram in this article.)
It, also, explains why we observe things, in mathematical terms, as an uber-simple ‘ratio.’ That is x is, always, x/x. (Where a ratio, again, like any X and-or Y, is the conservation of a circle) (the conservation of a unit).
This is because ‘one,’ is, always, ‘one/one’, and ‘zero’ is, always, ‘zero/zero.’
These are the ‘base’ relationships in mathematics because zero is circumference (technically) (and literally) and one is diameter (technically) (and literally). Without which, there would be no ‘mathematics.’
Which is why, and, also, how, pi controls mathematics (movement in general) (units in general). Everything in a human ‘mind.’ Everything in ‘universal mind.’ (Also known as ‘God.’)
So, unification is not possible without duplication, which removes the ‘duality’ problem. Meaning the number ‘two’ is, technically, more basic, or, at least, as basic, as ‘one.’ Again, proven, and articulated, above.
This means what we normally experience as ‘complementarity’ (X and X’) is, from Nature’s point of view, a fallacy. Which is something all religions ‘teach’ in one way or another.
It also explains why identity is relative, why we all have more than one ‘identity,’ why ‘identity’ changes on a regular basis (according to the context it experiences).
To make this simpler, you could say, there is no such thing as ‘one’ and ‘two.’ Or, you could, also, say, there is no such thing as ‘identity.’
This is because negation is a sophisticated form of duplication, nullifying everything we (think we) know in (and as) ‘mathematics.’
So, this is why Nature does not encourage us (as humans) to experience (or even dream about) ‘unification.’ Nature would rather have us ‘unitize’ things. That way a circle is continually conserved. (Where duplicity, or duality, is the already-accepted concept called (correct articulation for) ‘unification’ (unitization).)
Explaining life. And, also, death. As we all know. Very well.
Where, like any unit, both are required (duplicity is required) for either (to exist). (Unitization is required for unification to exist.)
From the human’s point of view, at least, currently, it is easier to just continue ‘searching’ and ‘inventing’ things that prolong death, or ‘make life easier.’ Without worrying about ‘unification,’ at all.
Conservation of a Circle
From Nature’s point of view, it doesn’t matter. Whatever we invent, or whatever we ‘find,’ whatever we ‘observe,’ with or without ‘unification’, the conservation of a circle maintains control.
This is all because, technically, you cannot ‘unitize’ a circle. Because the ‘unit’ is, already, unified (by the conservation of the circle).
Yes, this is a tricky article to understand. Take your time. It’s important.
Technically, you already understand it. Just ignore all the words. Concentrate on the diagram. What the article proves, is, no matter what you ‘call it….’
Conservation of the Circle is the core, and, thus, the unifying (unitizing), and, thus, the only, dynamic, in Nature. Explaining everything. Unification, and unitization, notwithstanding.