Categories of Existence IV

The fifth category of existence is time. Time is the structure of motion. Being actual objects in space, we are all subject to time, but due to a time dilation, we do not know what actual time is. The dilation may come from being a conscious being coming into existence, because an environment must exist prior to the existence of a conscious being, resulting in time dilation between objects in space and space itself. There is also the problem of seeing all events from a single perspective because each conscious being is quantified as a single observer. Each observer perceives motion from different positions in space, but no two observes can occupy the same position in space at the same time, since they are not existentially the same objects. In any case, the primary reality all objects in space are contained in is existence, therefore all objects are the result of the first motion that existed in space. From this we can conceive of a real beginning of time for all objects in space. Though no being can know for certain what the first motion of existence was, we can perceive a continuous motion in phenomena using the laws of cause and effect, the main premise being that all causes are prior to effects. However, this only concerns real objects, therefore real time concerns motions of objects and phenomena that are results of an unknown first cause or first motion in existence, I call this time real time.

Real time isn’t an idea or concept, it is the current state of existence, a constant alteration of forces throughout space. Real objects exist in nature and are known by their harmonious interactions, harmonious in the sense that no object defies the laws of physics. Limitations provided, all objects thus become connected in space and, while remaining separate objects, maintain one motion from cause to effect. Real time is the connections of motions operating in sequences, every motion is necessarily followed by or prior to another motion. Connection between objects and motions occur because of locality, mainly no object can go out of existence; objects can only move in existence or alter their current existential states, meaning all objects are interacting in the same space. This connection between objects in real time, because of their connection in the same space, leads to a more practical time for conscious beings, a time that is started from particular points in existence, a division of real time into parts known as relative time.

The more typical time we refer to is relative time, which are motions following that of the first motion. Actual time, first motion to current motions in existence, can not be known without tracing all real objects causes back to a prime motion. As this is virtually impossible, because an effect can be the cause of another effect but not the cause of its own cause, there’s no way to realistically go back to the first motion. Therefore, an observers beginning of time, as a quantity and motion, is where the observer’s first reference of observation began, or where the object which is being observed first entered perception, leading to whatever the current structure of motions are.

(Footnote: It is not difficult to understand what time is if space and motion are understood. Time is the ever flow of motion and interacting forces. This is also a more metaphysical view of time rather than a measurable view that clocks refer to. Measurable time is relative time as depicted by an observer. There maybe no way to prove an actual measurable point in time to have a real time clock. It would require a model of the beginning motions which occurred in existence leading to current motions, such a task would require a large amount of proof and calculation. And the motions that first took place in existence must have cosmological or particle physics origins, assuming the forces necessary must have been to an extremity in nature.)

Objects in Space

Upon some reflective thinking it became obvious to me that no object or phenomena has the ability to exist without relation to another object or phenomena. Solitary existences can’t be a possible occurrence. For everything that exist, or that has the potential to exist, must exist in the domain of existence. However, existence itself must be given form and dimension by the objects which exist, therefore existence must be a feature related to all objects and phenomena. How exactly can all objects be related to each other?

All things are related in time and space, practically speaking. For all real objects are immersed in space, this seems obvious in the fact that no object or phenomena can be created from nothing. For any object to come into existence a combination of objects or entropy of an object are needed. This seems to be a consequence of merely existing and impossible to withstand. Objects come together in “time,” the sequence of motions in a phenomena, for phenomena are dynamic. This is important to realize when speaking of beings, for all beings must come into existence through a process in time.

All objects being in necessity of other objects for their coming into being would mean all objects must come from or be apart of an antecedent object or phenomena. Take A as the main substance of space, since space is either unbounded or bounded, and can only exist in reference to an object; an object must be a kernel in space, because space with no object is a form of non-existence. Now, space as such will engulf substance A, also substance A must exist in time. Substance A can only be perceived through some change in the mental affairs of an observer; and only as “in time” if substance A produces direct effects to its surrounding. Such a case would conclude in substance A producing substance B, this occurring in time, assuming substance A is going through some sort of process in space; this process being some alteration in substance A. Substance B, being produced by substance A, would be related to substance A in space and time; this meaning the only thing separating substance A and substance B is distance and motion, motion being whether they are moving away or towards each other in time. Such is the way objects are related to each other in space and time.

