Emptiness Is The Only Requirement For Life (proof)

[Dodo]

21 minutes ago, Toby said:

So, do you study mathematics at university or not?

I did, but it's irrelevant here.

If 0 was anything other than emptiness, 0+1 would be more than 1.

Thats as much maths as you need to know for a fact that 0 points to emptiness. I dont see why you would argue the point.  Its incredibly simple.

You need to be able to see beyond the labels here. Visualise a 3d axis and see what i mean by each step.

Notice how the point 0,0,0 is the dot center of the axis. That doesn't mean that the dot exists. 

You can define a triangle too, it doesn't mean that it exists. You can define a lot of things that do not exist, that's what maths prooves again and again.

Lets also get spiritual : You can also define yourself, that doesnt mean you exist.

Edited May 2, 2017 by Dodoster

[Barna]

Let's say that inf = 1/0. 
Then inf * 0 would be (1/0) * (0/1) = 0/0. This means that inf * 0 is undefined.

So multiplying infinity by zero does not result in zero, because infinity is just as full as the zero is empty.  

But nice thinking.  

[Toby]

Also you are using different "infinite", one time you use countable "0+0+0+0+0+..." and then you use uncountable infinite. Obviously it is not the same.

[Loreena]

This topic doesn't make any sense at all. Sorry Dodo if it offends you.

But I have to say Toby is right here. 

The math here is not adding up to the conclusion arrived at. 

Very strange assumptions have been made to deliberately arrive at the needed conclusion. 

Sorry but it appears like confirmation bias. 

Plus mathematics can't be so easily and loosely used to arrive at spiritual conclusions. They aren't matching here. 

At the end, only definitions and assumptions and premises with mathematical elements and markers to mix together and create a spiritual theory/ statement. 

But no real value. 

But nice to have fun with

Although cannot be taken seriously

[Dodo]

51 minutes ago, Toby said:

Also you are using different "infinite", one time you use countable "0+0+0+0+0+..." and then you use uncountable infinite. Obviously it is not the same.

Infinity means infinity. Those 0s are still being added in the present moment. But of course it's only one zero which implodes due to it's infinity  Creates 0*infinity and everything else follows. Boom! 

 

57 minutes ago, Barna said:

Let's say that inf = 1/0. 
Then inf * 0 would be (1/0) * (0/1) = 0/0. This means that inf * 0 is undefined.

So multiplying infinity by zero does not result in zero, because infinity is just as full as the zero is empty.  

But nice thinking.  

I do say later in the post that inf*0 is an undefined real number. I said 0=0*infinity, because of the simple observation 0 = 0+0+0....+0 (infinity amount of times, meaning you can always add 0 to 0 and it will remain 0, you can do it infinitely long and arrive at the same 0.

Let's say that inf = 1/0. 
Then inf * 0 would be (1/0) * (0/1) = 0/0. This means that inf * 0 is undefined.

1/0 is already undefined the following steps not needed.
Infinity is also undefined and 0 is undefined. The definitions can only point to them.

Infinity times 0 can be any number. Have you looked around at the diversity? 

 

Edited May 2, 2017 by Dodoster

[Dodo]

29 minutes ago, Loreena said:

This topic doesn't make any sense at all. Sorry Dodo if it offends you.

But I have to say Toby is right here. 

The math here is not adding up to the conclusion arrived at. 

Very strange assumptions have been made to deliberately arrive at the needed conclusion. 

Sorry but it appears like confirmation bias. 

Plus mathematics can't be so easily and loosely used to arrive at spiritual conclusions. They aren't matching here. 

At the end, only definitions and assumptions and premises with mathematical elements and markers to mix together and create a spiritual theory/ statement. 

But no real value. 

But nice to have fun with

Although cannot be taken seriously

I can clear up any misunderstanding, please do tell where the assumptions are that I need to revise?

[Loreena]

2 minutes ago, Dodoster said:

I can clear up any misunderstanding, please do tell where the assumptions are that I need to revise?

It is said that 3 rd  reality = 0 therefore emptiness. 

How does zero become the equivalent of emptiness. Zero is a mathematical expression which may represent no quantity so we say remove 1 from 1, we get zero. 

How does that become equivalent to the concept of emptiness which is qualitative. 

Can zero represent something qualitative. How can a qualitative state be defined by a mathematical number. 

If I have a state of mind or existence, can I interpret that as 1,2 3 or zero. . I don't think so. 

 

[Barna]

10 minutes ago, Dodoster said:

I do say later in the post that inf*0 is an undefined real number. I said 0=0*infinity, because of the simple observation 0 = 0+0+0....+0 (infinity amount of times, meaning you can always add 0 to 0 and it will remain 0, you can do it infinitely long and arrive at the same 0.

You're right, I skipped that line because I was in a hurry to contradict you. :)) 

And I still want to contradict you, so here is my second argument: reality cannot be described by mathematics because mathematics is based on logic. And the whole base of logic is the belief that contradictions don't exist. Now why would this belief be true?  

[Loreena]

By the way, in the so called emptiness there can still be something, something indefinable that cannot be defined by zero or any number for that matter...

