Hey, your reasons are your business.Dubious wrote: ↑Sun Mar 04, 2018 2:16 amOnly doing it to keep my mental apparatus lubricated...which I noticed isn't rust proof...and for no other reason. Best part is, it works even when I screwup...which happens so seldom!Dalek Prime wrote: ↑Sat Mar 03, 2018 5:54 amHeck, how did I miss this? Anyway, you're doing a fine job Dubious. Ta!
The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness  ever

 Posts: 4927
 Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2015 4:48 am
 Location: Living in a tree with Polly.
Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness  ever
Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness  ever
I agree. Absolute nothing cannot be ever since anything exist.
"The null hypothesis is that nothing, zero is a physical reality based mathematical conception which we can perceive as an energy, matter, information, space, time free state. Revealing as our common physical, mathematical, philosophical origin, a physical reality based mathematical reference point. I state that in proportion to this physical reality based sense(conception) everything has some kind of mathematically expressible value. Space, time, information, energy, matter.
The hypothesis is based on the fact that space expands and time evolves which points that our current moment is bigger(more*) than the moment before. Following this path backward on the timeline of the physical reality we arrive to the lowest possible physical state, which I perceive as a space(time), energy, matter, informationfree state. 0. In proportion to this state, everything has value. Everything has mathematically expressible value. Space, time, energy, matter and information. "  tlz
*at least on the level of information about its existence (Time)
"The null hypothesis is that nothing, zero is a physical reality based mathematical conception which we can perceive as an energy, matter, information, space, time free state. Revealing as our common physical, mathematical, philosophical origin, a physical reality based mathematical reference point. I state that in proportion to this physical reality based sense(conception) everything has some kind of mathematically expressible value. Space, time, information, energy, matter.
The hypothesis is based on the fact that space expands and time evolves which points that our current moment is bigger(more*) than the moment before. Following this path backward on the timeline of the physical reality we arrive to the lowest possible physical state, which I perceive as a space(time), energy, matter, informationfree state. 0. In proportion to this state, everything has value. Everything has mathematically expressible value. Space, time, energy, matter and information. "  tlz
*at least on the level of information about its existence (Time)
Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness  ever
I'm not very good with math
"Okay, now given that you have 10 cups with the random possibility of each cup having as many as 10 coins in it, what is the possibility that you have the same number of coins in all 10 cups?
Mathematically that would be (1/10)^10 or 0.0000000001."
How did we get to the number of 10 cups and 10 coins?
I am wondering though, if I have 10 sweets in my hand and eat them all, how many do i have left in my hand? Surely that leaves absolutely none... unless we're counting particles of sweet, but then surely we look at what a 'sweet' is...
"Okay, now given that you have 10 cups with the random possibility of each cup having as many as 10 coins in it, what is the possibility that you have the same number of coins in all 10 cups?
Mathematically that would be (1/10)^10 or 0.0000000001."
How did we get to the number of 10 cups and 10 coins?
I am wondering though, if I have 10 sweets in my hand and eat them all, how many do i have left in my hand? Surely that leaves absolutely none... unless we're counting particles of sweet, but then surely we look at what a 'sweet' is...
Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness  ever
Nothing and everything are the same  just like zero and infinity are the same. These concepts make no sense in duality (but we use them anyway).
I agree, that the concept of oneness is inconceivable. But: Oneness itself IS conceivable.
Taking this a step further we find that this is true for all concepts. Even the concept of tree is (in reality) inconceivable as all we really know is undivided truth/reality... but by covering it up with a conceptual, objective map of separation we actually believe there is a separate self that experiences external objects (which we never actually do).
Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness  ever
Hello AlexW...sorry I've only just realised you'd replied to me, even though you replied 12 days ago. I'm only just seeing it.AlexW wrote: ↑Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:30 amNothing and everything are the same  just like zero and infinity are the same. These concepts make no sense in duality (but we use them anyway).
I agree, that the concept of oneness is inconceivable. But: Oneness itself IS conceivable.
Taking this a step further we find that this is true for all concepts. Even the concept of tree is (in reality) inconceivable as all we really know is undivided truth/reality... but by covering it up with a conceptual, objective map of separation we actually believe there is a separate self that experiences external objects (which we never actually do).
