Is there an easier way to explain the complex nature of Postulate H or should it be scraped from the math world completely? 

Does working on the computer better or hinder your understanding of the figures and language in this book? Why?

How does this compare to Mendeleev and his research on the Periodic Law?

“Every ostensible paradox in hyperbolic geometry is offset by a complementary one.” Does this work for math as a whole? Was the author correct in making that assumption? 

The author gets fed up with the inconsistent nature of figure 224 and said: “Geometric diagrams should be our servants and not our master” What does he mean by this? Has the author (so far) done a good job of making Non-Euclidean Geometry our servants?

Does hyperbolic geometry have any sort of "edge" on performing calculations in any specific geometrically applicable science?