[perspective exchange]

Consider that language can be used as a metaphor/model to better understand appearances of 'coincidence' and other rather inexplicable order in both physics/mathematics and bio-genetics/life through its axiom of dual, or relationship based, origination. Science has traditionally assumed that, at least predominately, explanations of observations should follow a 'line' or 'tree-like' structure branching out from a single, often 'point'-like, origin. And a general belief in increasing entropy follows directly from this paradigm. However, if the physical constants which blueprint our universe for life, as well as the tiered sequencing of DNA molecules, are interpreted as being like 'words' within a language that result from a binary (and further tiered ternary) origin, then the unbelievable 'order and progression' which seems the result of chance or chaos--analogous to viewing the symbols and words of a foreign language--is simply the arbitrary interaction of the exchange between the elements of the binary relationship (most fundamentally, this would be references of perspective).

For instance, if two people were talking in Chinese, I would see the symbols that are being used as chaotic and arbitrary, and it would seem rather amazing to me that one of these two persons would do some 'particular' behavior in response to such a complex array of coded symbols, and that, further, the other person might change in some way and therefore use different 'words' in the next communication as the result of the preceding conversation. In other words (pardon the pun), the language is not 'what's important' and would not be the creator of the behaviors for the constituents of the relationship, for they are arbitrary, but rather it is the agreed-upon meaning (the communication) which result from the ongoing interactions of reference and context that gives the 'word' its value to the overall system. So, consequently, as the language develops and becomes more complex and thereby more chaotic in appearance, the 'order' and symmetry of the behavior of the system actually increases, such that an observer of the 'foreign' language and only one of the participants (perhaps him/herself) would easily misinterpret the system as 'order stemming from chaos by chance' due to inability to 'see' or perhaps consider the participant on the other side of the language that falls like a curtain of code, not yet fully interpreted, between the contributors of the relationship. I cannot say the word 'pencil' to describe a bicycle because the history of interactions between the perspectives of individuals has come to this shared symbol, so the word 'pencil' becomes like an object, both referenced and assumed, and built upon like an axiom; and the relationship between the constants of physics and between the constants of mathematics, as well as their coded counterpart of genetic information are of the same fundamental workings. And like the observer who only sees the dividing 'curtain' of language and one of the participants of the conversation, and therefore assumes a linear progression from a point/static origin, we too have traditionally made this same oversight of the relationship which creates the arbitrary laws and codes until the further and further agreed upon meanings establish a level of communication to allow the system of 'order' itself to be pondered upon.

As for the binary (ternary) origination: One can say that no/thing exists, but there does exist a contrast, what one might call two types of 'nothing', as the finite nests between the overlapping infinitely small and the infinitely large, forming an interminable relationship as the 'something' that necessarily exists, interacting across the totality, two 'nothing's searching for each other and to understand.

Therefore, that which is created is communication; and the universe, world, life, etc. are not the end result, or what we move towards in terms of being and understanding, but rather the arbitrary in-between elements of exchange. So, the sharing of perspective, giving of one's self, is not 'from', but 'towards', God, and co-communication is the goal of understanding, and the happiness vs. pain scenario of the self is replaced by the Happiness that is only seen through someone else's eyes--we talk to each other until we understand each other, then we give ourselves to each other, fearless, and in this way speak, in a new language, the first words, like the babble of a baby, to God.