| I was wondering how come I had less posts than before: I asked my self if maybe I had travelled back in time, or if I had seen the future writing my other posts. But now I know: you (Robert) eliminated the non-themed posts of this thread.
I think this could be a solution to my paradox:
We admit, from the paradox, that TOE implies TOE. Now, for the TOE to imply the TOE, this second implied TOE should imply the TOE. but as TOE=TOE, or TOE is identical to TOE, then the TOE that the implied TOE implies is the TOE that implies this TOE and so, implies itself. So it would have has to be impplied to imply, and if it implies, it has to be impplied. but as what it implies is what it has been implied, then it can never impply without being impplied and can never be imppplied if it doesn't implly. So it never starts to impply and be imppplied because it would need one to form the other, the other to form the one, and both to form both. |