Sure, but anything that tried to explain the observations would be a dark matter theory, and if that theory involved particles, it’d be a particle theory.

Dark matter isn’t a theory, nor is it particles, it’s just a body of observations that’s poorly named. In that sense, dark matter definitely exists, we just don’t know in what shape or form.

They don’t “communicate” faster than light, the wave function itself is non-local and collapses non-locally.

Dark matter is not a thing, it’s an observation, a phenomenon that was poorly named. There’s so much evidence under the name “[d]ark matter” that we can’t discount it as a real phenomenon. We just don’t have a strong evidence for a single dark matter theory (theory in the scientific sense of the word, not the colloquial one).

It’s not “inflating”, it’s “insularum” (they also used to use the tilde as a shorthand for m and n), using the old long s

No, it’s correct. You define the operation by it’s properties. It’s not saying that “a plus 0 = a” but “the result of applying the binary operation ‘+’ to any number with 0 should give the original number.”

• is just a symbol. You could instead write it as +(a,0)=a and +(a,S(b))=S(+(a,b)).

You have to have previously defined 1=S(0), 2=S(1), 3=S(2), and so on.

The system works perfectly, it just looks wonky in base 10. In base 3 0.333… looks like 0.1, exactly 0.1

Do you know what an irrational number is?

Sure, let’s do it in base 3. 3 in base 3 is 10, and 3^(-1) is 10^(-1), so:

1/3 in base 10 = 1/10 in base 3
0.3… in base 10 = 0.1 in base 3

Multiply by 3 on both sides:

3 × 0.3… in base 10 = 10 × 0.1 in base 3
0.9… in base 10 = 1 in base 3.

But 1 in base 3 is also 1 in base 10, so:

0.9… in base 10 = 1 in base 10

Carbohydrates are the ones with (H20)n

But snakes are legless lizards. Link to youtube

Edit: Wrong link, I’ll leave the previous one anyways because it’s also fun https://youtu.be/_5jNZyoSszE