(Footnote: I would guess substance B would be a smaller or “anti” version of substance A. I assume this only because all change must be a significant alteration, and the only significant alteration to a singularity is its polar opposite; in this case substance B is the polar opposite of the singularity substance A)

Concerning The Universe and A Little Science

Based on my current knowledge of my existence, I am left to conclude that the creatures on this planet are the only developed life forms in what we call “the universe.” The universe is our limit on existence; considering existence is bounded only by those who exist. We are able to trace our causation back to a biological source, this allows us to assume the premise that we do indeed exist. Thus is the case for all other existing material; all leading back to physics, the awareness and understanding of force. Our scientific knowledge has far advanced past those of our ancestors. But considering that our ancestors are the only beings that we are able to compare knowledge with; our technology doesn’t surpass any natural bounds; and our many uncertainties, it is safe to assume that control over ones own existence is rather difficult. Restrictions on science, mainly those caused by lack of practicing individuals, won’t allow for any true perception of our existential limits. Thus we will not know how vast of a dimension the universe is. We do have a clear idea of the difficulties however, and the known facts alone compel me to conclude that there are no supremely advanced organisms in our universe.

(Footnote: I consider a supremely advanced organism to be one with clear and precise information on existence. Obviously any information can be expressed by any organism simply through interaction. But, any “advanced” creature would possess an actual science, knowledge of specific methods that actualize specific ends. Such knowledge isn’t seen in less developed species, in fact we are the only species who possess an transcendental understanding of existence; all other creatures on this planet have a general understanding but not a complex one concerning the universe. We, however, aren’t what i would call “supremely advanced” because of our lack of freedom concerning our actualization of possible ideas. For example; it is possible for us to space travel, but we aren’t so advanced that this possibility can be actualized without much difficulty. Such difficulties are seen throughout society, in the form of detrimental issues, and our inability to resolve such issues with easy and accuracy, so the issues don’t happen again or the solutions are readily at hand, shows our disqualification of the title of even first-rate beings; We lack full control over our environment.)

The only true known facts of the universe are scalar as physics implies, these are the awareness of force and motion. It is in this that we understand the function of other beings and objects. Highly developed minds have knowledge of physics by being in control of force, we have the ability to sense force and react to it. If we move beyond scalar knowledge we begin to speak of different sciences, but all would imply scalars. It is this which lead science to becoming a main idea in most living creature’s minds, though most lack the capacity to fully understand the complex concepts that govern the universe; assuming all forces can even be fully comprehended in an unified science. The force of being a self controlled entity must synthesis with the force of nature, this is practical with all individual living beings.

We can speak of a few bounds or scalars found in existence. These are volume, force, and direction. We are constantly aware of force, existence is essentially force. Biology is a self aware force, this is opposed to mechanics, which is merely fundamental and necessary force. Direction is what separates force. Things that are accelerating at a constant speed will not stop unless acted on by something else moving at it from the opposite direction. In reality the direction of force doesn’t matter because force is always conserved, the universe operates on mechanics that have an unlimited supply of energy, due to the fact that matter and energy are constantly interchanging into one another. Direction becomes a concern to biological entities because our volume of energy is limited, we must find and obtain energy, thus direction is required knowledge.

The universe we perceived is a small portion of the volume existence is able to contain. Volume is the quantity of space which a being occupies. This is of course relative to other beings and only a concern of biological creatures. The greater the volume a being occupies the more force it will have, this is the main scalar which allows for each science to be separated. Cosmology is the study if the force of heavenly entities which in size take up extremely large volumes space. Particle physics is the study of extreme small entities and fundamentally energy itself, they are Planck size but are massively abundant. Biology is relatively in between cosmology and particle physics, We are immensely larger than a particle, but might as well be considered particles in relation to a star or a planet. Each study is apart of the single dimension of existence; they become separated by size, size very much influences the functionality of different beings and this is fundamental knowledge in science.

