## Time as Approximation of "The One"

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Eodnhoj7
Posts: 3442
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

### Time as Approximation of "The One"

Time is an approximation of a unified state of being through multiple infinities, where each phenomena as an extension of "The One" reflects "The One" through an inherent multiplicity of "images" in which unity is "veiled" by an inherent "void". The "veil of void", or the "chasm" of unknowing referred to my mystics or the "dark matter" of physicists, effectively is observed by an inherent multiplicity of phenomena where "void" cannot be seen in and of itself (as it is nothing), but rather through a sheer multiplicity of phenomena folding into and out of reality.

Time, as finiteness, is fundamentally rooted in a multiplicity of images or "logical atoms" where we can observe an inherent boundary of "unity" within an image/atom of reality (abstract or empirical), but upon further inspection through "time" this boundary is subject to a simultaneous entropy/negentropy, as "individuation", into further boundaries.

The act of "localizing" any phenonomena, through deductivity/inductivity/abductivity, effectively is an act of creating further time where the phenomena as existing in time (as the relation of one part to another) is observes through further times zones.

Take for example the observation of a horse moving from Point A to Point B. We observe the horse fundamentally because of its movement, but this movement is observed because of a framework of "progression", that is the framework of point A and point B where its movements originate.

Upon closer inspection the horse can be observed as composed of simple hair, muscle fibers, blood vessel, nerves and reproducing cells. These phenomena in turn exist as boundaries of movement sharing this same linear form/function in not just just appear but the fact thier movements always requires a movement from point A to point B. I may observe a hair, sway back and forth through time, but the framework always observes some portion of the hair (top, middle, bottom or any other point) going back and forth between point A and point B.

Reversibility I may watch the horse move from Point A to Point B, but if I observe the framework in which the horse is moving I also am observing the framework existing within a timezone similar to not only what defines the horse but what the horse is composed of. The horse, defined by its movement across a bridge, observes not just the bridge moving up/down or left/right at a much lower rate of movement but the actual ground in which the bridge is connected moving forwards/backwards, up/down and/or left/right...all of which observes a basic movement in each context from a Point A to Point B.

So what we understand of time, not only observes a replication of a base linear format of movement from Point A to Point B (where each point is respectively an origin of movement), but fundamentally timezones within time zones where the framework exists as a constant boundary of movement composed of various infinite grades of movement. Movement, under such terms as evidenced by the basic Point A/B dichotomy (which is universally present regardless of the framework as the framework recursively manifesting itself everywhere, fundamentally is dualistic in nature.

This dualistic, or 2 dimensional, foundation to "time as finiteness" observes a basic phenomena of "convergence/divergence" where one phenomena (lets say the horse mention above) exists as a perpetual gradation of the points A/B. Where the movement of the horse originates from Point A (and Point B simultaneously considering its movement is determined if and only if there is a potential destination for which it is too move) the phenomena itself (the horse again) is point A of the framework effectively existing through various grades as it moves to point B through the horse.

The third element of time, depth in this case, is a perpetual state of change.

This dualism observes a perpetual change by gradation conducive to synthesis as convergence/divergence. For example the particle may be defined by the dichotomy of points A/B through which it moves, but the particle in moving from point A to point B is effectively existing in multiple states by the movement of the particle itself. The particle at point A1 is not the same as the particle at point A2 but exists as a boundary of movement, or "quality of infinite grades", existing as a continuum of movement; hence the particles is a boundary of movement itself where points A and B are:

a) Converging: in the respect A1 to A2 observes the space between A1 and A2 effectively existing as "1", with "A1 and A2" existing as points A and B effectively joining through the continuum or "quality" of the particle itself. Point A and B exist through a convergence of the phenomena itself where Point A and Point B move towards a state of unity by the phenomena itself.

b) Divergence: in the respect A1 seperates from A2 when the particle exists as A2 and A3. Points A and B are simultaneously "diverging" in these respects by the "quality" of the particle itself. Keep in mind this "quality" is strictly a boundary of gradation. Hence Point A and B hence as an "active state" of sythesis where these points, as fix/passive/stable, are frameworks of movement.

c) Movement fundamentally is multiplicity as finiteness. Infinity is a pure movement that is synonymous to no movement except when observed relative to another infinity, thus necessitating "time" as "finiteness/muliplicity" grounded in a law of Relativity.

### Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bahman and 2 guests