Laegna Comparisons

In Laegna, it’s not specifically true that when one number is smaller than another, another one cannot be smaller.

While Latin comparisons often work, consider this:

= is equality and when it’s having little space in the middle - inequality.

When you rotate the same symbol 90 degrees, you can add it before the normal equality and it means equality in infinity.

You can write in two-digit notation of R and T, typical to Laegna - R is the rotated, T the non-rotated equality.

The infinity equality is opposite to normal equality: to be “true”, you rather expect it to be non-equal, different from local equality. For example, police of two countries is equal, but for this they are different; houses in the village are equal rather while they are different in color and shape; but despite this they are houses - if they all look the same, they are rather some other thing than group of houses, properly, so if they are equal in infinity, they are “false”. While locally, a house is with given criteria such as door, roof and floor; in infinity it rather matters that having a house also needs you need some unique style.

Where = and =, which is broken at center like I Ching yin nine, getting = = of character-width (where < and > are also having a “space” in the middle to form a lack of it); this breakage means the logical position is known to not exist there, meaning you did not write the position nor plan to write it.

Latin version, which is having a line on =, < or >, cancelling it, still forms the opposition and has nearly the same Latin meaning (”Latin” still means it follows Laegna conventions, for example in actual Latin you don’t necessarily use this convention for < and >).

a < b

b < a

In Laegna, it’s possibly not a contradiction. Given that letters alone have smaller value, together they have bigger value, or they have value, which in infinity creates qualitative properties, so that both numbers reach above another and add to the measured qualities: both numbers can be bigger, given that with only one number, you have worse solution (it comes from circle of operations where suddenly, certain solutions excpect the “bigger” and “smaller” in such way, not in absolute logic boxes).

a < a, a > a

This can be a paradox, for example whatever value you assign to a, the actual outcome is having a smaller value; or that if you assign a value, the circle of calculations fits rather that the value was smaller.

This could be seen as a communist joke, but rather:

Where a = a, you can have an infinity value or ideal of a in some realistic context (i.e. sine) and futuristic dream (i.e. cosine) involved as typical; a rather does not equal itself if it’s not the good-enough version of fulfilling it’s quality given by it’s definition or outcome or position in relations.

Moreover, when two variables are compared: equality is often seen as positive operation and thus, two positive values are rather more equal than two negotive values. This is a complex theorem and whether you need a classic equality for a given solution, or this one, appears in circulation of values and solutions - the solutions rather fit your given criteria after passing all the ^T and ^R paradox (I call them Turing and Luring or R(a/u)ring) you might find out that actually, the concept of your solution being equal to itself might not hold in solely classical constitution.