God is just a part of the evolution of Creation

Lawsinium

Registered Senior Member
If we look at the world we live in, we always find objects in pair. When something goes up most likely it will go down. A magnet has always north and south poles. Electricity runs, when the positive and negative terminals of a battery are connected. We created the word bits, for binary digits zero and one. White and black, A and Z, roots and branches, crest and through, right and left, body and soul, yin and yang, lighting and thunder, yes and no, here and there, e and pi, matter and energy and many more examples could be given possibly with no end. We do not need to be a scientist to figure out this matching game, these objects can be detected or interpreted by our senses - sight, touch, smell, taste, hearing and dreaming. And as you analyze deeper the evolution of all kinds of pairing, they always follow the seven laws of creation or I sometimes called the Family Life Cycle.

My theory tells us that before the birth of the universe, there are only two species that exist: the presence of something (space) and the absence of nothing (nabse). From this duality or pairing, all things in the universe came into existence, where even God is only a part of the evolution of creation.

Before we debate that god is part of the evolution, I will first illustrate my theory of pairing (although you can use any of the examples above) using the inanimate letters of the alphabet as an example. The alphabet pairing is made up of the letter A and its alter pair the letter Z. These letters live in an enclosed system called the Family of Alphabet. These two letters are logistically positioned to coexist as partners. As these letters combine, they group together and transform into words, sentences, paragraphs, books, encyclopedias, libraries. Letters group together and expand to create more different words, words group together and expand to create multiple sentences, sentences create paragraphs, paragraphs create pages, pages create books and books create never ending voluminous information. However, in their exponential transformation and continuous progression, some words become dormant and others become effective and efficient. These letters who are effective and efficient dominate, thrive and survive.

The concept of pairing is the ultimate answer to how things evolve from the birth of the universe to the way life is today. In the book Creation by Laws, the evolution of anything on earth and our universe can be authoritatively explained using the theory of particle duality and the law of spontaneous infinity. The concept dictates a continuous propagation of "life" (living and non-living) and exponential transformation of species (living and non-living) in a never-ending process of procreation, which is guided by verifiable empirical list of instinctive instructions, that activates gradually the natural process of evolution of anything in the universe, a process that allows even god to be part and parcel of the evolutionary creation.

In the Space-Nabse duality, this partnership belongs to a natural system called the Grand Family of Everything. From this duality, information also evolved gradually like a computer program to guide the evolution of creations. At a certain point over the course of its primodial history, they evolved into two "life forms" - the nonliving things (all things that do not fall as living things) and living things (plants and animals). Take note that the word "life" here means that any particle that has the instinctive intelligence to retain and develop its genetic characteristics inherited from its parental duality. As creation follows the seven instinctive natural laws, the non living things became dormant while living things continuously propagate and exponentially transform to new organisms. Darwinian's theory of evolution takes place, homo sapiens came into the picture and the story of adam and eve captured the whole world. As human beings dominate the world, the tool system, the numerical system, the alphabetical system and other new family of systems evolve.

To sum up the creation of our universe, the timeline of our cosmos from a macrolevel point of view started LITERALLY with the family duality theory (space-nabse), the planetary big bang (mass-energy), the Darwinian evolution of organism (egg-sperm), the genesis of the bible(Adam and Eve), and the microlevel family of man-made systems exemplified by the tools system (metal-wood), the alphabetical system (A-Z), and the numerical system (0-1) to name a few. All these dualities follow the stages of family life cycle called Creation by Laws.

The practical significance of this article:

This article revolutionizes the Family Age, since all creatures belongs to the same family tree and ergo have the same status as all other species, each and every organisms including us must be equally treated. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and straight should not be regarded as different since all of them have the same common particle that we inherited since the birth of the universe. There are standard man-made norms that we follow, but the happiness of anybody should not be taken from them. After all, it is not only sex that makes a partnership survive, companionship and care contribute the most in order for a relationship to last. And from this duality principle, you will be surprised that pairing is not only for man and woman in order to grow and multiply. Everything in this world can spontaneously propagate and exponentially transform by simply following the natural seven laws of creation.

Also, within this family age, all living things must come together to unite in order to save the earth and to enjoy life to its fullest by introducing a new way of living. If this duality theory will be accepted by the common tao, then the reality of protecting and sustaining the world will be almost at hand. And it is nice if our group will be a part of this endeavor. If civilization started from Stone Age, Agricultural Age, Industrial Age, Technology Age, Information Age, it is high time now to recognize and to promote with immediate attention the Family Age.

On the other hand, if the leaders of every country recognize this family theory, then there will be no innocent kids or soldiers that will be killed in the line of fire, there will be no crimes since everyone is earning at their own face, and the earth will be protected since a new way of green living is being introduced. And on this picturesque, the key element to be united is not peace but harmony within a family. Like bees or ants in colonies who worked in harmony and protect their "Queen", human beings, with a slight gift of intelligence and not to far from other species, must worked together too to protect "Mother Earth" in order to survive, grow and flourish.


"The universe evolved from nothing and something; and has most of this elemental duality until now."...Sir Joey Ledesma Lawsin.
 
