This is outstanding, however it will take me longer than 2.5 business weeks to untangle this one. I fear it’s way above my pay grade 🤣 I would try and contribute meaningfully but to be honest I would have to google it. Great concept, I will have a look around and get back to you ☺️
Stultifying gibberish! I recommend that you read WLC's papers on The Contingency and Kalam arguments over and over again (and maybe send him some questions), because you are deeply confused, and have a long way to go.
I learned high school geometry mod of which I’ve forgotten. Not important. I don’t understand how nothing and something are geometrical. Something and nothing are dialectical. But geometric as I learned it would seem to be describing a potato is a hot air balloon. So?
If I say "there is nothing in my pocket," I don't mean a portal to a non existent universe is in my jeans. I just mean the count of physical objects in that specific boundary is zero. The boundary and the physics making up the pocket, still fully exists.
right, which totally makes sense locally, but in a TOE my sense goes to asking, if I push the boundary of the 'statistical convenience' (for it to be a, let's say, 'natural limit', more than an 'imposed' one) to its extreme ends, wouldn't there have to be 'no condition' on the other side of the bracket? I'm not trying to win anything here, just understand better! pockets... lol have a great day
Because “nothing” by definition could not “exist'“ … Nothing no mater how you use thst term is the absence of somthing it is not a substance in and of itself.
Darkness could not exist if there were no light because darkness is the absence of something light, therefore darkness requires something else to exist for its own existance.
Emptiness, nothingness non-existance is not the default state or condition of reality …..If anything exist at all then the default condition of reality must be infinite existance & substance.
Can't have non-existance without having existance.
Can't have non-existance as the base reality. A finite existance must have a infinite existance as base reality first before a non existance condition can “exist”
THE LOGICAL & EMPIRICAL DEMANDS
a) That which is finite must have some infinity in which to define its limitations within…..A limitation requires an infinity otherwise it is a limitation of what? You cannot have a limited quantity of base reality of nothingness because a bade reality of nothingness does not exist itself. Nothingness only has meaning wrt some base reality.
b) the finite can never superceed the infinity in which it exist
c) an infinity must be known to itself with all points in space & time within it & such that it is deterministic in its construct no randomness exist
d) The finite is by definition set (s) limitation. Randomness only exist due to lack of knowledge understanding. Free agency is a exercise in limited knowledge, time, space & limited foreknowledge of outcomes or how-why thoes outcomes arrived.
In theology we call the eternal infinite & concious, the base reality or God himself.
The finite is the box we live inside & math physics science cannot step out of to disect that infinity or its constituent properties.
The Infinity is ONLY known to itself ... the finite exist & plays by rules defined by the Infinity but the infinity itself is immune from scientific math physics examinations because math & physics were created by that infinity to build the finite scaffolding on within itself. Math & physics is not a scaffolding for the eternal infinite (aka God) and as such canot disect or precisely evaluate infinity or any existance layer outside the finite box.
God-infinity by definition is nondependent on the physical universe thus using math & physics to disect base reality is a waste of time & that is what math & physics also show..
You cant get outside the system to prove it and no matter how much physics you learn nor how much math you know. There is no finite experiment you could perform to prove non existsnce of a infinite eternal God.
There are atleast three layers of reality nested into each other. (there could be more inbetween that we do not even know about)
Base reality eternal -infinite
Finite “spirit” space
Finite physical quantum space
Access only functions from base to bottom. The bottom physical finite canot measure or disect the layer above it. Math & physics cannot indicate the higher layers but it cannot disect them because physics math is the scaffolding that the finite physical space is built on but it is built within a much larger & inaccessible scaffolding in the next higher reality layer.
The eternal-infinite is “God” by definition and only God has access to the base reality layer.
REF DIAGRAM
Imagine the white potion of this diagram extending in all directions infinitely.(2D or 3D) All time, past present & future, all space and all energy of heaven & earth exist within limits & bounds set & defined within this infinity. All creatures are finite with finite time, knowledge power et al. Time itself is a defined limitation. Even which way “cause & effect” & or “the arrow of time flows is a finite defined set within this infinity.]
Matter out of math and geometry was easy compared to bridging the perception of matter to geometry. It goes back to your experience with "materialists" . I see materialism or physicalism as a localized mind trapped in a physicalism feed back loop. Its easy to look at it as " Matter out of math"??? . Except that obvious question takes "US," out of the equation.
Math to Matter is a daunting threshold to cross. Why does a leap from equations to atoms feel impossible? How does a bat’s echolocation and our visual brain map the same reality? What changes when we perceive? Nothing. A bat spatially reconstructs the world through sound and echo. We do it through light and shadow. Same reality. Same 8D manifold. Different phase locking. Our brain isn’t changing the universe; it’s tuning into its harmonic structure. The threshold isn’t daunting because math is hard. It’s daunting because we don't see it, we tune to it, reconstruct it and display the simulation in our mind.
I have to sleep now, but we can talk more tomorrow. Thank you and goodnight. A circle is still a circle no matter what the circumstances. Your question seems to suggest that we are both not here to think about it. But we are here. So, imo we have to put ourselves back into the equation. reality is an integrated system where the brain phase locks with a foundational geometric blueprint, then math, matter, and mind are like a triad. Its all connected. Its a shared blueprint.Math isn't waiting alone somewhere; it is whatcensures our perception and the external world can perfectly map onto each other. Its a bridge, not an isolated island. Everything is fundamentally relational. You, me. Presumed matter. Abstract math. Truth. Beauty. Qualia. You and I are different. You have a boundary that defines you. I have a boundary that defines me. We are talking about matter. It has a boundary as a concept. Abstracts have boundaries that distinguish them from each other and us. If it wasn't so, we wouldn't be here. We have to have distinction to be. Fundamentally that's geometry. And if we weren't here to ponder it, there'd be a squirrel with a pecan and a tree. They'd be bound to the same geometry. Math doesn't wait in isolation because it is the very framework of relation and boundary that allows anything to exist and most importantly here: "to interface" in the first place.
This is outstanding, however it will take me longer than 2.5 business weeks to untangle this one. I fear it’s way above my pay grade 🤣 I would try and contribute meaningfully but to be honest I would have to google it. Great concept, I will have a look around and get back to you ☺️
Ditto 🐝
Buzzy, we can’t know everything 🤦🏻♀️🤣
You are right about that 🐝
beautiful
beautiful
beautiful
Whether someone agrees or not, this is the kind of writing that sparks interesting conversations. Thanks for sharing your perspective.
My my... aren't you confident. Pretty architecture but is it deep? 🤷🏼♀️ Honestly I don't know enough about most of these subjects to say for sure.
Stultifying gibberish! I recommend that you read WLC's papers on The Contingency and Kalam arguments over and over again (and maybe send him some questions), because you are deeply confused, and have a long way to go.
Perhaps you are lost. This article is based upon Leibniz Principle of Sufficient Reason. Here is one on WLC's Islamic cosmological argument:
https://vsatoe.substack.com/p/why-the-kalam-cosmological-argument
Yeah, that's why I mentioned The Contingency Argument, which interacts with The PSR.
I learned high school geometry mod of which I’ve forgotten. Not important. I don’t understand how nothing and something are geometrical. Something and nothing are dialectical. But geometric as I learned it would seem to be describing a potato is a hot air balloon. So?
in your mathematical model, if "nothing" is logically impossible, why does it even get used as a condition status?
If I say "there is nothing in my pocket," I don't mean a portal to a non existent universe is in my jeans. I just mean the count of physical objects in that specific boundary is zero. The boundary and the physics making up the pocket, still fully exists.
right, which totally makes sense locally, but in a TOE my sense goes to asking, if I push the boundary of the 'statistical convenience' (for it to be a, let's say, 'natural limit', more than an 'imposed' one) to its extreme ends, wouldn't there have to be 'no condition' on the other side of the bracket? I'm not trying to win anything here, just understand better! pockets... lol have a great day
Because “nothing” by definition could not “exist'“ … Nothing no mater how you use thst term is the absence of somthing it is not a substance in and of itself.
Darkness could not exist if there were no light because darkness is the absence of something light, therefore darkness requires something else to exist for its own existance.
Emptiness, nothingness non-existance is not the default state or condition of reality …..If anything exist at all then the default condition of reality must be infinite existance & substance.
Can't have non-existance without having existance.
Can't have non-existance as the base reality. A finite existance must have a infinite existance as base reality first before a non existance condition can “exist”
THE LOGICAL & EMPIRICAL DEMANDS
a) That which is finite must have some infinity in which to define its limitations within…..A limitation requires an infinity otherwise it is a limitation of what? You cannot have a limited quantity of base reality of nothingness because a bade reality of nothingness does not exist itself. Nothingness only has meaning wrt some base reality.
b) the finite can never superceed the infinity in which it exist
c) an infinity must be known to itself with all points in space & time within it & such that it is deterministic in its construct no randomness exist
d) The finite is by definition set (s) limitation. Randomness only exist due to lack of knowledge understanding. Free agency is a exercise in limited knowledge, time, space & limited foreknowledge of outcomes or how-why thoes outcomes arrived.
In theology we call the eternal infinite & concious, the base reality or God himself.
The finite is the box we live inside & math physics science cannot step out of to disect that infinity or its constituent properties.
The Infinity is ONLY known to itself ... the finite exist & plays by rules defined by the Infinity but the infinity itself is immune from scientific math physics examinations because math & physics were created by that infinity to build the finite scaffolding on within itself. Math & physics is not a scaffolding for the eternal infinite (aka God) and as such canot disect or precisely evaluate infinity or any existance layer outside the finite box.
God-infinity by definition is nondependent on the physical universe thus using math & physics to disect base reality is a waste of time & that is what math & physics also show..
You cant get outside the system to prove it and no matter how much physics you learn nor how much math you know. There is no finite experiment you could perform to prove non existsnce of a infinite eternal God.
There are atleast three layers of reality nested into each other. (there could be more inbetween that we do not even know about)
Base reality eternal -infinite
Finite “spirit” space
Finite physical quantum space
Access only functions from base to bottom. The bottom physical finite canot measure or disect the layer above it. Math & physics cannot indicate the higher layers but it cannot disect them because physics math is the scaffolding that the finite physical space is built on but it is built within a much larger & inaccessible scaffolding in the next higher reality layer.
The eternal-infinite is “God” by definition and only God has access to the base reality layer.
REF DIAGRAM
Imagine the white potion of this diagram extending in all directions infinitely.(2D or 3D) All time, past present & future, all space and all energy of heaven & earth exist within limits & bounds set & defined within this infinity. All creatures are finite with finite time, knowledge power et al. Time itself is a defined limitation. Even which way “cause & effect” & or “the arrow of time flows is a finite defined set within this infinity.]
Matter out of math and geometry was easy compared to bridging the perception of matter to geometry. It goes back to your experience with "materialists" . I see materialism or physicalism as a localized mind trapped in a physicalism feed back loop. Its easy to look at it as " Matter out of math"??? . Except that obvious question takes "US," out of the equation.
Math to Matter is a daunting threshold to cross. Why does a leap from equations to atoms feel impossible? How does a bat’s echolocation and our visual brain map the same reality? What changes when we perceive? Nothing. A bat spatially reconstructs the world through sound and echo. We do it through light and shadow. Same reality. Same 8D manifold. Different phase locking. Our brain isn’t changing the universe; it’s tuning into its harmonic structure. The threshold isn’t daunting because math is hard. It’s daunting because we don't see it, we tune to it, reconstruct it and display the simulation in our mind.
https://vsatoe.substack.com/p/matter-created-from-math
I have to sleep now, but we can talk more tomorrow. Thank you and goodnight. A circle is still a circle no matter what the circumstances. Your question seems to suggest that we are both not here to think about it. But we are here. So, imo we have to put ourselves back into the equation. reality is an integrated system where the brain phase locks with a foundational geometric blueprint, then math, matter, and mind are like a triad. Its all connected. Its a shared blueprint.Math isn't waiting alone somewhere; it is whatcensures our perception and the external world can perfectly map onto each other. Its a bridge, not an isolated island. Everything is fundamentally relational. You, me. Presumed matter. Abstract math. Truth. Beauty. Qualia. You and I are different. You have a boundary that defines you. I have a boundary that defines me. We are talking about matter. It has a boundary as a concept. Abstracts have boundaries that distinguish them from each other and us. If it wasn't so, we wouldn't be here. We have to have distinction to be. Fundamentally that's geometry. And if we weren't here to ponder it, there'd be a squirrel with a pecan and a tree. They'd be bound to the same geometry. Math doesn't wait in isolation because it is the very framework of relation and boundary that allows anything to exist and most importantly here: "to interface" in the first place.