Authors: Vidamor Cabannas
I analyzed the refutation of the Theory of Objectivity performed by Colin James III in vixra.org/abs/1904.0549 and verified that the applied method as well as the values found were correct. However, there is an error in the conclusion, as it refutes the Theory of Objectivity instead of confirming it. The values found in Colin James III's refutation confirm the exact findings of the Theory of Objectivity. Therefore, as the values that were found confirm those presented by the theory, these values are a confirmation and not a refutation of the theory. In other words, the equation N + 1 = n – 1 is tautological, confirming the existence of a geometric entity that occurred before the onset of the universe, which the Theory of Objectivity calls Nothing. However, Nothing is a geometric entity incompatible with the existence of the universe, which forms a contradiction with non-tautological values at the atomic level. This is because in the era of Nothing, there is no space nor any other element other than the geometrical point known as Nothing. There is no reference. This geometric Nothing does not signify absolute zero and has an informative value. The Theory of Objectivity uses a logical and geometric model to demonstrate how the spherical point called Nothing transformed itself into universal space. Thus, it proves that absolute Nothing does not exist.
Comments: 11 Pages. More information and comments on Theory of Objectivity and Author Vidamor Cabannas can be found at www.theoryofobjectivity.com
[v1] 2019-06-02 16:07:32
Unique-IP document downloads: 19 times
Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.
Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.