Originally posted by naXaH
Later u seem to understand my point of view but say it cant be cuz i assume the universe is limited. Well just to let u know the matter in universe IS
limited only space is unlimited. There is a limited number of galaxies, stars and generally matter.
But what if there isn't? What if there is no limit to matter/galaxies/universes/dimentions/realities? If you suggest that space itself can be
infinite, why should matter not also be?
Again i assume the current stance of the science saying the matter is limited even more it can be measured! In fact it is possible to calculate the
mass of the universe.
Perhaps to the extent of our awareness/knowledge. And of course that doesn't account for the possibility of other such universes, other spacial
dimentions, other realities, etc.
Your theory rests on the assumption that if any singular entity or group of entities COULD take over the universe, they would! But that does not
answer the fundemental question that you're simply taking for granted - CAN they? Why do you simply rule out the possibility that it may be
impossible (for one reason or another) to completely take over the entirety of existance?
I think it would help shine some light on your theory if you tried to mentally trace the origins of existance as best as you can do so, using only
logic and absolutely no assumptions. When I tried this, I started at the beginning: either the entirety of existance came out of absolute nothingness,
or it came from "something", which means something, in some form, has always existed. I have concluded that the latter must be true, because if
there had ever been absolute nothingness (total lack of existance of absolutely anything, including space itself - I mean TOTAL "0"), there would
ALWAYS be absolutely nothing, and therefore, no existance. Since something exists, I conclude that something has always existed. Absolute nothingness
does not have the resource to create anything, since it has nothing! Not even "magic", since magic would be something!
Is it possible to infer more specifics about our reality from this previous conclusion? I think so - although my logic can be faulty without me even
realising it, though it's just as possible that the logic is not faulty at all. Anyways, lemme go on. If something had always existed, then I can
safely say that absolutely everything that can ever possibly exist had already occured - because it had an eternity to occur, since I've already
established that there was no "beginning" to the entirety of existance itself, since a beginning would imply that it came out of nowhere. Obviously
if it did not already occur, and it had eternity to do so, then it is IMPOSSIBLE and therefore will never occur - because not occuring for eternity is
simply another way to say "can never occur", since eternity is forever.
Is it possible to infer more specifics about our reality from these previous conclusions? I think so, and again, without making any assumptions and
using only the conclusions I've logically derived above. If there is no beginning, it means that there is an eternity of "time" behind us in the
past. And because it is impossible to ever get through eternity, then it is also impossible to have an eternity of anything behind you, otherwise it
would mean that you've already gone through an entire eternity - but an eternity does not end. So my next conclusion is that linear time does not
exist either, it is an illusion of our perception only. If time existed, then nothing could exist. Since something exists, time does not. Why could
nothing exist? Because the existance of time would imply the impossible - the existance of "eternity" in our past, since we've established that
there was no beginning to the universe. But since you cannot have an eternity "in the past", since that would imply it has been traversed, time
cannot exist except as a subjective aspect of our current perspective of reality, not as any objective or absolute phenomenon.
Can I infer an even more detailed outlook on objective nature of reality without making any assumptions but using only the logical conclusions I've
derived previously and building other mathematical/logical conclusions off of them only? I think so. This also means that everything that can EVER
possibly happen or exist, does exist - except that it does not "happen" because "happen" is an aspect of time, and time does not exist. If things
appear to happen, it is an illusion of a subjective perspective only - like playing a videotape and observing the movie which does not actually
"occur" but already exists on the tape, you're just choosing to "see" it in such a way as to create the illusion of things "happening". This
analogy does work, but is clumsy at one point - a tape is finite and predefined, but the fabric of all potential possibilities itself is infinite, and
we, using free will, pick and choose how we traverse this infinite potential from our perspective in the illusion.
I'll just stop myself here and say that I think your theory does not apply to the universe, it CAN apply to any finite "universe", to any reality
that has a limit and has a beginning of some sort. Perhaps our PHYSICAL universe as we perceive it CAN indeed be governed by your theory, and as such,
we may be the only beings in the currently visible physical universe (although there is MUCH evidence to the contrary). However, this does not work
for the entirety of existance itself, which, due to having no beginning and being infinite, cannot be fully taken over by a finite being. And an
infinite being can only be one thing - the universe itself, since any 2 things that are infinite, are precisely the same thing.
So using a number line analogy, you can take over numbers 1 through 10, but you cannot take over the entire number line no matter how powerful you
are. The only way to do that is to be the number line. In infinity there is unity, every aspect of infinity is in fact infinity itself, there is no
separation, and the concept of finity or limited amount of "stuff" is an illusion, the only objective reality is One unified infinity, and we are it
(I'm still just using pure logic here, not just making this up as assumptions). You cannot subtract from infinity or divide infinity or do anything
to it to get any "number". If you have infinity, there are no numbers, they no longer exist, only the infinity. If you start with a finite number,
then you cannot reach infinity it is only a potential. Again, there is an unbreachable divide between finity and infinity, you cannot go from one to
another, and since the universe has no beginning, there is only the infinity, and finity is an illusion, though it IS reality at our level because our
entire reality is based on this illusion at this "time". Of course that does not mean we have to ignore the world around us because of the idea that
we may all be "One" - since that only applies to the highest level of reality, the level of the absolute. Until our awareness reaches that level,
the existance of the universe will forever contain mysteries and things we do not comprehend or know. But it's always fun to speculate, since
speculation is a necessary element to discovery, imho.
Anyways, I can certainly be wrong in anything I said above, any logic I used, etc. But as far as I understand it right now, this is what I think is
most probable in terms of the underlying nature of reality. If someone can see any errors, please feel free to correct me and let me know, I always
keep an open mind with the intent to learn.
That being said, it's also possible that I'm not wrong! NaXaH
does what I said above make sense to you, especially in light of your idea?
[edit on 14-12-2005 by lilblam]