why is there anything at all

http://www.wholejoy.com/whyisthereanythingatall/

Beyond the Duality of Existence and Non-existence, There is a Universal Oneness
Everything Depends on the Perspective of the Observer

Why are we here? What is the true nature of reality? This article provides a bold answer to an ancient question: Why is there anything at all? Everything is relative. Reality is utterly self-defining and self-supporting. All things come from one great Source: a single, infinitely massive, Universal Oneness or Wholeness. Beyond the duality of existence and non-existence, there is a universal oneness! Everything depends on the perspective of the observer. There is one substance that comprises all of nature: space. Everything is made of some variation of this universal Oneness which is actually the very same thing as the space that exists everywhere. Light would not exist if this fact were not true. There has to be a "something" in space for light to emit through it.

Most astronomers know that the whole universe is expanding in every direction and that the further away a celestial object is from where we are, the faster it will appear to be receding. This rate of recession can be measured through the Doppler effect. If it were possible for objects to move away from us at the speed of light they would have an infinite redshift and appear invisible. Its rate of time or movement of energy from our viewpoint would also be equally slowed down to a complete stand-still or practically non-existent. The point where this would happen would be called an "event horizon" where all time and energy seems to completely stop. If an entire galaxy disappeared over this "event horizon" the inhabitants of that world would notice nothing except that our galaxy from their viewpoint would also seem to vanish into the nothingness of a similar event horizon. Depending entirely on the perspective (in this case the relative rate of motion) of the viewer it is possible for ENTIRE worlds to vanish and reappear without any actual changes taking place except through changes in perspective.

All rates of speed, motion and energy in creation is 100% RELATIVE to the observer. If the observer had a relatively low rate of energy, then the rest of creation would appear to have a higher rate of energy. If the observer had in relation to the rest of existence an extremely high rate of energy, then the rest of the universe would appear very dark and cold. All apparent motion through space is entirely dependent on reference to some other object or group of objects (such as the rest of objects in the universe) in space. Inside a perfect, infinitely huge vacuum (the universe is almost like this) it would be impossible to determine the actual path of two objects flying past each other in deep space -- whether or not one is actually stationary and the other moving past or is the other standing still with the "stationary" object moving past? Or are both moving? Motion is relative, energy is relative and therefore time is relative and entirely dependent on the perspective of the observer. The energy level of the observer's perspective seems to be the actual source of energy for all phenomena. The movement of the observer's perspective is perhaps the ultimate source of all movement. One's level of energy is inversely related to the rate of time going by for the rest of the observed universe. If one's level of energy somehow became infinite (or reached the speed of light) all the rest of creation from that person's perspective would seem to vanish into a state of "frozen time" where time comes to a complete halt! Everything in reality and all definitions are relative to each other; there are no absolutes.

The perspective of the observer or how the universal Oneness is observed seems to be the key to how the whole system of phenomena comes about. In reality there is only an everlasting, undivided, ever-present Oneness or universal "space" beyond all duality of existence verses nonexistence, light and dark, etc. Massive amounts of energy can be observed bursting out of that seemingly endless "nothingness" the moment one's perspective (viewpoint) comes from within an infinitesimally small part of that vast Oneness, making one's sensitivity infinite. The true nature of that universal "nothingness" is actually a universal Oneness which from any limited viewpoint, appears no longer as a single, perfectly complete whole, but as a checkered landscape of polarized forces such as the quantum fluctuations of the vacuum. Everything in the universe consists of multiple vibration rates of multidimensional oscillating fields all part of an infinitely complex design of perfectly balanced polarities. Only through the illusion of being small and separate does all phenomena seem to exist! The greater that illusion of smallness and separateness, the greater is the reality of the world of opposites. The more that illusion is dissolved, the less real the world of phenomena and opposite forces appear to be, until ultimately, all things seem to dissolve into a universally complete Oneness or Wholeness.


© May, 1976 & June, 2008



Does anyone know the ultimate cause of all existence? One may answer that "unanswerable" question by probing into mathematical and religious concepts that lead to an explantion of the universe.

Existence is the universe and everything that might be beyond. All existence is an endless manifestation, whole and complete in itself, and controlled by an infinite "master mind" (system of principles) consisting of all the laws that maintain and create.

Everything exists because there is one supreme law that transforms nothing into a manifold creation by purely relative means. To understand how creation comes about it is important to know the nature of infinity.

George Gamow, author of a number of far-reaching books on science and astronomy, states that one kind of numerical infinity is stronger than another kind: (l)





Thus it is impossible to establish a one-to-one correspondence between the points on a line and the integer numbers, which means that the infinity of points on a line is larger (stronger) than the infinity of all integer or fractional numbers. (2)

Gamow points out the fact that an infinity, one step stronger than the infinity of integer or fractional numbers, is actually an infinite number of infinities. He proves this statement by the following experiment:

To prove this statement let us try to establish one to-one correspondence between the points on a line, say one inch long, and the sequence of integer numbers.

