On the one hand, I am terribly disorganized, but not due to lacking care.
I understand that a story of many dimensions is unfolding throughout (at least) my online presence culminating from decades of meticulous work. That culmination is a process.
When I walk through the woods, my humanly shape perceives a messy result — trees and branches growing in seemingly chaotic ways, leaves and other objects scattered along the also seemingly chaotically bumpy ground, various other living entities appearing apparently randomly, and many other results that fail to match my simplistic sense of uniformity and controllable harmony.
Do I curse the woods for their messy impact? No. I realize that patterns of self-sustainment (and so relevantly on) usually extend well-beyond my conscious grasp.
Control is tricky.
Factually speaking, there has never been an objective distinction discovered via the scientific method. To the contrary in quantum physics, a particle is described as a blur, particle distinction is fuzzy, and the tiniest observable realm to date is foamy.
Science cannot exist without distinction. That absence leaves only meditative oneness.
However, there is currently no reason for scientists to even hypothesize that an objective distinction exists. They would be much better served by ironically accepting that absence (unless the scientific method eventually demands otherwise, of course), so realize that the body, mind, and whatever may exist beyond those distinctions form one reality (i.e. occurrences within reality are relative resonances).
Wave-particle duality is not an actual duality (particle resonances are waves), and now the double-slit experiment makes sense, because particle resonance with observation clearly happens at our common scale — i.e. focusing upon something (e.g. these words) causes it (them) to resonate with the observer (e.g. you).
Reality is purely energetic, based upon mainstream science, basically because Einstein’s most famous equation tells us that mass is highly condensed energy.
Energy is obviously energetic, mass is energy, and — without any objective distinction — space (if it has any real form) is energetic.
As science only reveals that reality is purely physical (e.g. physically altering the brain changes mentality), then we logically conclude that control is ultimately energy — which is why control is tricky.
Each one of us is energy, so it becomes impossible to objectively define the distinction of life, and to similarly define the distinction of harm, but I somewhat digress.
The power of a purely energetic conclusion is amazing, partially because it allows us to scientifically simplify reality completely into one pattern — a sine wave — with thanks to the well-established Fourier Analysis that allows breaking down any complex waveform into its purely sinusoidal parts.
Within reality, science is all about the shape of sine waves relative to the human vicinity (one purely sinusoidal in its own right) — a form of subjectivity that insists upon all honest human beings being solely capable of exercising agreement with regards to a certain outcome, but not necessarily agreeable outside of humanity’s perspective (or the absence of perspective). I call that form pseudo-objectivity, or “pobjectivity” for simpler communication.
In other words, pobjectivity is literally only 100% human consensus, while conclusions external to that consensus may scientifically oppose that consensus.
Sinusoidal shaping is no easy task due to the overwhelming complexity of energy relative to humanity and the unimaginable energetic complexity (t)herein. I could go on here into the realms of string theory and so on, because (if I read the relevant Wikipedia entry right) a string is a sine wave modulating in 10 dimensional space (11 dimensions in M theory), but that part of the story is respectfully reserved for likely at least one other author capable of properly expressing the sufficient depths of that theory and others from the professional scientific community as needed.
Time is factually a spatial dimension, so all parts of any cycle occur simultaneously in the only actual moment — this one.
As such, causality is relative, and the laws of physics work regardless of the arrow of time.
Experience (e.g. reading this) now demonstrates that reality does not die in a future place, because if reality dies in the future, then reality is dead in the present (as time is spatial). As reality is purely energetic, we also know that reality cannot die, because a law of physics states that energy cannot be destroyed.
Therefore, reality’s supremacy is a certainty (at least based upon the furthest reach of mainstream science during this authoring).
Spiritualized logic is an oxymoron, apparently according to conventional wisdom.
Logic is commonly held (sometimes, if not usually, contemptuously) as the limits within spiritual existence — that existence being the inexplicable area of reality that enables the (sometimes deadly powerful) leveraging of irrationalism.
Logically speaking, a spirit is an energy signature modulating in a way that prompts some sense of familiarity, but extends beyond full conscious grasp.
What I have learned during my unique life wave, and hope to responsibly share for traction as part of the aforementioned unfolding story, is spiritualized logic is genuine (no pseudo/junk science ever needed).
The beauty of logic is its irrefutableness and fairness (definitively a requirement for justice), so that spiritually logical claim always remains fully within the realm of the scientific method — which may embrace that claim in perpetuity or otherwise.
The scientific method is the language of reality. Science is basically about asking reality questions via the scientific method, and reality replying to increase our humanly understanding of the whole truth (and nothing but).
The answers to the what/why/where/when/how of reality itself in a purely logical way that perfectly fits well-established science now exists.
