An individual existence cannot be it's own cause...

An individual existence cannot be it’s own cause, nor yield anything beyond itself

take an empty space and place a particle in it, …how did you do that? How is a light equivalent to the colour it makes if it does not contain colour? How does light exist without a means to existence?..

The answer is, that the cause of both light and colour must be a third party?

  • no, not that; the answer is perhaps that; ‘there are no instances of singular existence’ in the purest sense. Finiteness and 'part’icles are an illusion, where they have accuracy that is only true to the universal truth, the all-particle matrix if you will.

_

But existence doesn’t exist, things and processes exist, so only they may or may not be caused.

Think of how the word ‘existence’ is used. To denote that something is rather than not. How and why things are can be talked about causally, but not the property of existence itself. It’s a subtle almost undetectable linguistic confusion… not too far removed from what’s going on with the pathetic fallacy. Conceptually forcing the meaning of the word existence to be something that it isnt so that nonsensical statements can be made about it.

Ok. when we look directly at ‘things’ and processes, the closer we look the less cardinality can be found, that is, directly in the thingness.

If no individual existence can be arrived at factually, then there is only existence [all] and not a given ~ an individual singularity of existence.

Ergo existence does exist, an existence aside from that entirety does not. This is what science misses, that the universe is a total reality first, individuation comes way down the line from that.

Does this mean that if true, I can conclude that the universe is infinite and/or eternal? or both infinite and eternal?

I would conclude that, as it cannot really mean anything else. I think physicists mostly think the universe is infinite, the cosmic background radiation denotes that apparently.

As I see it, the notion of non-singularity means that existence is as if like a jell, where that infinite mass is being shaped into ‘particles’ or waves and everything else. Gravity could be just big bulges in that, where particles are small ones, and dark matter may simply refer to the jell itself ~ unadulterated [not bulging in places]. As opposed to an almost greek-like view of an atomic reality composed of lots of higgs bosons, and quantum packets of energy.

An existence has a smallest instance and does not go to an infinitesimal point, instead the universe does an act of contortion whereby the smallest part stretches out into the bigger part. Why? Because a single entity has to be stretched into shape, and particles don’t just magically appear out of the void.

naturally time is also infinite, because if we consider it only as an effect or effects of other things moving, then that is still stretching into the infinite jell. so yes, time must be eternal.

hopefully one day we will be able to use the way the universe does that, for warp-drive. :slight_smile:

Rubbish.

I am going to tell you the facts.

The amount of particles/existents in the universe may or may not be infinite, but are probably not infinite.

The bounds of the universe may or may not be infinite. Likely it is like a donut torus that loops around near the edges.

Existence=Consciousness. Existence exist. Existents exist. Without existents, there is only Time. Pure Time with no existents, may be a sublime type of conscousness,but not neccesarily 100% unconscious. Existents are the components inside of of existence.

Time is infinite in the sense that there are no frames, no minimum resolution between frames. It has a seemingly infinite amount of subdivisions.

Time contains the dimensional data of all 3 dimensions. Time is simply the 4th dimension, since it is just a repeat of the 3 dimensions. For example, the 3rd dimension is simply a repeat of the 2nd dimension, plus more. The only difference is, the only data Time adds is simply empty 4th dimension data, and more repeats of the 3 dimensions. Basically, we are the 4th dimensional entities, so we cannot see Time as a data representation, because we are part of the data representation. Essentially, we are the film reel itself.

Causality is circular. Without consciousness, there is not existence and Time. Without existence and Time there is no Consciousness.

.

Time is the 4th dimension.

A point is the zeroth dimension. A line is 1 dimensional. A plane is 2 dimensional.

We can only see that which is 2 dimensional. We cannot see lines or points.

We cannot see the 3rd dimension except with our conscious feeling. Things “feel” like they are imposing themselves on our brains with our holographic vision. When we cross our eyes, objects “feel” 3d, even though they are objectively 2d, according to the pixels in our mental eyes.

Time is the 4th dimension.

A line has a fixed amount of data in the 1st dimension. When you add the 2 dimension, you keep the original line data, but then add a 1 dimensional array of more lines with random data. A point is zero dimension. When you add the 1 dimension, you keep the original point, but add more points with random data. When you have a 2d plane, you make it 3 dimensional by adding more planes underneath it with random data. There is no degree of seperation. it has an infinitely subivisibal resolution. For instance, if you had a 2d plane, and added more 2d planes underneath it, it would never stack because 2dimensional planes have 0 thickness. Therefore, the extra dimension is simply that which allows you to grant an arbitrary amount of seperation between things. A 0 dimenional point. A 1 dimensional line allows you to add arbitrary seperation between the original points and more points. We cannot see a 1 dimensional line though. A 1 dimensional line. A 2 dimensional plane allows you to add arbitrary seperation between the original points and more points. We can see in 2d. a 2 dimensional line. A 3 dimensional cube allows you to add arbitrary seperation between new lines and the original 2 dimensional line.

