An Epistemic Theory of Everything

Known unknowns and unknown unknowns!

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
commonsense
Posts: 1375
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

An Epistemic Theory of Everything

Post by commonsense » Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:18 pm

:mrgreen:

Not everything is explainable. We don’t know what we don’t know about anything. There is no basis to the belief that we will eventually know all there is to know about a thing. However, knowing what everything is not brings us closer to a theory that explains it.

Not everything is tangible. Not everything accessible to one sense is accessible to another.

Not everything is expressible nor even thinkable. Everything includes undiscovered concepts for which there are no words as yet.

Insofar as definitions are tautological, everything is all that is and all that isn’t. Nothing is excluded from everything. Nothing is included in everything.

Where did everything come from? We don’t know. When did everything start? Likewise. Does everything have a purpose? Perhaps.

There is no practical theory of everything, epistemically or metaphysically, other than as stated here.

Age
Posts: 3829
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: An Epistemic Theory of Everything

Post by Age » Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:16 am

commonsense wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:18 pm
:mrgreen:

Not everything is explainable. We don’t know what we don’t know about anything. There is no basis to the belief that we will eventually know all there is to know about a thing. However, knowing what everything is not brings us closer to a theory that explains it.

Not everything is tangible. Not everything accessible to one sense is accessible to another.

Not everything is expressible nor even thinkable. Everything includes undiscovered concepts for which there are no words as yet.

Insofar as definitions are tautological, everything is all that is and all that isn’t. Nothing is excluded from everything. Nothing is included in everything.

Where did everything come from? We don’t know.
I KNOW.
commonsense wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:18 pm
When did everything start? Likewise.
I KNOW.
commonsense wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:18 pm
Does everything have a purpose? Perhaps.
Yes.
commonsense wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:18 pm
There is no practical theory of everything, epistemically or metaphysically, other than as stated here.
Is TOE envisioned as an actual (explanation) Theory of EVERY single thing, or just as a Theory Of (combining/linking/uniting) EVERY thing together - an all-encompassing theory?

For example, although there is NOT a discrepancy between general theory of relativity and quantum field theory some people see one, and think that there is a discrepancy. TOE, for example, is meant to encapsulate or solve this supposed discrepancy.

Coming up with or providing a theory of absolutely EVERY single thing seems a bit of far stretch beyond capabilities.
Last edited by Age on Wed Nov 20, 2019 11:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

commonsense
Posts: 1375
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: An Epistemic Theory of Everything

Post by commonsense » Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:49 pm

Age wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:16 am
commonsense wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:18 pm
:mrgreen:

Not everything is explainable. We don’t know what we don’t know about anything. There is no basis to the belief that we will eventually know all there is to know about a thing. However, knowing what everything is not brings us closer to a theory that explains it.

Not everything is tangible. Not everything accessible to one sense is accessible to another.

Not everything is expressible nor even thinkable. Everything includes undiscovered concepts for which there are no words as yet.

Insofar as definitions are tautological, everything is all that is and all that isn’t. Nothing is excluded from everything. Nothing is included in everything.

Where did everything come from? We don’t know.

I KNOW.

When did everything start? Likewise.

I KNOW.

Does everything have a purpose? Perhaps.

Yes.

There is no practical theory of everything, epistemically or metaphysically, other than as stated here.
Is TOE envisioned as an actual (explanation) Theory of EVERY single thing, or just as a Theory Of (combining/linking/uniting) EVERY thing together - an all-encompassing theory?

For example, although there is NOT a discrepancy between general theory of relativity and quantum field theory some people see one, and think that there is a discrepancy. TOE, for example, is meant to encapsulate or solve this supposed discrepancy.

Coming up with or providing a theory of absolutely EVERY single thing seems a bit of far stretch beyond capabilities.
This is very good. I like what you are saying. Tell me more, like where did everything come from and when did everything start. You teased that you know but kept hidden what it is that you know.

I don’t know why I included the phrase, “other than as stated here.” Everything I said above led to the conclusion that there can be no TOE.

