We need a foundation in applied math, particularly around computational theory flexible enough to encompass quantum computing even as its foundations are not yet complete. What is needed is linkages between math and physical theory via information theory and computation, and triadic semiotics is the linkage layer we need to estaplish. In doing so we must untangle more of the structure of the small numbers, the first three encompassing the rest via semiotics, the growth of signs. We can then say that dynamics is the action of signs, and demonstrate their active structure.

We don't expect that Peirce's architectonic logic and metaphysic of sign is complete, but it is an essential guide as his logic drives us forward from the categories to the signs and how they act, flow and connect. It will be possible to translate any archetypal system of ancient coded wisdom into signs, but we cannot know exactly how these signs and categories operated within the cultures and minds that created them. We invite holders of wisdom traditions to link there concepts and categories to this basic continuum of signs and sign actions such that they can become valuable informational artifacts of our collective histories. As these systems were created in contemporary minds, and come to us from our collective heritage as they do, we are now freed to create and recreate these traditions as in pleases us now and in the future. We owe it to ourselves and our future to passionately preserve every bit of it. Not as superstition to stop thinking but as mandalas of the opening of our minds to past and future.

The reference to continuum in Card systems is a reference to Peircean thirdness, the space of law and rule. The forfront of theoretical physics is beginning to take cues from information sciences and so if there is a grounding of these theories in signs and semiotics, ideally an isomorphism, we might suggest that Peirce already had the solution. Peirce's continuum is the actual rules and habits in play with the local sign flows, so if the rules are set in the beginning, Peirce could be right that they are habits of an intelligence that is the mathimatical/physical laws as we find them with the methods of science.

To describe information systems and languages, we don't need to explain how our systems emerge from random bumping and relating of countless atoms and molecules without any plan to guide the way. Information systems are designed, not grown and evolved. On the other hand, the need for and description of mechanical recipes for computation arises in a long history of sign use and the spontaneous emergence of human language in all its many forms. In a sense computing itself emerges from symbolic language in a way that is deeply analogous to the emergence of the languages of life in the signed languages of DNA/RNA codons that record a digital description that is absolutely necessary to be living systems. The metabolic structures that manage the free energy cascade driven by the diurnal pumping against 5000+ of the sun to the 3K background at night.