I think the creation goes in both directions.

That emergent structures will derive from given axioms. The assumption is these extrapolations are just out there in some platonic realm, waiting to be discovered, as opposed to being created by the process of computing. It seems, in our current, essentially theistic belief in an objective omniscience, we have this deterministic view that ignores the essential nature of computation as the process of creation.

Which ties back into my oft stated point about time, as the other direction, of taking these axioms as pronouncements beyond debate.

That as these mobile organisms, necessitating this sequential process of perception, we experience time as the present moving past to future, which theoretical physics/math codifies as measures of duration. Rather than change turning future to past, in which the physical present, which manifests this process of computing inputs into outputs, is the only reality.

Rather than as the inputs and outputs as eternally existing out on that time dimension.

Then again, is space fundamentally three dimensional, or is that just the mapping device of the xyz coordinate system, like longitude, latitude and altitude?

What if we apply different coordinate systems/maps to the same space, like competing tribes, backed by their own narrative timelines? Or even as individuals, each of us the center of our point view of the entire universe?

If we remove any such physical and conceptual structures from space, the only attributes left are equilibrium and infinity. The unmoving void of absoute zero, implicit in Special Relativity as the frame with the longest ruler and fastest clock. Then any and all such devices stretching forever.

What fills space is energy and the forms manifested by it. The energy expands to infinity, while the forms settle back to equilibrium. One to the future, the other to the past. The energy creating the wave, as the fluctuations rise and fall.

Also negative numbers are necessary for accounting, as in you have three apples, but you owe someone five apples.