Nothing and Everything paradox

The Nothing and Everything paradox, also known as Sunayil's Paradox, Morbeth's Paradox, or the Illogical Creation paradox, is a in the creation of Anarturia as described in the third subparagraph of the first paragraph of the first chapter of the Deneriath (D:I-I-III), the book of lore of Anarturia.

The paragraph focuses on Sunayil, the Goddess of Everything, who became out of nothing, and Morbeth, God of Nothing, who became to be the opposite of everything. The paradoxical situation arises due to there being nothing, and thus the Goddess of Everything was really the Goddess of Nothing, and the God of Nothing was the God of Everything, as nothingness constituted everything at the beginning of everything.

The paragraph and paradox are the subject of intensive studies in the field of paradoxicology, which studies the existence and the effect of paradoxes on the world of Anarturia.

The Deneriath
The paragraph in which the paradox is described is the third subparagraph of the first paragraph of the first chapter of the Deneriath, also noted as D:I-I-III. The chapter is titled The Creation of Everything.

D:I-I-I describes the presence of nothing. There was literally nothing, as not even nothing was there. D:I-I-II describes the becoming of Sunayil, the Goddess of Anarturia, Everything, and the Mother of All Deities.

D:I-I-III goes as follows:

"'As there was something, so there had to be nothing. Morbeth became nothing. Conversely, Sunayil became everything. Together they sat in nothing and everything, for there was nothing in the everything, so everything was nothing.'"

As such, D:I-I-III describes the paradox.

Rules of Life
The Rules of Life dictate the existence of Anarturia and the interactions between the different immortal deities. One of the Rules, The Thirtieth Rule of Life, dictates that one immortal deity is not allowed to interfere with another immortal deity's Realm, under punishment of loss of immortality, followed by immediate execution (see: Anneordite). The Rules of Life are not a presence but a guideline controlled by Sunayil without exception; not even Sunayil herself is an exception to the Rules of Life.

The Thirty-First Rule of Life dictates that a deity shall be that which the deity is the deity of; i.e., the Goddess of Everything is not only the Goddess of Everything, but also the concept of Everything in its entirety. Similarly, the Godd of Nothing is not only the God of Nothing, but also is himself the concept of Nothing.

The Thirty-Second Rule of Life dictates that there can be no one thing without its exact opposite; i.e., there can be no Everything without Nothing. It also dictates that though the two exact opposites cannot exist without each other, they can never be each other.

Theory
As at first there was nothing without everything, there was literally nothing. However, when Sunayil became, she was something, and since she was the first to become, she was immediately the Goddess of Everything. As there cannot be one thing without the presence of its exact opposite, there had to be Nothing, which became Morbeth.

The paradox comes when one takes into account the presence of Everything and Nothing at that particular moment. Since there was nothing at all despite the presence of the Goddess of Everything, the concept of "Everything" was constituted solely of the concept of "Nothing"; conversely, the concept of "Nothing" was "Everything". This means that, when looking at the existence of things at that particular moment, the Goddess of Everything was directly the Goddess of Nothing, and the God of Nothing was directly the God of Everything.

Though it is possible both theoretically and practically that a deity concerns itself with a Realm other than this or hers, this should, according to the Rules of Life carry the consequence of mortality and immediate death following the onsetting of mortality. This has however not been the case with Sunayil and Morbeth. As such, their example shows that it is possible to be each other's exact opposite at the same time, even though it is impossible.

Written out in statements, the theoretical argumentation goes as follows:

Truths

"TRUTH I: There has to be Nothing for Everything to exist, and there has to be Everything for Nothing to exist."

"TRUTH II: Nothing can never be Everything, and Everything can never be Nothing."

"TRUTH III: It is impossible to do the impossible."

Realities

"REALITY I: There has to be Nothing for Everything to exist, and there has to be Everything for Nothing to exist."

"REALITY IIa: Nothing can be Everything, and Everything can be Nothing."

"REALITY IIb: Nothing can never be Everything, and Everything can never be Nothing."

"REALITY IIIa: It is possible to do the impossible."

"REALITY IIIb: It is impossible to do the impossible."

"REALITY IV: Even though it the impossible is possible, it is still for all intents and purposes and in sense and aspect impossible."

Conclusion

"CONCLUSION: Though nothing can be its opposite, it is possible for something to inherently be its opposite without consequences, even though this is by definition and its inherent nature impossible."

The formula used by Anarturian scholars goes as follows:

$$T_1 = (N \ne E) \therefore \!\, (E \ne N)$$


 * $$T_2 = ((N + E)(E + N)) = NE$$


 * $$T_3 = ((N - E)(E - N)) \ne NE$$

$$R = R_1 + R_2$$


 * $$R_1 = (N \ne E)$$


 * $$R_2 = (N = E)$$

$$\therefore \!\, R_1 = R_2$$ ※

where T stands for Truth, R for Reality, E for Everything, and N for Nothing. It shows that reality is contradictory and therefore paradoxical, as $$R = R_1 (= (N \ne E)) + R_2 (= (N = E))$$ shows that both opposites are equal and therefore the same, making them not opposites of each other.

Implications
The implications of the existence of the paradox means that it is in some way possible to do that which is by default impossible. The question that remains focuses on what impossible things would be possible to do. Conversely, questions also arise as to whether something which is possible could in reality be impossible.

It also shows that it is possible for two things to be one thing, which goes against the basic mathematical truth $$1 + 1 = 2$$, instead showing that either $$1 + 1 = 1$$ or $$2 = 1$$, both of which are theoretically, and, within Anarturia, practically impossible.

The fact that the impossible is possible, if the paradox were universally applicable, would mean that possibility would not exist, nor ever have existed, in the first place. This would have profound effects on the entirety of existence and nonexistence if it were to be true.

As a final note, it must be said that it is as of now and so far unknown what the effects of the paradox being universally applicable would be.