i always preferred algebra.
i'm quite drawn to circular shapes, and geometry in general. the thing about geometry is there is no end to your path of following the line. there is never an obvious start, or an obvious finish. sure, if you pick something with dynamic angles, you'll be sure to pick a point to begin; but who's to say it was the right point? or if that same point is the right [ending] angle? circles are geometry. circles have not point, no angles, no starts, no finishes. unless you break the circle. then you have interfered symmetry. do we like simmilarities and symetrical things? doubtful. but do we like repetition? this is doubtful as well. what if repetition is a product of a change? where some things are mostly simmilar, but there's something small that's changed. how small or how big is significant? does size even matter? we're back to geometry, and angles. it all has to add up to 360º in the end -- or in the grand circle of things. what if we have a rectangle, where two sides are once equal. over time, the left length grows, while the right decreases in size. this overwhelming slope brings obvious answers. suppose time passes, and those sides begin to in/decrease back to their equal size? which side is better? what if those sides switch lengths, that which was once smallest, has become to overwhelming length between the comparison of the two. check the scoreboard, we're still equal. and then again, a reversal of hierarchy. that smooth circle comes back, doesn't it?