A magnet has always north and south poles.
Except for monopoles.
White and black
And all the shades of grey inbetween, plus the other colours.
yes and no
Maybe.
here and there
Everywhere, nowhere, somewhere.
Phi etc...
sight, touch, smell, taste, hearing and dreaming
Dreaming is a sense?
Since when?
And as you analyze deeper the evolution of all kinds of pairing, they always follow the seven laws of creation
Not a pair of laws then?
Sir Joey Ledesma Lawsin
Sir?
Knighted by whom and when?
 
Durr!! where you been man? - you can buy knighthoods these days.
Tch, how the country's gone down these days...

I did like this selection from his biography though:
whether it is a pigment of my imagination,
http://www.authorsden.com/visit/author.asp?AuthorID=82742
Colourful thoughts?
I also like the idea that he's programmed his PC to "control the minifridge" though.:eek:

Pseudoreligion?
Nah, I've already suggested a "Total Bollocks" sub-forum, it'd fit right in.
 
Well im sorry guys but I am always booted from other forums for no reasons at all. They simply ban me or take my access out from my threads. So I move from one forum to another to exercise my mind and for you guys to disprove my theory. That is why it is always a cut and paste thing. I just feel that they are not really that expert in their fields or simply these people are just cry-babies. I know this forum should be argumentative both ways: pros or cons; but sometimes they become personal or otherwise. I just joined a forum that is dictatorial in nature (at least i can see that some of them make sense) however they locked me out for no reasons at all or maybe one - war of intelligence.

BTW just like Edgar Allan Poe, I also have two names Sir and Joey. Just like a friend of mine named Doc Jordan. He is not a doctor and he is not michael jordan.:D

Now show me that this forum is really about science. No more personal matters( cry-baby fallacy)or topics that is not a scope of my theory. If I do not answer your question it means that it is not related in anyways at all. However, unless you prove first that your arguments is true by showing proofs ( do not direct me to a book or a website for answers). Thank you.

excerpt from the book of Doc Jordan (just teasing). Chill Out and let us have FUN!
 
Well im sorry guys but I am always booted from other forums for no reasons at all.
I wouldn't say that based on the evidence so far.

however they locked me out for no reasons at all or maybe one - war of intelligence.
Or lack of.

If I do not answer your question it means that it is not related in anyways at all.
Or you're side stepping the issue you mean?

However, unless you prove first that your arguments is true by showing proofs ( do not direct me to a book or a website for answers).
The small point you're missing is that you are the one making the claim, therefore you should provide the proof.
And please don't don't direct us to a book or website :rolleyes:
Read the rules -
C. Stating Opinions
If you have an opinion, back it up with evidence, a valid argument and even links and references if possible.
From the regulations for this sub-forum.
 
Last edited:
Well since some of you here have been into most probably all the forums that i joined, the script on each threads will just serve an evidence why i was banned or locked.

I am sorry about not knowing your regulations. I will make sure I will read them.

Now with cut and paste, before I do that here most probably you have read my arguments and evidence that backed my theory up. If you have not read them then I will paste them here.

So let us keep the ball rolling!
 
monopoles don't exist
You mean we haven't found any yet.
Not the same at all.
Doesn't quantum theory more or less demand them?

the funny thing is that scientists are trying to find them but they have already found them: electrons don't have north and south pole and neither do protons... electrons are negative (south) and protons are positive. i don't know how scientists could miss that..
So what you're you're saying is: they don't exist and they do exist?
 
I have joined probably 10 forums and it is always the same arguments: they think that i am talking about two opposite things - a duality of opposite things because I provided in my introductory an examples that are opposites in nature. They are just examples and I really do not know if they are opposites or not.

My argument here is that to process Creation the first requirement should be there is a pairing, a partnership, a two of something (the first and the other one I called alter-pair). I just used duality since it sounds scientific! lolz.
Any suggestions from you guys so I will not confuse you and our readers about the word duality?

The first requirement is just one of the seven conditions that my theory claims. And I will discuss them one by one as we go along or until there is no more loop holes in my first. We are not yet talking about the mathematical aspect of my theory and the isodimensional models that I used as a proof.

So I need you guys to guide me with suggestions, criticism, harsh comments (not personal, lolz) and probably praises. Thank you. More brains the merrier.
 
I have joined probably 10 forums and it is always the same arguments: they think that i am talking about two opposite things - a duality of opposite things because I provided in my introductory an examples that are opposites in nature. They are just examples and I really do not know if they are opposites or not.

My argument here is that to process Creation the first requirement should be there is a pairing, a partnership, a two of something (the first and the other one I called alter-pair). I just used duality since it sounds scientific! lolz.
Any suggestions from you guys so I will not confuse you and our readers about the word duality?

The first requirement is just one of the seven conditions that my theory claims. And I will discuss them one by one as we go along or until there is no more loop holes in my first. We are not yet talking about the mathematical aspect of my theory and the isodimensional models that I used as a proof.

So I need you guys to guide me with suggestions, criticism, harsh comments (not personal, lolz) and probably praises. Thank you. More brains the merrier.


