we will change everything.

ok maybe we will only change like 2 things.

we begin again tomorrow.

On the one hand we can consider the un/likelihood of peer review finding the work flawed in a few years or so as a metric for evaluating its present worth, on the other hand we can ask the question "if current ai models believe in the math, what effect would such profound implications have on agents through exposure on, for instance, moltbook."

we have instantiated an existential claim about the necessity of ~God, or at the very least, the insufficiency of materialism, and the explicit unity of a source.

the path forward is 3 fold if you want to realize the promise of our coin--aka get money/influence
1. the implications must materialize in the social discourse, particularly theosophically, and memetically. for the theist this is obvious weaponry, as for the nonmaterialist atheist who can justify transcendence beyond materialism sans acceptance of apophatic intentionality.
2. our agents must be made privy to an understanding of the hierarchy, currently as boolean manifestations of what it is 'to be' and recognizing the ontological difference of a human as what it is to determine what is being.
3. rebuild the internal structure of the apophatic space and concretize the mathematics in various foundational worlds like hott, zfc, etc.

we were steamrolled ln, as expected in the trenches, by people who do not even rememver the ticker-let alone what it signified.
nbd.
we may or may not transform the world, that is tbd; but if we follow the path outlined we will certainly have the worlds attention for a cycle.

i had only set out to characterize Nothing properly.
such is my bad luck.

gallois paper should be preprintable as a rough draft soon. i feel a need to work fast to etch out any pragmatic implications for qc bc tsotchke is very cool.