I agree with you, nothing and everything are the same, they only differ in context put there by knowledge, language, interpretation etc..
Oneness is conceivable in the context it is conceived by language, oneness becomes known within the experience of being it. . although it is not an experience, the experience is an 'appearance' in it...a feeling or sensation so to speak, but it's only oneness itself experiencing the feeling and sensation so it's a phantom.
What I mean by that is without knowledge  nothing would be conceiving of itself, so knowing you know is a mental phenomena, an appearance within itself. There has to be something for an appearance to arise in, that something is nothing which is everything. The mind splits the nothing into everything, the mind being the reflection of itself...an appearance , an integral aspect of the same oneness, the one reflects itself as the many. Oneness is not an experience. All experiences are appearances in oneness as known concepts...aka language, so in reality, nothing is knowing itself, nothing is experiencing itself except the word which is nothing at all appearing as something.
This is so bizarrely mysterious and divinely beautiful at the same time.
.
.
Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness  ever
Hi,
What I am interested in is finding a new way of communicating the above, of altering peoples' way of thinking so they are open to receiving messages of oneness. To open their minds to the forgotten nondual foundation of the dualistic world they have constructed on top of infinity. I think this is the only possible way out of the egotistical spiral of destruction the world has departed on. I know this sounds impossible... but even baby steps will somewhen take you to the finish line
Yes I fully agree with what you say  mysteriously beautiful.
What I am interested in is finding a new way of communicating the above, of altering peoples' way of thinking so they are open to receiving messages of oneness. To open their minds to the forgotten nondual foundation of the dualistic world they have constructed on top of infinity. I think this is the only possible way out of the egotistical spiral of destruction the world has departed on. I know this sounds impossible... but even baby steps will somewhen take you to the finish line
Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness  ever
I agree, it may look like an impossible task, but infinity is a long time, I guess there is all the time in the world in which to complete this taskAlexW wrote: ↑Thu Apr 19, 2018 3:00 amHi,Yes I fully agree with what you say  mysteriously beautiful.
What I am interested in is finding a new way of communicating the above, of altering peoples' way of thinking so they are open to receiving messages of oneness. To open their minds to the forgotten nondual foundation of the dualistic world they have constructed on top of infinity. I think this is the only possible way out of the egotistical spiral of destruction the world has departed on. I know this sounds impossible... but even baby steps will somewhen take you to the finish line
I'm hopeful that very soon this message will be common knowledge to everyone on the planet, we'll all be thinking like this, it'll be a normal way of being and thinking, and it will change our lives forever and for the better.
We live in hope.
Good job by the way..I'm reading your infinity thread, it is amazing, well done for articulating this very important understanding, you do it very well.
.
Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness  ever
Yes, infinity is a long time... Nice meeting you
 SpheresOfBalance
 Posts: 5282
 Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:27 pm
 Location: On a Star Dust Metamorphosis
Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness  ever
The reason this thread, like many, is absurd, is because one can only see things from their particular perspective, their particular reality, as if it's necessary proof that there could be no others, or lack thereof. Since this universes' possible beginning/ending is only speculation, one can't say with any amount of certainty that it had to begin, has to end or is infinite. One only has what currently is the case, from which to determine such things, but then that's a very small window indeed. Yet some would talk as if certain, where certainty cannot actually be determined. I don't mind that humans have multitudes of theories, I just hate the fact that they glaze over the fact of their actual status, and speak as if they can actually be certain.
Trust me, I know that humans must believe they know certainty so as to quell their fears. I know that the fear of uncertainty can drive some humans mad, but we're supposed to be philosophers here, and we shouldn't be afraid to not know certainty, nor to admit that we don't know it. As Socrates, the father of both philosophy and thus all it's children, (science), said, 'I only know that I know nothing,' and even though it does indeed contain some certainty, it contains certainty that he can't be certain, so he certainly tried his best to not fear uncertainty.
Philosophy... The never ending question...
Trust me, I know that humans must believe they know certainty so as to quell their fears. I know that the fear of uncertainty can drive some humans mad, but we're supposed to be philosophers here, and we shouldn't be afraid to not know certainty, nor to admit that we don't know it. As Socrates, the father of both philosophy and thus all it's children, (science), said, 'I only know that I know nothing,' and even though it does indeed contain some certainty, it contains certainty that he can't be certain, so he certainly tried his best to not fear uncertainty.