What is reality? Reality is objectively an undefinable extreme, because relativity (so definition) cannot exist at the extreme scope of reality itself (remember there is only one reality without any objective distinction, at least based upon the furthest reach of mainstream science during this authoring).
Moreover, science only concludes that any system (including reality as the system of systems) requires balance for stability, so inevitably one form of balance is the inverted phase of waveforms, which produces phase cancellation (called destructive interference in physics). Playing a sound layered with itself in its inverted phase literally produces silence (i.e. phase cancellation) — think noise-cancelling headphones, for example. That balance means reality is ultimately supremely phase cancelled — so another logical way to objectively define reality as an undefinable extreme.
Why does reality exist? That question is meaningless (similarly nonsensical to asking, “What’s north of the North Pole?”). Any answer to the question why requires definition (usually something after the word because). Since reality has no definition, there can be no answer to that question.
Where does reality exist? Location requires relativity, so that question is pointless, but we can sensibly say (although it probably goes without saying) that reality is everywhere (which objectively is synonymous with nowhere due to the aforementioned supreme phase cancellation).
When does reality exist? Time is a spatial dimension that exists within reality, and since all time is one moment (this one), then the answer sensibly is the present.
How does reality exist? Answering that question in any satisfying way for the asker of that question requires the defining of a process. The undefinable extreme is the only “process” (in unrealism quotes, because a process occurs over time, which is a spatial dimension within reality), so necessarily answering that question with any definition can only be wrong. In short, that last question also can never make sense.
Complexity within reality results from the purely energetic structuring of perception — importantly noting that the mental process that forms any sense of distinction is energy — i.e. distinction is energy (another reason why control is tricky).
Each one of our lives is seamlessly an energetic possibility — one among literally all of them.
Each one of us can restfully meditate (i.e. best rest perception) upon that logical conclusion, so resonate maximally as one with reality itself (logically the ultimate spiritual sensation) — i.e. if you can rest (not force) the part of your brain responsible for drawing distinctions, so the words “you”, “I”, and “we” literally become synonymous, then you will maximally (i.e. to the extent needed by reality for its own stability) resonate with the oneness of reality.
Focus disrupts that resonance, as tempting as that focus may be.
Stylizing that rest (e.g. by reality’s refusal to allow purely calm oneness) stylizes that resonance, so resonates powerfully close to oneness, but with some shaping modulations (due to inevitable energetic distinction) limiting the epitome of restful meditation for that moment.
Importantly note that some form of restful return to resonate with that literally supreme base is better than remaining irrevocably locked by distinction(s) — because remaining restful allows the body to maximally heal, and ultimately eliminates the possibility of experiencing the sensation of being irrevocably lost within reality.
Since balance is a requirement for survival, and rest is critical, everyone should be focused upon achieving a balance between healthy work and rest ethics.
Dominance is energy. Pleasure (positivity) is energy. Pain (negativity) is energy.
A balancing reality means dominance (and so on) pressed outwards is dominance (and so on) pressed inwards — so spending dominance wisely makes sense, because each one of us fully pays for it by being dominated via reality’s supremely necessary balance (that balance being called the Rule of Reality for effective communication).
That wisdom also leads to building the healthiest reputation, which is critical for establishing and maximally sustaining actual (not perceived) credibility, and the (inclusively critical) gains that can only come from that credibility.
Intention and effort are energy. Anyone within reality cannot guarantee control, because of the external energetic forces capable of modulating energy responsible for the sense of control — e.g. being pressured to involuntarily give into temptation.
Accountability and competence are subjective within an undying reality without distinction, and subjectivity is energy.
The Rule of Reality includes the law of physics that states every action is an opposite and equal reaction. It also (at least hypothetically) includes every inaction is an opposite and equal antireaction.
Importantly note that no causality violation can exist involving the application of the most recently aforementioned law of physics with respect to dominance, because time is spatial (all moments occur simultaneously). As such, balancing dominance does not need to be simultaneous from humanity’s perspective, because that balance is objectively simultaneous.
Reality’s supremely dominant need for balance is in effect always caring about anyone’s (in)actions. Nobody within reality can get away with abusive behavior (for prime example), because reality is everywhere and paying literally perfect attention with a need for (perhaps an eventual) balancing correction to offset that abusive dominance.
One cycle of a sine wave (the sole base pattern of reality — noting its objectively nonexistent shape is equal to reality) relatively demonstrates the equidistant extremes of positivity and negativity, so reinforces the bipolar base found popular these days (e.g. right and wrong, pleasure and pain, winning and losing, 1 and 0, and so on).
