Select Tractate Abstract Introduction Contents The Error of Hegel The Error of Einstein The Error of Russell The Error of Heidegger The Error of Philosophy Symbiotic Panentheism

---

Tractate 8 : The Error of Einstein (continued)

So where does symmetry lie? Mathematically the demonstration of symmetry lies with the first mirror introduced by Hegel lies with the inversion of the Aristotelian perception that the functionality of time and the functionality of distance affect the observer. Hegel inadvertently introduced the first mirror, introduced the inversion of the left becoming the right, with his expansion of Kant’s idea that the observer affects the functionality of time.



Opening the system up we obtain:



What appears to be is the concept of ‘knowing’ the verb and ‘knowing’ the noun, the knowing of knowing. Knowledge appears to be the universal building block of existence, metaphysically speaking. Straightening the lines even further we obtain:



Or:



The left hand is the right hand and the right hand is the left hand. In terms of distance and time the mirror becomes:



Why would the mirror be a form of nothingness? The mirror is a form of nothingness for the mirror has no dimension, is nonexistent physically.

Why would the mirror be physicalness, which implies the physical, is itself a form of nothingness? The physical is limited in terms of existence and its presumed annihilation leads to the conclusion that the physical, although it may be reconstructed, is not permanent as ‘it was’ but rather is permanent in ‘it will be’. The universe is a verb, action as opposed to being a noun, an object. A verb is not; rather a verb is simply a statement regarding the acknowledgement of the existence of an object.



For:



Could just as well be expressed as:



Why is there no ‘left, symmetry to zero? Zero is not the point of demarcation for knowing for there is no ‘negative’ to knowing. Metaphysically, the point of symmetry for knowing is one not zero and thus the point of demarcation for knowing is one. In essence there is:



The concept of there being no negative of knowing can be exemplified by the statement: There is no ‘negative’ of air. There may be a void of air but not a ‘negative’ of air.

In terms of physicality:



It is not:



Likewise in terms of knowing, the noun, it is not:



Rather it is:



Where 0 and &Mac176; are approached rather than ‘passed through’.