What is ‘Goldilocks’ in this scenario?
Because there does exist existence, there is variety. Because variety, there will be infinite variance, given that reality is whole and infinite. ‘infinite variance’ is here not the same as ‘infinite variety’, as prior to existence [I.e. outside of linear time] there are no things [see ‘cosmic blender theory’ on many other threads].
<---------------------------------------------------------- infinity ------------------------------------------------------------------------->
<----------------------------------------------------- infinite variance ------------------------------------------------------------------>
→ insert ‘Goldilocks’.
<--------------------------------------------------------- infinity -1 ---------------------------------------------------- > X <— {-1}—> [ = ]
<------------------------------------------------------ infinity [or?] -------------------------------------------------> Tao <------------>
?
If ‘Goldilocks’ walks into Hillbert’s infinite bear hotel, she will be presented with the entire collection of bowls of porridge. When she gets to daddy bears bowl, she would find in infinitely greater than all the preceding bowls. This leaves all the other bowls [an infinity] as the subsection denoted by infinity -1. ‘X’ is the balancing point of the comparison between daddies bowl and the other set.
Comparatively, is daddies bowl always ‘something big’ and not an infinity as like a space or some such thing, much as the other bowls are bowls ~ existent things. Albeit that an existence is a measure of variance and speed of agitation [information], and nothing is completely concrete. So basically we have ‘something big’ and ‘other things small’. something like god and existence then? Or going with the latter inference, and as we are speaking in terms of a metaphor, are there simply those parties involved in the manifest existence of all things? So we could say that the ‘something big’ in terms of our own manifest existence, is ‘you’ and that is as real as ones physical existence. that is where one must surely consider that causality cannot cause itself and existence exists as a product of the same formula which denotes an existence I.e. a physical existence is as real as the oneness/emptiness it derives from, and the experiencer in all things is equally real.
I leave it open to the inquirer
_