Quotessence
Home / Quotes / Quote by Dejan Stojanovic

Quote by Dejan Stojanovic

“If we would, hypothetically, explore the idea of the universe's contraction, the result would be similar to the black hole. Regardless of a much bigger mass of the whole Universe, as ours is, the absolute contraction would lead to the same point at which the black hole reaches maximum density. The point of maximum density is Zero, at which point the Big Bang happens (or the Universe disappears, which is less likely). In this sense, from the point of the result, expansion or contraction of the Universe would lead to almost the same result.”

Quote by Dejan Stojanovic

Work

ABSOLUTE

Browse quotes and source details for this work. more

Author

Dejan Stojanovic
Dejan Stojanovic

Dejan Stojanovic, born on March 11, 1959, is a Serbian poet known for his profound emotions and unique style in his poetry, which has won the hearts of readers worldwide. more

You May Also Like

“We believe it is more likely that there is not only one Big Bang but multiple Bing Bangs at different points in the Universe of Universes or Multiverse. Let’s suppose there is more than one universe. In that case, we cannot talk about any of them independently of the rest, except hypothetically, because there would be no absolute void beyond one universe or Big Bang. In that sense, the Universe of Universes would be unaffected by anything beyond it except the Universal Mind or Absolute itself. All we state in this sense applies to the unknown or unknowable Universe exceeding our perceptive powers and scientific instruments.”

“For argumentation, we can imagine there is only this Universe we are aware of, and we can treat it, along with black holes, as if there is nothing beyond it except absolute nothingness or absolute void. This world would be Einstein’s space with the curvature of space. Beyond it, there is a “spaceless space” without curvature. But without the uncurved “spaceless space,” curved space is impossible. This spaceless space is nothingness, and only a void provides room for the creation of space. The only real space is the spaceless space or absolute vacuum, and this spaceless space cannot be curved. What is curved is the creation that took “one part” of the primordial void, to put it that way, to create the World—the gravitational field and the spacetime continuum. But the primordial void, or the only real space that there can be, is not curved and cannot be curved.”

“The most unscientific idea in the history of humankind is that something came (or can come) into existence from nothing. Yet, since the Absolute is nothing without its emanation (manifestation in plurality), it must create Something to be Something. Absolute is not nothing just for being nothing but because it is an absolute something at its "highest point," at which there is no need for further movement, and all meaning and purpose are lost. The moving of the same thing to a different same point is no movement at all and is pointless.”

“The Absolute can only create and recreate itself if it transforms into something “less absolute.” This “less” absolute Being manifested through many beings is not only the Absolute's creation or recreation but is also its only life. In absolute Oneness, there is no real life. Division is the source of life. The secret to life is plurality. Oneness without plurality loses meaning. Plurality in Oneness is the source of meaning and purpose.”

“Life is not perfect. Almost nothing is ideal in the strictest sense, and we humans are not perfect in the strictest sense. But what is perfection? Even if a human being, or anything else, could have been perfect, would that "perfection" be desirable from an absolute point of view? Regardless of our debates about the intelligent design of the Universe or accidental appearance or always present matter and the always present Universe, the question remains—what is perfection (or absolute goodness), and how much do we know about perfection (is perfection perfect)?”

“It seems reasonable to believe that, regardless of the number of possibilities and universes, the Universe (Omniverse, Macro-Universe, Multiverse) would still be nothing more than a dead thing. What is it that powers the Universe? We see and recognize motion; we recognize the four main forces (gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear force) of the Universe, but we still do not know or fully understand these forces or the Universe itself. We recognize the Universe; we can feel it, touch it, think about it; we can describe it and its forces, but do we understand it? If we admit that we do not understand it fully, we must acknowledge that we do not fully understand perfection. Suppose we realize that we do not fully understand perfection; we must shift the subject of discussion to a higher level, which is not necessarily a higher level of understanding but a higher level regarding our approach.”

“We may win and still be wrong or partially wrong. We may win based on the merits of a superior thought at any given moment. But would we have won if there was a thought superior enough to challenge the winning thought at any particular moment? We would fail if there were a superior thought at any given time to challenge us. Would even the more superior idea be nobler or only superior in terms of the truth? Countless questions always arise and follow any serious inquiry.”

“How do we know our thoughts are the best and, simultaneously, the noblest? How rigorous is the inspection of our thoughts and merits? Are we satisfied more with winning or knowing? Do we enjoy victories and fame more than the truth itself? Our motives are driven more by winning than by finding the truth. If when this is the case, the winning "truth" or personal "triumph" can be more devastating, not only to “progress” but also to knowledge and the truth, than if there were no such "truths" and such thoughts at a particular moment. Some ideas may temporarily open some doors but close others in the long run. (Features of this kind in human nature are most apparent in politics.)”

“Considering all these elements, the context and frame from which we try to think or place ideas become more extensive and cannot be easily simplified to fit the purpose of a "winning" argument or idea. For example, the concept of intelligent design is, in a strict sense, a religious concept, but must it be strictly religious? To answer this, we must first ask what intelligent design is. And then, what may this design be from a metaphysical point of view, from the point of view of creation or recreation? How much do our particular human ideas about design enslave us, and can we even think about the design outside of our strictly human context and place it in an extraordinary context of the Absolute, God, existence, essence, matter, and Universe?”