I feel a lot better with recent posts that may clarify some things and also talk about mainstream concerns which can possibly free me a bit to talk to another audience of people who may look through my math ideas and wonder about implications.

To me that's a lot of fun, but it's also problematic as to ruffling feathers and possibly drawing harsh criticism so I will discuss some implications I think result in a very broad way. (Yes it turns out that people being mean and nasty to you is not fun, so it's best to avoid it if possible.)

The biggest implications in my opinion cover the way you look at some abstract mathematical ideas around the subject of groups, which is kind of big. That one is where I got upset in the past as I felt that mathematicians had to respond to that possibility and in a big way if only to handle mathematical consistency.

And I LOVE emphasizing that I'm NOT a mathematician. The reality though is that I have a B.Sc. in physics so that's not exactly putting myself down as I'd rather have notability on the physics side if possible. And physics is cool, so I have no problem emphasizing that I'm not a mathematician.

On the physics side the implications of the mathematics are rather fascinating, and delve into areas very hard where I like to think there is most impact with quantum chromodynamics. Like I find it fascinating that my research indicates things like how you can have entanglement mathematically which could explain some things, say about quarks. Which is all I'll say in that regard.

Some of the more recent simpler things where I've had a LOT of fun with modular arithmetic fascinate me because of what it may say about how people have been DOING mathematics research over the last hundred years or so in terms of how they might have missed some easy things.

Looking back over what I have here I'm a bit wary, and wonder if that's even enough for someone curious, but also think I may have said too much in terms of giving fuel to critics.

Oh well.

James Harris