Existence is necessarily All-existing, Almighty, Alknowing, Infinite and eternal
-
No I do not know what you mean by all-existing that would b different from existing.
omnipresent, I can imagine what you mean, but I do not see how it is part of existing, present yes omnipresent, cna't see what you means.Salaam
Salam Huruf
If you understand omnipresence, can you make sense of Existence without it? Can you have a non-contradictory, non-paradoxical definition of Existence without it being omnipresent, infinite and eternal?
-
No, they can't. Everything (including scientific observations) require reason. You make scientific theories by applying reason to the observations made. When reason is clearly stating that it is paradoxical for something to into non-existence, any scientific observation made would have to avoid this paradox otherwise it would be entirely meaningless. Think about it, is it more plausible that things go into somewhere else that we can't see or that they go into non-existence?
Non-existence has always been and absurd concept and will always be an absurd concept.That is why CONTEXT is needed.
Define the context before defining exist or non exist.No Existence exists. That is all. It is the first item of knowledge as requires Existence. Reason dictates non-existence is absurd. Saying something like due to non-existence existence exist is paradoxical/irrational.
Yes no existence does exist. Non existent is not absurd at all.
Just because it is paradoxical doesn't mean that it is irrational.Let's give context now, the phenomenon of non existent in this universe does exist in this universe.
A particle can change state from exist in this universe to become non-existence in/from this universe.
And vice versa. -
Peace Jafar.
How can this be possible? QuoteA particle can change state from exist in this universe to become non-existence in/from this universe.
And vice versa.Where did the particle go? The particle still exist in another domain out of this universe. Or does only this universe exist?
If only this universe exist, then the particle could be somewhere else in this universe.Or give an example of a particle that becomes nothing. i.e not a particle or changed particle but nothing(transferred from exist to non-exist).
GOD bless you.
Peace -
That is why CONTEXT is needed.
Define the context before defining exist or non exist.How is Existence = that which is omnipresent. You give me any other definition and I'll show you that it's paradoxical. Use any kind of context you want.
Yes no existence does exist. Non existent is not absurd at all.
Just because it is paradoxical doesn't mean that it is irrational.Non-existence is absurd. Always has been, always will be.
Let's give context now, the phenomenon of non existent in this universe does exist in this universe.
A particle can change state from exist in this universe to become non-existence in/from this universe.
And vice versa.For something to become non-existent in this universe is fine because that is not the same as it went from this universe into non-existence. It essentially means it went to some other existing place or that it changed to something else.
You can put words, sentences and theories together in the wrong way (this is possible, this is a phenomenon) I am not in disagreement with this. So for example
A) You can have someone say square-circle (putting words together in the wrong way)
B) You can have someone say a square within a circle (putting words together in the right way)What A says can never exist whilst what B says can exist. A is being irrational, whilst B is being rational.