The Absolute Theory of Everything .

[Nakosis]

God's dream is from a different formulation, but I'll use a Jewish one which is very close. The merging that Rebbe Nachman refers to is what I had in mind. Awakening from the dream is to me the merging into Hashem which I called God.

"Before Hashem manifested Himself, when all things were still hidden in Him... He began by forming an imperceptible point; that was His own thought. With this thought He then began to construct a mysterious and holy form... the Universe." - The Zohar

"Empty your heart and mind of all your mundane preoccupations and then work to nullify all your negative traits, one after the other, until in the end you nullify all sense of self completely. First work on one character trait, then another and another, until you reach the point where you are free of any self-centeredness and any sense of independent existence.

You must be as nothing in your own eyes. Then you will be worthy of attaining true self-nullification and your soul will be merged with its root. The whole universe will be merged with you in your Source. You and everything with you will be merged in the Unity of Hashem." - Rebbe Nachman of Breslov

Huh... Exactly what God told me.

 

[ANEWDAWN]

You are attempting to define nothing, thereby making it a thing and no longer nothing.

I am stating apparent obvious observation

Remove all the air and EMR content from the volume within this glass , what do you have left ?

A measure of nothing .

 

[Spirit of Light]

I am not attempting to define , I am stating apparent obvious observation

View attachment 36176

Remove all the air and EMR content from the volume within this glass , what do you have left ?

Vacum, so it is still something, not a nothing

 

[Wu Wei]

I am stating apparent obvious observation

View attachment 36176

Remove all the air and EMR content from the volume within this glass , what do you have left ?

A measure of nothing .

But based on the question asking, and the rules you apply to the answer, you are attempting to define it, which then makes it something and then asking others to do so as well

The absolute theory of everything begins with a very simple question !

To be clear in our understanding it is important we reach agreement and specifically use the same definition and semantics as each other to accurately define a beginning with certainty and absolute conclusion .

A1)What is nothing ?

A2)What is something ?

 

[Skwim]

.

.

 

[wizanda]

A measure of nothing .

As Lao Tzu said, it is the bowl's space that makes it useful, it is the room that allows people to go through it, that then gives it a purpose; like the hub of a wheel has a task...

Space has meaning between the notes, and timing is everything; to then what that measure contains.

In my opinion.

 

[Wu Wei]

As Lao Tzu said, it is the bowl's space that makes it useful, it is the room that allows people to go through it, that then gives it a purpose; like the hub of a wheel has a task...

Space has meaning between the notes, and timing is everything; to then what that measure contains.

In my opinion.

absolutely agree, but would that then be nothing?

 

[ANEWDAWN]

But based on the question asking, and the rules you apply to the answer, you are attempting to define it, which then makes it something and then asking others to do so as well

I ask others to accept definitions based on truths and not just labeling .

 

[ANEWDAWN]

Vacum, so it is still something, not a nothing

Which I explained prior

A1a) Nothing is a point with 0 dimensions

A1b) Nothing is an empty volume of space

As Einstein once said about light being a wave and a particle , why not both ?

There is a volume of nothing (a point with 0 dimensions) in an ''empty glass''

Do you agree that your something is a volume of nothing ?

 

[Wu Wei]

I ask others to accept definitions based on truths and not just labeling .

Labeling makes it a thing, asking others to agree upon a definition of nothing makes it a thing, and both make it something other than nothing. How can one actually define, and understand by that definition, something that is the absents of everything...if in fact that is what it is

From Buddhism and the 4 Nobel Truths

Right Understanding is the understanding of things as they are, and it is the Four Noble Truths that explain things as they really are. Right Understanding therefore is ultimately reduced to the understanding of the Four Noble Truths. This understanding is the highest wisdom which sees the Ultimate Reality. According to Buddhism there are two sorts of understanding: What we generally call understanding is knowledge, an accumulated memory, an intellectual grasping of a subject according to certain given data. This is called ‘knowing accordingly’ (anubodha). It is not very deep. Real deep understanding is called ‘penetration’ (paṭivedha), seeing a thing in its true nature, without name and label. This penetration is possible only when the mind is free from all impurities and is fully developed through meditation.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Which I explained prior



There is a volume of nothing (a point with 0 dimensions) in an ''empty glass''

Do you agree that your something is a volume of nothing ?

