reply to post by JaxonRoberts
Assuming of course we're not dealing with five-dimensional objects in a basic Euclidean geometric universe and given the essential premise that all
geo-mathematics is based on the hideously limiting notion that one plus one equals two, and not as Astemeyer correctly postulates that one and two are
in fact the same thing observed from different precepts, the theoretical shape described by Siddus must therefore be a
Everything else is popycock.
Isn't that so?