To recap, TOE is beyond all capabilities and beyond all possibilities.

Age
Posts: 3829
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: An Epistemic Theory of Everything

Post by Age » Thu Nov 21, 2019 12:33 am

commonsense wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:49 pm
Age wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:16 am
commonsense wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:18 pm
:mrgreen:

Not everything is explainable. We don’t know what we don’t know about anything. There is no basis to the belief that we will eventually know all there is to know about a thing. However, knowing what everything is not brings us closer to a theory that explains it.

Not everything is tangible. Not everything accessible to one sense is accessible to another.

Not everything is expressible nor even thinkable. Everything includes undiscovered concepts for which there are no words as yet.

Insofar as definitions are tautological, everything is all that is and all that isn’t. Nothing is excluded from everything. Nothing is included in everything.

Where did everything come from? We don’t know.
I KNOW.
Age wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:16 am
commonsense wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:49 pm
When did everything start? Likewise.
I KNOW.
Age wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:16 am
commonsense wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:49 pm
Does everything have a purpose? Perhaps.
Yes.
Age wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:16 am
commonsense wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:49 pm
There is no practical theory of everything, epistemically or metaphysically, other than as stated here.
Is TOE envisioned as an actual (explanation) Theory of EVERY single thing, or just as a Theory Of (combining/linking/uniting) EVERY thing together - an all-encompassing theory?

For example, although there is NOT a discrepancy between general theory of relativity and quantum field theory some people see one, and think that there is a discrepancy. TOE, for example, is meant to encapsulate or solve this supposed discrepancy.

Coming up with or providing a theory of absolutely EVERY single thing seems a bit of far stretch beyond capabilities.
This is very good. I like what you are saying. Tell me more, like where did everything come from and when did everything start. You teased that you know but kept hidden what it is that you know.
I do this 'teasing' about what I know but keep "hidden" quite often, as can be evidenced throughout here in this forum. I do this because I am seeking those who are Truly curious, like "yourself" are here now. I write in a way to 'tease out' and find those who are Truly OPEN. I found that there is absolutely no use in talking to those who are Truly CLOSED, so it is those who are Truly OPEN that I am looking for.

'Everything', one word, did NOT come from anywhere. Everything is just HERE.
'Everything, one word, also did NOT start. Everything is NOW.

Everything is JUST, HERE-NOW. Always, and in all ways.
commonsense wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:49 pm
I don’t know why I included the phrase, “other than as stated here.” Everything I said above led to the conclusion that there can be no TOE.
Everything is relative to the observer.

Do you already believe that there can be no TOE, and so 'you' are just looking for things, which could back up and support 'your' already held conclusion?

Could it have just been an error, revealing a sub or an un-concious knowing or feeling, why you included that phrase?

Everything you said above, which SUPPOSEDLY leads to a conclusion that there can be no TOE, is just because only ONE perspective is being looked at, and from.
commonsense wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:49 pm
To recap, TOE is beyond all capabilities and beyond all possibilities.
Again, this all depends on how 'you' are defining TOE?

What does a 'Theory Of Everything' actually mean to 'you'?

To me, what exists can be summed up in two ways;

Every thing, and

Everything.

The sum of EVERY (single) thing equals (or is) Everything. Or, EVERY thing together, literally is; Everything.

'Every thing' combined together literally becomes 'Everything'.

EVERY (single) thing when looked at together or combined is Everything, or the Universe, Itself. So, to me, the Theory Of Everything is just a theory about how every thing works together or fits together as One encompassing thing, that is; thee Universe, Itself. To me, the Theory Of Every thing is NOT some theory about absolutely EVERY single thing, but just a theory about the One thing, known as, 'Everything' or thee 'Universe'.

Adding the two words 'Every' and 'thing' together literally gives you Everything, just like adding up every thing together gives you the equal sum of Everything.

Now, how Every thing works together to produce Everything, or thee Universe, Itself, is no big deal at all. In fact it is a very simple equation, which is also very easy to explain.