Categories of Existence III

Every phenomena an observer perceives is a single Space in itself(It maybe best to refer to Space as a system composed of elements, since we will be speaking of properties, a category of existence). The observer is also a phenomena, thus is also a single Space(or System, assuming the observer is able to do more than merely perceiving) in itself. Two Spaces need Motion to co-exist; regardless of if it is one phenomena(System) containing 2 Spaces, or one phenomena changing from one form to another. Every phenomena is in need of Motion, and form itself is known by Motion(For senses are needed to observe a phenomena, and to be apart of one. In this way the term “senses” is used more generally, it is the ability to generate force. We generate biological forces to perceive and interact with the world, whereas particles use weak forces, strong forces, and electromagnetic forces to interact. Planets, stars, black holes, etc. seem to use the force of gravity to interact. We sense matter through force, the force of light on our eyes allow us to see, the relative force of our molecular structure compared to the molecular structure of a wall is what determines the limits of motion; i.e. a person punching through a thin wall compared with a thick wall stopping the punch).

(Footnote: Properties are especially necessary in opposites, contraries, and contradictions; for these concepts necessitate dualities. Examples: long/short, true/false, existence/non-existence, young/old, whole/part, virtue/vice, zero/one, one/two, good/bad, straight/curved, etc. They are objects which are elements of a common system)

Properties are the elements of a system. I’ll use a very rough form of geometric space and logic to demonstrate my meaning. We would have to first begin by defining null space, or space with nothing in it, this we can represent with the element 0, lets give it a sense of a flat plane(represented with element p) and the color black(represented with element b). This would give the null space elements (p(b(0))), and this being one system we can call it S1. Within S1 we can create 2 more null spaces(00) on top of S1, then give them the senses of the color white(w) and the bounded figure circle(c). Placed (w(c(00))) anywhere in S1, and we can say S1 contains 2wc, or wc wc. The combined spaces would be 2wc(S1) making it a single system containing the properties of 2wc and S1, and elements pbwwcc000. It is just an arbitrary logic form that I’m using to illustrate the way in which properties and elements are, or can, be used. This is an example of the vastness of properties, such a vastness can’t be expressed in it’s fullest sense because senses themselves require properties and elements to exist. There would be too many elements to name in a single property of a major system(assuming all properties are from a metaphysical system containing words(properties) and their meanings(elements) being words defined by other words).

(Footnote: The null space(0) was meant to show the quantity of spaces used, for each system needs space to operate. Properties are the parts of a system, they are the origin of force in a system.)

The innate characteristics of a phenomena is what i call properties. Such a thing is somewhat difficult to explain, for every Space contains properties, and properties are in every Space. So defining what properties are, while still using properties, contains no depth. Perhaps another model will clarify the way properties are utilize. Take the proposition “A line is connected by two points.” This proposition is the illustration of a phenomena(or it can be consider a system), its a completed single Space. But the single Space contains innate characteristics, the two points and their connection to form a line. The completed Space is the line, but the line is created or can only exist by containing within it certain properties, these properties being two points(2 Spaces) and their connection to each other(1 Force); the points are elements of the system, the line created by the 2 points is the property of the system. Hence, “A line is connected by two points” is the system, the sense of the system is a line(property), created by means of 2 points(elements). The line could of been created by 10 bricks, that sense would be a brick line, with the elements of 10 bricks

Properties can be seen as the parts of a being, for every being is made of parts. Properties, or parts, are rather broad reaching and can be a trivial thing to consider. For if everything is a whole, then the whole is complete because of its many parts. Only nothing, pure non-existence can be defined as not having parts, if it is consider as a whole. But even nothing is related to everything and something, thus being apart of and a part of a system. Anyone who would inquire into the properties of everything may find themselves in a very difficult situation. When considering the properties of anything, one must consider every possible element combination. And every part of the totality of things is connected simply from being the properties of existence itself.

