A Commonality of the Duality of Reality

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

Classical and Quantum are recognized as the two realities of existence, but what is their
most significant commonality? It is what they both consider to be a real existent, space.
Since space makes existence possible by making place for what exists, it should be
paramount. Space, then, as a common paramount existent is ontologically fundamental
for both Classical and Quantum reality; fields existing in space are fundamental for the
quantum creation of particles.

As a possible first existent, space in the pre-universe with a potential for being actual can
become actual space in the current universe while releasing energy that created the
universe. Philosophers have asked why “is there something instead of nothing” because
the existence of the universe seemed impossible since it could not start; the first existent
could not be. However, nothing does not exist; therefore, something must exist and that
something would be the first existent, immaterial space.

2

I think this makes sense mathematically, not sure about philosophically though. Mathematically we can posit a flattened grid, a baseline space-as-such immateriality on which other things, energies and quantities etc. can occur. But philosophically (logically) I wonder how the idea of basic immaterial space-as-such can be justified. We can always ask of something “why this and not rather something else?”, so unless the logical necessity of space-as-such can be demonstrated, in purely logical terms, I cannot see how this can be rationally justified.

I tend to think of space as nothing more than very far-removed orders of existence that are so far beyond our relatively macro-scale that we simply experience those removed levels as a “nothing that yet somehow seems to occur”, like how space is supposed to be “nothing there” and yet this “nothingness space” still exists as space itself. It exists in a way that other things can occur within it. If we assume there is the quantum level occurring even in so-called empty space, and below that all the way down to the sub-quantum levels even if we detect no particles or energies at all in any given region of space we can still be sure there is SOMETHING there deep deep deep down beyond our ability to detect… then it makes logical sense that there is no such thing as empty space as such, but rather relatively distant and more-removed degrees/scopes of existence interacting as minimally as possible. Once a threshold of distance is reached between two degrees/scopes of existence (for example, our level as humans and that which exists at the sub-quantum level and even deeper below that), how would these possibly be able to interact? Well certainly through intermediary levels, what we experience as particles and waves of energies, but even in regions where we detect no particles or waves, how are the extremely distant levels still ‘interacting’ with one another? Through this apparent EMPTY SPACE which is both “nothing” yet also “is there/exists” at the same time.

3

A shift…
Space = possibility
Matter, and all you perceive = probability

Time = change relative to observer’s processing speeds, determined by his metabolic rhythms - systole (0), diastole (1).
Binary.

Space is not empty. Space has a temperature, meaning there is energy present.
Existence is energy.

Chaos = absence of order
Order = patterned energies = determining probability of interaction.

Quote - Tesla, Nikola (3)
Quote - Tesla, Nikola (3)556×350 69.6 KB

4

I don’t think math or deepness apply to immaterial space; the issue is philosophical.

5

Math is another representational language…the most abstract of them all.

There is no one, and no nil, outside the human brain.

6

Wrong. Quantities objectively exist. And bear objective relations (RATIOS) to one another. This is the reason why the language of math is able to reveal truths about reality beyond the human brain.

For someone who claims to be anti-nihilistic, you sure like to push silly radical subjectivity. “Numbers only exist in the human brain” yeah ok, sure. I suppose that is why we can use numbers (QUANTITIES) to create things like computers and the internet, highly complex technologies that rely on MATH to work. But naw, I bet the internet and computers also don’t exist outside the human brain, right? :rofl:

There is one cup on my desk here. ONE. That is a quantity, which is an objective fact. It doesn’t matter if no one is around to label it with a “1”. It is still a fact there is a quantity of one cup here on my desk. That reality, that quantity and the fact of it exist outside the human brain. The only thing that can arguably exist only inside the human brain would be the actual physically written symbol “1”. However, that too objectively exists, as does its relation to the objectively existing quantity of ‘one cup’ also exist objectively and outside of human brains.

7

Philosophy encompasses math, and everything else.

8

Define one.
Show me one.

One is a conscious mind discriminating a particular unity…and converting it into a static thing, represented by a word or a number.
It can only ever exist in the brain.

Is it useful?
Like all language it is.

ONE = a piece of space/time, abstracted into a thing…a singularity.

9

I would have thought that pretending not to understand the concept of quantity is beneath even you. Clearly I was mistaken.

10

Only the persons who use cups as cups differentiate it as a cup. To everybody else it— like every other instance of pattern—is just a coincidence of nature.

…but it is just one coincidence.

Every coincidence taken by itself is proof of nothing. Just because you put a whole bunch of coincidences together doesn’t mean you have a case. They are standalones. Singularities. Outliers.

11

Isn’t it stupid that every/all, no, and some (yada) have to do with freaking categories (quality) and not necessarily quantities at all?

12

What are numbers…1/0?
Do they exist outside human skulls?
What are they?

13

differences can not logically encompass a unity, therefore unity can only be conscious of unity, and not as a (though) premordial differentiability.

Therefore consciousness can only be a premordial unity.

14

God created everything.

He’s used two forces to do it.

Attractive and Repulsive electromagnetic force ABSOLUTES.

