One can’t tango



It takes 2 (meaing: 2 alternate 1’s) to tango. 1 to 1,* hence @c2 contact, creates (a quantum or moment (i.e. as stopped momentum) of) realness. 1(i.e. One, for instance, the Brahman or God) alone (i.e. without a second or alternative) remains unreal. If the ancient and mightily flawed Indian definition of realness, namely ‘eternally abiding’, is applied, then an eternal 1 (to wit, the Atman/Brahman) is real, albeit virtually. However, virtual reality cannot be experienced as such, notwithstanding the claims made by ancient Indians and restated by the Brahmin bookworm Adi Shankara.


Simple observation (intensified as personal experience by means of selective to a point concentration) suggests that (the experience of) realness happens as result of 1 (whole quantum or ens**) to 1 (whole quantum or ens) contact in a relativity vacuum, hence @ c2.***


A series (or network) of c2 contacts produces a (relative, thus presenting with a self) line experienced as real. A complex or network of contact series (i.e. @c2) produces/creates a (relative, thus presenting with a self) form experienced as real.



Since ‘only random events (meaning: @ max. entropy quanta as contacts) carry instruction’, meaning that only quanta @ rest can strike, i.e. make contact, a strike, i.e. a contact between 2 random (meaning differential) events (hence as @c2 moments) is needed to create (a quantum of) realness.


In simpler terms, a real form, such as a human or a blade of grass, happens as multidimensional (i.e.  ND rather than 3D) output/imprint (within a Bose-Einstein quantum concentrate) of a multiple discrete strikes/contacts series in much the same way as the printout of an archaic dot matrix printer.


The dodgy but politically useful notion put forward by very late commentators of the Upanishads, and seemingly derived from Shankara and Badarayan et al., that the pantheistic Braham/Atman is sat-chit-ananda could only apply to the saguna, hence to the ‘tango-ing of 2 Brahman/Atman applications (i.e. as fractal elaborations). At best the nirguna Brahman/Atman can by fantasised as merely virtually real because eternal.


*… In the pantheistic world, the two 1’s are not opposites or others but alternatives, i.e. alternate fractal elaborations.


**… ens’ is short for an enstasy, to wit, an enstatic, meaning ‘steady’ (because at either maximum or minimum entropy) state.


***… The momentary c2 realness quantum, lacking relativity, is not identifiable, hence does not present as a self.  A series of c2 moments presents with a (transient) self and whose extension (over time) depends on the number of contacts in the series. Shankar together with the ancients claimed that an abiding (i.e. eternal) self/SELF that is real exists (though he offered no proof but scripture (i.e. sruti)). The Shakyamuni (later named the Buddha) rejected the notion of an abiding (i.e. eternal) self/SELF. About momentary selves he said nothing.