Quotessence
Home / Authors / Dejan Stojanovic
Dejan Stojanovic

Dejan Stojanovic Quotes

Poet

Filter quotes by topic

AllDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniverseCosmosUniversal MindGodPhilosophyLiteraturePoetryLiterature QuotesPoetry QuotesQuotesCitatiTruthKrugovanjeTimeWisdomPoezijaRealitySpace

Famous Dejan Stojanovic Quotes

“We may argue that since nothing is just nothing, it cannot be space, and since it is not space, space is, in other words, what we see or think space is. However, what we see or think about space does not mean we have proved that what we see as space is real space. What is curved is only the Being, presented to us as something we call matter and energy, not space. Although Being envelopes space or is enveloped by space, it does not mean that space curves, only the Being. Since space is undetectable, passive, and nonexistent except concerning the Being, it does not contain any property or feature and, therefore, cannot be curved. There must be something to be curved.”

TimeUniverseSpaceCosmosDejan StojanovicNothingnessAbsoluteNothingSomethingUniversal Mind
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“We still can insist that space is what we say because nothing, or an absolute vacuum, is not space. Then, we must prove how space can exist without this nothing or absolute vacuum. But we cannot prove that space is possible without nothing. Since we cannot prove that there is space or curvature of space without nothing, we will establish the opposite: without the absolute vacuum, the Nothing (void, emptiness), there is no space. When we become convinced that there can be no space without the Nothing or an absolute vacuum, we must answer precisely what space is and how it becomes space. The only actual space is nothing or an absolute vacuum; we have already stated that this space cannot be curved.”

RealityTimeUniverseSpaceCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteEinsteinCurvature Of SpaceCurvature Of Information
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“We may still insist that space, although mainly emptiness, is completely “contaminated” by all the forces in the Universe—particles, waves, and so on. Still, based on this deduction or inference, we cannot prove that what is curved is space since nothing remains nothing and cannot be transformed into something based on the laws of physics. If the Nothing does not convert into something, the curvature of space is impossible. To prove the curvature of nothing (space), we must prove that nothing can transform itself into something based on the laws of physics. Suppose we further insist that this is only a problem of linguistics and philosophy and not physics since we stated that space is how we define it and not as it is. This reasoning would be insufficient because we must first prove that actual space is what it is and not what we say it is to fit our arguments. There can be no answers to the most critical questions of contemporary science, physics, philosophy, and even religions if we are not as precise as possible, linguistically, experimentally, or in any other way. These questions appear to be self-evident, self-explanatory truths and axioms, yet they are neither self-evident nor clear and precise to reflect the actual underlying reality. If we are not as precise as possible, we create theories and paradigms presented as facts, although the starting premises are undefined and unanswered. However, if we do not answer the starting causes and premises, we cannot adequately describe the laws of nature, nor can we understand them. Regardless of how sure we are about space and the curvature of space, we still cannot claim we are correct without describing the nature of nothing. Without the Nothing, there can be no space. There will be an immediate argument, though, that the Nothing has no nature and, therefore, there is nothing to describe. The answer is that its passivity and lack of properties are its most potent “property” because they enable creation and existence. Without the Nothing or void, there is no creation and no existence. We converted nothing into something by our thoughts and language, using deduction or inference, and concluded that space is the consequence of this thought process, not the actual process. We applied our definite language to our indefinite “understanding,” ideas, or reasoning to prove the “fact.” However, the fact is or is not, regardless of our ideas, language, or reasoning. We must use the opposite and apply language to the facts rather than our understanding. Our understanding is limited, and facts are impersonal and independent of our knowledge. We cannot falsify the language to fit and understand the facts better. We cannot change facts or affect them with our ideas, but facts are verifiable up to a point. There are facts beyond the verifiable point by humans since human beings are limited. Still, language is verifiable, and our theories are both falsifiable and verifiable to a large extent.”