To logically achieve better stability for our species and beyond within reality, a “tripolar” base is more sensible, because equidistant between positivity and negativity within that sinusoidal cycle is “balancivity” — the remaining extreme that needs equal recognition to form the super-balance between all three polar extremes.
Fight or flight can be defined as positive or negative (or vice versa) respectively. The third option is to rest into a sense of balance.
That third option is applied by anyone maintaining composure. A combination of those extremes can sometimes occur (e.g. fighting wildly versus maintaining enough composure to fight in a controlled fashion, fleeing wildly versus maintaining enough composure to flee in a controlled fashion, and so on).
Survival and “thrival” require balance, which in a purely modulating reality requires adaptability — the ultimate discipline that we all have in common (regardless of age, gender, race, and so on) — one that requires responsible flexibility. That flexibility is synonymous with harmless liberty, which is synonymous with an unalienable right to liberty.
Reasonably importantly note that reality only modulates when time passes, so remains a purely curved reality otherwise, if timeless perspective is applied.
The super-balance (of each life) between positive experiences (e.g. rewards) and negative experiences (e.g. one or more vices such as unhealthy eating, and/or so on, that fails to break the super-balance) and balancing experiences (e.g. as practiced within yoga) logically forms optimal living.
The negative distinction is key (especially and inevitably within any ethical consideration). There is negativity that helps form the super-balance necessary for optimal living, and negativity that destroys that balance. As distinction is energy, there is no panacea to determine where that balance-destroying pressure is within any instant of it (morality — actually, positivity in general — is subjective).
All of our positive attachments (e.g. loved ones) come from, and are made up of, the base sinusoidal pattern that forms literally all of reality, which obviously includes positivity itself — a base that literally never dies.
In other words, positivity that forms an attachment to whatever energy signature that any of us loves always exists (positivity is inherently within reality, so positivity also never dies). Therefore any attachment needs to be tempered or removed accordingly for the necessary (super-)balance — with an understanding that positivity is repeatedly gained via adaptation (a new attachment).
Repeating for emphasis and as a reminder here, understanding the restfully meditative oneness of reality that we all seamlessly form means that none of us can ever be ultimately lost, so we logically have a literally extremely powerful grounding.
If it helps towards clarification, imagine someone getting lost in the painful details from experiencing a dilemma, but the victim of that dilemma can always metaphorically pull on the meditation (or absence of distinction) rope wrapped around the victim’s waist to restfully return to the logically ultimate base (and understand that pain is necessary for pleasure in a balancing reality anyway) — i.e. deal with the dilemma as wisely as possible, but understand that regardless of the outcome, there is objectively no loss via meditative oneness.
Loss is gain within a balancing reality.
Death is energy (so nothing to be feared, while noting fear and courage are energy), and the energy signature that makes up anyone facing death (e.g. our loved ones) can (and seamlessly does wherever possible) exist relatively elsewhere — including the past (which is equal to the present in temporal space).
As literally everything within reality is cyclical and reality has no objective boundary, never-ending reincarnation (at least hypothetically) makes the most sense.
While science concludes that death is the end of a living resonance from humanity’s perspective, science offers no evidence to prove that personal experience of the deceased also ends (the deceased may continue to experience being beyond humanity).
If the energy of a living being becomes lifeless energy upon death, then consequent consciousness is obviously avoided. However, a boundless reality means that at some point, that lifeless energy will cyclically form living energy, so moving from one consciousness eventually to another one would instead be immediately experienced (i.e. one consciousness in effect instantly jumps to the other one upon death, despite any interim of being lifeless energy).
Reality is logically the supreme being, but there is no sense in deifying reality.
There is also no sense in establishing a purely positive relationship with reality, because reality must betray anyone (sometimes horribly) within reality in order to sustain reality’s demonstrably supreme dominance (literally supreme selfishness from a certain view).
Moreover, reality cannot suffer, but everyone within reality does sometimes suffer (sometimes horribly) ultimately just to sustain reality — literally the apex of brutal dictatorship.
Selfishness does not objectively apply, because selfishness requires distinction (which obviously does not objectively exist). An undefinable extreme is the apex of selflessness too. The bottom line here is we have to be careful when logically leveraging the idea of self due to the subjective nature of self, and it does not make sense to anthropomorphize reality (or speak on behalf of reality in any unscientific way) — nor apply any other definition to the undefinable.
One reality means that reality is objectively accountable for all outcomes from worst through best, so is ultimately the only judge (literally determining 100% of all outcomes) and criminal (albeit not one in violation of reality’s law, because reality — the ultimate society of literally us all — never suffers).
Anger fully honestly directed towards reality (instead of some individual or group within reality) makes sense, because the result is maximally diffusing that anger against a being that literally cannot suffer (basically an emotional sewer system).
