Brief History of Creation, Part Two

Brief History of Creation, Part Two How can it be something from nothing? What is "Nothing" Nothing is what it is not the potential of something. If you have something from nothing, then, that nothing would be the potential for something, because if you asked how there is something out of nothing, we ask this question by something, if something already exists. If we want to look for a deeper "nothing", you find that "nothing" is a paradox. Each definition is something that if you define "nothing", then it would be something that is contrary to its essence of being "nothing". Another way to deal with "nothing" could be anything after that is useless. This means that "anything" might be something wrong, and that no matter or not related at all. That is, if there is something very alone in the universe, then it would be nothing, but it would be meaningless. If it exists, would be its existence outside of our perception, and, as such, the "nothing" would be indefinite. We have said that the time-limit could be anything until it is specified (not defined). However, if we are still trying to define "nothing" (indefinitely), what should we do? Since "nothing" is not definable, is transparent, as the object of our investigation. So if you try to define everything that is what we have in it, the process of definition. "Nothing" was nothing that we have not only making the process of defining explicitly. "Nothing" is gaining importance, if we fail to define, but which have proven, there are still a bonus, something that our process is the definition of "nothing." Creating something from nothing is not a function of a definition ', but a function of trying to define "nothing." And if this process of definition - which is already there - look back to its origins, when this process of definition studied in its genesis, then, what you see? E 'superfluous. It sees the process of definition - self-reference. If there is nothing exteal perception, then this is the definition of all, the creator of meaning, you can rely on themselves. However, the importance of the process of definition, this definition would be a self-referential and almost infinite continuous process of defining boundaries, which also stipulates that the limits of permanent which ended the set limits ... which means that constantly full and not always to define themselves at the same time, to define success with something - anything other than itself, of course, the whole totally defined and idealized conceptions are indefinite, and not by the loop logic Holophanic or may be in Nature. The completely indeterminate, the whole meaning nothing, not the kind of-that can not be fathomed, because if we think that it would be something. On the other hand, one can not define. I have the notion of equal uncertainty to describe the logical impossibility of the whole definition. A company can be defined, said to have reached parity - is the same as that - which means that it exists as something definite, no matter what parameters are defined. But not before achieving our goal of equality as the uncertainty of equal raises its ugly head. Could it be otherwise? Yes, of course. There may be other parameters? Yes, of course. Perhaps have been defined with precision? Yes, of course. This uncertainty is equal indefinitely in the definition, which is the result of including the instruments defined in the definition. Since "A" can not be defined as "A" with a sense that means "not-a '(time-limit beyond the boundaries of the definition), and since' a 'can only be meaning of 'a', because it differs from all other (everything else is indefinitely beyond the borders, are actually the importance of 'a'), in the sense of 'a' depends on 'non-A " ;. If the meaning of something depends on the permanent nature, what our goal is not defined, so this is necessarily indeterminate in the process of definition. The logical implication that the perception of the senses is only possible if and only if the time-limit is the perception is the reason why the 19 Century, the dream of a single, complete axiomatic system with only well-defined (explicit) in white characters fail (see more in my article, the logic loops). Despite the fact that the logic is the basis of algorithms and science, they have neither the will nor the ability to connect to the real world, precisely because his statements were so anemic on importance. In an effort to avoid any reference to an indefinite logical conclusion is based on a binary world, the very nature false and without any correlation with life and experience. However, the time-limit in the definition, not only the basic logic cycle of existence, but certainly the need for existence. With the birth Holophany, Heidegger, the question "Why is there all in all, rather than nothing? "is irrelevant. The existence of relationships, and it is the act of perception, and perception is the process of definition, then there is the legitimacy of the legitimacy of the process of defining isomorphous - the cycle of creation. What is perceived, which is stabilized, the importance is in the forefront of the amorphous background of the Indefinite, depends on the non-linear system of complex interactions. Therefore, the logic loop emphasizes the creation of Essent, rather than their interactions. There is a rule that for every existence? An electron and a dog are very different creatures, as the invisible law is responsible for the existence of the two? What kind of legitimacy could meet these requirements? The answer is isomorphism - the same logic of the inteal structure in different representations. If an electron, a dog or the weather, everyone can have a different implementation of the inteal logic structure. Creation of all is the creation of meaning, which is an act of definition. The act of definition attempts to define, is the conscience. Thus the consciousness or the soul, if you wish, is not an invisible copy of our bodies with our identity, but the legitimacy of creation to express our essence as a quality individual. Of course, it is infinite, that we are God, that we are from God, and similar expressions. This is true, but also in the sense that God is the legitimacy that the creation, and this is the legitimacy of all creation, including