When we think about Properties, we can begin by thinking of necessity. What is necessary for such and such phenomena to exist, or what details do i perceive as an observer of such and such a phenomena? Our mode of communication is the expressing of properties, it is metaphysical. For every observer is a Space in themselves, and by being a single phenomena innately, has a particular point of view. The point of view is a property of an observer. We communicate our different points of view with one another through properties of a medium, such as the use of language or other expressions of meaning. Also, there must be a Space outside an observer with its own Properties for an observer to communicate with another being. If the only Space that exist is that of a single observer, then that observer must come out of itself to communicate with another. An observer that communicates with him/her self is merely utilizing his/her own innate properties; such as force to change his/her own Space, i.e. reflection, thought, imagination.

(Footnote: Language is a medium of communication. Every word is forced upon the object which it symbolizes, but the word itself is the property of the language. The correct way in which to use the symbols of a language is produced by the formal rules of the language itself. This, I find to be important, for most seem to take language for granted and assume its a normal thing. Language is nothing more than the Motion of sound waves produced by vocal chords; different sounds made in particular sequences to express meaning. The things that words symbolize aren’t the things in themselves but rather the idea of the things, they are metaphysical entities. A car is named a car because it is unable to name itself, and because it is necessary to identify the car as a single system, as a car qua car. A car qua car is still apart of another whole, and a whole composed of parts itself. But if we didn’t give car qua car its own Space and consider it a single phenomena(a single system), we may end up speaking ad infinitum. For, if starting the conversation on car qua car, we separate car from its parts and couldn’t tell the whole system from its properties, we would end up speaking about all things related to car, and thus speak about everything and infinite. A rather absurd consequence considering our imperfect knowledge.)

The precise structure of properties and their elements are determined by time.

On Time

I am quite confused as to what “time” actually is. The different aspects of practical time are the forward motion of past, present, and future. Now the present is a product of the past, which itself was at one point a present. Thus the present, as part of the past, becomes the future through time’s forward motion. Now the present is current time, the past is previous time and the future is later time. It is current time which we relate past and future to. If this is the case, then all past time was at one point present time; but since all present time is the result of a past time, all present time is actually future time. The future, in this sense of time, doesn’t exist as anything other than the present. For, to become the future, time must pass from past to present. If time passes from present to future, then the future becomes present, and the previous present becomes past. The future, as it is normally depicted, doesn’t actually exist. A future that is reached, without a realization or actuality, is nothing more than speculation. The present itself is nothing more than the continuous motion of the past. And if this is the case, then all of time is the alteration of the past, and thus all of time is present. Is this the true nature of time?

Actual time, scientifically represented, is a relation between two objects. We measure time using the repetitive count of 60. This count is broken into three; hours, minutes, and seconds. Seconds being the fastest count and each ending cycle resulting in a minute, and each 60 minutes resulting in an hour. This time system is then integrated into our notion of days, weeks, months, years, etc. In this view of time, time is relative to other time. Many may have heard of time in this form in Einstein’s special relativity. Special relativity, in a simplistic sense, states that time is the product of motion, and is contingent on the speed of an object. Our universal time is the relation of the earth’s motion around the sun. The measurement of motion is dependent on us, since we created our measuring system. Therefore, time is our subjective measurement of the relative motion between the earth and the sun. Certainly this is not natural time but pseudo-time, for “time” is dependent on us and is a feature of ourselves; but time qua time must be time as it is in itself, without the necessity of another object.

Time must be a state of motion. For the simple mention of time is a start of a phenomena, and every beginning is a force of motion. The only thing which has no true beginning is nothing; for if nothing begins, then it immediately becomes something. Therefore nothing is the closest one can get to a true state of rest. Let us look at the forward motion of time in accordance to numbers. When time is at rest, it must be at the motion of 0. But, 0 being one thing in itself is actually 1; it does the action of coming into being, and thus a motion is made which in itself represents 1. For 0 to exist as 0 qua 0 it must be in a constant state of destroying itself, going from one to zero, from something to nothing, without ever fully achieving its pure form(non-existence). Time in this form would be in a state of infinite destruction of itself, which can’t be the case.

