T.o.N. (Theory of Nothing)

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Lode,



Not quite. Here, I'll toss a very general statement at you without getting into the details.

Inside the absolute (which is actually beyond description) is a hierarchy of relative pairs.[Eric, don't you get it here. You admit it, but don't see it. If you can't describe it, which you admit, it doesn't exist. It's your mother's or father's karma___invading.]

1. An absolute quality & quantity[Eric, you earlier defined the absolute as beyond infinity. Then in order for any validity of quality and quantity, you must have describable object you are referring to, or it's illusion___it don't exist.]
2. A pair of relatively absolute qualities[This is really loose logic.]
3. A pair of relatively absolute quantities[Again, as above.]
4. A relative quality & quantity[Do you have any idea how loose a term relative is, unless talking about kin___I know, I know___then it's really, really loose.]

The infinite universe is #4. It is an infinite intermingling of "appearent" finites.[Appearent is your personal emotions, not logic. Emotions have nothing to do with absolute infinite universe___they exist only in finite universe.]

It's not right from infinity to the absolute.[Your absolute remains absolutely undefined, except it is 1___what one?]

Mabe this is an unfair summation. It's just to show that there is more to it.[I see not one damn thing here or anywhere beyond infinity___except possibly what lode referred to, and I hoped was what you meant.]

Eric

Boy, oh boy, have we got our work cut out for us...

regards,
Lloyd

p.s.
Hey Eric, don't get discouraged with me or this thread, as we need you as the bridge mind between mythos and logos. Nobody else is willing to play this part. I very much appreciate your contributions___sincerely...

[Nobody]

Eric,

Space isn't infinite and everything is not finite, but I had said according to relative physics it is because physics is bound by misleading observations. Space doesn't exist, and everything is infinite - meaning the absolute doesn't exist and this can only be represented by the zero, not one or one divided by zero.

Lloyd,

You said that the cause for all energy and temperature can't and doesn't come from what is unknown, but that implies that scientific observations are not limited which they clearly are. Empirical and theoretical science can't go where the mind can take logic to its justifiable conclusions, because one is limited by observations and the other by math which can't correspond to the non-existent absolute. The low energy/temperature that you claim is absolute is always relative to absolute zero, never reaches zero, as well as being relative to other quanta that go on infinitely - like 3K and electron/positron charge and "intrinsic" mass and constant speed. So the extreme violence you asked about is found in confinement, sort of like a nuke bomb that is harmless until what is within it is released. It has been said that a coffee cup of zpe, which is just a fraction of what I'm referring to, is enough to boil the world's oceans. Much hotter than a trillion degrees, but much colder than 3K when confined. Myself, I find summer and winter hot and cold enough.

The point that you're missing because your head is bound by scientific reasoning is that the absolute point of non existence is the means by which those quanta exist. In other words, it is the exactness of pinpointing position (violating the Uncertainty Principle) that allows for the opposite perspective of an infinite flux - out of which are all finite measurements. You confused me again on this point because you told me that finite quanta are not within infinity, but then told Eric that they are. It seems you want to have your cake and eat it to in order to justify the logic of science.

Which is why I would say that you would say things such as "quantum mechanics only allows c^2." It only allows that velocity because it is bound by an artificial ground state. I don't think you're really understanding what I'm writing, but merely seeing what you feel you can oppose through science and then responding with textbook explanations that I don't disagree with. My arguments are not with relative concepts of relative theories, but with using those concepts to proclaim an absolute has been found.

The rest I agree with, except for the angular/linear mix of motion which is what I referred to using the analogous analog whereby linear time is found within the in/out waves of an infinite number of monopoles. Again, not that I'm disagreeing with your accurate interpretation of linear time. Only with your insistence to disregard all that background noise.

Also, the 1=infinite; 0=finite; E=everything can't work because 0 is not equal to everything multiplied by 1. The only absolute is zero then, because 0=everything multiplied by zero. The zero represents the fact that absolute points don't exist.

[Eric]

A real object has no outside.

There is only one of them.

It does have an inside.

[Nobody]

Eric,

I think that a real object is generally thought to have an outside, space, for it to exist in. That's pretty much the reason I have a problem with the logic behind the present model of a space-time universe as an absolute with no outside - for something to exist it requires space to exist in.

If we then might say that the universe exists within a greater dimension, that dimension would obviously be part of the universe and that would run counter to the logic of saying that the universe has no exterior space.