Adding 'Every' 'thing' together is equal to Everything.

Everything, as One, is just thee One, single, Universe, Itself. How every thing is created is just by thee Universe, Itself. There is NO other thing than the Universe, Itself. So, thee Creator of every single thing, including the single Universe, Itself, is thee Universe, Itself.

Now obviously absolutely every single thing is created from the coming together of at least two other things. There is NO one thing that can create itself, so how could the One Universe be Creating Itself, some may now be wondering? Well this is very easy to understand. The Universe, Itself, is made up fundamentally of two things;

Something, and

Nothing.

'Something' literally means 'some', or any, thing. The word 'some' means at least one of any group of thing up to but not including all of that group of things.

'Nothing' literally means 'no' thing.

Obviously what exists is some (physical) things, which have to be a distance apart from each other. What exists between those physical things is literally nothing or no things. So, the Universe is fundamentally made up of some thing and no thing. These two things coming together or co-existing with each other is HOW the Universe is continually Creating Its Self. These two things of something AND nothing have ALWAYS coexisted together.

Physical things without space or nothing between them nor around them could not freely move about. The continual interaction of physical things together is what creates continuous Energy. The action of physical things inter-acting with each other is what Creation, Itself, IS. EVERY action causes a reaction, and reaction is another action, itself, or just a re-action. This Reaction process is just Creation, Itself, ALWAYS in action.

Every interaction of physical things is an action, and every action, causes a re-action, which pre-determines what will happen. The space or nothing between ALL physical things, which allows all things to move about Freely, then leads on to how 'free-will' and 'determinism' BOTH play an EQUAL part in Life, or Existence, Itself. Through the process of elimination, every thing that is obviously created also obviously evolves. There is NO one thing, which is created, which just stops changing, or stops evolving. Evolution is nothing more than just change, itself. Through the process of 'Every action causes a Reaction', which is just Creation, Itself, which causes every thing to be Created, including how the thing 'Universe' is also Created, but through this process, every thing, including the Universe, is also changing, or evolving. So, just like 'free will' AND 'determinism' BOTH play an equal part in Existence so to does 'evolution' AND 'creation' BOTH play and EQUAL part in Existence, as well.

However, in saying this, as I said earlier, coming up with a theory of absolutely every single thing would appear to be very unlikely.

commonsense
Posts: 1375
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: An Epistemic Theory of Everything

Post by commonsense » Thu Nov 21, 2019 7:51 pm

Age wrote:
Thu Nov 21, 2019 12:33 am
commonsense wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:49 pm
Age wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:16 am


I KNOW.
Age wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:16 am

I KNOW.
Age wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:16 am

Yes.
Age wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 6:16 am

Is TOE envisioned as an actual (explanation) Theory of EVERY single thing, or just as a Theory Of (combining/linking/uniting) EVERY thing together - an all-encompassing theory?

For example, although there is NOT a discrepancy between general theory of relativity and quantum field theory some people see one, and think that there is a discrepancy. TOE, for example, is meant to encapsulate or solve this supposed discrepancy.

Coming up with or providing a theory of absolutely EVERY single thing seems a bit of far stretch beyond capabilities.
This is very good. I like what you are saying. Tell me more, like where did everything come from and when did everything start. You teased that you know but kept hidden what it is that you know.
I do this 'teasing' about what I know but keep "hidden" quite often, as can be evidenced throughout here in this forum. I do this because I am seeking those who are Truly curious, like "yourself" are here now. I write in a way to 'tease out' and find those who are Truly OPEN. I found that there is absolutely no use in talking to those who are Truly CLOSED, so it is those who are Truly OPEN that I am looking for.

'Everything', one word, did NOT come from anywhere. Everything is just HERE.
'Everything, one word, also did NOT start. Everything is NOW.

Everything is JUST, HERE-NOW. Always, and in all ways.
commonsense wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:49 pm
I don’t know why I included the phrase, “other than as stated here.” Everything I said above led to the conclusion that there can be no TOE.
Everything is relative to the observer.

