Reasoning is the determination of the degree of freedom within a logical framework.

Therefore, to reason is to determine symmetries.

Therefore, reasoning is a product of symmetries.

This post presents intelligent design as a resonance on the crystalline structure of the universe and follows the context of a previous article on the subject.

The concept of resonance allows to understand the crystalline structure of the universe, on one hand, and the idea of intelligent design in the universe on the other.

Firstly it is necessary to clarify that we do not have any conscious experience of time whatsoever. We only perceive time by comparing different moments. In this sense, we exist in a single moment in time, the so called “here and now”. Which is the same as saying that this is the way by which everything is presented to us, hence the common saying that reality is the here and now. But it is asserted that that is not a portrait of reality but instead our perspective of reality.

Now if something exists independently from the perception of its existence, then it has to exist in time, that is, it cannot by itself cease to exist. Due to the fact that our perception is time-less, from the PoV of this perception this impossibility of the (future) inexistence of something is a retroactive consequence in time. That is, it is a consequence of something that is established after its perception.

This is where we gain the perception of intelligent design, that is, the consciousness of future states of which the current state is a cause.

In reality there is no design a priori but the perception of a design.

This can be defined, from the perspective of the perception of something, as a resonance in time, that is, a constructive interference in at least one dimension of the universe (in this case, time).

This applies to something that exists at any moment in time, therefore what exists at some point in time has always existed and always will exist. This demonstrates the crystalline structure of the universe, since there is nothing that is left to add to the universe. Everything that exists is a resonance in a crystalline structure, that is, a complete and immutable structure.

The perception of the universe adds to the dimensions by which it is perceived at least one other dimension, that of the subject of perception. The subject can perceive himself, therefore the universe is perceived as infinite-dimensional. therefore, either the universe is a-dimensional or it is infinite-dimensional. What here is said regarding time applies to the perception of the universe in any N dimensions relative to the (N+1)-th dimension.

Another way of looking at this is the fact that the number of possible configurations of any system increases exponentially with the number of its constituent parts. Therefore, more complex systems are more likely than otherwise (this likelihood spawns from the resonance mentioned before). The law of entropy still holds, but at a subsystem level. At a super-system level it is superseeded.
This explains the order on the universe, and that the disorder is in reality an affirmation of the different (infinite though countable) possibilities of order.

All this does not mean that God does not exist but rather that, if it does, we are certainly a part of it. It is not an entity distinct from its creation. It is THE creation, both as an object and as an action.

Nothingness, since it cannot define itself, is a definition of the existence of something. This something is indeterminate, that is, this definition underlies everything that exists.

Therefore, defining nothingness is to create everything that exists. [1]

Meditation, as a form of defining nothingness, is a form of contemplating the creation, and a form of creation.

If it does not itself change reality, it allows to create a perception of reality.

From nothing… everything.

_______

[1] this is isomorphic to the concept of inversion dealt with on previous posts

Proof of the existence (1) and unicity (2) of the decomposition.
As usual, the only thing relevant here is the music score, but you go ahead and spend 20 minutes dumbing yourself down like the good ideological peasant that you are. The trailer trash nobodies who profit from this will tell you its a “higher” form of education.

music:
Mozart Concerto for Piano and Orchestra No. 20, I. Allegro and II. Romance (excerpt)
Mitsuko Uchida; English Chamber Orchestra, Jeffrey Tate

If we assume that the Ego is by definiton an assertion of individuality, that is, that it is not possible for the Ego to terminate itself, the fact that a person is able to kill him/herself moved by a belief or a cultural norm proves that there is no such a thing as an Ego, which in nondualistic terms means that what we call “I” does not in reality exist as a distinct entity.

The demonstration is simple: such a suicide, which as any other behavior is ego-driven, leaves no room for anything else distinct from those suicidal beliefs that could perform the role of the Ego, therefore there is no Ego since that would contradict the assumption.

In other words, if there were an Ego it wouldn’t be possible to exist a culturaly-driven suicide.

We could generalize the assertion to any suicide regardless of the mobile but this particular case makes it evident that either the Ego can be superseeded by external factors (which contradicts the initial assumption) or it does not exist at all.

This problem is also solved if we assume that the “I” is not the Ego nor anything perishable, which leads to another proposition I made before when I defined consciousness as not a thing but an operation in a crystaline immutable Universe. And this one can be proven in agreement with BOTH cartesian dualism and nondual propositions.

When I am runnning in the woods I have no idea about for how long I have been on it, or what distance.

I am not after a goal.

I am the goal. And I am in motion.

If we only started existing at some point in time, and if nothing spawns out of nothing, then we are all that exists since we were “created” and moreover, nothing was added from ourselves to it since.

Therefore, there is no ontological division on anything that exists.

While we are unable to describe the 3-dimensional physics of gravity we are obliged to accept the possibility of a 4th dimension of space in which our familiar 3D referencial is accelerated from the bodies’ centers of mass outwards. That would be the true gravitational acceleration, from which gravity would be a consequence and a manifestation.

This is necessarily a spatial dimension because there is a motion in that dimension, which we cannot perceive merely because our 3D referencial is invariant to it. We are in permanent motion relative to that 4th dimension.

It could also be logical to place other gravitational effects on 3D bodies in that fourth dimension, which would then be the dimension of existence of what we call dark matter.

In fact, when we say that matter distorts space, because we measure it as invariant, we know that this distortion does not affect the geometry of 3D space. Therefore we are in reality stating the existence of a fourth dimension of space. If the shortest path between two points in space is not a line, while we can still follow a 3D measured line, then that curvature only happens in a fourth dimension.

A straight line in a sheet of paper is invariant to distortions of that sheet beause its the whole sheet that is being distorted, making the 2D geometry invariant under any measurement carried in 2 dimensions. Its when we introduce a 3rd dimension that we can distort the plane while maintaining its intrinsic geometry intact. The same applies to the distortion of 3D space from which gravity is an effect. That distortion, translated to 3D measurements (the only ones we can carry out and explain) is an acceleration.

Another way to put this is that classical physics (and simple mathematics) can still explain gravity.