Section 22 (first updated 1.10.2021)
“Light at end of tunnel”
Time and space are propositions of being and nothing, the latter being the presuppositions of the former.
Productivity
The general principle of productivity is the simple fact that it takes time to do something. Time is universal for productivity because it arises instantaneously in the onset of the conception as opportunity for the determination of action. Time is a set back-loop NOT as mere restriction of an already determined act, but is the very opportunity for determination to move forward as the conception (origin) for action. The moment for thought is the opportunity to think. Time is NOT reactionary to preexisting events as our measure of it makes it out to be. The clock takes on circular form. Time is opportunity the term is broken down into opp-or-t-unity, opposition or unity, tune (adjust or correct) law of irreversibility is function of time as opportunity (add here law of irreversibility), time is the first dimension. The dimension of simultaneity is the interaction between opposing determinations happening)
There is at least this first necessary order wherein something cannot just be done, but it takes time for it to happen. Predetermined does NOT only mean that some event is destined to happen, but is the set of determinations put forward that enable action. An event requires the necessary preconditions before it is suppose to happen.
Asking why does it take time to do activity is like asking why is energy needed for work? Both of these just point to the self evidence of the thing, asking why something is long is the same as stating that something is life, the answer is stated in the question.
(compare whitehead simultaneity with Einstein)
Studies of Simultaneity
– Time is motion, motion is light and light is energy –
(Connect with complexity and simplification)
Spacetime is syntactic concept meaning that the presupposition of space by time and vice versa allows for the components time and space to be individual propositions. Spacetime is the observer-independent totality of all events, meaning that it is undoubtable fact. How spacetime is split into space and time can differ from observer to observer.
In special relativity, observer in motion relative to each other will not agree as to whether two events happen simultaneously, or as to how great is the distance between two objects. They do, however, agree as to what events there are, although not to when and where they happen.
This aspect of relativity relates to uncertainty principle of quantum. Time is order (see locus here) The way physicists define a time coordinate is to associate with each event a number so as to reflect its order – if event B happens after event A, then the number associated with B should be larger than that associated with A. There seems to be the addition of Mass with the motion of time, but this addition is not one of mere quantity because we find that the first moment of the universe exhibits the largest mass and the universe seems to be progressing into smaller and more condensed composition of itself as we see in biological life, quality is the only quantitive element. (Add how numbers are relations not bodies, because when we add for example 2+2=4, the number 4 is not a body distinct from the relation between 2 with 2, instead 2+2 presupposing the addition of 1+1+1+1 that relation grouping them together as the same body is 4. For example, if we have 4 individual males walking down the road, 4 is not number assigned to anyone of them in particular as in the case of a sport jersey does to some specific player, but that there congruity sharing the same space with certain distance from each other characterizes their relation as 4 of individuals.
In conjunction with the increase physicists assign a time coordinate value (“a time”) to any possible events, and describes how fast or how slow processes happen, compared to that time coordinate. The time coordinate is reflective of the duration of event having beginning when first conceived and end when last conceived. This is built into the very nature of number being an abstraction of relation. The increase in numerical quantity is the revelation of more comped relations greater than the increase, increasing in number is abstraction from null principle being their total possibility (add here how every number is negation of 0. According to special relativity, the aspect of time concerning the order of events happening is motion. This order is not merely temporal in the case of one thing coming after another, nor is it only causal like event A causing B, but the bare activity of motion is relational, the connections necessary to produce form, the relation of one thing differentiated from another is the connection where each together form indistinguishable whole. In the concept of Motion the synthesizes of time with space involves order of events occurring after or before each other is determined by having extension in space- where the past in relation to the future.
Where an object is, the space it takes up, in spacetime total entity determines its period of time. Motion means the space covered by time. the motion determines the order of when in time it occurs, when something happens, is measured by where it is, where something is involves abstraction of it from the order of all other relations – space is defined by any geometric dimension, mathematically the concept space is only understood from the negative as set of points having specified structure. A line for instance is a single dimension, is its order in a two-dimensional surface, or higher-dimensional spaces. This understanding of motion alone however does not tell us inversely how time determines the general scope of space as principle of order? How does time as principle of order disclose space as extension for motion?In mathematicians, all kinds of sets of points are spaces – a line for instance, which has but a single dimension, or a two-dimensional surface, but also higher-dimensional spaces.
Space constitutes for time a source of motion. We normally take this source as place where something is heading towards or position where something is identifiable. Both of these factors are derivatives of Space as simultaneity with time. In the same way an observer acts as frame of reference disclosing the relative motion of two objects, space is simultaneity of the determinations of time having relation. This does not mean that space acts as the place where the relation of determinations are conceivable but that space aids in the very reason for the relation, that a circle is line connected to a point is for one reason due to the plain having a property of extension.
Space is quantity outside itself- external quantity- is primarily function of simultaneity because temporal determinations having pattern means that they are connected by their space outside each other. space is source to be reached by the motion of time, be determinable to.
If two objects share the same space, does that mean they are perfectly synchonized – that they show the same time, simultaneously? That depends if they are moving towards the same space, but to be occupied by the same space does not mean they are determined towards the same space. This distinction is made by whether space is equal distance away from both determinations? If the distance is equal then both objects are moving in the same speed, if the distance is unequal one object is moving faster or slower than the other. To be moving in the same speed means that the space they are determined to is equal distance away yet so far as this is their shared space where they are determined to.
Simultaneity is presupposed when it needs to be explained. Space is the relentless feature of motion – motion is never at rest because it is always falling outside itself. In light we see that there is identification with this externality, light identifies with this external space as its own self, it remains identical with itself while distinguishing itself as other. We have in this way light is the first solid quantity. This solidity so far as having mass is still not ultimately at rest because itself is now falling outside itself while remaining the same extension, but an extension that constitutes the first moment of determinate motion, motion driven with definite direction and not merely falling by principle but falling with an identity of itself. This is electricity, energy.
Electromagnetism
If both objects are heading towards the same place with the same speed this brings up problem of simultaneity which is demonstrated by the question: if light speed is constant and move in all directions how are objects distinguished as having lower speeds of motion? Space is the material used for the relation. It is not place for preexisting material to operate in but space so far as it is distinguished from nothing is the material for the form. The answer is presented with the concept of light. According to special relativity, light is the motion where space determines the order of time- the occurring of one thing as related to another (time dilation?)- and time discloses the general scope of space as kind of order- how space is form of time (spacetime curvature). (Light is principle outside itself while remaining itself) (light as eternity and infinity add to) light is therefore not motion in the sense of reaching from one place to another, nor is it motion in the sense that it occurs during past time as opposed to future time. Light is complete totality and therefore its motion is not any superseding outside itself for than it would be disclosed by that transition of itself, nor does it generate into being from a time it was once not present because than the reason it would be distinguishable from darkness would be arbitrary. The motion of light is the transmission of information within itself. Light carries information. Speed of light is constant.