Do you already believe that there can be no TOE, and so 'you' are just looking for things, which could back up and support 'your' already held conclusion?

Could it have just been an error, revealing a sub or an un-concious knowing or feeling, why you included that phrase?

Everything you said above, which SUPPOSEDLY leads to a conclusion that there can be no TOE, is just because only ONE perspective is being looked at, and from.
commonsense wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:49 pm
To recap, TOE is beyond all capabilities and beyond all possibilities.
Again, this all depends on how 'you' are defining TOE?

What does a 'Theory Of Everything' actually mean to 'you'?

To me, what exists can be summed up in two ways;

Every thing, and

Everything.

The sum of EVERY (single) thing equals (or is) Everything. Or, EVERY thing together, literally is; Everything.

'Every thing' combined together literally becomes 'Everything'.

EVERY (single) thing when looked at together or combined is Everything, or the Universe, Itself. So, to me, the Theory Of Everything is just a theory about how every thing works together or fits together as One encompassing thing, that is; thee Universe, Itself. To me, the Theory Of Every thing is NOT some theory about absolutely EVERY single thing, but just a theory about the One thing, known as, 'Everything' or thee 'Universe'.

Adding the two words 'Every' and 'thing' together literally gives you Everything, just like adding up every thing together gives you the equal sum of Everything.

Now, how Every thing works together to produce Everything, or thee Universe, Itself, is no big deal at all. In fact it is a very simple equation, which is also very easy to explain.

Adding 'Every' 'thing' together is equal to Everything.

Everything, as One, is just thee One, single, Universe, Itself. How every thing is created is just by thee Universe, Itself. There is NO other thing than the Universe, Itself. So, thee Creator of every single thing, including the single Universe, Itself, is thee Universe, Itself.

Now obviously absolutely every single thing is created from the coming together of at least two other things. There is NO one thing that can create itself, so how could the One Universe be Creating Itself, some may now be wondering? Well this is very easy to understand. The Universe, Itself, is made up fundamentally of two things;

Something, and

Nothing.

'Something' literally means 'some', or any, thing. The word 'some' means at least one of any group of thing up to but not including all of that group of things.

'Nothing' literally means 'no' thing.

Obviously what exists is some (physical) things, which have to be a distance apart from each other. What exists between those physical things is literally nothing or no things. So, the Universe is fundamentally made up of some thing and no thing. These two things coming together or co-existing with each other is HOW the Universe is continually Creating Its Self. These two things of something AND nothing have ALWAYS coexisted together.

Physical things without space or nothing between them nor around them could not freely move about. The continual interaction of physical things together is what creates continuous Energy. The action of physical things inter-acting with each other is what Creation, Itself, IS. EVERY action causes a reaction, and reaction is another action, itself, or just a re-action. This Reaction process is just Creation, Itself, ALWAYS in action.

Every interaction of physical things is an action, and every action, causes a re-action, which pre-determines what will happen. The space or nothing between ALL physical things, which allows all things to move about Freely, then leads on to how 'free-will' and 'determinism' BOTH play an EQUAL part in Life, or Existence, Itself. Through the process of elimination, every thing that is obviously created also obviously evolves. There is NO one thing, which is created, which just stops changing, or stops evolving. Evolution is nothing more than just change, itself. Through the process of 'Every action causes a Reaction', which is just Creation, Itself, which causes every thing to be Created, including how the thing 'Universe' is also Created, but through this process, every thing, including the Universe, is also changing, or evolving. So, just like 'free will' AND 'determinism' BOTH play an equal part in Existence so to does 'evolution' AND 'creation' BOTH play and EQUAL part in Existence, as well.

However, in saying this, as I said earlier, coming up with a theory of absolutely every single thing would appear to be very unlikely.
That’s a lot to absorb. I think I agree with all that you said, except I am unsure about the universe comprising everything and nothing.

As I am open about this, please explain how that works.

Earlier I indicated that the universe is everything and also everything that doesn’t exist. I’m not sure if what I said is the same concept as what you said. Do you think it is? Or else, what‘a the difference?

