Bob: i can i i everything else . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Alice: balls have zero to me to me to me to me to me to me to me to me to
Bob: you i everything else . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Alice: balls have a ball to me to me to me to me to me to me to me
Bob: i i can i i i everything else . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Alice: balls have a ball to me to me to me to me to me to me to me

It's funny how some of the things we do to stave off boredom tent to be things that stimulate or challenge our minds. Or maybe it's not a coincidence? The Sumerians who developed the first concepts that eventually became mathematics also developed the particularly compelling Royal Game of Ur, and the same can be said with Indians and chess.

Coincidence? I think not!

Mathematics, the basis of everything from physics to chemistry to biology. And hence, it must be older than any of them. So to understand nature and it's inner workings, we must first understand maths.

And what better way to understand something than to trace its history and development?

Humanity has always pride itself of it's position in nature. We have been preconditioned by society to see ourselves as special, unique, or chosen. How about non-human animals? How much can we identify ourselves with them? Even considering the lack of communication and understanding. David Armstrong's short story is about bridging that gap...and the ethical consequences thereof.

How much are animals like us, and how much are we like animals?

One of the most basic questions in biology throughout history is regarding our origins: how did we came to be? Paleonto-biologists look of answers in our past, evolutionary biologists look at other species (our biological cousins, so to speak). But developmental biologists look for it from how we were created: the first few moments of our conception.

By studying this, we may discover more than our origins, maybe even our purpose in nature.