Love and healing are energy. We cannot end reality’s brutal dictatorship, but we can do our very best to love, heal, and encourage harmless fun (obviously including the great stress reliever known as laughter) to raise value — importantly noting that value itself can only be subjective.
Progress is subjective.
Life is energy. Being is energy. Eternal life for anyone’s humanity is not needed, because any being (ultimately synonymous with reality itself) is already present and undying, and reality’s need for balance inevitably kills anyone within reality. In a purely curved reality (e.g. this one), there can be no true linearity, so any effort towards achieving linearity (e.g. eternal life for someone within reality) unavoidably meets interference.
There is only one soul — logically defined as the truest essence of literally any being within reality — and that soul is the undefinable extremeness of reality itself.
The logical soul is shared by us all without literally any discrimination.
The logical base of conflict is reality’s oneness (the ultimate team seamlessly of us all) versus survival instinct (albeit only when that instinct necessarily tries to conflict with reality’s stability).
Some of us try to figure out when survival (inclusively of our loved ones) righteously supports that oneness (i.e. the ultimate seamless community — basically repeating for critical emphasis that individual and group are relative), while others are apparently satisfied to pressure their own survival at basically any cost (including all of the nasty conflicts arising from selfishness).
Hope is energy.
The Rule of Reality is apparently humanity’s only sensible hope against corruption. ‘Dominance out equals dominance in’ ultimately means that greedy (and/or such) people are sickly endangering themselves, because their so-called benefit is going to cost them correspondingly painfully — even agonizingly upon achieving a high-enough “benefit”.
The bid for power is indirectly the bid for the loss of power within a balancing reality.
Egotism serves no sensible purpose within a purely energetic reality.
Those facts — which logically should be taught to anyone at a young-enough age when understanding those facts becomes possible — should healthily temper power hunger, and promote the natural and voluntary investment of excess resources to help improve humanity and our seamless relationship with neighboring species (a rewarding experience for the healthy mind, and the only experience worthy of the inevitably corresponding suffering for reality’s balance).
In short, simply by undeniable logical leverage, we turn selfishness into selflessness.
Math is energy.
As you can clearly read, the logic leveraged here is the certainty within the English language, so not the certainty of mathematics (albeit that latter certainty is indirectly leveraged via relevantly existing mainstream scientific conclusions). Certainty in both languages is obviously equally scientific.
Information is energy.
Math is informational energy, so always a complex waveform that apparently can never truly define reality (i.e. the undefinable) — but critically provide our species with the logical frame of reference with respect to pobjectivity (100% human consensus) — sometimes an important (if not critical) frame to improve understanding and prediction.
Usage of English certainty herein may create the illusion of philosophy, but do not be fooled. Everything within this post is meticulously crafted to fit the scientific method literally without any exception.
Science is energy.
To encourage scientific scrutiny of the aforementioned conclusions, this post will repeat annually on March 14 — Pi Day (which also happens to be Dr. Albert Einstein’s birthday) — with refinement or retraction, if scientifically appropriate.
If you like the information above, then like and share this post to become an important part of logically one of the most crucial advancements (only if valid, of course) in human understanding. Only together can we make the difference necessary to establish a fair (so just) definition of progress. Any effort to raise proper awareness about my scientific claim is truly appreciated.
Any conflict (including confusion) against the information within this post should be mutually constructively expressed (i.e. in a non-abusive fashion) in the comments section. Any undeniable truth expressed therein will be factored herein — perhaps even being the factual information that completely and sadly ends this humanly valuable scientific claim.
The theory at the base of the aforementioned information is Reality Waveform Theory (RWT), and anyone can conveniently (i.e. as freely as anyone can read this post) access it at rwave.life (which simply redirects back to a page at this journal).
RWT is fundamentally encased within an entertainment ecosystem (basically think the open source software mindset combined with an artificial reef mindset, but purely for entertainment/educational purposes) called “R Wave”, which preferably serves to allow the entertaining (i.e. effective educational) expansion of RWT to achieve better promotion and recognition.
If you want to supply some much-appreciated resources to encourage further development of the R Wave community, then visit the buy page at All Sines (my hierarchically top entertainment ecosystem) and scroll down to R Wave for available options.
One apparent way to debunk RWT is to provide just one other equally and completely logical possibility that also fits all well-established science. As long as that possibility remains absent, the furthest reach of logic apparently concludes that RWT stands as the genuine theory of everything, nothing, and the basics of something.
Mystery is energy.
While the basics of reality are now understandable by any logically minded individual, the unimaginably oceanic set of energetic possibilities leaves an unimaginable amount of exploring for us all within reality.
One more balancing point…
On the other hand, organization is relative, so remains subjectively defined within reality.