This blog contains a surprisingly simple question: what are the first ten numbers? Simple indeed. Through contemplating the possible answers, one can end up seeing the Big Picture contours of the Structure of Everything.
It seems a simple question: what are the first ten numbers? When answering this with 1 to 10, the reply will probably be true to how most people would answer it. But look at your phone: the ten numbers on the display are not 1 to 10. The numbers are 1 to 9 plus a zero. Seemingly, there are two distinct answers possible.
— — -
This is the introduction to a ten-blog series, investigating the ways in which we comprehend information and look at the Big Picture. Simple descriptions are provided to show how we can think both in natural and in artificial ways. By showing how distinct structures of the mind are used to understand the world we live in, the underlying Big Picture can become visible. This will help in highlighting important information, for instance, about how we view the Big Bang.
— — -
Much like the number question above, consider ten bowls in which fruit is placed in such a way that all bowls deliver a sequential number of fruit in outcome, and that these bowls can be seen as the first ten outcomes.
Starting with the first bowl containing a single peach, each subsequent bowl contains one peach more than the previous, all the way up to ten peaches in the last bowl.
Yet when starting instead with leaving the first bowl empty, and then placing one peach more in each subsequent bowl, the last bowl will only contain nine peaches; this answer still fits the original question. The choice of starting with a single piece of fruit in the first bowl or leaving it empty is ours to make.
When reviewing the two sets of ten bowls, it doesn’t take a mathematician to discover which set contains more peaches. But it also doesn’t take a judge to rule which set delivers more of the diverse aspects we may encounter in life.
— — -
Let’s place the two answers apart once more to uncover what makes both possible outcomes distinct from one another.
If the answer is 1–10, with each bowl containing fruit, then it is possible to think that the overall level may contain some form of Unity, that somehow all is peachy.
If the answer is 0–9 and includes the option of the empty bowl, then it is not possible to think that the overall level conforms to some aspect of Unity, because all is not always peachy.
— — -
What follows are examples from world religions. We’re not digging deep here, simply remaining at the surface. Yet the presented perspectives show that with these world religions a similar distinction exists among their overall structures, too.
Christianity, Islam and Judaism can be recognized as being based on Unity. They either all contain Unity already at the highest level of their structures, or there is the expectation to end up at the highest level with that Unity intact. Allow me to say that in the end, when coming along to see it this way, there will be a piece of fruit.
Contrast this with Hinduism and Buddhism, and examples are found in which Unity is not prime, but secondary. In these religions the parts need to be understood (or the challenges need to be overcome). Yet looking for an ultimate Unity is in general not the end game. Here, reaching understanding is the goal, and this includes knowing that a bowl can also be empty.
— — -
Though the Structure of Everything is not that hard to understand, one confusing aspect can get in the way and should be discussed here. It does not exist in the outside world, but in how we comprehend the largest of frameworks. It is actually easy to see where and how this distinction occurs. But in order to address the potential confusion well, let’s simplify the ten number question, and make this be about the first two possible numbers. There is then either the option of picking 1 and 2 as the answer, or picking 0 and 1 as the alternative.
The 1–2 option, with one and two peaches in the two bowls, delivers the idea that there can be Unity among things. This is not the confusing aspect.
Confusion may occur when looking for Unity in the 0–1 option, because it is awfully easy to mistake that single 1 as representing Unity all by itself. With Unity already in mind, it is actually difficult not to find it anywhere we look. By envisioning two bowls, however, with one of them containing a single peach and the other being empty, the potential confusion of uniting it all can be kept at bay.
Any overall framework can be filled out in two slightly distinct ways, the choice is ours, and this is then also applicable to interpreting the information we have about the Big Bang.
— — -
Before ending this introduction blog on the Structure of Everything, let’s view these two slightly different options, while making the point that one of these structures contains an important artificial aspect to it.
If we accept that the truth contains a zero, just like the numbers displayed on a phone deliver this to us, then we could declare that the 0 and 1 option is much like our seeing the truth of what is right in front of us. Naturally, the other option of 1 and 2, that was declared here as the vehicle for Unity, will not be based on shying away from the truth. Rather, the reason for also focusing on Unity is that it delivers important benefits to us. Information does not necessarily need to be true to end up delivering us a benefit.
An example of how people collectively benefit from being united is language. Note how there is not much truth in the specific vowel or consonant change found between hand, hound, hind and hunt. The sound changes themselves do not contain much meaning. Yet the full words are understood as distinct and each word conjures a specific image inside our minds.
Language is an artificial, learned tool that nevertheless unites us through common meanings for sounds. Because of language, we can further unite and organize ourselves on many more levels. That is a major benefit of something deeply artificial. We have learned that unification can be highly beneficial.
— — -
Finally, a simple image about our universal framework, about the Big Bang moment that delivered materialization. At first (1), there is no matter (0). Then, second (2), there is matter (1). The zero is indeed where it all came from. But it wasn’t from nothing. The alternative view on the Big Bang will be delivered in the next blog.
— — -
I hope you have a strong desire to see that there is structure to everything, and that Everything has a very specific framework. The goal for this ten-blog introduction about The Structure of Everything was to set two aspects of our thinking apart: we can see things as one, and we can see things as diverse. It also appears possible to fill out any framework of the largest kind in two almost similar ways, through fully embracing zero or by ignoring that number instead. The distinction is quickly made among these perspectives by recognizing that one of them contains a highly beneficial but artificial aspect. Both perspectives are needed to see the Big Picture.
Perhaps your phone is ringing off the hook now, because all ten numbers on display, including zero, deliver fundamental aspects to us and our universe. The next blog, titled Bicycles and the Big Bang, first full blog in this series, delivers an alternative perspective to what took place at the birth of our material universe.
— — -
— — -
Delivery based on The Proof of Nothing, published by Penta Publishing (2000) and In Search of a Cyclops (2003), internet publication.