I'm not 100% comfortable with the idea that n/0 retains the sign of n, 0 is neutral - not negative or positive. Although a division by a positive infinitesimal

I'm not 100% comfortable with the idea that n/0 retains the sign of n, 0 is neutral - not negative or positive. Although a division by a positive infinitesimal would retain the sign of the numerator, with zero I'd expect a result that was either both positive and negative, or neither. As far as I got into the paper, the proofs seemed somewhat circular and no significant value (from a mathematical standpoint) was covered. The comparison to the use of a negative square root was unreasonable - since even if i is not a meaningful value, it still can act as a useful intermediary, whose weirdness goes away at the end.