It is such that the arbitrary layers will never intersect with the original entity from which the dimension was spawned. For example, a 0 dimensional point. A 1 dimensional line is simply a copy of 0 dimensional points. The direction vector is assumed to be constant. Because if the direction vector is random, the probability of new points colliding with old points increases over time. Its very arbitrary though. Even if the direction vector was random, one could argue that the line was still 1 dimension, if looking upon it orthographically. However, if the direction vector is allowed to randomize on two axis, there is no possible frame of reference one could argue that it is 1 dimensional! Therefore, the conditions of which something is 1 dimensional, is if the direction vector used to spawn new points in reference to the original point is only allowed to randomize in <1.0001 axes. The conditions in which something is two dimensional, is if the direction vector used to spawn new points in reference to the original point is required to randomize in 1 axis. A two dimensional plane will become 1 dimensional if viewed orthographically. The probability of a two dimensional plane becoming 1 dimensional approaches zero percent probability in nature, approaches 100 percent probability in a step based/grid based system such as computers.
The conditions in which something is three dimensional, is if the direction vector used to spawn new points in reference to the original point is required to randomize in 2 axis. 3 dimensional entities can either be felt (physical/spiritual qualia) or inferred (innate empirical immediate memory.) 3d dimensional entities cannot be seen, except as 2d compressions, since our consciousness is localized and photons are focused. Our consciousness does not directly entangle with photons as they enter our eyes, they are projected onto a 2 dimensional retinal film. Thus our consciousness is incapable of seeing 3 dimensional objects. Interesting case study would be to see if lower animals can navigate 3 dimensional entities. Inability to navigate would imply a lack of innate empirical immediate memory in lower animals. Since there are only 3 axis in Euler space (due to orthogonality) such mnemonic devices are arbitrary and futile to describe Time, the fourth dimension. Orthogonality of pure vectors, is the notion that there is a direction which will cause no recurrence of past origins.

If orthogonality describes the 0th dimension, it describes the non-movement. No recurrence because there is no effort to move. Nothing ever happened, and nothing began. The 1st dimension is the gauranteed probability that the future points will never recur into old points. The second dimension, is that future points travel infinitely, and may recur and collide into older points. The third dimensional is an abstraction. It cannot be seen by humans, only felt. The third dimension is a duplication of the space and layers of the 2nd dimensions, so that the layers shall never recur or intersect into old layers. The layers may be clones or identical, but they shall never recur, that is, never run into the exact original instance, or the origin point. Thus, mathematical orthogonality was born. Time, is the constraint of the 3rd dimension. When rotated, it freezes the 3 dimensions in place. Time is essentially, the rotation/translation matrix itself. It stores the data of rotations and translations. Memory and Consciousness is the 5th dimension. It stores the data of the rotations and translations and its contents. Like the other data, the seperation is arbitrary. Each layer can be infinitesimally close or infinitely far away. Consciousness closes the gap between layers, being unaware of gaps.

Time does not require the third dimension, it could still work in a 2 dimensional only world.

Therefore, 3d dimension is an abstraction, an assumption, we make based on the observations of particles. Without memory, we would not “percieve” the 3d dimension, everything would be colors and blobs. Therefore, the 3d dimension is time. But the other part of the 3rd dimension, is spirit, when our eyes are crisscrossed, there is no need for memory, it immediately feels physically 3d to us.

Time is the 4th dimension.

We are the things moving. We are moving the things. Things move at the exact rate our consciousness moves.

We (Consciousness) are moving through the 5th dimension, Memory.

Memory is the 5th dimension, Time is the 4th dimension, time is the retention and form of the 3rd dimension, time is the rotation/translation matrix of the 3rd dimension. Memory differs from this because it only records the 2nd dimension, where as time does not record the 2nd dimension it only records the 3rd dimension in relation to the parent of the 2nd dimension.

Time is the 4th and 5th dimension. It requires one dimension less than space to manifest because it ‘leeches’ off the first dimension, which is simply ‘progression’. 5th dimension timeshifts account for ‘synchronicity’. The human mind is capable only of manifesting consciousness in either mnemonic arrangements or instant value correspondences. This is the wedge whereby the human powerstandard sifts through the supply of specimens and arranges by criteria known as ‘luck’ to those that are sifted out and ‘immediacy’ by those who are ‘harvested into the bread of time’ to use a shred of a notorious occult maxim.

Existence, causation, singularity, they are mere concepts.

Can the question even be raised, whether, existence exists? Not looking for a definition of what existence means, and this is why, existence can not be defined.

Am I looking out of a self that is a singular expression of what that entails? Or, something is looking in, thinking it’s looking out.

Without such dialectical conscious awareness, if you will, there could not be either, the consciousness which reduces to a concept (of singularity), which presents consciousness in it’s self. (as it’s self).

The concept is the absolute anthropy of process as praxis. Without it, signs would not come into BEING.
And there could not be consciousness of it’s self.

Straight out of Sartre.

Word

I don’t get the insistence on regarding the principles here as connected with consciousness and our conscious experience. We have instruments which can measure worldly information.

More than that, these are philosophical principles [in the op], and can be debated properly without unnecessary distraction surrounding our experience. These principles are not those of conscious experience ~ even if reality is [which I think is absurd]. You don’t debate mathematical principles and physics by virtue of there representation in the consciousness!

