[Lloyd Gillespie]

Why, you are absolutely, absolutely right, David... Shame on us all, for being so blind...
regards

[dleviwing]

There is no shame in being able to see reality Lloyd. Just as there was no fabric for the emperor's cloths, there is no reality or meaning to many mathematical paradoxes.

[subversion]

Hey Archetype, you stole my theory! Ha ha, just kidding, it belongs to everything!

I definitely agree Archetype is saying something very important here, that any real value (i.e. non-zero) divided by nothing is the mathematical definition of everything! In simple terms, something divided by nothing is everything. Everything then, 1/0, is able to be defined. It is actually the opposite thing, zero, which cannot be defined. Therefore we have everything backwards, and it is because of our fear of what we think is unknown (everything). Optimists know that nothing is the only thing which is undefined, not everything, 1/0. This is exactly the same as how optimists know that you can only prove things are true, you cannot prove something false (except for nothing, see the law of laws).

Dleviwing, 1/0 is a kind of mathematical violation, but only depending on how you look at it, and besides which apparent contradiction is exactly what Godel predicted for a complete theory. Therefore I think the truth is apparent, but to see it one has to realize it with an open mind, something you have a very hard time doing I have found. Morality therefore is proven absolute, for a pessimist (one who doesn't believe truth is contradictory even if it's proven) will look at the true TOE and say, "that is complete nonsense!" So in conclusion, I would like to edify you that there is meaning to ALL mathematical truths, even the ones that appear as paradoxes. You should have been expecting this because Godel told you dummy! Everything is simultaneously completely positive and completely negative. That's just the way math works. Remember, a paradox is not a true paradox unless it can be viewed as both. So you're going to have to look at the bright side on this one buddy.

I'm sure more conversation will follow...

[baudrunner]

Back to one of my favorite conundrums, the mathematically "undefined". It is ironic that mathematics, the "pure science", as the primary tool for releasing mankind from the yoke of ignorance, is intended to be used to explain fully all in this physical realm and which yet establishes that a simple puzzle like dividing something by nothing cannot be defined.

We should consider that explanations of the physical world are not provided by mathematics so much as are the quantities and representations resulting from the calculation of problematic scenarios, provided that they can be quantified to begin with. Explanations of things are provided by words. So let's take another look at the "undefined".

Dividing a number (dividend) by another number (divisor) gives us the resulting number of times (quotient) that the divisor can be multiplied by in order to produce the original dividend. The rules of arithmetic state that any number multiplied by zero produces zero. Why is that? The rules of semantics, at least in my book, require that the result of multiplying any number by nothing yields the original number, because we obviously haven't done anything to it with anything. So it is better to say that a multiplication by zero is an empty term. So similarly, dividing a number by nothing must yield the original number since we haven't done anything to it with anything. Therefore is an empty term, not undefined in my book, simply an unnecessary calculus.

Now, this is not facetious. The term "undefined" was introduced into mathematics because it was assumed that both and must not be allowed to produce the same result, because they were different numbers. But the fact is that is not a number at all but the absence of anything, and therefore since of itself cannot be undefined since it has meaning, any product or quotient resulting from an implementation of it must of needs be defined properly. It is when we encounter the beast that we must revert to common sense and leave mathematics temporarily on the back-burner.

Might I ssuggest that we cannot use as being undefined and then use it to define something else unrelated unless we see the logic in my argument, and then use it for what it represents, certainly not anything related to the TOE, but rather emptiness.

[archetype]

I completely disagree with you sir Baudrunner. In order to have a complete theory, you must include the concept of what is undefined, what you cannot know. This concept is nothing. It is absolutely impossible to know nothing, because the very process of knowing is alien to the concept of nothing.

So 0 is the number which represents everything that is undefined, i.e. everything you cannot see, i.e. nothingness, i.e. what cannot be defined. If you take anything no times, you have nothing, so that correctly means that any number times 0 is 0. However, if we do the opposite, and divide by zero instead of multiply, then we arrive at the concept of everything (provided the dividend is a non-zero value to start with, otherwise the result is anything). In other words, you would have to add 0 to itself an absolute number of times in order to gain any appreciable value. This means that theoretically if you added 0 to itself with greater than infinite rapidity you would arrive at an appreciable value that is simultaneously both positive and negative.