Each point on the line is characterized by its distance from one end of the line, and this distance can be written in the form of an infinite decimal fraction, like 0.7350624780056 .... or 0.38250375632 .... Thus we have to compare the number of all integers with the number of all possible infinite decimal fractions. (3)

It turns out that the number of infinite fractions can be represented only by the distances of points on a line, not by periodic decimal fractions or integers alone. (4) There are an infinite number of different infinite fractions between every terminating decimal, periodic decimal and whole number. (5) Therefore, the infinity of points on a line is actually an infinite number of infinities. Gamow goes on to say that there are many infinities even stronger:

According to George Cantor, the creator of the "Arithmetics of Infinity", infinite numbers are denoted by the Hebrew letter N (aleph) with a little number in the lower right corner that indicates the order of the infinity. The sequence of numbers (including the infinite ones!) now runs:

1, 2, 3, 4, 5........... N 1, N 2, N 3...........

and we say "there are N 1 , points in a line" or "there are N 2 different curves", just as we say that "there are 7 parts to the world" or "52 cards in a pack." (6)

For every infinity there is another, stronger infinity. While N 0 designates the number infinity (coresponds to the first dimension), N 1 is an infinite number of infinities (coresponds to the second dimension) and N 2 is an infinite number of an infinite number of infinities (coresponds to the third dimension). (7) What is the largest possible infinity? The principle of the slope-intercept equation, y = mx + b (9) will help to answer the above question:

... the number m determines how much of a change there will be in the value of y for every change of one unit in the value of x. For example, if m = 2, y will increase by two units whenever x increases by one unit.

If m = O, then the line will be horizontal and would therefore have a "zero" slope, If m = 1, then y will equal x and for every unit across there will be one unit rise. The line would then be exactly between vertical and horizontal. If m = 1/0, which is the reciprocal of zero, then an exact mirror image of the horizontal line (a vertical line) is produced with the line x = y (l1) as the mirror or line of symmetry. All pairs of lines that have each other's reciprocals are reflections of each other, with x = y as the line of symmetry. A line becoming horizontal has a slope approaching zero in the same way a line becoming vertical has a slope becoming infinite. A vertical line has a slope of the strongest possible infinity, which is designated 1/0 because its exact reciprocal is zero, which is the slope of the horizontal line. 1/0 is definitely the largest possible of all infinities. What can be more vertical than a vertical line? 1/0is the reciprocal or multiplicative inverse of its "twin sister" zero, which is likewise the smallest infinitesimal possible. What could be more level than a horizontal line?

The ultimate, infinite whole, or set of all objects, is existence itself. Any whole can be represented by a fraction, such as 1/1, 2/2, 1,000,000/1,000,000 (which equals one) or infinity/infinity and 0/0 (even though considered "undefined" can still equal any quantity or value). The pie sections of a circle (which is a good example for a whole) are used in the following paragraph as an example to demonstrate the principals of the infinite integral (13) utilized in calculus to figure out the exact areas within curved boundaries. (14) David Bergamini, an author specializing in scientific subjects, states that the whole is nothing but the summation of an infinite number of infinitesimal parts:

As a triangle becomes infinitely narrow, exactly when does it cease to be triangular shaped and start to behave as if it were a pie-shaped sliver of pie? Surely it does not take on the shape of a proper pie slice until it is infinitely narrow and then, surely, it is no longer something, but nothing. How can an infinite number of nothings be added up to produce a something such as a circle? (16)

The circle is not exactly an infinite amount of nothings, but an infinite amount of infinitesimally small parts that make up the circle. An infinitesimal amount is closer to nothing than any decimal fraction can be, but it is still not absolutely nothing. (17) However, If we take the strongest infinity (1/0 from the slope intercept equation), and if a 1/0 amount of nothing (1/0 x 0) was used in making the circle, then there would have to be the division of zero into itself (0/0) which would have to produce something however ambiguous that "something" might be--perhaps enough "something" to create some numerical value, a circle, anything? The multiplication goes like this:

1/0 x 0/1 = 0/0 = any value

Any number times its reciprocal equals one. (18) Any object or set of objects can equal zero divided by zero. 1/0 times zero could equal one whole set of anything, whether it be all the atoms in a rock or all the stars in the universe.

To those who have pondered the existence of God or wondered if there must be some universally aware Principle of creation, you might find thefollowing interesting; we are now hopping beyond the frontiers of science into the mystical and spiritual.