Age
Posts: 3829
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: An Epistemic Theory of Everything

Post by Age » Fri Nov 22, 2019 8:04 am

commonsense wrote:
Thu Nov 21, 2019 7:51 pm
Age wrote:
Thu Nov 21, 2019 12:33 am
commonsense wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:49 pm










This is very good. I like what you are saying. Tell me more, like where did everything come from and when did everything start. You teased that you know but kept hidden what it is that you know.
I do this 'teasing' about what I know but keep "hidden" quite often, as can be evidenced throughout here in this forum. I do this because I am seeking those who are Truly curious, like "yourself" are here now. I write in a way to 'tease out' and find those who are Truly OPEN. I found that there is absolutely no use in talking to those who are Truly CLOSED, so it is those who are Truly OPEN that I am looking for.

'Everything', one word, did NOT come from anywhere. Everything is just HERE.
'Everything, one word, also did NOT start. Everything is NOW.

Everything is JUST, HERE-NOW. Always, and in all ways.
commonsense wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:49 pm
I don’t know why I included the phrase, “other than as stated here.” Everything I said above led to the conclusion that there can be no TOE.
Everything is relative to the observer.

Do you already believe that there can be no TOE, and so 'you' are just looking for things, which could back up and support 'your' already held conclusion?

Could it have just been an error, revealing a sub or an un-concious knowing or feeling, why you included that phrase?

Everything you said above, which SUPPOSEDLY leads to a conclusion that there can be no TOE, is just because only ONE perspective is being looked at, and from.
commonsense wrote:
Wed Nov 20, 2019 5:49 pm
To recap, TOE is beyond all capabilities and beyond all possibilities.
Again, this all depends on how 'you' are defining TOE?

What does a 'Theory Of Everything' actually mean to 'you'?

To me, what exists can be summed up in two ways;

Every thing, and

Everything.

The sum of EVERY (single) thing equals (or is) Everything. Or, EVERY thing together, literally is; Everything.

'Every thing' combined together literally becomes 'Everything'.

EVERY (single) thing when looked at together or combined is Everything, or the Universe, Itself. So, to me, the Theory Of Everything is just a theory about how every thing works together or fits together as One encompassing thing, that is; thee Universe, Itself. To me, the Theory Of Every thing is NOT some theory about absolutely EVERY single thing, but just a theory about the One thing, known as, 'Everything' or thee 'Universe'.

Adding the two words 'Every' and 'thing' together literally gives you Everything, just like adding up every thing together gives you the equal sum of Everything.

Now, how Every thing works together to produce Everything, or thee Universe, Itself, is no big deal at all. In fact it is a very simple equation, which is also very easy to explain.

Adding 'Every' 'thing' together is equal to Everything.

Everything, as One, is just thee One, single, Universe, Itself. How every thing is created is just by thee Universe, Itself. There is NO other thing than the Universe, Itself. So, thee Creator of every single thing, including the single Universe, Itself, is thee Universe, Itself.

Now obviously absolutely every single thing is created from the coming together of at least two other things. There is NO one thing that can create itself, so how could the One Universe be Creating Itself, some may now be wondering? Well this is very easy to understand. The Universe, Itself, is made up fundamentally of two things;

Something, and

Nothing.

'Something' literally means 'some', or any, thing. The word 'some' means at least one of any group of thing up to but not including all of that group of things.

'Nothing' literally means 'no' thing.

Obviously what exists is some (physical) things, which have to be a distance apart from each other. What exists between those physical things is literally nothing or no things. So, the Universe is fundamentally made up of some thing and no thing. These two things coming together or co-existing with each other is HOW the Universe is continually Creating Its Self. These two things of something AND nothing have ALWAYS coexisted together.

Physical things without space or nothing between them nor around them could not freely move about. The continual interaction of physical things together is what creates continuous Energy. The action of physical things inter-acting with each other is what Creation, Itself, IS. EVERY action causes a reaction, and reaction is another action, itself, or just a re-action. This Reaction process is just Creation, Itself, ALWAYS in action.