TimeSpaceDejan StojanovicAbsoluteRelativityEinsteinCurvature Of Space
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Since the immaterial Being envelopes the Nothing, this nothing, in “cooperation” with the Universal Being (Mind), becomes space as we experience and describe it. The “fabric” of this created space, with the help of nothingness, is curved. But all this is the product of the transformation of the Being into its different forms, modes, and interdependent qualities of reality. The “material” world is only a symphony of “materialized” qualities of the Universal Being,” not matter per se because matter per se does not exist. What we see as space is a “materialized” program of the Universal Mind. What appears to us as dimensions is the underlying nothingness holding the illusion of Reality, making it appear material. The Primordial Primary Quality is the Primary Ultimate Force, or Source, that powers all we see, experience, and measure. Everything is related to Everything else and is affected and conditioned by Everything else. Everything within the Universe is a message, information, and code to everything else. Energy and matter are the messages of the Universal Mind sent into nothingness to fertilize it. Relationships and communication among the myriad beings are the life of one organism. All the features of matter we experience are real in the sense that we experience the spacetime continuum, but all that is the result of programming and conditioning rather than energy and matter as physical realities per se. Everything was One and became a multitude, yet Everything stayed One on the most basic level. The story of One is the story of All. Every sense, every pain, and everything we feel are the messages of existence, messages of the Universal Mind in action, interconnecting the Web of the Universe into One Family. Absolute is the Ultimate uniting force of Everything. To be one and only is death. That’s why creating is needed. Without creating, there is no life. The Universe is the life of the Absolute. Something and Nothing are the Father and the Mother of the World. From One Absolute, there is an almost endless family dispersed through space in search of life and meaning, which is what we call existence.”

TimeUniverseSpaceExistenceDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindEinstein
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“The whole past, the present, and the future are in the world as potential. Without space, there is no growth and time. Growth and development are possible only in the multitude, which implies distances and is not accidental. Even if the beginning was accidental, and it was not, growth and development are not. A compressed idea, the primordial Universal Mind, contains the Way and every dimension. Time is the measure of distance; time beats from its heart and records the motion of its bloodstream; time turns the pages of the Way and epitomizes the unmistakable memory of the Being-God. Time is the Being’s device with which it deceives the emptiness within itself. Time records and glorifies the glory of the Being-God.”

PastTimeUniverseFuturePresentDejan StojanovicAbsoluteBeingNonbeing
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Everything or anything before the Big Bang does not obey the laws of physics and is not necessarily compatible with our understanding and views of the world. We do not mean that there is nothing before the Big Bang, but that we can hardly understand what is hidden before it (we can only use our abstract thoughts to imagine it). As we explained in other parts of this book, we cannot look at time in the same way from the perspective of the “physical” world as from the perspective of an immaterial world. Neither space nor time exists in the nonmaterial world. Space and time are categories we deal with only in the “physical” world.”

ScienceTimeSpaceDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindStephen HawkingNo Boundary Proposal
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“The exit of the Being is not in exiting itself but instead leaving on a voyage. Since there is nothing except the Being and Nonbeing (the Nothing, emptiness), it cannot go on a journey because a journey into the void has no meaning or purpose. Alone within itself, at the height of its power, it becomes the same as its opposite—Nothingness. The Being resolves this problem not by moving into emptiness but by moving into itself, by sucking up nothingness, or void, into itself.”

PurposeTimeSpacePowerDejan StojanovicNothingnessAbsolute
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“At the point of creation, two poles of the Absolute, Universal Mind (Something) and Absolute Void (Nothing) become creators of the world. The Universal Mind is the active “pole,” and the Absolute Void (Nothingness) is the passive “pole.” At the “moment” of creation, the Universal Mind envelops nothingness by the size of its program, but there is always nothingness “beyond” this nothingness unaffected by the creation. There can be many of these creations or universes. All of them together form the Universe. The Universe we live in is only a speck of the real Universe we cannot identify based on our current technology. It is a big question whether we will ever be able to glimpse the Absolute except through abstract thought and imagination, which are, in my opinion, legitimate methods not only of philosophical investigation but also scientific ones.”