In my understanding, if there is a volume, it can not be empty.
Space is not empty, it has a mass.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I will gather my thoughts and return later when my children have settled for the evening to start to write the absolute theory of everything . I will write the entire theory here on this forum as opposed to writing a white paper . In writing this I will ''destroy'' many scientific falsities of our past and present , that which science does not want me to speak of .
Please moderators , if people try to post attacks at me in this thread, remove them . ''Their'' first directive is to disrupt threads and avoid the science objective facts .

I am a cute and fuzzy little bunny. How could I attack anyone. I cannot wait to read your theory. I want to know how it all turns out.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

once you give something a name it becomes a thing and you have already named it nothing so it is no longer nothing.

Nothing = 0? but yet you divide any number by zero it is undefined....so is zero nothing or something?

Comes down to this "The Tao that can be expressed is not the eternal Tao; The name that can be defined is not the unchanging name"
You are attempting to define nothing, thereby making it a thing and no longer nothing.

Not for nothing, but I agree with you.

 

[ANEWDAWN]

Labeling makes it a thing, asking others to agree upon a definition of nothing makes it a thing, and both make it something other than nothing. How can one actually define, and understand by that definition, something that is the absents of everything...if in fact that is what it is

From Buddhism and the 4 Nobel Truths

As explained prior

B1b) Something is matter

B2b) Something is a measurement

A measure that is absent of everything .

 

[Dan From Smithville]

As explained prior



A measure that is absent of everything .

Will this presentation of this theory take long? I'm late for a very important date.

 

[ANEWDAWN]

In the ''empty'' glass is a volume of space , a volume is a measurement .

0 / Rn =∞

Before matter , the beginning .

In mathematics, real coordinate space of n dimensions, written Rn (/ɑːrˈɛn/ ar-EN) (also written ℝn with blackboard bold) is a coordinate space that allows several (n) real variables to be treated as a single variable. With various numbers of dimensions (sometimes unspecified), Rn is used in many areas of pure and applied mathematics, as well as in physics. With component-wise addition and scalar multiplication, it is the prototypical real vector space and is a frequently used representation of Euclidean n-space. Due to the latter fact, geometric metaphors are widely used for Rn, namely a plane for R2 and three-dimensional space for R3.

 

[Wu Wei]

As explained prior



A measure that is absent of everything .

I don't think you are quite getting this in that everything you are describing makes nothing something..... I leave you to your theory of everything, but for the record I think you are starting down the wrong path with attempting to define nothing and due to that will likely fail. But then I also do not believe that there is a unified theory of everything either, nor do I feel that one is even necessary.

Good luck

 

[ANEWDAWN]

Nothing is not something physical , a measure is not something physical ,
A measure of nothing is applicable and already I feel people are trying to confuse the readers .

The empty glass was very simple to understand .

In the beginning was an infinite space without any physical properties !

0 / Rn

This space I'll define this absolute oblivion space ,

noun

1. 1.
   the state of being unaware or unconscious of what is happening around one.

 

[wizanda]

absolutely agree, but would that then be nothing?

Empty space in a cup is a definable thing.

In my opinion.

 

[QuestioningMind]

Nothing is not something physical , a measure is not something physical ,
A measure of nothing is applicable and already I feel people are trying to confuse the readers .

The empty glass was very simple to understand .

In the beginning was an infinite space without any physical properties !

0 / Rn

This space I'll define this absolute oblivion space ,

noun

1. 1.
   the state of being unaware or unconscious of what is happening around one.

So you're saying that there was never nothing, since in the beginning there was infinite space.