Thread: My friend & my own take on existance.

Bear with me this is my first post and i made it more as an article than a question, just looking for more external output on this...its probably got a huge flaw in it that neither me nor my friend can see. If you dont mind can you comment on the theory.

Existence. What is it? How long is it? Why is it? There are so many questions surrounding Existence but what if existence really isn’t what we believe. I am referring of course to the comparison of Existence and Non-Existence. Existence is everything we know, And Non-Existence is everything that doesn’t exist, self explanatory am I correct?

But we do not comprehend the full extent of existence, leaving a good chance that everything Exists, This may be hard to grasp but it’s true. There is a good chance that off in some distant galaxy there’s a Luke Skywalker walking around with a lightsaber. Now I’m sure your probably ready to put this down, thinking I’m a crackpot, but think to yourself, What proves that There ISNT a Luke Skywalker running around with a lightsaber? What proof is there to show that anything doesn’t exist? There is none. Physics may say one thing about super powers like the force but Evolution Says another, There is a possibility that there may be some 'enlightened' beings with supernatural powers that can throw stuff around with their minds. You truly cannot know.

This thought alone made my friend, and co-creator of this Theory, Scott Countryman, and me, Joseph Polly, to think deeper into the situation. We thought and argued such as the previous Philosophers, except about something that not many put much thought into. That is the theory that Non Existence, Truly Does NOT exist. We both knew that this puts the universe in a paradox but neither of us, nor does anyone else, truly knows what happens during a paradox. Some say time stands still, yet time continues to move. Some say the universe steps aside, leaving that singular paradox to become no longer a problem. In most theories of a paradox, time steps aside or doesn’t acknowledge the singular to cause it. This brought upon us yet another question. Why does time still move for us? That would most likely mean that the paradox doesn’t exist, meaning that something doesn't exist in the universe, but we found something with the help of a friend from a chat room, whom happens to be named, on this chat room, "Bella;heartbroken/where_were_you_when_i_needed_you./smarter"

We learned that everything exists as concept, Thus forcing everything to exist, and as we discovered more things, imagined more, thought of more, they all became existent in theories and concepts. This once more led to the question of "Why does time still move for us?” The answer could be anything to tell the truth, we could be wrong about all paradoxes and the true side effect of them is nothing, that they are just there, or it could also be "Time is a concept based upon Perceived movements of our environment." Being that there is nothing to elaborate on in the earlier answer we focused on the latter. If time was just a concept based on movements, then the theories of a paradox, to our extent of knowledge, is wrong, and just means that the singular would technically be non-existent, This answer leads us back to the paradox in question that non existence doesn’t exist because we based existence on the objects in our environment, and if we didn’t exist that means that existence exists inside of non existence. And if existence doesn’t exist that means there is nothing for non-existence to oppose making it nothingness. We then, with a doubt that this was the right answer to our question, conceived that we are in fact nothingness. Just plain nothingness. Another problem that arose from this was "I think therefore I am" This was easily removed by putting out the fact that nothingness was only limited to what nothingness 'believes'. This of course in theory returns to us that, being nothingness, if we truly believe something would happen, then it would happen, But as long as there is a molecule of electrons conceived as a doubt, then we are still tethered by the common beliefs of mankind.

Umm sorry this theory has been tossed around endless times. You are not the creators of this theory.

really? dangit... imma go yell at him for telling me he didnt find any info on the internet

I'm not sure whether or not this thread is going to be serious, but basic existence will compound mass as well as it will be taking on some volume, I would say. : )

Steve

I'm not sure whether or not this thread is going to be serious, but basic existence will be compounded of mass as well as it will be taking on some volume, I would say. : )

Steve

edited

Mass was having some volume too which does belong somehow, I mean.

Steve

On the case of the Luke Skywalker/ force thing:

The theory of multiple universes states that if something can happen, it will happen. So in another universe, someone who happens to be named Luke Skywalker may find that whenever he thinks about something moving, a freak wind picks it up.

Originally Posted by Steve Miller

I'm not sure whether or not this thread is going to be serious, but basic existence will be compounded of mass as well as it will be taking on some volume, I would say. : )

Steve

edited

Mass was having some volume too which does belong somehow, I mean.

Steve

I really don't understand your post! Perhaps you can explain in a different way.
Anyway I'm off to read some other posts by Nawaz kunal pagare khan.

Originally Posted by Halliday

Originally Posted by Steve Miller

I'm not sure whether or not this thread is going to be serious, but basic existence will be compounded of mass as well as it will be taking on some volume, I would say. : )

Steve

edited

Mass was having some volume too which does belong somehow, I mean.

Steve

I really don't understand your post! Perhaps you can explain in a different way.
Anyway I'm off to read some other posts by Nawaz kunal pagare khan.

Hey,

in which way do you want me to explain it to you?

Steve

Originally Posted by Steve Miller

Originally Posted by Halliday

Originally Posted by Steve Miller

I'm not sure whether or not this thread is going to be serious, but basic existence will be compounded of mass as well as it will be taking on some volume, I would say. : )

Steve

edited

Mass was having some volume too which does belong somehow, I mean.

Steve

I really don't understand your post! Perhaps you can explain in a different way.
Anyway I'm off to read some other posts by Nawaz kunal pagare khan.

Hey,

in which way do you want me to explain it to you?

Steve

Try making your post intelligible!

Did you try to think about it? As for my part it was intelligible, or understandable.

Sorry, don't know what's the problem. What's your point?

I still have A. Einstein in mind, who, theoretically, allows -m to be calculated (E=mc² ).

You'll know that equation. -m but was physically not existent, since it not only should be a negative amount of mass but could very well hold any number far smaller than 0 (zero ).

That's why we're dealing with such, once actually obvious, questions since him, or his 'work', I think.

Steve

Originally Posted by Steve Miller

Steve

edited

Mass was having some volume too which does belong somehow, I mean.

Steve

Probably your knowledge science is greater than mine and I accept that English may not be your first language.
My point, or problem, is that I do not understand the above statement taken from your original post.

Thanks for your sincerity and appreciation. The meaning was only, mass does take on some volume expansion, which was obvious somehow.

However, since the Einsteinian 'contribution' this, as a matter of fact, has to be doubted.

The least, one could doubt the volume expansion of mass seriously, but you still would be a regarded a scientist.

Therefore, something which was existent truly, lets say a particle for that matter, was made of mass which will expand spatial. True or not?

I think if this wasn't given the entity, which ever, was not being existent.

Could even be more confusing now. Please let me know.

Steve