T.o.N. (Theory of Nothing)

[dipayankar]

To take the numerical system into consideration, yes I understand. However the limits to the Universe could be reachable. We might not be able to do it. Somebody else might..

I would never dream of disagreeing with that, Dip, but would also never dream of equating infinity with absolute or claiming that the absolute can be reached.

Theoretically, we can look at it as how long it would take for anyone anywhere to reach the greatest possible number in the universe. Since there are no bounds to our numerical system, it could be classified as the highest standard to be met - if there would exist a larger one, fine.

By any standard then, to reach the greatest possible number in the universe, it would take forever, primarily because there can be no such number - we can always add one more number. So, again, just to give the basis for my inference, the absolute greatest number can be equated with the absolute lowest - zero - to render both the greatest and lowest representative of absolute non existence, not absolute existence.

[Fluent Piffle]

From its definition I infer that it is relative to all observers, and can never be absolute as a single entity. A few folks may poke fun at my definition of absolute, by posting statements like, "Absolutely, I agree!" to claim that absolutes exist, but that is taken so far out of context that I can't even bother to respond.

The following from pif is how I define absolute, not infinity, as I have repeatedly proclaimed to deaf ears that the absolute doesn't have to reach infinity because it renders infinite motion motionless. "Therefore, it is only a strange and abstract concept that 'believes' it can be 'reached', when all things are already 'it', and 'it' already 'reaches' itself, be default." Yet, this statement explains both why I infer what I do and how infinity differs from the absolute, because infinity can change "within itself" and marks an infinite number of changeable reference points that would require an eternity at infinite to cross "itself"; whereas the absolute is changeless, and need not change to cover an infinity in no time. "So, it does not 'grow', but rather constantly changes within itself." If pif wishes to classify infinity as broken by illusory change, I'll concede that the two can be correlated, but not until such time as to agree that there is "really" no such colors as relative difference between black and white to the absolute - not even an infinite number of shades of gray.

Again, Nob, you seem to be lost in some kind of 'competition'. It is a case of whatever is necessarily so, not whether you or I can 'infer' anything. Once again, this is because you have inner competition with yourself, firstly, ideas which conflict with the Reality, regardless of who or whatever points it out to you. 'My classification' has no importance to me, personally. I am willing to attempt to discuss the Reality, and how it must necessarily be. Not to argue about who is correct with their 'classification', which seems to be your intention.

'Absolute' must be an aspect of Infinite Spatial Reality. It's 'ultimate' aspect, if you like; it's aspect of 'absoluteness'.



pif.

[Fluent Piffle]

I don't invent any new definitions btw, pif. There are enough definitions out there as it is.

Yep! Anything 'more' than Infinite, in 3-dimensions, is not needed.



pif.

[Fluent Piffle]

When Consciousness embraces Awareness:
'I will reveal to you what no eye can see,
what no ear can hear,
what no hand can touch,
what cannot be conceived by the human mind.'

Again with the arm-waving drivel!

If it 'cannot be conceived by the human mind', where are these mere words coming from?


Infinity and Eternity are also the same thing. The 'time' concept is another intuition of 'motion'. It only applies when we choose finite 'points' to measure to and from. Thus, it is another aspect of Infinite Space.



pif.

[N0B0DY]

"I am willing to attempt to discuss the Reality, and how it must necessarily be. Not to argue about who is correct with their 'classification', which seems to be your intention."

Things aren't always what they seem to be, so feel free to elaborate upon the absolute aspect of infinity, pif.

I can agree with infinity and eternity being as synonymous as space is to time, but the point stands that it implies continuation without end; whereas absolute zero is the ultimate boundary that the infinite doesn't reach - hence, reducing something infinitely doesn't ever reduce to zero.

That there latter part is the whole point in question, pif.

[Drifter]

Waving to an self-assuming asshole, apparently piffle, and your pompous back-handed attempts patting yourself on your self-centered back are also apparent, ignorance rewarding itself for trying to justify its own existence.

If your so smart, hows come you can't fugure it out!

You busy yourself, in your obstinance, with taking/making issue with the "points", you continually "fail" to get the picture.

"You", are a finite aspect of the infinite eternal whole. Your "choice" is obvious.

Again with the arm-waving drivel!

If it 'cannot be conceived by the human mind', where are these mere words coming from?


Infinity and Eternity are also the same thing. The 'time' concept is another intuition of 'motion'. It only applies when we choose finite 'points' to measure to and from. Thus, it is another aspect of Infinite Space.

you ask where are these mere words coming from?, your own conscience, if you had ears, you would hear.


pif.

[Drifter]

Remember "Big-Daddys" words to his little piffle?, "your never going to get any bigger", so expand your mind instead, shorty.

You should pay more attention. I don't think he meant into a Napoleon[little tyrant] complex.

Again with the arm-waving drivel!

If it 'cannot be conceived by the human mind', where are these mere words coming from?


Infinity and Eternity are also the same thing. The 'time' concept is another intuition of 'motion'. It only applies when we choose finite 'points' to measure to and from. Thus, it is another aspect of Infinite Space.



pif.

[Fluent Piffle]

reducing something infinitely doesn't ever reduce to zero.

You cannot 'reduce something Infinitely', thus there is no such thing as 'zero'.




Drifter,



Just LOVE your pretence of 'spirituality', ...Brother!!!



pif.

[Drifter]

"A dual state of mind (mental house divided or double mindedness)
projects its relative limits in much the same way that looking through a
pair of binoculars projects its circular limits. The mental screen of
relative words and thoughts through which we look is similarly projected
on the limitless horizons of consciousness. What we see is real, though
the mental boundaries we unwittingly project are not. From this one
might surmise that life is really some form of self-projection, both
individual and collective, and that the world serves as a mirror in
which it reflects. In this regard, both Scripture, which declares, “For
as he thinketh in his heart, so is he…” (Pr.23:7), and quantum physics,
which concludes that “the observer conditions his observations,” bear
witness to the probability of this premise." -WhatisTruth

[Drifter]

Obviously you want dialoge on your turf. If I need lower myself to your standard, No problem, shorty. Pretend to Ignore me and I'll return the favor. How's that for reciprocity[cause and effect].

If you want to dialoge as a mature adult, fine pif.
Every childlike cheap shot you take at me I will put back in your face, in spades,
and the thing is pif, Truth is on my side, it is "you" whom insist in dividing things.

You cannot 'reduce something Infinitely', thus there is no such thing as 'zero'.




Drifter,



Just LOVE your pretence of 'spirituality', ...Brother!!!



pif.