"1" as Causal In Nature?

Philosophical, mathematical and computational logic, linguistics, formal argument, game theory, fallacies, paradoxes, puzzles and other related issues.

"1" as Causal In Nature?

Postby Eodnhoj7 on March 13th, 2018, 12:55 pm 

"1" as Causal In Nature?


Presented Argument

1) All Cause exists if and only if there exists an effect (α ↔ ≈α).

ex: A plant exists from a single seed.

2) All effect is strictly an approximation of the original cause and in turn is cause for another effect (α → ≈α → ≈αx).

ex: The plant is the "effect" of the "seed" as cause. The plant containing both itself as effect and seed as cause and in this respect "cause and effect" are both "one".

3) All effect therefore exists if and only if their is a cause (≈αx ↔ ≈α).

ex: The plant and seed exist if and only if there is a plant and seed before it.

4) In this respect cause and effect are reflective structures. (α ≡ ≈α ≡ ≈αx) Effect is strictly a structural extension, as approximation, of cause that reflects both cause and further effects.
In turn cause reflects itself as effect; therefore is self-reflective.

ex: Considering the plant/seed exists both before and after the plant/seed, the plants/seeds both reflect eachother as "plant/seed".


5) As self-reflective all cause and approximate cause (as effect) as strictly observation of reflective points in time-space. In this respect causality is the observation time structures as "wholes" with this whole being observed as "points" which form through a circular reflective symmetry.

ex: What we observe as the cause and effect of the plant/seed is strictly the plant/seed reflecting across time and space as "plant/seed" or "one structure". The nature of the plant/seed existing across time/space through is simply multiple plants/seeds reflecting as "one".

6) As the observation of structures, causality is unifying median observe within the nature of time as a reflective symmetry. As a unifying median it "transcends" time as the nature of causality observes a circularity
through the observation of points.

ex: In this respect the plant/seed is it's own "cause" as extension of a greater cause (earth, God, etc.). This plant/seed as a cause, which reflects times, not only manifests as cycles but in itself is a cycle of further causal structures (plant/seed as "one" point reflects "soil" as another causal point, water as another causal point, etc.) These causal points reflects as extensions of "the one" cause.

7) This circular nature, observed within and between causal structures, in turn reflects as an etherial point which is both stable and unitive. This "ethereal point" or "dimension of space" contains all and is all and any observation of a causal structure through time is strictly observing reflective points of the ether which unify under the ether as "1 point composed of infinite points". These infinite points inturn reflectas a unified whole as "1 point". In this respect causality as the point is synonymous to 1 as infinity for all are stable and symmetrical in nature.

ex: This "oneness" of cause and effect through the point is in itself "stable" space or "ethereal space" (that which maintains all reality as unity). This ethereal space, as composed of causal points, can be observed best as a "1" dimensional point which transcends all being and in doing maintains itself. It is in this unity that the ether is infinite.



We have to keep in mind that when observing the nature of cause and effect in the natural world, it is striclty an observation of points, with the point never really being truly defined except as other points. These infinite causal points reflect as the "one point" of "all-being". The interpretation of cause and effect in time and space does not work as all points are strictly centers that transcend time. In this respect what we understand of cause and effect is strictly and extension of understanding the "one" through "extensional structures (or points)" of "the one".

A viewpoint conducive to Parmenides "oneness" is more conducive to understanding causality than a strictly one of flux found in the physical sciences (or Heraclitus, Anaximander, Aristotle).


A simple question we have all heard as kids would be: Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Answer: A chicken with a male egg inside it.
Eodnhoj7
Member
 
Posts: 61
Joined: 02 Mar 2018


Re: "1" as Causal In Nature?

Postby DragonFly on March 13th, 2018, 1:21 pm 

All that goes on would be the continuation of the one big effect of the Oneness, or more locally, of the one effect of the Big Bang.

Looking even more locally, we approximate the seed as the cause of the plant, even leaving out the water, the sun's energy, the mud, the air, and what the seed needs to grow.

So, most of our identified "causes" are artificially placed for the connivence of a local shorthand.
User avatar
DragonFly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2256
Joined: 04 Aug 2012


Re: "1" as Causal In Nature?

Postby Eodnhoj7 on March 13th, 2018, 1:42 pm 

DragonFly » March 13th, 2018, 1:21 pm wrote:All that goes on would be the continuation of the one big effect of the Oneness, or more locally, of the one effect of the Big Bang.

Looking even more locally, we approximate the seed as the cause of the plant, even leaving out the water, the sun's energy, the mud, the air, and what the seed needs to grow.

So, most of our identified "causes" are artificially placed for the connivence of a local shorthand.



What we understand of causality is merely the mirroring of structure.

1) A as cause may observe B as effect with B being an approximate cause of A through which A maintains itself.

2) B in turn acts as a cause for C with C being the effect of B (and A through B). A exists and is maintain through B and C.

