Polarity

Author: janesix ,

Posts

Total: 11
janesix
janesix's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 2,033
3
3
3
janesix's avatar
janesix
3
3
3
Is polarity a necessary part of existance? Male/female, creation/desruction etc. 
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,777
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
--> @janesix
No it is not. The universe could exist perfectly well in a state of complete ennui. In fact cosmology assures us that one day it will.
Castin
Castin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,090
3
2
6
Castin's avatar
Castin
3
2
6
I've heard dualism traces its roots back to Zoroastrianism.
janesix
janesix's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 2,033
3
3
3
janesix's avatar
janesix
3
3
3
--> @secularmerlin
cosmology is in it's infancy. we have no idea.
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,777
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
--> @janesix
New evidence could come to light or we could find that our math is incorrect but for current cosmological model projects the heat death of the universe.
TwoMan
TwoMan's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 309
1
2
3
TwoMan's avatar
TwoMan
1
2
3
--> @secularmerlin
Wouldn't the heat death of the universe be considered the destruction opposing it's creation?
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,777
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
--> @TwoMan
What part of the universe is being destroyed? There is no reason to think that any of the stuff that exists in the universe today will not still exist,  in one form or another, after this projected heat death.
TwoMan
TwoMan's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 309
1
2
3
TwoMan's avatar
TwoMan
1
2
3
--> @secularmerlin
Then perhaps the word "death" is incorrect. Something like "heat transformation" may be more appropriate.
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,777
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
--> @TwoMan
Perhaps, I didn't coin the phrase.
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,053
2
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
2
3
3
--> @janesix
I think we humans naturally think in terms of opposing pairs - north/south poles, positive/negative, action/reaction and many others, but there is no rule that there must always be exactly 2 opposite sides.

One example is that white light is made of 3 colours(red, green and blue) not 2, and that is metaphorically carried over into nuclear physics. Stable particles such as protons need '3 sorts of charge' to gain stability.   That is an atom is stable and neutral by balancing the familiar pair of postive and negative electric charge, but inside a nucleon you need red, green and blue charge - it isn't a case of 'opposites attract' - it is a 'menage a trois' that is stable.

10 days later

EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,808
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
--> @janesix
Without any doubts, without duality and contrast there would again be only a singular omnipresent reality....which is what all creation derives from even if you study quantum physics. Creation starts from the very reality of polarity and opposing forces, this is what splits the omnipresent field and divides the oneness of all conscious awareness into different experiences and forms.....without that there can be no creation, no experience as an individual observing separation from the illusion of forms and contrast.