I'll wait till you book is published.
 
I have joined probably 10 forums and it is always the same arguments: they think that i am talking about two opposite things - a duality of opposite things because I provided in my introductory an examples that are opposites in nature. They are just examples and I really do not know if they are opposites or not.
So what are you talking about?
If you can't explain it how well do you understand it?

My argument here is that to process Creation the first requirement should be there is a pairing, a partnership, a two of something (the first and the other one I called alter-pair).
Why should that be a "first requirement"?
Science doesn't work like that.
You don't set requirements, you look for what is not what you specify.

I just used duality since it sounds scientific! lolz.
Well you failed to give any impression of "sounding scientific".

Any suggestions from you guys so I will not confuse you and our readers about the word duality?
Oh right, you want US to develop YOUR "theory"?

The first requirement is just one of the seven conditions that my theory claims.
And "theory" is based on... what?

And I will discuss them one by one as we go along or until there is no more loop holes in my first.
That's gonna be a very long time.

We are not yet talking about the mathematical aspect of my theory and the isodimensional models that I used as a proof.
So you have mathematical proofs?
Present them: it will cut out all the talk.

So I need you guys to guide me with suggestions, criticism, harsh comments (not personal, lolz) and probably praises. Thank you.
Praise?
Um, you can use a keyboard.

More brains the merrier.
Any would be a step up.
 
Last edited:
So what are you talking about?

In order to process creation, there are two of a something (at the least) in order to evolve. This pairing (the first of the pair and an alter pair- the second pair) will evolve as a family. From this first generation, other families will evolve too. However, they need to follow the seven requirements of creation. If the alter pair or the first is missing, creation will not take place.


If you can't explain it how well do you understand it?
Did you understand what I am talking about now?

Why should that be a "first requirement"?

First, that’s how my isodimensional morphs started to grow. It started from two of a something.

Second, just like in our society, we have a family system which starts with a partnership of a father and a mother (the least). And population explosions is the by product of this duality, I mean pairing.

Third, my formula suggests that there should be two of a something in order to propagate life forms in order to transform new life forms. Life forms are all things that we sensed or "nonsensed(we sense that something is out there but we could not find evidence that it is there. Because they live in an immaterial universe. However i can prove them, at the least, logically and by my formula at the most).


Oh right, you want US to develop YOUR "theory"?
Yes, probably! In a way that my readers will understand clearly my theory. Since I do not belong to any scientific organization or have a peer to review my works, I look forward to this forum to give me favorable insights to all the flaws, imperfection or shortcomings that my theory entails.


And "theory" is based on... what?
My theory tells us that before the birth of the universe, there are only two species that exist: the presence of something (space) and the absence of nothing (nabse). From this duality or pairing, all things in the universe came into existence, where even God is only a part of the evolution of creation. This premise is based on the 3 factors I just mentioned above.


So you have mathematical proofs?
Yes but can we discuss first if my theory is feasible without getting to mathematical proofs? But I can give you the formula without derivation and data: the square root of S plus 1 is equals to N. The law states that the product of creation (Family life cycle) and evolution (spontaneous infinity of families) defends on the family pairing system - The Law of Symmetrical Inversion.
 
Last edited:
In order to process creation, there are two of a something (at the least) in order to evolve.
Evidence for this conclusion?

In order that evolution will take place, they need to follow the seven requirements of creation.
And these are what?
What evidence do you have that they are required?

Did you understand it now?
No.

First, that’s how my isodimensional morphs started to grow. It started from two of a something.
Okay,what are "isodimensional morphs"?

Second, just like in our society, we have a family system which starts with a partnership of a father and a mother (the least). And population explosions is the by product of this duality, I mean pairing.
Non-sequitur.

Third, my formula suggests that there should be two of a something in order to propagate life forms in order to transform new life forms.
"Transform to new life forms" what does that mean?

Because they live in an immaterial universe.
Immaterial universe? Speculation.
And anything living there is even less founded.
If your reasoning is at all based on an "immaterial universe" (which is unverifiable) then you cannot claim validity.

My theory tells us that before the birth of the universe, there are only two species that exist
Um and you arrived at this "theory" how?

the presence of something (space) and the absence of nothing (nabse).
Nabse? What language is that?
And "absence of nothing" indicates "presence of something", i.e. if there is "not nothing" then there must be something.

From this duality or pairing, all things in the universe came into existence
Supposition.

where even God is only a part of the evolution of creation
If you're introducing "god" as anything other than the religious concept then you had better define it.
If it is the religious concept then your "theory" has no science to it.

But I can give you the formula without derivation and data: the square root of S plus 1 is equals to N. The law states that the product of creation (Family life cycle) and evolution (spontaneous infinity of families) defends on the family pairing system - The Law of Symmetrical Inversion.
Unless you define your terms (e.g what is "S", what is "N") and units of measure then the formula is meaningless.
"Product" indicates that there's a multiplication - which doesn't exist in your formula.
How do you indicate "defend" mathematically?

SQRT(S)+1 =N
does not match the description since you have three variables in that (creation, evolution and "family pairing system")
Your formula already appears flawed.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top