[lodestar]

I understand your confusion, but it's a little more subtle than that. Everything does not equal just a plain 1 because when you say 1 what you're really saying is 1/1. And one divided by one is not undivided, for it is divided by itself, 1, which means that it is seperated from everything by one thing, itself. In order to have everything as a whole, 1 must be undivided, and this means it must be divided by nothing, and this means it must be divided by zero. So 1 is divided from everything by itself unless you divide it by zero in which case it becomes undivided, and hence everything itself. See?

[mkirkpatrick]

O is absent when all is one,but present when one is all!Plurality is totally absent in
absolute reality,there is but one,but is totally present in the relative universe that we at
present partially inhabit?

regards michael.

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by Nobody

It's not an idea, Michael. Again, I don't have a problem and don't argue, or intend to argue, with relativists about relative reality or relative theories.

The problem is with assigning an absolute value of one to the universe when the net effect of the universal forces responsible for creating relative reality is zero. The sum of the parts is zero, not one, but the smallest-possible parts are non-zero - infinitesimal.

So I'm not saying that someone who works a day for $10 or so is the same as working for nothing. I'm saying that time works both ways, cancelling at the present, to the tune of those workers working a day and then going back a day to the point when they haven't started to work yet.

Einstein, who originated theories of relativity, said: "The distinction of past, present and future are illusions." Yet, I would imagine he would proclaim the present as existing, where I proclaim that it doesn't. Just that the mind falls way short of the rate of speed that universal states "change." Sort of like observing light from a star that is already dead, but extended to the absolute limit.

What we really have hear is the ever present and eternal now,and that there is no-thing
either side of that moment!
regards michael.

[lodestar]

Originally Posted by Nobody

"Think about it this way, if you put a south pole and a north pole together do you get a sum total that is nothing? No, you get something that is both north and south, which is a magnet. It's the same way with 1/0. You put positive and negative together and do you get nothing? No, you get everything. Nothing is the lack of positive and negative, not the combination of the two."


You are not combining north and south fairly, Lode. You are separating the two into "north and south." Combining them absolutely would negate both of them. To give you an idea of what I mean, regarding an absolute reference frame from a universal perspective outside of your relative thinking, consider going north if you were in outer space, or doing a headstand in outer space. What would you do except remain in the same place...confused?

Aha, I knew you would say this. Yes on a magnet north and south are absolutely combined because you will not find a monopole, naturally. North only exists with South. They are always combined and somehow they seem not to negate eachother!

My viewpoint is relative to everything, everything, which your theory does not define. And what kind of outer space are you talking about? You mean if you were existing inside nothing? So sorry to tell you again oh person who says he is nobody, but nothing does not exist, and you are indeed alive, and part of everything.

so cheers

[Nobody]

Outer space as in half way to the moon, Lode. Do a headstand or head north from the point in between.

You're right about not being able to have north without south, though, because once you create one the other is created by default. Yet both are separate points - relative to each other. The absolute point, the one I've been referring to all along and the one you continually avoid, is the central point between the two...is that point south or north; or is it both and/or neither?

Michael,

Not to imply that you're dull-minded, but I doubt that your conscious mind is fast enough to follow the present. Even the subconcious is fractions of a second behind.

By the time it takes for the screen in front of you to manifest itself by stablizing its composite particles, they no longer exist. They only exist as observed because the human mind is half-baked, very slow, and forced to follow the structure laid down by the subconscious.

The reality of the screen, in the true present, is closer to it disappearing right before your eyes. The virtual particles that create "real" particles are beyond existence and non-existence, they are neither and both, so what and where are they exactly?

It seems as though time dilation (illusion) is everything, and without it there is nothing.

[lodestar]

Originally Posted by Nobody

Outer space as in half way to the moon, Lode. Do a headstand or head north from the point in between.

You're right about not being able to have north without south, though, because once you create one the other is created by default. Yet both are separate points - relative to each other. The absolute point, the one I've been referring to all along and the one you continually avoid, is the central point between the two...is that point south or north; or is it both and/or neither?

Well why don't you tell me what you think first. Is a magnet both a north and a south poll or is it neither? And incidentally the absolute point where positive and negative infinity become the same is the point of 1/0 so how it is that you think I've been avoiding that is beyond me!!

And I don't understand what you're trying to say about taking a handstand in outerspace.

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by Nobody

Outer space as in half way to the moon, Lode. Do a headstand or head north from the point in between.

You're right about not being able to have north without south, though, because once you create one the other is created by default. Yet both are separate points - relative to each other. The absolute point, the one I've been referring to all along and the one you continually avoid, is the central point between the two...is that point south or north; or is it both and/or neither?

Michael,

Not to imply that you're dull-minded, but I doubt that your conscious mind is fast enough to follow the present. Even the subconcious is fractions of a second behind.

By the time it takes for the screen in front of you to manifest itself by stablizing its composite particles, they no longer exist. They only exist as observed because the human mind is half-baked, very slow, and forced to follow the structure laid down by the subconscious.

The reality of the screen, in the true present, is closer to it disappearing right before your eyes. The virtual particles that create "real" particles are beyond existence and non-existence, they are neither and both, so what and where are they exactly?

It seems as though time dilation (illusion) is everything, and without it there is nothing.

Nobody,what you say may well be so,however the eternal now is ever present,and whether my conscious mind is fast enough to catch it,is of no "real" consequence to the
actuality that it is so!We exist on many levels of consciousness,from the "slug-like
torpidity of consciousness exiting via the brain,to the ubiquitous consciousness eminating
from within the human soul!
regards michael.

[Nobody]

I'm guilty of making things unnecessarily complex and esoteric myself, but if we return to elementary thinking regarding first philosophy I think we can find the missing key to the toe.

The modern studies of zpe, that exists at both ends of the spectrum, and the ancients concepts of unifying infinitesimal particles comes close to uncovering absolute reality, but apparently all have been chasing their tails for thousands of years. I think the reason for this is that non existence is discarded as being irrelevant, the scientists I've asked repeatedly declare this, but can there be another absolute point? Once we say yes, it becomes differentiable and is no longer absolute.

Lode, to answer your question: the magnet has both north and south poles, but shrink it smaller and smaller and smaller even to an infinitesimal point. It still exists. The absolute point is different because it is the point where the relative separation becomes singular, but no not singular because it ceases to exist completely. When there is one, or half-half-half-half, there is north and south, but to truly merge the two (relativity) is to absolutely erase both. I.e., the central point is not one, but zero. Relative concepts exist around a non-existent point, and this non-existent point is the same as the "present."

The headstand is saying that there is no such thing as standing upright or upside down at the point in between the Earth and the Moon. There is no up or down outside of relative reference frames, and those frames have nothing to do with the absolute which I thought we were striving for.

[Lloyd Gillespie]

MK, show me soul in a test-tube, and I'll see if I can verify it___sounds like another meta-non-physical alligator, to me... What about the real quantum-bio-chemical soup kitchen of real memory states? You seem to remember you have a meta-magic-soul?

regards,

[mkirkpatrick]

Lyoyd dear,please consult the dictionary as your spelling is quite atrocious you are
giving and causing offence to all us reptile lovers,the correct spelling Lloyd,that is in
English,is alligator,do you comprehend English Lloyd?Maybe while resting on the beach
you could read through a good dictionary,I would personally recommend Lloyd the
Oxford everyday dictionary,it is chock full of very interesting words!


regards michael.