GodTimeReligionSpaceAbsoluteUniversal MindLaws Of PhysicsCurvature Of Space
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“The idea that the World can create itself from nothing is equally absurd as the idea that God created the World from nothing. The lack of the material world, space, and time in the primordial, immaterial state of the Being is not proof that the primordial Being does not exist. Also, the lack of a material world in the primordial state does not mean that the Being creates from nothing. The Creation, or the process of creating, happens in the interaction between the Being and Nonbeing. The immateriality of the primordial Being does not mean that there was only absolute Nothing in the imagined “beginning.” This Immaterial Something is the Source of Everything.”

GodCreationMeaningDejan StojanovicAbsoluteNothingUniversal MindSource Of Everything
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Russell’s Teapot (Celestial Teapot Analogy) We cannot equate Russell’s teapot idea with the idea of God. Although this idea is humorous, it isn't very sensible. If anybody without scientific credentials stated thoughtfully that the teapot is circling the Sun, the majority of people would think that a person saying that is either bipolar, schizophrenic, or suffers from some other mental illness. This kind of comparison is absurd. Comic and absurdist comparisons of this kind only muddy the waters. Proof or disproof of such a thing is unnecessary because almost everybody knows the teapot can't orbit the Sun as freely as planets on a microcosmic or macro level. Regardless of Russel being aware that his example is nonsense, he still used it (and he states that). The point was not to prove anything but to make a funny remark to diminish the subject of the attack, God. It is a logical fallacy whenever we use such tactics or tricks because we use witty comments for lacking something more potent. If we make fun of some ideas, it does not mean they have no value. We cannot destroy an idea that has existed for millennia by witty but silly arguments. Carl Sagan made an even sillier argument about the undetectable dragon in his garage. To compare the idea of God to the teapot or a dragon in a garage is a useless way to refute an idea or argument with an “argument” (example) in the form of funny irony. I admire Bertrand Russell and Carl Sagan for their ingenuity and insights. I also admire Bertrand Russell’s writing style because he could express complicated ideas and concepts in very readable and clear prose. There can be no comparison between the idea of God and a teapot floating around the Sun or between God and an unidentifiable dragon in the garage. We cannot base our arguments on the value of their wit because regardless of how witty the statement is, it has to stand the test of truth, not the test of wit. We can easily exclude the idea of a teapot floating in orbit around the Sun as ridiculous. The same applies to the argument about the dragon in a garage. But can we exclude the idea of God from religious and theological thoughts and serious philosophical inquiries interested in discovering the truth about the world and God? We can easily refuse to accept a teapot or dragon in the garage as serious arguments. However, we cannot a priori deny the legitimacy of the idea about God, at least not the deist one (or pantheistic).”

GodReligionUniverseCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteCarl SaganBertrand RussellTeapot
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“We may accept the idea that natural laws govern everything in the Universe and that these laws are in some way absolute. Still, we cannot hide behind scientific laws before explaining them. According to Hawking, scientific laws may be enough for our understanding of the World. His implicit message is that the Creator is not needed. Such statements could have been valid if scientific laws were absolute and scientists, including Hawking, resolved the mystery of existence, the Universe, and the origin and future of everything. Since that is not the case, no scientist can replace the idea of the Creator just by insufficient scientific knowledge. Only a scientist or scientists (or anybody) with absolute knowledge can dethrone the Creator if there is such complete knowledge (scientific or otherwise), proving that there is nothing beyond the “point” where time stops. Unfortunately, this kind of knowledge and understanding does not yet exist. The purpose of science is not to push the Creator out of the picture but to improve, define, and redefine scientific laws in its pursuit of truth.”

TruthScienceCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteSpace TimeBig BangStephen HawkingNo Boundary ProposalScientific Laws
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Humans free themselves from conceptual traps by freeing themselves from paradigms that close horizons instead of opening them. Language is the supreme instrument of thought, but a number is a word, too; without a word, there would be no number. Every number corresponds not only to the graphic symbol but also to the linguistic one. Conceptually, numbers and words are different because words represent or name things and phenomena, while numbers represent the quantitative or numeric value of things and phenomena. We understand the function and the role of numbers and words. Through words, others know what we think or want to say. However, even a bird knows what the nest is by feeling it intuitively. A dog, thrown away ten miles from the house where it lived, will find it. Animals often communicate among themselves.”

IdeasScienceThoughtsDejan StojanovicAbsoluteScientific LawsLanguage And PhilosophyDevelopment Of Language
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“A word had to predate the number. As a graphic sign, the number is the graphic expression of the word that predates it. Both words and numbers are linguistic expressions of thought. The purpose of words is to express and explain the essence, and the purpose of numbers is to express quantity. Words are qualificators, and numbers are quantifications.”

IdeasScienceLiteratureLanguageThoughtsDejan StojanovicAbsolutePhilosophy Science And Language
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“We will start with Hawking's few quotations. “The quantum theory of gravity has opened up a new possibility, in which there would be no boundary to spacetime and so there would be no need to specify the behavior at the boundary. There would be no singularities at which the laws of science broke down and no edge of spacetime at which one would have to appeal to God or some new law to set the boundary conditions for spacetime. One could say: ‘The boundary condition of the universe is that it has no boundary.’ The universe would be completely self-contained and not affected by anything outside itself. It would neither be created nor destroyed. It would just BE.” Or, in the same manner: “There ought to be something very special about the boundary conditions of the universe, and what can be more special than the condition that there is no boundary?” Also, he stated, “According to the no-boundary proposal, asking what came before the Big Bang is meaningless—like asking what is south of the South Pole—because there is no notion of time available to refer to. The concept of time only exists within our universe.” The “no-boundary proposal” is a classic example of a device called in Latin, Deus ex machina—God from the machine, invented by the ancient Greek dramatists Aeschylus and Euripides. The primary purpose of the device was to resolve the irresolvable. The question of what came before the Big Bang is not meaningless. We cannot accept that our Big Bang is the beginning of all existence. Since there is "no notion of time available to refer to," that does not mean there is nothing to refer to. This reasoning is a logical fallacy based on the idea that there should be nothing to refer to if there is no time to refer to it. This kind of reasoning falsifies reality to fit the argument. For this statement to be accurate, there must be proof that there is nothing to refer to, not "no notion of time to refer to." The lack of notion of time to refer to or its availability is not proof that there is nothing to refer to, but only that there is no notion of time to refer to and that it is not available. The lack of availability is only proof that something is not available to someone but not proof that nothing exists beyond the “point” where “time” stops. If Something, the Being, the Universal Source of Everything, is not available or approachable in any way by some particular scientist, that does not mean that the Universal Source of Everything (the Absolute) does not exist beyond the physical world. In this sense, the no-boundary proposal is a boundary proposal of a different kind. Since it is impossible to speculate about abstract concepts or ideas, such as God, Absolute, or Universal Source, it is easier to invent some trick (pardon my language), with all due respect, to compensate for the lack of understanding of the most abstract ideas and to compensate for the limitations of a frame of mind of any particular scientist or philosopher. In this case, the no-boundary proposal precisely serves the purpose of a boundary—to limit the world to the point where “time stops” and declare that there is nothing beyond because time stops there. That should mean that the laws of nature and science stop at this artificially produced boundary. But what do we have as proof that this is true? Precisely like in religions, we have words that sound seductively beautiful and convincing. Also, to a large extent, these words are supported by scientific knowledge and investigation. Yet, they are just words, and in no way do they prove that there is no immaterial Universal Source beyond the “point” where time stops.”

TruthScienceDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindBig BangBlack HolesStephen HawkingNo Boundary Proposal
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Hawking’s insistence on scientific laws hides the desire to transform the current scientific laws into the ultimate and absolute knowledge of everything, physical and metaphysical, of this world and the outer world. According to him, we are on the verge of declaring, with almost absolute certainty, that we have solved the whole enigma of existence and gone down to nearly the deepest end of science and scientific laws. Although he expressed many ideas in a simple, popular, and often funny way, there is a little bit of unjustifiable scientific conceit (to call it that way) behind some statements. If we were to imagine the creative force capable of creating the Universe, this creative force would be out of time or eternal. The Eternal Being is not contingent or affected by the boundaries of the physical world. The no-boundary proposal is accurate in that there are no boundaries we can apply to the Eternal Being. Still, the Universe, as the Being with its beginning, is bounded by time. The first point of the Universe is its first limit; it would have no limits if it were a timeless Being. Even if there were a series of births and rebirths, these would still be limited creations or recreations of something eternal that creates or recreates itself through the creation of universes. The creative power of the Eternal Being is the ultimate force that keeps the Eternal Being alive. The only way for the Eternal Being to exist with meaning is through its creative power to rejuvenate itself in new ways and myriad forms constantly. The Creator is its creation, and the creation creates the creator in a deeper sense. Without creating, the Universal Being loses its purpose and becomes meaningless. Meaning is only possible in plurality. The World, or Universe, gives the Universal Being meaning and purpose. The world is its salvation.”

ScienceUniverseDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindBig BangBlack HolesStephen HawkingNo Boundary Proposal
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“The nonmaterial world is the spaceless "space" and timeless "time." In the nonmaterial world, there is no time and no space. Paradoxically, no time means eternity, and no space means infinity. No boundary proposal is a proposal about an everlasting world and everlasting time. Everlasting means time with a beginning and no end. The concept or idea of eternal implies no beginning and no end. The concept of the everlasting Being, or time, or space, as an ultimate principle is shaky because we cannot use our limitations in thinking to argue against reality as it is and not as we say it is. If we do not understand the idea of time in its totality, we cannot talk about time from the point of superior “knowledge.”

ScienceUniverseDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindSpace TimeBig BangBlack HolesStephen HawkingNonmaterial World
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Whatever has a beginning is not eternal. What is not eternal must have come from "somewhere." The worst thing is to try to prove something, counting on the idea that it came from nothing. It is also as unscientific as it can get. No chaos theory can prove this reasoning, and no "butterfly effect" can prove it because nothing is only nothing and cannot be anything else except nothing. Nothingness cannot move the Nothing or create from nothing.”

ScienceUniverseDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindBig BangBlack HolesStephen HawkingSpace And TimeNo Boundary Proposal
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“The idea of infinite regress is absurd. The question of God cannot be reduced to a cosmological argument either. The ultimate question of reality is if there is something or not. If we agree that there is something, then the question is if that something can come into existence from nothing. Wouldn't it be more logical that there is just nothing? But just the idea that there is nothing implies, at least linguistically, that nothing is something; otherwise, we would not use the words ‘there is.’ Again, language demonstrates how limited it is.”

ScienceUniverseDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindBig BangBlack HolesStephen HawkingSpace And TimeNo Boundary Proposal
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“We should conclude that this Nothing is eternal. To prove that Something is not eternal, we would have to prove that this Something just appeared from nowhere and became something. The burden of proof here lies on atheists to demonstrate how something came into existence from nothing. This burden is the same one Bertrand Russell tried to impose on theists, deists, or any believer. Why would believers be burdened with the burden of proving God and disbelievers get away without proving how Something, whatever we choose to call it—God, Universe, World, came to be?”

ScienceUniverseDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindBig BangBlack HolesStephen HawkingNo Boundary Proposal
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“That the matter originated just by itself or was always "there" in the form of "energy" and organized itself into superbly sophisticated organisms forming the Universe borders on insanity. We can, perhaps, all (both atheists and those who believe in a higher source) agree that there always was Something. The question is how we define this Something. It is much easier to prove that the Something always existed than to prove the opposite. Scientists can deal with this Something more easily because, moving back, step by step, scientists will come to nothing. When they come to nothing, the "spotless spot" before the Big Bang, they will have to scientifically explain how all the reality, the whole of what we think the "Universe" is, was contained within an immeasurable "spotless spot." Once they find the answer, they will understand that this "spotless spot" from which everything originated is immaterial and spaceless. This immaterial Being is the Creator of all reality and is the reality itself. Plotinus would call this reality intelligence or mind.”

ScienceDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindBig BangBlack HolesStephen HawkingNo Boundary ProposalPlotinus
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“We provided the frame from which scientists can prove that matter is a construct, program, and “instruction” of the Universal Mind and that the same program predetermines our perception. Our understanding of the world is contingent upon our experience, cognition, and perception (tertiary quality in my system of thought), which is contingent upon the secondary in my system of thought (originally, primary quality) since there is no matter as we perceive it or conceptualize it. There is no matter as such.”

SciencePhysicsDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindBig BangBlack HolesStephen HawkingNo Boundary Proposal
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Religious thinking is more accurate in realizing there can be no creation without the mover. Zero point is the "first" point. This zero point is something. It did not come from nothing. The World, as a "physical reality," has its physical and temporal beginning, but the force empowering it, the Universal Mind, is out of time, so there can be no notion of time to refer to before the Big Bang.”

ScienceDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindStephen HawkingSpace And TimeNo Boundary Proposal
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“The comment about the South of South Pole is a logical fallacy because it presupposes nothing existed before the Big Bang. The Entity before the Big Bang is not comparable to what is south of the South Pole. The idea that we do not understand that there is something "North, South, East, and West" of the Big Bang does not mean that these "North, South, East, and West" do not exist in a way incomprehensible to our limited cognitive powers, senses, and based on limited scientific discoveries. That which lies beyond time and space and is the source of everything we see cannot be referenced only by the too-simplistic and sometimes semi-humorous means. Our language and words or terms describing the sides of the “physical world” are limited if we want to apply them to the metaphysical, immaterial realm beyond space and time. In no way does this kind of reasoning or “arguments” prove that the Universal Source of Everything does not exist. I have chosen to call this Source of Everything, known and unknown, the Universal Mind. In our sense of the word, there is no space before the Big Bang, and there are no sides of any kind, not to mention sides of the World. South of the South Pole is just Nothingness from a physical point of view. There are no sides of the world in the primordial Nothingness or the Absolute Vacuum. At the same time, this Nothingness “hides” immaterial Being, the Universal Source of everything.”

PhilosophyScienceDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindBig BangBlack HolesStephen HawkingSpace And TimeNo Boundary Proposal
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“No Need for Time Before the Creation of the World Here is one more quotation representative of the way Stephen Hawking thought: “The role played by time at the beginning of the Universe is, I believe, the final key to removing the need for a grand designer and revealing how the Universe created itself. As we travel back in time towards the moment of the Big Bang, the Universe gets smaller and smaller and smaller, until it finally comes to a point where the whole Universe is a space so small that it is in effect a single infinitesimally small, infinitesimally dense black hole. And just as with modern-day black holes, floating around in space, the laws of nature dictate something quite extraordinary. They tell us that here too time itself must come to a stop. You can’t get to a time before the Big Bang because there was no time before the Big Bang. We have finally found something that doesn’t have a cause, because there was no time for a cause to exist in. For me this means that there is no possibility of a creator, because there is no time for a creator to have existed in. People want answers to the big questions, like why we are here. They don’t expect the answers to be easy, so they are prepared to struggle a bit. When people ask me if a God created the Universe, I tell them that the question itself makes no sense. Time didn’t exist before the Big Bang so there is no time for God to make the Universe in. It’s like asking for directions to the edge of the Earth—the Earth is a sphere that doesn’t have an edge, so looking for it is a futile exercise.” In its absolute state, beyond the World, the Being is immaterial, and the Nonbeing is an absolute vacuum, nothingness, or emptiness. In the primordial state of the Absolute, the Being and the Nonbing become the same—the Nonbeing. There is no time or space in the absolute realm beyond the World. Timeless “time” is the potential for Eternity. Eternity is beyond time because it is all time, past and future. Spaceless “space” or nothingness is the infinite potential for space. Infinity is beyond space because infinity is all space, past and future. Creation or recreation of the World (Universe) activates the two poles of the Absolute. Creation of the World is the salvation of the Absolute. Absolute is absolute potential. The activity of the Being enveloping the Nonbeing (Nothingness) transforms the Being and the Nonbeing into the World (Universe). When the Absolute transforms into the World, the Being becomes positive, and the Nonbeing becomes negative. The Being is positive “energy.” The Nonbeing is negative “energy.” Zero is the point of equilibrium between the Being and the Nonbeing. Zero is the passage (wormhole) between the primordial state of the Absolute and the World or Universe. Before the spacetime continuum, plus and minus are the same: + = – Before the creation, Absolute is 0 (+ – = 0) At the point of the World Creation, the Being envelopes the Nonbeing: + 0 – The Being cannot envelop the whole of the Nonbeing because Nothingness is infinite in its potential. The Being is infinite in its potential, too. (+ [plus] is the Being; – [minus] the Nonbeing; 0 [Zero] is the Absolute) The primordial state of the Absolute is immaterial, spaceless, and timeless. The primordial state of the Absolute is absolute potential. In its potential, the Absolute is infinite and eternal. Absolute can only exercise its potential and power in the infinite number of possibilities and universes or worlds it can transform into.”

ScienceUniverseDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindBig BangBlack HolesStephen HawkingSpace And TimeNo Boundary Proposal
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Universal Source and universal potential are always beyond space and time and do not abide by human scientific laws. Still, this does not mean that, potentially, humans may not acquire abilities to solve the biggest mysteries within the boundaries of the existing Universe we are aware of or of the much larger Universe this one is only part of. Even the secrets hidden beyond the “point” where time stops may be potentially solved, at least by abstract thinking, which can be a vast and valuable source for the further development and enrichment of scientific laws and humans as a species.”

ScienceDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindStephen HawkingNo Boundary ProposalUniversal SourceUniversal Potential
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“To state there is no need for a creator or God if there is no time is meaningless. Because the Absolute is beyond time and space as we know them. Absolute is the Source of time and space and, therefore, does not need time to create or recreate itself through the World. Such statements are not scientific; they are presuppositions and intellectual constructs that serve as fillers for the lack of accurate understanding or a fundamental theory explaining how reality, which is almost incomprehensible to the human mind, functions.”

TruthScienceCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindBig BangStephen HawkingScientific Laws
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“There are laws of nature. We may describe the laws of nature but still not wholly unravel and understand them to pronounce that scientific laws are equal to natural laws or that they are an absolute representation of natural laws. Scientific laws did not yet cover, describe, and explain all natural laws, mysteries, and secrets.”

TruthScienceUniverseCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteSpace TimeBig BangStephen HawkingScientific Laws
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“We cannot hide behind science nor talk in the name of science while proclaiming statements that are not scientific. Such statements are that there is no creator if there is no time. However, this is only a statement a scientist (Stephen Hawking) uses, not a scientific argument or fact with scientific validity. The same goes for the south of the South Pole because such a statement is a logical fallacy based on the presupposition that there is nothing south of the South Pole, meaning there is absolutely nothing beyond some point of the material World, which is only a presupposition and not a scientific or natural law. Such statements may sound like analytic or logical propositions. Still, these are not analytic or logical propositions but methods or tricks to cover up the loopholes of scientific knowledge and understanding with dogmatic statements.”

TruthScienceCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindBig BangStephen HawkingNo Boundary Proposal
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Science is a human construct. Scientific laws are as valid as our understanding at any particular moment. Scientific laws are not absolute. Scientific laws wear human colors. Regardless of how close we got to the truth, the scientific laws are still not 100% accurate and complete. If we do not possess absolute truth, then scientific laws cannot be final, or they may be representative of the truth up to the level of our knowledge and understanding, not more.”

