If a model produces paradox it is incorrect. Paradox is the product of an unbalanced equation. The paradoxes:

A. "How does something come from nothing?"

B. "Why is there something rather than nothing?"

Are the result of the "thing"-"nothing" model. My theory states that in order to balance the equation, a third variable is required. But this third variable isn't on the same plane as the equation. My model says that all of the other models are missing the = sign. This equals sign is the middle column of the Fundamental Model of Reality.

However, the current language (thing-nothing) does not even allow for the possibility for the = sign to be expressed/communicated. It was necessary to adapt the language slightly in order for what everyone has been trying to communicate this whole time, to be communicated! You see, __it has literally been impossible to construct a final concluding theory ____until this adaptation__** .** The adaptation of the language allows for the robustness required to resolve both of the above paradoxes. If you are sincere in your search for the ultimate truth, you must investigate this theory until you understand it to the point where you see how this changes EVERYTHING, or until you prove it to be impossible to be true.

Either I'm right or I'm crazy, because I'm not wrong.

## Comments