Misunderstanding on what constitutes something fundamental We have a misunderstanding on what constitutes something fundamental. We take that the principle previous is more fundamental than the one after. Yet the progress of mind shows that the last principle is the most fundamental, the ascension forward is in fact the revelation of the more fundamental principles. Light is more fundamental than space and time in being their relation, but as single abstraction it is less fundamental entity. Time is being and not-being Objects form discrete bodies separated by space and they come into contact, but as to how these bodies are formed in the first place is their element of time that they come in and out of being and into nothing and out of nothing, and these moments form a series where you have a moment of an event separated by its negation, not itself or nothing, which is separated by another moment, or any possibility for a moment. This is what an instantaneous point flash is. Instead of the same light flashing imagine a different sequence within the event is happening after every flash.
Space is chosen to be fixed In nature had to make one substance fixed and stable and the other dynamic and in flux. Space was chosen to be the stable state while time is the state in flux. Flickering
The discrete measure in space is that bodies are separate from each other, the discrete measure in time is that they exists and do-not-exists in relation to each other, the discrete measure in time is being and non-being. But the understanding takes these moments in time as absolutes, when a thing exists, it does not not exist, and when it does not exists, it does, it cannot not exists. This logic makes sense from an observational standpoint, when looking at something, it is there and not not there, it either exists or it does not for sight.
From Einstein’s time, Plato does not exists, and from Plato time Einstein does not exist, both from the point of each other the other does not exists, but both exists in relation to time, Einstein potential future for Plato, and Plato the past for Einstein . We take the properties of being and not being too absolutely because we have a survival instinct to continue being and avoid non being, least for a certain amount of time. but living things do not have the same drive to be in one place over another, whether we are here and not there or there and not here, is part of the same motion. Being and not being happening as abruptly and abundantly in time as the property in space of occupying one position over another.
just like all locations in space are present at the same moment, the general idea of time can only guarantee that every instance must be occupied by a moment, but as to the rate the single moment occupying an instance changes into the other is indefinite. Whereas in space the number of objects occupying a different position is always definite at some scale.
There is always a bunch of objects occupying different positions in space all at once. What this means is that something has to always be occurring but the way something occurs in space is not the same way it occurs in time. In other words there is an instantaneity in any occurrence for two opposite factors to be simultaneous at once. When one thing is in being there other is not in being, standing here is not standing there, but there is always two things standing in the place where the other is not standing, and there is always a moment occupying the present irregardless of how many times a new one came to take the centre.
This we take to actually be the resolution to a contradiction, or what it means to have a noncontradiction. However it is the very principle that maintains an inherent unpredictability in the world. To have a set of potential events any of which can happen creates the uncertainty of which one, when one happens at the present, we can say we are certain of it, but so far as it did not happen, that it may potentially happen, this is where the uncertainty is, and are at least to some degree unable to predicted if it will happen or what event will happen.
The question is not whether an event is there or not there because any event that can be conceived as a potentiality is there, but what possible event will occupy the present, is the concern for uncertainty, because that will be picked out as the particular over all other events, and to determine a possible event into a particular one shows the intention of what kind of reality is conceived. Since there is an infinity of possible events, for the event to occupy the present makes it the one in particular over all other, so the question is why that event in particular? For the same reason it is luckily good or unluckily bad that an event be the present moment. It is good that an event is made the particular one because if everything is possible there is an equal amount of good and bad events, or rather all the events that form everything are distinguished from nothing that happens at all, but if we conceive of a world where nothing can be conceived at all, then that only leaves us with everything to be conceived, as there is no nothing, while on the other hand, if nothing really exists as the insistence of no thing to exist, than that being a form of existence is the active negation of every possible thing that exists, it must conceive of everything that exists to negate it. The reader should by now realize that both situations of logic thusly outlined constitute the already apparent condition of nature right now and will always do so. relativity time is as bent and bumby as space, there is no perfect line in space like there is no one direction of time.
Impetus
The impetus of time irrespective of space and vice versa, space irrespective of time concerns that in the spatial domain physical mass dictates the plain and motion seems secondary in that it is determined by the mass. While in time behaviour dictates the substance of temporal sequence, in that it causes the scenarios and circumstances mass finds themselves in and is identical with the composition of mass that forms a specific kind of thing . In time behaviours add up and form the continuous sequence of a duration, this is what habit is for example, present behaviours build on past ones. While in space, behaviour is not directly seen in the same way a mass is directly present in time, in other words, it takes a certain period of time for the effects of behaviours to be evident while in space the mass of the object is instantaneously evident. In space it is always the present, while in time, the past is allows heading into the future.
In the pure conception of time there is only behaviour and in the pure conception of space there is only mass. Now of-course these are both abstractions in the sense that you cannot have mass without a motion generating it and you cannot have motion without mass employing the behaviour. However this hints at the tricky nature of abstractions. On the one hand abstractions are limited conceptions of nature but if we assume that the observer is limited and that nature is unlimited, I.e., the limit is in the incapacity of the observer in grasping nature, while nature is unlimited, this distinction between observer and nature is itself an abstraction, since the observer is part of nature and nature having a part is limited both in having a part that is limited, and part itself is a limit to the whole. The continuum between observer and nature is characterized by the limitation of one into the other, that nature exhibits the limit of being unlimited for the observer, and the observer conceives nature in a limited manner or limits nature to a finite conception.