3) It is the symmetry of A, B, and C which observes that causality is an observation of structure as the propagation of structure, hence structure is maintained through structure with structure existing through boundaries.

4) These boundaries exist as extensions between points in space, with these extensions observing the multiplicity of the structure through movement, considering these extensions (which provide the structure of the boundary) are an approximation of unity through multiplicity.

***In reference to the big bang what we observe is an expansion of spatial boundaries (considering what we understand of as boundaries are inseperable from space) which extend from a single point. This "movement" observes a process of individuation in which the boundaries, most specifically 1d lines, continually relate to form the structures which form reality through 0d space. Hence, what we understand of physical reality, as movement synonymous to time, is inseperable from a process of folding.

****The question occurs if the possibility of multiple big bangs occur, considering the big bang is necessated by an inherent alternation of expansion and contraction as actual and potential movement (see Lines Inseperable as 1 inseperable from unit particulate thread in logic section)

5) Observing these boundaries from the perspective of 1d we must understand that time is merely an observation of localized phenomena, which exist through further localized phenomena, which in turn exists as unit particulate.

6) From this 1d perspective, where everything exists as one simultaneous moment, what we understand of cause and effect is strictly the symmetry between temporal points of space, which do not exist in themselves, but as extensions of a whole and simultaneously are approximations of it.

7) Cause and effect is an observation of structure through structure, with this structure existing through a mirror effect as a perpetual replication of symmetry ad-infinitum as one moment.
Eodnhoj7
Member
 
Posts: 61
Joined: 02 Mar 2018


Re: "1" as Causal In Nature?

Postby DragonFly on March 13th, 2018, 2:14 pm 

All sort of due to Parmenides impossibility of Nothing, and perhaps by extension, Stillness being impossible also, this latter making for the necessary transformation of the unity into its multiplicity, which multiciplicity perhaps now seems not so unnecessary as Parmenides thought it was.
User avatar
DragonFly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2256
Joined: 04 Aug 2012


Re: "1" as Causal In Nature?

Postby Eodnhoj7 on March 13th, 2018, 2:40 pm 

DragonFly » March 13th, 2018, 2:14 pm wrote:All sort of due to Parmenides impossibility of Nothing, and perhaps by extension, Stillness being impossible also, this latter making for the necessary transformation of the unity into its multiplicity, which multiciplicity perhaps now seems not so unnecessary as Parmenides thought it was.



Parmenides concept of the "1", fundamentally observes a rate of infinite movement conducive to "stillness" considering 1 must mirror itself ad-finitum.

The approximation of 1, through relativistic movement (observed by Heraclitus, etc.), observes "1" as "unit" rather than "unity", yet this "unit" is still and extension of "unity" and any percieved movement is an observation of "finiteness" rather than infinity.

What is finite is slower than what is infinite with this finiteness embodied through relativistic movement as the relation of parts. Nothingness, embodies through the 0d point, is merely an individuator which separates and multiplies parts (as observed through the 0d point and 1d line) through "time as movement".

Unity and Unit, or Absolute and Relative, exist as duals with Relativity being an approximation of the absolute.

This duality between the Absolute and the Relative, (non movement versus movment), synthesizes space as dimensions with give boundaries to reality by simutlaneously unifying and seperating phenomena.

"1" as causal observe that nature of causality as merely a replication of symmetry ad-infinitum where structure is observe through approximation, considering we cannot observe "pure" 1d space.

"1" as "unit" or "acausal" observes a process of continual movement through 0d point space as absence of cause.

Hence to observe 1 as both unity and unit would equate it to uncaused cause...to put it loosely.
Eodnhoj7
Member
 
Posts: 61
Joined: 02 Mar 2018


Re: "1" as Causal In Nature?

Postby DragonFly on March 13th, 2018, 3:20 pm 

Einstein's Relativity of an all at once reality also known as the block universe appears to match Parmenides' Oneness.
User avatar
DragonFly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2256
Joined: 04 Aug 2012


Re: "1" as Causal In Nature?

Postby Eodnhoj7 on March 14th, 2018, 10:01 am 

DragonFly » March 13th, 2018, 3:20 pm wrote:Einstein's Relativity of an all at once reality also known as the block universe appears to match Parmenides' Oneness.


It may or may not work for this universe, but the question comes to mind if it applies to other universes or even dimensions separate from our own? Does it applies to the Holographic Theory where our universe exists as a potential hologram, or "image", or another?
Eodnhoj7
Member
 
Posts: 61
Joined: 02 Mar 2018


Re: "1" as Causal In Nature?

Postby Eodnhoj7 on April 10th, 2018, 11:30 am 

The argument of .99999... = 1 observes that 1 is infinite in nature.

If there is 1 cause from which all cause extends from, with cause and effect being an observation of temporal order, then causality and structure exist through infinity as infinity.
Eodnhoj7
Member
 
Posts: 61
Joined: 02 Mar 2018



Return to Logic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest