I expected this reply, George, but I want to thank you for making it an elegant reply. You are capable of expressing yourself very well.

--

The best place to hide a truth is through denying its circumstantial setting.

When I declare that you did not break the biggest egg on your brain, you declare there is no egg to break. As such, you are leaving the infant stage intact, even when that occurs just at that singular largest of levels while you have matured to full blossom on every other level.

You are actually super elegant, because you stripped the intact egg to the point the flimsiest level of intact egg is remaining. It may have even become near-invisible to you because that is how much you have chipped away from it without breaking the egg.

I suspect that you cannot break the largest egg on your brain because you do not like where it would put you?

What I showed with the envelope example is that the highest level of everything is without an (active) function. Even if we add functionality to universe by adding a next level of multiverse, then we still end up with the highest level of everything being without an (active) function. There is no denying, George, and yet I see you try.

Structure is the highest discipline humans are involved in, see math as well as modeling within science. There is no denying that the largest level is without an (active) function. I hope you do not try more.

You either accept, or you reject this position. But so far you are accepting one and undermining the other with all you have got. Or... worse... you make them both questionable -- the perfect 'whole-egg' solution.

If you are as intelligent as I think you are, you will actively investigate both the accept and the reject option. If you are dumb (which may be hiding in the most obvious places), then you'll make a choice without fully investigating the other option.

I know you have not broken the egg; your replies are very clear about this. I will not ask why you did not break the egg, because this can belong to an extremely personal realm, and Medium is not the place to discuss this.

Yet Medium is the place to ask you to investigate that option in which the egg is broken. How come you did not investigate both options as if each is separately presenting us the largest truth there is? Why did you make both options questionable only so they would remain as-if-one inside your brain?

We either have a universe in which we are totally scratching our heads how in godsname it was possible to have all this happening at all. Or... we recognize that the prior state of the universe broke, and we see the pieces of the broken vase rather clearly, our Milky Way one of the broken pieces, not related to the Vase any longer because the Vase is no more.

It is up to you, George. Will you do this homework, or will you find the most elegant words that will help you avoid peering into the broken-egg possibility? Will you side-step the question like you have so far? Or... will you look in the mirror of the universe, its truths staring us squarely in the face?

Gödel provided us the mathematical truth already. I have additional proof about the mathematical building blocks. Many have already come to the same conclusions, even eons ago. The evidence is everywhere, but folks do not recognize the clearings in the forest as dividing lines. They see one forest, while there is no one forest. There are many forests.

Will you break that egg on your mind? That is all I am asking, George. It is of the tiniest thickness, and it is almost unrecognizable. Yet believing that the universe can be some kind of unit, and guarding this idea with the claim that we cannot know one way or another, that is enough to know that your brain is holding on to the idea of unity, somehow, somewhere. You can't let go and it may be too painful, emotionally, intellectually.

Good luck on this trip therefore, if indeed you decide to investigate a universe in which galaxies are the largest material settings and where there is no (functional) relationship to the universe other than a pointing backward to the location where the Milky Way originated.

I am hoping for a reply in which you do not side-step this assignment.