Harmonygirl, I liked your comments about how time must work. Actually all of your beliefs and everything you've said is exactly what this theory about the number circle is saying too. You see, it is as if all possible storylines of our universe exist together eternally within a single instant (the instant represented by the circle itself and all it's revolutions), so all points on the circle in all its revolutions exist simultaneously, but we only experience one point at a time, just like you said. The circle does not depict time as being linear, it depicts our apparently linear time as being circular over infinitely large scales. When considering the system as a whole, all points ocurr simultaneously, in theory. Do you see?

Another way to say it is that every possible alternation of events is covered by all the rotations of the number circle, and between every single instant of time the circle rotates all times (imagine the way a fan looks in a strobe light, the motion we see is just an illusion based on the phase of the strobe light, well the arrow of time works the same way). The phase of our universe is such that we only experience one alternating train of events, but all the other events are happening too at the same time. Does this sound like what you're talking about?

[harmonygirl]

this is similar to the way I conceptualize time (realizing of course, that it is only connected to motion and exists in conception, rather than concrete terms). I have often pictured a spring as an example of combination of cyclical and linear that I believe is representative of time. I don't know if you have ever seen the british comedy show 'Red Dwarf', but they make fun of time using this conception (ie notions of parallel universes, time going backwards, etc). For me it makes intrinsic sense, otherwise the choices we make are simply random, which certainly doen't accord with nature and its cycles.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Archetype, the more I think about this idea, the better I like it. It has awakened something deeper within me, to see not only its value, but the values of its relations to other ideas. Just as an example; years ago I thought about a logical tautology of dividing mind and or matter to infinity, at which point the only logical answer possible would be spirit___now this is quite strange for an atheist like myself, yet I can't escape the sound logic of the idea___I like it... Keep up the great work...

regards
Lloyd

Originally Posted by archetype

Greetings everyone, and welcome to the thread which many of you have been
waiting for! My name is Lee and I have discovered a startling theory
about everything. Actually, it's not so much a theory, as it is a
realization.

What I have realized is that 1/0, the heretic of mathematics, is
improperly defined and this improper definition is what is preventing us
from seeing the amazing truth about everything. We say that 1/0 is
undefined, but this is wrong. The true definition is that 1/0=everything.
Therefore the theory of everything is synonymously the theory of one
divided by zero.

Just as multiplying any number by zero results in nothing, so too,
dividing any number by zero results in the opposite, everything!
Everything is a real mathematical value, literally the largest thing
you can possibly imagine. We can imagine the number "everything" to
be like all numbers added (or subtracted) together. All numbers added
(or subtracted) together represents the set of all sets, and it does contain
itself.

The amazing thing about the number "everything" is that it appears to be
simulataneously equal to both positive AND negative infinity. Only
virtually so, this is the puzzling result mathemeticians have always known
when you take the limit of 1/X as X approaches zero (ed. this should be
put in latex). Depending upon whether you approach zero from the negative
or positive side, you can show that 1/0 is equal to either positive or
negative infinity. This is true, but it is important to note that 1/0 is
the greatest value and that infinity is not as large, infinity only
approaches 1/0, getting as close as it can, but never making it. Infinity
is essentially any number which is arbitrarily close to 1/0, in a similar
way that 1/infinity is a number that is arbitrarily close 0.

Being so close to both negative and positive infinity, 1/0 seems to pose a
sort of contradiction, which has caused mathemeticians to fear it and to
label it as "undefined." But let me reiterate, we have nothing to be
afraid of, as this sort of contradictory nature is what Godel predicted.
Nothing, actually, is what is undefined.

