Maths is representational of reality or of a perception of reality. It is not reality. By virtue of being representational it is relative and thus may at best deal with relative absolutes.

Furthermore, our maths as it stands today represent a perception, not reality.

Zero, for instance is the only representation of an absolute in maths, since all numbers are measures of the absolute, yet nothing cannot be absolute, it must be relative to something, and a measure of nothing is still nothing, so zero can't be nothing.

In fact Zero actually means the whole, everything, and the following numbers represent divisions or fractions or fractals of that whole, which seems fitting for the representation of a fractal based reality, no?

Allowance by itself does not dis-allow other absolutes or absolute absolutes but, it does allow for their dis-allowance.

Nothing is possible without allowance. Saying for instance"swearing is not allowed" is not necessarily dis-allowing swearing. Dis-allowing swearing is actually preventing it from swearing from occurring. If swearing occurs then you have allowed it.

It is the one Law above all others simply because it necessarily precedes all others.

There can only be one absolute absolute, otherwise one would contradict the other and neither would be absolutely absolute.

It's not just my universe It's the logical universe, as opposed to the rational one, and unlike rationale, being independent of rules, context and purpose logic requires no specification of rules, context or purpose.

Sorry bro, no offence intended but the only shooting I can see is you shooting yourself in the foot.