Whole and parts related to complexity and simplicity (This explains how the predict dimensions containing particular are more fundamental, cell realm is more fundamental contains the body made up of cells. Cell are the pixels of perceptible body, the body is not the whole of the cells even though it is the combination of them and product of them, and cells are not its parts even though they make it up, )
The phenomena of “Binding energy” explain that the characteristic of physical object is stability means composition will not spontaneously “decay”, transform, into its component parts. (Connects this with below demonstration moves from false to true but in nature it’s already true and being divided means decay which is the opposite of the understanding because knowledge moving forward means to divide) For example, the nucleus of a helium atom does not spontaneously split into the two protons and two neutrons that are its constituents:
There is logical contradiction concerning the nature of energy because energy does not spontaneously come into existence or vanish. Energy is fundamentally conserved meaning that it cannot be created nor destroyed. Yet it takes energy to separate the constituents of an object apart against the forces that keep them together. The total energy that goes into the splitting of composite object into its parts is the same total energy that the object hasbefore the split. This means that it does not take more energy to spilt an object than to maintain it, to maintain something and to change it require the same energy. The law of physics that energy is not created or destroys concerns the universal nature of energy as the process of transformation. The term transform has the unfortunate implied meaning that during the process of change the previous form is left behind due to the arrival of the new one. Yet when we examine particular forms of energy transformations we see levels of fluctuations characteristic of wave spectrum. Wave is in part defined as changing levels of fluctuation. (Physics Def of wave, missing particle,) “periodic disturbance of the particles of a substance that may be propagated without net movement of the particles, such as in the passage of undulating motion, heat, or sound.”
E=mc2
4#- E=mc2 means that matter is energy and energy is matter. Specifically, the E represents units of energy, the M represents units of mass (matter) and the C2 is the speed of light multiplied by itself. This is also the principle of quantum that matter is activity, quanta means units of process or energy.
Energy is simply a determination, which Aristotle defines as the transition to an opposite. Determination defines quantum leap, which refers to the abrupt movement from one discrete energy level to another. This is also why energy is irreversible, because if it was it would not be determinate.
This equation is identified as the greatest of all principles because it captures the essence of matter, that it is actually energy, that is, matter is an activity. Light is the form that matter as energy takes. Light is the self identical externality according to Hegel. Light is able to be external from itself while at the same time remain what it is, which is simply to say, light defines the quality mass- which is the quantity of matter that a body contains, with quantity meaning amount. The way light defines the quantity of mass is precisely based on the nature of it being always outside itself while remaining an identical thing. Light is the very definition of quantity because it is a thing, a 1, that remains so while being outside of itself, another 1.
The very fundamental principle of Einstein’s theory of special relativity is based on the claim that the speed of light in space is inverse to the speed of light in time. The faster a thing goes in space the slower it goes in time. This says that space and time are one and the same, that is, spacetime fabric.
The term “atom” is the Greek word for undivided– indivisible. That which is indivisible is an activity, and NOT a ridged object.
Time Dilation-
Time dilation in “forward time” (linear time) is a phenomena caused by various factors in which time moves more slowly, in “reverse-time” (non-linear time or parallel time), the same phenomena causes time to accelerate. This concepts explains Pierces’ law of mind wherein “Mind” is future and “Matter” is past. The mind projects the idea that matter will take the form of, and matter is the substance that moulds the form of time into a “record” or an objects having a persistence from past to present. Time in how we (Hegel and Aristotle) understands it, is the principle of activity.
Activity for Aristotle is divided into two determinations: active and passive.
Active is mental activity or form, passive is material activity, capacity, or matter. An active determination (a proposal of an idea or a thought) according to time dilation is slower than passive determination or the materialization of the thought. For example, imagine you come across the game of chess without ever knowing it exists, how long do you think it will take for you to figure out the rules, then the steps you can make and so on? Presumably longer than someone familiar with the game and simply applying tactics and rules. Someone who knows can simply apply, but someone needs to know has to figure out. This is similar to mind. In the active determination, when time is forward, it is slow because mind is reasoning or rather working out itself.
This reasoning process is constituted by determinations each when actively proposed for the sake of working out the equation, take on material form, the passive determination. The material determination is faster because it simply takes on form, in fact by faster, it is immediate and abrupt, following the idea. This is why hypothetically when time goes backwards it’s accelerates because the reasoning, or the figuring out has already been achieved by the active determination of mind, and so going back in time is the same as the passive determination of matter taking on the form of the idea. What we ordinarily take to be going back in time, that is, reliving a previous event, is in fact the very process of the future for mind. For the mind proposes the idea, or reasons a thought, and the future for the mind is the actualization of that thought. The thought for mind is the past because it has already thought of it, but the material actualization of it is the mind’s future because it is the conception of that thought as an object confirming what the thought is as that thought. Materially your living the past of mind.
This explains precisely the process of determination as distinguished from determinism. Mind explains determination for it sets the idea. Matter is the determinism because it is the fixity of the idea as an object relative to another object of thought. For example, if you have the idea of becoming a doctor, that idea is a determination creating a future. Your life up to the point of being a doctor, going to medical school etc. is a determinism towards that determination. Now the relationship between determination and determinism is not so fixed and is very difficult to understand. Because the determination or the gaol of being a doctor is itself a determinism, setting a future, and the process towards attaining that involves multiple determinations to get to it, going to med school is a determination for instance.
Do not view determination and determinism as separate concepts, they are two forms of the same activity, one active one passive and it is the negation in relation to each other that constitute the whole. In the concept of time dilation for example, everything is relative to the speed of light, that is, light is the limit. The reason is that light is the first and fundamental determination (explained earlier) where mind and matter are the very same substance. The identical unity. Your whole life in one sense has already been determined by your mind. This means that you chose your genetics before you were born. Soul finding the body as the Greeks say, but not that any soul can go to any body, but that the soul is the idea of the body. Your body is the idea of your mind.
heredity and birth, how you are the actuality of your fathers potential. That’s why species diversify, the future species is the actual sum collection from the potential of the past. Your father in terms of mind is your future in terms you are your fathers past. The concept of spacetime in fact presupposes the principle of quantum science, that the observer and object are connected, or the phenomena and observation are inseparable. How this relates is that space is the object always external, and time is the activity always internal and identical, one explains the active determination the other explains the passive. The faster speed in space equal the slower speed in time means that both principles constitute a relation whereby they become the same concept, a new concept that itself now bears a determination that is faster or active and slower or passive. The relation between Space and time constitute matter, which is defined by the nature of light squared, simply mean that light is a substance outside itself, a space, while remaining itself, a time.
Light is both wave and particle because it is the geometric form, the circle, is that abstraction of it. The most fundamental principle, self-identity; because how can a thing be anything without first identifying its self? To identify itself, because it is first not itself, it identifies itself from the position where it is not itself, which is what is first necessary in the first place to be before it can identify itself, it is already in a position where it is not itself, and therefore from there identifies itself, and therefore becomes itself; and finally, it is now itself within itself outside of not itself, but from outside itself it cane to be itself outside itself, and therefore that essetinal first self, is the first self which is not given
Now if we aim to define what consciousness is as a concept, or what thought is? Then the answer is that thought takes itself as object, and perceives that as its identity, this is precisely characteristic of consciousness because the aim of consciousness is to derive knowledge of the thing. And so in order to do so, consciousness, requires that its nature be conceivable to itself. The process whereby consciousness derives knowledge of itself begins with the nature of space time as the relation of light. That is to say, matter or light, is nothing else but the defining form of consciousness. They are at least, abstractions from the activity of thought itself. Spacetime continuum constitute the outline of the mind of thought, or as Einstein says “I want to know God’s thoughts, the rest are details”.