It's rather a bothersome bird, unless we Occam Razor the whole literal universe and render it merely an illusion of relativity.

[Eric]

Nobody,

A real object needing space to exist in, is a relative ad infinitum. What does the space exist in?

If we render the whole universe as an inverted image of reality, then it can "exist" within a dimensionless point with no outside.

"Reality (the universe) is merely and illusion, albeint a very persistent one." – Einstein

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Hi Nobody, great critique. I have responded to your points where I thought I should clarify and offer a few reasons for my way of thinking and theorizing.

Eric,

Space isn't infinite and everything is not finite, but I had said according to relative physics it is because physics is bound by misleading observations. Space doesn't exist, and everything is infinite - meaning the absolute doesn't exist and this can only be represented by the zero, not one or one divided by zero.

Lloyd,

You said that the cause for all energy and temperature can't and doesn't come from what is unknown, but that implies that scientific observations are not limited which they clearly are. Empirical and theoretical science can't go where the mind can take logic to its justifiable conclusions, because one is limited by observations and the other by math which can't correspond to the non-existent absolute.[Yes, this is true, but if we can understand the entire death decay cycle of the present universe, and do its math, we have the ingredients to understand its birth and growth cycle. It's kinda like a doctor who learns all about helping the living by studying dead things, and things that kill. I see no other way, because I agree logic alone is far too fallable.] The low energy/temperature that you claim is absolute is always relative to absolute zero, never reaches zero, as well as being relative to other quanta that go on infinitely - like 3K and electron/positron charge and "intrinsic" mass and constant speed.[My definition of absolute here is only because a near zero thermal must by its own self-necessity, eternally move, and that essence is implosion/centripetal motion. That's just observation of scientific proofs of near zero motion, here on earth. We use highly compressed gas by generators to compress through refrigeration, lng to a volume of 600 to 1, with nothing more than thermal cold. I often use the word absolute out of context because my life experiences have been so filled with relativists, who knew little of srt or grt, and their true classical interpretations, as by quantum mechanics or thermodynamics. Sorry if it sometimes throws you off, I'll try to be more careful of the wording, but it's quite a habit to break.] So the extreme violence you asked about is found in confinement, sort of like a nuke bomb that is harmless until what is within it is released. It has been said that a coffee cup of zpe, which is just a fraction of what I'm referring to, is enough to boil the world's oceans. Much hotter than a trillion degrees, but much colder than 3K when confined. Myself, I find summer and winter hot and cold enough.[Myself, I think zpe is way, way overblown mythology. That's the price we pay for allowing the super-luminal into quantum mechanics. The electron can be completely explained with c and +c velocities___it dissappears at absolute true c because we don't have any thing that can measure true absolute c, and that is an absolute variable sliding time scaler motion. Motion is just a variable absolute attribute of the absolute. I'll explain better in next post. I don't like to try to see any motion as relative, though I realize that is the language. I rather stay with solid classical motion.]

The point that you're missing because your head is bound by scientific reasoning is that the absolute point of non existence is the means by which those quanta exist.[I would have to disagree with this. Explanation in next post.] In other words, it is the exactness of pinpointing position (violating the Uncertainty Principle) that allows for the opposite perspective of an infinite flux - out of which are all finite measurements.[I have purposely restricted all my relative and quanttum physics modeling to Einstein +c., as I found in the `80's all math and model problems could be solved with such hyper-light tricks, even though I mentioned it below, I do not use it or need it to explain all the mechanics through classical thermalicity.] You confused me again on this point because you told me that finite quanta are not within infinity, but then told Eric that they are.[That was a linguistic slip, sorry. It easily gets very confusing talking about the one infinity of all.] It seems you want to have your cake and eat it to in order to justify the logic of science.[No, every time I do that, it is entirely my fault for not quantifying and qualifying succinctly. I want you to straighten me out on all points. I realize these problems exist from working with a buddhist monk friend of mine, trying to define the absolute for over three years. The best we came up with was "Wisdom Logic", but we never could agree to the definition of 1. A mind map and a universe map may be of help to us. Him and I used such maps extensively, yet sad to say, with little success. I feel this foursome may have better luck.]

