Between Dimensions

I was surprised to see the question "Create a stone that God himself cannot lift." This is a very famous theological question. It seems to directly logically deny the existence of God. In reality, however, it did not undermine the status of theology. Theists have excellent refutations of this. This is a famous rebuttal from the past, which is extremely interesting. I prefer to present it in the form of dialogue: "Can God create a stone that even he cannot lift?" "Aha, of course, he is omniscient and omnipotent." "How to create? If he creates it, then he cannot lift the stone. There is at least one thing he cannot do. If he cannot create it, then there is at least one thing he cannot do." "Aha, look, doesn't this just show the greatness of God's omnipotence? We don't know how to accomplish this at all, but God can do it. As for your inability to understand, of course you can't understand it, because you are not God. If you can understand this, what is the difference between you and God? You can even do this that we cannot understand at all. He is the great God!" Of course, some people pointed out the logical fallacy of this question itself, and it was widely accepted: The stone that cannot be lifted does not exist, which means that the essence of this question is to ask God to do an illogical thing. And this is meaningless. Asking this question means that you are tacitly admitting that "there is a stone that cannot be lifted no matter what," and this itself is a false proposition. As long as a stone has weight, it must be able to be lifted. The kind of stone you ask about doesn't exist, so how can you expect this question to be meaningful? Just like when you asked "How to prove 1+1=3", you already assumed that 1+1=3 when you asked, but this is wrong in the first place. How can you expect the question "Prove 1+1=3" to be meaningful? Therefore, it is not that God is no longer omnipotent, but that the questions you ask are meaningless. Such questions are obviously meaningless for theological discussion. Looking back at the first rebuttal, you will find that it is actually very interesting. This explanation has a deceptive meaning of "since you are unreasonable, then I am not unreasonable either." Haha, so this may be the reason why the second explanation is recognized, after all, it is more "reasonable"? Isn't it interesting?

When there was a shortage of books, Dian Niang recommended the author's "Light, Short, Scattered". I fell in love with him at first sight, as if I had found the feeling of watching the story show back then. Later, I read some short stories of "Zhuan, Shen, Li" and "Soft, Transformed, Things", which left a deep impression on me. The ones he wrote are "Devil's Corner" and "The Game of National Destruction". The author has a very rich imagination, and the high-intelligence stories he wrote are amazing. I am still reading "Between Dimensions", and I plan to read it after I have fattened up. 😁 I wish the author better and better.

The starting point is convulsing

The short story I first came across with Keba a few years ago was probably "Softening, Transformation, Object", and then I finished reading "Light, Short, Scattered", and just happened to start the book "Turn, Leave, Leave", and now "Between Dimensions" has been subscribed to now. These books have been fully subscribed and read. No matter how many short stories I read, "Between Dimensions" It was so amazing every time, but after reading the epilogue of the last chapter, I really felt sad. How could it be that no one needs your story anymore? So many of the stories you told are really good stories. I can still read short stories from that time to this day and I am still fascinated by them. It is a pity that I don't know why the subscription is not good.

There are a lot of typos, sorry if they cause discomfort. It will be fixed within a week, I try to speed it up as much as possible. Please also help me mark the content with syntax errors. Thank you all and let's make progress together.

I remember that this author seems to be the leader of Qidian short stories

Everyone, come quickly

The starting point is convulsing

I just watched it today. After watching "Margaret", I think it is still really awesome. The following is my personal opinion: In Qidian, I am used to reading long stories in a continuous pattern of 0~~~1, but short stories always read in an intermittent pattern of 0~1, 0~1, which is not very adaptable. The long story is a big story that makes people unable to put it down; the short story can be put down at any time after reading a short story. Moreover, you will feel tired after reading a story, whether it is a long story or a short story. This makes reading multiple short stories at once more tiring. (The feeling of exhaustion can also be said to be the feeling of gain from reading a novel. After reading a story, you get an experience. In the case of short stories, you get multiple experiences in a short time. Personally, I feel tired easily.) Having said so much, it does not prevent me from feeling that the writing is awesome. I looked at the number of fans, and they were too few. I just had over fifty, which was seriously inconsistent with my strength. 🕖It is still a long-form mainstream website, and short-form articles have obvious disadvantages in online articles. Short stories feel more suitable for publishing, Zhihuyan, public accounts, Weibo, and self-media. I don't read short stories, but I accidentally read a light short story one time, and I thought it was awesome. But... I didn't read the whole book. . . Because every time a story in the book ends, it is a full stop. The book is very good, but the starting audience doesn't eat this dish very much. The creativity is great. I look forward to integrating, summarizing, sorting out ideas, and creating a "mainstream Internet article" that is in line with the mainstream people in the starting point.

From the earliest beginnings of Qingshuan, to the softening, turning away, and finally to this dimension, the author's story-telling ability and storytelling ability have been maintained very well. It is easy to immerse yourself in this short story. Personally, I feel that the biggest improvement of this new book is the addition of a main line, but it does not destroy the independence of each story. Then the length is shortened to three chapters. The plot is still attractive and complete (although the corresponding chapter is about 5,000 words), and the connection of related short stories is still great. As for each story, it also has a certain depth, but what attracts me are the wonderful stories (laughs).