Einstein believed in Spinoza’s understanding of god. Spinoza says: “I believe that a triangle, if it could speak, would say that God is eminently triangular, and a circle that the divine nature is eminently circular…” this means that God is the sum of his own thoughts. In the famous euthyopro dilemma, Plato makes Socrates says: “is it the good because God said it is good, or because it is good God said it is good?” If the former then is the good based on gods arbitrary commands, or if the good is recognized by god, then it is more divine than god. In Aristotle’s account, the divine is thought. Newton found that any object going in a circle accelerates.
energy = mass
Einstein famous equation of E=mc2
E=mc2 simply means energy correspond to mass and vice versa – to every mass there is corresponding energy. In broader philosophical terms this means every activity is a body and every body is activity, the process is result and the result is process, Aristotle form and matter. But so far body is defined by stability meaning that object does NOT transform into its component parts, the component parts have more total energy then the body that is said to be their whole because according to binding energy the whole is not sum of its parts but even more the whole is less than the sum of its parts. In other words the energy needed to split object apart- the composite object (the “bound system”) is less than the sum of its parts. This is due to the “relativistic mass” which means that because every energy corresponds to a mass no matter the extent of the energy it is still measurable as particular mass, in other words there is a minimum mass called “rest mass” that is relative to an observer that is at rest. This means that the conception from the observer is itself a kind of stability where the energy of mass is broken down into its most minimum form, this stability is the particle form which takes the centre point trapped by the extremities extent of the conception. This explains quantum tunnelling where a particle tunnels through a barrier that it cannot surmount. This barrier is the consciousness disclosing the object.
The consciousness serves as the whole, When consciousness conceives energy it discloses it as mass, Means that the body that is said to be the whole of its parts is really another part in the whole of parts, taken as an equal body among others, the contrast between one body versus many bodies is that the one is smaller than the many.
Relativistic mass ultimately means that the whole of parts is itself a part in that whole. Logically a whole that consists of parts still plays the part of being the whole, the whole is still part in the whole of all parts.
The fact that a body serves as a whole of other bodies is a partial abstraction. One body that consist of many together if is taken as one among them, which objectively is the case, will have less total energy then its combination of bodes each of which singly have equal energy to it singly.
Oscillation is basic motion, the motion of contradiction the inversion, polar opposite cannot have one pole without the other. This activity takes on the body of wave. Particle is the identity of this wave, the wave as particle is sphere and it moves when one particle is missing meaning that it has to now fill its place, it moves into that missing body. This missing place is the centre. The universe is falling into the centre, the cosmological principle states that the conception is the centre, conception as something created and witnessed, creation by means of observation but not in the sense of vision but thought- rationally conceived- any point conceived on the surface of sphere is its centre, but this centre as wave spectrum is the missing of particle meaning that the motion falls into that missing place. This is Singularity which is a point that takes on infinite value. Black hole as distinguished from wormhole is that the former is infinity dense meaning no light enter or escapes nothing enters, whereas wormhole something can enter it.
Wormholes are the passages of communication, the way universe as organism communicates between its parts is by way of wormholes. The universal shrines. These all fall towards the same unknown principle their black hole, their centre. The universe is wormhole falling towards singularity, like a cone everything going towards that point, as their centre. (Add to wormhole consciousness) the centre so far as it is blackhole, is the principle of unknown, not that which is not yet known, but the unknown as an object. The universal process of nature is identical with the process of thought, both are the activity for knowledge, the known going after the unknown.
The deconstruction of whole into parts does not by assertion confirm the move from complexity to simplification. In abstract Knowing the transition from complexity to simplification involves dissection, but NOT in the sense of disassembly as biologist dismember a frog into its body parts. Thought acts in form of assimilation- motion of progress and regress- like back and forth pendulum- assimilating itself into particular events whose continuous connection back to the universal source induces the experience. This is not merely repetitive but is the bare energy subsisting the stability of the form. The so called “stuff” of matter does not come from some special place like factory pumping out supply because then that place must be accounted for in the same manner as the means of production. The way form is responsible for the material relates to the assimilation of thought, the going through the thought, taking the time to think, sets forth the grounds for the positing of objects but not as preliminary for then the objects to be brought out from somewhere to be examined in those conditions. The going through the thought is identical with what is presented for thought.
1035 “The fact emerges from the ground. It is not grounded or posited by it in such a manner that ground remains as a substrate; on the contrary, the positing is the movement of the ground outwards to itself and its simple vanishing. Through its union with the conditions, ground receives an external immediacy and the moment of being. But it receives this not as something external, nor through an external relation; on the contrary, as ground, it makes itself into a positedness, its simple essentiality unites with itself in the positedness and is, in this sublation of itself, the vanishing of its difference from its positedness, and is thus simple essential immediacy. Ground, therefore, does not remain behind as something distinct from the grounded, but the truth of grounding is that in it ground is united with itself, so that its reflection into another is its reflection into itself. Consequently, the fact is not only the unconditioned but also the groundless, and it emerges from ground only in so far as ground has ‘fallen to the ground’ and ceased to be ground: it emerges from the groundless, that is, from its own essential negativity or pure form.” (The plain and line, they are ground to each other)
If potentiality is taken as the ground for something to be actual, then why does it require process to be actual if it is already so? This kind of logic that ‘if something already is, then why does it need to be?’…, divorces what it means for motion to be objective phenomenon. In other words, it confuses what it takes for something to become because process is assumed to be the “pretence” of result, the attempt at making something NOT true, become to appear as “true”. A pretence is something that is NOT the case appear true. Not the case can still appear true because it is always the equal invariable to any variable. Motion is NOT instrumental pretence, but generative also such that the production of result means there is no longer in motion.
Motion is becoming
(Add here symmetry vs asymmetry, tree image, asymmetry something in motion)
potentiality at least actual in thought as the most complex principle given its infinitude. And if the answer is as the nature of growth indicates, that the creator is self caused, why does the nature of self involve multiplicity of details each working against the other for some definite end? Why does the chicken come out of the egg only so the egg comes out of the chicken? Both creation and growth involve aim in inverse manner. The goal of growth is to result in creation whereas the aim of creation is growth.
