[N0B0DY]

Creation would be okay, and would solve the paradox, but the creation would have to be relative and non-literal - motion into absolute solidity or vacuity is impossible. Whatever the model used is fine, and as long as there is no mention of absolute there is no paradox - things exist, things move, etc., all according to relative laws.

However, when the absolute is considered, I guess you can call it outside of the laws or beyond the laws, there can be no variable densities of matter, gravitational or any force effects whatsoever, creation or annihilation, space or time, because the absolute must by default "exist" throughout any and all differentiable qualities and quantities.

It shouldn't be hard to express in words, because it really is very easy to understand. It is merely a matter of relative separation and absolute unification, and understandably conforming to the former because we exist as individuals. It is very difficult, if not impossible, to imagine existing as both ourselves and, say, the earth. Yet the absolute universe simultaneously "exists" as everything everywhere, and I put "exists" in quotes because that state can be equated with nothing nowhere. There would be no difference in this point, "." and a point even an infinite distance away.

Can you even begin to fathom how they can be the same point, and that because they are exactly the same point, there can really be no such thing as a differentiable point? If so, then we can ask what this absolutely full/vacuous, or fully empty, thing is made of and whether or not it can be said to possibly be in and/or contain any motion.

[Fluent Piffle]

I AM Nature, and I have discovered an indoctrinated sense of contradiction, called sometimes 'paradox', within my evolved cultural understanding that has caused me unnecessary problems in my past, so I have decided to try to understand the true Nature of this most unwelcome thing, and thereby resolve to rid myself of it.

It does not exist in the other parts of Nature that I observe, so why do I allow such a thing to exist within myself, thereby becoming the cause of my own contradiction? - This just makes me see 'paradox' where there is none. Instinctively, I feel I am on the right path with this thinking, and I deduce that this is because my instincts are Nature also. If I can just hold on to them, and not let myself be swayed by other people's misconceptions, I may just have a chance of understanding this Nature as it truly is...

But wait! By the same reasoning, I can also know how Nature truly is by understanding myself! Wow, that's great, because I am with myself all the time! That means that I only need to become more vigilant of my own actions, and equate what I find to an expanding Cosmological understanding...

How wonderful! This non-contradictory stuff really works! Isn't motion a most glorious thing?

When we "cause motion" this is just the manipulation of space.

Yep. Space moves. It manipulates itself. What else can One thing do?


pif.

[Graybeard]

Ok ... I suppose where I made the mistake was that I was not talking in the total abstract. By paradox I meant 'The chicken or the egg' or 'Achilles and the Tortoise'.

Nob ... If I get your drift, you are talking about an extremely abstract level of cosmic reality. The Universe as a single fundamental entity, with no further division. And at this level what you are saying appears to make sense. I say appears, because I am no judge.

Originally Posted by N0B0DY

Can you even begin to fathom how they can be the same point, and that because they are exactly the same point, there can really be no such thing as a differentiable point?

Yes ... I can fathom it, just, but this is, for me, heavy going philosophy. The universe as an absolute. Your reaching to explain the next step, whereas I am still concerned that we are not yet balanced on the first. One day I'll be there, but for the moment I can't take the stairs two at a time.

I thought F/Pifs example of the paradox being within ourselves an excellent explanation.

cool bananas ... greg

[Fluent Piffle]

heavy going philosophy.

People make it heavy with unnecessary contradiction. We ('civilisation') have just all allowed ourselves to become this way.

Your reaching to explain the next step, whereas I am still concerned that we are not yet balanced on the first. One day I'll be there, but for the moment I can't take the stairs two at a time.

This is an excellent example of how things are misconstrued, and why it is necessary to come to certain conclusions for ourselves. At this level, we cannot be 'told', but must surmount the 'problem' from within, where it originates, and where it re-connects with reality.

If you want to know about 'time', don't ask a policeman!

Cool and fruity, Greg!


pif.

[N0B0DY]

"At this level, we cannot be 'told', but must surmount the 'problem' from within, where it originates, and where it re-connects with reality."

"Contradictaphobia is not contagious, unfortunately."

[Fluent Piffle]

Originally Posted by N0B0DY

"At this level, we cannot be 'told', but must surmount the 'problem' from within, where it originates, and where it re-connects with reality."

"Contradictaphobia is not contagious, unfortunately."

Nobby seems to have a bit of a 'bee in his bonnet' about some perceived contradiction, so just to clarify, all 'problems' are perceived from within the individuals' understanding, and are not cosmological 'paradoxes'.

Neither do I exempt myself (as explained in my previous post) from my own sense of 'problem', or am I 'cured' in any way. It is something that all Humans have evolved necessarily, but which backfires on us at cosmological level of understanding.

The best we can do for each other is to help each other towards an agreeable understanding (the very essence of 'scientific enquiry', if I am not mistaken!), but when it comes to our unique positions within Space, we are on our own, at the last hurdle...

We do not have to do any of this enquiring. We can just as easily continue blindly, and poison ourselves in ignorance. Would that make you happy, if I just gave up, Nob?


pif.

[bottomlander]

Improve is always better than give up.

Yet time and tide wait for no one, really sometimes too difficult to improve, not to mention paradigm shift when faced a paradox.

Only now I notice that paradox and paradigm are of same prefix "parad".
Seems they both relate to "thought pattern".

Best Regards. Bottomlander

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by bottomlander

Improve is always better than give up.

Yet time and tide wait for no one, really sometimes too difficult to improve, not to mention paradigm shift when faced a paradox.

Only now I notice that paradox and paradigm are of same prefix "parad".
Seems they both relate to "thought pattern".

Best Regards. Bottomlander

Exactly Bottomlander.expand thıs a few poınts and the answer wıll appear?



warm regards mıchael.

[MJA]

Nature's Paradox

If it is true that there is no paradox in nature,
And all paradoxes are man made,
And it is also true that man is nature,
Then there is a true natural paradox,
Nature's paradox is man.

=
MJA

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by MJA

Nature's Paradox

If it is true that there is no paradox in nature,
And all paradoxes are man made,
And it is also true that man is nature,
Then there is a true natural paradox,
Nature's paradox is man.

=
MJA

You may well have a poınt there my friend.We are that whıch IS ?


regards mıchael