Awareness seems basic to existence and the creation of matter. Physicist, Bob Toben, states: "The incomprehensible unaware oneness beyond space-time becomes aware of itself, creating light...." (19) which "chases itself in gravitational collapse" (20) forming "a quantum (mini) blackhole (21) which is the fundamental unit of matter." (22)

This "unaware oneness" must be nothing because nothing can exist until it becomes aware of itself. (23) Existence is awareness. (24) From an absolute (rather than relative) perspective, nothing really exists, because beyond space-time is everywhere. (25) Nothing "becomes aware of itself" only when it divides into itself (when the perspective of itself changes from absolute to relative), which is a constant, inevitable process. Zero divides by zero, creating all relative existence. 0/0 is just the two opposite forces, 1/0 and 0/1 in combination with each other. The universal forces, 1/0 , 0/1 and their combination is remarkably similar to the Trinity.

In support of the above theory, Paramahansa Yogananda, author of Autobiography of a Yogi and founder of SRF, states:

God the Father is the Absolute, Unmanifested, existing beyond vibratory creation. God the Son is the Christ Consciousness (Brahma or Kutastha Chaitanya ) existing within vibratory creation; this Christ Consciousness is the "only begotten" or sole reflection of the Uncreated Infinite. The outward manifestation of the omnipresent Christ Gonsciousness, its "witness" (Revelation 3:14), is Aum, the Word or Holy Ghost: invisible divine power, the only doer, the sole causative and activating force that upholds all creation through vibration. (26)

Zero becomes the "Holy Ghost" or "invisible divine power, the only doer, the sole causative and activating force that upholds all creation through vibration" (27) when it (through changing its perspective--awarness of itself--from absolute to relative) divides by itself or, in effect, multiplies with its reciprocal, 1/0 . Then from the perspective created by the equation, 0/0 = reality ,"Son" or "creation"",1/0 appears to be an equivalent to the infinite "Father", "the Absolute, Unmanifested existing beyond vibrating creation" (28) beyond space-time. The infinite "Father", by relativity or perspective, might be an effect of the original zero that zero divides into:

0 (infinite "Father") is divided by: 0 ("Holy Ghost")

The quotient of 0/0 is the "Son" or creation itself. It could be defined as the "only begotten sole reflection of the Uncreated Infinite". (29)

The underliying principles (laws) of creation (existence) never began, nor will they ever end. The beginning of creation lies in every moment, arising directly from the virtual existence of eternal, permanent, "Unmanifested" mathematical principles (1/0 or infinite intelligence--"Father").

In essence, all existence is a relative phenomenon of vibration that dances between the opposites, 1/0 and 0/1 . Like the sequence of counting numbers, there is also a sequence of infinities, the strongest and largest being the reciprocal of zero. The slope-intercept equation demonstrates the validity of the number 1/0 . There are exactly as many zeros in zero as there are parts in a whole. 1/0 , 0/0 and 0/1 seem to play the same unifying roles as the "Father", "Son" and "Holy Ghost" as explained in Yogananda's Autobiography of a Yogi. Zero divided by zero, in the context explained above, could be the ultimate cause of all Existence.


FOOTNOTES

1 George Gamow, One Two Three...Infinity (New York,

Viking press, Inc. 1971), p. 20.

2 Ibid., p. 20.

3 Ibid., pp. 18 - 19.

4 Ibid., p. 19.

5 Ibid., p. 20.

6 Ibid., p. 23.

7 Ibid.

8 Ibid.

9 Gardner Cowles, The Cowles Commrehensive Encyclopedia (New York, Cowles Educational Books, Inc. 1965), Book 9, p. ll66.

10 Ibid., Book 9, p. 1166.

11 Ibid.

12 Ibid.

13 David Bergamini. Mathematics (New York, Time Inc., 1963, p. 107.

14 Ibid., p. 107.

15 Ibid., p. 44.

16 Ibid.

17 Ibid., pp. 108 - 109.

18 Mary P. Dolciani, Modern School Mathematics Algebra One (Sacramento, California State Department of Education, 1967), p. 637.

19 Bob Toben, Space - Time and Beyond, (New York, .PO Dutton and Co. Inc., 1975), p.47.

20 Ibid.

21 Ibid.

22 Ibid.

23 Ibid.

24 Ibido, p. 88.

25 Ibid., pO 54.

26 Paramahansa Yogananda, Autobiography of a Yogi (Los Angeles, California, Self-Realization Fellowship publishers, 1973), p. 169. See Footnote n.

27 Ibid.

28 Ibid.

29 Ibid.

BIBLIOGRGRAPHY


Bergamini, David. Mathematics. New York: Time Inc., 1963.

Cowles, Gardner. The Cowles Comprehensive Encyclopedia. New York: Cowles Educational Books, Inc., 1965.

Dolciani, Mary P. Modern School Mathematics Algebra One. Sacramento: California State Department of Education, 1967.

Gamow, George. One Two Three....Infinity. New York: Viking Press, Inc., 1971.

Meyer, Jerorne S. Fun with Mathematics. New York: Fawcett World Library, 1966.

Toben, Bob. Space-Time and Beyond. New York: E.P. Dutton and C o. Inc., 1975.

Yogananda, Paramahansa. Autobiography of a Yogi. Los Angeles, California: Self-Realization Fellowship Publishers, 1973.