The physical law of irreversibility describes the relationship between growth and creation, the growth of creation. Irreversibility proves that the occurrence of events cannot be undone, that once an event occurs it cannot unhappen. Different outcome requires new form. The experience of an event cannot be taken back, in order to have a different outcome of the experience, the event must take on a whole new form wherein the different outcome of the experience is not affected by the previous result. Yet the previous result is what requires that there be the need to take on new form so that it can result in something different.
The way of growth is the creation of differing forms manifesting as opposing parts of the same relation.
Events are patterns, habits, so that the interaction between events is the interference of one form of pattern by another.
The determinate motion of light is electricity- hydro-gene -Time is the general rule of simultaneity that indicates conceivable differences of activities disclosed by the same spatial extension whose subject is itself to be activity. For example the planet earth is spatial extension in motion that serves as the relation between any two individuals within it moving relative to each other. The question of special relativity is to what effect does particular movements influence the general motion disclosing them? Special relativity shows that the relative motion between particulars sharing the same space minutely influences the shared spatial extension, movement adds mass to space. (Add to, in string theory, vibrations means that every sequence of change in something’s motion leaves its mark on, adds to the mass, the spatial extension. Add to light is the only resource. This explains Time dilation. (History is the spatial extension of time. The subjective experience of history exhibits a moment in time as the present. ( explain here how history is the simultaneity of all events, the frame of reference, the experience determines where in history. All historical time periods are occurring at the same time, history like a script, each historical time period is inside the mind of the present being.
Demonstrate by showing how time is motion and motion is the light and light is simultaneity because Hegel says it is the principle outside itself while remaining identical with itself, that constitutes the motion for the becoming of the platform onto which reality itself and its particularities are attributed as stable and consists forms of conception.
All the possible events of time exhibited as spatial extension is what is meant by the idea that the only moment that exists is now. The term “now” is taken as the ultimate moment because it discloses all possible events, the relative relation between events constitute past and future. But the fact that now is the moment disclosing all events does not tell us the order of them. This order is the continuity of development. What is meant by as the only stability is progress concerns how each is maintains the whole to maintain each. The reason how each maintains the whole is because the whole is activity, a wave spectrum, that one part n it constitutes the continuity of the spectrum. Part as abstracted from whole concerns the particle state of wave, the particular, which so far is continuity for the whole is not some portion of some greater whole, because than the whole would be some particular part dividable into parts whose whole is the same as the whole as they are portions of. For the particular to be continuity of activity is connected to what whitehead identifies as how the phenomena is disclosed by its conception, the measurement of the phenomena serves as the disclosure of it.
This element of simultaneity for whitehead is the non relative principle because there is nothing outside the conception disclosing phenomena, “outside” itself becomes a relative concepts between objects internally disclosed by the conception. (Concept with principle of relativity above)
The particular is part of the continuation of the whole as activity because it is the conception disclosing its movement. Development is not this moving forward process with heads turned towards the aim of the activity but is rather the whole motion of the activity reflected back into itself by the conception that discloses the continuity of the motion. The conception is turned onto its object while the object is content of conception disclosing it. (Add to consciousness as sphere, (picture of observer of ocean.)
The problem of relativity is that the reason why two observers going in relative motion to each other cannot agree as to the extent and magnitude of the event but only agree that there is event is because their conception is the disclosure of the event. Behind the conception is absolute uncertainty principle. This uncertainty is derived from asymmetry as indicative of motion. When the observer is in motion, this very motion becomes the object disclosed by the conception but the very nature of motion is to preach beyond the scope of its conception such that to generate into being the object for concept. The conception of motion shows that the continuity extends to point not yet conceived, potentially conceivable.
It is not obvious how the relative relation between two particulars effect their common space especially when their generality is seen as having brought the relative relation. In the latter case the space occupied, size, determines the position, and size is determined by speed.
The principle of relativity states that the laws of physics are the same for two observers moving relative to each other with constant relative velocity such that not one of the observers is “at rest” in an absolute sense.
When the observer is moving everything in their conception is caused to move. There is no difference between the object in motion and motion disclosed by conception.
The ultimate relativity is being moving in relation to nothing. The logic of relativity is that being in relative motion to nothing is absolute motion, because motion is left by itself when relative to nothing, and nothing is motion when relative to being. Motion is function of time that enables the conception of relatives. The term “relative” is ontologically shallow not only because it is often proposed as the exclusion of absolute principle but moreover because the term does not adequately describe the nature of relation. Relativity points out that relation contains differentiate points but it does not explain the nature of this difference. The term “inverse” is preferable because it describes that the differentiation of relation is an opposition.
Heraclitus “all things pass and nothing stays”
This is the simple ontological fact first proposed by Heraclitus that “everything is always flowing in somerespects,” or “every pair of contraries is somewhere coinstantiated; and every object coinstantiates at least one pair of contraries,”
His most famous lines:Heraclitus, I believe, says that all things pass and nothing stays, and comparing existing things to the flow of a river, he says you could not step twice into the same river. (Plato Cratylus 402a = A6)His famous quote is that you could not step twice into the same river, but I think the more important quote is the one before it “all things pass and nothing stays”Which does not necessarily mean that no thing stays the same, but only the concept of nothing itself is the only thing that does not change. The old notion that being is always changing may not be referring to begetting because to beget something into being is invariably also the experience of it. However in order to experience something like an event it needs to exists for the experience.
Simultaneity for Einstein is the relative motion between two things affects the shared general motion. Whereas for whitehead all of this is disclosed as an absolute relation, non relative entity. This is more of a rule of process rather than statement about the world as some object, for example any entity is perceivable as whole and its component parts that make it up are not seen unless abstracted themselves as some whole. (Add how the whole is not sum of its parts because the whole is the conception, the consciousness concentrate within the thing)
Timelessness
(Hegel quotes spacetime)The idea of immortality has been stamped into our heads by religious thinking in such a way where we only grasp a narrow understanding of it. The general idea of immortality is defined as the ability to possess life for eternity. The idea of life has always been understood as a universal principle in the world by the Ancient Greek philosophers, and so as to the question of whether there is always life, the Greeks answer that life has always exited, they take it as a principle, which also means beginning. but here we are concerned with human life as bearing an eternal existence? Two concepts need to be further elaborated in the definition of immortality: life and eternity. The latter is strangely easier to grasp then the former given that life is the very sustenance for individual contemplation. Eternity is understood as infinite time (unending time) or the state in which time has no application, that is, timelessness. Infinite time is eternal in a peculiar way because it is not like space- space being the indifferent difference- a double negation that is purely positive existence. Infinite time is the negative of this positive and so is purely negative existence. This negative in relation to the positive is but its division. Time is the division of space and it is in this way that we say time is infinite- time is the infinite division of space.
Timelessness is the negative notion relative to infinite time but it presupposes time insofar as to be its limit-less. Timelessness is then the manifestation of eternity in time. Timelessness is the negative principle relative to time as the negative principle to space and so it the positive state where time persist as the division of space. Eternity is the universal principle of motion and to this extent time is the particular collapsed state of eternity. Motion for Aristotle is not reducible to locomotion but rather it also signifies the activity of becoming- bringing to being. To understand how time is the particular collapsed state of eternity it is good to understand it in contrast to space. Space is the indifferent motion and so exists outwards in duration whereas time is the different relative motion existing inwards in duration. The outward movement associated with space contradicts the inward movement associated with time and so their tension is what we understand by the object. The object itself is a state rather than what most people understand by the term- a static body. Both space and time meet as the synthesis- such a synthesis is itself a state of being, a particular state which is in flux as much as it is static. The synthesis between space and time is an intersection. This intersection is in flux in the sense that it is the constant flow between space and time, static in that such a flow dualistically meet as the point in the plain- the object. It is an assumption that flow is only in one direction.
## or + : the intersection between time and space is the object. The object is the synthesis between space and time and so it is the state of Timelessness. The term timelessness in its semantic use alone without further deliberation suggests a lack of time or the state where motion is suspended. The suspension of the laws of nature is however empirically impossible. Timelessness is not a suspension of motion it is rather the concentration of motion. Timelessness is a resolution in the negation and therefore it is resultless- that itself being the initial determination. For example, even the regressive cycle of planetary orbits is itself a form of determination, a static one, but nevertheless a determination. Individual planets will come and go but there will always be the planetary orbit system of planets. The negative result of timelessness is the opposite of this example because whereas orbits are limited in determination, timelessness is unlimited in determination. Timelessness is the inverse version of time; if what we ordinarily take as time is the continuous state whereby events are concurring after another, then we have to consider the other state whereby events themselves are maintained as qualities that happen. Since events happen then go, we assume they are passing moments, however events also leave a mark in memory, and for the time being of them happening, an event is the most real of all things, moreover a potential event we also take to be very real as it can occupy the present, and the past we take to be real because it evidently happened.
These instances of time although are not directly present, they all bear an element of reality equal to the present. This is the spacial-temporal aspect of time, not time in space, as we say some event is taking place there in that place, but rather what time is as the event having a spatial extension . Our ordinary conception of time only conceives it temporally in the same way we see motion as only loco-motion. Time is ordinarily understood as a linear equation which measures how long does the loco-motion of a variable take in units of time. What this does not indicate is the actual change that is taking place in the variable- that it is either generating, corrupting, becoming and so on. However this is presupposed with every unite of time- a second for example is 9 thousand million periods of radiation of the caesium atom. Second is then a unit of periods, periods are certain lengths of conditions- when does the state of one thing end and the other begins.
The distinction between inwards and outwards is the same as internal and external. Timelessness is the state of time where the determination of time occurs not in its ordinary duration, it is inverted outwards- timelessness is the externality of time as space but maintained as the quality of time. Timelessness is the obscurity of time after the fact that time affected space. For example, the theory of special relativity indicates a concept of “time dilation”: a difference of elapsed time between two events as measured by observers either moving relative to each other or differently situated from gravitational masses. An accurate clock at rest with respect to one observer may be measured to tick at a different rate when compared to a second observer’s own equally accurate clock. This effect arises neither from technical aspects of the clocks nor from the fact that signals need time to propagate, but from the nature of spacetime itself. This relativity in spacetime continuum is the notion of timelessness at play as the the internal relation with time implicit in the object. The future of one object in locomotion according to time dilation could by the past of another object in locomotion. This is because every object possess the element of timelessness in itself- in fact the object is itself this state of timelessness- the state where the object determines itself- just like the plain is the space where the object roams, timelessness is the demand of the object against time to possess liberty given its duration.
This relation between time and timelessness is the internal dialectic that manifest the object. This internal dialogue implicit in the object is the state of birth and death in life- generation and corruption in matter. The latter terms are foreign to the modern reader. Time dilation possess a qualitative determination in that it does not only indicate a relative difference in the time between objects in different locomotions, it rather indicates a relative difference between how time is applied by objects. This serves as a primary subject matter for the science of thermodynamics- which is the subject of the relation of heat to forces acting between contiguous parts of bodies, and the relation of heat to electrical agency.” Time dilation pertaining from the point of view of particular objects portrays a qualitative relative relation between objects. This portrays what is indicated by thermodynamics as energy necessary for work. Laws of thermodynamics; the first law states that “in physics, the law of conservation of energy states that the total energy of an isolated system remains constant—it is said to be conserved over time. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed; rather, it transforms from one form to another”. Energy conservation is a state of timelessness in the object that maintains energy while time duration is invariably effects the object. The aspect of energy cannot be destroyed or created but only transferred is precisely this very basic principle of conservation. The duration of time on the object produces a determinacy of the object to transfer its energy, and by transferring enegry it is in fact conserve it. The object loading its energy is just the transferring of its energy because one object does not see its energy as its own, objects do not have egos, the energy of one object belongs potentially to every object. This it conserves because it will potentially come back to it. The concept of Consciousness is presently warranted with the ungrateful attribute of being invisible. As a result, the ordinary opinion sees it as bearing no material constitution. It only possesses a concrete form indirectly by belonging inside objects that are material. Consciousness manifest as form in the same way as dark matter is inferred from its gravitational effects on visible matter, on radiation, and on the large-scale structure of the universe. Consciousness is inferred from its form effect on object. The evidence for this is literally yourself and every object around you. All are examples of forms of consciousness. the second law of entropy is timeliness producing an increase. When an object conserves its energy my transferring it. The way to conserve enegry is not to maintain it but rather to apply it. (use this to support whitehead that only form of stability is progress in evolution)
This process in the organic form is what we call life. Life is ordinarily understood as a biological condition of organic matter that is distinguished from inorganic material. Life consist of organisms that possess the following characteristics: responsiveness to the environment; growth and change; ability to reproduce; have a metabolism and breathe; maintain homeostasis; being made of cells; passing traits onto offspring. The concept of life although belongs to particular organisms and organisms are the smallest unites of life, it must also be understood as a universal state-of-being in the universe whether this be that the smallest unit of the universe possess life and life is general in this way, or that the universe as a whole is made up as a whole of life and we only have an abstraction of life at one local part in it. Biology understands life as a universal concept…the main characteristic which philosophy takes as the defining aspect of life is not discussed as being aspect of life in biology, because in biology only the mechanical consequences or unconscious processes of a conscious being are recorded. Consciousness in the philosophical sense is literally defined as activity or the life of a body, the spirit per say.