We can look at time before time, but we must jump out of time itself to perceive what is outside of time, this we do using motion. But, if time is mere relation between the motion of two objects and their speed, then time must be an innate property of the relation between objects; not an innate property of the objects themselves. We manage to maintain a stable time by restricting time to a cycle, rather than allowing time to progress infinitely; which is what must be the true affair of time. For everything that is at rest is a constant state of being, while everything in motion is in a state of constant alteration. This being the case, time would continue from the point the phenomena itself began into infinity. And if we look for the beginning of time itself, rather than the beginning of our own time, we would find ourselves looking back to infinity, or find ourselves infinitely looking back; for to move back in time one must move themselves forward in their own time. We can move forward in our own time as far and as fast as our abilities allow, but must use our forward momentum in time to go back in time. If the person going back in time were immortal, he/she would go back to infinity. So even if time had a beginning, he/she would pass that beginning.

God and Quantity

An interesting conclusion follows from the logical deduction of God in terms of Quantity. Anyone who knows how to count can easily follow my reasoning in this matter, let me illustrate my meaning. God is 1 thing, therefore It can’t be nothing, and must be something. However, to know of God, an observer must perceive either God’s form or God’s motion. Now this can follow with several conclusions concerning Quantity and God. First there must be at least 2 things, God and the observer. God is also known by Its form or motion, making at least 3 things. If we negate the statement, “God is also known by Its form or motion, making at least 3 things,” we still end with 3 things. For, at the very least, the observer is 2 or more things, observer qua observer(Form) and observer qua observing(Motion); less any observer as such denies this determination. Thus resulting in the outcome still ending in 3; God, the observer, and the observer observing; this being the case regardless if God is known or not.

Another odd conclusion follows from God as First Cause. Considering the concept of a 1st Cause, this cause in itself, in relation to quantity, necessarily is 1 thing. But, a cause, in itself, necessitates an effect, making 2 things. And if a cause has no effect, then it can’t be considered a cause qua cause, rather the concept(idea, event, phenomena, etc.) must be an effect itself, or nothing at all(non-existent). Effect as an necessity is one circumstance of a 1st Cause; a causeless cause, a cause resulting from no effect, is another, and a paradox indeed. For a causeless cause can only come from 2 things, nothing and itself. The result of this is drastic, for if the causeless cause came from nothing, then we would still have 2 thing; the causeless cause and nothing. But, if nothing does anything it will cease to be nothing, and become something. No longer being nothing, it would be a falsehood to say a causeless cause came from nothing.

The second circumstance results in the same case. If a causeless cause caused itself, then we have still 2 things. For the effect of the causeless cause is the causeless cause itself. This leads to the cause of the causeless cause being itself, and the effect of the causeless cause being itself. Therefore the causeless cause must be somehow outside itself to cause itself, i am not quite sure how this is done. One way is for there to be 2 causeless cause, problem with that is 1 causeless cause would end up as an effect. Another way would be to make the causeless cause cause only itself. But how could a causeless cause become anything more than a causeless cause if it can only cause itself; for a causeless cause only effect would be itself, itself being nothing more than a causeless cause. A causeless cause seems to have the ability to exist as a causeless cause, but as nothing else.

Let us say the causeless cause caused itself and a man. The causeless cause would have caused 2 things. The cause of the causeless cause being the causeless cause itself, therefore the causeless cause is either 1 thing or 2 things. But how could the causeless cause cause a man? A man is a complex of things, to keep it simple let’s say 10 things, how did the causeless cause acquired 10 other things? the causeless cause hasn’t become anything more in itself but a 1st Cause, at most it is 2 things, which are both causeless causes. And in itself, it is nothing more than 1 thing, itself. For a causeless cause can only come from nothing and itself, and in itself it is nothing more than a 1st Cause.

Unless the causeless cause causes something other than itself, it is essentially always close to nothing(non-existence or null-existence). In the case of the causeless cause causing itself and a man, it can only cause a man. For it being a causeless cause would force it to result in a man. But, man qua man is the configuration of many things, and each thing related to something else. So from where could the causeless cause have preceded from causeless cause to a man? For, if such a proposition were to stand without validation, it would be the same as a man coming from nothing and from nowhere. And this is a result we have concluded before, that a causeless cause can only be caused by nothing or itself. A man can’t be the cause of himself, but if a man is caused by a causeless cause, then he would be the cause of himself. The cause of the causeless cause would be man, and man would be caused by the causeless cause.