T.o.N. (Theory of Nothing)

[N0B0DY]

I know, pif, but not all, and it only takes one bad apple to ruin the bunch is one of the fluctuating points I'm trying to make. Just like I know you couldn't respond to me directly, so did so through Pat.

The other is that infinity is not absolute - although very similar and commonly thought to be synonymous - and even the inadequate infinite amount of knowledge would take an eternity of progression for even an infinitely-powerful conscious computer to process. Only the "omniverse" has the absolute knowledge and power because it has already transcended in no time the subconscious madness that the mind clings to throughout the ages.

You may oppose the metaphysical and opt for the physical, but only the metaphysical can prevent the "Eternal Return" that is obviously anything but harmonically-balanced. There is a breathless, pulseless state that can be attained every night while you sleep which trains transcends subconsciousness; and this is the non-existent state of the omniiverse, as opposed to the anthropomorphic breathing and pulsating state of the universe - originated by religion and supported by science.

The "Tao" results from a returning from observable existence (Tai Chi) and a passing through the absolute gateway of non-existence (Wu Chi). Of which I'm fairly sure is what you are after, and not the atrocity-filled world that will eventually be burned by the sun.

If it isn't eternal, it's meaningless, and why so many folks wish to cling to a meaningless world that breeds pain and imbalance is beyond me. So perhaps you're right. To each their own level of understanding and experiences, and point of progression before the singularity.

[N0B0DY]

John,

So far I agree with what you claim, that space without time can not be penetrated, but argue that there is no container and even the primary force can't literally penetrate it because "it" isn't literally anywhere. The observable "truth" being what we make it, governed by the shared subconsciousness that breaks the "one" into both infinite space and eternal time, whereby consciousness quantizes and categorizes all the bits of information into logical and understandable finite measurements.

I equate the one absolute solid with absolute non existence because both states are motionless, and without motion there is no reality. Also, for the reason that non existence is just as impenetrable as absolute solidity, therefore I don't agree that we can put any such containment of what essentially doesn't exist in the first place.

With respect to the exterior, literally placing something within a place that doesn't exist, or claiming expansion of something into a place that doesn't exist, is synonymous to standing in or stepping forward into a place that isn't there; and with respect to the interior, literal separation resulting from relativity is synonymous to stepping forward and backward at the same time.

[everymansmedium]

There can not be one absolute as there is always two. The one is absolutely everything, leaving only the other, absolutely, nothing! The primary force is absolutely everything, everything beyond that is the other side of the boundary between everything and nothing.
John

[everymansmedium]

We constantly step into a place that does not exist. The future does not exist and the past is an impenetrable existence that can not be changed. The point of creation is NOW. as this is where we create the past as we step forward. The steps we made can not be erased. We can not go back to the time that we created them. We can only create again and again as that is what we do.
AE gave us the relationship E=mc2
If you generate a single predicate that shows what we can see you have.
Eden(X((gravity,space,matter,energy)3),Y((continue ,time,being,creation)1))

The only way that this problem of symmetry is solved is with the 11 dimensions as follows

multiverse(Eden(X1((gravity,space,matter,energy)3) ,Y1((continue,time,being,creation)1)),
Elsewhen(X2((continue,time,being,creation)3),Y2((g ravity,space,matter,energy)1)))).

Now if you find the other 3 relationships for E=Mc2.
The first one you see is us. (being=creation) this is what we do at the point of creation, now.
Then you find this (being = creation times C squared) If you ask me, that looks very much like let there be light.
The final relationship is (matter = energy) this is the divine memory in Elsewhen. A 3 dimensional being in the perfect hyperspace medium. Single dimensional space.
If you think about the implications of this and compare it to the information about our religions, It scared the hell out of me what do you think.

[everymansmedium]

Must go now! I will try to get back tomorrow.
God Bless. Or maybe I should say may the force be with you.