What seems thus far as a digression from the topic of immortality has in fact created us with the right basis to understanding it scientifically. The ordinary understanding of immortality is based on the religious understanding of it. Monotheistic religion claimed that the soul is distinct from the body not only in essence but also in extension. The soul leaves the body upon death and enters into an afterlife that is separate from corporeal nature. This idea is derived from plato…explain… And it has already been evaluated by Aristotle… “As if any soul can go into any body”… For Aristotle the term “soul” is the essence of the body and it cannot exists independent from it… Reference to monotheistic religion is not needed because it’s idea about morality is by no means original. That idea is rather the concrete reality that Plato’s idea assumed in history. Immortality exists in two forms concerning life: first, the body of organisms is immortal. Individual bodies are born and later on decompose and this is a cycle in organic matter, however the conditions of reproduction and homeostasis both assum immortality on the part of species. And so the constant flux in the material composition of life is itself the form of immortality. This makes sense given that the essential property of matter is extension and life does exactly this at the level of corporeality. Second, mind is immortal. In the same way as the essential property of matter is extension (descarte) the essential property of mind is consciousness. And the essential synthesis between body and mind is extension with consciousness. The extension of consciousness is the universal principle for the unity between mind and body. This latter unity takes form in the particular. The extension of consciousness is the developmental process. Matter is the necessity where this developmental process unfolds. In the cunning of consciousness what is achieved endures the flux of birth and death among physical bodies. In the same way extension is essential for matter, consciousness is essential for extension. The question of diversity in evolution for instance has always been a confusing one. Why is life so diverse? There is such a multiplicity in variations among life forms, even among the same species. This indicates precise evidence to what is meant by the statement that consciousness is the essence of extension. Extension is not a static process. In one sense, snythesism as understood by Pierce is right in contending that there is continuity, in this case, extension by definition is continuity. However what it does not further elaborate is how this continuity is the collection of particulars. For the river in once sense extends as a continuous stream, but the fish are operating distinctly in the continuity of the river.
The Zeroth law of thermodynamics defines the equilibrium among bodies that come on and go, that on the basis there is a temperature, not in terms of climate, but in terms of a “transitive relation”. The first law of thermodynamics applies to consciousness as a developmental process whereby the means of conserving energy, energy of consciousness is knowledge, is by transferring it. This consciousness it does a) to maintain itself as activity and b) to maintain that activity as development. The history of Philosophy is itself evidence of this process of consciousness. Plato and Aristotle are not dead their thought produced generations each like them, and so with each passing generation the idea grows in quantity. Every day is like this, the sophist are lawyers now a days, sceptics are post modernist, atomist are scientist.
World history is self consciousness. The soul according to Aristotle is the essence of the body, as such soul is reduced to life. What is the life of consciousness? Truth is the life of consciousness? Truth of what? Truth of reason. Reason is everything that potentially exists, and so consciousness is the truth of itself. (see spacetime)
Light at the end of tunnel- the end Point is the birth point(See supersymmetry)
Birth
The coming into consciousness characterizes the birth of individuality. A lifespan is itself an objective event Alan watts makes the interesting proposition to elaborate the fallacy in the common sense idea of causality: “that events are caused by previous events from which they result necessarily. What is meant by an event? For example take the event of a human being coming into the world. When does that event begin? Does it occur at the moment of parturition when the baby actually comes out of the mother, or does the baby begin at the moment of conception, or does the baby begin when it was ‘an evil gleam in its father’s eye’, or does the baby begin when the spermatozoa are generated in the father or the ovarian in the mother?
All of these can be thought of as beginnings but for pragmatic reasons we decide that a baby is born at the moment of parturition” (this is a big contested issue in contemporary abortion claims) Alan watts shows the same phenomena in the dimension of space instead of time; “how big is the sun? Is the sun defined as limited by the extent of its fire, ? Can the sphere of the sun be defined by the extent of its heat? The sun can also be defined by the extent of its light. Each of these would be reasonable choices except it would be difficult to keep track of the extent of its light because we are inside it. We arbitrarily define the sun by the limit of its visible fire.”
By these analogies, how big an object is or how long the duration of an event is can be determined by conception imposing limitation on a process.
Every event and object exists eternally. In an abstract state the side of an event that has not yet happened equally constitutes the total existence of a thing as the aspect of it that has happened. We normally think that in order to be enteral something must exists eternally but an event non existing is still eternal as not existing. The existence of an event at one point exists eternally as existed at one point. The implications of spacetime grants ideas it did not customarily considered like for instance if we take the application of space to time seriously, in the sense that space has an immutable effect on any event, and space is the relation where the duration of one event changes to another, then it may not be far to say that so far as that change is disclosed by space, the change itself is an immutable part of space. the occurrence of an event in space . Since space is a feature of an event that is immutable and belongs throughout every step of its duration, then in what sense that an event haven passed no longer existence.
For Socrates we can say only lived for 70 years but he still exists to this day even if he is no longer living, and perhaps it might be not erroneous to say that evolutionary he existed even before he was born as the potential of some archaic animal. The universal and individual relation is the substance of the world to exists simultaneously and eternally as every possibility but its individual nature is to partake in each of the possibility one at a time while the universal doing that all at once. For the individual it is very difficult fact to accept their life is and was always eternal because everything in external existence intuits against the acceptance if this fact due to the passing of moments once they occur. The law of irreversibility seems to be a challenge to not do something twice again, but as a law it does not negate that whatever happens already exists, but once it is done cannot be done again. Very difficult paradox that when something is done cannot be done again yet at the same time it always exists as having only being done once. This is what it means for something to be objective, that an electron is such a fundamental doing, it exists as a universal memory of a fundamental action, but does that not mean the doing of every action reaffirms doing the electron again? Every action does reaffirm the electron but not by constantly recreating it otherwise by virtue of that recourse involves the elimination of an electron as having once not been done and needs to be done, but what it means for a certain action to presuppose electron as fundamental action is to suscitate the truth of its objectivity.