If we can finally accept that 1/0 is a real number which represents the
mathematical value "everything," we can turn the number line into a number
circle, thus completing our knowledge and revealing the nature of
everything. I was marveled by this revelation and hopefully you will be
too!


http://s2.photobucket.com/albums/y9/...everything.jpg

Like the great wheel that was mankind's first invention, the number wheel
will change the way we live and understand things forever! That is
because the circle is a secret and "divine" shape, which embodies the
perfection of the universe. We can use the number circle as a paradigm
which explains to us the nature of time. At the top of the number circle,
0 represents the zeroth hour, the initiation of time, i.e. the big bang.
The big bang was a result of time/space inversal, which is what occurrs
everytime the arrow of time passes over what I have labeled the "axis of
time." This so called "time/space inversal" is what would happen if you
sent an object faster than the speed of light! As time progresses, it is
advanced by the expansion of the universe. Gravity is a force which
counters time, attempting to reverse it. Right when gravity and it's
counterpart, dark energy, spar off and cause the universe to almost reach
a poised steady-state, we can consider ourselves to be in the "middle" era of
time, and it is somewhere around this period that life forms will have
evolved and developed the theory of everything.

As the universe's expansion picks up speed again, we leave the "middle"
era of time and continue advancing to the "end." At the "end of eternity"
the arrow of time crosses over the axis again causing another inversal of
space/time, but in the opposite direction as before. This reversal is
triggered when the universe's expansion reaches greater than light speed
at less than planck scales. When the arrow of time reverses our universe
is played back in rewind (we will not witness this) until it reaches the
beginning of time and starts travelling forward again. Each new cycle
plays out an alternate universe based off the same starting conditions,
i.e. the same cosmic background radiation. The whole cycle was probably
initiated because it was possible to send something faster than the speed
of light in a parent universe, perhaps aided by a life-form.

So there you have it, the theory of everything. Actually this is mostly
just the cosmology aspects of the theory of everything. I am currently
writing an article for the site which describes all the other aspects of the
theory of one divided by zero, such as the unification of forces, etc.

It's the dawning of a New Era!

[archetype]

Greetings Sir Lloyd Gillespie, I am glad that you like my theory of 1/0

Allow me to share you a quick story which shows you how I discovered it, and then I will tell you a bit more.

It happened when I was at a happy social gathering and I overheard some individuals talking about the speed of light. They were discoursing about how an object becomes infinitely small and infnitely dense as it approaches the speed of light. At that point a sudden realization snapped in my mind, for I realized that if a particle were to exceed the speed of light it would have to become less than infinitely small, in other words, it would have to become negatively big! If the particle continued to accelerate beyond the speed of light, it would be getting bigger, in negative space. Now if you turn this around and imagine that you are in positive space, you have something that looks like the expansion of the universe. So I realized that exceeding the speed of light would cause an object to be turned inside out through an infinitely small point and expand out the otherside, and this exactly like what happeed in the big bang. I term this, time/space inversal. Using this intuition we can now view the expansion of the universe as a sort of negative lorrentz transformation that happens in all directions.

So as you can see, my theory was born from the concept that the big bang resulted from something (in another universe?) being sent faster than the speed of light, and this pivotal act we can term "time/space inversal." This concept of time/space inversal lead me directly to the number circle. Now in trying to come up with a symbol to represent the concept of everthing which the circle required, I labored long and hard. Then I realized, a symbol already existed for the concept of everything, and this symbol is 1/0. The way that I figured this out was by seeing that the number "everything" is simply the opposite reciprocal of 0, as conveniently all numbers on the number circle are the opposite recipocral of their number counterpart directly across from them. Since one is the base unit, we choose one divided by zero, as opposed to two divided by zero, to denote the measure of everything. It is important to note that two divided by zero is the same thing as one divided by zero, just the same as one times zero is the same as two times zero. Zero divided by zero, however, is something totally different, which represents the concept of anything, so do not be confused.

So that's the story of how I discovered the idea that 1/0=everything. We can think of 1/0 as the amount of energy/time in all, or simply as the amount of all. However, I actually had already come up with this idea (that 1/0=all) in highscool, but I was told that I was wrong and so I total forgot about it until the whole realization that the big bang was an act of timspace inversal akin to super-luminal violation which led me back to the realization that 1/0=all. Having discovered the same thing twice by accident apparently i was on to something. Maybe it was destiny? Maybe it was just an inevitable outcome of evolution?

