Valid and this is very certainly my math bias poking through. Though I think to consider the false case of a gender binary, the 1-bit value being M or F would suggest it's describing the scope of gender expressions in memory values, and this interpretation seems to continue with the meme of it needing to be a 64-bit gender. So in correcting that falsehood, it would be a the space that have spots for all possible gender expressions.

While I agree the tautological approach of person['gender'] = "{Person's gender}" would accurately label all genders, I think the radical point to make is that the space itself is the confining factor. My point being the systems needed to properly represent a gender expression can only be approximated with finite discrete systems.

Agreed the difficulty of describing the gender space even would be near impossible! I always say the simplest way I can describe mine is: Ae^iαt^|💪> + Be^iβt^|💅> + Ce^iγt^|🤖>

|💪>, |💅>, and |🤖> of course being the base vectors I find most useful as invariant under my transformation.

Though, to ramble a bit

Please, this is a very serious conversation about very serious things like an n-dimensional gender hyperspace! Please refrain from nonsensical ramblings.

I guess the real question is, what would best represent your eigenvectors?