How can equilibrium or balance exist in a system where nothing lasts forever?

Forever, generally speaking, may mean never-ending or until the end of time. In my opinion, nothing lasts forever (except maybe the cyclic nature of the universe). So how can balance or equilibrium (ecological, metaphysical, any type of balance) exist in a system where impermanence is absolute reality? Is balance the only exception and that it lasts forever, or do we only percieve balance (as I think is the case)?|||Consider the fulcrum of the balance or equilibrium. In two dimensions, it could be a board over a triangle, like a child's teeter totter. If two children are seated such that neither has a foot on the ground, they could each be given a ball at the exact same time, of the exact same weight, and maintain equilibrium. Now imagine three dimensions, where the balance point is a needle point, and what is balanced is an irregularly shaped object made of wet clay. three people stand at equal intervals around the shape, at the 120, 240 and 360 degree marks. Each has a small lump of wet clay in hand. At the appointed time, each throws their piece of clay at the object. Is it possible for balance to be maintained? yes. Likely? no. Repeatable, at more than one location on the object for each thrower? yes. How many different ways? A lot of them, but the relationship between the three throws and the irregularity of the shape must combine to maintain balance, so the changes must be precise in relation to one another.











So the premise is that we assume nothing lasts forever, and ask if a condition can exist that





Your supposition that nothing lasts forever can be true or false. You assert that it is true and ask given that, what would allow for equillibrium?, and we can answer the question for each caseanswered it. What need be in balance becomes the thing to adjust, for those of us trying out the proposition.|||sorry about the last section, that was a draft that got garbled up and was to be deleted.





I think an equillibrium is an abstraction to help explain interrelationships between things that have an effect on something else of interest. I don't see the profundity of the fact that it changes

Report Abuse

|||@John So you're saying we only perceive balance?

Report Abuse

|||Nothing about balance or equilibrium indicates temporal disposition. You may want to look into the 'eternal/sempiternal' distinction - 'outside' of time vs. lasting forever 'within' time.





P.S. - 'i' before 'e' EXCEPT after 'c'. Sorry, I edit.|||equal rates of decay would result in balance





a pound of U235 on each end of a see-saw would remain in balance, not tipping in either direction, despite the decay