[N0B0DY]

I think what you say is true, John, but that we can equate the absolute one and none because there would essentially be no difference between the two states - both are absolutely motionless and absolutely dense; and this non-dimensional state transcends both dimensional existence and finite - even infinite - velocities such as c. I also agree that the NOW is where reality is created - albeit inaccurately - and propose NOW HERE can be equated with NOWHERE.

Now if the proposition is one that differentiates the two states in any way, then we are breaking the absolute solid state into an arbitrary substance - perhaps like 100% cotton, without the spaces between molecules, nucleons, quarks, etc.; if the proposition is of absolute space, it is absolutely static and again no different than absolute vacuity. So I propose the absolute whole can only be represented by none, not one unless equated with none, because it is the only possible non-relative state.

I also propose that non-existence carries throughout every absolute point of what is considered existent, and to prove this beyond a reasonable doubt, no evidence or experiment outside thought experiments is necessary. Like the Earth's polarity I have used a few times here, describing how the absolute division of the poles must be non-existent - as non-intuitive as it may seem - in order for there to be any concept of the existence of polarity. If the divider or center were to exist, it would have its own set of poles or dimensions.

Some have pointed out that regardless of whether or not we use polar terminology, the Earth still exists, but the carriage of the imaginary divider is absolutely necessary for any and all observations within the dimensional interface you referenced above. There would be no possible reality of up or down; right or left; front or back; and even time without the imaginary absolute reference frame required to differentiate between frames.

The proof of the point in question is that there is no center because each point of reference - like the mind - required to differentiate opposites is the center, and, again, the absolute center can't exist. Which can tell us something about our egos imo.

If the absolute center doesn't and can't exist, and all existence is the absolute center, what can literally exist?

[Fluent Piffle]

If the absolute center doesn't and can't exist, and all existence is the absolute center, what can literally exist?

As a random guess, i'd have to go with absolute confusion!


have fun!


pif.

[N0B0DY]

It's a good guess, pif, but sometimes we can get so accustomed to confusion that something as simple as 1-1=0 can seem more confusing than what we're used to.

From something like this: http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2006/0...-of-space-time we can attempt to fill in the gaps without a "god of the gaps" theory, by positing an absolute constant that reduces spatial dimensions to zero - decreasing distance by increasing speed. Time would be the sole governing factor that produces observable reality by slowing down absolute speed of light.

What is proposed as an accelerating universe is relative to light speed, but if you think about it there is nothing preventing infinite speed. Eventhough I disagree with expansion into non-existent places, following the implications could imply an absolute vacuum, unlike the vacuum that determines "c," whereby "everywhere" is reached instantaneously.

Logic ceases here, pif, and I guess becomes a tad confusing, because we have to suggest a type of gravitational force as the cause of matter instead of matter being the cause of gravity. Where gravity slows light speed down to form matter at infinitesimal scales, and light destroys matter continually through variable decay rates depending on how much gravity has dilated time.

The problem is that there is no literal force possible to slow down what can't be slowed down in any way. So I suggest an illusory model based on consciousness.

[everymansmedium]

Defining the absolute: You are correct, there is nothing more absolute than absolutely nothing. I believe that you are correct in the thought that this is the beginning of all defining principles. When I say that there is always two is in fact with respect to relativity. But this relativity is all that we have.
If we consider the absolutely everything. We can always imagine adding one more thing. unless the absolutely everything is bounded only by the other absolute, absolutely nothing. It is the absolutely nothing that defines the absolutely everything by the fact that there is nothing more to be added.

We however must concern ourselves with the knowledge of the everything as this is all we have as defined by the primary absolute, The absolutely nothing. It no doubt is the primary absolute, But it is also totally upstaged by the absolutely everything. Absolutely nothing observes the absolutely nothing. Absolutely everything observes the absolutely everything. It is not necessary to account for what is not necessary to account for, etc, etc.
John

[RascalPuff]

To be, and not to be, that is the - Tao/YinYang - answer?

Best regards,
- RP