Which is why I would say that you would say things such as "quantum mechanics only allows c^2."[I meant to say c2] It only allows that velocity because it is bound by an artificial ground state. I don't think you're really understanding what I'm writing, but merely seeing what you feel you can oppose through science and then responding with textbook explanations that I don't disagree with.[I am using my own macro-logic of quantum and relative mechanics combined, yet I agree I am rebutting before I have given enough time to completely dijest your and Eric's ideas. I'll try to go deeper into both your ideas. They interest me greatly.] My arguments are not with relative concepts of relative theories, but with using those concepts to proclaim an absolute has been found.[My next post should explain this.]

The rest I agree with, except for the angular/linear mix of motion which is what I referred to using the analogous analog whereby linear time is found within the in/out waves of an infinite number of monopoles. Again, not that I'm disagreeing with your accurate interpretation of linear time. Only with your insistence to disregard all that background noise.[I will deal with all the background noise in my next post___The Absolute State of "The Absolute." For Eric's principles of the absolute, also.]

Also, the 1=infinite; 0=finite; E=everything can't work because 0 is not equal to everything multiplied by 1. The only absolute is zero then, because 0=everything multiplied by zero. The zero represents the fact that absolute points don't exist.[Nobody, if you noticed that in all I have written, I did mention that your fractionalization would have to be used to create a "Whole new math," to substitute for what all the present higher order maths can not accomplish___that is theorizing as near a possible a way to divide ordinals into cardinals, i.e., 1/0. By realizing the size of the universal numbers I have generalized. I know this is possible___though difficult___still possible.]

regards,
Lloyd

[Lloyd Gillespie]

Hi Eric, after giving it considerable thought and realizing how rough I've been on you, I thought of a way to describe what we are seeing from different worldviews. I will state my positions and you are encouraged to critique completely, so we may engage in a real dialogue about your and my absolute principles, if that's alright with you? Here goes:

The Absolute State Of "The Absolute"

1.The state of no mind. No free will. This state can be deduced by trans-finite logic of what the absolute must be after radiation decay of quantumized angular spin. Mind is impossible to exist without a fully quantumized space. This is non-quantumized space, because it is low entropy linear motion only. Low entropy requires this by the laws of physics.

2.The state of no logic. No cognition. Though we can with trans-finite deductive and trans-finite inductive logic know this state, the state can not support logic, as again it is linear.

3.The state of no emotion. No intuition. Though we can feel with imagination and emotionally know this state, the state can not support emotion, as again it is linear.

4.The state of eternal perpetual motion. We can think of no other way for a universe to exist, and eventually produce life. Low entropy thermo-hydro-dynamics requires it by necessity of the law of no law, and the laws of physics. The absolute possesses no laws, only matter motion. We interpret its motions obeying the laws of logic, when in fact, its the laws of its own mechanical self-necessity. It is unfree to do anything else. It has no choice, thus later on is seen as a quantum chance___the uncertainty principle.

5.The motion is imploding/centripetal. This is a required necessity of thermodynamics' hydrodynamics of the laws of physics and motions of any extremely low entropy linear state at this early time period of infinity.

6.The motion is wave structured. Both quantum and relative mechanics agree with this. We can prove it to ourselves just by feeling the waves of cold and heat hitting our skin.

7.The wave is matter. The wave is linear. This is the tricky one to understand. Einstein showed that all matter and energy are equivalent at light speed, but we are talking about the lowest speed of all motion. Why is wave motion matter? The absolute must have a substance to exist. What must this substance be to exist? There is no energy without substance, therefore the substance has to be made of some type of fluid matter, to have motion, which we know it does. We could call it energy, but then how would energy move? What would move it? Where's the substance? The energy absolutely has to turn to matter at low entropy, to have any substance, therefore substance is matter. The trans-finite logic of total universal decay also agrees with the above, and as has been similarly proved by David, "Matter Is All In A Void." I agree. The linear low entropy state can support only matter motion.

8.The wave is non-quantumized. The wave medium of space, being low entropy of a near lowest order, is non-angular, since such low entropy will not support high entropy angular motion. It takes high entropy to support or create quantumized matter.

9.The motion is thermal at 0k. to 3.7k. low entropy. Simple logic would dictate this true by analysis of leaving the finite high entropy spin of quantimized space for low entropy non-quantumized linear wave infinity, and the fact we are addressing the absolute before any finiteness existed.

10.Motion is the eternal necessity. This should be a reasonable statement to any belief. Since linear space can not support logic, mind or emotions, necessity is all that's left, though I would have to admit it has Michael's potentiality. All motion has some sort of potential inertia. It also has this inertia, a property of perpetual motion.

