(11-15-2015, 03:45 AM)Adonai One Wrote: Can nothing be directly equivalent to everything? Zero equal to one, in truth, but not in the potentials of attachments, math and accounting?
I've heard some people put this notion forward, but the math never worked out in my head, or my intuition, personally.
It all depends on how you define nothingness.
To me, nothing is nothing. Infinite absence. If it is anything but that, it is not nothing from my point of view. From my perspective, it is just a conceptual abstraction, a word, a hypothetical state of infinite lack. It cannot be imagined. It cannot be observed. And if it existed, it wouldn't be nothing.
If nothingness was equivalent to everythingness, that would not make sense to me. You might as well say circles and squares are the same thing. Nothingness by itself, doesn't make sense to me because I am constantly aware of things (aware of somethingness).
Everythingness, by itself on the other hand, *does* make sense to me. I call that infinity.
If you entertain the concept of nothingness, you also have this paradox of figuring out how it all began. How somethingness began from nothingness. That is a conceptual trap, in my opinion.
Everythingness conveniently escapes this trap of beginnings and endings because I can perfectly well imagine how everythingness might limit perception, but I cannot for the life of me imagine how nothingness would ever transform into somethingness. It doesn't make one iota of logical sense to me.