Every interaction of physical things is an action, and every action, causes a re-action, which pre-determines what will happen. The space or nothing between ALL physical things, which allows all things to move about Freely, then leads on to how 'free-will' and 'determinism' BOTH play an EQUAL part in Life, or Existence, Itself. Through the process of elimination, every thing that is obviously created also obviously evolves. There is NO one thing, which is created, which just stops changing, or stops evolving. Evolution is nothing more than just change, itself. Through the process of 'Every action causes a Reaction', which is just Creation, Itself, which causes every thing to be Created, including how the thing 'Universe' is also Created, but through this process, every thing, including the Universe, is also changing, or evolving. So, just like 'free will' AND 'determinism' BOTH play an equal part in Existence so to does 'evolution' AND 'creation' BOTH play and EQUAL part in Existence, as well.

However, in saying this, as I said earlier, coming up with a theory of absolutely every single thing would appear to be very unlikely.
That’s a lot to absorb.
I have this trouble when communicating. I either do not say enough, to promote inquisitiveness, or I say way too much, not allowing what I am saying to be caught up with and understood. (There is a balance some where, which I hope I find sooner rather than later.) Anyway there is absolutely nothing complicated in what is to be said, it is just the wrong way I explain things that makes what I say only appear to be a lot to absorb.
commonsense wrote:
Thu Nov 21, 2019 7:51 pm
I think I agree with all that you said, except I am unsure about the universe comprising everything and nothing.

As I am open about this, please explain how that works.
Think of physics (or physical things) at the smaller quantum level (or even the larger cosmic level, if that helps).

Surrounding any particle of physical matter there has to be a distance of absolutely nothing, to the next particle of matter. The smallest particle of any piece of matter, obviously, HAS TO be separated from another particle/piece of matter. If they were not separated, then they would just be the EXACT SAME particle/piece of physical matter. To have separation, between or around physical things, then there NEEDS to be NO thing of physicality, or just otherwise known as 'nothing'.
commonsense wrote:
Thu Nov 21, 2019 7:51 pm
Earlier I indicated that the universe is everything and also everything that doesn’t exist. I’m not sure if what I said is the same concept as what you said. Do you think it is? Or else, what‘a the difference?
Yes I see our concepts as being the SAME.

To me, the Universe IS Everything, which includes the completely empty distances between the smallest of particles of sub-atomic matter. This 'empty distance', in a sense, does NOT exist. Every 'thing' that does NOT exist is part of the Everything, which makes up thee Universe. So, the Universe is Everything, which includes the 'every thing' that does not exist, or just the 'empty space' between and surrounding actual physical things.

The word Everything has to also include the 'empty space', which obviously in and of itself could be said to be some thing OR no thing. Empty distance between objects has to exist but an empty distance is just comprised of no thing or nothing. 'Empty distance' is a thing, in and of itself, it is just a thing of nothing.

Besides that way of looking at this, the Universe is also Everything, in that Everything also includes what is imagined, but does not exist in physical form. Any thing that is imagined, but 'does not exist' in any other form is still a part of Everything.

commonsense
Posts: 1375
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: An Epistemic Theory of Everything

Post by commonsense » Fri Nov 22, 2019 4:21 pm

Thank you. :)

nothing
Posts: 291
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:32 pm

Re: An Epistemic Theory of Everything

Post by nothing » Mon Dec 09, 2019 7:33 pm

Here is a one-liner theory of everything:
Conscious Knowledge of Ignorance Inference Theorem (CKIIT) Theory of Everything:
Knowing all *not to* believe approaches all-knowing.
which calls for:
All knowing is by way of indefinitely trying all belief, but
not all belief is by way of indefinitely trying to know all.
thus replaces the modern-day philosophical waffle:
All knowing is belief (?) but not all belief is knowing.
a monumental blunder capturing the monstrous ignorance of man (!)