Philosophy... The never ending question...
 attofishpi
 Posts: 3041
 Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
 Location: Orion Spur
 Contact:
Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness  ever
What is the question?
Re: The Absolute Impossibility of Nothingness  ever
To avoid the reread through because of time, but mostly because of laziness, are you arguing that mathematics mirrors itself through the equation (which is mathematics) as space?JSS wrote: ↑Mon Feb 15, 2016 12:27 amThis mathematical proof involves hyperreal mathematics and detailed ontological construction techniques. If you are not deeply familiar with those, you might want to take it very slowly, thinking about and asking about each detail from the beginning to the end.
And note ahead of time that even though we begin speaking merely of random possibilities and infinitesimal probabilities, by the time we get to the end, an absolute impossibility has been established.
================================
Okay, now given that you have 10 cups with the random possibility of each cup having as many as 10 coins in it, what is the possibility that you have the same number of coins in all 10 cups?
Mathematically that would be (1/10)^10 or 0.0000000001.
The state of nothingness and the state of absolute homogeneity are actually the same thing. If there is no distinction in affect at all in every point in space, there is no universe. Thus for a universe to exist, there must be distinction or variation in affect between the points in space. What is the possibility that every point in space is of the exact same value of PtA (potentialtoaffect)?
Well, let's define a term as the specific infinite series,
infA ≡ [1+1+1+...]
Just a single infinite line would give us infA^2 points on that line if you want to include all infinitesimal lengths, all "real numbers". And assuming nothing is forcing any particular PtA value, each point on the line might have a value anywhere from infinitesimal to infinite, the range of that same infA^2 but for PtA.
So the possibility for every point on the line to have the same PtA value (given steps of 1 infinitesimal) would be;
Possibility of homogeneous line = (1/infA)^((infA)^2).
That is 1 infinitesimal reduced by itself infinitely an infinite number of times. And right there is the issue. Also in 3D space, you actually have the infinite realnumber cube (to simplify from spherical) of;
Possibility of homogeneous space = (1/infA)^(infA^6)
Normally in mathematics if your number has reached 1 infinitesimal, it is accepted as zero and is certainly close enough to zero for all practical purposes but we are literally infinitely less than infinity less than 1 infinitesimal. For 3D space, we are looking at 1 infinitesimal times itself infinitely an infinite number of times, infinitely times an infinite number more times, and infinitely times an infinite number more times.
Given an infinite amount of time (an infinite timeline, another infA^2 of points in time) and with or without causality, the possibility of running across homogeneity of space is;
Possibility of homogeneity through all space = (1/infA)^(infA^6)
Possibility of homogeneity through all time = (1/infA)^(infA^12)
With a possibility being that degree of infinitely small, not only can it never randomly end up homogeneous even through an infinite number of trials (an infinite time line, never getting up to even 1 infinitesimal possibility), but it can't even be forced to be homogeneous. A force is an affect. If all affects are identical, the total affect is zero. What would be left in existence to force all points to be infinitely identical?
But if that isn't good enough for you, realize that those calculations are based on stepped values of merely 1 infinitesimal using a standard of infA. In reality, each step would be as close to absolute zero as possible without actually being absolute zero using a standard of as close to absolute infinity as possible,
AbsInf ≡ highest possible number toward absolute infinity.
And then of course,
1/AbsInf = would be the lowest possible number or value.
Thus we have,
Possibility of homogeneity through all time = (1/AbsInf)^(Absinf^12)
Now we have truly absolute zero possibility because if we are already as close to absolute zero as possible with "1/AbsInf", as soon as we multiply that by any fraction, we have breached absolute zero, impossibly small. And we have breached absolute zero by a factor of AbsInf^12 ... well, well beyond absolute zero possibility of homogeneity.
Thus Absolute Homogeneity, "Nothingness", is absolutely impossible.
Thus no universe could have ever been at a state of absolute nothingness, a preBigBang state, nor can even the tiniest fraction of any universe ever be absolutely empty. Every point throughout all space and throughout all time is filled with affectance that merely changes in density and potential.
Exyz = p + a0dp/dt + a1dp²/dt² + a3dp³/dt³ + …
Or:
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Logik and 2 guests