So while I'm on a role here, we can see that there are three special numbers in math, nothing, everything, and anything. I call these the "absolute" numbers for certain reasons. These absolutes are all real numbers, denoted by 0, 1/0, and 0/0 respectively. 0/0 is the tricky concept which proves that contradictory things are true, and that true things are contradictory. But let us not worry about that for the time being, since it was Godel that predicted it with his "completeness" theorem (yes, I called it the completeness theorem on purpose).

What we really need in order to finish this theory about 1/0 is to explain the real/virtual difference between zero and one divided by infinity, and similarly, to explain how infinity is not quite 1/0. For example, can we use this rea/virtual concept of one divided by infinity to explain the perfect incremental process of time? You may be confused, but it has to do with planck time relating to the tick marks on the circle.

For our universe, effectively infinite speed is the speed of light, but absolute speed is 1/0, wich is a lot greater. Also in our universe planck represents the effective limit of infinite smallness, yet it is not completely small, like how 0 is. How can we use these principles to explain the apparent quantization of time, the perfect imperfection, and correlate this quantization to the instantaneous period of inflation which directly preceded the first "official" moment of time. Also, can we liken 1/0 to the unification of forces? There is obviously a connection there. Well, I will leave these questions open-ended until I write my article, which when I'm finished with all the information will tell you everything you need to know about how to send something faster than the speed of light, how to modify gravity and thus time, to create anti-gravity, and free energy, thus proving that everything is possible. I am not doing this for a Nobel prize, I am doing this because I have to, becase I want to, because it is good and because I believe humans deserve it because I believe they will act righteously when afforded the greatest opportunity. Also, how does consciousness relate to this theory? You will will have it all and a time-travelling machine, and a bag of chips. The last thing I will say is, what an amazing thing it is! Congratulations on being here and being a part of the new exaltation and enlightenment Thank you so much again for the kind comments and contributions on this work in inevitable progress (destiny)! Remember, everything, 1/0, belongs to everyone!

Originally Posted by Lloyd Gillespie

Archetype, the more I think about this idea, the better I like it. It has awakened something deeper within me, to see not only its value, but the values of its relations to other ideas. Just as an example; years ago I thought about a logical tautology of dividing mind and or matter to infinity, at which point the only logical answer possible would be spirit___now this is quite strange for an atheist like myself, yet I can't escape the sound logic of the idea___I like it... Keep up the great work...

regards
Lloyd

[mkirkpatrick]

Many thanks Lee,and welcome to the toe,one divided by zero is a very ancient idea Lee,it is referred to in the ageless wisdom written some ten
thousand years ago!The number ten,one enclosed in a circle,or zero if you prefer,theyare the same thing,you have just expressed it as 1/0,I agree that if you understand the implications of this,the the secret of life will stand
revealed to you!There is but one!And that one encircles all?=1/0.

kind regards michael.

[archetype]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick

Many thanks Lee,and welcome to the toe,one divided by zero is a very ancient idea Lee,it is referred to in the ageless wisdom written some ten
thousand years ago!The number ten,one enclosed in a circle,or zero if you prefer,theyare the same thing,you have just expressed it as 1/0,I agree that if you understand the implications of this,the the secret of life will stand
revealed to you!There is but one!And that one encircles all?=1/0.

kind regards michael.

Thank you for your thoughtful comments and your insight Mr. Kirkpatrick. In what sense are you saying that zero and ten are the same thing?

It could make sense in the sense that if everything=everything (which should be a true statement I believe), and if the number circle is continuous, then all numbers should be equal to one another, after a fashion. But how should we interpret this? Again the puzzle (of everything being equal to everything) arises when we considered anything, 0/0. 0/0 can be said to be equal to 3, but does that mean that 3 is equal to 0/0? Well, perhaps not necessarely, afterall, the arrow of time only makes sense in one direction, so perhaps we must revisit the reflexivity of consequence and equality. In other words, if moment A leads directly to moment B, but it doesn't make sense when moment B leads to moment A, then perhaps 0/0 can be equal to 3 without 3 having to be equal to 0/0? Could this be the key to making sense of the possible inconsistencies which Godel foretold would arise in such a theory, complete unto itself, as I have embodied in the number circle?