Systematic
Posts: 238
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 5:29 am

Re: An Epistemic Theory of Everything

Post by Systematic » Thu Jan 02, 2020 3:46 am

commonsense wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:18 pm
:mrgreen:

Not everything is explainable. We don’t know what we don’t know about anything. There is no basis to the belief that we will eventually know all there is to know about a thing. However, knowing what everything is not brings us closer to a theory that explains it.
Not everything is explainable, because it is too complex in its particulars. The universals and structures are the realm of science. Science is known by the several scientists and technicians. I have theorized that if we could organize the particulars into structures that they could also be known.
commonsense wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:18 pm
:mrgreen:
Not everything is tangible. Not everything accessible to one sense is accessible to another.
commonsense wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:18 pm
:mrgreen:
Not everything is expressible nor even thinkable. Everything includes undiscovered concepts for which there are no words as yet.
Because it is too complicated in its particulars.
commonsense wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:18 pm
:mrgreen:
Insofar as definitions are tautological, everything is all that is and all that isn’t. Nothing is excluded from everything. Nothing is included in everything.
I'm not sure what you mean.
commonsense wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:18 pm
:mrgreen:
Where did everything come from? We don’t know. When did everything start? Likewise. Does everything have a purpose? Perhaps.
I think that purpose of everything is theologically necessary, but otherwise not.
commonsense wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:18 pm
:mrgreen:
There is no practical theory of everything, epistemically or metaphysically, other than as stated here.
I'm not trying to be rude, but do you know the definition of the word "practical"?

nothing
Posts: 291
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:32 pm

Re: An Epistemic Theory of Everything

Post by nothing » Thu Jan 02, 2020 7:18 pm

BIOS
in/out
(+)/(-)
(∞)

Twin Automatons Theory (TAT)
(thought experiment)
Build two identical automatons
whose components are five-fold:

head and torso = thus
arm = all (Α; affirmative +)
arm = not (Ω; negative -)
leg = to Believe
leg = to Know

Knowledge Automaton leads with to Know:
{to Know all thus not to Believe}
approaches 'state' of all-knowing...

Belief Automaton leads with to Believe:
{to Believe all thus not to Know}
approaches 'state' of all-believing...

Which automaton is more likely to discover any possible root
of true knowledge, if left running indefinitely?
viz.
Truth by Way of Negation: indefinitely
TRYing to believe both ways: to, and/or not to, BELIEVE(?), by way of indefinitely
TESTing to know either way which is (more) TRUE (or NOT), thereby indefinitely
FALSIFYing what is unbelievably unTRUE ad infinitum, thus indefinitely ever-approaching any possible 'state' of all-knowing.
_______________________________________________________
All knowing is by way of indefinitely trying all belief, but <*-conscious knowledge
not all belief is by way of indefinitely trying to know all. <-*of ignorance
_______________________________________________________

One can consciously infer consciousness itself is as indefinite as the wielder of it
should they be indefinitely trying to falsify all (false) belief ad infinitum.

commonsense
Posts: 1375
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: An Epistemic Theory of Everything

Post by commonsense » Thu Jan 02, 2020 7:35 pm

Yes, we don’t know things because they are too complex in their particulars. Yes, that’s the reason behind my mere observation that not everything can be explained.

It’s with exasperation that I say that I am at a loss for other words to explain the contradiction I noted concerning everything and nothing arising from defining everything as being all-inclusive so that it includes nothingness.

I thought “practical” means useful, not theoretical and so on.

nothing
Posts: 291
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:32 pm

Re: An Epistemic Theory of Everything

Post by nothing » Thu Jan 02, 2020 8:14 pm

commonsense wrote:
Thu Jan 02, 2020 7:35 pm
Yes, we don’t know things because they are too complex in their particulars. Yes, that’s the reason behind my mere observation that not everything can be explained.

It’s with exasperation that I say that I am at a loss for other words to explain the contradiction I noted concerning everything and nothing arising from defining everything as being all-inclusive so that it includes nothingness.