11.It is a substance. What kind of substance? It is the decayed matter/motion/energy of the present and last universal cycle. Does our solid matter completely decay to the wave matter substance? This we await the Hadron Accelerator next year, to see if an Einstein-Bose Condensate falls out, or other real particle matter. I surmize there is some elemental stardust mixed with the absolute matter substance___my conjecture. Radiated finiteness turns to infinite space matter/motion.

12.The substance is eternal infinity. This is how I describe the absolute, as this is all that will be left after finite universal decay, until the universe self-rebirths itself by the absolutely necessary motions mentioned above.

13.The substance is the entire universe in two state change___the finite within and about the infinite. The absolute substance is matter, eternally. The absolute is fluid matter that has motion. There's only one absolute___matter. There's only one singularity of absolute matter with two states___infinite and finite.

A few laws and ideas to back this up.

1.Keep all theories below Einstein c and all mysteries vanish.

2.I'm studying the death of the universe to find out how its birth worked.

3.The absolute universal life cycle principle___Life only exists in death. We're living in the death cycle side of the universe.

4.The death cycle of the universe is the life cycle of humanoids.

5.Mind, a product of the biosphere, does not influence the greater mechanical universe.

6.The absolute matter quantum principle___All motion is thinned or densed matter states.

7.All field's are matter's motions, thinned and densed.

8.All field's are absolute matter, thinned and densed.

9.The absolute matter quantum states___The low infinite and high finite is one matter/motion/energy.

10.Stay within Einstein's laws of physics and nothing can exceed the speed of light, and all of quantum matter/motion energy can be explained classically sound by thermalicity.

11.The absolute principle___All motion is absolute matter in varrying states of motion.

12.The cold quantum is low entropy mass or absolute matter.

13.The wave mass of an electron proves all waves have mass, thus motion is matter.

14.The infinite substance is two sets of matter mass___low and high. This means what we normally think of as energy is actually low or high entropy matter, turned to high or low entropy mass.

15.The law of absolute motion is a perpetual eternal necessity of low entropy.

16.The universal principle of motion___It must move by the law of thermodynamics' necessities.

17.The universal thermalicity principle___Motion travels the same scaler rate on both sides of light.

18.The absolute universal principle___Necessity "IS"

19.Absolute TAO truth equals absolute TOE truth.

20.The thermodynamics equivalency principle___Absolute low to high entropy and high to low entropy, dark and light motion sliding scaler rates, is identical on both sides of light.

21.The thermalicity principle___If it be 10^137 years on this side of light, then it must be 10^137 years on the other side of light___Light motion equals dark motion.

Eric, one must realize finiteness is infinity itself in full view and factual absolute conversion of low entropy matter into high entropy, highly visable absolute matter, thus the twin dynamics of absolute infinity and absolute finiteness___They are one total absolute matter dynamic.

Sincerely,
Lloyd

A real object has no outside.

There is only one of them.

It does have an inside.

[Eric]

13. There's only one absolute___matter.

Absolute matter has an outside.
There is more than one of them.
Absolute matter does not have an inside.

A real object has no outside.
There is only one of them.
It does have an inside.

We are a universe apart from agreeing, but it doesn't matter.

[lodestar]

1/0 is nothing less than the number of God, if you want to think about it that way. It does exist, but as Eric so correctly pointed out, it is somewhat beyond description. Even so, it is not something we can't necessarely understand, and therefore it is not necessarely undefined. It just depends on what you mean when you say undefined. Undefined in a good way or undefined in a bad way?

[lodestar]

Space doesn't exist, and everything is infinite - meaning the absolute doesn't exist and this can only be represented by the zero, not one or one divided by zero.

If by space you mean empty I agree, it doesn't exist. But where you're wrong is in thinking that "the absolute doesn't exist because everything is infinite." If you truely consider that 1/0 is the definition of everything, you will see very clearly that it means that everything is more than infinite. For just as 0 is less than 1/infinity, so too 1/0 is more than infinity. Do you see?

Also, the 1=infinite; 0=finite; E=everything can't work because 0 is not equal to everything multiplied by 1. The only absolute is zero then, because 0=everything multiplied by zero. The zero represents the fact that absolute points don't exist.

Sorry to point this out to you but your algebra is way wrong on this buddy. Observe:

if 1/0=everything
then it means that everything*0=1
not that everything*1=0

you straight up got your algebgra wrong. Do you remember when I explained to you that everything*0 does equal 1? Because 1/0*0=0/0