[mkirkpatrick]

The steps that need to be taken,(apart from big ones)are to have an infinite goal with a
relative point of reference,to become supersymmeterised to provide maximum cohesion
and idea bondation,a collective pool of linking notions,readily available to all participants
via earpieces and headsets.Ego negation will be needed to complete this task.



regards michael.

[Eric]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick The steps that need to be taken,(apart from big ones)are to have an infinite goal with a relative point of reference...

If the goal is infinite, then there is no POINT to a TOE. If the point of reference is relative, then the entire pointless effort will be relative.

Ego negation will be needed to complete this task.

Yes.

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by Eric If the goal is infinite, then there is no POINT to a TOE. If the point of reference is relative, then the entire pointless effort will be relative. Yes.

Thanks for that affirmative reply,we now need the next step.


regards michael.

[Eric]

The next step would be the first step, in arriving at a TOE.

It obviously can't begin with "everything", because that's where it's supposed to end.

So if it can't begin with a "relative", then how does it begin with an "absolute"?

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by Eric The next step would be the first step, in arriving at a TOE. It obviously can't begin with "everything", because that's where it's supposed to end. So if it can't begin with a "relative", then how does it begin with an "absolute"?

Maybe like within the Absolute lies all.so we start with all,and finish with everything?


regards michael.

[Eric]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick Maybe like within the Absolute lies all, so we start with all and finish with everything?

Can't assume the Absolute and begin inside of it. Have to prove the Absolute and then get inside of it. (what's the difference between "all" and "everything"?)

The Absolute has to be "(in)dependent" and not "relative". That supplies the implications to get inside of it.

It also states the goal of where to begin.

To prove the existence of the Absolute (something), one has to first prove the impossiblity of absolute nothing (non-existence).

A TOE can not be started by assuming something absolute and then saying therefore, absolute nothing does not exist. Nor can it be started by saying that something and nothing as a relative pair, are the starting point.

No asumptions whatsoever.

[Mr. Nobody]

Energy within a closed system cannot be created nor destroyed only transformed.
The first law of thermodynamics is where you start and where you finish. It might not be sexy, but it sures looks like a TOE to me and we have known about it for hundreds of years

[5589]

Originally Posted by Mr. Nobody Energy within a closed system cannot be created nor destroyed only transformed. The first law of thermodynamics is where you start and where you finish. It might not be sexy, but it sures looks like a TOE to me and we have known about it for hundreds of years

Can I use the first law of thermodynamics to create compelling dialogue for my new novel? How about using it to attend class?

[Eric]

Originally Posted by 5589 Can I use the first law of thermodynamics to create compelling dialogue for my new novel? How about using it to attend class?

What is not created (therefore can not be destroyed) is certainly where a TOE needs to begin.

But "thermodynamics" (active mass) should not be assumed at the beginning.

What is not created, has no equal or greater, partner or opposite.

[5589]

Originally Posted by Eric What is not created (therefore can not be destroyed) is certainly where a TOE needs to begin. But "thermodynamics" (active mass) should not be assumed at the beginning. What is not created, has no equal or greater, partner or opposite.

How can a TOE begin with something that cannot be perceived?

My theory, Flucidity, holds that we can know of something through its representation.

Is there a way we can represent 'what is not created', in this example?