I thought “practical” means useful, not theoretical and so on.
reading
everything and nothing arising from defining everything as being all-inclusive so that it includes nothingness.
There certainly would be a contradiction (!) if/when:
defining everything as being all-inclusive so that it includes nothingness.
Everything can no more include nothingness than
yang can include yin.

Because there is light, there is darkness
being the absence of the former.
Thus, darkness has not property
less light, whereas the light does:
light displaces darkness.

Because there is something, there is nothing
being the absence of the former.
Thus, nothing has not property
less something, whereas something does:
something is not nothing.

commonsense
Posts: 1375
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: An Epistemic Theory of Everything

Post by commonsense » Thu Jan 02, 2020 9:57 pm

:mrgreen:

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 5112
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: An Epistemic Theory of Everything

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Fri Jan 17, 2020 3:20 am

Systematic wrote:
Thu Jan 02, 2020 3:46 am
commonsense wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:18 pm
:mrgreen:

Not everything is explainable. We don’t know what we don’t know about anything. There is no basis to the belief that we will eventually know all there is to know about a thing. However, knowing what everything is not brings us closer to a theory that explains it.
Not everything is explainable, because it is too complex in its particulars. The universals and structures are the realm of science. Science is known by the several scientists and technicians. I have theorized that if we could organize the particulars into structures that they could also be known.
commonsense wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:18 pm
:mrgreen:
Not everything is tangible. Not everything accessible to one sense is accessible to another.
commonsense wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:18 pm
:mrgreen:
Not everything is expressible nor even thinkable. Everything includes undiscovered concepts for which there are no words as yet.
Because it is too complicated in its particulars.
commonsense wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:18 pm
:mrgreen:
Insofar as definitions are tautological, everything is all that is and all that isn’t. Nothing is excluded from everything. Nothing is included in everything.
I'm not sure what you mean.
commonsense wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:18 pm
:mrgreen:
Where did everything come from? We don’t know. When did everything start? Likewise. Does everything have a purpose? Perhaps.
I think that purpose of everything is theologically necessary, but otherwise not.
commonsense wrote:
Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:18 pm
:mrgreen:
There is no practical theory of everything, epistemically or metaphysically, other than as stated here.
I'm not trying to be rude, but do you know the definition of the word "practical"?
If we where to explain everything the basic logic would be so general as to mean anything, hence nothing. The assumptive logic thread proves this, it is rational but ironically pure gibberish at the same time.

At best we all left with seeing forms unfolding from a formless nature, and that is it. The paradox is that the deeper the particular the more generalized and simple it is.

Philosophically I am at a wall.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 5112
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: An Epistemic Theory of Everything

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Fri Jan 17, 2020 3:22 am

nothing wrote:
Thu Jan 02, 2020 7:18 pm
BIOS
in/out
(+)/(-)
(∞)

Twin Automatons Theory (TAT)
(thought experiment)
Build two identical automatons
whose components are five-fold:

head and torso = thus
arm = all (Α; affirmative +)
arm = not (Ω; negative -)
leg = to Believe
leg = to Know

Knowledge Automaton leads with to Know:
{to Know all thus not to Believe}
approaches 'state' of all-knowing...

Belief Automaton leads with to Believe:
{to Believe all thus not to Know}
approaches 'state' of all-believing...

Which automaton is more likely to discover any possible root
of true knowledge, if left running indefinitely?
viz.
Truth by Way of Negation: indefinitely
TRYing to believe both ways: to, and/or not to, BELIEVE(?), by way of indefinitely
TESTing to know either way which is (more) TRUE (or NOT), thereby indefinitely
FALSIFYing what is unbelievably unTRUE ad infinitum, thus indefinitely ever-approaching any possible 'state' of all-knowing.
_______________________________________________________
All knowing is by way of indefinitely trying all belief, but <*-conscious knowledge
not all belief is by way of indefinitely trying to know all. <-*of ignorance
_______________________________________________________

One can consciously infer consciousness itself is as indefinite as the wielder of it
should they be indefinitely trying to falsify all (false) belief ad infinitum.
You are mathematizing buddhist/taoist philosophy.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest