a theory in practice
adichotomy
This text assumes the following.
- Reality isn’t something else, what we experience/examine in depth and at the surface is “it”
- Examination of reality is only possible through subject/object duality and can only be confirmed via this complex interaction. Read: “3rd party view”.
- The only rule or law is that there are never 2 or more of anything, no perfect duplicity (definition to follow) or its inverse perfect nothingness.
- This duality is paradoxical. It “dissolves” at its “poles” to complete an eternal loop. i.e. The smallest cannot assess the largest (object/subject duality) directly. Think: trying to view an atom in detail from a mile away. See rule above. There is no outside the outside.
- There are no independent subjects, as such, no independent objects. See rule above.
- Subject cannot directly examine subject, without object.
an expression of words
This paradox is, quite so, what you can call, a singularity. There is only this (read rule above). The expression of only progressive time is a past/future duality. There is only one “place” this singularity, now. All subject/object dualities breakdown and form of this singularity (think “big bang”, but eternally so).
This is the way, the Tao, the concept of god, the essence of being. There is no other. We can forever search for what is and has always been the case, creation, in a nutshell.
Any particle physics can confirm this by examining the shimmer of “particles” blinking in and out of existence. However, you will never need to understand or confirm this, only experience it.
a perfect duplicity
There isn’t anything outside this singularity. Two truly identical objects (one that takes up the same space/time, for lack of a better term) or it’s inverse a perfect nothingness. (see the only “rule”)
an expression of time
Our experience of time as linear, as past, present and future is a contextual illusion. The experiencer is the frame of which the experience of progression unfolds. The experiencer can only ever exist in frame, meaning the “where” in relation to the “what” is the experience.
To give a general example of this, if we sent a probe out into the universe and could slow it’s rate enough (read: movement in contrast to ours) the experience of time at the probe, relative to our experience of time would appear significantly faster than our frame. Time would pass for us much faster than the probes, yet nothing has really changed at all about duality (reality). Luckily for us, we don’t have to go very far to experience this (although very minutely). Our satellites show this juxtaposition and we build our systems of measure to compensate for our frame of experience.
the gravity of the situation
This may seem silly to explain, but gravity is also the experience of the movement of time, relative to the amount of space it takes up. Any object “takes away space”, experiences gravity, and that object is forever in conflict of the space in which it takes up. For example, our sun is likely in fact, in instantaneous explosion, however, as it takes up so much space, our experience of the time it takes for the explosion to complete is exponentially greater than it’s true rate at another massive object. At mass and its inverse, space, everything breaks down, the rate of which is dependent on this juxtaposition. It wouldn’t be difficult to generally assume that “at space” is a representation of 0 (or near 0) and “at mass” is at 1 (or near 1). You can also assume that light “speed”, (as it escapes gravity) is actually instantaneous or near 0. It would be at this breaking point in which the birth of objects appear and disappear, eternally.
this is creation
I’ve never been a fan of some determative god, it’s generally always occurred to me that this existence is indeed a paradox, a self-cleaning, self-perpetuating, self-identifying and in turn, a self-narrative creation event. That the development of intelligence is ever apparent and persistently so, the entire motivation of creation. There is, in all of reality, no other.