Get with the philosophy people.

jerkey

I don’t get ‘why’ ~ in the last part? We don’t have to ask that question here, we just need to ask the question; can an individual existence [e.g. a particle or singularity] exist by virtue of its own cause? And wouldn’t that require something to always come before it [etc; see op].

This opens up the idea that reality or existence [especially if the universe is infinite] is not composed of objects, and so the notion of it being ‘physical’ is debunked. This where an physical existence is classified by virtue of its objectness or singularity/quanta.

_

The same problem arises with ‘Objectness’ as with singularity. Objectness depends on singular commonality, as does singularity upon objective reduction into phenomen-related experience. (Using the word 'related here, in both senses: 1: as related
to another singularity, and 2: as in a prior proximity of both, so as to commute the sense of it.

This is why, understanding each without referring to the other is impossible. But that does not mean they are conceptually impossible, only that they are
unique and general as both sides of a coin are.

The causation issue is mute, since they contain each other in a Ying Yang fashion. Containment does not
need temporal/spatial relationships to make possible
the sequential progression of cause and effect. It (containment) pre dates the conceptual reduction.
The idea of forms, of formal classification of ideas

Occurs when containment, or overlapping has not occurred yet, they are thought to be mutually exclusive, creating the third, the idea that the formal
synthesis is the task of a future epistemology. Here
ontology suffices in the classical sense and this is sustained throughout the ages of philosophical history as the transcendent idea, or the Dasein.

In this sense, the individual existence is it’s own cause, since IT, and Existence are non differentiable.
If the idea of the transcendental reality is sustained,
IT , - the individuals dual existence, and it’s cause
are implicit in its very conception.

It depends on the stream of thought, whether the
new formulated idea of the end of history is believed
or not. Historicity cannot deny the transcendental unity of existence, and denies any argument toward it. Belief in the end of history, does in fact allow such
an argument, and causation is re-affirmed but in a
way which disallows post postmodern conceptual signs to retain referential schema with only spatial determinants, excluding temporal ones.

This is a roundabout way to describe the fact of the problem of the imminence of the history of existential
reduction, - which did not cause it’s self , but is
implicit in it. Another way of putting it is, that science merely happened, man didn’t invent it, it caused it’s self by always having been there in the
very structure of epistemology, it’s just that
awareness has not yet reached the point of realization of it.(it’s self)

Those who do not believe this, can safely maintain the view that synthesis is only a matter of having reached the point where the possibility of
regaining the lost paradise, is an effect of coming to
the surface, from the depths, previously
not accessible.

This is only meant as a sort of apology, in the most general sense, as happens in relation to God being the uncaused cause, but may extend to singular experience, as well, but only as an effect of such general sense.

Read my post again. It is grounded, it connects Math to the Absolute and Reality of the Consciousness of the situation.

jerkey

Does it matter what terms we use, when we are meaning the same thing. An existence is an observing or affecting party, ergo I would think of the fundamentals as behaviours [like info] rather than part-icles. Now we don’t have to consider the ‘objectness’ et al. An infinite universe would have an infinite material of value zero, which is then shaped into behaviours. The informational value of a behaviour denotes its affecting value ~ so steel will hurt if you get hit with it etc.

What contains each other? Are you suggesting that ‘phenomena-related experience’ equates with the state and value of objects? Conscious experience has no bearing upon measurable [by a third party e.g. instrument] informations in the world. They can agree in that quantum effects in experiments between observers has been shown. This means they can have quantum effect i.e. when observing, but the same phenomenon occurs without human observers [in experiments made with instruments].
Lets just get that one out of the way so we can focus on the real philosophy, rather than the meaning of meanings.

If you mean that a particle contains its own causality, its means to coming into existence [!] ~ the thing which comes prior to it and denotes its primary state, then that doesn’t make sense. Where would you denote the cardinality of such a form, when it would mean that one thing didn’t change into another? how can that reflect change itself?

Ultimate Philosophy 1001

Consciousness is measurably local.

It may be that all the working out which must occur for the universe to be what it is, denotes intellect and perhaps that in turn denotes consciousness. But there can be an intellect which doesn’t have consciousness like e.g. a robot. However, either way, if the universe is conscious then it has its own distinct matrix ~ not unlike you and I have. If the systems were directly connected they would be causally connected, and any changes to the brain would be observable.

Consciousness may not be a matrix, but a 2d plane.

Yes, and arguing it without that added dimension causes the anomality of the argument.

Consciousness is our inner Giza Pyramid (digital prison) that enslaves us to Orion which is why the calcium ions which govern our consciousness (no calcium = no consciousness) are equal to 15120, which is 666; time is 60 Seconds, 60 Minutes & 24 Hours which is 666; the orbital velocity of our own planet is 66,660 MPH; the mark of Man is 666; Carbon atoms are 6.6.6; the year 2016 is 666 + 666 + 666 + 6 + 6 + 6; the Time Cube is 2160 which is 666; the World War 111 is associated to Mars which has the radius of 2106 Miles and that again 666. Consciousness is the prisoner of the subconscious.