These are all assumptions. 

[Dodo]

1 minute ago, Loreena said:

It is said that 3 rd  reality = 0 therefore emptiness. 

How does zero become the equivalent of emptiness. Zero is a mathematical expression which may represent no quantity so we say remove 1 from 1, we get zero. 

How does that become equivalent to the concept of emptiness which is qualitative. 

Can zero represent something qualitative. How can a qualitative state be defined by a mathematical number. 

If I have a state of mind or existence, can I interpret that as 1,2 3 or zero. . I don't think so. 

 

Good questions. We are in the realm of mathematical mapping of reality on paper. 0 is the mathematical representation which points to emptiness. The numbers are the representation of things as mathematical symbols. 

Try the following visualisation exercise to see what I mean when I talk about emptiness.

Visualise a cow. Now see the cow pop as a balloon leaving behind nothingness. That nothingness doesn't have a particular shape or size. It was also always there, it was just that the cow was appearing on top of it and not allowing it to be recognised, because the cow is standing out. Doesn't this sound familiar? Khm.. Khm... Ego.. Khm... Khm..

Now you can do this exercise with ordinary objects you see too. See that TV? Now imagine it pops, leaving behind 0, *( what 0 points to). But that nothingness again doesn't have any shape and size, it seems like it has always been there, and actually if you look around, you see that this same nothingness or 0 is everywhere. It's just hiding behind all the objects / numbers in your perception. These objects include inner phenomena. 

[Toby]

Emptiness is that in which your world arises in. It's not an absence or a presence of an object (e.g. cow).

[Dodo]

10 minutes ago, Barna said:

You're right, I skipped that line because I was in a hurry to contradict you. :)) 

And I still want to contradict you, so here is my second argument: reality cannot be described by mathematics because mathematics is based on logic. And the whole base of logic is the belief that contradictions don't exist. Now why would this belief be true?  

Heyooo who said there is not middle ground between logic and spirituality? I'm only trying to walk the middle road here yo forgive me senpai

I see no problem in trying to map reality / or certain aspect of it. I am not going to get published and get any awards for this, but I find this explanation to look quite nice. I certainly don't need anybody to agree with it. I am just waiting to see any valid arguments that will disprove it.

It doesn't give me experiential knowing, it doesnt give me anything, but maths is not to be done for some additional prize. Maths is done for math's sake. 

#SpiritualMaths 

[Dodo]

12 minutes ago, Toby said:

Emptiness is that in which your world arises in. It's not an absence or a presence of an object (e.g. cow).

Have you seen my emptiness sketch? Go have a look, best visual representation of emptiness 2k17 - It shows exactly what you say, and it is exactly the same as absence of cow. Now I see why you are arguing with me. You think that absence of object is smaller than a point, but you don't see how it is bigger than the universe???

 

Edited May 2, 2017 by Dodoster

[Barna]

6 minutes ago, Dodoster said:

It doesn't give me experiential knowing, it doesnt give me anything, but maths is not to be done for some additional prize. Maths is done for math's sake. 

#SpiritualMaths 

Huh, okay then. I thought that you were trying to do something useful.  

Edited May 2, 2017 by Barna

[Dodo]

3 minutes ago, Barna said:

Huh, okay then. It thought that you were trying to do something useful.  

I guess it's useful to move the gray cells a bit  Also I like to ponder a lot on Fermat's last theorem, because I want to find a simple solution, not one like Andrew Wiles  

It's a fun torture !! 

[jse]

Here's another mathematical model, absolute proof supporting the dualistic paradigm:

            1 + 1 = 2

So much for non-duality...

 

 

Edited May 2, 2017 by jse

[Toby]

No, until the last post I was just arguing on an mathematical level. For me "emptiness" doesn't depend on the absence or presence of the universe. The absence of a cow still happens within the universe. An absence can be a doorway but is imo not the same as emptiness.

[Dodo]

7 minutes ago, jse said:

Here's another mathematical model, absolute proof supporting the dualistic paradigm:

            1 + 1 = 2

So much for non-duality...

 

 

 I know it's meant to be a joke, but in case it was a joke meant to discredit my initial post, I want to show how this does not break anything in the theory or non-duality:

Since all the numbers arise from infinite concentrations of emptiness, all numbers are built from zero, meaning that any math in duality, if seen for what it really is, is simply the math of 0s. Non Duality Hurray! Any number = 0, because only 0 is real, the numbers are all illusory flashes made by infinite concentration of emptiness!!!

 

[jse]

3 minutes ago, Dodoster said:

Since all the numbers arise from infinite concentrations of emptiness, all numbers are built from zero, meaning that any math in duality, if seen for what it really is, is simply the math of 0s. Non Duality Hurray! Any number = 0, because only 0 is real, the numbers are all illusory flashes made by infinite concentration of emptiness!!!

Okaaay... then how do you explain the decimal point? 

[Dodo]

8 minutes ago, jse said:

Okaaay... then how do you explain the decimal point? 

The decimal point is spiritual ego