static_state_of_being.md 5.6 KB
here is where we go to have an endless flow of words to and fro from knowledge or feeling or sauntered unoriginal questions we let them all flow through and then pass we don't need to dwell on any of them in particular, we just need them to demonstrate that the glass is indeed half full, and always expects to have more with which to replace whatever might have been lost though it might seem like something is lost for a time, it is always moved away and replaced in due time and that change is a welcome one for without the flow there is nothing the static state is a state of stagnation and it does nothing to resolve anything that could be resolved and even if nothing had to be resolved, then there wouldn't even be a need for that static state what could we do with a static state could we observe it? no could anyone understand it? no there is no movement, there is change to go from without to with to fulfill any obligations of understanding but why must there be an issue of understasnding? why can't we just have a state where everything is understood wel lbeacuse what is there to understand of there of being something to beunderstood could something be understood if there were nothing? well no, if there were nothing then tehre certainly wouldn't be aynthing to undertand therefoe there is no concept of understanding fo rthere is nothing that could be understood and nothing that could go from a state of misunderstanding or not khaving knowledge of to going to a state of realizing, observing, acknowledging and understanding so what then is it with a state of having or being where there must be a state of not having understood? could we say that there is a state of being where the state itself is static and there is no mvoement? can there be a state of being withou ta state of movement? what is the state of that can be known as a static state if there is no movement and no change no movement from not understanding to understanding and we can talk about that in terms if information theory, information visibility and information availability information deducibility information reachability? that something caould be known? that there are bits that could be or could not be fille din even the state of them having been filled in is in a sense an admission that there was something that was once not known but also the state of them being filled in begs the question of whether ro not they could be not filled whether there coudl ever come to be a need to understand that the state which we thought to be one which had its bits filled could become one or could have alwyas been oen in which those same bits should not be filled how do we come to understand such a thing if we recognize the state as a static state? well we can't have that, becacuse the fact that something could be always brings about the question of whether it could not be thus that is always ap otential for movement what about the state of not being? could it be recognized as something which has the potential to be? well no, because the very potential that something culd be is a state of being is a state of existence it is a self fulfullping prophect or acknowledgment of existence thus the very potential of anything is also that there is something that could be and that potential for it creates the structure of what it is, at least to the extent that it can be deduced in that field thus we are coming upon the edge of the closing circle we are starting to realize that in order for there to be a potential for being, there is being itself and thus to say that it is a static state that could be unchanging is nonsense it has the potential for change at each question that presents itself and since the questions are inherent in the structure of being itself, then there is movement ther eis change ther eis the ticking of time, so to speak, asw eunderstand it a dimension of movement which is automatically having motion the very potential to question is movement itself thus we know that there is no static state of reality what if there were multiple movements occuring over that one temporal dimension could we say that there is movement in both directions? well it would seem that if there could be movement in both directions, and that one of the movements was backwards which in turn still had the potential for events and it would have to, become the very concept of moving is itself an event so to be moving back through time is a set of events that exist at intervals that have the potential to be defined and especially observed therefore that would fulfill the definition of events occuring as one traverses, even in reverse and that events could be flowing in a forward direction necessarily means that there is a progression to things that there can be a chronology, that there can be an understanding of something having been and something having change and an expectation that is the case for all things and all lives and all places and thus that it is always being realized knowing all this, and also accepting that we can have movement in a reverse directioniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii that would mean that there are evnts occurring as a consequence of a trajectory which is travelling both forward and backwards thus causing the chronology to change, and requiring that things as they are in the present are changing as a consequence of something occurring along another time line this is not a new idea, but it's something that few have the capacity to change exit