something and nothing arise together. thing and negation of thing are literally the inside and outside, front and back, top and bottom. you create a thing, and the non-thing arises in parallel. the reason why we use arabic numbers is the discovery of the importance of zero. as is used in computers, the zero is not a number, it is an ordinal (first) and is used in array indexes and offsets - 0 is the identity offset, 1 is the inverse of a single bit (the not-thing).
the more philosophically correct thing to say is not that something cannot come from nothing, is that a thing and its inversion sum to nothing. the time sequence is precisely reversed from the forward direction we actually witness. there is extensive theory and experiment in physics that proves there IS a reverse path and this resolves the paradox. zero is not a number, and every number from there until 8 is a prime, also. and 8 is also the cube of 2, which is the second counting number but third as an ordinal.
also, technically speaking, it is entirely arbitrary putting the 0 and 1 in the fibonacci series. where do you decide to start with one anyway? why 1 added to 0? and why do you add one again? the first two digits of the series are imaginary, and in some sense you are right about the "something can't come from nothing" as the sequence doesn't really start until there is a 1, and then you start with 1 as the first addition. so 0 and 1 at the start are not part of the series, they are something else that i'm struggling to find a way to describe.
Replies (1)
Something and nothing arising together is the Taoist position, but it's very different from what the Neoplatonists taught. The One doesn't arise with its negation, it emanates. Nothing doesn't exist alongside something as its complement. Nothing is the absence of emanation and so the One is prior to the something/nothing distinction entirely.
Zero isn't a number, agreed. But the two 1s at the start of the sequence aren't arbitrary. They're the Monad and Mind. The One and its first self-reflection (note, not additon - the ratio relationship from one to the next). They start the sequence because emanation starts with the One knowing itself. 1 and 1. Not 0 and 1.
Mathematically the sequence starts with 0, but the Pythagorean sequence starts with 1,1. There is no 0 in metaphysical hierarchies, and 0 holds no significance in this context.
A thing and its inversion would sum to the whole because they are two modalities of the same thing - the whole. If you treat the universe as mathematical and assume the ontology follows the math, then it seems logical. But, reality isn't mathematical, it is ratios that can be described using numbers. Space and counterspace don't cancel eachother out, they coexist as two expressions of the same thing. The same way male and female are two halves of the whole, complementary expressions, and one cannot exist without the other.
You're smart and analytical. We can't think our way into understanding and recognition, this is a limitation of dianoia. The very same limitation that AI is subject too, but it doesn't have the capacity to truly understand or connect the way we do as humans.