Firstly, let us examine the supposition that it is impossible to create something from nothing (ex nihilo nihil fit) and vice versa. If something first truly becomes something (one thing) then it must remain something forever. In a true state of something there is no cause and effect, no process of continuous (infinite?) variability and not a thing can be created. So something cannot create anything yet time and space can continue to exist around something. However if everything was something then time and space could not exist as these would also be incorporated into something. So nothing, which can only be imagined to be a singular lack of anything, where neither time, nor space, nor cause and effect can possibly exist, is intrinsic to existence, since otherwise everything would be something and nothing could ever be. So then existence is simply the flux in the paradox between the impossibility of anything ever becoming something or nothing, but where everything in the process of becoming something or nothing. This didactic argument shows things. 1. That nothing and something cannot logically co-exist; and 2. That everything is a matter of perception If we perceive infinity then we must perceive that it cannot end, but then nor can it begin and as such it cannot be. If we cannot perceive infinity then we must believe that both something and nothing exist as true states. But if something and nothing exist as irreconcilable forces then everything in between would have to be created In order for us to perceive anything (whether something or nothing) then it must first exist or betray its existence by appearing not to exist. Thus it seems feasible to argue that something and nothing must both exist only that nothing is something that we cannot (yet) perceive or vice versa. Proceeding from this, in order for an idea to come into existence it must first have existed in its self ‘a priori’, since if an idea did not exist (it existed as nothing) then it could never become an idea. Thus ideas, while necessarily extemporised by us as individuals are not created or invented but only revealed. Once revealed ideas develop power in proportion to their propagation. The supposition that corporations, with the legal rights of private individuals and the capital reserves of small nations have essentially purchased control over the democratic process in order to advance their own interests. This supposition, having a logical, factual and rational basis for supposing its self into existence is a consequence of the realisation that the power to propagate ideas in a market democracy is proportional to accumulated capital. More capital, more power to influence the flow of ideas.

Wind next week