When you look at everything from any of its three possible angles the universe, the nothingness or the zero energy corona at the extreme of any of these is a perfect symmetry, it may not be one that you like say if you are looking at the nothingness, which suffers a perfect chaotic symmetry, everything is perfectly disorganized. But the relevant part here is that the nothingness does hold symmetry, the difference is how it retains it, no pressure, simmering perfection, it does not need joints, it does not need connecting points to hold it all together, the symmetry of it all is so extremely consistent that it is even as it isn’t.
Scientists, the people that brought you the big bang, are keen on symmetry, they argue that the universe was originally created in a perfect singularity called the big bang, surprisingly they are not all wrong. There was one and many big bangs, all the manifestations of a desire for definition. But where they are wrong is in really believing that it was perfect symmetrically at the moment of its inception. If the universe could have held a perfect geometry at its inception it would not have gone critical and exploded nor would it now be fighting a possible collapse. In fact there would be nothing more defined against the nothingness, and more absolute in form and consistency than a perfect symmetry origin. Such origin would not collapse into a big bang explosion, it would hold, it would be a very small but absolute universe within the nothingness, and the nothingness would have a very difficult time breaking it, because of its perfect symmetry.
A universe however born into definition with a nice burst of desire is not perfect, it is the imperfection that produces the energy collapse we call the big bang, it is the fact that the universe is born with intent of a perfect symmetry but fails to complete perfect symmetry and then goes critical that causes it to create the forces that dissipate from the original crystal imperfection. Yes it was tension, the tension of a crystal that was unbalanced that births the universe, not a symmetrical perfection, but an almost perfect symmetry that was not obtained and is collapsing.
So as we experience the collapse of energy we are also experiencing the collapse of an imperfect symmetry, the universe is born of an imperfection, not a perfection, perfect symmetry does not give birth to universes as we know them. Symmetry breaking is what we witness in the cosmos, and as the symmetry breaks the energy within the symmetry collapses.
The antimatter and matter dilemma which allows our existence because we do not align ourselves with the antimatter, we inhabit different points of space/time, this antimatter is much a part of the universe, and was born in it, so there is no dual extinction probability here, matter and anti matter are the same wall of the universe, they both accomplish as much destruction as sustainability. And wen the universe collapses completely, to prove their current compatibility, neither will survive the experience.
There is only one line to perfect symmetry and that of course is the infinite entity, void of energy, one of its parts its all of its parts, it has no history or matter, so none of its parts weigh more than the other parts, in fact one of its points, if we could see it would look like all of its points, so turn it this way or that way, and either way you get perfection. It is an incredible idea, not really very believable, but perfect symmetry is equally impossible, so if one exists the other one does too.
We have a historical idea about symmetry, we remember having more symmetry in the early life of our universe, we know that definition and structures support us, our bodies, though sewer energy, are structures, and our minds more structured than our bodies, our minds create abstract symmetrical structures such as governments, philosophies, religions, even ethical constructs, and of all these are pure or at least we perceive them as pure, erroneously we attribute the imperfection of any of these ideas, not to the idea, but rather to the practice of the idea, the idea is perfect humanity is imperfect, humanity created the idea and the idea is perfect. Logic at its best. We say, for instance, that Justice as an idea is perfect, it is the practice of justice that is imperfect. All about application, how you apply the law, Justice is corrupted by humans, but what escapes everyone is that imperfect things do not create perfect things, and when imperfect things create perfect things then those perfect things disassociate themselves from the parental imperfection, witness as evidence god’s own denouncement of the humanity that created him. At the level of Justice we can surmise that the reality is, that Justice, and the need for justice is only born where there is crime, if there were no crime there would be no need for justice, so the brutal reality is that like matter and antimatter, justice and crime are identical personalities, and they complement each others symmetry to exist. Our minds acknowledge the importance of symmetry, and we idealize all aesthetics in equilibrium, how even is it? how well does it flow? does it all fit together? and, critically, is it an original symmetry? Does it tell us something different? Originality is all important because we know we are imperfect, originality is merely the desire expression of discovering a perfection. These are the fundamental components of beauty, a denial of our corrupted and painful symmetry, our balance is unstable, we are constantly tittering, which is why the true aesthetic expression is rare and mostly unobtainable.
All because the symmetry that gave rise to our universe was imperfect and broke, it suffered abnormal tension and went critical; and so we can conclude that we are searching for that perfection, that magical equilibrium that can perfectly captivate symmetry and only exploring originality can lead us to that objective. To accomplish the originality the creators of original things have to work alone, in physical isolation and mental solitude, away from the influences of the universe that they know, and this is the hope, and this is where the probability of reaching a perfection might be obtained. The idea is that we are the ones that will survive if we reinvent ourselves, if we discover a new perfection that will correct the original imperfection, and that ideal leads us to the aesthetic value judgement.
The more symmetrical something is, the stronger it will be, the more durable, the less it will suffer the ravages of consequences, those that have had good beginnings or that endure best will have the greatest symmetry. They, closer to the ideal symmetry will mark the direction of the species. Today however all an initial symmetrical unity guarantees is that you will survive longer, but born of the imperfection it is not sustainable, imperfect symmetry is collapsing, all around us is rising ugliness.
