Begin.

In the endless ocean of numbers, there is no obligatory path, no imposed beginning. You can choose to start at 1, or at 7. Maybe you choose π, an irrational path of decimals with no end. Or you jump straight to 10,000, just because you can. In the abstract space of numbers, any number is equally suitable as a starting point. Yet people often seem to start in the same places. Why?

Is it just coincidence that we often start at 1, or at 0? Are these numbers really more special than all the others, or is it just habit, instilled by educational systems, conventions and culture? Zero and one have an almost mythical status in our systems. In computer science, for example, they form the binary foundation of everything. In mathematics, they are starting points for series, for counting, for definitions.

Perhaps we are looking for something to hold on to in this infinity. The human brain, which constantly seeks structure in chaos, longs for anchor points. What is simpler than the number 1? What feels more logical than starting at the beginning, even if that beginning is arbitrarily chosen?

But imagine that these preferences are less random than they seem. What if there are invisible patterns that impel us to choose precisely those numbers as a starting point? Patterns that go beyond culture or education. A kind of numerological gravity, subtle but present. Or algorithmic preferences that have nestled in our collective subconscious over the years, driven by technology, data analysis, choice architecture.

Is there a higher logic behind the choices we make in a space that should be free of logic? Or is it just evolutionary efficiency—making choices that have been made before because they feel easier?

A conspiracy may sound far-fetched, but the idea that our choices are driven—either by human systems or by something beyond them—is worth pondering. Perhaps we are merely travelers in a landscape of numbers whose paths were mapped long before we began to walk.

Or maybe… it's just a coincidence.

We don't know for sure.
And maybe we shouldn't want to know that either.