Duality
Explains everything.
The chaos that is ‘reality’ currently goes all the way back through time. If you believe in ‘time,’ that is.
More technically, because duality is the basis for time, and everything else in Nature, chaos never leaves ‘us.’
Where ‘us’ is an idea that requires duality (and vice versa).
So, we have to start with duality if we want to understand reality. In all of its flavours and colors. More thoroughly, we have to understand duality, more thoroughly, if we want to understand reality.
Duality is based on the number ‘two’ in arithmetic. It is also dependent on circular reasoning in philosophy. As the diagram shows, and proves. Because duality is nothing more or less than two circles in a circle.
Explaining first and foremost, the basis for Nature, and duality its ‘self,’ ‘sex.’
Sex depends on M and F, again, as the diagram, clearly, shows. Which gives us the basic process called ‘reproduction.’ And, also, the ‘copy.’ Which is required for everything in math, everything in physics, everything in everything.
This is because M and F, in biology, is X and Y, in algebra.
X and Y in algebra is duality (the number two) in philosophy. Explaining why, and, how, ancient tribes explained Nature using a universal ‘God.’ And-or ‘gods.’
Meaning we cannot have a one without a two. And, if we understand the ‘one’ as ‘two,’ we have circumscribed Nature, and, thus, reality.
In language arts we understand the ‘one’ and ‘two’ as ‘subject’ and ‘object.’ But, we’re told along the way not to use circular reasoning if we want to understand reality. This is because God told Adam to stay away from the tree of knowledge. Explaining why Eve disobeyed God, getting Adam into trouble.
Meaning you would not be able to have Nature without both Adam and Eve, so somewhere along the line, one had to become two (one has to be ‘two’), and, thus the myth around ‘stay away from circular reasoning.’ (The diagram shows us: the number ‘three’ is also the number ‘two.’)
So, going back to ‘fix’ this, we can see, quite easily, the diagram articulates ‘reality’ and, also, Nature, eliminating the need for physics, philosophy, and, technically, if you want to be thorough, psychology.
Thus, mathematics has it wrong (or right) depending on your point of view, and, technically, because the basis for everything is the number ‘two,’ you can say what you want about anything (and everything) and it has to be half-the-time ‘true.’
This is because there is a mandatorily conserved circle between one and two (also known as true and false) (any ‘two’).
Meaning, it is impossible to have a half without a whole because it is impossible to have a zero without a one because it is impossible to have a circumference without a diameter.
This is why, despite the fact this reasoning has been submitted to physics journals for peer review and mainstream acceptance since 2007, it is continually rejected while the editors who reject it include the reasoning in their own papers (they know it’s true, they just don’t want everyone to know it’s true) (just yet) since they need more time to consider (discover) (think it through).
So, now you are at the point, the same point, actually, that Foucault, Deleuze, and Nietzsche reached, where it’s impossible to not consider duality as the basis for everything. Including, and, especially, the whole idea of ‘self’ (‘I’).
This is because duality explains the human mind (universal mind) (mind in general). Meaning pi in mathematics is the correct term (name) (label) (statement) articulating ‘mind.’ Your mind. My mind. Everybody’s mind.
This is because everything that comes out of, or goes into, a ‘mind’ articulates duality in one form or another (there is a circular relationship between in and out) (any pair).
Meaning pi is always in the background responsible for the foreground because background and foreground, like any X and X (X and Y) (X and X’), requires pi (duality in general). Circular? Yes. Absolutely. Has to ‘be.’
This explains criminology.
Because everything is 50–50 meaning we all have a criminal within. And, you cannot separate love and hate. They depend on each other. Because duality is the basis point. Same as life and death. Why it’s OK to kill in some circumstances, and not OK in others (Ok-NOk) (duality subscribed).
This is proven easily because zero and one in math is circumference and diameter in math. Meaning it’s impossible to have the coupler ‘and’ without the coupler ‘or.’ (Couple= Duality) (= signifies duality).
Explaining why everyone will ‘turn’ on you (and you will turn on everyone else) eventually. We’re all bound by the conservation of a circle (50–50 everything) (duality is a mandatory ‘sentence’).
Meaning, as you very well know, your ‘self,’ there is no ‘individual’ ‘self,’ and, at the same time, there is only an individual ‘self.’ Selfish = selfless.
Meaning, eventually all ‘selves’ will ‘cut’ them’selves’ off (this is called ‘detachment’ in philosophy) in order to avoid chaos, disagreement, anger, sadness, trauma, PTSD, etc. Where one self wants to live, the other wants to die (again, it’s 50–50) (duality subscribed).
So, where does this leave us? Nowhere. And, everywhere. At the same time. Half chaos. Half order.
So, we cannot avoid duality. Meaning we cannot avoid the 50–50. And that’s what forms the chaos called ‘reality.’ And that’s what’s under all of the ‘hidden’ anger in Nature (in all of us).
Which is why mainstream physicists (referees in mainstream physics journals) keep rejecting the idea that the conservation of a circle is the core, and, thus, the only dynamic in Nature. While at the same time they are reaching this same ‘conclusion.’ Duality demands a basic 50–50 contradiction that is endemic to (embedded within) all of us.
So. Once we all think like this. Well. Who knows?
We all ‘know.’ Nature is designed to destroy its ‘self.’ And, then, (in three ‘days’) (pi-diameter-circumference) recreate its ‘self’ again. We think things are horrible half-the-time, no matter where we are in time. And, thus, the opposite is, always, also, true.
Conservation of the Circle (think: duality) is the only dynamic (requirement) in Nature. Explaining ‘magical thinking.’ (As a basic defense mechanism, coping device, proof.)