He’s balanced these two forces that exist between all spinning objects with N and S poles (Stars/Planets/Holes) by the formula N/S=N/S

The question is,when we look out into space are we observing the macro or the micro or neither.

All galaxies levitate in space because mass is balanced out.

If you want to know the secrets of the universe think in terms of energy,frequency and vibration,

The mind of man is cognitively biased,dull and atheistic.

15

That proposition is based on in another contingency that propounds that there is no possible connection between the mind of Man with the mind of God.

16

Of course man can connect with God.Don’t be silly.Are you seriously going to go to your physical death and not realise this? The physical body is nothing but a lifeless binary processing biological machine that God has given to us to assist us.It computes that it exists and doesn’t exist which is true because that is what binary software does.

Atheists believe the lie of the devil that attractive and repulsive electromagnetic force absolutes cancel out.

They don’t.

They balance out in line with the starting philosophy which God adopts for his creation which is +/-=+/-

17

It’s not a duality. It’s a triunity.

why stuff moves (into the places it has always willfully chosen to be, so tenselessly has always been)…

formal (seed containing the pattern to be actualized), final (actualized adult tree) [these patterns are one and the same], efficient (stuff moving/acting), material (moving/acting stuff)

The patient has to move in alignment with the agent-become-patient in order to move itself.

Some say the past is always with us, but the other side of that is that the future is in the beginning. In that sense, Leibniz was/is right.

So you have the universe. And you’re part of it, but you’re also not part of it because you can shape it, but it is also “part of it” that it can be shaped. The shaper is not outside the universe, and the universe is not outside the shaper. The shaper is in the universe, and the universe is in the shaper. The shaper shapes itself, but only the shaper that is in (exists) every moment never changes shape—it has/is the shape toward which and in accordance with which everything unfolds/moves.

The blueprint / plan(ner) of the universe is conscious, and all the made blueprints/planners are in the blueprint and are conscious.

The one who moves the matter to match (or in accordance with) the blueprint(s) (our blueprints subsumed in the Blueprint) is conscious, and all the movers who are in the Mover are conscious.

The valuers, the movers, the material… either willfully choose to complete themselves in alignment with “the adult tree“ after which they are patterned, or they willfully choose to denature themselves despite themselves, and despite the adult tree (the valuers, the movers, the materials) after which they are patterned.

… when their denaturing becomes second nature, they have to willfully denature their second nature in order to fully become in alignment with “the adult tree”.

18

:top_hat: Sorry, too lazy to read the whole thread — but the concept of existence only makes sense when it includes
:red_triangle_pointed_up: three essential forms:
:rock: Matter, :cyclone: Space, and :mantelpiece_clock: Time.
If someone talks about existence without involving all three — you get pure nonsense.
Sure, nonsense “exists”, but only as :dog_face: dogshit logic.

:milky_way: Looking for a model of the Universe?
Here’s one so simple it hurts:

:white_square_button: NOTHING (Chaos) — does not exist.
Why? Because it is only a form, with no content.
Its opposite, :black_square_button: EVERYTHING (Order), is full of actual, separated content.

:puzzle_piece: Understanding made simple:
Chaos is a Monolith — a Point —
where :rock: matter, :cyclone: space, and :mantelpiece_clock: time are totally compressed into one undivided form.
Since there’s no division —
:cross_mark: there’s nothing to perceive anything,
:cross_mark: nothing to define anything,
:right_arrow: NOTHING (Chaos) — does not exist.

:bullseye: Thread closed.

19

:scroll: How Chaos Manifests and Why Order Must Change

Chaos is not disorder.
Chaos is the absence of structure before any distinction. It is NOTHING — no differences, no separations, no forms. And because there is no structure, Chaos holds the potential for all forms. Like white noise: it contains everything, but expresses nothing.

Order is structure.
Order is when something is already separated, shaped, stabilized. It is a system of defined forms and rules. Order is self-sufficient, complete. Within itself, it doesn’t seek change — because it already “is” perfect in its own terms.

But here is the paradox:
Completion is death. A closed system like Order cannot evolve. It decays, stagnates, or collapses — simply because it is done.

So to survive, Order is forced to change. And change always comes from the outside — from Chaos.

:counterclockwise_arrows_button: Change is the Manifestation of Chaos

When structure breaks, new possibilities emerge. Every true change is Chaos intervening — disturbing the pattern, and thus allowing evolution.

All that is new comes from Chaos.
All that is old rests in Order.

:cyclone: What about Movement?

Movement is not change.
Movement is a form through which change becomes visible. We notice change when something alters its position, timing, or state.

But since movement is always relative, it reveals that Order is not absolute. What seems still — moves. What seems fixed — is already shifting.

Movement is the illusion of form.
Change is the essence of Chaos.

:light_bulb: In Short

  • Chaos is the source of change, the root of all potential.
  • Order is structure, but it must change or die.
  • Change is the point where structure breaks and rebirth begins.
  • Movement is the visible form of change — but only relative.
20

What a complete load of nonsense.Get a life demon and stop posting dribble that is of no use to man nor beast.

1 Like