The then is environmental, no?
We have a search sequence or a prposition in traditional algorithmic and computational format: eg let a + b )then we get ab etc.)
Once we let the then sequence element drop, the former 1st part has to alter to account for that:
if y .
This though has 3, at least 3 that I can perceive now, operational elements constitutional to it:
the loop of self ref. ie if y . if y . and so on
the Environment/time of person doing the if sequence. they might fancy adding that in:
then a + b (which is why am saying the algorithmic form contains the environment, the inference of using energy into power: if a + b then am using my power to make ab. Its a closure in its abstract sense.. (which might be interesting to explore, no?)
The other element of environment is saying:
If Y .
humm
If X .
or
If y . . y
etc
which can be collided with one another
or not..
they are def collidable, linkable in a way that stuff like:
If xzxz .
might not entirely collide with
If y .
or with
If .. .. X
etc..
Because we are doing various frequencies various “sets”.
Through ofcourse we can get elements of each to collide..
(was refering to sequence as a whole..)
ie
If y .
collides with
If . y
differently to how it might collide – or not – with
If x.z
because the range of sequences is different the frequency is different..
Well.. That is how it seems to me anyway..
Chigau?
Wrong?