the creatures. It could be argued that the soul, a person is more than simple definitions and intelligence. If this logic is the logic of this, you should be able to outline the logical structure of experience, as well. Indeed. Everything has a meaning, must be defined somewhere on the scale between continuous and discrete, between permanent and final. The indefinite, continuous, infinite tends towards meaning, which a well is at best imprecise. Experience is the process of trying to define the time limit. If you try to gain experience in a description, we are defining our attempt to define the time limit. Experience is a description that continues, the definition is hidden. Just as we can never fully define, one can not define the experience. Every description, a definition which is by nature discrete, while the network is the experience continues. So if we have a perception or experience, and we know that this experience, then give it meaning, by what it is. In this way we create a fair representation of experience, but experience remains continuous and not definable, not discretizable. The experience is for leaing. The person who encounters something new. How can we know what's going on? Since that is not compatible with our system. So, when interacting with him, we must integrate, assimilate into our system. If we can achieve something that is not new to the system, so our system recognizes as a part of himself. If recognition does not occur, the system interacts with something new. This is the effect. The system also adapts to the new - that is change. Of course, this is the way of change after the experience. Our knowledge about the experience - whatever it is the experience we have - there are for us. One could say that one experiences when one is aware of life. How do we know that we are aware of something living? From experience, we experience the awareness of life. In this sense, the experience and knowledge of experience, awareness of living the experience of being conscious of living an awareness of the experience, and so is a chain continues indefinitely, defining what the experience is what is (not the interpretation of a specific experience, but experience in its broad sense). And this is the definition of experience: an endless cycle of process knowledge. If "nothing" is the limit of the two totally indefinite and completely defined, it is like a circle of something for nothing to do something, etc. The "current" is the perception. "Nothing" is a term that has meaning if it is perceived, in fact, a paradox. If it is really "nothing", then he can not be defined, and thus it has no meaning. But if I may, so it's something. To see if I have "nothing" when I said, creating something from nothing, who "has no meaning for me, so it is important - it's like all the other bits. This means that the structure of the "nothing" is the same as the structure of something. In essence, education is something from nothing, not made, because nothing is something. What then is the creation? Creation is much more to create something from nothing, because creation is the process of definition, and if we define, we create the vague about the definition to its limit is zero, and only then can something out of nothing .. . Ah yes, the loop. One ring is true only if its source. Unless it can be shown outside of perception, then the logic is a loop, and that there is a need to close the logical loop. Including the indefinite in the process of definition has far-reaching consequences. This means that the instruments of definition are necessarily included in the definition. This means that meaning can only occur if both the definition and experience. This means that consciousness (if you can define, or otherwise), must be part of the so-called objective science or effort. This means that all the experiences of perception. The interaction with the indefinite, the experience is what the significance of the senses. Perception, significant definition, can not but be extremely flexible in a complex system that can lea and change. This is the difference between us and an electron, the only solid relationships and interactions accordingly limited. An electron always able to define, or would be correct to say, you can only interact with what they can define. If he is indefinitely, passing from a state of superposition. Where is God in the loop of creation? If we want to define God, the totality, we could not define God, because by definition that the law would also, with regard to God, which are contrary to God's wholeness. Therefore, the definition of God would not do justice to God, and that definition truncate God entirety. If God is indefinable, then God is indefinite. If God is unlimited, then I know God from the law, the definition - a definition, since any definition will be in addition to the permanent borders of the definition. In this sense, this is in line with the statement that I have God by my perception (definition). This does not say that I am God, but that my perception is that the indefinite (God). This means that if I have a dog, this perception implies the existence of God when I see that I am, then this implies the existence of God If dust a table, an idea, regardless, so this means that 'If the existence of God the experience, then this means that the existence of God This is because every life implies the existence of God because every life, whether it relates or refers to whether it makes sense, even if only partially, it was determined, which means that its very definition involves the indefinite beyond the boundaries of the definition, which means God, the indefinable. Things can not perceive God directly (which is perhaps why it's in the Bible that no one could see the face of God and live = exist - "let no man see me and live ..." - Exodus 33: 20), but just knowing about God, by implication, which means that the impact of indefinite - God - is what attributes exist for all the senses. However, "God" is not equal to "unlimited", but the process means that the existence of a time-limit is what you say to God, because this is the process of creation. This is the process of creation, which is to create something that is there, and nothing, which is common. This is why this is a logical loop. ? Clara Szalai