[N0B0DY]

That's some great work, guys. It helps alot to explain your position, and like I said before it conforms to the standard model, Lloyd's model, Lynd's model, and quite a few others. Theories of relativity and evolution are ingenius really, being based on duality and change, everyone observes dualistic principles and change in everyday life so they must be right.

I had thought that you would pick up on the "young/old doesn't negate age" or, further, breathing - an in-out mechanism that ceases if both aspects occur simultaneously. This breathing mechanism is pertinent to incorporating the religious aspects of the TOE, or the gateway that I spoke about, whereby the yogic breathless state must be attained. Contrary to popular belief, as is depicted in the wave structure of matter, the universe doesn't breathe. So I made it a point to go deeper into the negation of existence in its entirety through absolute unification, to say that, of course, you can have two age perspectives at the same time, but you can't literally be two ages at the same time. You can't be 10 if you're 20, and the absolute universe would have to absurdly be both, so I justify that the absolute universe is neither - the universe is not a human.

There is an infinitely subtle and narrow line that allows relativity to function infinitely. I think if purveyor of knowledge stuck around long enough, we would have seen eye-to-eye on quite a few things because we were pretty much at this same point here. He suggested that the unification of north and south rendered north and south always, whereas I suggested that absolute unification negated both north and south. The reason for the argument was that the equator can be reduced infinitesimally while retaining north and south - forever. Yet, this cumulative polarity can't exist without non-existence at the absolute center in order for there to be two poles - two poles divided by what? There is no singular state in between that renders an accurate break, so the rendering must be the result of non-existence being abstractly divided infinitely; and, further, this absolute point exists nowhere within the everywhere, so to speak, if we were to remove any infinitesimal point from the whole. In other words, literal non-existence must carry throughout all abstract existences in order to render impressions of existence. The inverse doesn't and can't apply, which is my argument with Lloyd.

I appreciate the time you've offered and the work you've put into your search for truth, and I've been looking for someone who would meet me half way to perhaps better express my picture. It has been suggested that the Yin/Yang symbol adequately explains things, much like your depictions of white and black, each containing aspects of each other. Yet, it doesn't explain the absolute unification of white and black, which would be neither white nor black, nor would it be grey (similar to infinitesimal polarity). It would be non-existent, which I would describe as clear, but that doesn't do it justice. So I think the absolute state must remain indescribable.

I noticed, though, that you mentioned white is composite and that blue, yellow and red are intrinsic. It reminded me of the proposed intrinsic properties of the electron, which are now being considered as relativistic. So perhaps you might elaborate on this point here to explain why these colors above are independent.

Also, is it possible to edit the pictures? It's hard to read with them being so large.