A a particular lifespan is a necessary particular sequence in the manifold of possibility in the same way a basic dimorphism is primary object in nature.
The idea that everything is eternal in a potential state is defined by the logical axiom where the beginning point is at the same time the end point, and that the actuality is the real processes of the advance having confirmed or that the distinction between the beginning and the end is the demonstration that one is the other. Take for example what has been the most perplexing question across all human cultures; what happens after death? The answer to this question has always been that there is something after death, an after life, whereas in modern time atheistic accounts proclaim that there is ‘nothing’ after death. as to whether an afterlife is the same continuity of the subjective individuality or a form of reincarnation whereby life continuous impersonally into different forms is of a further question, but paying attention to the bare distinction between whether there is something or nothing after death, we interpret this literally and make two proposition: first, the something after life is ambiguous because it is potentially anything and if anything includes nothing, then second if nothing is a potentiality of afterlife than that itself is identical with the potentiality of being any given thing. The claim that there is an afterlife on the one hand is correct because life generally continues after the individuality of the dead, that everything happens after death except the individual, but it is preciously for this same reason that the notion of an afterlife is erroneous when the subjective personality of the deceased is assumed to continue as it is in a more ideal circumstance. When the subjective personality of the individual is taken out as the factor which endures the change brought about by death, then the notion of an afterlife leaves us without an inadequate explanation of the meditating route that allows the transition for the entity into its after life, what is the medium it enters through for the transition, death therefore lacks an explanation as a medium that facilitates a change assumed to be caused by it. The more recent atheistic accounts ironically indirectly answer this by the proposition that nothing happens after death, and death therefore is identical with the end. While this provides the answer that death is the object of nothing, it results in a dead end in thinking -negative reason- whereby a thing no longer being itself is confused with the absolute state negating what it ever was (negative reason means the wrong reason) .
If death is a feature in nature and everything comes towards that end, the process towards death must still be accounted for as a continuity. If death is an end result of a process it is still a feature of the process. Either that there is something outside of death that determines it and therefore death is not an absolute end point. One problem with the account that nothing happens after death usually implied by the nihilist is that the end of a particular subjectivity is confused with an absolute end. There are reasons for this because when a thing dies all things do come to an end form it’s point of view, but this is quickly negated with the inverse proposition; everything happens after death except you, or the thing that dies. In the latter proposition everything continuous to happen and there is the implication that being is an eternal state whereas death is not. In this case death is therefore a mechanism of change and not an absolute end point.
Death as the end point is at the same time identical with birth as the beginning point, the moment of death where nothing happens is simultaneous with the moment of birth something happens. When an old person dies is the exact moment when is baby is born out of the womb.
Universe as a string
In every religion birth is associated with light and death with darkness. These two points are physical accounts of being and nothing. When a consciousness dies and all goes dark is when consciousness is instantly met with the light of being born. The entire life process of growing is the realization that these two points are the same, that the end of life is found in the beginning.
In string theory they reduce the entire universe to a string that is vibrating. Theorist say that “strings” are even more fundamental than the quarks in the atoms. Instead of the universe being made out of atoms, it is primarily made out of strings. At this level the difference between the universe being made out of strings or as to whether it is itself a string, is not defined. Scientists easily make the claim that the universe is made out of atoms however if we propose that the universe is itself an atom, or bears that form, than it becomes more theoretical, it becomes an ungrounded claim. However the presupposition is fundamentally the same because that basic structure we observe defines the basic structure of the universe. Except when we say the universe is made out of atoms we have empirical grounds because we observe atoms at the base of any object, so it seems as if the object is made out of these atoms, they combine to structure it, while to say the entire universe has the form of an atom is ungrounded because we cannot observe the full extent of the universe as bearing that shape. But the latter implication is what is wrong with empiricism because it requires that we have to disclose the entire outline of an object to fully determine its shape. Empiricism is always searching for the full extent of a magnitude whether that is what is observed by telescopes or finding the radioactive reminisce at the earliest moments of the universe,
At the moment of death, we can speculate that the consciousness that was once an individual conception of itself becomes as general and as least individual as possible. In this way it has not discerned anything at all, and the entire universe excepts for itself an indeterminate strand of nature. We observe it as a DNA strand but is is more abstract than that even. The universe in our ontological context is defined as the state of being where everything exists in every possible way simultaneously. And as part of one possibility of this condition is the particular detachment from this flux, and because it’s nature is as particular as possible so it can get away from the generality of everything, it sees everything as something particular. Therefore it ascends into the condition of everything represented as a strand of vibrating string, it enters it like a tunnel and begins to construct a specific kind of reality for itself. And this is happening in every kind of way. In other words, there is an infinite of these particular perspectives constructing a specific kind of reality, and this is what culminates together to form the state of everything in the first place. That everything is each and every possible thing in every possible way.
The entrance of consciousness into infinity does not happen in the same way as two objects approaching each other. In other words consciousness does not enter upon infinity like someone entering into a room. What we take to be the ordinary interactions of objects as defined by classical mechanics, that one object moves because the contact with another object causes friction between them and that causes one object to glide over the other. This kind of motion is the inverted way concerning how motion behaves fundamentally because it assumes that there are objects with certain mass, density, weight, texture etc., to preexist the motion and which than the motion is a product of. However as to the question of what movement brought about the certain kind of measurements we already associate as being the constitution of the object, the answer is that nothing other but that the total maximum amount of possible objects are inherited, meaning not only taken something out of something, as said in inheritance, that you take out the aspects from something no longer in position of, and take those values, since they take on a measure, and possess them for the present in which this process is taking a position of.
Consciousnesses is not anything in itself and that is the positive feature of what it is. And so it is not attracted towards anything because it is not anything to be moving. This does not mean that things are not attracted to it and therefore move towards it. In fact the way consciousness emerges into infinity to construct a particular sequence of events we know as a lifetime, is by way of infinity coming to merge with into consciousness. The reference frame of consciousness stands still, as the Islamist define god as the ultimate “stillness”, as that which does not move nor can be moved.
As consciousness stands still infinity enters upon the reference frame, and principles of nature pop into the reference frame and therefore pop into being for consciousness, insofar as consciousness determines them into being by conceiving them, recognizes them, and they become absolute, they become moments in time.
When consciousness tunnels into infinity, it is not as if there is a tunnel and when you enter you see objects. But rather these forms we take to be the rubble, like the light at the end of the tunnel, is the form where an idea is moulded over and comes into being.