Not exactly a plane/normal reply: IMHO, much simplier if use dual numbers[0] in lisp/lambda calculus context aka let a=lisp car and b-epsilon be lisp cdr. The

Not exactly a plane/normal reply: IMHO, much simplier if use dual numbers[0] in lisp/lambda calculus context aka let a=lisp car and b-epsilon be lisp cdr. Then normal calculations can also be symbolic, even if complex. Although, per Lewis Caroll's concept of imaginary numbers with no concept of 'time', this doesn't quite work per functions/lists needing 'time to compute' a result. Guess why Lewis Carrol's 'turing' white rabbit was always late. ?? car functions are real & cdr (functions) imaginary until realistically evaluated/looked @. White rabbit never had time to get rid of at least one free variable of squareroot(i) = 0. Can't think outside the box if can't complete the square / define the square boundaries. aka escape 0/'hole'. No going blue over 'escape, aboard, retry?' too! Although, one would thing endless repetitive real quad (quadriatic/quadraceps) exercises would lead to declining/-1 quad issues[3] at some point in the narrative. That'd require defining a lot of axionomic booles though. (Wachowski 'The Matrix' contructs not withstanding). If Lewis Carrol had known Andrey Markov[0], would the white rabbit have been able to learn the concept of time? (assumming Giuseppe Peano[1] doesn't enter the looking glass and the turing white rabbit stops reading the (sin() sub 0 * sin() sub 1 * .... sin() sub n) sequence / learns to complete the square at some point). ----- [0] : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceaNqdHdqtg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceaNqdHdqtg [1] Giuseppe Peano. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peano_axioms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peano_axioms [2] Andrey Markov. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markov_chain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markov_chain [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imaginary_unit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imaginary_unit