TruthScienceCosmosDejan StojanovicAbsoluteUniversal MindBig BangStephen HawkingScientific LawsTruth No Boundary Proposal
Author:Dejan Stojanovic
Create image

“There is a universal reservoir, the source of all knowledge, which is the same for the arts and sciences as for philosophy and religion. In a way, science is an art. In some ways, religion is philosophy because philosophy and religion often deal with the same questions—with the first and the final causes, among others. Religious people a priori “bet” on God, whereas philosophers may bet on God or not. The difference in approach toward God between religion and philosophy is that religion imposes and prescribes God, and philosophy offers the freedom of thought and choice. Religious prescriptions of God are not proof of faith or God’s existence, but rather the opposite—they prove that philosophy is more “religious” than religion because it doesn’t steal God from people but offers freedom.”

PhilosophyGodScienceReligionDejan StojanovicAbsoluteArtsSource Of All Knowledge
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Canonization, limitation, and reduction of God to a “few” sentences are inconceivable attempts to kill and expel God from people under the excuse that God is doing that. There is no weakness in science and language as instruments. There is no excuse. There is only human power and weakness. Understanding depends on the balance between human strengths and weaknesses.”

PhilosophyScienceReligionUnderstandingKnowledgeDejan StojanovicAbsoluteArtsUniversal Source
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“The world was ready for greater discoveries two thousand years ago. (Heron of Alexandria is an excellent example of an inventor who invented the first steam engine, aeolipile.) There was a basis for it. Only the language to translate abstract ideas and symbols into the language of science was missing. The only obstacle to a human being is a human being himself. The only limitation comes from the inability to dream and pierce into the essence that permeates all that exists in the universe. There is the same law for a galaxy, for a man, and for an ant. Basic principles are the same everywhere; they never change and exist as long as the universe exists.”

PhilosophyGodScienceReligionKnowledgeDejan StojanovicAbsoluteArtsUniversal Source
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“God is not absolute, and Nothingness is not absolute. If we come from these positions (postulates), we confront the inability of language to be precise. This inability reveals that the problem of understanding different phenomena is not so much in the phenomena themselves but in our failure to understand or present them linguistically in the best and most precise manner.”

GodScienceReligionDejan StojanovicAbsoluteArtsUniversal Source Of KnowledgePhilospohy
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“God, or to put it better, our idea of God, is a concept before anything else. The way God had been (mainly) understood throughout history leads to the idea of God as an entity beyond the world that creates the world and stays beyond the world but affects it. There is no proof for this, but the concept itself, by its nature, is a theoretical expression or view of a particular phenomenon. As such, applied to something invisible or tangible and visible, it is subject to change.”

GodScienceReligionKnowledgeDejan StojanovicAbsoluteArtsPhilsophyUniversal Source Of Knowledge
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“Many concepts and ideas become laws in time, like the laws of physics. In time, many of these same concepts lose validity in favor of new concepts that become new laws. These phenomena lead to the progress of science; otherwise, some concepts, which were previously laws, would always stay the same regardless of whether they were correct.”

GodScienceReligionKnowledgeDejan StojanovicAbsoluteArtsPhilsophyUniversal Source Of Knowledge
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image

“New concepts or laws would not be possible without the preceding concepts or laws. What we refuse today as incorrect is the basis for something we accept as correct tomorrow. Then the question arises—if the preceding concept was incorrect, how is it possible that the new concept, or law, that we think is correct can be based on the previous and rejected one? Something “incorrect” cannot be the basis for something correct. In this way, we conclude that even those laws (concepts) we reject today as incorrect contain the elements of a new law or concept or something that we think is correct or more correct. The world's universal nature cannot be wholly apprehended and observed by the human mind. All this happens while the laws stay the same; only our ideas and concepts about the laws change, not the laws or the truth (fact) itself.”

GodScienceKnowledgeDejan StojanovicAbsoluteArtsPhilsophyUniversal Source Of KnowledgeDejan Stojanovic Big Bang
Book:ABSOLUTE
Create image